Sully,

To the extent that we do agree...!

I am an Independent, however, one thing that I truly admire about the Democratic Party for which it seems at the same time to be their Achilles heel, is that between the two major Parties, they appear to be the Party that is the most representative of all Americans and at whatever end of the spectrum they happen to be. And even though they have a ways to go in terms of actual practice, the other major Party does not even pretend to have an interest in anyone other than those of 'their kind', unless the new candidates are willing to be fully converted and transformed into the image of their new Republican brothers and sisters.

With regard to Mr. Powell, it is too bad that he allowed himself to be prostituted by a Party whose elite never really trusted him after he spoke at the Party's Convention and encouraged the Republicans to support Affirmative Action. I suspected then that other than his credentials and his background which were useful to the Party at the time, that once he was no longer useful to the Party, he would be discarded. And as we have both observed, the same came to pass. Colin was never fully converted.

According to Yale Historian, Dr. David Brion Davis, 'History is taught with an illusory sense of the present'.

We have to keep pulling back the layers of the political onion, I suspect, until we get to all of the truth, and refocus our present day perceptions under the miscroscope of reality, then perhaps we will be able to get something done about what appears to be our permanently bifurcated electorate!

The Rev wrote:

--Right on--
Ahh, that takes me back...

--Most Republicans are held together by an irrational fear that reaches down into their twisted psyches if not their souls, that everyone in the world is after and out to get us, and they are all jealous of us and want to take away 'our' freedoms and our way of living.--

I disagree to some extent. You could take the same position against the twisted psyches of some Democrats and say they feel they have a fear that the US is being run by Nazis, that these Nazis are listening to all our phone converstaions, tracking our credit cards and 1984 is not 22 years ago but happening today. Both sides of this polar political process can point to the extremes of the other party and paint the entire party in that color. Reagan did not lead to a dictatorship as many on the left predicted, Clinton did not lead us to a socialist state as many on the right predicted. The republicans however have been much better at honing their message of extreme fear and targeting it. They have done this in the past too by calling democrats "pinko liberal communist sympathizers" which stuck to some extent regardless of the democrats leading the cold war with the USSR and China in the 60s and standing up to Cuba. The precision of being able to do this well was demonstrated in 2004 when republicans took war heros with silver stars and made them look cheap and dishonest, and even some in the military who should have known better bought it.

The majority in the middle who listen to both sides do not hear much of the truth or much of anything that is important. Last night I was watching Fox news (my favorite comedy channel) and they had a talking head on discussing this murder of a woman whose fetus was cut out of her. The talking head said the democrats would not call the death of the fetus a murder because they approve of fetuses being murdered by the millions every day. Now one can listen to that and add it to your list of why you hate democrats or you can actually think about it and realize the fetus was 7 months old and anyone who performed an abortion on that fetus would be in jail in any state. Yet the talking head was not questioned or the subject discussed any further. Another political shot had been fired in the continual political war and it only landed on those who already agreed with the statement.

Rational thought is no longer part of the process. Our citizens who have experienced war first hand are becomming fewer. Consider that since 1918 the majority of Americans had themselves or were closely related to someone who served in the armed forces, until about 1990 when the lack of wars since Vietnam and the volunteer military and the subsequent small size of the military has made our military adventures not as important to the average American. That's why some democrats are saying that maybe the draft should return, then people will think harder about adventures like Iraq. Maybe so. But my point is that war has been distanced from the public's mindset and so plays less in determining whether the country is on the right track.

--consider Colin Powell's recent experiences in the Party--

Well you need to understand that while America seems to love Powell most neocons never did. He was used by Bush in 2000 to get elected. He remained until it appeared he could be easily booted without much political harm. But if you are going to consider Powell you must also consider Rice, who even some neocons have said would like to see her run for president in the future. Times have changed on all sides and I have to give Bush credit for not maintaining a purely white staff which I believe his republicans supporters would not have minded at all.

--Out of no where his answer was, do you want to overthrow the United States of America.--

Well, you can take the satisfaction that you won the argument and that the response was no different than a bully loosing an argument and punching you. Its right up there with the "why do all democrats hate America" question and other rhetorical statements with no factual basis. It was a Lee Atwater attack. If you haven't read them, read Al Franken's books. He points out a lot of this. You need to understand that the rhetorical question you were asked was not a question for you but for the audience, just as a bully's punch is not meant for you but to warn others not to challenge the bully. Glad to hear you stood firm but don't feel like you needed to respond. Ignore that type of rhetoric and stick to the relevent topics. Those in the middle will follow your conversation and not the host's rhetoric, and ignoring the question makes you look better and smarter leaving the host to sit there looking as stupid as he was.

Democrats need to understand that most people are in the middle and really do not take much from these attacks against the extremes. Democrats and republicans need to learn to ignore or even laugh at the extreme arguments and talk about those problems in the middle. That is Bush's problem today. People are talking about his incredibly stupid handling of Iraq, something that matters. Handwaving about helping the enemy, being unpatriotic, and blaming leftist extremists is having little effect. If the republican response is "do you want to overthrow the US", just smile and know you are winning and continue to target the things people care about and not the extremes or twisted psyches, and most importantly, learn to refute the common attacks like "democrats do not have a plan", which is a lie, or "Bush has a plan" which is also a lie. The republicans know elections are won and lost on talking points. Its time for the deomcrats to do their homework and prepare them for the upcoming election but talking points about what is relevent, not the extremes. There is nothing simpler than debating a right-wing republican if you are well informed. The host's reponse sort of proved that.

Sully,

but the fact is that there are a lot of Democrats who do not care for 'the kind' in the Republican Party who they perceive as malcontents who are attempting to take over their Democratic Party.

I meant to say, 'the kind' in the Democratic Party...

P.S. I did not have time to talk about my efforts to change the minds of religious people, suffice it to say that religion has been a historical challenge throughout the history of the world!

The Rev

Sully,

Right on, we are both fighting for the cause of freedom and justice. You touched on something that I have experienced on many occasions, given that I am also from a blue state as well. On many occasions we are simply preaching to the choir. However, there are those occasions when I meet with Americans who agree with my position about American misbehavior; however, they still support Bush, and Republican agendas.

There are several reasons for this I have discovered, and some of the reasons for this paradoxical behavior are ugly ones. Consider the Zel Millers of the world and the other eight million cross over Democratic voters, aka Reagan Republicans, who crossed over to vote for Mr. Bush in the first Bush election. Many of these same individuals helped to vote Reagan into office. The issue of racial politics and 'liberalism' as it was then, is an enormous problem for and within the Democratic Party, and for some voters who would cross-over from the Republican Party and vote Democratic given their dissatisfaction with the Republican Party.

However, as long as Reverend Sharpton, Reverend Jackson, Maxine Waters and other black Republicans have a prominence or a voice in the Democratic Party, eight million or so Reagan Republicans are going to support the Republican agenda and the same are prepared to cross over and vote Republican in the next General Election.

Consider Joe Lieberman after he lost the primary a month ago in Connecticut, and what did he do next? Mr. Lieberman invoked a Republican strategy shortly after and began to drop the name Maxine Waters during his subsequent Press Conferences and to openly attack Democrats and some of the Democratic positions. And what was the result, he shot up in the polls? I know that some Republicans in Connecticut are doing what they can to influence the polls and the upcoming election, but the fact is that there are a lot of Democrats who do not care for 'the kind' in the Republican Party who they perceive as malcontents who are attempting to take over their Democratic Party.

Is the problem attributable exclusively to racial politics? No, the fact is, and it sounds funny when you hear it, some Democrats who the Republicans consider liberal Democrats, view their own fellow Democrats as being too liberal or just plain wacko.

On the other hand when I talk to Republicans, I experience what theologian Dr. C. Eric Lincoln describes as 'a consciousness of kind'. Republicans, who are organized around four primary issues, gravitate towards voters who think like them and in many instances look like them. They will accept some who do not look exactly like them (once they pass the Republican smell test), but they will be kept under close scrutiny, and some will be discarded or set aside; consider Colin Powell's recent experiences in the Party, when they fail to fully uphold the party's line. Most Republicans have more regard for Powell it would appear, but still he is considered an Apostate by most, just listen to Tony Blankley and Newt Gingrich if you don't believe what I am saying.

What appears, to me, to motivate Republicans the most? It is my opinion that the politics of fear has to be one of the top three factors that motivates Republicans, second only to 'a conscienous of kind'. Most Republicans are held together by an irrational fear that reaches down into their twisted psyches if not their souls, that everyone in the world is after and out to get us, and they are all jealous of us and want to take away 'our' freedoms and our way of living. Unwittingly, many times Republicans have included Democrats in this group and have relegated Democrats to a place right alongside the Republican's worst enemies in the world, such as Al-Qaeda!

President Bush and the Republicans can continue to play on Republican fear for the foreseeable future, and the need to circle the wagons and prevent all of the rest of the world and the Democrats from coming in to take away 'their freedoms'. As I mentioned before, when speaking to a Television Talk Show Host in McLean Virginia a few years ago (he considered having me on his program), but recanted feeling that I would be too radical causing him to loose some of his conservative viewers.

But the same gentleman who argued in private that Iraq violated the U.N. Constitution (I forget all of the resolutions), and therefore America was justified in attacking Iraq, got noticeably upset when I countered by saying that the United States violated International Law and usurped the U.N. and invaded Iraq. Out of no where his answer was, do you want to overthrow the United States of America.

I learned a lot from him. For he taught me that at the heart of what many Americans believe is an inexplicable and overwhelming fear that America has to do the things that it does, legally or illegally, because there is a whole group of people out there, inside and outside of America, who want to overthrow America, a euphemism for overthrowing Republicans and Republican conservative values which in their minds are the true America values which were put in place by America's founders.

And sadly, right or wrong, these people will do anything to put the Party back in office who will help them to retain and enjoy their current lifestyles which they confuse with historical American values maybe, even if it means swift-boating candidates, cheating at the polls, spreading other smear campaigns, or providing financial resources through any means necessary even via corrupt lobbyist's and all!

P.S. I have nothing but admiration for the Reverend's that I mentioned above, for they compare well with America's other historical leaders!

The Rev wrote:
--Now, what have you been doing and what is your motive (was that a cheap shot) for trying to draw out 'The Rev', who wishes to remain anonymous?--

I was not trying to draw anyone out, just pointing out that patriotism is more than just talking about the issues, though discussion is an important part of staying involved. Today's problems are more than the economy or issues of health care for all. Our nations heart, its constitution, has been stabed by this administration and its complicit congress. I could never have imagined an American president would stand up and say we need to torture people. I agree that people need to look at more than their own lives, their mercedes or large house, but to look at this country, its direction, its loss of values, and get up and do something. I'm glad to hear you are involved and working to improve the situation.

My efforts are less dynamic and involve supporting and volunteering for local candidates and writing my representative when I see something they are doing is wrong. But living in a blue state means I only need to write a few letters. I attend county council meetings and even my home owner's association meetings where I found the board members treating themselves to "well deserved" dinners using the association's dues. I then ran for and became president of the HOA not because I had support but because no one else wanted the "thankless" job, which is a true decription of any HOA board position. The dinners stopped and we started an annual community festival using the money that used to go to the dinners. I learned from that experience that people with any power, in general, are naturally corrupt and the only thing that keeps them honest is scrutiny. I also learned that people in general want to do the right thing but are easily corrupted or willing to go down the wrong path if they feel they are in the minority.

I feel today that most Americans do not agree with the direction of this country, do not agree that Iraq is the central front for the war on terror, and do not agree that reducing the taxes on the wealthy helps the poor or anyone in America except the wealthy. But most people are willing to defer to the president, agree with Rove's propaganda, and quickly accept that everything is fine because they hear little opposition to this administration. And that is what I see needs to change and the only way for that to change is for more people to get involved, speak up, challenge people who say Bush is a great president and otherwise show Americans that there is a true opposition to this president and his party. Once the momentum builds it will be the start of a turn around. The majority of Americans who harbor a silent dislike for Bush and his agenda allow Bush and congress to continue to dismantel the constitution and our American values by remaining silent. Its time for them to speak up and say what they think to their representatives. I'm glad to hear you are in front in this effort.

Sully,

You, however, took a lot for granted when you presupposed that the Rev was sitting at home blogging his frustrations away; I just left the Nation's Capitol a few days ago where we got a lot accomplished.

For starts, why don't you fly over to England, visit Toynbee Hall and learn why the Rev's picture is hanging there. Or instead, visit with members of Congress, and numerous political action groups all around the country, groups that were organized to bring about social change. Ask them what the Rev does? The Rev even folds envelopes and passes out fliers, you know the dirty work!

In fact the Rev will continue to do what he began doing approximately 40 years during the Civil Rights Movement, and after the first time that he set foot on the Kent State University Campus, a few days after several students were gunned down by the Ohio National Guard.

Or come out to Berkeley or visit the Stanford Campus, or anywhere else in the Bay Area and ask what the Rev has been doing, and they will tell you that the Rev does far more than blog or just preach!

It's funny, your supposition, for I recall in the early 80's when someone asked me if I was an American or what? The question came about as a result of my teaching several Americans to stand up for what was right no matter what, and to not just simply lay down and accept American feel good propaganda. Well the Red Book from Chairman Mao, had infiltrated out communities at the time, so I guess they had a reason to be concerned.

But I have never thought of overthrowing the country, as I was accused of in all of places Dulles Virginia a few years ago, for simply pointing out that the U.S.A. had ignored the U.N. when it illegally invaded Iraq. You know Sully, one of the most flattering things ever said to the Rev was, and 'you will tell the truth even if it hurts you'. Americans need to learn to tell and pursue the truth even if it means one less Mercedes in the garage, or if it means loosing 2 to 3 thousand square feet off of their lavish homes! If I could get an audience with Mr. Bush, the Rev would have no problem in telling him that he is a liar, but of course I would address him of course respectfully as Mr. President Liar!

I suspect that of my scores of visits to Capitol Hill meeting, speaking, and visiting the offices of many of nation's representative and caucusing, sitting in plenary sessions with many of the Washington elite counts for something. I suspect that the work that I have done and continue to do on both the west and east coasts will count for something, for we have mobilized a lot of people for and to action. I won't mention all of the heads of state and officials that we have met with from all other the world, working to come up with solutions to address the myriad of problems in the world that our government merely gives lipservice to.

Factually, our work consists of organizing political rallies, but aside from that we reach deeper in appealing to the hearts and souls of American men and women. We educate people and challenge individuals on a personal level, challenging them to assess their historical beliefs, as well as their biases that are usually based on faulty preposition and presuppositions, as well as skewed American propaganda. Historically, by the time that most Americans learn the truth; the damage that has been done by its own government has long since been forgotten; consider the most recent declassified documents that were revealed to the public.

In our church, a transdenominational church that includes people of many nationalities, I try to raise the awareness of my followers and teach them the truth about Religion, the United States and the rest of the world. Now, what have you been doing and what is your motive (was that a cheap shot) for trying to draw out 'The Rev', who wishes to remain anonymous?

I can't help thinking about the following statement made in history, and hope you will think hard about it too.

"Naturally, the common people don't want war, but after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a parliament or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country." ---Hermann Goering, Hitler's Reich-Marshall, speaking at the Nuremberg Trials following WWII

Also you might consider this: (I have had this on my computer a while, and do not have the name of the resource anymore)

Here are the six mind-tools used by social propagandists, political
consultants, and governmental officials use to incite the public. These are
the tools of the Media War.

Mind-tool One is Atrocity Allegations. In it's most common form, it is the
accusable of ritual murder, infanticide, rape, sexual depravity, mass murder
and so on. This can go deeper, with unfounded and untrue statements as well
as true statements of small numbers of people, left to fester. Remember, an
Atrocity accusation can even be as simple as they wear black because they are afraid of the light, as long as it isolates the community member.

Mind-tool Two is Hyperbolic Inflation of the Stakes. This recently took form
in Bosnia when NATO stated if we do not stop Serbia we will have another
Hitler, and fight a larger war. These first two mind-tools create a powerful argument, no matter how true or false. Simply put, atrocity and Hyperbolic inflation assures that even if you are not sure it is true, you don't dare defend them in case it is true, and you certainly don't become involved.

The Third mind-tool is Demagnetization and Dehumanization. In every conflict,
the enemy must not have a human face. Broad brushes are used to slander and
deprive human feelings for the attacked, otherwise one would have to consider
them as individuals.

The Fourth is Polarization, "Those not for us are against Us." Simple and is
the basis for all manner of fights.

The Fifth is the Claim of Divine Sanction, which frames all arguments, out of
the human context and instead places it on God, Allah, or some other
authority in charge of the action. Further the power to forgive for any
excess of zeal is gained. This assures no matter how much one would feel the
action is wrong, the person committing it is secure because God told them to
do it.

The Sixth mind-tool is Meta-propaganda, and the most powerful. This
discredits the other sides propaganda not by challenging the veracity of a
single story, but by repeating holes and mistakes on the whole argument and
discredit everything coming from the enemy. The aim is to produce wholesale
disbelief and close doors to redress.

The Rev wrote:
"Factually, I am tired of the American Devils in Washington DC and the Religious Right myself!"

So what are you going to do about it? I don't ask this question rhetorically. Its one thing to be in a country without freedoms and have a government lying and propagandizing. Its another in a free democracy. I remember back in the 60s the East Germans youths looking at the youth rioting in the streets of America. They could not understand people living in a free society rioting against that society while they lived under a dictator and oppression with border guards that had shoot-to-kill orders for anyone sneaking out of the country.

So Rev you and I both dislike the Bush administration. We feel they have lied and have fixed the evidence to the policy in Iraq. They continue to lie to us saying that things are better while the NIE says otherwise, the NIE that Bush has read so his lying can be backed up with facts and evidence. But unlike those in the former East Germany who had no recourse other than attempted escape, we have a lot of recourse. We can give money to non-republicans running against republicans for office. Reporters with a spine we can dig for the truth and expose it for all to see. We can volunteer to work for non-republican candidates and we can support 3rd party organizations who bring the truth to the people and expose bad policy, no matter how pretty a name it is given.

The problem as I see it is that most people do not think of a president or even a senator or congressman as a public servant. They think of them as kings and nobles, people who somehow deserve the position, people who cannot be admonished or otherwise held accountable for their actions. When I hear you saying that America needs to change course I do not hear you talking about how to make that happen. It sounds like you are expecting other people to make it happen. And that is the problem. As we expected the nobles to remove a bad king, Americans somehow expect Bush to be removed by others in the government or at least held accountable by them.

People forget that in America power comes directly from the people. This is seen by Bush's current low approval rating and his difficulty in getting things through congress, such as the torture bill. But that power of the people only happens if the people use it, by writing their congressmen, by changing who they give political contributions to and other ways by not staying silent or privately hoping the nobles take charge. Voting is only one form of civic duty. Becomming part of an organization that helps shape policy or refute bad policy is another. Like Bush says, you are with us or against us. So are you with him or against him. In this fight you cannot stay at home and blog your frustrations away, you must be part of the solution or you are part of the problem.

The Ball is in America's Court Now...

The fact is that the world is undergoing a radical change. The so-called weaker nations of the world are joining together in order to solidify their strength in order to speak truth to American power. Has anyone considered why so many nations of the world are not speaking to the Russians or Chinese, instead more than a few nations view America as the problem and not these two so-called Communist nations? Do some Americans even care?

Could it be that we are the problem, instead of it being the other way around? Hugo Chavez and many in the world believe that George Bush is the dictator the world, so do I. These folks believe that he is being disingenuous when he criticizes other nations of the world and their form of governance in deference to the way that America, and George Bush currently orders the world around.

When I wrote to Mr. Bush myself about 3 years ago, I told him that as far as this minister was concerned then, he was conducting himself in the manner of a worldwide dictator; my opinion has not changed a bit. Furthermore, I support those nations who are fighting against American hegemony and oppression; you folks can have the lying Bush Administration and the Ambassador Bolten's of the world, who in this minister's opinion is another lying unscrupulous sleaze ball! I DO NOT NEED LIARS AND CROOKS TO PROTECT ME!

Now how do I convince some other Americans to stand up for what is right, as opposed to going along with people who have lied over and over to you about what is taking place in other nations around the world and their own misbehavior around the world. We must hold these jokers accountable, and then get on with the business of helping America to make its transformation and to learn to co-exist peacefully with other nations in a 21st Century changing world!

Those of us, who have been on both sides, know that America is reacting towards the voices of dissent, just as it reacted towards those of us who struggled so hard in the Civil Rights movement in the 20th Century, and the rest of the world knew then that we were right and that majoritarian America was wrong!

But what would you expect from the functionally illiterate and unskilled leadership in Washington D.C. that is being led by individuals who refused to serve their own country and the same whose only objective is to please 'their political base'?

Factually, I am tired of the American Devils in Washington DC and the Religious Right myself!

We'll get back to you on that. In the meantime, I'd like to furnish a news leak. The Armed Forces Deployment Panel/AFDP is strongly considering offering large bonuses to veteran retirees to return to active duty for overseas war zones. This can not be confirmed.

I'm now returning to the Press Club Bar.

==How to tell the serious nuts from the harmless ones ?, The ones who have the rsources to carry out there rantings need special attention. Hugo,kim and Ahmedinijad.==

Well, if you are concerned about hostile military action against United States, then it is easy to separate the serious nuts from regular nuts. The serious ones will have military with a global reach, a trans-continental air force, a blue water Navy, a expeditionary force Army and, of course, a fleet of ICBMs. Without at least one of these things, and preferably several, the nuts are just regular nuts and are not a significant military threat to the United States territory. It is true, that even a old-fashioned military structure can field insurgents that can tie down a modern military force, but that military force has to be in close proximity to the insurgents, i.e., occupying their country or the one next door. That kind of "military threat" is easily avoided by not invading and occupying Iran's neighbore, Iraq.

And as we now know conclusively from the recently completed intelligence estimate (as if sane people needed to be "told" this), attacking and occupying other countries simply worsens the terrorist threat. So if the country does not possess any capacity for conventional military threat, attacking and occupying it on a very remote possibility of some complicity in the future potential terrorist acts will only make the possibility of this potential terrorist act higher. In other words, the policty we have been pursuing in Iraq, and want to start up in Iran is pig-headed wrong and has already endangered our country, including our children. Now, anything that endandgers the future well-being of our children I am very much against. Shouldn't we all be?

==Americans have and will always go anywhere to bomb to protect there interests. Whether its cruise missles or troops on the ground. Any nation with global interests will. Many presidents have done this, its not just Bush.==

Well, yes, in fact untill the mid-20th century many countries in the world were colonies, which were ruled by foreign occupiers. United States went to war and killed people for United Fruit. Britain considered India, a country many times its size in territory and populaiton a possession. Africa was carved up the "civilized" countries of the world. The French refused to give independence to Vietnam for many decades. Soviets invaded Afghanistan.

Today, these actions are universally considered very wrong. The age of colonialism and by extention, "bombing to protect ones way of life" is over. Sure, there is a modern resurgence of colonialism, with various Bushes, Rummies and Cheneys struggling to once again occupy and make the world safe for Haliburtons, cheered on by various Drews and Dan Friedmans from NYC, etc. But it the exception that proves the rule, or to put it even more starkly, the dying breath of an old 20th century world order, akin to the invasion of Afghanistan precipitating the collapse of the USSR and communism.

I highly recommend this quite brilliant article from a journalist who stayed behind in a NATO-cleared part of Afghanistan:

Inspiring tale of triumph over Taliban not all it seems
GRAEME SMITH
From Saturday's Globe and Mail

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060922.wmedusa0923/BNStory/National/

The New Nuclear Danger: George W. Bush's Military-Industrial Complex
by Helen Caldicott

a little light reading,

"
This revised edition includes a new introduction that outlines the costs of operation Iraqi Freedom, details the companies profiting from the war and subsequent reconstruction, and chronicles the rampant conflicts of interest among members of the Bush administration who also have a financial stake in weapons manufacturing. After eight printings in the original edition, The New Nuclear Danger remains a singularly persuasive antidote to war and its horrific costs.
"

once reason was lost, but now it is found........

you were blind, but know you'll see.........

dang me dang me

.

King of the Road.

why don't you tell them what your name is?

nuts that belong to us,

the ones that destroy electoral process and defeat oversight, by placing their appointees

over

CIA NSA Congess FBI Secret Service and Black Operations.........

Negroponte answers only to the president, but he can _jerk_ your pension if you turn

"states evidence," against this administration.........

by congressional mandate.

google that Negroponte Congress Pension

have a nice day.

gawd talks to your presidente' doncha know, he's on a holy mission to control all of the worlds oil, and the stock market, and your liberties......

who needs nuts in other countries........he's a keeper, put him in the zoo with the other monkies.........filthy ones.

Dimitry,

There have been quite a few global nut jobs who have created quite a bit of turmoil, castro, stalin, mao, qadhffi etc. How to tell the serious nuts from the harmless ones ?, The ones who have the rsources to carry out there rantings need special attention. Hugo,kim and Ahmedinijad. Americans have and will always go anywhere to bomb to protect there interests. Whether its cruise missles or troops on the ground. Any nation with global interests will.Many presidents have done this, its not just Bush.

Dan,
I think the pope did try to apologize in a speech in 2000.

Ross, agree there is a basis, but what to do now ? Dont think the hardliners will ever trust the US, we certainly dont trust them w/the bomb.

Jaxas,
Just hope these global nut jobs out there keep there nukes to themselves.

how about responding to this question:

what would happen if it could be proven that there was a

hidden agenda

of
uniting and turning a bunch of sleepy tribesmen into a terrorist insurrgency takes time....

which bush and co have done, intentionally I might add,

is create an enemy after the collapse of the Soviet Union that would justify the continuing military expenditures

read this: http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

it was the Republican, complicit congress, and DOD's agendae in 1997....to go to "war,"

when bush was elected, did he mention this agendae?

are there any legal repurcussions? ramifications? would we currently be in "a coup," if it were proved to be true and would those responsible be executed for treason?

who signed it want to know?

.

how about responding to this?

time for honest tea?

or maybe some executions for treason?

how about some COMPLICIT (starting with McCain/Frist/Hastert/Lieberman) Congress people or executive branch people

how about discussing this point?

quite clearly,

"the awful horror will be where least expected..."

not that I'm into that sort of thing.k

and it also say, there will be many false claims in my name.........

and you shall know them by their works....

torture, lying, mind control, family_soldiers holding the highest position in the land with no_oversight reeks of royalist/mafia

rule.......

although that really impugns' the mafia.

.

Drew,
For the other part of your objection, I refer you to what I cannot say better than Dimitry.

Drew posted:
"well, the relevancy is how you view the world, you 've determined that americans need to pay big time for the sins of there father"

I did not talk of (transgenerational) punishment or reward,which would definitively be stepping on a religious ground... though it is true that traditionally the so called objective and external point of vue is also called the 'point of vue of God'. But,as it were, this is just a metaphore for total intelligibility...The point was that the Iranians defiance and lack of trust toward the US has much more objective ground than the reverse.
Furthermore, there is no evidence that Iranians, as of today, want to make the US pay for its past sins. What is sure is that they do not forget easily (why should they?). The most rational and reasonable conjecture we can make at this point is that, having a memory of our past sins (again, only a metaphor), they want to be in a position in which we will not repeat or do to them we we have done once.

The New American Praxis...Hugo Chavez and others, beware of the Superstate!

If Americans were to weigh the details and stop wearing their hearts on their sleeves, Americans could see that Hugo Chavez and other foreign heads-of-state are correct in their assessments about President Bush and America's hands-off attitude towards some nations in the world, as opposed to its come hither attitude towards some other nations of the world that America favors.

The new American Praxis is based largely upon a single factor, that is to say that America is a Superpower, and of late that America is 'The Only Super (or if you prefer) Hyperpower'; that is all that I have been hearing for the past 6 years from The Administration and many American.

I don't know about you, but to me the latter sounds blasphemous. It reminds me of several scriptures in the Christian bible that read, Yahweh is the only true God. Perhaps, instead of the Devil, perhaps Bush and the Administration believe that they are the only true God; the, 'god of democracy'.

What changed America and why are Americans seemingly so indifferent, lately, to the cries of freedom from their brothers and sisters from around the world, particularly those brother and sisters who share the Americas? Aren't they Americans as well?

Why has America made a complete about face and turned its back on some nations, as Mr. Chavez reported, while embracing others? Why do some Americans want to separate from the rest of the world other than to control and benefit from the resources held by other nations of the world?

And what happened to the nation and people that once believed in freedom, liberty and justice for all (well most) people of the world? Were early writers like Tolstoy and others, who visited and had a first-hand look at the American experiment correct when they recognized the disparities in terms of what Americans were telling the world, as opposed to what they had witnessed with their own eyes, particularly in the slaveholding South?

Here is what I believe happened to America, simply put, America became a Superstate, and its new identity is tied to that and that alone. Americans are no longer interested in the pitiful longings of lesser nations America is concerned about preserving itself and its standard of living. To the rest of the world, your problem is your problem, America has bigger fish to fry!

We need to do some of our own "House Cleaning". Satan is on U.S. soil. 13th Amendment. It's like God is showing us our own evil. Let's close the book on the old testament and write a new Constitution. We have the most brilliant minds in the world; and we are attached to a document that only holds us back. Politics is Religion. End of story.

You know Drew, on this one we actually agree. I do apply the same view of Bush being megalomaniacal to these other leaders--including Hugo Chavez and Ahmadinejab. There is a popular, old saying on the right that I find odious except in this one instance: "Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out!" Although I generally find that an odious and unelnlightened sentiment ususally uttered by the type of two dimensional, oversimplified thinkers among Bush's redneck base, I think it might have some utility i applying to all of the present world leaders.

Maybe we should get together and form a secret order devoted to assassinating all of the world's present leaders and replacing them with sane, sensible moderate men who are no motivated by messianic, religious sentiments.

I have no doubt that Bush and Cheney have agents and operatives scanning the blogoshphere for subversive sentiments such as the one I have just put forth. I expect the secret service to pay me a visit any day. But, is what I am suggesting any more deadly or subversive or dangerous than what our present world leaders are plunging us into?

I would trade 150 dumb-from-the-neck-up world leaders for the lives of millions of innocents who will have to die to achieve their radical, murderous visions any day.

Read.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/22/AR2006092201303.html

==You've excused the Iranian loon who wants to "wipe out another country" yet americans
are labeled as invaders etc. Its an unbalanced and scary view of the world.==

What is truly frightening is your basic confusion about words and deeds. You confuse a loudmouth's stump speech to a domestic audience with actual invasion and occupation. You must, somehwere in your mind understand that saying "boo" isn't the same as dropping thousands of tons of bombs on actual living people.

Perhaps you don't. There a lot of people in America who are more than willing to kill people half way around the world, because some dimwitted demagoge has convinced them that someday, these people may be in position to do something that might be considered dangerous. So we kill them now to liberate them from their potential future.

For the people who have not been afflicted by this mass psychosis it is akin to waking up in a transposed version of Orwell's 1984.

pc gorilla fascism? still worried about those gay germs on the drinking fountains from ellen de'generous types?

you're as authentic as milli vanilli, what does your father do again?

Finally you say that if in their country, I were to write what I've written, my family and me would be in jail. But what the relevancy?

well, the relevancy is how you view the world, you 've determined that americans need to pay big time for the sins of there father( a somewhat religious based view akin to god in the old testament punishing future generations for there fathers sins).
You've excused the Iranian loon who wants to "wipe out another country" yet americans
are labeled as invaders etc. Its an unbalanced and scary view of the world.
Your giving free passes to everyone and there cousin to take shots at americans because of the past, a somewhat god like judgment yr passing, just as bad as those religious right wingers. Peace starts when you give current generations a chance to start anew, not this endless "your going to pay for yr fathers sins forever " attitude

Drew wrote
"Nothing else on Islamo facism ? How can you even compare Islam in Iran, Syria (the axis of evil) with what we have here ? Its intellectually dishonest at best. If you wrote what you did in Iran or Syria regarding the gov in power, you and yr family would be in pretty big trouble.Its fine to criticize the gov, but do it in an honest way."

Please keep the "islamofascist" and "axis of evil" stuff for neocon mass celebrations. I do live in the real world in which fascism and nazism sprung out of centuries of European antisemitism and exploded during the first half of last century. Fascism and nazism belong to Western culture. So, don't make a projection on others of our own sins. Additionally and ironically, when the Jews were persecuted during that period in Europe they found a refuge in more tolarating islamic middle eastern societies (Isn't it 'funny' to see how Palestinians are treated today!)
Regarding the "axis of evil" stuff, keep it for kids or decerebrated crowds. In three or four millenaries of existence the Persians (today Iranians) have never invaded another sovereign nation. If you are one of those advocating for military action against them, you should also note that in all their long history they have never lost a single war either (Not even the one The US and European supported by massively arming Saddam to invade Iran)... From an objective (external) point of view, regarding American intervention in their country to overthrow a democratically elected government and replace it with the Shah, and regarding American intervention in Irak they are much more closer to truth when they call the American government the 'Great Satan' than the neocons placing them onto their 'axis of evil'.
Finally you say that if in their country, I were to write what I've written, my family and me would be in jail. But what the relevancy? So what? And is it even true? what do you intend to do? to send ma in their country for having fun of Bush and the Bushies, like they did with the other poor canadian guy they sent to Syria to be tortured, Syria which was supposedly part of the 'axis of evil'...You see the Devil (like Bush) is in the detail!

"..played into this ridculous, megalomanical view of himself with his lofty religious rhetoric which elevated his devoted followers.."

Jaxas, I hope you realize this goes double for the islamo fascists in the midlle east.
Its one thing to criticize our gov but another to have an unbalanced view of what is wrong in the world. Theres plenty of the above to go around, chavez? , Iran ? But no we keep proving to the world we hate ourselves.

Rossini,

Nothing else on Islamo facism ? How can you even compare Islam in Iran, Syria (the axis of evil) with what we have here ? Its intellectually dishonest at best. If you wrote what you did in Iran or Syria regarding the gov in power, you and yr family would be in pretty big trouble.Its fine to criticize the gov, but do it in an honest way.

The people who support George W. Bush's messianic, neoconservative view of a world dominated by roght wing economic, social, political, and religious values are living in a world that no longer exists, a sort of weird time warp within which America is still seen pretty much as it was in the 1950s: the overly romanticized vision of America as bulwark against all tyranny, acting as an ensign to the world of just how an advanced, enlightened, progressive society can bring peace, freedom, progress and prosperity to the entire world.

It was a noble vision that we labored hard to live up to for much of the 20th century when were weren't allowing Machiavellian CIA and ultra-Conservative types to create chaos and instability in those socialist oriented countries we were trying to change with persuasion instead of force of arms. But that era is long gone and it is high time you in the media stop repeating these old, obsolete, neoconservative talking points concerning a "war of civilizations" against Islamofacists who pretty much think like Hitler and Stalin.

It is this persistent reaching back to the old ideological battles of the 20th century that is preventing any serious progress in the present struggle to manage and control terrorism. Yes, I said "manage and control" because this addled notion that we are going to have some world shattering final battle between us--the good guys in the white cowboy hats and spangled shirts--and them, the dark, swarthy, imagined masses of thugee-like Middle and Far Easterners that plague the nightmarish dreams of Armagaeddon that are the stuff of the Left Behind screeds on the religious right.

Until Bush and these whacked out neocons are of the picture and 2009 hopefully brings on leadership that is a bit more grounded on the world as it is, I see no hope for meaningful change. Bush cannot change because it would destroy his--and the religious right's--image of him as some sort of Divinely inspired leader put in office by God and his Son Jesus Christ. Bush himself played into this ridculous, megalomanical view of himself with his lofty religious rhetoric which elevated his devoted followers on the religious right into fits of rapturous celebration.

Not until this hopelessly delusional, creepily devout, ass of a man is gone and his cadre of anal wiping sycophants with him, will we ever hope to see any meaningful change.

After Bush leaves the office (if he does - the question being legitimated by the mutiple constitutional coups this administration has realized),Do Americans intend to build for him a presidential library and have him talk around the country and the world about peace and democracy as the bright future of mankind?
Meanwhile, for all of those who are talking about 'islamofascism', what does it tell you about your country that your president can so easily be granted special powers to torture, and to 'trial' people on the basis of informations obtained under torture?
Taking side with atheistic observers, one might say that if Bush is not the Devil (to say that, is to be a religious believer), he is the secular equivalent of the Devil. In the remodeled conception and language of our time, we call Devil-equivalents 'neocons' as old-fashion guys would call them 'tyrans'.
With a poetical tone, in memory of our beloved JeeNious, let us remember this Political Ode from an unidentified Bard:
"On the road to security devilish neocons flourish;
Our road to security in tyrany will finish"

I smelled a rat when they anounced the "deal on torture"

-----------------------------------------
Detainee Deal Comes With Contradictions
By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: September 23, 2006

The compromise reached on Thursday between Congressional Republicans and the White House on the interrogations and trials of terrorism suspects is, legal experts said yesterday, a series of interlocking paradoxes.

It would guarantee terrorist masterminds charged with war crimes an array of procedural protections. But it would bar hundreds of minor figures and people who say they are innocent bystanders from access to the courts to challenge their potentially lifelong detentions.

And while there is substantial disagreement about just which harsh interrogation techniques the compromise would prohibit, there is no dispute that it would allow military prosecutors to use statements that had been obtained under harsh techniques that are now banned.

...
------------------------------------------

Sully posted:
"The big question is whether this civil war that Islam is in will be won by the moderates or the radicals."

Like usually a fine analysis.However,there are three reservations one can raise about what you say:
(a) 'Civil war' is a too simplistic reduction of all the conflicts and/or tensions that are unfolding in the Middle East. For sure, the US did 'allow' the resistance fight in Irak to mutate into a civil war(Notice the subtle -or may be not so subtle- strategy of shiftting the responsability of the massacres from the invaders to the locals). But I don't see where else there might be real 'civil wars' in the Middle East right now.
(b)The political game in the ME does not involve only radicals and moderates. You have a third party, the autocratic and often tyranic regimes in power that are too often supported by the US and the Western countries, or even China (like in Sudan). The large scale struggle in the ME involves the radicals vs foreign backed brutal regimes. The 'moderates' constitute the silent majority. But being moderate in the ME does not necessarily mean supporting Western interventionism. (The current administration desesparately needs some 101 geo-political mapping course...)
(c)There are two types of civil wars going on in Africa: the first type involves animist and christian blacks vs Arabs and muslims (some US-UN intervention and help would be more than welcome; the second type can be characterized as 'post-colonial' civil wars in which the ex-colonial powers (notably France, always acting under the guise of 'legitimate' UN mandates) seek to maintain their domination on the resources by fueling and arming endogenic tribes' rivalry.

William, there's not much to understand about people like chavez or that Iranian Loon. You read what they say and you wonder why "we " have a problem ?

Did you know: "The promotion of religious freedom is a core objective of U.S. foreign policy and is part of the U.S. Department of State's mission"?
Don't beleive me? http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2006/
It seems the US Ministry of Religeon has it's own agenda

It's interesting that the countries listed as "countries of particular concern" under the "The promotion of religious freedom" mantra are also listed as "state sponsors of international terrorism"
http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2000/

We are living in strange times and all sides need to know who the players are and what their angle is.............

a biased media is not what I complained about, that was just one thing........

when the whitehouse jams phone lines in new hampshire, it's got nothing to do with a biased media.

when duke cunninghams seat is up for reelection because he's in the cooler, the republicans spend 15 times more than they've ever spent in that district to elect a republican, and the president and vice president tape messages for phone voicemail use......it's got nothing to do with a biased media........

when soundbite mentality is used so effectively that "most Americans," think that we've been attacked by Iraq.........it's not a fricking mistake and has nothing to do with the people being stupid........

it's called media control, by whatever means.......putting the Exexcutive Branches spin on things as the truth....

homophobia, demagoguery, jingoism

a few of their favorite tools, maybe you're one too?

the standard of the neo conartiste', when challenged,

the retreat to "appeal to emotion," as the primary theme of reelection campaigns....

because the propagandists' have created a

dumbed down electorate with their, use of the "soundbite," to produce a tailored result...

the attempt to disinform, by implication, the soundbite mentality is part of what angers me........

why would anyone want to create a more disinformed population?

why did they keep slaves from learning to read and write.......control.

Sully keeps blaming it on the people....the people that have been driven to taking jobs in the service sector by the corporates voraciousness for outsourcing, originally limited to blue collar workers, now transforming white collar jobs.........

competing with Bangalore for your "inside the beltway dollars,"

good f o c k i n g luck traitors........

you're sitting in the middle of it and you just say,

"thank gawd it's the jews and not me,"

Who owns FOX? Rupert Murdoch? Who was prevented from acquiring majority ownership in several large United States Media Corporations about five years ago..........the same rupert...he wants to control _your_ news.........and who does he love? the neo conartiste'

CNN, used to sort of be an unpredjudiced source of information......

But YOU KNOW the Executive Branch buried Kerry's campaign last election year

by flooding the News Market with "bogus war" stories.......most of them pre packaged....ready for playing DVD's with bombs going off and cars exploding, just like on Television........zoom bam wowwwieeeeeeeeee

and the DA's at Media central did their patriotic doooooooooooootie........

are they doing it again? are they being played by a smarter Executive Branch and Complicit Congress that wrote the rules on how to control spin and make s h i t look like shinola

for the ordinary citizen?

yes, and Sully sayz "it's all your fault!," for not being as sophistacated as the doctors of PSY OPS that they employ to trash your brain cells with

GARBAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

here's what WashPo Weisman sayz in response to a question posted to him today on line....

this from Wiesman Friday, 22, 2006 Politics Discussion online

Washington, D.C.:
Is there really such a thing as the Democratic Party? I ask because, despite two weeks of Republican war on terrorism talk slowly lifting Republican polling numbers, there has been no Democratic nationalized coherent response. Why can't the Democrats, with only seven weeks to go before the most critical midterm election in a long time, not speaking out about anything: Iraq, global warming, wages, etc.?

Jonathan Weisman:
On this one, I must say the media is partly at fault. Congressional Democrats have been holding near daily press conferences on their agenda and their response to Republicans. But in the hullabaloo over dissent within Republican ranks, the Dems have been shut out of the news. Little wonder that you think they have been silent.

and there's nothing you can do about it.

from Dan Froomkin of WashingtonPost WhiteHouse Briefing fame:

"
The Washington Post editorial board writes: "Mr. Bush, as he made clear yesterday, intends to continue using the CIA to secretly detain and abuse certain terrorist suspects. He will do so by issuing his own interpretation of the Geneva Conventions in an executive order and by relying on questionable Justice Department opinions that authorize such practices as exposing prisoners to hypothermia and prolonged sleep deprivation. Under the compromise agreed to yesterday, Congress would recognize his authority to take these steps and prevent prisoners from appealing them to U.S. courts. The bill would also immunize CIA personnel from prosecution for all but the most serious abuses and protect those who in the past violated U.S. law against war crimes.

"In short, it's hard to credit the statement by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) yesterday that 'there's no doubt that the integrity and letter and spirit of the Geneva Conventions have been preserved.' In effect, the agreement means that U.S. violations of international human rights law can continue as long as Mr. Bush is president, with Congress's tacit assent. . . .
"

in other words, human rights, and Geneva conventions don't matter to this "civilized," country..........

hypothermia is all right.

.

google "School of the Americas" then Negroponte Honduras

.

New terror that stalks Iraq's republic of fear
By Patrick Cockburn in Arbil
Published: 22 September 2006
The republic of fear is born again. The state of terror now gripping Iraq is as bad as it was under Saddam Hussein. Torture in the country may even be worse than it was during his rule, the United Nation's special investigator on torture said yesterday.
"The situation as far as torture is concerned now in Iraq is totally out of hand," said Manfred Nowak. "The situation is so bad many people say it is worse than it had been in the times of Saddam Hussein."

...The horrors of the torture chamber that led to Saddam Hussein's Iraq being labelled "The Republic of Fear", after the book of that title by Kanan Makiya, have again become commonplace. The bodies in Baghdad's morgue " often bear signs of severe torture including acid-induced injuries and burns caused by chemical substances, missing skin, broken bones (back, hands and legs), missing eyes and wounds caused by power drills or nails", the UN report said. Those not killed by these abuses are shot in the head.

...The Iraqi state and much of society have been criminalised. Gangs of gunmen are often described on state television as "wearing police uniforms" . One senior Iraqi minister laughed as he told The Independent: " Of course they wear police uniforms. They are real policemen."

...One former minister said: "I know of ministers who have never been to their ministries but get their officials to bring documents to the Green Zone where they sign them."
Beyond the Green Zone, Iraq has descended into murderous anarchy. For several days this month, the main road between Baghdad and Basra was closed because two families were fighting over ownership of an oilfield.
Government ministries are either Shia or Sunni. In Baghdad this month, a television crew filming the morgue had to cower behind a wall because the Shia guards were fighting a gun battle with the Sunni guards of the Electricity Ministry near by.
Ends

Read the whole thing. The mass kidnappings it describes, carried out by Iraqi police, are by no means the biggest seen in Baghdad this summer. In one case, 80 people were abducted in a few minutes from an office building and the street outside, to disappear or be killed, or ransomed for everything their family had.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article1696153.ece

The official casualty statistics in Baghdad last month were terrible, but what were the civilian casualties in Iraq's most violent province, al-Anbar?

Zero. The Health Ministry, who provide all civilian casualty statistics to the government and the Americans, list zero civilian dead in Anbar Province. Because it's too violent to collect statistics there. We no longer have any real idea how many Iraqis are now dying.

Baby steps:-
The New Iraq held its first mass execution two weeks ago. Twenty-six men and one woman were hanged at Abu Ghraib prison.

--Bush is not America. America is the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.--

Yes, but an Ugly American Bush is.

Since Chavez, obviously, has had a good Catholic education, and has been taught to recognize the devil in his many forms, I am forced to defer to his judgement on religious questions. My own view of Bush is that he has twice violated the Constitution, federal law many times, advocated torture, and, under cover of fighting the war on terror violated the separation of powers doctrine by centralizing power in the executive branch for the Benefit of the wealthy and the Multinational corporations. I have and will continue to call him a Neoconservative, Corporate Fascist who, along with his administration, belongs in jail. Otherwise, he is a guy you would want to have a beer with. Go figure?
Bush is not America. America is the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Senor Buchanan,

Ola,

Something muy importante has come up. Mushareff of Pakistan informed us today that the reason that he joined his nation to the, 'Coaltion of the Willing' in Iraq, had to do with being threatened by the Americanos.

Senor, is that what you meant by what America will do, '... in order to get what we want and leave your husk of a corpse in our wake'?

Por favor and gracias senor, mi sabado are muy confused!

--bush wants only family people around when he is robbing the store, sounds pretty old fashioned to me.--

I think its more of Bush's upbringing at play. The grandson of a Senator and son of the head of CIA, then vice president, then president. His whole life was one of a well to do child who got whatever he wanted with little effort. He did not have to work for it. Get into Yale? Ask a friend for a favor. Need a job managing a company? Ask a friend for a favor. Need to get out of "hard work" flying jets for the Guard? As a friend for a favor.

In this environment you cannot deal with people who are not friends and cronies. When Bush "looks people in the eyes" to determine whether he can trust them, he is determining whether they can be friends and thus be trusted with providing favors and loyalty. The idea of putting a qualified stranger in a position of power is something Bush would never do willingly. He needs that ability to call in a favor if needed, otherwise he has no control and cannot get things done "his way".

The problem with this is it may work at the local/family level to some extent but Bush has brought this mentality to the presidency. When Clinton came into office he held strategy sessions with industry leaders, people he had never met, to discuss solutions to problems in the economy. He easily worked with people he knew and did not know. Other presidents republican and democrat have had this ability and used it to further their agendas, good and bad. But Bush is something we have not seen for over a century. More like a child inheriting a throne than an American who worked to become successful and then entered politics to land in the White House. History will record his presidency as the beginning of a dark time for America. The question is when will Americans make a change and get ourselves out of this darkness.

And yes, it is the people who put/keep Bush et. al. in power. Blaming a biased media is as stupid as Bush blaming the media for his problems. All media are biased to some extent. If the people are stupid enough to only listen to Fox news, is the problem with Fox News or the stupid people who can't watch more than one news source to stay informed?

James Buchanan said:

...its a nation that will, like any other, pursue its interests at the expense of anything that gets in our way. If we like you, we'll promote you. If we don't like you, we'll f*ck you over in any way we have to in order to get what we want and leave your husk of a corpse in our wake.

Senor Buchanan,

Que Pasa muchacho, como estas usted and muy bien gracias!

Your words are unfortunately a reflection of the thinking of some Americans, but thank God most do not feel the way that you do. You should keep in mind the plight of former empires and their perceived invincibility who pretty much acted in the same manner that you suggest that America should act in. And where are those empires today? Estabian!

I would like to see America be one of the first to say, given all of its intelligent, religious and educated citizens, that there is a more civilized way to deal with one's fellow human beings, comprende!

You know what works in many family's when there is a problem, family-members sit down and talk and resolve the differences, and they do so without anyone getting shot or bombed! For when we think about it senor all of us, north and south are Americanos for we live in the Americas.

Perhaps no one told you senor!

Buenos Noches Senor, Feliz Navidad and hasta la vista baby!

I am practicing mi espanol in the event that I may have to become a padre in Venezuela...!

Michael Chertoff, head of DHS?

bushes biggest campaign contributor and Clinton Heckler?

how is he so priveleged to have the number one most important job in the United States with no

friggin Qualifications?

bush wants only family people around

when he is robbing the store,

sounds pretty old fashioned to me.

complicit congress? of course, got to pay off the feds......

need to help anyone that looks like they're being outed (Jefferson) what was that intervention on the FBI about?

"I got your back," bushism?

thieves in arms?

Dr.Q wrote:
--this will be a very long war. Muslim countries wich were at war, now pledge aliance.
A number of school kids did not assist to class on 9-11-06. Instead they went to celebrate the day of the 9-11 martirs who died in the twin tower attacks.
That is a number of future fighters that will join the effort to the last concecuenses.--

And the Nazi's had Hitler youth who were fighting to the last child in Berlin in 1945. Yes it may be a long war, but it won't last forever. If you were staring at 1939 Germany you'd be shaking in your boots a lot more than watching Muslim kids celebrate or Nasrallah celebrating in a field flatter than his headquarters. The big question is whether this civil war that Islam is in will be won by the moderates or the radicals. Right now the radicals have the upper hand and are certainly doing most of the yelling, but once muslims look around and see what it has wrought: Afganistan going back to the stone age once again; Taliban type rule; war as was created in S. Lebanon and Palistine; buildings blown up in Jordan and Saudi; and beheadings of Muslims on a grand scale in Iraq, maybe radical Muslims who wish change will begin to reconsider their path. If they truely believe they have a legitimate struggle on their hands, they need to consider other methods that succeeded as represented by Ghandi, ML King, Christ and others who used peaceful means to change the course of history. I would also offer the Bush administration the same advice.

Part of the reason we're losing the war on terror, both on the hearts and minds campaign as well as in the field, is that we aren't using our A team on either front. I don't mean the troops, or even the koolaid-drinking generals who refuse to buck the administration. I mean the amateurs appointed to lead everything from the finance office in the provisional authority in Iraq to the heads at the DHS. America is a land full of expertise, but to be part of the Bush team's war on terror you have to be a loyal (read: unquestioning) Republican first, competent second. Or perhaps not competent at all.

Who the *#$@ was Paul Bremer again???

but you know the Executive Branch buried Kerry's campaign last election year by flooding the News Market with "bogus war" stories.......some of them pre packaged....

are they doing it again?

this from Wiesman Friday, 22, 2006 Politics Discussion online

Washington, D.C.:
Is there really such a thing as the Democratic Party? I ask because, despite two weeks of Republican war on terrorism talk slowly lifting Republican polling numbers, there has been no Democratic nationalized coherent response. Why can't the Democrats, with only seven weeks to go before the most critical midterm election in a long time, not speaking out about anything: Iraq, global warming, wages, etc.?

Jonathan Weisman:
On this one, I must say the media is partly at fault. Congressional Democrats have been holding near daily press conferences on their agenda and their response to Republicans. But in the hullabaloo over dissent within Republican ranks, the Dems have been shut out of the news. Little wonder that you think they have been silent.

and there's nothing you can do about it.

Lets go bomb the hell out of Chavez country and build some good old fasioned American indian reserves.The American congress shoud not have to see these brown skinned men tell them.Who is Iran to critisise America for an Israel occupation of the palestinian people.And what the heck is Chavez towing around American Indian dancers.You would think that America did not have one American Indian in congress,and so what that we dont.And if we want to vote for a racist that calls dark skinned people macacca,that is our right.THe world can say what they want but as long as God blesses America and no one else who cares.

martyrs?

you mean the ones that were set up by their own government?

like the boyz in Iraq thought they were attacking the people that attacked their country.........

which meant, "they didn't treat the Iraqi's nicely,"

something didn't look right and felt wrong, I believe was the Washington Post article which described the initial brutal assault upon

the ?insurgents?

what was their crime again?

not handing over the oil fast enough?

being pissed off about being shot for no effing reason?

what was the Iraqis' crime?

being scapegoated by the Executive Branch and Complicit Congress, in a country that has only Billionaires on it's most wealthy list as

the poverty rate increases, and the most rapidly growing sector entering poverty is

_old_ people

boomers? are you getting to be _old_ people?

are you taking care of any?

.

the retreat to "appeal to emotion," as the primary theme of reelection campaigns because they've created a

dumbed down electorate with their, "soundbite," mentality is part of what angers me........

why create a more disinformed population?

why did they keep slaves from learning to read and write.......

Sully keeps blaming it on the people.

Who owns FOX? Rupert Murdoch?

CNN, used to sort of be an unpredjudiced source of information......

but you know the Executive Branch buried Kerry's campaign last election year by flooding the News Market with "bogus war" stories.......some of them pre packaged....

are they doing it again?

this from Wiesman Friday, 22, 2006 Politics Discussion online

Washington, D.C.:
Is there really such a thing as the Democratic Party? I ask because, despite two weeks of Republican war on terrorism talk slowly lifting Republican polling numbers, there has been no Democratic nationalized coherent response. Why can't the Democrats, with only seven weeks to go before the most critical midterm election in a long time, not speaking out about anything: Iraq, global warming, wages, etc.?

Jonathan Weisman:
On this one, I must say the media is partly at fault. Congressional Democrats have been holding near daily press conferences on their agenda and their response to Republicans. But in the hullabaloo over dissent within Republican ranks, the Dems have been shut out of the news. Little wonder that you think they have been silent.

and there's nothing you can do about it.

this will be a very long war. Muslim countries wich were at war, now pledge aliance.
A number of school kids did not assist to class on 9-11-06. Instead they went to celebrate the day of the 9-11 martirs who died in the twin tower attacks.
That is a number of future fighters that will join the effort to the last concecuenses.
Sit tight, this promises to be a very long war.

you want to resolve the _illeagal_ aliens issue on the cheap?

ARREST THE EMPLOYERS!

I guarantee you within six months the ants won't be coming to the kitchen looking for honey/money.........if there isn't any to be had......

they _will_ be changing their own country if they have to, to get commensurate wages.........

send them home to have their own War of Independence from the Aristocracy........

they've certainly seen a different way of doing things........

send them packing, so that the world gets to be a better place to live in beacause _they_

create it,

not steal it from someone else.

...

match that p e n d e j o !

"Has anyone heard about this report that I think Barbara Boxer came up with showing that the FCC did a study showing that concentrating media outlets into fewer owners reduces reporting on local news?"

They did finally discovered an old and still relevant thesis developed by Chomsky on the Manufacture of Consent!

you want to resolve the _illeagal_ aliens issue on the cheap?

ARREST THE EMPLOYERS!

I guarantee you within six months the ants won't be coming to the kitchen looking for honey/money.........if there isn't any to be had......

they _will_ be changing their own country if they have to, to get commensurate wages.........

send them home to have their own War of Independence from the Aristocracy........

they've certainly seen a different way of doing things........

send them packing, so that the world gets to be a better place to live in beacause _they_

create it,

not steal it from someone else.

...

match that pendejo!

======Yankee GO HOME=======

I wonder if we put out banners that say "Illegal Wetbacks GO HOME" we could resolve the border crossing issue on the cheap.

Nah, guess that won't work either.

Anyway, you can call the US and its leadership whatever you want, but you'd better believe its a nation that will, like any other, pursue its interests at the expense of anything that gets in our way. If we like you, we'll promote you. If we don't like you, we'll f*ck you over in any way we have to in order to get what we want and leave your husk of a corpse in our wake.

Any nation given the ability to do so will do the same damned thing. We're all nationalists in it for our own.

Sully,

Thank you for your reference and always wise analysis. You clearly are an informed consumer.

Will is right. America does need to see the light, but at the same time we cant shrink from our responsibility to forge a better world. Bush is right in that we should be democratizing the Middle East, but his means are off. There is an alternative approach. For anyone interested, take a look at my lastest post at The Bazaar Report "thebazaarreport.blogspot.com".

It is perplexing that in a country where politicians, companies, corporations and even the little store around the corner spend zillions of dollars on PR and image, when it comes to image and PR beyond our borders, it's a non-issue.

It suggests that in a sense our super-power status backed up by an arsenal the likes of which the world has never seen has led us to believe that we don't HAVE to pay attention to image and PR because nobody can compete with us - we can out-bomb, out-gun, out-obliterate any country on the planet. Afterall, one only has to worry about image and PR when faced with a formidable competitor.

It is obvious, however, that the missing ingredient in our wooden-headed foreign policy is our failure to notice that there are far more of THEM than there are of us. (US population is 300 million; China's army alone numbers 2 billion; there are 1.4 billion Muslims world-wide...) Those numbers alone indicate a lot of potentially unfriendly "boots on the ground."

I really don't know much about Chavez,

however I do know OIL is a commodity that Venezuela has plenty of.......

and that many United States Military types used to go there for vacation as it was a cheap place to stay that was exotic.

All the posturing by Chavez the last couple of years about the United States was really about him being afraid that his country would become another Iraq getting raped in the allies by the upper class taking what they want..........

taking what they want,

are you one of the richest people in the United States or just reading about them.......

they seem to be getting rich faster?

as the poor get poor faster. Dickens wrote to alert people to the situation of the poor, as the transition occurs........moving from doing alright to surviving........

remember you _had_ a choice.

Is the Rev Serious...Has the Rev popped his afro (whats left of it)?

How serious am I about what I am saying? Imagine this?

The Rev is in the audience where 8 individuals have been asked to speak. Their names are as follows: Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rove, Libby, Rice and Fidel Castro?

Ask me which of the speakers does the Rev trust, and which one does the Rev believe is more likely to be truthful?

Answer: The true freedom fighter, Fidel Castro!

I'm not kidding folks, Fidel and Hugo should slip across the border with the illegals, apply for American citizenship (then after picking lettuce or replacing worn out roof tiles), later run for Office, let's say the Presidency. These two would get my vote before Bush ever would, if he could run again!

It is too bad that many Americans have never come to understand what America was supposed to be all about, freedom, justice and liberty; sadly, America has never lived up to or fulfilled its promises!

It would appear that a 'peaceful Revolution' has begun, involving civil discourse, and wouldn't it be nice if the American empire would be the first to acknowledge the voices of discontent and make the neccessary changes without any one else being slaughtered?

Sure that the foreing policy of the US have not been the most acurrate. But this is not time to be confuse about the real situation. Hugo Chavez reach the power because a mistake made by venezuelans in ellecting him as a pressident. We didn´t Know what kind of person he really was. Now we know that he is really a tyrant, that wants to subjet Venezuela and latin américa to his demands. He is working and using whoever or whatever would be usefull to increase the contradictions in our societies without any meassures, in order to divide and make us weak, so he can spread his wrong idiology of a new socialisim and treat peolpe like a sect using ( One of His Memtors ) Norberto Ceresole´s premise of " LIDER - ARMED FORCES and PEOPLE ". But he is really leadding us into a caos very soon if we aren´t able to unmask his plans and stop him.

Thank you.

Rev,
Dont call back the (evil?) genius

...I suspect that the JeeNious could not take us anymore and he defected to some place like Guatamala, where he can live out his life in contemplation while chewing...leaves!

mon frère

...gracias!

Bush's Axis of Evil...Reagan's Evil Empire...!

Let me see if I can get this most recent permutation of an American double-standard by straight. American Presidents and politicians can label other nations as the Axis-of-Evil or as an Evil Empire? And, American Presidents and politicians can also refer to foreign leaders as dictators, despots, fascists and strong men? On the other hand, the same American leaders and citizens cannot believe or accept the moral turpitude or audacity of some lowly leader of a third-world nation banana Republic using the American tactics in referring to America's President as, 'The Devil'. Now the latter some of my snooty comrades would remark, is uncivilized!

Now what are some Americans more upset about, the fact that Mr. Chavez referred to Mr. Bush as 'The Devil'? Or are some Americans more outraged that this man had the nerve to come to America and stand before the whole world and refer to Mr. Bush as The Devil? And here it comes, 'doesn't he know that we are a SuperPower? Mr. Chavez must have spent some time with the Danish Press: remember a few years ago when the Danish Press published caricatures of Mohammed. And what did Americans say to the Muslims, ah, get order it, we do those kind of things in a free society.

Well Americans, get over it and bear with the Rev for a moment. For what nation has a history of, during its short existence, referring to other humans with other disparaging names like savages, gorillas, heathens, coons, wetbacks, wops, slant-eyes...shall I go on?

Americans, let's take everything that Mr. Chavez said in his speech to the United Nations 48 hours ago into consideration. However, in place of the name 'Bush or the United States', lets insert the name Germany, The Soviet Union, The Empire of Japan or the People's Republic of China. And, let's think of the ascription, 'The Devil, in place of the names of such luminaries as Mao, Tito, Hitler, Hirohito or Idi, if you will. And what would be the American response then? I suspect that it would be something like, bravo, Amen, or give that man a Cuban [cigaro]!

Folks, seven years ago when the Taliban were fighting against the American-named Evil Empire, Russia, America joined in and supplied the Taliban with both weapons and financial aid, just as America injected itself into the Vietnam war reportedly to stop the expansion of the Communist empire/dictatorship.

Americans eventually joined in with the world it would seem, to stop the expansionists, only to subsequently work its magic back home and fight to replace that empire, over the next half-century following WWII, with its own form of a hegemonic imperialist empire.

And now the world is saying to America that you have taken on all of the bad behaviors of an evil empire, and acting much like Hitler's Germany! The world is saying that now America has become the evil hegemonic empire that nations have come together in the past to get rid of, and turned a deaf ear to the voices of reason from around the world.

And sadly, just like those empires that preceded the American empire, the leaders of America and its citizen supporters are not listening either. For when anyone refers to America as an imperialist empire, Americans cry blasphemy, balderdash and death to the blasphemers...

The world is changing but clearly many Americans will not soon adapt. I suspect that just as it had to be done during the Civil Rights Movementin America in the early 60's and 70's, the majority of Americans once again will likely have to be forced 'from outside' to make, at least cosmetic changes, inside.

Frankly, I don't which is worse, that Americans believe that there is a real devil, or that Mr. Chavez and others believe that Mr. Bush is 'The Devil'. Now that is something to ponder or as one writer wrote, an enigma wrapped up in a conundrum!

P.S. Namron,

You might be shocked my friend to find out that both you and Mr. Admadinajab have something in common, he is unsure about whether there ever was a Jewish Holocaust, and you were still in denial about the Black Holocaust in America lthat lasted for 400 years, when we last debated.

Think about it for as David Brion Davis said:

'History is taught with an illusory sense of the present....and

Modern History should be taught from every angle'

W.C. wrote:
--If you don't beleive that the media is trying to brainwash you into believing Bush's agenda, just get a hold of the live coverage of the press conference from FOX today.--

I have to agree Fox is totally biased and then some, and CNN and others may be acting carefully so as to not do a Dan Rather and embarass themselves. But even if you are convinced that MSNBC, Fox, CNN, ABC, NBC and CBS are all conspiring to brainwash America, you have only scratched the surface of American journalism. True they are the big ones on TV, but this country has many papers, radio stations as well as online journalists. There is the BBC on each night on my TV and of course there is the english language Al Jazeera online (talk about brainwashing).

It just goes to show that no reporting is totally biased and an informed person gets their news from multiple sources. With todays technology that ability is greater than ever. For example I watch Fox as well as CNN, the BBC, The Daily Show, and read the Post, NY Times, and The Independent. I mainly watch Fox for a good laugh and the Daily Show to see if they caught the stupidity I see on Fox. Your example of the "Axis of Evil President" would be a good example.

Has anyone heard about this report that I think Barbara Boxer came up with showing that the FCC did a study showing that concentrating media outlets into fewer owners reduces reporting on local news? But the FCC wanted to loosen the regulations on media ownership allowing more concentration arguing that it did not reduce local news coverage and buried the report. Thank God the democrats are on top of this one. The republican stranglehold on government is getting tighter with HUD head having a *policy* on cronyism and now the FCC hiding studies that report the opposite of what they say, not to mention all the other cronism and corruption. Just look at the Park Service. If you want to see how good people are leaving or being forced out of government service by this administration look at this web site and scroll down to "The Fallen Legion" heading:
http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=28817
The next democratic president will have a lot of mopping up to do and a democrat House and Senate a lot of investigating to do. Don't worry too much about what you see on TV, worry about you and your neighbors voting.

I think that Afghan President Hamid Karzai got to the root of America's current global problems speaking at the Clinton Global Initiative in NYC.

Karzai pointed out that many of America's global problems have emerged by a lack of engagement with the world to prevent the conditions that create instability. This has led us to react with surgery (the use of military action) where early attention to diet (prevention) might have been much more effective:

"On Thursday morning... Karzai said the West had, at times, exhibited a "lack of morality when it applies to dealing with the rest of the world" because it often did not realize how its intervention or lack thereof would affect itself.

He noted that he had urged Western governments for years before the Sept. 11 attacks to help the people of Afghanistan. "But no attention was paid because you in the West were not hurt," Karzai said. "It was only us and that didn't matter, and that is wrong. Seriously."

As to what should be done. The Clinton Global Initiative presents a model of creating a less dysfunctional U.N., which should be at the center of our attention, rather than the periphery:

http://www.maximsnews.com/1006mnunseptember21.htm

On a related note. I hardly think that the rise of an authoritarian China to co-superpower status is the solution to this problem, as one earlier poster seems to suggest. While I think it is inevitable that China will rise to a super-power position later on in the century. I think that the whole model of wasteful Pentagon spending this suggests is largely unnecessary(see David Unger's discussion of "Our Indefensible National Security Budget" in the September 20th edition of the NY Times):

http://select.nytimes.com/2006/09/20/opinion/20talkingpoints.html

The money spent on military hardware for (a superpower military adversary who does not yet exist) would be better spent in a competition for the minds and hearts of the global community ala initiatives patterned after the Clinton Global Initiative. In a sense the Clinton Global Initiative is in a smaller, privatized model or demonstration project for a less dysfunctional U.N.

Unless we reorient our thinking to changing the rules of international competition from mostly hard power to mostly soft power we will continue to waste valuable resources enabling a more dangerous world, rather than using foresight to meet the global challenges from climate change to eliminating poverty, improving health, and mitigating religious and ethnic conflict, that rightly, the Clinton Global Initiative is focusing on. Besides being the morally right thing to do it has other positive attributes as well-- it is more effective, it is more rational, and in the long-run it is vastly cheaper and less dangerous to the world than our present dysfunctional course of action. We desperately need new political leadership in power in America that recognizes both the challenges and opportunities of the US as a superpower to help guide the world (without hubris)into a safer glide path for future development.

Scott P posted:
"This part of the world intends to blame the civilized world for it's failure"

You are certainly talking about Bush's America blaming the Islamic world for failing to capture OBL...
But if you locate yourself within the 'civilized world', we don't have the same definition of 'civilization'.

Scott P. posted
"Yes, Iran's agenda is clear. It facilitates the spread of islamic extremism, and supports the Wahabist madras