 |
||||
|
|
December 08, 2005John Lennon, Handguns and Me: A 25th AnniversaryTwenty-five years ago today, John Lennon was shot dead outside the Dakota apartment building in New York City. He died about 11:00 pm. In those days, news was not so instantaneous. It wasn't until the next morning that many people--myself included--learned of this horrific event. At that time, I was working at the Center for the Study of Responsive Law in Washington, DC--otherwise known as the office of Ralph Nader. I was taking a year off from college. The news that morning hit me--and millions of others--hard. After stumbling into the office--a rabbit warren of offices, some separated by walls made of cartons containing remaindered books produced by the Nader operation--I was asked to deliver a letter from Nader to President Carter. We didn't fax back then. I don't recall what the letter was about, but Nader was probably again blasting Carter, who at this point was a lame duck preparing to vacate the White House after losing to Ronald Reagan the previous month, for failing the public interest on some regulatory matter. I didn't mind the assignment. I didn't feel much like working or talking to anyone. It was a cold morning and about half a mile walk. I could stretch this mundane delivery task into an hour of solitude. I walked down 16th Street NW, and within a few blocks I passed the headquarters of the National Rifle Association, an entire building next to one of Washington's lovely traffic circles. I stared at the building. My sadness and numbness slid into anger. I didn't know yet that Lennon's killer, Mark David Chapman, had purchased the .38-caliber handgun with which he shot Lennon, at a Hawaii gun store despite having a record of mental illness. But I did know that the NRA and its allies in the gun industry were one of the most powerful lobbies in town and that their primary concern was easy access to weapons. I started talking to the imposing building. No, I said, no, you're not going to get off scott-free here, no, no way. And an idea struck. After dropping off the letter to Carter at one of the entrances to the White House, I hurried back to the office. I told Russell Mokhiber, one of the staffers and a veteran agitator, that I had decided to mount a protest rally outside the NRA's office. Here was a chance, I thought, to spur a debate on gun control. I wanted time off to organize the event. Mokhiber approached Nader, who said that would be fine, but that I should do it as a private citizen, not as an associate of the Center. That was fine by me. I immediately formed Citizens against Gun Violence, an "ad hoc citizens group." CAGV--that is, me--quickly picked a date a few days hence for the event and designed a flyer advertising the rally. In recent weeks, there had been other examples of handgun violence in Washington. The brother of author David Halberstam, a local doctor, had been shot and killed by an intruder whom he had chased out of his home. And a popular community activist, a young African-American woman, had been shot dead, too. The flyer featured both of them and Lennon. And I asked a copy shop--no Kinko's back then--to print hundreds of copies on a super-rush basis. It could in those days take a day or two to get such a job done. The person at the counter looked at the material and said, "Come back in an hour." CAGV grew in numbers, by which I mean that several interns at the Center and some friends of mine volunteered to put up flyers around town. Mokhiber went out and bought a bullhorn. I filed a permit application minutes before it was due. A local radio station announced that Lennon fans would be gathering at the end of the day on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. And as soon as the copies of the flyer were ready, I picked them up and headed toward the Lincoln Memorial. There were several hundred people on the steps. One scrawny-looking fellow was in the middle of the crowd, holding up a cheap cassette player--no iPods, either--that was blaring out various Beatles and Lennon tunes. I politely pushed my way toward him. I handed him one of the flyers and asked if at an appropriate time he would let the people around him know about the rally. He looked at the flyer. The cassette player was playing "While My Guitar Gently Weeps." He said, No, you tell them. The song ended. He turned off the machine and said, "This guy has something he wants to say to you." On the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, I made my first and only political speech. "We've just heard this song that says, 'After all this time, we must surely be learning," I began. "But are we? There are 10,000 handgun deaths a year. Are we learning how we can prevent that?" I noted that not only Lennon but other important members of our community had been killed by guns recently and that efforts to restrict guns routinely fail. "Why?" I asked. "Because people who work there"--I pointed across the Reflecting Pool toward the Capitol--"listen too much to the people over there"--I pointed in the direction of the NRA building. But, I added, now was an appropriate time to show that other Americans had different views. I asked the people there to come to the rally. And I'm afraid I said something corny like, "Imagine if everyone who feels as you do today showed up." When I was done, the scrawny fellow gave me a hug; the people applauded. I darted off to start putting up the flyers. Besides working the grassroots, CAGV had a media strategy. I had fellow workers at the Center call up various media outlets--particularly radio stations that played rock music. They asked for the news or program director and then said something like, "I hear there's going to be a large protest outside the NRA headquarters in three days to commemorate the death of John Lennon and to call for sensible handgun control, and I want to go. Do you have any information on this?" Of course, they did not. But invariably the person on the other end of the phone said, No, but if you find out anything please let me know. Hours later, I would call these media people and say, "I'm David Corn of Citizens Against Gun Violence, an ad hoc citizens group. I understand you're looking for information on the rally we're holding." Everyone was quite keen on listening to me. Several radio stations asked me to come into their studios to talk about the event. "Was I exploiting this tragedy to make a political point?" some asked. Yes, I said. The aim was to use this awful killing to advance policies that might prevent such another tragedy from occurring. Do you think, I countered, that John Lennon, the antiwar, antiviolence activist, would mind? Word got out. People started calling from all over the region. Some students at a college--I believe it was in Pennsylvania--were renting a bus. I contacted the leading gun control advocates in Washington, convinced them this event was actually going to happen, and got them to commit to attending and speaking. Within a day or two, the office had unofficially become the headquarters of CAGV. Nader asked what was going on, but he didn't seem to mind. Nor did his chief of staff, John Richard. The rally went off as planned. About one or two thousand people, I believe, showed up. There were camera crews, reporters from various newspapers. I put the professional handgun control advocates in front of the journalists; they gave the interviews. So too did relatives of Halberstam's brother and the community activist. All these people used the new bullhorn and spoke of the need for restraints on guns. I gave no speech. One woman approached me and said she had come because she had heard me on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. The bus from Pennsylvania (or wherever) arrived. Cars driving by honked. The event--as far as such events go--was a success. There was media coverage. Those who had come felt they had done something with their grief and anger. And as almost always happens when a prominent act of gun violence occurs, the topic of handgun was again on the radar screen. Not because of our effort, but we had done our part. However, that moment--like all moments--quickly faded. It is now 25 years later. John Lennon is still dead. (And so is George Harrison.) The NRA years ago moved to a bigger and better headquarters in suburban Virginia. The gun lobby has had its ups and downs, but it's been mostly ups of late (such as the expiration of the ban on assault weapons). Lennon's death, it turns out, was no catalyst for action. And we have still--after all this time--not learned how to stem the tide of gun violence. Which is one of several reasons why this anniversary of Lennon's death is a sad day. Posted by David Corn at December 8, 2005 11:43 AM |
|
|
"HUBRIS is a bold and provocative book that will quickly become an explosive part of the national debate on how we got involved in Iraq." --Tom Brokaw |
Comments
Mr. David Corn,
Great story, in a major sad way, on a very sad day. When you write from the heart it moves the reader. You are able to get right to the center of the feelings about the theme you address.
You really shame me, I have never taken up a cause with the energy you do (very often).
Your contribution is not limited to what you write but makes what you write a move valuable gift that you share so generously.
Thanks,
Kirk
Posted by: capt at December 8, 2005 11:57 AM
Crucifixion
By Phil Ochs
And the night comes again to the circle studded sky
The stars settle slowly, in loneliness they lie
'Till the universe expodes as a falling star is raised
Planets are paralyzed, mountains are amazed
But they all glow brighter from the briliance of the blaze
With the speed of insanity, then he dies.
In the green fields a turnin', a baby is born
His cries crease the wind and mingle with the morn
An assault upon the order, the changing of the guard
Chosen for a challenge that is hopelessly hard
And the only single sound is the sighing of the stars
But to the silence and distance they are sworn
So dance dance dance
Teach us to be true
Come dance dance dance
'Cause we love you
Images of innocence charge him go on
But the decadence of destiny is looking for a pawn
To a nightmare of knowledge he opens up the gate
And a blinding revelation is laid upon his plate
That beneath the greatest love is a hurricane of hate
And God help the critic of the dawn.
So he stands on the sea and shouts to the shore,
But the louder that he screams the longer he's ignored
For the wine of oblivion is drunk to the dregs
And the merchants of the masses almost have to be begged
'Till the giant is aware, someone's pulling at his leg,
And someone is tapping at the door.
To dance dance dance
Teach us to be true
Come dance dance dance
'Cause we love you
Then his message gathers meaning and it spreads accross the land
The rewarding of his pain is the following of the man
But ignorance is everywhere and people have their way
Success is an enemy to the losers of the day
In the shadows of the churches, who knows what they pray
For blood is the language of the band.
The Spanish bulls are beaten; the crowd is soon beguiled,
The matador is beautiful, a symphony of style
Excitement is estatic, passion places bets
Gracefully he bows to ovations that he gets
But the hands that are applauding are slippery with sweat
And saliva is falling from their smiles
So dance dance dance
Teach us to be true
Come dance dance dance
'Cause we love you
Then this overflow of life is crushed into a liar
The gentle soul is ripped apart and tossed into the fire.
First a smile of rejection at the nearness of the night
Truth becomes a tragedy limping from the light
All the (canons|heavens) are horrified, they stagger from the sight
As the cross is trembling with desire.
They say they can't believe it, it's a sacreligious shame
Now, who would want to hurt such a hero of the game?
But you know I predicted it; I knew he had to fall
How did it happen? I hope his suffering was small.
Tell me every detail, I've got to know it all,
And do you have a picture of the pain?
So dance dance dance
Teach us to be true
Come dance dance dance
'Cause we love you
Time takes her toll and the memory fades
but his glory is broken, in the magic that he made.
Reality is ruined; it's the freeing from the fear
The drama is distorted, to what they want to hear
Swimming in their sorrow, in the twisting of a tear
As they wait for a new thrill parade.
The eyes of the rebel have been branded by the blind
To the safety of sterility, the threat has been refined
The child was created to the slaughterhouse he's led
So good to be alive when the eulogy is read
The climax of emotion, the worship of the dead
And the cycle of sacrifice unwinds.
So dance dance dance
Teach us to be true
Come dance dance dance
'Cause we love you
And the night comes again to the circle studded sky
The stars settle slowly, in loneliness they lie
'Till the universe expodes as a falling star is raised
Planets are paralyzed, mountains are amazed
But they all glow brighter from the briliance of the blaze
With the speed of insanity, then he died.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at December 8, 2005 11:57 AM
Ffolks,
I've noticed the tunes in my head (to which the voices sing in harmony) lately have been greatly slanted to Beatles and John Lennon tunes. I think "Eggman" has had something to do with that, but I honestly believe not a day goes by without a lyric or a tune touched by John Lennon hasn't crossing my mine. (an admittedly brief journey)
My local NPR CLASSICAL station just ended "Performance Today" with John Lennon singing "Norweigan Wood". A telling thing, that.
His life's work crossed all lines and continues to touch, influence and move people in every corner of planet earth.
If, somewhere out there, there's intelligent life (gods know it hasn't happened HERE yet) I can only pray that the first radio waves they decipher sound like.... "All we are saying...is GIVE PEACE A CHANCE".
Imagine...
A Working Class Hero
Posted by: Hajji at December 8, 2005 12:20 PM
I remember exactly where I was when I learned that Lennon was shot dead - doing push ups in eleventh grade P.E. class - one hero shot down by a kook with a gun -
standing up to the NRA was admirable of you, but times have certainly changed haven't they? - it might come to pass that one would wish for a gun, or be glad that they already have one -
no one is taking my gun(s) away now, that is for sure
Posted by: James Ha at December 8, 2005 12:24 PM
Today's Democracy Now! includes a performance of John Lennon's "John Sinclair" from a free John Sinclair rally performance, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1971.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at December 8, 2005 12:29 PM
Wow, David really likes talking about himself. Just like a progressive/liberal to blame the gun instead of the wack job that pulled the trigger.
Capt, it is really embarrassing reading your posts about David. It must take him all day to clean his ass of all that slobber from the ass kissin you give him. Hey, what ever chokes your chicken!!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 12:29 PM
Where was I? Getting ready for school, hearing on the mourning news. Then meeting up with the group who stopped to smoke on the defunct railroad platforms every morning. The normal dulling effect of the smoke did nothing to deaden the pain of the news. That day in school was a blurry swirl of "other things" I refused to allow in.
A days before I'd stood on stage in my Catholic School to sing sang, "Imagine" for some assembly. That remains my only public, solo singing performance.
-T
Posted by: Hajji at December 8, 2005 12:32 PM
"A FEW days before...."
Posted by: Hajji at December 8, 2005 12:33 PM
HA,
Happiness is a warm gun. May it continue to give you cold comfort and may the people you know and love never be harmed by it.
Posted by: Neil Sagan at December 8, 2005 12:36 PM
Hajji,
Let me get this straight. On a Catholic School stage you sang, "Imagine no religion...?"
Cool.
Two, one, two, three, four
Ev'rybody's talking about
Bagism, Shagism, Dragism, Madism,
Ragism, Tagism
This-ism, That-ism, is-m, is-m, is-m
All we are saying is give piece a chance,
All we are saying is give piece a chance
C'mon
Ev'rybody's talking about ministers,
Sinister, Banisters
And canisters, Bishops, Fishops,
Rabbis, and Pop eyes, Bye, bye, bye byes
All we are saying is give peace a chance,
All we are saying is give peace a chance
Let me tell you now
Revoluton, evolution, masturbation,
Flagellation, regulation, integrations,
Meditations, United Nations,
Congratulations
Ev'rybody's talking about
John and Yoko, Timmy Leary, Rosemary,
Tommy Smothers, Bobby Dylan,
Tommy Copper,
Derek Taylor, Norman Mailer,
Allen Ginsberg, Hare Krishna,
Hare
Krishna
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at December 8, 2005 12:41 PM
"to call for sensible handgun control"
I do not think David was off base at all.
Sensible gun control is sensible. ie: a person with mental health issues access to firearms is insane.
Just sayin'
capt
Posted by: capt at December 8, 2005 12:44 PM
I was getting ready for class. Later that eve there was a candle light vigil. Many attended, Then slowly the songs began. everyone got bolder when we sang and sang...
"All We Are Saying
Is Give Peace A Chance"
Three days later, my team of students and geologoists left for Pakistan. The country was very curious about our American treatment of John Lennon. Two men offered candles.
Posted by: th at December 8, 2005 12:50 PM
As I loaded this article of Mr. Corn's, by coincidence, Lennon was singing "Cry Baby Cry" through the speakers of my computer...from the White Album.
Yes, it was a terrible crime, and a horrible loss.
I do wonder, though, how many people as talented as Mr. Lennon have died in Mr. Bush's war? In car accidents in the past year? How many people potentially as talented as Mr. Lennon will never write music, or sing, due to their death in an abortion clinic?
Mr. Lennon's senseless death reminds me that senseless death is all around us.
Bob in North Dakota
Posted by: Bob in North Dakota at December 8, 2005 12:51 PM
Robert,
It was in my 11th year of being in a class of about 20-some in a 2-story school builing with maybe 18 classrooms...
One of the first things they taught me there was to QUESTION EVERYTHING... They were quite surprised when I actually did!
As adversarial as it became, as much trouble I caused for the teachers, my poor MOM, and myself, I wouldn't trade that education for the world.
-T
Posted by: Hajji at December 8, 2005 12:52 PM
I cannot place my memory for that day. No memory at all. I know I heard about it but . . .
Maybe a mental block.
capt
Posted by: capt at December 8, 2005 12:52 PM
Who Killed John Lennon
Do not mention his name.
The man kills John Lennon, now he's on TV again.
He's blaming Holden Caulfield in the face of the lens.
And each time he does it, he kills him again.
Who killed John Lennon?
A loser with a pistol, a martyr's best friend.
And each time he's televised, he kills him again.
It's the prize that he wanted when he loaded the gun.
And each time he's mentioned, murder is done.
So, who killed John Lennon?
A no one.
He's on TV again.
He's playing the hero.
The networks won't let the story end.
He brings in the ratings for them.
He's playing the hero.
But he's a killer.
He's been convicted.
He's been convicted...
His lawyer must think it's a game.
Though he knows Lennon's songs, both in word and by name.
He cold calls the networks, retrieves all the funds.
Then he scrapes his percentage when the programs are run.
Who killed John Lennon?
A lawyer, an agent.
Big money's best friend.
And each time he's televised, they kill him again.
It's the prize that they wanted when he emptied the gun.
And each time he's mentioned, murder is done.
So who killed John Lennon?
A no one.
A no one.
-Ellis Paul
Posted by: Hajji at December 8, 2005 12:57 PM
cold comfort? - no. I hate guns. but food and water may become quite an issue someday, and guns may be the only way to hang on to food and water.
Posted by: James Ha at December 8, 2005 12:58 PM
Over 30,000 firearms deaths (2002?)
Three times as many as back then.
Very sad.
capt
Posted by: capt at December 8, 2005 12:59 PM
Autobiography of a Pistol
__________________________
I'm a pistol, a forty-five,
I just shot two men in this hot-house dive.
Now I'm smoking - burning hot barrel of metal.
Believe it or not, I was bought by this guy named Ray,
a card carrying member of the NRA,
But he left me out in his car one day,
And now the finger on my trigger hasn't seen it's sixteenth birthday.
Some things they never tell you when you're riding the assembly line.
Like who'll be the hands to hold you and what's their state of mind - -
Hey, I'm not much bigger than a pointed index finger.
So who am I to lay the blame?
I'm only here to cause some pain...
The sirens --
I can hear them, they're singing ...
They're singing my song,
"When the sun sets, I get upset --
Darkness fills me and I want to light up the world"...
Would you believe I've seen better days?
I starred in westerns and won rave reviews.
Now I sit on a shelf, tagged for judgment day.
I've got to change the jury's point of view.
You see, guns don't kill people, it's the bullets that do.
I said guns don't kill people, bullets do.
Yeah, the bullets do...
Some things they never tell you when you're riding the assembly line.
Like who'll be the hands to hold you and what's their state of mind - -
Hey, I'm not much bigger than a pointed index finger.
So who am I to lay the blame?
I'm only here to cause some pain...
-Ellis Paul
(prolific on the subject, eh?)
Posted by: Hajji at December 8, 2005 01:04 PM
off topic:: look at these flight paths of the highjacked planes on 911:: flight path precision :: choreography that even the bolshoi could be envious of
Posted by: James Ha at December 8, 2005 01:06 PM
> David really likes talking about himself.
Baf likes to hear himself talk.
> Just like a progressive/liberal to blame the gun instead of the wack job that pulled the trigger.
It takes both a gun and a shooter. I don't know why you think it can be done without both. "Wack jobs" as you so eloquently put it, shouldn't have access to hand guns but how do you know in advance? We've got a powerful NRA lobby that fights for accces to handguns as well as assault rifles. What is the sense in providing the public with assault rifles? The issue is not just one of self-defense, ita about the safety of unarmed citizens and powerful economic interests, gun makers. When everybody caries guns, your safety is at the whim of the wack job that doesn't like the way you looked at him.
>Capt, it is really embarrassing reading your posts about David. It must take him all day to clean his ass of all that slobber from the ass kissin you give him. Hey, what ever chokes your chicken!!
This statement merits no response but three questions, you want in? as ass-licker or as ass-licked? or can we just leave it as ass?
Posted by: Neil at December 8, 2005 01:12 PM
Feingold says he'll filibuster Patriot Act
12/08/2005 @ 12:30 pm
Filed by RAW STORY
Senator Russ Feingold issued the following statement this afternoon in response to an announcement that the House and Senate conference committee had reached an agreement to extend controversial provisions of the Patriot Act. (Read about the compromise here.
"I will do everything I can, including a filibuster, to stop this Patriot Act conference report, which does not include adequate safeguards to protect our constitutional freedoms. The version of the Patriot Act that was signed today is a major disappointment. I appreciate that it includes four-year sunsets on three controversial provisions, but merely sunsetting bad law is not adequate. We need to make substantive changes to the law, and without those changes I am confident there will be strong, bipartisan opposition here in the Senate.
This isn't about stopping Patriot Act reauthorization. The President could sign Patriot Act reauthorization legislation into law tomorrow if the House would just take up and pass the compromise Senate bill that was approved unanimously in the Senate earlier this year Ð a bill that includes important and reasonable privacy protections. The conference committee had the opportunity to fix many of the provisions of the Patriot Act to which Americans across the political spectrum have voiced their opposition over the last four years. Unfortunately, they decided not to listen. This battle is not over."
Posted by: capt at December 8, 2005 01:21 PM
CNN virtually ignores Pearl Harbor anniversary
Could it be that they donÕt want the words ÒPearl HarborÓ mentioned? (UPDATE 10:35 AM ET: CNN mentioned Pearl Harbor in its news update. No stories on the event however.)
Whenever there is an event, a holiday, celebrity news, or anything that enters the public discourse, a percentage of people automatically search the Internet for information related to the topic de jour. Could it be that the media do not want you to ÒGoogleÓ ÒPearl Harbor?Ó Could it be that they are terrified that you will find out about the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) and their call for a Ònew Pearl Harbor?Ó Performing this search will surely lead people to information about the events of 9/11 and the very incriminating facts related to the members of the Bush administration who signed on to the Project for a New American CenturyÕs colonial agenda. It will also lead you to a mother load of information about the real facts surrounding 9/11.
^^^^^^^^^^6
oh, I forgot ~ there IS no PNAC ~ ha
Posted by: James Ha at December 8, 2005 01:40 PM
[The disarming of citizens] has a double effect, it palsies the hand and brutalizes the mind: a habitual disuse of physical forces totally destroys the moral [force]; and men lose at once the power of protecting themselves, and of discerning the cause of their oppression.
-- Joel Barlow, "Advice to the Privileged Orders", 1792-93
Posted by: WHY at December 8, 2005 01:46 PM
David Corn is an idealist and he should be an idealist, especially since he has young children. Thoughts of butterflies and flowers are better than real thoughts of America. We live in a real world and in this real world America is a nation that embraces hatred, murders, torture, and wars. America is also a corrupt and a deranged country.
Posted by: Gerald at December 8, 2005 01:49 PM
Niel
You can leave it at ass!! I would not want to take the title of ass licker from you and capt. It might hurt your feelings!! Besides no telling where Davids ass has been- ewwww!!!
Yes, it does take both a gun and a wack job, but David seems to only write about the gun, this makes my point.
As long as progressive/liberals do not have access to guns then we can eliminate the wack job part.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 01:56 PM
UN rights chief warns on torture
The absolute ban on torture, a cornerstone of the international human rights edifice É is becoming a casualty of the so-called war on terror," she said.
Ms Arbour's comments preceded a ruling by Britain's highest court yesterday that evidence obtained under torture cannot be used in British legal hearings, backing the case of eight terrorism suspects and civil rights campaigners.
A panel of seven Law Lords overthrew a decision by Britain's Appeal Court last year that secret tribunals hearing cases relating to the terrorism suspects could consider evidence that would not be acceptable in a criminal court trial.
That meant British authorities could consider information that might have been extracted using torture in another country, provided British agents were not directly involved.
"I have to conclude that the duty not to countenance the use of torture by admission of evidence in judicial proceedings must be regarded as paramount, and to allow its admission would shock the conscience, abuse or degrade the proceedings and involve the state in moral defilement," Lord Carswell said.
The Lords' ruling comes a day after the US banned its interrogators around the world from treating prisoners inhumanely after pressure from European governments and the US Congress.
*****end of clip*****
We banned torture yesterday?
capt
Posted by: capt at December 8, 2005 01:56 PM
Gerald
"America is also a corrupt and deranged country"
No, that would only be you and your Cornnut buddies Gerald.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 02:00 PM
David, I know how passionate a subject this is for liberals and progressives, but the statistics don't lie. A couple days ago I posted a letter from a police officer in Australia with the statistics of the first year of a complete gun ban in that country. The results, as the statistics below confirm, banning guns is a complete failure. There's got to be a better way. Common sense dictates that convicted felons and people with mental health issues should not be able to legally possess a gun, but there's the rub, like illegal drugs, anyone who wants a gun can get one, and criminals are in no way deterred from getting them illegally. So what to do? Disarm the overwhelmingly law abiding citizenry in a bogus attempt to reduce gun crimes? How does that reduce crime when they were never the problem? The problem is still out there, running around with guns, only now the innocent people have no means of defense other than the hope that a police officer will show up in time to save the day. Sorry, but I don't have much faith in that scenario! I do not want to give up my personal right to own a gun because of some well intentioned but unworkable solution like banning guns for everyone.
Five years before the D.C. Council banned nearly all firearms in 1976, the District's murder rate fell from 37 to 27 per 100,000 people. In the five years after 1976, the murder rate rose to 35 per 100,000 people. Between 1976 and 1991, the D.C. homicide rate rose 200 percent. The national homicide rate during the same 15-year period rose just 12 percent.
According to the FBI, the District has the highest violent crime rate in the nation of any city over 500,000 people. Its homicide rate is eight times higher than the rest of the country and four times higher than similarly sized Ft. Worth, Texas. The comparison is apt. Texas has some of the most constitutional gun laws in the country.
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 02:03 PM
Pentagon Memo on Torture-Motivated Transfer Cited
By Ken Silverstein
The Los Angeles Times
Thursday 08 December 2005
A court filing describes a classified proposal to send a detainee away for information extraction.
Washington - Although Bush administration officials have denied that they transfer terrorism suspects to countries where they are likely to be abused, a classified memorandum described in a court case indicates that the Pentagon has considered sending a captured militant abroad to be interrogated under threat of torture.
The classified memo is summarized - its actual contents are blacked out - in a petition filed by attorneys for Majid Mahmud Abdu Ahmad, a detainee held by the Pentagon at its Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, facility.
The March 17, 2004, Defense Department memo indicated that American officials were frustrated in trying to obtain information from Ahmad, according to the description of the classified memo in the court petition. The officials suggested sending Ahmad to an unspecified foreign country that employed torture in order to increase chances of extracting information from him, according to the petition's description of the memo.
The precise contents of the Pentagon memo on Ahmad were not revealed, but the memo was described in the petition by New York attorney Marc D. Falkoff, who contested the transfer of Ahmad and 12 other Yemenis in U.S. District Court in Washington this year.
Falkoff's description was not disputed by U.S. government lawyers or by U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, who read the actual Pentagon document. The judge ruled in favor of the Yemenis on March 12, and Ahmad has not been transferred from the Guantanamo Bay detention facility.
The memo appears to call into question repeated assertions by the administration that it does not use foreign governments to abuse suspected militants - what critics call "torture by proxy."
Pentagon officials did not return calls Wednesday seeking comment on the memo.
More.
*****************
That should make these Europeans feel so much more reassured:
NATO Allies Welcome Rice's Explanation
Thursday December 8, 2005 5:16 PM
By ROBERT WIELAARD
Associated Press Writer
BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) - European foreign ministers said Thursday that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had ``cleared the air'' by assuring NATO allies that the U.S. does not allow torture of terrorist suspects and respects principles of the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of prisoners of war.
Shifting away from a confrontation with Washington, some NATO allies welcomed Rice's explanation of U.S. views on secret prisons and treatment of terrorist suspects at a private dinner Wednesday with her NATO and European Union counterparts.
``It is my impression that Secretary Rice ... cleared the air. You will not see this discussion continuing'' at the NATO headquarters, NATO Secretary General Jaap De Hoop Scheffer told a news conference.
Rice ``addressed the principles that guide United States policy with regards to respect for international law,'' Belgian Foreign Minister Karel de Gucht said.
More.
*****************
Who knew?
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at December 8, 2005 02:03 PM
Looks like the terrorists have decided to torture and kill their hostage today!
Where was Cindy Sheenan? Why was she not protesting this? Where is the outrage by you Cornnuts?
Oh ya, it's because it wasn't our military doing the torture, who cares what the enemy does!!!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 02:03 PM
Saladin 29
There is a better way- no guns for Cornnuts and we all will be safe!!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 02:08 PM
Where was Cindy Sheehan?
#4 on the petition, between Dennis Halliday and Noam Chomsky.
An Urgent Appeal: Please Release Our Friends in Iraq
Four members of Christian Peacemaker Teams were taken this past Saturday, November 26, in Baghdad, Iraq. They are not spies, nor do they work in the service of any government. They are people who have dedicated their lives to fighting against war and have clearly and publicly opposed the invasion and occupation of Iraq. They are people of faith, but they are not missionaries. They have deep respect for the Islamic faith and for the right of Iraqis to self-determination.
C.P.T. first came to Iraq in October 2002 to oppose the US invasion, and it has remained in the country throughout the occupation in solidarity with the Iraqi people. The group has been invaluable in alerting the world to many of the horrors facing Iraqis detained in US-run prisons and detention centers. C.P.T. was among the first to document the torture occurring at the Abu Ghraib prison, long before the story broke in the mainstream press. Its members have spent countless hours interviewing Iraqis about abuse and torture suffered at the hands of US forces and have disseminated this information internationally.
Each of the four C.P.T. members being held in Iraq has dedicated his life to resisting the darkness and misery of war and occupation. Convinced that it is not enough to oppose the war from the safety of their homes, they made the difficult decision to go to Iraq, knowing that the climate of mistrust created by foreign occupation meant that they could be mistaken for spies or missionaries. They went there with a simple purpose: to bear witness to injustice and to embody a different kind of relationship between cultures and faiths. Members of C.P.T. willingly undertook the risks of living among Iraqis, in a common neighborhood outside of the infamous Green Zone. They sought no protection from weapons or armed guards, trusting in, and benefiting from, the goodwill of the Iraqi people. Acts of kindness and hospitality from Iraqis were innumerable and ensured the C.P.T. membersÕ safety and wellbeing. We believe that spirit will prevail in the current situation.
We appeal to those holding these activists to release them unharmed so that they may continue their vital work as witnesses and peacemakers.
Signed,**
Arundhati Roy, author, The God of Small Things
Tariq Ali, author, Bush in Babylon
Denis Halliday, former U.N. Assistant Secretary General and Head of the U.N. Humanitarian Program in Iraq (1997-1998)
Cindy Sheehan, mother of Casey Sheehan
Noam Chomsky, Professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Haifa Zangana, Iraqi novelist
Kamil Mahdi, Iraqi economist and anti-occupation activist. Lecturer, University of Exeter
Mahmood Mamdani, "Herbert Lehman Professor of Government," Columbia University
Rashid Khalidi, "Edward Said Professor of Arab Studies," Middle East Institute, Columbia University
Cindy and Craig Corrie, parents of Rachel Corrie, killed by Israeli military
Hasan Abu Nimah, Permanent Representative of Jordan at the United Nations (1995-2000)
Ralph Nader, former independent presidential candidate
James Abourezk, former US Senator
Howard Zinn, historian
Naseer Aruri, Professor (Emeritus) University of Massachusetts Dartmouth
Kathy Kelly, Voices for Creative Nonviolence/Nobel Peace Prize Nominee
Naomi Klein, author/journalist
Michael Ratner, President, Center for Constitutional Rights
Rev. Daniel Berrigan, poet
Jeremy Scahill, independent journalist
Mazin Qumsiyeh, author, Sharing the Land Of Canaan, board member US Campaign to End the Occupation
Milan Rai, author, War Plan Iraq: Ten Reasons Against War on Iraq
Sam Husseini, writer
Dahr Jamail, independent journalist
Ali Abunimah & Nigel Parry, Co-founders, Electronic Iraq
Leslie Cagan, National Coordinator, United for Peace and Justice
Eve Ensler, author
Jennifer Harbury, Director, Stop Torture Permanently Campaign
Bishop Thomas J. Gumbleton, Auxiliary Bishop, Archdiocese of Detroit
Anthony Arnove, author, Iraq: The Logic of Withdrawal
Medea Benjamin, Global Exchange
G. Simon Harak, SJ, War Resisters League
David Hartsough, Co-Founder and Capacity Building Director of Nonviolent Peaceforce and Executive Director of Peaceworkers. Nonviolent Peace Force
Blase Bonpane, Office of the Americas
Carol Bragg, Coordinator, Rhode Island Peace Mission
Rev. Richard Deats, former Executive Secretary and Fellowship Editor, Fellowship of Reconciliation
Omar Diop, PrŽsident de la Coalition SŽnŽgalaise des DŽfenseurs des Droits humains
Jim Forest, Secretary, The Orthodox Peace Fellowship
Thomas C. Cornell, The Catholic Worker
David Grant, Nonviolent Peaceforce
Ted Lewis, Global Exchange
Charles Jenks, Chair of Advisory Board, Traprock Peace Center
Jeff Leys, Voices for Creative Nonviolence
AndrŽa Schmidt, independent journalist
Michael Albert, ZNet
Richard McDowell, Senior Fellow for Iraq Policy, Friends Committee on National Legislation
Dave McReynolds, former Chair, War Resisters International
Peter Lems, Program Associate for Iraq, American Friends Service Committee
Kevin Zeese, Director, Democracy Rising
Sunny Miller, Director, Traprock Peace Center
Dave Robinson, Director, Pax Christi USA
Rev. Osagyefo Uhuru Sekou, National Coordinator, Clergy and Laity Concerned about Iraq
David Swanson, Co-Founder, After Downing Street, Board Member Progressive Democrats of America, Washington Director Democrats.com
Mary Trotochaud, Senior Fellow for Iraq Policy, Friends Committee on National Legislation
Michael Birmingham, activist
Barbara Wien, Co-Director, Peace Brigades International/USA
Bishop Gabino Zavala, President, Pax Christi USA
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at December 8, 2005 02:11 PM
U.S. consumer borrowing plunges
Dec. 8, 2005. 01:00 AM
WASHINGTON Consumer borrowing in the United States plunged in October by a record amount in dollar terms, reflecting a big drop in demand for auto loans.
The Federal Reserve Board, the U.S. central bank, reported yesterday that Americans' borrowing fell by $7.2 billion (U.S.) at an annual rate in October, the biggest amount on record, with much of that decline reflecting a record drop of $5.6 billion, at an annual rate, in the category that includes auto loans. The declines were a drop of 4 per cent in overall borrowing, the biggest setback in nearly 15 years, and a decline of 4.9 per cent in the category that includes auto loans, the biggest drop in 13 years.
The big drop took analysts by surprise. They had been expecting that consumer spending would rise at an annual rate of $5 billion in October.
The decline in borrowing was certain to spark concerns about how much consumers plan on spending during the current holiday shopping season.
Associated Press
------------
Those analysts are idiots who can't see the forest for the trees!
-------------
Foreclosures up 35 percent this year
By Ken Maguire, Associated Press Writer | December 7, 2005
BOSTON --Home mortgage foreclosure filings are on the rise in gritty cities and leafy suburbs, according to a new report showing a 35 percent increase statewide through October.
Boston.com
Filings in suburban Reading more than tripled and there's been a 113 percent increase in Lawrence compared with the same period last year, according to Land Court filings tracked by Framingham-based ForeclosuresMass.
"It spans the whole gamut of income levels," said Jeremy Shapiro, president of ForeclosuresMass.
The number of foreclosures filed through Oct. 31 was 9,459, compared with 7,003 in the same 10-month period last year, the report said. Essex County had the largest increase, at 50 percent.
Adjustable-rate and interest-only loans, which are riskier than traditional fixed-rate loans, are partly to blame. They've become popular because they cost less up front, but they require higher payments typically after a year or two.
------------
Like ducks in a row. That light at the end of the tunnel is getting mighty noisy.
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 02:12 PM
I sometimes wonder what the people like John Lennon and Sam Cooke would be doing now if lived. Sam Cooke was just beginning to address the civil rights movement in a big way when he died.
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 02:15 PM
I sometimes wonder what the people like John Lennon and Sam Cooke would be doing now if lived. Sam Cooke was just beginning to address the civil rights movement in a big way when he died.
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 02:15 PM
From: Wake Up From Your Slumber Blog
Coming Soon: PAY from the GRAVE!
You drag yourself to work each day to pay back monstrous student debts.
Can it get any worse?
Apparently, it can.
Yesterday, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the government can seize up to 15% of a retiree's monthly Social Security benefit to pay off old student loans.
NICE.
This is another blow to baby boomers on the heels of Greenspan's calls that they forego health and pension benefits [and eat Hostess cupcakes instead!]
"The court [ruled] in the case of James Lockhart, who attended four institutions of higher education between 1984 and 1989 and took out nine federally guaranteed loans. By 2002, he was disabled from diabetes and heart disease,[!!!] and had $80,000 in unpaid student loans."
"[Disabled,] Lockhart received a Social Security benefit, but the government withheld $93 per month to repay his student loans . . . when he reached retirement age . . . the government . . . began withholding $143 per month."
--------------
Only in Bizzaro America!
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 02:18 PM
Ok I even checked to see if I had posted and so I posted again. Grrrrrrrr.
By the way, Hajji's game Bush's brain is addicting.
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 02:18 PM
I wonder how many christians who gaze upon the crucifix realize their symbol's violent history is reflected in it's very name::
'cross' and 'crucifix' stem from the latin verb cruciare - to torture.
Posted by: James Ha at December 8, 2005 02:20 PM
Diebold execs gave to Republicans in spite of ban
Although Diebold officially banned political donations by top brass in 2004, Diebold executives have continued to feed money to Republican campaigns, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reports. The story was earlier reported by blogger Michael Petrelis.
After a Bush campaign fundraiser and controversial statements by CEO Walden O'Dell, Diebold barred its CEO, financial officer, and Election Systems VP from making political donations. However, that ban has not stopped other executives from giving to GOP campaigns.
In all, Diebold executives contributed $1,400 to the campaigns of Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH) and Ohio State Senator Kirk Schuring (R-Canton).
---------------------
In other words, the company that brings you the voting machine and committs voting fraud also gives to the Republican Party.
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 02:22 PM
#33
Well that clears that question up. I thought they may have been doing something TOTALLY USELESS. Sending love notes to kidnappers at least provides some amusement to others.
Posted by: WHY at December 8, 2005 02:23 PM
here is another bush game :: bushco shoot-out starring con rice
Posted by: James Ha at December 8, 2005 02:32 PM
Veterans for Peace member Stan Merriman got this letter published in today's Houston Chronicle...
A message local vets had hoped to give to Cheney
VFP members protest the misuse of military in Iraq
here's a couple of grafs from the letter...
As we were being escorted off the premises of the Westin Oaks Hotel in the Galleria, outside the event, with 300 other protesters, stood a proud and amazing person, Ann Wright, a fellow VFP member and anti-Iraq war activist with a resume as powerful as anyone's in the fund-raiser. A diplomat and foreign service officer as well as Army Reserve colonel, Wright became an international media "star" when she resigned her post at the outset of the invasion of Iraq. She had most recently served in foreign service posts in Mongolia and Kabul, Afghanistan.
The local media chose only to depict Wright as just another sign-carrier on the sidewalk at the Galleria, and as a modest person, she chose anonymity as well.
Inside the Cheney banquet, another VFP member, Diane Wilson, a nationally recognized environmental activist and author unfurled a banner opposing the Cheney-concocted war, representing the very imaginative protest group Code Pink, which has managed similar incursions into gatherings at both Republican and Democratic national conventions. Wright, Wilson and our team of six share these viewpoints about this administration and its treatment of the military, along with our tens of thousands of brothers and sisters of Veterans For Peace in 85 chapters across America.
Instead of defending the people of the United States from foreign attack, Cheney and the Bush administration have used our military as a tool to further a plan for world domination and reward corporate friends.
=============================
It's not a long letter, so please read the whole thing. I'm surprised our paper published it.
Posted by: Alan at December 8, 2005 02:33 PM
Christian Peacemaker Team Kidnapped In Iraq
So, who is responsible for this kidnapping? And, who benefits? If these insurgents want us out, why do they insist on acts that are guaranteed to not only keep us there, but expand this horrid war all across the middle east? This doesn't make any sense. Add to that our endlessly lying govt. through the endlessly lying media tells us what is going on. Why do I find these sources less than reliable? If you want to learn a little about what these peace keeper groups do, read this article, it is short, and you will see motives you won't hear about on the MSM.
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 02:33 PM
From: BrusselsTribunal.Org
Young Iraqi surgeon testifies about the horrors of the Iraq war
Even during operations, doctors were shot at by US soldiers.
Barbara Debusschere, De Morgen (Belgium), 26 November 2005
translated 07 December 2005
The Iraqi surgeon Salam Ismael (29) has piles of pictures and interviews with survivors and witnesses that show that many Iraqi civilians and doctors were victims of much more than collateral damage, as was the case with the US attacks on Fallujah. Doctors and patients were killed, ambulances were attacked. They used illegal weapons such as napalm, and even those who surrendered and dared to move, were shot.
I want to return to Iraq soon. In Fallujah, I'm going to help set up a water purification plant, and in Hadeetha, I want to help build a new hospital, Ismael says. It sounds like urgent. A member of the Doctors for Iraq Society, Ismael is thin and has those typical long, fine surgeon's fingers. But in Iraq, Ismael has already survived the worst situations. His organisation is gathering evidence of human rights violations under occupation. He was invited to Brussels by the Belgian NGO Medical Aid for the Third World in order to draw attention to the war crimes being committed in Iraq.
Right before he would show his images to demonstrate that indeed illegal chemical weapons had been used by the US during the second siege of Fallujah, Dr. Ismael finds the time to tell his story. He doesn't know where to start. But then comes an avalanche of stories, images, and examples to underscore his point. The breaches of medical neutrality must stop. Shooting at doctors and ambulances is a crime.
------------
This reminds me of TRH's statement that our soldiers aren't killing people on purpose. This sure doesn't sound accidental to me. This also ties in with the work the peace keepers perform. They have documented a lot of evidence that I am sure a certain state would do anything to keep quiet. Remember the Italian journalist? She had a lot of info. too.
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 02:43 PM
David, you should have named your pet organization "Blame the Gun". By the way, the NRA does not advocate wide-open firearms access, and especially not access to firearms by the mentally impaired.
Posted by: x at December 8, 2005 02:45 PM
"Dear Editors, Do Joseph Pulitzer's words still apply today?"
"I will always fight for progress and reform, never tolerate injustice or corruption, always fight demagogues of all parties, never belong to any party, always oppose privileged classes and public plunderers, never lack sympathy with the poor, always remain devoted to the public welfare, never be satisfied with merely printing news, always be drastically independent, never be afraid to attack wrong, whether by predatory plutocracy or predatory poverty." -- Joseph Pulitzer, April 10, 1907
Posted by: James Ha at December 8, 2005 02:46 PM
"There is a better way- no guns for Cornnuts and we all will be safe!! Baf 32"
Pure drivel, why bother?
No argument, just attack.
Posted by: Neil at December 8, 2005 02:49 PM
While she *reassured* the world that the United States does not use torture or condone its use, Miss Con-di, elaborated at a NATO press conference today: she said she can give no guarantee that terrorism detainees won't be abused again despite what she called the US' clear rules against torture.
"Will there be abuses of policy? That's entirely possible," Rice said, "Just because you're a democracy it doesn't mean that you're perfect."
She offered assurances, however, that any abuses would be investigated and violators punished.
"That is the only promise we can make," Rice said.
************
Well, well. I guess now they are off the hook for their *honesty.* I can just hear it, "mistakes were made." Fuckers.
Posted by: micki at December 8, 2005 02:51 PM
David,
I believe we lost one of the most talented musician and songwriter on that day. I may not have agreed with his politics, but I would never have denied him the right to express his views, as the Nixon Administration had attempted to do.
Posted by: TRH at December 8, 2005 02:54 PM
Thanks for an ispirational piece. The lack of progress is an indigtment of those of us who are Lennons' contemporaries.
Posted by: dubendorf at December 8, 2005 02:55 PM
Iran's Ahmadinejad says Israel should be moved to Europe
TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran's hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that if Germany and Austria feel responsible for massacring Jews during World War II, a state of Israel should be established on their soil.
Ahmadinejad, who sparked an international outcry in October when he said Israel "must be wiped off the map", also repeated his view Thursday that the Jewish state was a "tumour".
"Now that you believe the Jews were oppressed, why should the Palestinian Muslims have to pay the price?" the hardline president asked in an interview with Iran's Arabic-language satellite channel, Al-Alam.
"Why did you come to give a piece of Islamic land and the territory of the Palestinian people to them?
"You oppressed them, so give a part of Europe to the Zionist regime so they can establish any government they want. We would support it," he said, according to a transcript of his original Farsi-language comments given to AFP.
"So, Germany and Austria, come and give one, two or any number of your provinces to the Zionist regime so they can create a country there which all of Europe will support and the problem will be solved at its root," he said.
"Why do they insist on imposing themselves on other powers and creating a tumour so there is always tension and conflict?"
Al-Alam said Ahmadinejad was speaking in the holy city of Mecca in Saudi Arabia where he was attending a two-day meeting of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference that opened Wednesday.
"Is it not true that European countries insist that they committed a Jewish genocide? They say that Hitler burned millions of Jews in furnaces ... and exiled them," Ahmadinejad told Al-Alam.
"Then because the Jews have been oppressed during the Second World War, therefore they (the Europeans) have to support the occupying regime of Qods (Jerusalem). We do not accept this," he said.
He also noted that European countries "believe in this so much and are so determined that any researcher who denies it (the Holocaust) with historical evidence is dealt with in a most harsh way and sent to prison."
--------
He has a point! I am reminded of the quote, I believe Capt. posted it, that we never had enemies in the middle east until Israel showed up.
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 02:57 PM
"Pulitzer may be turning over in his grave, wanting to pull his name from the prestigious awards given out yearly, considering the media's pathetic coverage of 9/11, the PATRIOT Act and doctoring of WMD intelligence reports to sell the war in Iraq."
For example, New York Times "reporter"-and I use that word loosely--Judith Miller once won a Pulitzer Prize, believe it or not. One can thus conclude that news awards, as presented by the self-congratulatory US press, have become almost a fraud perpetrated by phonies as awards for fakery. Otherwise the US news media would be attacking rather than ignoring the mountain of discrepancies in the 911 event. The US media might even conclude that, yes, 911 was indeed an act of terror. An act of terrorism conceived after weeks of secret planning in some five-sided fortresses, by a cabal of war criminals, double agents and nefarious profiteers.
Posted by: James Ha at December 8, 2005 02:57 PM
Baf is like the distant cousin that keeps showing up at family gatherings, getting drunk and making as ass of himself.
Occasion after occasion he makes himself the center of attention and a source of embarassment. When people try to have serious conversations he buts in, contradicts and calls people names like ass-licker, wack-job etc.
Family members try to keep their social events a secret but he continues to show-up oblivious that everyone involved wishes he would just stay away or atleast keep his inflammatory ad hominem attacks to himself.
Posted by: Neil at December 8, 2005 03:02 PM
Neil, I see him as an annoying dog barking, eventually he will get tired and give up, especially if he is continually starved of attention, he will realize that barking gets him nowhere. That is, if he even has the sense of a dog!
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 03:07 PM
I believe that is correct; that we never had enemies in the middle east until Israel showed up. did anyone see where Israel sed that an entire Ukrainian university should be invalidated? then the same university sed that Israel should be invalidated, so Israel of course got all outraged and cried "anti-semitism" in response to the university's response... typical.
Posted by: James Ha at December 8, 2005 03:09 PM
about my post at #43... I emailed Stan Merriman with a short note thanking him for his letter, and telling him I sent copies to my mailing list and also posted it here on David's site. He just replied to my email with this...
thank you. I am a big David Corn reader and "fan". stan
hey hey!
Posted by: Alan at December 8, 2005 03:10 PM
James, I posted that article yesterday. My response to Israel- WAAAAAHHHHH!!!
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 03:11 PM
Neil
You butted into my conversation so you would be the drunk uncle. You also brought up the butt licker comment which I responded to. So you can add dumbass to your description of yourself-idiot!!!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 03:12 PM
Most of us who are sane would agree that our nation's obsession with guns is absurd, but how can we reduce the obvious dangers from this problems? Under what circumstances would gun control work? At the end of a journey to East Germany before the wall fell, my neighbor on our train was an elderly woman, whose husband was a friend of Kurt Masur, the conductor of the Leipzig Symphony Orchestra, and he always went hunting with him, because Mr. Masur was the only man he knew, who could own a gun. In that sort of society, gun deaths are very rare, because so very few own guns. I own some guns, but I am definitely not in love with them, but consider them a burden, which I must bear to protect my family. Having to kill during my tour in Vietnam was a traumatic experience, as it is for anyone who has retained his sanity. It's the same question that we face with international disarmament. Who will take the first step, and how can we trust them not to cheat? I don't know the answer.
Posted by: Wolfgang P. May at December 8, 2005 03:14 PM
Open and Shut 9/11
Four years later, we still have ten big questions
by Jarrett Murphy
This is linked to the Village Voice by Raw Story.
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 03:16 PM
if it a secret prison how can any abuses be heard and investigated? Stupid bitch!!! Condi deserves a little vacation at one of these places just to get a heads up on what torture truly is. I would love to see the whole crowd enjoy a taste of it, just to awaken them from their torpor.
Posted by: What the F**k at December 8, 2005 03:20 PM
Saladin
I do not expect you Cornnuts to respond, you have tried already and fail horribly. Flan has tried, you have, Hajji has, Jeanne has, Kathleen has, Robert S has, Don S. has, What the Fuck has, James Ha has, Capt has made a weak attempt, Alan has and now Neil and all have failed. It is better to hide than get slaughtered in front of your peers. I still have fun making you guys look silly so though-it's all good!!!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 03:23 PM
I dont no whye you leftys get so werked up about guns and people shoting people anyways. I have had a bullit lodged in my brian for manny years and Im no werse for where.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 03:23 PM
Saladin
I do not expect you Cornnuts to respond, you have tried already and fail horribly. Flan has tried, you have, Hajji has, Jeanne has, Kathleen has, Robert S has, Don S. has, What the Fuck has, James Ha has, Capt has made a weak attempt, Alan has and now Neil and all have failed. It is better to hide than get slaughtered in front of your peers. I still have fun making you guys look silly so though-it's all good!!!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 03:23 PM
I reached this post through Pajamas Media. I have had friends brutally murdered by sociopaths, with knives. I remain unconvinced that the best defense of sociopathy is to become helpless, because in my experience, I lose friends to that method. Making it more difficult for sane people to resist the power quests of the deranged does not serve civilization or society.
I respect your feelings of loss and disagree with your conclusions as to the cause.
Posted by: Patrick Lasswell at December 8, 2005 03:27 PM
Wolfgang, My husband and I have had this conversation as well. In an ideal world there would be no need of guns as self-defense. My husband could envision a day when govt. officials could actually come to your door and demand that you hand over all your firearms. At the time I disagreed that this would ever happen, but then Katrina hit and that is exactly what happened. Now SF has passed a gun ban that will force everyone to hand over firearms. What bothers me the most is the Stalinist fashion in which these laws are being enforced. Statistics show that when these laws are enacted, the very opposite result is achieved. I don't know the answer either, but I do know that when Govt. force is used, I don't like it. Especially when it adversely affects mainly law abiding citizens. Why should the many be forced to pay for the crimes of a few? If someone gets drunk and kills someone else with their car, should we ban all cars and ban alchohol as well? Even though most people are responsible enough to avoid that situation, drunk driving does kill a lot of people, so, should all drivers pay the price?
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 03:28 PM
Baf, is that the best you can do? "It's not me, it's you."
Posted by: Neil at December 8, 2005 03:29 PM
Saladin
I am only here because David has asked me (he offered to pay me but I said I would do it for free) to liven it up a little because you trolls are so damn boring. He has a reputation to uphold!!!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 03:34 PM
The Middle East during World War One
By Professor David R Woodward
The Ottoman Empire called for a military jihad against France, Russia and Great Britain in November 1914. How did this affect subsequent Allied campaigns in the Middle East? David Woodward charts the demise of an empire and a dramatic shift in the region's balance of power.
Few events in world history have had a more profound impact than that of World War One (1914-8). Although the German attempt to dominate Europe was thwarted in the end, the equilibrium of the region was also destroyed by the fierce fighting between its different elements.
'At the beginning of November 1914, the Ottoman Empire ...abandoned its ambivalent neutrality.'
The Middle East was no less affected by the conflict. After four centuries of continuous rule, the Ottoman Empire collapsed, creating a vacuum that contributed to tensions between local inhabitants and external powers or interests. The 'war to end all war' had not achieved its aim.
At the beginning of November 1914, the Ottoman Empire, the world's greatest independent Islamic power, abandoned its ambivalent neutrality towards the warring parties, and became a belligerent in the conflict, with the sultan declaring a military jihad (holy war) against France, Russia and Great Britain.
The Ottoman Empire had recently been humiliated by setbacks in Libya and the Balkans. Participation in what had begun as a European war might seem to outside observers, therefore, to have been suicidal, but key elements in the government, impressed by German industrial and military power and motivated by dreams of imperial glory, greeted the expanding war as an opportunity to regain lost territories and incorporate new lands and nationalities into the empire.
'In a pre-emptive strike, London immediately landed an Anglo-Indian force at Basra.'
The Ottoman/Turkish army (some 600,000 troops divided into 38 divisions) was of an unknown quality. But with Germany as an ally, the Ottoman Empire represented a serious threat to the British Empire, so in a pre-emptive strike, London immediately landed an Anglo-Indian force at Basra, near the estuary of the Euphrates and Tigris rivers. This was done to protect the Anglo-Persian oil pipeline, which was vital to the British navy, and to show the Union Jack in this strategically important area in the Persian Gulf.
Within weeks the Central Powers struck back with a surprise attack against Britain's 'jugular vein', the Suez Canal. This attempt, in early February 1915, to breach British defences on the Suez Canal and raise an Islamic revolt in Egypt, failed however, and resulted in heavy losses for the attackers.
More.
******************************
[...]that we never had enemies in the middle east until Israel showed up.
I suppose that depends on whom "we" is. America fought on the Allied side in WWI, the first war for oil resources; my Jewish forebears fought on the German side, go figure.
Then again, there was the issue of the Barbary Pirates:
"To this state of general peace with which we have been blessed, one only exception exists. Tripoli, the least considerable of the Barbary States, had come forward with demands unfounded either in right or in compact, and had permitted itself to denounce war, on our failure to comply before a given day. The style of the demand admitted but one answer. I sent a small squadron of frigates into the Mediterranean. . . ." Thomas Jefferson
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at December 8, 2005 03:37 PM
I have to wonder why an obviously right wing shill would continuously post to this site. 1. He/she is very lonesome? 2. He/she is trying to convert lefties to righties 3. He/she is here to collect info on bloggers 4. He/she has burnt all other bridges 5. He/she has mental health issues 6. He/she is a government (CIA) spy (see# 3 above) 7. All of the above 8. Some of the above 9. None of the above 10. Pervasive headupassitis
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 03:39 PM
Neil
You are on confused Cornnut.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 03:39 PM
Say it over and over Baf, reaffirm it, reaffirm it constantly, "I make them look silly, I make them look silly, I make them look silly." You are the master of this domain, don't let anyone tell you differently, so incredibly smart, smarter then everyone, and master of the bon mot, Oh that ass-licking comment was pure genius, what a nimble mind. "I make them look silly, I make them look silly...
Posted by: Neil at December 8, 2005 03:40 PM
Den
None of the above, I just like being an ass to idiots!!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 03:40 PM
Neil
I don't have to say anything you make yourself look silly, and yes I am the master of domain- damn right!!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 03:42 PM
Damn
I was looking for a quiet day of Corn bashing but Neil had to go and open the flood gates. It is rather draining taking on so many Cornnuts at once. But boy is it fun!!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 03:44 PM
All we are saying...Is give peace a chance.
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 03:44 PM
Baf, Bourbon or beer? Before lunch or after 5pm? High school diploma or not?
Posted by: Neil at December 8, 2005 03:47 PM
OK Jeanne
I am going to lunch now-you Cornnuts can come back now.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 03:47 PM
#11 a comedian
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 03:51 PM
No one can proof me wrong when I say you are all idiots buttlickers dumbassas doofuses Cornnuts dummies brane-dead goobers drug attics shirt-for-branes boneheads faglovers slobberers and wackjobs. Doesn't anyone know how to engaje in intellagent debate?
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 03:51 PM
Neil
There you go again, shooting yourself in the foot. Couldn't you take the hint from Jeanne and not speak? Don't you know that I am being blackballed for being a bully? Get with the program!
And yes I do have a High School diploma, I chose not to go to college to start my own business and now make lots of money with employees to boot. This is why I have time to waste on fools like you. What do you do Neil? What does that higher education bring in for you? Or are you unemployed sucking up my taxes to pay for your internet service like the rest of these Cornnuts.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 03:54 PM
Were'nt you going to lunch?
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 03:55 PM
Den
I would if you would just shut Neil up- he's starting to get on my nerves, which gives me heartburn at lunch so I may just have to wait.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 04:00 PM
I am out to lunch
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 04:00 PM
Saladin
I do not expect you Cornnuts to respond, you have tried already and fail horribly. Flan has tried, you have, Hajji has, Jeanne has, Kathleen has, Robert S has, Don S. has, What the Fuck has, James Ha has, Capt has made a weak attempt, Alan has and now Neil and all have failed. It is better to hide than get slaughtered in front of your peers. I still have fun making you guys look silly so though-it's all good!!!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 04:01 PM
Baf, no need to tell us "I was looking for a quiet day of Corn bashing," we know. That's what you do; BASH, INSULT, NAME CALL, and ATTACK.
The only thing you accomplish is getting a rise out of people but thatÕs at the expense of people taking you seriously. People think you're an idiot because you don't bother to offer any thoughtful opinions.
If you're interested in news and politics, try making a thoughtful argument without getting personal. It might give you the same feeling you get from provoking reactions with your inflammatory, name-calling posts, and people would start taking you seriously.
Posted by: Neil at December 8, 2005 04:01 PM
Can you leave your companys' address so we can send your employees a sympathy card?
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 04:03 PM
Keep on paying them taxes baf we need the input, I will just bet that you are rich, more like a poor dimwit that flips burgers and has his mom's laptop on every other day. Too bad you didn't go further in school you might have learned to spell. Oh well, continue on your way; your betters know all about you, and see it won't hurt much.
Posted by: What the F**k at December 8, 2005 04:04 PM
Conservatives are upset
The conservatives are upset because Bush's Christmas card excludes the word, Christmas. When are the conservatives going to wise up and realize that Bush is not a born-again Christian? He is, in fact, more evil than Hitler and Stalin together. I love it when the conservatives are upset at their god, George W. Bush.
The conservatives are so full of shit that they have shit coming outside their ears and eyeballs. Yet, if we had a fair election today the conservatives would vote for Mr. Evil, a mass murderer and a war criminal. What a country?
Posted by: Gerald at December 8, 2005 04:10 PM
Well Neil
You're kidding right? Like I care if you guy's take me seriously. You people love to bash Bush, Isreal, our military, corporations, republicans and everything you do not agree with with. When I come in and do the same to you trolls, all of a sudden you don't like it-not fair-bully-ass licker. What a bunch of damn woosies. However, I am done for the day. You can have the rest of the day trashing America and our troops baf free!!!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 04:11 PM
robert -
I suppose that depends on whom "we" is.
point taken my friend
Posted by: James Ha at December 8, 2005 04:12 PM
What the Fuck
If it makes you feel better thinking that I am a looser like you- then go ahead. See I am not a complete ass, afterall it's Christmas.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 04:14 PM
Den 88
Just like a progressive/liberal- destroy what you can't have just because you feel left out.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 04:15 PM
This is the FUNNIEST stuff I've seen on this blog, He thought I was a comedian, I yield the stage. My stomach hurts from the laughter
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 04:19 PM
At least I can spell baf. Go for it, just shows your upbringing these days, public schooling huh?
Posted by: What the F**k at December 8, 2005 04:20 PM
Den-What the Fuck
Don't you morons have a conspiracy theory to talk about? Really, it's not fun if it's not challenging!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 04:24 PM
I got one, comedian trolls secretly practicing their jokes on Davids blog, fact...or fiction?
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 04:30 PM
#43 Alan, thank you for sharing the letter. My fellow Americans, the noose around our necks is tightening. We are a fascist country. Cheney, the draft dodger, hates the military because they remind him of how chickenshit he really is.
#44 Saladin, we need more outspoken peacemakers in the U.S. Why go to Iraq when America is in need of 54 million peacemakers so we can out vote the repugnants.
#49 micki, Condi's two famous words are "trust me." Please excuse me so I can take a puke.
Posted by: Gerald at December 8, 2005 04:30 PM
I am the master debater!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 04:31 PM
hahahahahaha please..stop masterbater hahahahahaha!
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 04:34 PM
Neil 87
"Inflammatory name calling posts"
I guess Gerlads post at # 90
"Shit coming out there ears and eyeballs" "GW, MR Evil, mass murderer and a war criminal."
-meets your decency standard but my ass kissin remark doesn't?
Can you see (smell) the hippocracy oozing from you Cornnuts?
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 04:35 PM
Baf:"You can leave it at ass!! I would not want to take the title of ass licker from you and capt. It might hurt your feelings!! Besides no telling where Davids ass has been- ewwww!!!
Yes, it does take both a gun and a wack job, but David seems to only write about the gun, this makes my point.
As long as progressive/liberals do not have access to guns then we can eliminate the wack job part."
Wow Baf, you can't lay off being an asshole even to honor the dead. It's hate filled Republicans like yourself that we need to keep from gun ownership. Your party continues to spit out the Tim McVeighs and Eric Rudolphs of the world. It's in my opinion that these psychos need to start targeting their own party (republicans). The world would be much better off without you evil, hateful, bigots. Besides, I'm sure Satan could use the company. Your mission is complete. You hypocrites have misled enough followers to their hellish final demise.
Republican Party--Reign of the Anti-Christ and False Prophets
Posted by: luvthyself at December 8, 2005 04:35 PM
Den 100-101 in the same
Talking to yourself as two people again?
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 04:37 PM
and for those of you who don't know, hippocracy is what you get when you let hippos take over your country!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 04:39 PM
Baf,
Congrats on the business. I hope you have a good year.
Sorry if I was getting on your nerves; Quid Pro Quo was not my intention. My intention is to convince you to try to make an argument about an issue you care about without calling people names. Site facts and opinions, and express yourself in a manner that a reasonable person would be convinced to adopt your point of view. .
My college education did a few things for me. It put me in the company of people smarter than me and different from me. It got me interested in the world outside the small town I grew up in. My classmates were from all over the US and the world. Some were rich, some poor, one was from Hawaii, another from Milwaukee, Monaco, Jordan, El Salvador, and South Africa during apartheid.
We had small classes; the conversations in English Literature were as interesting as the conversations in Poli Sci - everyone comes to the material with their own experiences in life. I have classmates who write fiction for a living, another who is a federal prosecutor, a real estate lawyer in Milwaukee, a mother of two in Vermont, a veterinarian, etc etc. I'm an IT Director.
Posted by: Neil at December 8, 2005 04:40 PM
luvthyself
Well, you all can see from this cornhuckster that I am very effective in exposing the just down right looney trolls you all are in bed with. One big orgy.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 04:40 PM
I Love Bush
How can anyone not love this bag of shit? He talks so tough but we know him as that chicken shit scurvy rat quivering in the corner of some bar in Alabama during his Vietnam days. On a questionnaire he said that he did not want to serve in another country so he was stationed in Alabama.
Wailing Walls
I see much pain and suffering ahead for Americans. I do not see life situations improving in America. In order for Americans to survive they will have to remember what life was like in the USA. To remember each state will have a certain number of wailing walls. California could have as much as 100 wailing walls. These walls will be for lamenting and weeping about the pain and suffering in America. All that will be left are memories of a once great country.
Brutal and Inhumane
Let me start by saying that I have ripped on Bush with relentless abandon. As you know, I am not a fan of Bush. There is something about Bush and his family that rubs against the grain.
The 21st century brings in a brutal and an inhumane period in American history. I am afraid that this brutal and inhumane period will never go away. I oppose this kind of treatment that is directed at our people but it will not matter who resides in the WH. The American form of government will always remain brutal and inhumane. Every American dictator will be brutal and inhumane.
There is no way to avoid this kind of dictatorship. Our population will double in the next 50 years for both legal and illegal residences. The government because it lacks leadership will have to control the people like rats in a maze. Americans will only be considered rats that need to be controlled. We will have more Patriot Acts and brutality and inhumanity in America. This is our manifest destination for controlling the people. I oppose this destiny but it is inevitable. We will only be rats to be controlled by brutal and inhumane dictatorships.
Posted by: Gerald at December 8, 2005 04:43 PM
Didn't find out about Lennon's death till the next day... come on corn it was breaking news everywhere...or maybe you and ralphie boy was in the .....
Posted by: Bob Who at December 8, 2005 04:44 PM
Since no one can debate me I will have to go and debate myself as only a master debater can!
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 04:44 PM
#110 Baf
Left handed or right?
Posted by: Neil at December 8, 2005 04:45 PM
Hippocracy from hippos running the country? BWAAAAAAHHH! this guys a hoot! Owls running the country....Hooterocracy
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 04:46 PM
Don't worry baf nobody wants to masterdebate you!
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 04:47 PM
David,
Hoorah for you for standing up for a good cause! Though I was too young to remember John Lennon's death, great men and women have losed their lives due to the irresponsibility of our government choosing to lookout for corporate interest over the well being of it's citizens. When will the madness end? When will those who claim to love Christ, love the people of this country more than the mighty dollar? I'm sure a positive change will not occur under this administration. But our silver lining is that the majority of the country consist of a very compassionate group of people, it's a small minority (about 30-35%) who have taken the word "morals" and redefined it to mean bigotry and elitism. There's still hope for us yet!
Posted by: luvthyself at December 8, 2005 04:48 PM
Brothers and Sisters Awake
Posted by: Gerald at December 8, 2005 04:49 PM
Neil,
Of coarse right handed, I don't want to be like you leftys. I only use my left hand for wiping my butt so I don't have to wash it after.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 04:52 PM
#113, DEN floors baf or brock with a counterpost.
Posted by: Gerald at December 8, 2005 04:52 PM
That's disgusting. Do you kiss your mother with that mouth?
Posted by: Neil at December 8, 2005 04:53 PM
The media likes to repeat the Republican talking point that Democrats have no agenda--you and I know that is simply not true. Across the country Democrats are participating in dozens of events and with one voice saying it's time to reform: together, America can do better.
In Washington, DC, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi unveiled a new piece of legislation to eliminate tax giveaways for energy companies. Frank Lautenberg spoke in New Jersey about how America can do better than a Medicare prescription drug bill that confuses and shortchanges seniors by providing giveaways to drug companies.
In Wisconsin, Herb Kohl addressed the need for America to do better than an economy that kicks families out of the middle class and how we can help everyone achieve the American dream. While in New York, John Kerry discussed a plan to do a better job protecting Americans from terrorist attack. Patty Murray held four events across Washington State focusing on issues ranging from affordable housing to full funding of veterans' programs. And Chuck Schumer and Robert Byrd both addressed energy independence with members of their local communities.
Today Barbara Mikulski, Paul Sarbanes and I held a town hall meeting in Baltimore with nursing students to highlight the Democratic Party's commitment to reform. While we are working to increase opportunities for higher education, Congressional Republicans are slashing financial aid and curbing opportunities for students to get ahead. Christopher Reed, Patrice Pantin, and Julie Story, students at the John Hopkins School of Nursing, told us about their own struggles to get the training they need.
Each of these events focuses on an important part of the Democratic agenda that will guide us towards taking back both the Senate and House in 2006. We can have a government with open, honest elected officials--it's a matter of priorities. Democrats believe the government works for people, that issues such as student loans, high energy prices, safety and security, should be our top priority not handouts for the well connected.
Thank you,
Harry Reid
Posted by: harry at December 8, 2005 04:53 PM
Den, Neil's right. Ignore posters who are unable to contribute to a positive debate even if two views are opposing. As long as we continue to become sidetracked by insignificance, the real issues that effect the people of this country will continue to be ignored. We've had enough distractions this year from people who are scared of a real debate with real issues and have to turn to diversionary tactics to hide their own ignornance. There are some positive changes on the horizon that will effect all Americans, not just a hand-selected few. Those who oppose reuniting Americans sense they change is coming soon and they're scared. The more you see them sniffing around trying to distract, the more reason you have to cheer.
Posted by: luvthyself at December 8, 2005 04:58 PM
Neil
Now that is the most sense I have heard all day!
I also try to be around people that are more successful than myself to improve. Now I do not pretend to be smarter than anyone(except Den and What the Fuck) but I have been successful in what I do. I was raised by a single mother who worked two jobs. I owe everything to the opportunity that this country has given me. I despise people who trash our country and the economic opportunities available because they are to lazy to get off their ass. If a uneducated troll like myself can do it then anyone can so quit your whining about how terrible things are(not you in particular but your cornnut friends).
No offense but if you are trying to be around people smarter than you then what are you doing here? I mean come on, you are hanging out with people called "what the fuck." If this is all you get for being educated then I would rather not waste the money.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 05:01 PM
Neil
Now that is the most sense I have heard all day!
I also try to be around people that are more successful than myself to improve. Now I do not pretend to be smarter than anyone(except Den and What the Fuck) but I have been successful in what I do. I was raised by a single mother who worked two jobs. I owe everything to the opportunity that this country has given me. I despise people who trash our country and the economic opportunities available because they are to lazy to get off their ass. If a uneducated troll like myself can do it then anyone can so quit your whining about how terrible things are(not you in particular but your cornnut friends).
No offense but if you are trying to be around people smarter than you then what are you doing here? I mean come on, you are hanging out with people called "what the fuck." If this is all you get for being educated then I would rather not waste the money.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 05:01 PM
Neil, I bet he does, everytime he brings food to her in the shed out back.
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 05:03 PM
Den
Double posting as me, has that what it's come down to? Only a corndick like you would be so consumed with playing with yourself and then Neil had to jump in. I was beginning to think that you might not be as looney as these cornnuts.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 05:12 PM
Den
Double posting as me, has that what it's come down to? Only a corndick like you would be so consumed with playing with yourself and then Neil had to jump in. I was beginning to think that you might not be as looney as these cornnuts.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 05:12 PM
Hey pal you're double posting not me.
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 05:18 PM
luvthyself #120
Ya that's it!! Neil, come on man- you take this crap serious?
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 05:18 PM
Den
You are the one that's bi-polar dude!. I don't need to double post to make you trolls look stupid. Hell, you do that on your own anyway.
Posted by: baf at December 8, 2005 05:21 PM
Have you taken your meds today? wawawawawawawawawa! Dude!
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 05:27 PM
Dear Alan,
This White House stands between the American people and the truth. Despite growing public outcry for answers about Iraq, this administration continues to deny the Senate the documents necessary for a thorough investigation of pre-war intelligence.
Every day more Americans ask questions about the war, and you and I have played an important role in this growing -- and healthy -- awareness. Over the past few weeks, we've activated thousands of our fellow citizens through a simple document that calls for the White House to cooperate and release these documents.
Now it's time to take our demands to the source.
Next week, a group from our community will hand-deliver a power petition to the White House gates. Fifty thousand names on hard copy is an impressive sight, and I promise to send you some pictures. This is the last chance to sign on, so tell anyone who may want to before it heads over to Pennsylvania Avenue:
tell more
We will not be silent while the White House asserts that Congress had access to the same pre-war intelligence it did. Key materials -- including the Presidential Daily Briefs -- are still being withheld from the Senate's current investigation.
Simple actions like this petition are how Americans reclaim the truth through democracy. Each of us has the responsibility of making sure our fellow Americans realize the truth about this war -- and demand change.
Thank you for your continued work.
Sincerely,
Marty Walsh
Campaign Manager
TedKennedy.com
P.S. If you haven't signed the petition yet yourself, you can do so here:
tell more
Posted by: Alan at December 8, 2005 05:39 PM
People are still talking about gun control as viable? Wow...
Posted by: MPH at December 8, 2005 05:41 PM
The United States Constitution, Article 2, Section 1 states: In case of the removal of the President from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by law provide for the case of removal, death, resignation or inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what officer shall then act as President, and such officer shall act accordingly, until the disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.....I believe it is time to implement this portion of the constitution, for all our sakes and the sake of the world.
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 05:57 PM
The United States Constitution, Article 2, Section 1 states: In case of the removal of the President from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by law provide for the case of removal, death, resignation or inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what officer shall then act as President, and such officer shall act accordingly, until the disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.....I believe it is time to implement this portion of the constitution, for all our sakes and the sake of the world.
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 05:57 PM
Hunters like to bitch all the time about "libruls" wanting to take their huntin' rifles away from them. Hell, I've been around hunting firearms for a lot of years and no one has ever come to my front door wanting to take my rifle away. The NRA gets big dollars from gullible folks because it has mastered the art of selling fear.
Posted by: Alan at December 8, 2005 06:02 PM
Sorry 'bout the double post.
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 06:03 PM
Hunters like to bitch all the time about "libruls" wanting to take their huntin' rifles away from them. Hell, I've been around hunting firearms for a lot of years and no one has ever come to my front door wanting to take my rifle away.
Kinda like the 'war on Christmas', huh? It's a wedge issue topic to keep their sheep riled up. They hear O'lie-lee tell 'em, so it must be true.
*the other Alan
Posted by: Alan at December 8, 2005 06:15 PM
GREAT NEWS NEEDS TO BE REPEATED.
DeLay Hammers Earle of Austin
Democrat prosecutor Ronnie Earle's conspiracy charge against Tom DeLay was thrown out this
week, which came as a surprise to people who think it's normal for a prosecutor to have to empanel six grand juries in order to get an indictment on simple fund-raising violations. Mr. Earle will presumably assemble a seventh grand jury as soon as he locates someone in the county who hasn't served on a previous one.
It probably goes without saying that it is extraordinary for criminal charges to be thrown out by a judge before any jury ever hears the evidence. Juries decide guilt or innocence in this country. For the judge to dismiss an indictment before trial, it means he concluded that Ð even if the jury finds everything Ronnie Earle alleges to be true Ð no crime was committed. Obviously, this was a huge victory for DeLay and, as the Washington Post put it, "a slap at Texas prosecutor Ronnie Earle." (More bad news for Ronnie Earle: Today President Bush said the embattled Texas D.A. was doing "a heck of a job.") Or, in the words of CNN's Bill Schneider on what this means for Tom DeLay: "Not good." In the expert analysis of Schneider, it was "not good" for DeLay to have charges thrown out because it would have been even better if all the charges had been thrown out. It also would have been better if the judge had dismissed the conspiracy charges and given DeLay an ice cream cone. But that doesn't mean having criminal charges against you dismissed is, I quote, "not good." And they think Fox News has twice CNN's ratings just because it's fair and balanced. The accountants at Fox could give a more penetrating legal analysis. In the past few years, all TV news has become less biased due to the salubrious influence of Fox News. But Bill Schneider isn't backing off one inch! Watching Schneider is like entering a time machine and seeing how news was reported in the '80s. CNN ought to start broadcasting Schneider's appearances only in black and white. According to Schneider, the judge's failure to dismiss the money laundering charges proves "obviously, on at least one charge the judge disagreed" with DeLay's claim that the prosecutor was politically motivated. Schneider's entire understanding of criminal law was apparently shaped during the "Ally McBeal" years.
Schneider would have said more, but he had to run off to file a story about how 4.3 percent growth,
215,000 new jobs, record productivity gains and continued growth in real estate prices were "not
good" news for the economy. In fact, all we know as a result of the judge's ruling on Monday is that the remaining charge against DeLay, if proved, would at least constitute a crime.
To repeat what you might already have heard in third grade: In America, the validity of criminal
charges is determined by the trier of fact after a trial. A judge is not authorized to dismiss a criminal indictment handed up by a grand jury just because the prosecutor is a political hack.
This is true even if the prosecutor had to spend three years and empanel six grand juries to get an
indictment. It is true even if the same prosecutor also indicted Republican Kay Bailey Hutchison days after she was elected to the U.S. Senate, but after spending a year holding press conferences in which he called Hutchinson a criminal, still had no evidence and folded his hand. It is true even if the prosecutor is participating in a documentary about a brave liberal prosecutor (Ronnie Earle) exposing a black-hearted Republican (Tom DeLay) Ð which wouldn't make much of a movie if no charges were ever brought. Thus, for example, Earle's baseless charges against Hutchison Ð like the remaining charges against DeLay Ð were not dismissed before trial. What happened was, the trial date came and Earle had no evidence. The judge ordered the jury to acquit. Earle never admitted he had no evidence against Hutchison. Instead, he made a preposterous request of the judge. He asked the judge to issue a pre-emptive ruling declaring all documents that Earle planned to admit throughout the trial admissible Ð without allowing the judge to know what those documents were or allowing the defense an opportunity to object. Obviously, the judge said he would have to see the documents first and decide admissibility on a case-by-case basis.
So now and forevermore, Earle claims his case against Hutchison was watertight, but because the
judge ruled against him, he was prevented from presenting his "evidence" to the jury.
Posted by: danielle at December 8, 2005 06:16 PM
man, I finally caught up with the posts. There were a ton of good ones at the end of the last thread. Robert S. and Capt, and others were on a rolllll!
Posted by: Alan at December 8, 2005 06:17 PM
haha didn't take long to scroll right past that long one. I'm assuming it was trying to spin Delay's big disappointment that he's gotta stand trial (and poor soul isn't getting his leadership postition back). Earle, if you remember, don't play that politics b/s. If you've committed a crime, he's coming after you no matter what party. *note he's indicted alot more dems than repugs
Also, didya know Delay's attorney is a democrat? Because he got key info tossed out in Kay Hutchinson's case, they looked him too-swift! All that networking among all the repugs in this state, but they went straight for a dem lawyer.
As James would say.... "HA !"
Posted by: Alan at December 8, 2005 06:24 PM
LOL Got a short list of jokes about our football team in an email. The team sucks. Thought Gerald might like this one.
Q: What do the Houston Texans and Billy Graham have in common?
A: They both can make 70,000 people stand up and yell Jesus Christ.
and here's another one...
Q: How do you keep a Houston Texan out of your yard?
A: Put up goal posts.
Posted by: Alan at December 8, 2005 06:30 PM
Alan 134, that is just what happened in N.O. after Katrina. I could hardly believe it myself! I feel sorry for anyone who tries to come to my door demanding that we hand them over, they will receive a very cold reception!
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 06:34 PM
When are we gonna see and hear interviews with real, live, regular, average, non-royal-
family, typical citizens of Saudi Arabia ?
One would think that the INJURED
victims from the 9-11-01 would be demanding
that the major news gathering places do some actual reporting from Saudi Arabia ..................
Maybe ask the " Man On The Street"
in S. Arabia if things are just as bad today as they were on 9-11-01 .
Maybe ask if things are every bit as desperate for the working-class folks in S. Arabia .
Maybe ask if they got the nerve to do something naughty. Again.
Geeeeeeeeeeeeeee whiz, CNN, CBS,
FOX , etc. etc. Don't you think it is
T I M E
for the US public to hear the REAL
voices from Saudi Arabia ?
I, with my limited power, insist on it.
I wanna know what their problem is
Or, to put it another way
Posted by: Anderson Petition at December 8, 2005 06:35 PM
I am glad we actually got back to good posts again, I apologize if my humor rhetoric with the baf troll offended or put anyone off.
Posted by: DEN at December 8, 2005 06:44 PM
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of
government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the
public treasury, with the results that a democracy
always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.
The average age of the world's great civilizations
has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence:
from bondage to spiritual faith
from spiritual faith to great courage
from courage to liberty
from liberty to abundance
from abundance to selfishness
from selfishness to complacency
from complacency to apathy
from apathy to dependency
from dependency back to bondage.
-- Alexander Fraser Tytler (1742-1813)
-----------
This is the one fact of history you can take to the bank!
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 06:58 PM
Robert Schwartz - thanks for the clip on John Lennon in Ann Arbor, Michigan 1971. The Free John Sinclair Rally. Great moment. Great concert. Commander Cody and the Lost Planet Airmen played before John Lennon. I don't remember seats, just a packed field house and great music.
John Sinclair was busted and sentenced to 10 years for possession of one joint. Thanks to efforts of the people he was finally freed. The last I heard he was down south in Louisiana or Mississippi. He picked me up hitchhiking the galaxy once in 1968. A gentle man who like music, poetry and pot, among other things.
David. I enjoyed your story and your ad hoc effort. Great rally. Is that legal under the Patriot Act?
Saladin. Keep your gun if it makes you feel safe. Personally I don't need one, but should we be occupied I'm sure there are other ways to fight back. You know what happiness is!
Alan. You put it right with "Selling Fear". That's what makes Bush and the NRA so much alike. I wonder what he's afraid of?
Posted by: geof01 at December 8, 2005 06:58 PM
geof01, feeling safe isn't the main issue with me. Having guns certainly isn't something I do to feel happy! My main objection is any BS official trying to babysit me and lump me in with some asshole, gun toting psycho.
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 07:16 PM
geof01, feeling safe isn't the main issue with me. Having guns certainly isn't something I do to feel happy! My main objection is any BS official trying to babysit me and lump me in with some asshole, gun toting psycho.
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 07:16 PM
To bushco and all who think like them:
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands [boots] which feed [stomp] you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." -- Samuel Adams
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 07:29 PM
From: Electronic Frontier Foundation
December 08, 2005
North Carolina Sued for Illegally Certifying Voting Equipment
EFF Asks Court to Void Approval of Diebold and Others Without Source Code Review
Raleigh, North Carolina - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) on Thursday filed a complaint against the North Carolina Board of Elections and the North Carolina Office of Information Technology Services on behalf of voting integrity advocate Joyce McCloy, asking that the Superior Court void the recent illegal certification of three electronic voting systems.
North Carolina law requires the Board of Elections to rigorously review all voting system code "prior to certification." Ignoring this requirement, the Board of Elections on December 1st certified voting systems offered by Diebold Election Systems, Sequoia Voting Systems, and Election Systems and Software without having first obtained, let alone reviewed, the system code.
"This is about the rule of law," said EFF Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman. "The Board of Elections has simply ignored its mandatory obligations under North Carolina election law. This statute was enacted to require election officials to investigate the quality and security of voting systems before approval, and only approve those that are safe and secure. By certifying without a full review of all relevant code, the Board of Elections has now opened the door for North Carolina counties to purchase untested and potentially insecure voting equipment."
North Carolina experienced one of the most serious malfunctions of e-voting systems in the 2004 presidential election when over 4,500 ballots were lost in a voting system provided by e-voting vendor UniLect Corp. Electronic voting systems across the country have come under fire during the past several years as unexplained malfunctions combined with efforts by vendors to protect their proprietary systems from meaningful review have left voters with serious questions about the integrity of the voting process.
---------
Facism seems to be extremely contagious!
Posted by: Saladin at December 8, 2005 07:34 PM
I was watching Monday Night Football. Shocked out of my seat when I heard Howard Cosell intone (from memory):
Tonight, an unspeakable tragedy in New York. John Lennon, shot 5 (6?) times outside his apartment building. Rushed to (some) hospital. Dead On Arrival.
Posted by: brent at December 8, 2005 07:59 PM
In his Nobel Prize lecture on Wednesday the playwright Harold Pinter stated: "The invasion of Iraq was a bandit act, an act of blatant state terrorism, demonstrating absolute contempt for the concept of international law.
The invasion was an arbitrary military action inspired by a series of lies upon lies and gross manipulation of the media and therefore of the public; an act intended to consolidate American military and economic control of the Middle East masquerading - as a last resort -- all other justifications having failed to justify themselves -- as liberation. ... Therefore it is just that Bush and Blair be arraigned before the International Criminal Court of Justice."
For full text and video, see: haroldpinter.org
nobelprize.org
news.bbc.co.uk
Posted by: micki at December 8, 2005 08:15 PM
Micki
Nothing like a good playwright that is also an international law scholar a rare combination indeed.
Posted by: WHY at December 8, 2005 08:18 PM
SAD NEWS
The Supreme Court has ruled that there cannot be a Nativity Scene in Washington, DC this Christmas season.
This isn't for any religious reason.
They simply have not been able to find three wise men and a virgin in the Nation's capitol.
There was no problem, however, finding
enough asses to fill the stable.
Posted by: James Ha at December 8, 2005 08:19 PM
#149
Saladin,
I would love to see voters of these states establish a class action suit against Diebold for the voting fraud. I don't know if they can but these cons only understand something when you threaten to take away their mooolaaa.
The best things in life are freeeeeeeee.
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 08:19 PM
Richard Falk, emeritus professor of international law at Princeton University, currently visiting professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and author of the book "The Great Terror War" said:
"The conclusions are fully consistent with those reached by the World Tribunal on Iraq in Istanbul earlier this year, which held a serious inquiry into the legal status of the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the tactics used during the ongoing occupation. It is legally persuasive to suggest that if there was effective criminal jurisdiction exercised globally by the International Criminal Court, Bush and Blair would be properly and persuasively indictable."
worldtribunal.org
Posted by: micki at December 8, 2005 08:27 PM
WHY -- Harold Pinter has broken the silence in the arts community about bush/blair's illegal war.
Posted by: micki at December 8, 2005 08:29 PM
Thank you Harold Pinter. He's on my list, Gerald.
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 08:31 PM
#153
James,
How big is the stable?
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 08:32 PM
WTI is a horizontal network of local groups and individuals worldwide that work together in a non- hierarchical system. The project consists of commissions of inquiry and sessions held around the world investigating various issues related to the war on Iraq, such as the legality of the war, the role of the United Nations, war crimes and the role of the media.
Rough translation, they know as much about international law, as, well any other random collection of people. When Bush, Blair etc. get hauled before the bench in the Hague, then I will start to take it seriously.
Posted by: WHY at December 8, 2005 08:37 PM
Micki-
The silence of the "arts community" about the war in Iraq has got to be the loudest silence of all time.
Posted by: WHY at December 8, 2005 08:43 PM
Micky and WHY,
How did people become such cowards? I guess 9/11 did it. Nobody wanted to be labled unpatriotic.
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 08:52 PM
Sorry... Micki!
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 08:52 PM
I hope now that Harold Pinter has broken the silence, other people in the "arts community" will join him and the momentum will build and they will start speaking out about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Larry Beinhart who wrote "Wag the Dog" has mentioned Pinter breaking the silence.
fogfacts.com
Posted by: micki at December 8, 2005 09:14 PM
If he were alive on December 8, 2005, WWJLD?
Posted by: micki at December 8, 2005 09:15 PM
Bush must have been on the sauce or hungover when he talked to Matt Lauer back in August '04 -- or maybe he just didn't remember his "lying points" AKA "talking points" that day.
*************
To: National Desk, Political Reporter
Contact: Karen Finney of the Democratic National Committee Staff, 202-863-8148
WASHINGTON, Dec. 8 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The following was released today by the Democratic National Committee:
The RNC got it wrong. Today, they falsely claimed that President Bush has always predicted victory in the War on Terror, and argued in a release that "President Bush Never Said We Couldn't Win." In fact, last summer, on the first day of his convention, President Bush told Matt Lauer on NBC's "Today Show" that he didn't think "we can win it."
NBC, "The Today Show", 8/30/04
MATT LAUER: You said to me a second ago, one of the things you'll lay out in your vision for the next four years is how to go about winning the war on terror. That phrase strikes me a little bit. Do you really think we can win this war of ter--on terror? For example, in the next four years?
PRESIDENT BUSH: I have never said we can win it in four years.
MATT LAUER: No, I'm just saying, can we win it? Do you say that?
PRESIDENT BUSH: I don't--I don't think we can win it.
New York Times Headline: "Bush Cites Doubt America Can Win War on Terror." "President Bush, in an interview broadcast on Monday, said he did not think America could win the war on terror but that it could make terrorism less acceptable around the world, a departure from his previous optimistic statements that the United States would eventually prevail." (New York Times, 8/31/04)
http://www.usnewswire.com/
-0-
Posted by: micki at December 8, 2005 09:21 PM
I think that some of the people and organizations mentioned in the 14,400,000 Google hits for artists against the war might take exception to the statement that Harold Pinter has "broken the silence" against the war.
Posted by: WHY at December 8, 2005 09:26 PM
Guns are responsible for Lennon's death like spoons are responsible for Rosie O'Donnell being fat.
Posted by: Joe at December 8, 2005 09:27 PM
Brent, I too heard it from Howard Cosell, you hit it in my memory. Earlier, hajji, Robt, Schwartz, Jeanne, Gerald...some nice talk, i enjoyed it. Has anyone here, seen my old friend John, Can you tell me where he's gone.......
Posted by: dubendorf at December 8, 2005 09:29 PM
They played the NBC Special Bulletin (broken in on Johnny Carson) announcing the death of John Lennon) on the end of the News, this evening.
I miss them both for the same...and very different reasons.
-T
Posted by: Hajji at December 8, 2005 09:32 PM
One of the biggests and strongest anti war movements is in the hip hop movement. And then there are people like Harry Belafonte. Shows like the Today Show and nightly news don't have time for their message. That's why I go to the internet for my news. The artists are out there but their voices are muted by the MSM.
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 09:37 PM
One more name. I have to give Jessica Lange, a fellow Minnesotan, a plug. She was standing next to Cindy Sheehan in Washington DC.
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 09:42 PM
George Whistleass Bush will not (because he can not) win any war on terror or any other war he wants to start. Well, maybe he could kick his dog around and make it go hunt up a corner. He and his cabal have not made it advisable for terrorists to hesitate to exploit the fear of death, or made them be intimidated by fear of getting caught, tortured, killed. In fact, I believe I have never seen so much terror employed outside the confines of declared war (as in war between defined nations) as what has been implemented while Whistleass has been prez. He has not won anything, or proved anything (except his inanity) yet.
Posted by: Don Smith at December 8, 2005 09:44 PM
US blocks ICRC access to suspects
The US has admitted for the first time that it has not given the Red Cross access to all detainees in its custody.
The state department's top legal adviser, John Bellinger, made the admission but gave no details about where such prisoners were held.
Correspondents say the revelation is only likely to increase suspicion that the CIA has been operating secret prisons out of international oversight.
The issue has dogged Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's tour to Europe.
Mr Bellinger made the admission in Geneva.
He stated that the group International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) had access to "absolutely everybody" at the prison camp in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, which holds suspects detained during the US war on terror.
When asked by journalists if the organisation had access to everybody held in similar circumstances elsewhere, he said: "No". He declined to explain further.
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 09:47 PM
Jeanne
Not trying to be a pain here but is there any requirement that any nation operate prisons under international oversight?
Posted by: WHY at December 8, 2005 09:59 PM
Jeanne #173:
Hey, Jeanne; I suspect this is another indicator of there being CIA black ops prison locations. It also doesn't seem to be a stretch to conjecture that the prisoners they're keeping in secret are being regularly moved so as to keep everything under the rock.
Posted by: Don Smith at December 8, 2005 10:03 PM
Jeanne #174:
Not unless the new EU has such a rule. Otherwise it's all connected to sovereignty.
Posted by: Don Smith at December 8, 2005 10:06 PM
Here's another man for my list.
Feingold says he'll filibuster Patriot Act
Senator Russ Feingold issued the following statement this afternoon in response to an announcement that the House and Senate conference committee had reached an agreement to extend controversial provisions of the Patriot Act. (Read about the compromise here.
"I will do everything I can, including a filibuster, to stop this Patriot Act conference report, which does not include adequate safeguards to protect our constitutional freedoms. The version of the Patriot Act that was signed today is a major disappointment. I appreciate that it includes four-year sunsets on three controversial provisions, but merely sunsetting bad law is not adequate. We need to make substantive changes to the law, and without those changes I am confident there will be strong, bipartisan opposition here in the Senate.
This isn't about stopping Patriot Act reauthorization. The President could sign Patriot Act reauthorization legislation into law tomorrow if the House would just take up and pass the compromise Senate bill that was approved unanimously in the Senate earlier this year - a bill that includes important and reasonable privacy protections. The conference committee had the opportunity to fix many of the provisions of the Patriot Act to which Americans across the political spectrum have voiced their opposition over the last four years. Unfortunately, they decided not to listen. This battle is not over."
---------------------------
This isn't just about the intrusion into the lives of ordinary, law abiding citizens. It isn't just about the fact that the FBI can do irreperable harm to the reputations of ordinary law abiding citizens. It's also about wasted man power and wasted money. I remember what it was like in the 60's and 70's. People were being hounded for what? I haven't the slightest idea because they had done nothing wrong.
I had a history professor who threw a guy out because he was an FBI agent. Who would wear a three piece suit and shiny shoes to history class?
I had a latin teacher who was harrassed by the FBI because she had Sicilian parents. Do we really need to go back to the world of paranoia?
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 10:11 PM
If there is not observance and commentary of the Red Cross or Red Crescent or even whatever the color of the star of David on the Ambulances that transport organ donors from Palestinian to Israeli Hosptials, then any and all will be free to torture, to murder and to "dissapear" anybody they wish to.
Lack of such will give rise to apartheid conditions that will make Treblisi, Buschenwald amd Aucshwitz look like the country club detention centers the like of Tom Delay will end up in.
Just watched "Head of State" with Chris Rock of "Bullet Control" fame...
Just once, give me a candidate that is more afraid of forgeting or embarrasing his neighborhood than of losing campaign funds...
Just once...
-T
Posted by: Hajji at December 8, 2005 10:12 PM
And thinking of better things, there is a radio station here in CA (Pacific Time 8AM) www.kozt.com which broadcasts a show called Breakfast with the Beatles every Sunday. They can be picked up online. It's a great enough listen to lose the Sunday AM poli-talk shows. Lennon, McCartney, Harrison and Star never had such good treatment.
Posted by: Don Smith at December 8, 2005 10:14 PM
Actually, when I think of most of the "neighborhoods" our candidates come from...
(in an "Emily Latella" voice)
..Nevermind!
-T
Posted by: Hajji at December 8, 2005 10:15 PM
Jeanne
Does it not strike you as odd that Russ is an opponent of the PA but in favor of limiting political speech before an election?
Posted by: WHY at December 8, 2005 10:21 PM
#180
Hajji,
It's a good thought though.
And the Red Cross, Red Cresent. There has to be a sense of obligation or fear of consequence for nations. If there is not we sink into a lawless, hopeless, unforgiving world. We have to demand more of our leadership. We have to keep pushing.
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 10:25 PM
#181
Why do you think he is in favor of it?
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 10:33 PM
Jeanne,
I live my "professional" life with EMT's with Paramedics, with Flight and ER Nurses Firefighters and Docs. The range of political opinion, of vote preference and racial bias or acceptance and religeous upbringing reflects the makeup of the nation in every way...
I'd rather put my life in the hands of the most conservative pro-Bush republicon of them than someone who'd question the validity of, or interfere with, Red Cross inspections of prisoners, anywhere! (especially PoW's)
These are the people who TRULY understand the "Right to Life"!
-T
Posted by: Hajji at December 8, 2005 10:36 PM
Bush's Iraq PR Campaign Falling Flat
Early returns on President Bush's desperate pre-holiday campaign to convince the American public that he has a plan for victory in Iraq are out. Much like his Social Security offensive this past spring, President Bush is failing to fundamentally change how Americans feel about Iraq.
Results from the latest The New York Times/CBS News poll, which began interviewing Americans after President Bush delivered his first speech in the latest Iraq campaign:
-Six in ten Americans disapprove of President BushÕ³ handling of Iraq, which is essentially unchanged since public disapproval of his handling of Iraq increased above 50 percent earlier this fall.
-Fully 70 percent of Americans do not believe President Bush has a clear plan for getting American troops out of Iraq.
-Nearly six in ten Americans (58 percent) believe that President Bush is making things sound better in Iraq than they really are, compared to one third (33 percent) who say that President Bush is accurately describing the situation in Iraq.
Though these numbers are bound to shift slightly in President Bush's favor as the public relations campaign continues, they are not likely to alter the overall structure of American public opinion on Iraq for two main reasons.
First, a majority of Americans no longer find President Bush honest and trustworthy. Actions and results will speak louder than words to a skeptical American public, especially with a president who is no longer seen as a credible leader by a majority of the American public.
Second, and related to the first, the overall trend since President Bush's invasion of Iraq has been driven by events on the ground in Iraq.
Brian Katulis
-------------
There is a HUGE difference between the marketing campaign Bush is pushing and the sincerity of Murtha. Who is the public going to believe?
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 10:41 PM
#183 McCain Feingold Campaign Finance "Reform"
Federal Elections Commissioner Bradley Smith claims in a CNET interview that his panel is ony a few months away from officially beginning the process of regulating political speech on the Internet, including blogs. Click on the headline above this post to get the full interview with Smith.
The process Smith is describing is a direct result of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (aka "McCain-Feingold") and the U.S. Supreme Court's McConnell v FEC decision upholding that law in 2003. Among much else, McCain-Feingold bans "issue ads" that name specific candidates for Congress for 30 days prior to a primary election and 60 days before a general election.
Posted by: WHY at December 8, 2005 10:47 PM
Great efforts and a nice tribute!
Posted by: Daniel at December 8, 2005 10:55 PM
#186
Is that an attempt to end the swiftboating smears that have taken over elections?
Posted by: Jeanne at December 8, 2005 11:04 PM
McCain-Feingold is nothing more than the "Give us incumbents an even greater advantage" act. No surprise to me that a politician would vote this advantage to themselves. Bush could have veto'd it and didn't. That would have ended it because there would not have been the 2/3 support to override the veto. Then the lame Supreme Court upholds it. There is a lot of blame to go around. Just another reason not to trust the government.
Posted by: TRH at December 8, 2005 11:05 PM
How, exactly, does this "panel" expect to limit speech, especially on the internet? Clicking on your headline did nothing except to exacerbate my carpal tunnel...
TRH,
Do you really expect that Dumbya'd have the stones to veto ANYTHING?
-T
Posted by: Hajji at December 8, 2005 11:11 PM
Jeanne,
Swift Boating Smears, Bush National Guard Service, et al, is free speech and should not be limited by money or time frame. What if a candidate for election that you supported found out something against an incubent that could definitely shift support to their side but did not discover the information until they were inside the 30 day period. Therefore they could not run advertising mentioning the incumbent or the information. Something the public deserves the right to know would be denied, not by the Constitution, but by McCain-Feingold. MF didn't get rid oof the money in politics, it just shifted it away from the politicians themselves into the 527 groups.
Posted by: TRH at December 8, 2005 11:18 PM
Sorry, WHY, but the "arts community" -- especially the "fine arts community" -- has not been very vocal against bush's wars. They have a forum that we ordinary mortals do not have, and they have NOT taken substantial advantage of the visibility they enjoy.
They could be a force to be reckoned with, but they are wussing out. They should go see, "Good Night, and Good Luck" and take a refresher course on what taking a strong, principled stand can do.
Yes, it is beginning to happen that they are making their voices heard...but they have been as disorganized as the Democratic Party.
Posted by: micki at December 8, 2005 11:21 PM
Hajji,
Believe me, I blame Bush for M-F. I expect politicians to vote themselves any advantage. Why else would they exempt themselves from many of the laws they pass? Bush had the power to stop it but was "without stones" when it came to doing so. The Supreme Court dropped the ball too but it never should have reached them.
Posted by: TRH at December 8, 2005 11:23 PM
Micki,
I don't have much knowledge of the "arts community" but I would venture to guess that they remain primarily silent because they receive much of their funding from the government. I think that could explain a lot of it. Sort of like "don't bite the hand that feeds you." Just a guess on my part.
Posted by: TRH at December 8, 2005 11:28 PM
While quite a few members of the "fine arts" community have spoken out, (Jessica Lange, Susan Sarandan, Tim Robbins, Sean Penn, Martin Sheen, Kanye West, Bruce Springsteen, too many musicians, writers, actors, poets and producers to name) many, many others are simply afraid to be Dixie Chick'ed by their money facilitators to create a visible protest.
Many others (uhm, Toby Keith and uhm... uhm... well, I'm SURE there's others...) continue to fall into the same oblivious abyss as a large part of the people of the nation and shout "AMURIKKA, Rihht 'er RONG!
-T
Posted by: Hajji at December 8, 2005 11:29 PM
I wish to offer up an opinion about dems and artsy folk being disorganized: we ain't that. What we are doing is living the liberty granted citizens by the Constitution of the USA and by the tenets of freedom of our republic. We have not found it necessary to become a pack of dogs or bullies going around trashing others in order to look good ourselves. Nor have we found it difficult to admit who we are, with all our warts and faults. Most of us do not hide behind lies and false claims (or names such as WHY and TRH and Tim H and other turds of expression). Also most of us are concerned with solving the problems of the world with ideas, not bullets, and we prefer our elections be straight up contests, not barroom brawls. We tend to have morality and mores and care about culture for the living future.
Posted by: Don Smith at December 8, 2005 11:39 PM
Hajji,
Toby Keith to a degree, but I saw an interview with him where he actually said he didn't believe it was necessary to invade Iraq. He supported the action in Afghanistan and when he was asked if he supported Bush, he wouldn't respond other than to say everything he does, he does in support for the troops. I never saw anything that said he was in support of Iraq so I don't know if he was back trackin or if that was his opinion all along.
Posted by: TRH at December 8, 2005 11:41 PM
Don Smith,
I never have addressed you or expressed anything regarding your opinions. Yet, you as the all caring Liberal choose to attack me. That is okay, I can take. But, you had a typo in your post. It's smores, nor mores. I'll send you the recipe if you want it.
Posted by: TRH at December 8, 2005 11:45 PM
It seems few have thought to wonder what might have happened that day if Lennon had possessed a firearm himself and used it. He might still be with us.
There will always be the nutjobs with guns. Always. That's why we call them CRIMINALS, because by definition they do not obey the law. Today Britain is awash with easy to access firearms. They banned the things years ago. Supply has gone up, not down. It just doesn't work the way we wish it would in the real world. Ban the gun, arm the criminal. Sad but true. There's little point in blaming the NRA or gun owners. They didn't arm Chapman, he armed himself.
If all guns had been banned at the time, Lennon would still have been killed. Most likely shot the same way he was. Or stabbed to death. Because insane killers and criminals do not obey gun laws. They are criminals, they break laws. This should be have become clear after Lennon's death.
Perhaps Lennon's motto should be "Give (a) piece a chance". And no, I'm not being funny.
Posted by: James at December 8, 2005 11:47 PM
Strike out, TRH, Strike Out, Strike Out, blame the other guy, don't have your own case, make it seem like the other guy's at fault. Your hateful posts are directed at anyone with eyes. Did I get your monica right this time?
Posted by: Don Smith at December 8, 2005 11:53 PM
Uhm....well.
The reports say that Lennon's killer, who'd recieved an autograph earlier that day, simply said, "Mr. Lennon?" And when John turned, he was hit with 5 bullets...
Had he a weapon in his hand, he'd still be dead...
just sayin'
-T
Posted by: Hajji at December 8, 2005 11:54 PM
Hajji,
Ditto. What I recall of how it occurred, he didn't have a chance.
Posted by: TRH at December 8, 2005 11:59 PM
Most likely Lennon would still be dead. That is the advantage criminals have over the rest of us, they are willing to MURDER. The rest of us just want the chance to prevent it. Without that chance, we will always lose to those who will take advantage of the helpless. I refuse to be helpless. If you own a gun, keep it safe. Learn how to control and use it. Otherwise, it is useless. Don't add to the problem, giving the Govt. the excuse, however lame, to take your right away.
Posted by: Saladin at December 9, 2005 12:11 AM
Hajji and Jeanne
The problem facing the FEC is that McCain-Feingold broadly restricts coordination with, and contributions to, political candidates. So what is the agency to do with all those people who use their Web sites to praise a candidate? Computers and Web access cost money, which could be construed as a financial contribution to a campaign. Ditto bloggers who link to politicians' Web sites, or any individual who forwards a candidate's press release to a list of buddies. All this is to say nothing of blogs that are affiliated with political campaigns and coordinate their activities.
Posted by: WHY at December 9, 2005 12:12 AM
Oh, Don, I do think we are a bit disorganized...but that's not a bad thing. It's just another indicator that we don't insist on "group think" and that we are able (and highly capable) of thinking independently, with reason.
What did Will Rogers say? Paraphrasing here: "I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat."
Posted by: micki at December 9, 2005 12:15 AM
Saladin,
I do not own a gun. Yet, I would never deny anybody their constitutional right to own one.
I don't see how anybody could think that if you outlawed guns it would do away with gun related crimes. It wouldn't go down, it would go up. Drugs are illegal, yet we still have drug crimes and drug problems all across this country. As Hajji would say,
Posted by: TRH at December 9, 2005 12:19 AM
"Go Figgur!"
Posted by: TRH at December 9, 2005 12:19 AM
"So what is the agency to do with all those people who use their Web sites to praise a candidate?"
This is bullshit -- it is a red herring that is intended to intimidate. One could ask, "so what is the agency to do with all those people who get their mugs on the talking-head, Sabbath gasbag shows who hype their favorite candidate?" THAT has been going on for decades. How do you place a "dollar value" on that?
*********
The busheviks would like nothing better than to have trumped-up reasons to restrict the Internet. We shouldn't help them in their efforts.
Posted by: micki at December 9, 2005 12:23 AM
Drugs are ILLEGAL!!?
Oh SHIT! Why didn't sumbody tell me!
(sound of sarcastic flushing)
-T
Posted by: Hajji at December 9, 2005 12:26 AM
Micki,
I view the internet much like the press. It is constitutionally protected. Granted, the word internet does not appear in the constitution, but I would hope the Supreme Court would see beyond that if it were challenged. So much for unfettered debate!
Posted by: TRH at December 9, 2005 12:27 AM
G'nite!
Posted by: Hajji at December 9, 2005 12:27 AM
Hajji,
Hope the toilet didn't overflow!
Posted by: TRH at December 9, 2005 12:30 AM
McCain Feingold, and other examples of "campaign finance reform" will be used to crush any semblance of debate left in this country. But what do you expect from John "torture is bad unless it helps us" McCain and Russ ÒI need to love guns to get electedÓFeingold?
Posted by: WHY at December 9, 2005 12:35 AM
micki #205
In the Will Rogers 'degree' and 'type' of dis-organization, you are right. I go to the extreme of not being part of any party, and register as an independent voter. I just go along, being at liberty until I'm needed by my country or family, which has been the case on occasion. We're close to that condition -- of being needed -- again, in the sense of the major national emergency; not for Bush's war, but for the dire straits he's been leading us into.
There are those who say 9/11 was just that, but we also have people like James Ha giving credence to the government allowing 9/11 to happen.
Pre-9/11 I'd've had a hard time thinking there are people so diabolical on either side -- terrorist or USA government -- who would fly planes into the WTO or allow it to be done. Now I know there are terrorists. But would Cheney and Rumsfeld and the neocon clique agree it'd be wise to let it happen? That makes me shiver.
My mind is not disorganized, and I believe I can be counted on to do what is right.
Posted by: Don Smith at December 9, 2005 12:40 AM
Alan,
No wonder you seem so ignorant, you admit you don't read the factual stories, only left wing lies.
Here it is again, this time do yourself a FAVOR, and read FACTS, FOR ONCE. It won't hurt, I PROMISE.
DeLay Hammers Earle of Austin
Democrat prosecutor Ronnie Earle's conspiracy charge against Tom DeLay was thrown out this
week, which came as a surprise to people who think it's normal for a prosecutor to have to empanel six grand juries in order to get an indictment on simple fund-raising violations. Mr. Earle will presumably assemble a seventh grand jury as soon as he locates someone in the county who hasn't served on a previous one.
It probably goes without saying that it is extraordinary for criminal charges to be thrown out by a judge before any jury ever hears the evidence. Juries decide guilt or innocence in this country. For the judge to dismiss an indictment before trial, it means he concluded that Ð even if the jury finds everything Ronnie Earle alleges to be true Ð no crime was committed. Obviously, this was a huge victory for DeLay and, as the Washington Post put it, "a slap at Texas prosecutor Ronnie Earle." (More bad news for Ronnie Earle: Today President Bush said the embattled Texas D.A. was doing "a heck of a job.") Or, in the words of CNN's Bill Schneider on what this means for Tom DeLay: "Not good." In the expert analysis of Schneider, it was "not good" for DeLay to have charges thrown out because it would have been even better if all the charges had been thrown out. It also would have been better if the judge had dismissed the conspiracy charges and given DeLay an ice cream cone. But that doesn't mean having criminal charges against you dismissed is, I quote, "not good." And they think Fox News has twice CNN's ratings just because it's fair and balanced. The accountants at Fox could give a more penetrating legal analysis. In the past few years, all TV news has become less biased due to the salubrious influence of Fox News. But Bill Schneider isn't backing off one inch! Watching Schneider is like entering a time machine and seeing how news was reported in the '80s. CNN ought to start broadcasting Schneider's appearances only in black and white. According to Schneider, the judge's failure to dismiss the money laundering charges proves "obviously, on at least one charge the judge disagreed" with DeLay's claim that the prosecutor was politically motivated. Schneider's entire understanding of criminal law was apparently shaped during the "Ally McBeal" years.
Schneider would have said more, but he had to run off to file a story about how 4.3 percent growth,
215,000 new jobs, record productivity gains and continued growth in real estate prices were "not
good" news for the economy. In fact, all we know as a result of the judge's ruling on Monday is that the remaining charge against DeLay, if proved, would at least constitute a crime.
To repeat what you might already have heard in third grade: In America, the validity of criminal
charges is determined by the trier of fact after a trial. A judge is not authorized to dismiss a criminal indictment handed up by a grand jury just because the prosecutor is a political hack.
This is true even if the prosecutor had to spend three years and empanel six grand juries to get an
indictment. It is true even if the same prosecutor also indicted Republican Kay Bailey Hutchison days after she was elected to the U.S. Senate, but after spending a year holding press conferences in which he called Hutchinson a criminal, still had no evidence and folded his hand. It is true even if the prosecutor is participating in a documentary about a brave liberal prosecutor (Ronnie Earle) exposing a black-hearted Republican (Tom DeLay) Ð which wouldn't make much of a movie if no charges were ever brought. Thus, for example, Earle's baseless charges against Hutchison Ð like the remaining charges against DeLay Ð were not dismissed before trial. What happened was, the trial date came and Earle had no evidence. The judge ordered the jury to acquit. Earle never admitted he had no evidence against Hutchison. Instead, he made a preposterous request of the judge. He asked the judge to issue a pre-emptive ruling declaring all documents that Earle planned to admit throughout the trial admissible Ð without allowing the judge to know what those documents were or allowing the defense an opportunity to object. Obviously, the judge said he would have to see the documents first and decide admissibility on a case-by-case basis.
So now and forevermore, Earle claims his case against Hutchison was watertight, but because the
judge ruled against him, he was prevented from presenting his "evidence" to the jury.
Posted by: danielle at December 9, 2005 12:44 AM
Sorry, I do not have the link handy...but I am reminded of the days when the Church Ladies (and men) were up in arms that businesses were OPENING ON SUNDAYS! Hellfire and damnation!
Looks like this "business" (religion) is closing down on Sundays, for convenience. Hypocrite comes to mind...
****************
This Christmas, no prayers will be said in several megachurches around the country. Even though the holiday falls this year on a Sunday, when churches normally host thousands for worship, pastors are canceling services, anticipating low attendance on what they call a family day.
Critics within the evangelical community, more accustomed to doing battle with department stores and public schools over keeping religion in Christmas, are stunned by the shutdown.
It is almost unheard of for a Christian church to cancel services on a Sunday, and opponents of the closures are accusing these congregations of bowing to secular culture.
Posted by: micki at December 9, 2005 12:44 AM
God Damn Christians anyway.
Being a progressive,
I think we should be able to screw, kill, beat up, or rape anyone we want, anytime we want. After that, might as well go get drunk and stoned and rape again. NO RULES - NO LAWS - NO CHURCH - NO GOVERNMENT - THE PROGRESSIVE WAY
Posted by: Jay at December 9, 2005 12:55 AM
Micki,
I am not a religious person. But, wouldn't the answer to celebrating Christmas and still observing the Sabbath & keeping it Holy come down to opening presents on Saturday and attending church on Sunday? I suspect that clergy across the country maybe want Christmas day off too!
Posted by: TRH at December 9, 2005 12:55 AM
#216 micki, I did not hear about churches not offering services on Sunday, December 25. I do know from listening to mainstream religions that they are not happy with Bush and his lies. Bush's power rests with fundies, evans, 55 to 60% of Catholics, and a large percent of Jews. These four groups will always vote for hatred, murders, torture, and wars.
Posted by: Gerald at December 9, 2005 12:57 AM
Jay,
Your post is pathetic.
Posted by: TRH at December 9, 2005 12:58 AM
Mr. Earle will presumably assemble a seventh grand jury as soon as he locates someone in the county who hasn't served on a previous one.
sorry Danielle, that's as far as I read both times. There's two non-facts in one sentence, so I didn't bother to read the rest. He used three grand juries, not seven. And he's not 'assembling' another for this case. He's got 15 days to appeal the charge that was thrown out, and hasn't announced his decision. The other two charges remain set for trial after the first of the year. The worst charge he had isn't the one thrown out either.
You take care sweety, and quit smacking your gum while twirling your hair.
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 12:59 AM
Alan #221
I was nodding in serious agreement and then you throw in your last line and I start to laugh. I don't know danielle or have ever seen her post but I have seen the picture you painted with your last comment. Thanks for the chuckle.
Posted by: TRH at December 9, 2005 01:05 AM
Dreams becoming nightmares
Posted by: Gerald at December 9, 2005 01:09 AM
Alan if you want to mock people for the gum chewing habits or hair issues, fine, but get your facts right. Earle has impaneled 6 grand juries to investigate Delay. Now go spit your gum out and go to bed.
Posted by: WHY at December 9, 2005 01:10 AM
Judge Upholds Some DeLay Charges
(CBS/AP) A judge dismissed a conspiracy charge Monday against Rep. Tom DeLay but refused to throw out the far more serious allegations of money-laundering, dashing the congressman's hopes for now of reclaiming his post as House majority leader.
Texas Judge Pat Priest, who is presiding over the case against the Republican, issued the ruling after a hearing late last month in which DeLay's attorney argued that the indictment was fatally flawed.
When he was indicted in September, DeLay was required under House rules to relinquish the leadership post he had held since 2003. While Monday's ruling was a partial victory for DeLay, he cannot reclaim his post because he remains under indictment.
The ruling means the case will move toward a trial next year, though other defense objections to the indictments remain to be heard by the judge.
---
---
After the judge's decision, DeLay declined to speak with reporters as he entered a Houston hotel for a campaign fundraiser.
In a written statement, Earle's office said prosecutors were studying the ruling and had made no decision about whether to appeal. Prosecutors have 15 days to challenge the decision.
While Delay's office claimed it was a victory, the decision has created tremendous political problems for the Congressman, said CBS News correspondent Gloria Borger. DeLay is going to trial, and Borger reports many of the rank and file Republicans she talks to are becoming restless, some saying they think he should never return to his post because his ethics charges could tarnish them (video).
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 01:13 AM
danielle
People on the right think Earl's up to something. People on the left think Delay's up to something. They are all up to something all the time! Not just in Texas, but all across this country. It is called politics and it has been going on since the beginning of this country. To think that one side does something and the other side doesn't is naive at best. To ignore what one side does because you think the other is worse is ludicrous. They are all corrupt, reference John McCain's reason for campaign finance reform "we are all corrupted by money." Yet, I do not see one of them volunteering to turn themself in for this acknowledged criminal activity.
Posted by: TRH at December 9, 2005 01:15 AM
I am curious,
Are you guys,
Jeanne, Hajji, James ha, Alan, Saladin, capt, Nancy Pelose, and Howard Dean,
aware you are the only eight people in the world that think we losing the war in Iraq?
Are you aware of that?
Those of you locked in this little blog room should get out and talk to real, intelligent, Americans.
Posted by: singer at December 9, 2005 01:18 AM
Lost Faith
I have lost my faith in MSM. Our free press has failed America and Americans. I have not read articles in our free press for at least a year to fifteen months. I find that there are websites where I can get decent information. I will not fall for the repugnants effort to keep me uninformed, pregnant, and barefoot. Reading articles in the MSM would keep me uninformed, pregnant, and barefoot.
Posted by: Gerald at December 9, 2005 01:22 AM
Singer,
You must be the only one locked in this blog. I believe we are winning the war in Iraq yet, if you believe those are the only people who believe we are losing, you are wrong. And, I haven't seen any of the people you mentioned who post here say we are losing. They may disagree that we are there, but not that we are losing. Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi do not post here. I will not speak for them.
Posted by: TRH at December 9, 2005 01:27 AM
*singing*
Tell me WHYYYYY, why she cried and why she lieeeeed to me.
Tom DeLay's Troubles
JOHN GIBSON, HOST: We already know there are two grand juries charging Texas Congressman Tom DeLay (search) with conspiracy and/or money laundering. Now there are reports that, in between the two, there was another grand jury that reportedly declined to indict DeLay.
I'm joined now by Congressman DeLay's attorney, Dick DeGuerin.
Dick, it's good to see you.
DICK DEGUERIN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY FOR TOM DELAY: Thank you, John.
====================================
count on your fingers if you have to, but when there's two, and one more, that's THREE
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 01:31 AM
Gerald
I know they can make you feel uninformed, even make you feel that you are barefoot, but I find it hard to believe they will make you pregnant. Unless, Gerald is short for Geraldine! Take care!
Posted by: TRH at December 9, 2005 01:31 AM
*singing*
Tell me WHYYYYY, why she cried and why she lieeeeed to me.
Tom DeLay's Troubles
JOHN GIBSON, HOST: We already know there are two grand juries charging Texas Congressman Tom DeLay (search) with conspiracy and/or money laundering. Now there are reports that, in between the two, there was another grand jury that reportedly declined to indict DeLay.
I'm joined now by Congressman DeLay's attorney, Dick DeGuerin.
Dick, it's good to see you.
DICK DEGUERIN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY FOR TOM DELAY: Thank you, John.
====================================
count on your fingers if you have to, but when there's two, and one more, that's THREE
Oh yeah, and that was in FOX. haha
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 01:31 AM
Alan,
The charge of money laundering, is impossible to prove, even if Delay had done it. Earle knows that, especially since he doesn't even have a list he lied about having to get the charges brought in the first place.
But you just keep on avoiding the facts by not listening anything you don't want hear.
Alan, I can see you now, when the news comes on. Alan sitting in his chair, with his fingers in his ears, singing
Laa,Laa,Laa,Laa,Laa,Laa,Laa,Laa,Laa,
Posted by: danielle at December 9, 2005 01:32 AM
danielle & Allen
Actually the charge should be "money soiling." He took perferctly good coinage and soiled it.
It was given to a politician. I know I have said that is perfectly legal and should be, but as soon as it reaches a politicians hand, it is soiled.
Posted by: TRH at December 9, 2005 01:37 AM
I have been a regular reader of this blog for many months.
The posting has taken a turn for the worst. You have turned this blog into a collection of insults and stupidity.
What a shame.
The turn has been bad for a few weeks now. It does not seem to be making any improvement.
Go back a few months and read what it was like then, you all should be very embarrassed.
No theme, no information, no insightful posts, no enlightened commentary, just insults and name-calling from all. What a shame.
Once an open and meaningful place to discuss issues now devolved into a mess of chewing gum, twisting hair and high schoolers making the regulars dance to their tune.
You should all be very embarrassed.
What a loss.
Yet you all laugh? Not funny.
Posted by: george bush at December 9, 2005 01:38 AM
Remember Corn folk, we are part of baf's doctor prescribed therapy. We are less toxic for him than alcohol and drugs. We're his methadone, helping him get through his addiction and pain. He needs us, so go gentle with him. We can't expect him to be reasonable, after all who was he appealing to in order to justify his ability to out debate and prove you all wrong. He is immersed in self and trying to get his primordial needs met, he is not capable of having conversations at your level. As with any 8 year old to jr higher, you just sometimes have to overlook their comments until they can get themselves worked out of it. We shouldn't patronize him and we should provide a little tough love but in general we should just ignore his more inane and mean-spirited comments. He hasn't gotten to the 1st step yet, to admit that he has a abuse problem.
Remember baf, we're here for you... when you have your Lee Atwater repentance moment, we'll be here... even if your so-called friends call you traitor as you come into the light and the truth... we understand we have been maligned and called traitors by those who did not know what they were doing.
Posted by: yelnats at December 9, 2005 01:38 AM
The charge of money laundering, is impossible to prove...
Again with the spin, huh? Read the two articles I linked. That last one is on FauxNews too, so his attorney is spinning his azz off, but the truth still comes out.
You know what his argument is, right? There's two actually... one: it's not illegal because it wasn't cash, it was checks LOL
two: 'money laundering' has to be 'funds' made illegally so as to be 'laundered', but the judge says nuh uh, that as soon as they showed intent with those funds, a crime was committed.
Read 'em and weep sweety.
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 01:42 AM
Mr. President
I have never seen you wax so eloquently.
Posted by: TRH at December 9, 2005 01:43 AM
Danielle, were you at the Westin Oaks Hotel in Houston for the fundraiser? just curious
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 01:47 AM
hey singer,
You could add me to that list. Actually I'd like to qualify my addtion to that list by saying the war is already lost. Wait a minute what war, I forgot it's a miliatery operation, right? Major comabt operations - mission successful, yeah. Let's see here, we removed Reagan and Rummy's old buddy Saddam, replaced him with religious fanatics. Brought terrorism into the one place where it previously was absent. Oh, let's not forget that we showed those stupid Iraqis that Saddam isn't the only iron fisted, torture loving, chemical weapon using, propaganda spreading piece of shit. Oh no, you guys haven't seen anything yet. That awesome constitution that provides the country we have secured the right to disolve itself in five years. But really, my favorite is when they try to pass off our soldiers as peace delegates, you know hand out candy to the children. Somehow the connection that soldiers are warriors and targets, and maybe they shouldn't be the diplomatic face of the "reconstruction" has never been made by the "commanders". I mean everyone knows that a soldiers duty to the American constitution is to write stories and pay off the newspapers to print as an an innocent civilian from another country. Listen up singer, the war was lost before it began. Bush and his merry band of fascist corporate warmongers have no idea why peace is in the interst of humanity. War is much more profitable. Of course, there is a long long list of conquerors who thought they won the war there too. I know you have no interest in history or facts, but I threw that in there purely for text meat. Those empires and monarchs and conquerors and dictators have never been right though, what makes you think America is any different? BABYLON the great mystery, the nations will persue her into the wilderness until the end, the harlot that she is. America lost this one before it began.
Posted by: ripple at December 9, 2005 01:48 AM
Please listen to my award winning Lennon tribute at www.myspace.com/robgilesmusic
Posted by: robgiles at December 9, 2005 01:50 AM
Even if it did happen, which I doubt, it was before the rules changed anyway.
NOW TO SOMETHING ELSE.
I know some of you guys have a sense of humor.
The ...Laa,Laa,Laa, ... thing was funny.
Just to show you do have a sense of humor,
gimme an AMEN.
Alan won't mind. I'll bet even Alan chuckled a little.
If you even smiled, how bout giving that AMEN.
Posted by: danielle at December 9, 2005 01:55 AM
*amen Rip
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 01:55 AM
Listening now Rob. Sounds good!
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 01:58 AM
ripple,
All I have to say to that raft of crap is,
YOU'RE GOOFY.
Posted by: singer at December 9, 2005 01:58 AM
danielle,
I don't watch the news, but your La La etc. comment reminded me of an Eddie Murphy scene in a movie that I had seen where he did that. I didn't picture Alan watching the news either. I think he prefers the Astro's.
Posted by: TRH at December 9, 2005 02:00 AM
Here's another from Faux...
"Mr. Santorum, why are down by double digits in your race?"
It's only 39 seconds long. He looks and acts like a defeated man. HA
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 02:07 AM
In VA, where I legally carry my Glock 23 everyday and compete regularly at NRA HQ Shooting Range we have a much lower rate of violent and other crime than MD (concealed carry banned, handguns and semi-auto rifles allowed, AR, AK, etc.) which has a much lower rate of violent and other crime than DC which effectively bans every damn thing you can think of.
Coincidence? Don't let facts prevent you from imposing your "utopia" on the rest of us.
What we really need is prohibition of prohibition and prohibitionists like you and small-time wannabe totalitarians VPC, Brady Bunch, et al. Yes that applies to drugs, alchohol, knives, drywall buckets, swimming pools and every other inconvenience suffered by free people in free societies. I would rather suffer the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too little - Benjamin Franklin.
Whiny, glass-half-empty people like you don't belong here in the land of the free.
Yes I SAID it!
Posted by: Will Myers at December 9, 2005 02:09 AM
Alan, 243
was the, amen, part of ... *amen Rip ... for me?
Posted by: danielle at December 9, 2005 02:10 AM
ripple seconded
G. Whistleass Bush was off the res when he left Afghanistan.
Posted by: Don Smith at December 9, 2005 02:13 AM
Ex-GOP Official Faces Conspiracy Charge
By BEVERLEY WANG
Associated Press Writer
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) -- A former national Republican Party official played a key role in an Election Day 2002 phone jamming plot against New Hampshire Democrats, the prosecution said Tuesday during opening statements.
James Tobin, President Bush's onetime New England campaign chairman, is being tried on one federal count of conspiring against voters' rights and several counts involving telephone harassment. He could face up to 10 years in prison if convicted.
U.S. Attorney Andrew Levchuk said the state GOP's former executive director, Chuck McGee, had Tobin's blessing for the scheme as well as his help in the plot to disrupt Democratic get-out-the-vote phone banks and a nonpartisan ride-to-the-polls line.
====================
ahhh, the culture of corruption
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 02:18 AM
Don Smith, 250
YOU'RE GOOFY, too.
Posted by: singer at December 9, 2005 02:19 AM
Alan, 243
was the, amen, part of ... *amen Rip ... for me?
nawp, but that was kinda funny... that I was giving Ripple an "amen" and posted it at the same time as your "gimme an amen" post.
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 02:21 AM
singer-
I think it's spelled goofey, but that's ok, i understand your well thought out response. Maybe someday when you believe in your own delusions, you could enlighten us as to why America is winning the, what was it you called it a war?
Posted by: ripple at December 9, 2005 02:23 AM
In VA, where I legally carry my Glock 23 everyday and compete regularly at NRA HQ Shooting Range we have a much lower rate of violent and other crime than MD (concealed carry banned, handguns and semi-auto rifles allowed, AR, AK, etc.) which has a much lower rate of violent and other crime than DC which effectively bans every damn thing you can think of.
Coincidence? Don't let facts prevent you from imposing your "utopia" on the rest of us.
What we really need is prohibition of prohibition and prohibitionists like you and small-time wannabe totalitarians VPC, Brady Bunch, et al. Yes that applies to drugs, alchohol, knives, drywall buckets, swimming pools and every other inconvenience suffered by free people in free societies. I would rather suffer the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too little - Benjamin Franklin.
Whiny, glass-half-empty people like you don't belong here in the land of the free.
Yes I SAID it!
Posted by: Will Myers at December 9, 2005 02:28 AM
Reporters get a peak at Cunningham's bribes
Dec 8th, 11:40pm
RANCHO SANTA FE, Calif. (AP) -- Former U.S. Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham has sold his mansion to a publishing heir for $2.6 million, slightly more than he paid for it two years ago.
Cunningham, who resigned from Congress after pleading guilty to accepting $2.4 million in bribes from defense contractors and others in exchange for government business and other favors, signed over the deed to the home on Nov. 7.
Three weeks later, he entered his plea to charges of tax evasion and conspiracy to commit bribery, tax evasion and fraud. The home sale was recorded this week.
======================
and the thing is, the worst cases have yet to come... Scanlon flipped and Abramoff better get to flipping or he's facing serious time. Can't wait to hear all the politicians (dems and repugs) that he's got hooks in.
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 02:29 AM
*peek haha
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 02:31 AM
Alan,
ahhh, the culture of corruption
Wasn't it the Daley's of Chicago that started that whole corruption thing?
you know,
Democratic Campaign Chair, William Daley, the son of the old Chicago Mayor Richard J. Daley was instrumental in "stealing" the 1960 election for JFK from Nixon.
Posted by: danielle at December 9, 2005 02:31 AM
Will Meyers--
should the media be prohibited from taking pictures of coffins with flags on them coming home from iraq? or would that be acceptable in the land of the free, where is that by the way?
Posted by: ripple at December 9, 2005 02:38 AM
254 ripple
Goofy ... Goofey ... depends on if using as a proper noun or an adjective.
Posted by: singer at December 9, 2005 02:42 AM
Wasn't it the Daley's of Chicago that started that whole corruption thing?
I think it was already going on before that too.
Fitzgerald is working on some of those same people right now, but he's been a lil' bizzy.
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 02:43 AM
Alan you can't really be dumb enough to only consider the last 3 grand juries can you???? Oh I guess you can sorry.
Posted by: WHY at December 9, 2005 02:48 AM
Shoot, singer, I was hoping you'd stick with goofy, but capitalized Goofy, so I could think you meant me to be like the big yellow dog with the black vest at Disneyland.
I'm not aware of any goofey, unless you mean the guy down the street, but he likes capitals, too: Goo Fey.
Enough. I'm outa here.
Posted by: Don Smith at December 9, 2005 02:51 AM
ripple
When war is over, and soldiers are home, you can show coffins, pictures of detainee's in underwear, your ass, or whatever else you want to show. If it pisses off the majority of people, they will let politicians know at the ballot
box.
Posted by: Joseph at December 9, 2005 02:52 AM
Qaeda-Iraq Link U.S. Cited Is Tied to Coercion Claim
By DOUGLAS JEHL
Published: December 9, 2005
WASHINGTON, Dec. 8 - The Bush administration based a crucial prewar assertion about ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda on detailed statements made by a prisoner while in Egyptian custody who later said he had fabricated them to escape harsh treatment, according to current and former government officials.
The officials said the captive, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, provided his most specific and elaborate accounts about ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda only after he was secretly handed over to Egypt by the United States in January 2002, in a process known as rendition.
The new disclosure provides the first public evidence that bad intelligence on Iraq may have resulted partly from the administration's heavy reliance on third countries to carry out interrogations of Qaeda members and others detained as part of American counterterrorism efforts. The Bush administration used Mr. Libi's accounts as the basis for its prewar claims, now discredited, that ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda included training in explosives and chemical weapons.
The fact that Mr. Libi recanted after the American invasion of Iraq and that intelligence based on his remarks was withdrawn by the C.I.A. in March 2004 has been public for more than a year. But American officials had not previously acknowledged either that Mr. Libi made the false statements in foreign custody or that Mr. Libi contended that his statements had been coerced.
===================
"...made public for more than a year." hmmm, and yet some people still think it's true.
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 02:57 AM
They didn't have to torture Chalabi though. Lots of money did the trick.
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 03:01 AM
Alan you can't really be dumb enough to only consider the last 3 grand juries can you???? Oh I guess you can sorry.
haha We've already established who's the dumb one. Sourced and linked, straight from his Democratic attorney's mouth. You've been spanked my spinning friend.
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 03:04 AM
Tell Sen. Joe Lieberman: Debate Is Patriotic
Dear Senator Lieberman,
Recently you said, "It's time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge he'll be commander-in-chief for three more critical years, and that in matters of war we undermine presidential credibility at our nation's peril."
I disagree. The First Amendment enumerates our right "to petition the government for a redress of grievances." If Americans don't challenge a president who is bankrupting our treasury, destroying our moral leadership and jeopardizing our national security then we fail as patriots.
Senator Lieberman: As a member of the "world's greatest deliberative body," it's time you stopped trying to stifle debate and instead become part of the solution by joining the majority of Americans in questioning President Bush's foreign policy.
*****end of clip*****
Say it ain't so DINO Joe. We should all let him know if he keeps it up he has to go.
capt
Posted by: capt at December 9, 2005 03:05 AM
damn, I've been wondering where you've been Capt.
I was running outta good shyt to read.
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 03:09 AM
Ya Know what Alan,
I think we both can agree on these 4 simple facts.
1. Politicians SUCK.
2. If you are a person that DOES NOT SUCK, you don't want to be a politician.
3. People that are not politicians, but still SUCK, want to be politicians.
4. People that DO NOT SUCK, are not politicians, and do not want to become politicians.
Posted by: danielle at December 9, 2005 03:09 AM
Ya Know what Alan,
I think we both can agree on these 4 simple facts.
Yep, I agree. I bet we agree on other things too, but we'd have to get past the name-calling juvie stuff. Truce?
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 03:11 AM
http://pfaw.kintera.org/PatriotActFilibuster
capt
Posted by: capt at December 9, 2005 03:16 AM
271 Alan
Truce?
Yeah, what the heck.
That was a nice note to end on, I'm off to bed.
Posted by: danielle at December 9, 2005 03:18 AM
from that NYTimes article...
A classified Defense Intelligence Agency report issued in February 2002 that expressed skepticism about Mr. Libi's credibility on questions related to Iraq and Al Qaeda was based in part on the knowledge that he was no longer in American custody when he made the detailed statements, and that he might have been subjected to harsh treatment, the officials said.
---
---
Beginning in March 2002, with the capture of a Qaeda operative named Abu Zubaydah, the C.I.A. adopted a practice of maintaining custody itself of the highest-ranking captives, a practice that became the main focus of recent controversy related to detention of suspected terrorists.
==========================
so that's when the 'black sites' became operational
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 03:21 AM
I humbly submit that what we have here is a war based on idology. Which is Belief.
This Nation was founded on the principal of allowing all forms of belief, those that harmed nobody particularly.
Its real hard not so see this war as a war on a particular Faith. In Bagdad.
Here; we have a war on the poor.
We are spending Billions to insure the rights of Iraqui's. How much are we spending to help the victims of Katrina and Rita? These are OUR FELLOW citizens. Their rights USED to be guaranteed under the constitution..........Remember the Constitution?
It aint the same doccument now. And WE CAN NO LONGER TRUST OUR CONGRESS.
We know for sure we don't trust this Administration, but now we know the republican majority will vote on the Presidents side no matter what............except when it comes to torture.
McCain WAS tortured. He understands, the closest W ever came was entertaining Ted Kennedy.
Military brat here, when it comes to war I listen to Generals, too damn bad Shrub boy does not.
He assigns this to a cabal of draft dodgeres who couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag.
How badly does the Patriot Act errode our personal freedoms?
This IS the time to ask big questions of goverment.
No bid contracts are everyday stuff now.
Investigate Tamiflu.......
We are in serious danger of becoming a dictatorship run by the very , Very Rich.
Posted by: titchaba at December 9, 2005 03:27 AM
one more graf from the article...
The document showed that the Defense Intelligence Agency had identified Mr. Libi as a probable fabricator months before the Bush administration began to use his statements as the foundation for its claims about ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda involving illicit weapons.
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 03:27 AM
I think Lieberman would but an expotentially greater Sec. of Defense. It would also free up his Senate seat for a better Dem, and Joe could be gone in 3 years as well. It could be a great move, don't mind his angle, he just says what he has to to get the job. Pentagon get ready for Jomentum. It would be intersting to see anyway. They couldn't do any better with the rable they have to choice from on the Dark Side. Maybe Hagel, but that aint happening.
Posted by: ripple at December 9, 2005 03:28 AM
I've heard of the 'Lieberman for SofD' thing too. Zat mean Rummy's gonna 'cut and run'? What's the rumor on that?
Posted by: Alan at December 9, 2005 03:32 AM
#264
So what are you saying by this?
Are people who challenge the value of this war that is costing many lives must wait until the war is over to hold people accountable for their actions? That is a joke. I can already tell you what will be said when the war is over, the same thing that is said after the Katrina disaster. Let's not look back and point fingers, lets only talk about what we can do in the future. If legitimate criticism cannot be managed by this administration during the war, and we know how it will be deflected afterwards... then just when are people able to dialogue and debate the progress of this war and whether it was the right decision or not.
It is a political sham (or self preservation) to think that way, or a shell game.
What would it be like if we found out that while we passively waited for the war to end that what the critics believed was not only true but many times worse. Would we really learn a lesson or go through a guilt-shame ritual like Germany? What if our future wars and even the USA's well being in the world are being decided by the way we are prosecuting this war now, and not how we handle ourselves after the war is over... meaning its too late if we wait until the war is over?
Also what defines the end of the war when we can start throwing the 'bad politicans' out as you suggested and thereby not offend what you think is the right sense of patriotric honor? Saddam is facing trial, isn't it over? We are fighting factions and to a lesser extent terrorist organizations. There is no end to it... or if we were to truly end it, it could cost 100,000s more innocent civilian lives. There will be more opportunities to accidentally kill the innocent such as at roadblocks, and in raids. Also those airpower bombs are not as accurate as we like to believe.
Posted by: yelnats at December 9, 2005 04:18 AM
The government men in masks who terrorize Iraq
By Dahr Jamail and Harb al-Mukhtar
BAGHDAD - After the US forces and the bombings, Iraqis are coming to fear those bands of men in masks who seem to operate with the Iraqi police.
Omar Ahmed's family learnt what it can mean to run into the police, their supposed protectors. Omar was driving with two friends in the Adhamiya district of Baghdad at night on September 1 when they were stopped at a police checkpoint.
"The three of them were arrested by the police even though there was nothing in the car," an eyewitness told Inter Press Service, speaking on condition of anonymity. They did not return home for days, and the family began to search the morgues, common practice now when someone is arrested by the Iraqi police and does not return.
"Five days after they were arrested we found Omar's body in the freezer in a morgue, with holes in the side of his head and shoulders," a friend of the family said. "We don't know if the other two men are dead or alive. But we know these men were guilty of nothing other than driving their car at night. We have no security and the problem is that police are killing and disappearing the Iraqi people every day now."
*****end of clip*****
Lies built on lies built on fabrications and 2,100 of our troops and hundreds of billions of dollars and this is what we brought to the ever grateful Iraqi citizens?
We are responsible for training arming and setting an example for the Iraqi police and military. We brought freedom of fascism and democracy of duress.
capt
Posted by: capt at December 9, 2005 04:43 AM
Yep, old gw spreading that democracy and freedom. But, forget water, sewer, electricity, and medical treatment that ain't in the picture, wonderful how we are winning this war, in this manner. Well what can you expect from republicans no brains, no plans, just graft, corruption, lies and more lies. Put a happy face on disaster and wait for the next chance to lie to the american public. No matter how much they try to cover up their crimes it is all coming out now. Can't wait until they finally get the president in a court. That will be a great day.
Posted by: What the F**k at December 9, 2005 08:24 AM
Rumsfeld's Handshake Deal with Saddam
On Dec. 20, 1983, the Washington Post reported that Rumsfeld "visited Iraq in what U.S. officials said was an attempt to bolster the already improving U.S. relations with that country." A couple of days later, the New York Times cited a "senior American official" who "said that the United States remained ready to establish full diplomatic relations with Iraq and that it was up to the Iraqis."
On March 29, 1984, the Times reported: "American diplomats pronounce themselves satisfied with relations between Iraq and the United States and suggest that normal diplomatic ties have been restored in all but name." Washington had some goodies for Saddam's regime, the Times account noted, including "agricultural-commodity credits totaling $840 million." And while "no results of the talks have been announced" after the Rumsfeld visit to Baghdad three months earlier, "Western European diplomats assume that the United States now exchanges some intelligence on Iran with Iraq."
A few months later, on July 17, 1984, a Times article with a Baghdad dateline sketchily filled in a bit more information, saying that the U.S. government "granted Iraq about $2 billion in commodity credits to buy food over the last two years." The story recalled that "Donald Rumsfeld, the former Middle East special envoy, held two private meetings with the Iraqi president here," and the dispatch mentioned in passing that "State Department human rights reports have been uniformly critical of the Iraqi President, contending that he ran a police state."
Full diplomatic relations between Washington and Baghdad were restored 11 months after Rumsfeld's December 1983 visit with Saddam. He went on to use poison gas later in the decade, actions which scarcely harmed relations with the Reagan administration.
As the most senior U.S. official to visit Iraq in six years, Rumsfeld had served as Reagan's point man for warming relations with Saddam. In 1984, the administration engineered the sale to Baghdad of 45 ostensibly civilian-use Bell 214ST helicopters. Saddam's military found them quite useful for attacking Kurdish civilians with poison gas in 1988, according to U.S. intelligence sources. "In response to the gassing," journalist Jeremy Scahill has pointed out, "sweeping sanctions were unanimously passed by the U.S. Senate that would have denied Iraq access to most U.S. technology. The measure was killed by the White House."
*****end of clip*****
Like they really thought it was a problem when Saddam was our guy in Iraq.
capt
Posted by: capt at December 9, 2005 08:46 AM
Bush did NOT know there was difference between Sunni & Shiite Muslims until Jan '03
Oborne: I traveled to Boston to meet a former U.S. diplomat who had been a leading authority on Iraq for over a decade. A chance remark made just two months before the war, hinted at how the complexities of Iraq had bewildered Americans at the highest levels.
Peter Galbraith - former U.S. diplomat: January 2003 the President invited three members of the Iraqi opposition to join him to watch the Super Bowl. In the course of the conversation the Iraqis realized that the President was not aware that there was a difference between Sunni and Shiite Muslims. He looked at them and said, "You mean...they're not, you know, there, there's this difference. What is it about?"
*****end of clip*****
This is the problem with electing people to high offices who are incurious and unread.
capt
Posted by: capt at December 9, 2005 09:22 AM
I'm a fan of yours but I'm disappointed that you do a whole article on some dead rock star and don't even mention Pearl Harbor Day.
Posted by: John Goodman at December 9, 2005 09:26 AM
#241
Good song Rob.
Posted by: Jeanne at December 9, 2005 10:02 AM
#255
Will,
The arguments like that don't wash. As an historian, I know how statistics can be used. Washington DC has a much higher populations and a higher percentage of those in poverty. Higher stress levels. More hopelessness. There will be higher crime. Also you have to take into account the age of the population. It would be much better to compare populations of different areas that have very similar stats.
Posted by: Jeanne at December 9, 2005 10:09 AM
TRH 206, that has always been the case when total gun bans are enforced. Your example of the drug laws is a good one. Prohibition is another good example. All they do is criminalize a huge segment of society while those who couldn't care less about the law do whatever they want. As I mentioned before, alcohol related deaths are significant, but it would be stupid to ban drinking for everyone because of a few jerks that don't care if they endanger someone elses life. The whole idea of disarming the population is a bad one, this has been proven time and time again.
Don 214 you can bet they would allow a 9/11 to happen if it furthered an agenda that had nothing to do with holding this country together, especially if the goal was to tear it apart, from what I have witnessed in the past 5 years, tearing it apart does appear to be the goal. Why would they even bat an eye at 3000 Americans dead, when they had a war in the middle east waiting in the wings that would kill many, many thousands more? The death of innocent people means nothing to them, haven't they proven that?
bush 235, you may leave me out of that all encompassing statement. I do not engage the trolls and have many times suggested to others to ignore them. But you can't prevent people from responding if they want to. If you disapprove that much and find the discourse too annoying you should skip past the babbling of both, as I do, or avoid this forum altogether. I doubt that you are chained to a chair and forced to read the comments!
Capt 280, isn't it amazing how the arrest of those brits dressed as Arabs driving a car loaded with explosives and weapons just faded away into the nether world as if it never happened? I wonder how many actually accomplish the mission.
John 284, did you notice that none of the MSM gave it much attention, strange to say the least.
Posted by: Saladin at December 9, 2005 10:12 AM
Jeanne, even though that comment ended badly, I think the point is that banning guns didn't work in DC, it didn't work in Chicago or Australia and it won't work in SF. If the goal is to reduce gun crime, what difference does it make how poor and desperate the people are? Isn't a ban supposed to keep guns out of the hands of EVERYONE? Isn't that the whole idea? But in the real world it doesn't work because criminals DON'T OBEY THE LAW! That's why they call them criminals.
Posted by: Saladin at December 9, 2005 10:19 AM
regarding Pearl Harbor Day....
CNN virtually ignores pearl harbor anniversary
Could it be that they donÕt want the words ÒPearl HarborÓ mentioned? (UPDATE 10:35 AM ET: CNN mentioned Pearl Harbor in its news update. No stories on the event however.)
Whenever there is an event, a holiday, celebrity news, or anything that enters the public discourse, a percentage of people automatically search the Internet for information related to the topic de jour. Could it be that the media do not want you to ÒGoogleÓ ÒPearl Harbor?Ó Could it be that they are terrified that you will find out about the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) and their call for a Ònew Pearl Harbor?Ó Performing this search will surely lead people to information about the events of 9/11 and the very incriminating facts related to the members of the Bush administration who signed on to the Project for a New American CenturyÕs colonial agenda. It will also lead you to a mother load of information about the real facts surrounding 9/11.
Posted by: James Ha at December 9, 2005 10:20 AM
Also, if guns had been banned when Lennon was shot, do you really think he would still be alive today? Do you think that Chapman, determined to shoot Lennon, would not have found a way?
Posted by: Saladin at December 9, 2005 10:22 AM
just to be fair, if one does google pearl harbor, it's not until the 105th entry that
The New Pearl Harbor: A Debate On A New Book That Alleges The Bush Administration Was Behind The 9/11 Attacks shows up on the 11th page, so this might not be the reason that the mcMedia ignored pearl harbor day this year, but I can think of no other reasons....pearl harbor day has been a big deal every year until THIS year.
Posted by: James Ha at December 9, 2005 10:32 AM
Saddam on Trial
Yes, Saddam Hussein is on trial for a variety of reasons. He is on trial because his country had only a two bit military force.
Bush is not on trial for similar reasons and crimes. Bush is not on trial because the USA has the most evil and powerful military force in the universe. Since the USA will never be defeated because she has the weaponry to blow up the planet, Bush will never go on trial for murders and war crimes.
Saddam goes on trial and Bush continues to drink Jim and Jack and snorts whatever he wants to snort.
Posted by: Gerald at December 9, 2005 10:33 AM
#288
Saladin,
I understand but the arguments have to be supported with evidence that I can believe and trust.
I come from a state where hunting is a tradition in families. I would never take that away from anybody. I personally believe there needs to be stricter controls. But if you want to own a gun and you aren't a psycho (you as in the general population. I know you aren't a psycho), it is your right.
Posted by: Jeanne at December 9, 2005 10:34 AM
# 267
Alan you should really expand your reading list. Have you heard of Jack Abramoff? Did you know that Delay was investigated at the same time by the same jury?
For over two years, Earle and eight separate grand juries investigated possible violations of Texas campaign finance law in the 2002 state legislative election. His investigation of two political action committees that spent a combined $3.4 million on 22 Republican Texas House races focused on a PAC founded by DeLay and directed by Jack Abramoff (Texans for a Republican Majority PAC).
Posted by: WHY at December 9, 2005 10:40 AM
American Soldiers
American soldiers are being killed like flies for BushÕ³ lies. To date 2,381 American soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq.
OF COURSE, NONE OF THEM WAS GOING TO GET SHOT AT. NONE OF THEM WOULD HAVE TO ANSWER TO THE MOTHERS AND FATHERS OF DEAD SOLDIERS AND MARINES. GENERAL SCHWARZKOPF
DON'T PATRONIZE ME WITH TALK ABOUT HUMAN LIVES. COLIN "LAPDOG" POWELL
It sounds like human lives are not important to Lapdog.
Wolfowitz + World Bank = War + Poverty
As Diebold goes, so goes the election!
Posted by: Gerald at December 9, 2005 10:42 AM
American Soldiers
American soldiers are being killed like flies for BushÕ³ lies. To date 2,381 American soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq.
OF COURSE, NONE OF THEM WAS GOING TO GET SHOT AT. NONE OF THEM WOULD HAVE TO ANSWER TO THE MOTHERS AND FATHERS OF DEAD SOLDIERS AND MARINES. GENERAL SCHWARZKOPF
DON'T PATRONIZE ME WITH TALK ABOUT HUMAN LIVES. COLIN "LAPDOG" POWELL
It sounds like human lives are not important to Lapdog.
Wolfowitz + World Bank = War + Poverty
As Diebold goes, so goes the election!
Posted by: Gerald at December 9, 2005 10:43 AM
Jeanne, here are the stats for Australia. Every article I have read regarding the gun ban down under has reported that it has been a disastrous failure. I agree that psychos shouldn't have guns. Unfortunately it seems that passing these kinds of laws guarantee they will be the only ones that DO have a gun!
One year after gun-owners were forced to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed, including semi-automatic .22 rifles and shotguns, a program costing the government over 500 million dollars, the results are in...
A dramatic increase in criminal activity has been experienced. Gun control advocates respond "Just wait... we'll be safer... you'll see...".
OBSERVABLE FACT, AFTER 12 MONTHS OF DATA:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2%
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6%
Australia-wide, armed-robberies are up 44% (yes, FORTY-FOUR PERCENT)
In the state of Victoria, homicides-with-firearms are up 300%
Figures over the previous 25 years show a steady decrease in homicides-with-firearms (changed dramatically in the past 12 months)
Figures over the previous 25 years show a steady decrease in armed-robbery-with-firearms (changed dramatically in the past 12 months)
There has been a dramatic increase in breakins-and-assaults-of- the-elderly
At the time of the ban, the Prime Minister said "self-defense is not a reason for owning a firearm"
From 1910 to present, homicides in Australia had averaged about 1.8-per-100,000 or lower, a safe society by any standard.
The ban has destroyed Australia's standings in some international sport shooting competitions
The membership of the Australian Sports Shooting Association has risen to 112,000, a 200% increase, in response to the ban and as an attempt to organize against further controls, which are expected.
Australian politicians are on the spot and at a loss to explain how no improvement in "safety" has been observed after such monumental effort and expense was successfully expended in "ridding society of guns". Their response has been to "wait longer".
Posted by: Saladin at December 9, 2005 10:51 AM
Wait longer? I guess they think that the bad guys will come around eventually, see the error of their ways, and hand over the guns! HAHAHA!
Posted by: Saladin at December 9, 2005 10:57 AM
At the time of the ban, the Prime Minister said "self-defense is not a reason for owning a firearm"
ha ha - unreal. I suppose the .38 special was designed for hunting the 1500lb. american bison. I'm sure there's no greater thrill than sneaking up to within 500 ft. of that wily and elusive creature and blasting it in the heart with a hunting rifle equipped with an optical scope.
Posted by: James Ha at December 9, 2005 11:07 AM
Yeh wait until one of thses loser politicians gets robbed and his family harmed and watch. It will be mandatory to carry guns over there. What part of the slogan: When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns? Don't they get? If they are going to make the public vulnerable they should pay the price themselves. Bad guys don't respect civil rights, property rights, and individuals that are unarmed. They are basically cowards that prey on defensless people. Arm the citizens and even governments tremble.
Posted by: What the F**k at December 9, 2005 11:08 AM
#150 Robert...(previous thread) The other day on Talk of the Nation, Neil Conan helped lay out the grounds for pre-emptive action in Iran.
#22 Capt...Feingold kicks butt with the truth. I am on his train so far..Do you think he could get picked up by anyone in the 2008 presidential campaign? Or is he too honest?
David it is a sad day when saying "IMAGINE" feels corny. Great article...wonderful reminder to "IMAGINE".
I know Lennon would want you to get back to covering/investigating what is going on with PHASE II OF THE SSCI...Imagine him wanting liars to be held accountble for lies that took us to war?.....
Posted by: kathleen at December 9, 2005 11:10 AM
A man goes to the Post Office, to buy stamps for his holiday greeting cards.
He says to the clerk, "I'd like to purchase 50
Christmas stamps."
The Clerk inquires, "What denominations?"
The man says, "Holy smokes, has it come to this? Well, give me 6 Catholic, 12 Baptist, 10 Lutheran and 22 Presbyterian."
Posted by: micki at December 9, 2005 11:18 AM
kathleen, what IS going on with the PHASE II OF THE SSCI ? I'm willing to bet that you know more about that than anyone else on this blog at this time -
Posted by: James Ha at December 9, 2005 11:26 AM
Kat #301,
Too honest, I think. Honesty is a handicap these days. We might return to some semblance of sanity, someday but until then the better the liar at lying the more likely the liars win.
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened." ~ Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965)
capt
Micki - very funny!
Posted by: capt at December 9, 2005 11:33 AM
Re: sensible gun control -
I would settle for keeping the handguns away from violent felons and idiots but sadly it is all but impossible to do so without limiting the rights of the non-felons and non-idiots.
IMHO
capt
Posted by: capt at December 9, 2005 11:40 AM
Alan, the rumors about Joe Lie------ going over to DoD to replace Rummy could be just that - rumors - but if he does leave the Senate, the Republican Governor of Connecticut, Jodi Rell, would get to pick his replacement to fill out his term. Dontcha think she'd pick a Republican? I do. Quick way for the Repugs to pick up another seat...
Irony: Jodi Rell moved into the governor's seat to fill out the term of ousted Repug Governor John Rowland -- the corruption around him was so thick he resigned before he was impeached. So...an unelected governor picking an unelected Senator...
BTW: The City of Hartford, Connecticut, adopted a new slogan:
"Hartford -- It Takes Your Breath Away!"
(It truly does -- it has one of the highest asthma rates in the country due to corporate polluters.)
Posted by: micki at December 9, 2005 11:40 AM
With micki's #302 in mind, here are some thoughts for Christmas and my New Year's wish for the world.
Shalom
Here is more reality!
Here is what America and the world need in order to attain peace and justice on our planet for all of God's children. Here is also what I believe God wants for His children and His vision for the world.
Shalom translated means peace but it is much more than peace. Shalom is a vision of social wholeness; a state of well being for all, where everyone has access to the goods of creation intended to meet the needs of all. Shalom is the substance of the biblical vision of one community embracing all creation where all enjoy the resources that make communal harmony joyous and effective.
Shalom is nothing less than God's intended vision of the world, a dream of God that resists our tendencies for division, hostility, fear, lust, and misery. If there is to be well-being, it will not be just for the isolated and insulated individuals, it is security and prosperity granted to the whole community - the poor, the widow, the orphan, the immigrant, the tax collector and the sinner, the despised and the rejected, young and old, the have and the have nots, the powerful and the dependent. We are in it together. Together we stand before God's blessings and together we receive the gift of life. Shalom comes only to the inclusive embracing community that excludes no one.
Posted by: Gerald at December 9, 2005 11:52 AM
Gun control is not the answer. The only ones that would "go along" with that is law abiding people. The crooks who don't care what the law is will not and guess who has the upper hand then? That is right, the crook. Why would I want to allow that? The constitution plainly states that we have a right to have "arms" or weapons. The reason for this to be included was to keep a bad government from taking over our country. Just like in Iraq, where everyone had weapons, it is not possible to take over that country. We have tried....but you cannot defeat a people that are "armed". The only way a government or military establishment could take us over is if all of us give up our guns. That includes handguns. Don't be stupid and naive to think that is not true. Any country where the citizenship is "armed" no other entity is going to take them down. We must keep our weapons for that reason. In the meantime, we citizens could also be responsible enough to put down those crooks that try and spoil things for the rest of us. If a crook knows you are "armed" and ready to defend yourself, that crook will go somewhere else. We certainly can't go around with elephant guns and shot guns all of the time so we have to be able to have smaller weapons, such as handguns. We must be able to continue owning these types of weapons for our own good.
Posted by: Jim at December 9, 2005 12:01 PM
John Lewis of Congress gave apassionate speech that our mistreatment of the poor is a moral issue. Where are all the American souls going on this moral issue?
Taking Hits
After taking hits for my views on expanding life issues beyond the basic five life issues, pro-life involves many issues beyond five issues. Catholic News Service letters to the editor felt that my life issues were political and not moral issues.
In a copy of Catholic News Service there is an article by Carol Glatz, "Pro-life concerns should extend to the poor and the war." Carol Glatz wrote the article quoting two speakers at a conference. Their names are Sister Carol Taylor, Director at the Center for Clinical Bioethics at Georgetown University in Washington and Carl Anderson, supreme knight of the Knights of Columbus and a professor of family law at the John Paul II Institute in Washington.
Sister Taylor said some Catholic conservatives chose to dissent from Church teaching, claiming the war is just in nature and they were undeterred by lack of support from the Vatican for the war. (My view is that these 54% of Catholics are accomplices in murders and war crimes for voting for Bush.)
Sister Taylor goes on to say if Catholics want to be serious about creating a culture of life, Catholics need to now think beyond things like abortion and euthanasia. During Katrina people were trapped and killed by the floodwaters and they had no ability to get out. Katrina exposed the immense poverty still plaguing America today. She adds that the elderly in nursing homes died of gross neglect and their deaths arenÕ´ as important as the deaths caused by abortion and euthanasia? Catholics must respect, protect, love, and serve every human life.
Carl Anderson said that Catholics are uniquely suited to set up the needed social structures and lobby for political policies that will protect societyÕ³ most vulnerable members. (My opinion is how can accomplices in murders and war crimes who voted for Bush have the integrity to do what is fair, just, and right for human beings?)
Anderson goes on to say that a culture of life is going to take a much larger response than just going into legislature and restricting abortion legally. Catholics need to be people of life and a people for life by helping support mothers and children. If Roe v Wade is overturned or restricted women and children will need social support and community support. Presently, a public culture that helps women and children is lacking. Anderson told the conference participants that respect for life needs to begin with a consciousness among Catholics of what it really means to be accepting "The Gospel of Life." The Church needs to find ways to evangelize and catechize Catholics and Catholic families to better live out Church teachings on life.
It is my personal and strong belief that our planet cannot survive unless we, as a people, embrace love, mercy, justice, and peace. We must move away from the bushgod that is enamored with hatred, murders, torture, and wars.
Posted by: Gerald at December 9, 2005 12:04 PM
Gun control hurts Democrats and liberals like me more than it helps us. I've actually started a blog and website devoted to this issue which I encourage you to check out and contribute to in a written fashion.
www.progunprogressive.com
It saddens me as well to think about the death of John Lennon. Anyone going before his or her time always hits home hard. But denying ourselves the right to defend our loved ones and ourselves from the likes of the Chapmans of the world is pointless. I used to be pro-guncontrol...until I was mugged at gun point and realized that my only options were submit or fight back hand to hand Seagal style...and that it's time liberals acknowledge that there's nothing inherent in liberalism which means you yourself need be a victim.
Look at the top ten causes of death in the US...some you've never even heard of, but none have anything to do with guns.
Let's look at the top 20 causes of death in the USA for the year 2002:
1 Heart Disease 696,447
2 Malignant Neoplasms 557,197
3 Cerebro-vascular 162,555
4 Chronic Lower Respiratory Disease 124,777
5 Unintentional Injury 105,796
6 Diabetes Mellitus 73,248
7 Influenza & Pneumonia 65,418
8 Alzheimer's Disease 58,866
9 Nephritis 40,801
10 Septicemia 33,569
Gun control is a morally bankrupt position that divides the working class and prevents us from protecting ourselves from those who would harm us. It only penalizes the law abiding citizen, as any criminal willing to commit murder isn't concerned with a gun charge or the minor penalty associated with it.
www.progunprogressive.com
Posted by: Sebastian at December 9, 2005 01:20 PM
Neil,
Why must you feed the troll. Let it starve for lack of attention!!!
Posted by: Gus at December 9, 2005 03:09 PM
REAL liberals promote individual liberty above faulty counter-productive totalitarian social control schemes.
Gerald, a REAL liberal, OWNs you doctrinaire sixties, counter-culture LEFTISTS.
The gun control issue hobbles you politically AND intellectually.
BTW, here's a response to this post at Pajamas Media:
http://osm.org/site/dayposts/2005128johnlennongrimshall
Posted by: Will Myers at December 10, 2005 02:10 PM
Though vitriolic, Will's post is on the money. We can advocate social liberties for some groups and not for all. What right is really more sacred than the right to defend oneself and one's loved ones?
My thoughts here: http://progunprogressive.com/?p=16
RIP, John. Imagine if you were still here :(.
Posted by: Sebastian at December 10, 2005 07:50 PM
What about those guys (not to mention their families) who get gunned down every day in the inner cities and forgotten farm towns? People with poor prospects and poorer prospects for finding meaningful employment. Why care about some rich guy who had a great life? Yes he did important work and meant a lot to a lot of people. DonÕ´ these men and womenÕ³, stories count just as much? Why arenÕ´ we hearing about them? ThatÕ³ what John would have said. I know it.
Posted by: Tom Fitzgerald at December 11, 2005 01:07 AM
it's a shame that we don't have rock stars like John Lennon around anymore. Bono tries, but he's too bureacratic. Unklike Lennon, Bono does not steer enough direction towards the people... and that's where it's at, screw the politicians. they're gonna do what they're gonna do, regardless of whether you stand next to them when they're speakin or what. Lennon knew that, Folks like Bono could learn from him. If you want to get things done, don't fly over the heads of your fans, but get them involved and let them know that y'all are on the same team....not that you're 'way up here' and they're 'way down there.' "A working class hero is somethin to be"
Posted by: banana at December 17, 2005 12:15 AM
The United States Constitution, Article 2, Section 1 states: In case of the removal of the President from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by law provide for the case of removal, death, resignation or inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what officer shall then act as President, and such officer shall act accordingly, until the disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.....I believe it is time to implement this portion of the constitution, for all our sakes and the sake of the world.
Posted by: Nataly at January 9, 2006 03:35 PM