Hopefully, more names will surface who are traitors to America. Leaker of Valerie Plame's name is very serious but Americans are silence and they seem to be willing to accept treasonous deeds.

What is beyond my comprehension centers around our silence of Bush and his misdeeds that have killed thousands of people on his watch or more like his sleeping patterns?

Mr. Corn,

Thanks for the info. Anyone who illegally released classified information should be punished to the ultimate of the law.

Any word on the traitors who leaked the NSA wiretaps and financial monitoring to the Times?

any evidence of who violated the 4th amendment?

USA wants to know all
US and European Union authorities continue to dispute how much personal information should be released about travelers. The USA wants access to databases that collect passenger information during the process of ordering plane tickets, newspaper Dagbladet reports. This would include the person who ordered the ticket, who paid, who else is in the travel group, ordering of rental car and hotel, meal requests, telephone numbers and e-mail addresses, and previous journeys.
An EU tribunal rejected a May agreement between the USA and the EU from 2004 on the grounds that it lacked a legal foundation. That agreement involved European airlines transferring 34 different types of information about each passenger traveling to the USA, prior to departure. The tribunal has now given the EU Commission a deadline of the end of September to reach a new agreement with the USA.

Aftenposten's Norwegian reporter
Maria Elsness
Aftenposten English Web Desk
Jonathan Tisdall

-----------------------------

This reminds me when I applied for a US visa back in the seventies. At that time the the most importent concern for the US Embassy in Oslo was: "Have your father, or any other members of your family, been a member of the Communist Party? I got the visa then, none of my relatives was, or had been a member of the party. Anyway, the Communist party in Norway at that time (as it is to day) had less than 1% of the voters. The conclusion: It's harder to visit the US to day than it was 20 years ago.

Erling

American Soldiers

2,949 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan for Bush and his lies.

Saladin. What really piss me off is the fact that innocent people are being killed for the sake of some satisfaction for old people like Cheney and Rumsfeldt. Oh, I almost forgot the American-Norwegian, Karl Rove. I am ashamed that he has a Norwegian background. The Vikings was a bunch of war-mongers, but that was almost a thousand years ago. Since then, we have learned. Anyway, I'm planning to go to Lebanon next year to visit the places in the south wehere I spent seven months back in 1981. I hope that some of the people I met then is still there. Wonderful people, they still uphold the old beduin habit of shearing everything with strangers. Now, I expect factcheckier to give me shit again.

Ahhh, UFC #62 was a hella good card.
*Ultimate Fighting Championship*

The main event didn't last for shyt... 1st round tap out. I hate when that happens! haha

The under card was good. One was a rematch that everybody agreed should happen. Their first fight was much better... but isn't that typical? The first is almost alwayz better than the sequel.
These are all new to me. I'm a boxing fan big time. These UFC's are more like the fights you had growing up... almost anything goes. Knees, elbows, whatever it takes.... haha. I love this shyt. Well, when I was younger, anyway. haha

Hey Pande,
Tim Duncan was there in the audience. Bet you can guess how many bitchez were hanging on him.

Everybody likes to see the chiks at a fight card, but me... I always thought it was a wasted ticket. What tha fk did she know?

Alan! How old are ye. "when I was younger"
I'm 63, an old bugger, but I've seen it all!

Alan! How old are ye.

I'm 10 yrs yer junior.

I don't think I've ever said, but... I 'preciate and read all yer posts Erling. Kinda envious of your history, too. *wavin' and high fivin' at your 'peace' work.

Another miserable milestone for Bush's war
By Rupert Cornwell
Published: 27 August 2006
A miserable milestone was passed the other day. America's (and Britain's) disastrous war in Iraq has now lasted longer than the US involvement in the Second World War. Yes, this conflict has outlasted a war that ended with total victory over Nazi Germany. Hitler declared war on the US on 11 December 1941. Exactly 1,244 days later, on 7 May 1945, Germany surrendered. The US invaded Iraq on 19 March 2003, and this weekend it is 1,267 days later, with no end in sight.
Sticklers among you will have noted that the interval between the attack on Pearl Harbor and the Japanese surrender on 2 September, 1945 was 1,364 days. But even that record will tumble at the start of December. And if you do measure Iraq against the longer American war with Japan, the contrast is even starker. Victory in the Pacific was even more conclusive than in Europe. It produced no post-war entanglement with the Soviets and no Berlin airlift. The Iraq war unfolded the other way round: Baghdad fell barely three weeks after the invasion. Since then, however, it's been downhill all the way.
Yes, US casualties have been lighter, some 2,620 dead at the latest count, and four times as many seriously wounded. Adjust for respective populations, and Israel's loss of around 116 soldiers in the Lebanon war translates into 5,800 US dead in barely a month. As for Iraqi civilians, more of them are getting killed per month than all the American troops lost since the very start of the war. But forget the statistics,the endless terror alerts, the war in Lebanon and the looming showdown with Iran. Iraq is the issue that America keeps returning to. It haunts George Bush and - barring Democratic screw-ups - it will probably send his Republican party to defeat in the mid-term elections this November. Joe Lieberman's loss in the Connecticut Senate primary this month was just one straw in the wind. One of the seemingly most impregnable Democrats in the land could not even retain his own party's support. He was beaten because of his support for the war by a businessman with a simple campaign mantra: "Bring the Boys Home." Republicans, of course, pretended to love it. They raised the shade of George McGovern, the anti-Vietnam war candidate thrashed by Nixon in 1972. Once again, they said, the Democrats had turned into a party of left-wing pacifists who could no more be trusted to fight the terrorists than to "see the job through" in Iraq. Sadly, this argument that worked so well in 2002 and 2004 works no longer. Even the wilfully blind can see that Iraq is a disaster. Bush, who yields to no one in that category, lambasted the Democrats for pusillanimity. But even he could not bring himself to use the word "progress" apropos of events in the country that he once claimed would be a beacon of peace and democracy for the entire Middle East. Nor does the terror card have the force it once did. True, the President's ratings went up slightly after the foiled UK airliner bomb plot (but they could hardly have sunk much lower). Far more revealing, Chris Shays, a Connecticut Republican who had supported the war, last week broke ranks with the White House and called for a firm timetable for withdrawal. If you're seeking re-election to the House in November, there's really no choice.Bush's problem is that two-thirds of Americans - according to a recent poll - no longer buy his argument that Iraq has become "the central front in the war on terror". Iraq, they now realise, had nothing to do with 9/11, and the foreign fighters who are now in Iraq went there only after the 2003 invasion. They believe the Mesopotamian adventure has made them less safe. Put another way: if you start a war that lasts as long as the Second World War, you'd better have something to show for it. George Bush does not. A miserable milestone was passed the other day. America's (and Britain's) disastrous war in Iraq has now lasted longer than the US involvement in the Second World War. Yes, this conflict has outlasted a war that ended with total victory over Nazi Germany. Hitler declared war on the US on 11 December 1941. Exactly 1,244 days later, on 7 May 1945, Germany surrendered. The US invaded Iraq on 19 March 2003, and this weekend it is 1,267 days later, with no end in sight. Sticklers among you will have noted that the interval between the attack on Pearl Harbor and the Japanese surrender on 2 September, 1945 was 1,364 days. But even that record will tumble at the start of December. And if you do measure Iraq against the longer American war with Japan, the contrast is even starker. Victory in the Pacific was even more conclusive than in Europe. It produced no post-war entanglement with the Soviets and no Berlin airlift. The Iraq war unfolded the other way round: Baghdad fell barely three weeks after the invasion. Since then, however, it's been downhill all the way. been lighter, some 2,620 dead at the latest count, and four times as many seriously wounded. Adjust for respective populations, and Israel's loss of around 116 soldiers in the Lebanon war translates into 5,800 US dead in barely a month. As for Iraqi civilians, more of them are getting killed per month than all the American troops lost since the very start of the war. But forget the statistics,the endless terror alerts, the war in Lebanon and the looming showdown with Iran. Iraq is the issue that America keeps returning to. It haunts George Bush and - barring Democratic screw-ups - it will probably send his Republican party to defeat in the mid-term elections this November. Joe Lieberman's loss in the Connecticut Senate primary this month was just one straw in the wind. One of the seemingly most impregnable Democrats in the land could not even retain his own party's support. He was beaten because of his support for the war by a businessman with a simple campaign antra: "Bring the Boys Home." Republicans, of course, pretended to love it. They raised the shade of George McGovern, the anti-Vietnam war candidate thrashed by Nixon in 1972. Once again, they said, the Democrats had turned into a party of left-wing pacifists who could no more be trusted to fight the terrorists than to "see the job through" in Iraq. Sadly, this argument that worked so well in 2002 and 2004 works no longer. Even the wilfully blind can see that Iraq is a disaster. Bush, who yields to no one in that category, lambasted the Democrats for pusillanimity. But even he could not bring himself to use the word "progress" apropos of events in the country that he once claimed would be a beacon of peace and democracy for the entire Middle East. Nor does the terror card have the force it once did. True, the President's ratings went up slightly after the foiled UK airliner bomb plot (but they could hardly have sunk much lower). Far more revealing, Chris Shays, a Connecticut Republican who had supported the war, last week broke ranks with the White House and called for a firm timetable for withdrawal. If you're seeking re-election to the House in November, there's really no choice. Bush's problem is that two-thirds of Americans - according to a recent poll - no longer buy his argument that Iraq has become "the central front in the war on terror". Iraq, they now realise, had nothing to do with 9/11, and the foreign fighters who are now in Iraq went there only after the 2003 invasion. They believe the Mesopotamian adventure has made them less safe. Put another way: if you start a war that lasts as long as the Second World War, you'd better have something to show for it. George Bush does not.

--------------------

When will the next war start?

Iraq, they now realise, had nothing to do with 9/11, and the foreign fighters who are now in Iraq went there only after the 2003 invasion.

Dammmit man, you remind me so much of something in my past. A really awesome girlfriend when I was a teenager... grew up in Germany cause her Dad was in the Air Force. I was like... how did you get along and communicate? "No prob... all the young people know English." Us Americans are so spoiled and take shyt for granted. She knew, and 'preciated what the rest of us had no clue about. Erling, you know English... how many other languages do you know? We are so fkn clueless!

Keep posting my friend, and maybe some of us will get a clue. I hope my daughters will.
They are 25 and 21 by the way.
*best fkn thing I've ever done, for sure

#123 Alan! When I lived in Canada (Newfounland), I used to brag about speaking five diferent languages. Norwegian (of course), German, Danish, English and Swedish. Now, speaking Danish and Swedish to me is just a matter of dialect. Like English and American. You have simplified the English language by for instance, saying "harbor" instead of harbour. "labor" instead of labour. I love it when you say 2-nite, instead of "tonight". Anyway, I think that we Europeans know more about the US than the US know about Europe. Hell, some Americans don't even know anything about their neghbouring States! Alan, please excuse me, during the Weekend I've gone through a bottle of Scotch! Every time I pour a drink, I see the truth!

I wish you the best on the oncoming midterm elecetions, may the Democratic party win, both in the Cngress and the Senate!

Erling

Alan! Any grandchildren yet? I've got three children, eight grandchildren, and(Belive it or not) one great-grand child. I've done my duty in populating Norway! It seems to me that your age is in the vicinity of 45 to 50 years old. The best thing if you've got grandchildren, is that when they have been with you, you can allways return them to their parents.

Anyway, greetings from Norway

Erling

(There must have been Australians and Canadians on this blog, who are you!)

Alan! Any grandchildren yet?

Uh huh, one, and one on the way. My younger daughter Stefani has already made me a grandpa, and Randi, my older daughter is due in late September. I have a grandson almost two years old, and a granddaugher on the way. *YAY*

Peace to ya old man! haha

K, it's almost 4:00 am here, I'ma hit the sheets. G'nite Erling, and the rest of you 'people of the Corn'.

David,

Your followers will at least be partially right. It was a Dick that did the leaking, just not the Cheney they suspected. I hope your book does well.

#7, Erling is quickly learning the American ways. Yes, Erling, we have a lot of Americans flinging shit, especially if you disagree with them.

Casey Sheehan

Dear Cornposters:

Awhile back I received a Catholic News Service newsletter and in this newsletter there were several articles. One article talked about Casey Sheehan as a teenager in California. He was an alter boy and in high school he was active in the youth ministry. Casey wanted to be a priest. He volunteered for the military service with the understanding that he could be an aide to a military chaplain. Instead he was given a rifle and he served as a soldier.

Casey joined the military service to fight for his country. His enlistment was for a noble cause. The problem is that the cause was to fight in a wrong and immoral war.

The tragedy in Casey's death is that he would never be a priest. He would never have the opportunity to save hundreds, if not thousands of souls. His true calling and legacy was cut short in Iraq. I will not even try to say that I can feel Cindy Sheehan's loss or grieving process for her son. I can only say that even though Casey is not my son, I do feel a great loss because Casey's true potential will never be fulfilled. He will not be a priest and in a position to save hundreds, if not thousands of souls. We can say his mission in life was not accomplished.

With regard to our insane ruler we can say that his true calling and legacy have been fulfilled. Mr. Bush, our insane ruler, has gone from killing frogs to the killing of human beings. With that knowledge in mind I can shout to all corners of the world, "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!"

Sincerely,

Gerald

So Corn,

I might actually buy your book if you can assure me that it actually points to an actual lie told by an actual member of the Bush administration. Because if it does, it would be the first.

Re: Plame

Earth to the left earth to the left: grown-up America doesn't care because 1. still, years later, no one has established that a law has even been broken, and 2. "No harm no foul"—it's a general concept of fairness that most Americans hold. Google it sometime.

yours/
peter.

So, what are your conspiracy theories now about how Bu$Hitler leaned on Dick Armitage to "out" Valerie Plame. Buwahahahaha. All you people have been spewing was it was KKKarl Rove, DicKKK Cheney and Scooter Libby (belatedly). Interesting fact, however, that you Bush-haters overlook is that Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald probably knew it was Armitage yet he didn't thing Armitage, Libby, Rove, Cheney or fill-in-the-blanks ever "outted" Valerie Plame or if she was "outted" that she was a deep cover, super-duper secret CIA agent and they certainly didn't break any laws ... otherwise he would have explicitly indicted them. Oh, I forget, that's a coverup conspiracy, too.

The fact of the matter is is Joe Wilson is a serial liar himself. He lied about the nature of his findings in Niger, overstated the facts that he gave to the CIA and the Select Senate Committee on intelligence documented those mendacious lies. The White House was trying to defend itself against the media hysteria that was being generated by Joe Wilson's lies about the Niger yellowcake episode, which the British Intelligence agency still stands by to this day.

BTW, David, DKosopedia has you falsely informing Joe Wilson that the "leak" was a crime:

July 17
David Corn publishes "A White House Smear" in the Nation. Corn telephones Wilson personally to inform him that this leak was a crime.

I see you're part of the problem given your own profound ignorance of the laws pertaining to this issue of "outting" a CIA agent. Apparently an official investigation has determined that the "leak" WAS NOT A CRIME. So much for your destructive speculation.

Also, are you going to admit that you were the first to go public with the idea that Valerie Plame was an "US intelligence officer working covertly" (another partisan distortion on your part)? Your original article here. Until then the only people who thought they knew she was some kind of "secret agent" for the CIA were the Wilson's neighbors and friends who were getting hit with a big clue bat by Joe Wilson himself as he boasted in his wife's CIA status at private parties and such.

You wrote: Did senior Bush officials blow the cover of a US intelligence officer working covertly in a field of vital importance to national security--and break the law Until then Robert Novak and a very few American purveyors of this cloak-and-dagger stuff only knew that she "worked at the CIA" - as it turned out later, as an office analyst.

I think its pretty clear who is stirring the pot here. No cigar for you, sir. BTW, you can accuse me of misrepresenting the facts (and maybe I've made honest mistakes), but in this case you being the kettle would simply be calling me a pot.

"What is beyond my comprehension centers around our silence of Bush and his misdeeds that have killed thousands of people on his watch or more like his sleeping patterns?"

"Silence of Bush??" Haven't you been to the Daily Kos? More likely, you reside at Kos and the real question you're asking is why everyoone doesn't simply agree with you.

There ARE answers to that question. But you wouldn't want to hear them.

Here come the moonbats!

So predictable.

HA!

capt

Cheney or Armitage - the criminal leaker was a Dick, eh?

HA!

capt

We're not a democracy. It's a terrible misunderstanding and a slander to the idea of democracy to call us that. In reality, we're a plutocracy: a government by the wealthy." : Ramsey Clark, former U.S. Attorney General

=
"Of all forms of tyranny the least attractive and the most vulgar is the tyranny of mere wealth, the tyranny of plutocracy" : John Pierpont Morgan

=
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." : Thomas Jefferson

=
"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war. God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless." U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864 - (letter to Col. William F. Elkins) Ref: The Lincoln Encyclopedia, Archer H. Shaw - (Macmillan, 1950, NY)

=
"The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S. since the days of Andrew Jackson." : Franklin D. Roosevelt

===
Thanks ICH Newsletter!

Can Valerie Plame still see though buildings? Can she run super fast or something? She does look MARVELOUS in Prada, thouhg. What a joke. How about the real damage to US secuity: NSA, etc--when are these treasonous leakers going to get the special proscecutor?

The war isn't for "Bush and his lies."

The war in Iraq is a recognition that the problem of terrorism is very deep-rooted. It was an attempt, wise or otherwise, to change the fundamental calculus of political life in the Islamic world. As long as thugs like Saddam, Assad, Ahmadinijad (sp?) etc. rule, then the people will be immersed in a culture of oppression, lies and hatred for the West. This means you, my friends in Europe.

Change the sea and you'll change the fish.

Obviously, you don't buy this explanation (or don't want your friends to think you buy it). But somewhere, deep inside, you know it is true.

So go ahead and revel in your hatreds, your screeds, and your slogans ("Bush Lied!") if you'd like. Fill your heads with pseudo-facts about America becoming a police state. Laugh at our expense, if you must. Just don't pretend that you are contributing to a real discussion about some very difficult, vexing issues.

Scream about the numbers dead and the cost of the war if you need to, but realize too that wiser souls understand that Saddam's mass graves and oppressive police state were far worse.

And when a *real* war comes - with losses that even begin to compare with WWI and II - note too that you helped it happen by refusing to support America as it tried to disarm the thugs that will start it and that you instead retreated to safe, immature rants against a power that you know won't really hurt you.

Protests intrude on Bush's trip to Maine

KENNEBUNKPORT, Maine - President Bush came to his parent's century-old summer home on the Maine coast for a little relaxation, a distant cousin's wedding and some family time. He got all that, along with a boisterous reminder nearly on his bucolic doorstep of the unpopularity of his Iraq policies.

What local police estimated were about 700 anti-war demonstrators marched Saturday to within half a mile of the Bush compound before being turned back at a security checkpoint. Called Walker's Point after the family of former President Bush's mother, the stone-and-shingle retreat covering a craggy promontory is owned by the current president's parents.

The protesters sang, chanted, beat drums, waved signs and even played fiddles to call on Bush to bring troops home.

"Bush is fiddling while the world burns, just as Nero fiddled while Rome burned," said Pippa Stanley, 15, of Richmond, Maine, who was helping with the backdrop for pair of fiddlers dressed in togas.

More HERE

*****end of clip*****

There is hope for a better future.

capt

Canadian College Recruiting at Bush's "Expense"

The White House must be seething about today's Doonesbury strip. Yesterday, a Canadian newspaper featured an ad campaign poking fun at Bush's lack of smarts. Bush is a national embarrassment.

"Richard Armitage was the original leaker in the Plame case."

Novak and Rove have worked together for years. Bush 41 fired Rove for leaking to Novak. Do you think Bush 43 doesn't know that? There's your answer about good leaks and bad leaks.

This time Novak got it from Armitage and Rove confirmed. How does Rove skate while Libby faces criminal counts? . . . lying to the FBI, perjury to the grand jury and what was the third count?

David oes your book explain how Armitage came by that information and whether he was part of the cabal (WHIG) bent on defending the President's case for war in Iraq?

Who is Libby protecting? Certainly not Armitage. Is it possible he is protecting only himself or is it more likely Cheney is on the hook?

How is it that Armitage avoids indictment or atleast loses security clearance?

For all you moonbats out there that concoct the most inane theories does the name Ruby strike a familiar note?

Figures, the wanna-be traitor turns out to be a liberal.

I don't remember any liberals ever complaining about Clinton-era wiretaps (which were constitutional then, as now), much less his taking of about 1000 FBI files (oops, we have a problem there). You liberal tools and your 'police state' baloney. Try living in a real police state, like Cuba.

Erling Krange: You're comparing apples to oranges. In your WWII stats you are only counting military campaign time. Japan was occupied until Apr 28 1952, and Germany and Austria were occupied until 1955. Both of these periods are well over a decade. But you're forgetting something even more important - WWII wasn't a politically correct war like the Iraq war. Civilians were targeted - Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki - in an effort to bring about a quick end to the hostilities.

Richard Armitage blew the whistle on Valerie Plame and Joseph Wilson. A good thing he did. The full story explains why the CIA wasted taxpayers' money on sending such a dishonest and partisan publicity hound to Niger.

What a total non-story fanned into flames by moonbat journalists and the lamestream media as a whole. Now that someone as non-partisan as Armitage is being fingered (many conservatives postulated it was him within months of this moronic left-wing media kerfuffle), the question remains, who will the left-wing moonbats demand be frogged marched out of .... well Armitage certainly wasn't working in the White House was he? Buwahahahahahaha. Another faux story blows up in the left's face. Put this one on the ash heap along with the fraudulent Bush TANG memos, the misrepresented Downing Street Memos, and the various Pallywood phauxtography scandals fanned by Reuters to make it appear that the Israelis were targeting innocent Lebanese civilians.

And what's even more hilarious is the radical left has been so conditioned by the lies which pass for "news" at the DailyKos, democraticunderground.com, moveon.org and blogsites like this that they actually believe the lamestream media is "right-wing". What this kind of mentality proves, however, is how out of the mainstream and far left Bush-haters are since independent and impartial studies have demonstrated time and time again the MSM is actually quite liberal. The Decemeber 2005 UCLA Study is just the latest one to document the decided leftward tilt of our supposedly "objective and impartial news media".

Unbelievable how radicalized liberals continue drinking your poisoned kool-aid and its little wonder that the lamestream media is loathe to report the reality that many "moderate" and conservative Democrats are beginning to flee this new party of whackos the radical left has created in its own image. Look at the fratricide you people are committing against mainstream Democrats like Joe Lieberman.

I thank God every day that I saw where the Democratic Party was headed shortly after voting for Jimmy Carter in 1976. I got out of the Democratic Party and am now an independent voter. If the Demcratic Party continues to act on the seditions of some of its movers and shakers during these perilous times, it will be a very long time before I ever vote for another Democrat.

Clever Erling, now if you could just get in a reference about John Wayne you can complete your 70’s European clichés about the US. Europeans know about as much about the US as Americans know about Europe. In fact, I would say that Americans know more about Sweden and Switzerland than the Europeans know about Indiana and Illinois. And the latter are more important economically.

But more significantly, why should we need to know more about you? Other than a well rounded education on the basics, I don’t really see the point in knowing detailed information about Norway or the Norwegian government. Nor would I expect you to have thoughts on the Minnesota governor (no formers allowed), even though Minnesota and Norway are roughly the same in population and GDP:

Norway GDP (2004 Est.) 183 Billion--Population 4.5 million.
Minnesota GDP (2004 Est.) 225 Billion—Population 4.9 million.

It’s certainly good to know about certain tyrant kings and artists who paint with one ear but it’s not really vital. Yes, “culture” or what Europeans really mean is history is important but it’s just one part of the world. Asian history is far longer and infinitely more fascinating and it’s also an economically vibrant region. So it would be in all American’s interest to look the pacific and forget about the truffles in the opposite direction.

Lots of people have commented about punishing the "leaker"...but how about punishing those who PUBLISH classified material? Or...is the permmissible if the organization has the same political outlook as yourself?

Personally, I think BOTH parties should be brought before the bar of justice and punished to the fullest extent of the law...any taker?

免费铃声下载 手机铃声免费下载 mp3铃声 免费手机铃声 mp3铃声下载 三星手机铃声 三星铃声 诺基亚铃声 诺基亚手机铃声 移动铃声下载 nokia铃声 波导手机铃声 手机游戏免费下载 免费手机游戏 手机小游戏 诺基亚手机游戏 三星手机游戏下载 nokia手机游戏 摩托罗拉手机游戏 手机小电影 mp4手机电影下载 手机看电影 免费手机电影 手机视频下载 nec手机铃声 联想手机铃声 摩托罗拉铃声 amr铃声 手机彩铃下载 移动彩铃 免费彩铃 炫铃 移动炫铃 手机酷铃 手机电影 夏新手机铃声 联通铃声下载 联通手机铃声 联通彩铃下载 联通炫铃下载 特效铃声 midi铃声 和弦铃声 搞笑铃声 原唱铃声 mid铃声 cect手机铃声 和炫和旋铃声 海尔手机铃声 索爱手机铃声 飞利浦手机铃声 康佳手机铃声 真人真唱铃声 mmf铃声下载 lg手机铃声 诺基亚手机铃声 短信铃声 来电铃声 西门子铃声 小灵通铃声下载 tcl手机铃声 手机图片 手机铃音 手机动画 图铃下载 手机游戏 手机炫铃下载 手机彩信 手机铃声图片 免费黄色电影 最新电影 成人性爱电影 免费小电影 免费性电影 免费成人电影 免费电影在线观看 宽带电影 经典电影 恐怖电影 免费影片 免费影院 最新大片 十八电影网 美女写真 免费电影下载 两性生活 性教育片 两性知识 性爱图片 激情电影 免费电影下载 免费在线电影 看免费电影 免费电影网站 韩国电影 人体艺术 美女图片 美女走光 美腿图片 三级片 强奸电影 美女祼体图片 美女自拍 黄色电影下载 免费色情电影 激情图片 激情小电影 性感美女图片 漂亮妹妹图片 做爱图片 美少女图片 日本av女优 情色电影 同志电影 激情视频下载 明星露点图片 写真电影 阴部图片 乳房图片 明星裸照 性爱视频 偷拍图片 美眉图片 泳装美女 美女内裤 性爱贴图 情趣内衣图片 性生活图片 作爱图片 艳情小说 性交姿势 做爱电影 性福联盟 人体摄影 明星裸照 裸女图片 黄色小说 成人小说 乱伦小说 强暴电影 轮奸视频 性虐待电影 迷奸图片 妓女日记 写真集 全裸美女 淫荡小说 淫乱小说 淫书 舒淇写真 美女脱衣图片 裸体女人图片 人体写真 女性手淫电影 美女波霸 美女淫水 阴户阴道阴毛屁股 美女图库 口交肛交图片

"Thanks for the info. Anyone who illegally released classified information should be punished to the ultimate of the law. Any word on the traitors who leaked the NSA wiretaps and financial monitoring to the Times?"

This is a fine website and it is a pity to see stuff like this posted over the comment section.

Since the author of this early post (number 3) pretentiously goes by the name of factchecker, how about actually checking facts rather than dismissing them in favour in White House talking points?

There is no comparison between an official who breaks the law as part of a vendetta against a public servant (as Karl Rove and Lewis Libby did) and a whistleblower who breaks the law in order to draw attention to law-breaking by their superiors or a lack of Congressional oversight to a covert program.

A whistleblower's status is even recognised in some legislation, unlike the conduct of Rove and Libby.

The president's illegal conduct over NSA wire-tapping - as determined by more than one court - is a legitimate cause for concern for a public-minded official to provide information to the press.

By no stretch of the imagination is it a public service to leak the name of a classified employee, thus exposing her contacts and shutting down her anti-profilferation efforts, in order to get at her husband.

It is frankly contemptible to even have to explain the difference to anyone.

Oh, and get a new name, because I will not call such a person "factchecker".

Alex Higgins, Perhaps leaking Plame's name was a whistle-blowing effort to expose disinformation published by Wilson in the New York Times. While NSA wire tapping was exposed by someone who has a vendetta against George W. Bush or an Islamist terrorist who wants to render the program ineffective. By the way, the NSA program was ruled illegal by *one* judge shopped for by the ACLU. Patriotism is in the eye of beholder.

"Unbelievable how radicalized liberals continue drinking your poisoned kool-aid and its little wonder that the lamestream media..."

Etc, etc, etc. Andrew Sullivan would give this his Michelle Malkin Award for setnences that contain unoriginal, abusive cliches, assuming reader agreement.

"Now that someone as non-partisan as Armitage is being fingered (many conservatives postulated it was him within months of this moronic left-wing media kerfuffle), the question remains, who will the left-wing moonbats demand be frogged marched out of ...."

I think you'll find that David Corn deals with this very point at considerable length on this website.

"...well Armitage certainly wasn't working in the White House was he? Buwahahahahahaha."

Wow, actual evil villain laughter. And to think you go on to insult people who disagree with you as "moonbats".

"Another faux story blows up in the left's face."

Like the story of preparation for Hurricane Katrina? Or the story of New Orlean's non-reconstruction? Or the story of pre-war Iraq intelligence? Or the story of body armour for American troops? Or the story of Bush's links to Ken Lay?

"phauxtography scandals fanned by Reuters to make it appear that the Israelis were targeting innocent Lebanese civilians."

The scandal that involved making plumes of smoke in Beiruit look slightly different with Photoshop? That scandal? Have you seen the altered photograph compared to the original - they are virtually identical. And the bombing of Beiruit therein was hardly a fabrication unless you wish to argue Reuters also destroyed large districts of the Lebanese capital just to make Ehud Olemrt look bad.

For an account of IDF bombing of Lebanese civilians see Human Rights Watch's in-depth report. And think carefully before wdismissing suffering you were fortunate not to live through yourself.

Fatal Strikes: Israel's Indiscriminate attacks Against Civilians in Lebanon

Before anyone pretends otherwise, HRW research also describes Hizbollah war crimes.

"And what's even more hilarious is the radical left has been so conditioned by the lies which pass for "news" at the DailyKos, democraticunderground.com, moveon.org and blogsites like this that they actually believe the lamestream media is "right-wing"."

Again, another round of cliched, thoughtless abuse.

But at least you bothered to provide some evidence this time, a UCLA study which found a liberal bias in the media. Kudos to you.

However, a reading of the report suggest that this conclusion - which i think is quite wrong - is provided by this definition of "bias":

"Before proceeding, it is useful to clarify our definition of bias. Most important, the definition has nothing to do with the honesty or accuracy of the news outlet. Instead, our notion is more like a taste or preference. ...In contrast, other writers, at least at times, do define bias as a matter of accuracy or honesty. We emphasize that our differences with such writers are ones of semantics, not substance."

I completely disagree with this notion of "bias", and the authors acknowledge that there is disagreement on this.

In my view media bias should be measured only be the closeness to or distance from a report and the actual, discernable facts.

So for instance, one evidence of bias offered in the report is that some news outlets were more likely to have "negative" headlines if the president was a Republican. But that would only be evidence of real bias if recent Republican presidents had a better economic or equal economic president to their Democratic counterparts. An attempt to measure negative or positive stories independent of real-world facts, as though an unbiased news outlet is supposed to deal an equal amount to each regardless of the facts, makes no sense.

And i doubt you would be able to defend such a definition of bias.

The fact that the report you cite actually found the Drudge Report to be left-leaning and Fox News more centrist than other TV news outlets indicates its serious flaws.

"Look at the fratricide you people are committing against mainstream Democrats like Joe Lieberman."

There are so many errors in that statement it is hard to know where to begin.

First, Ned Lamont's opposition to the Iraq War is a majority opinion in the United States of America.

Second, Democrats in Connecticut are entitled to de-select a candidate who does not represent their concerns without people pretending they are engaged in an act of blood-letting.

Third, Lieberman is not a mainstream Democrat - he is on the right-wing of the spectrum, hence his ability to work so closely with an unusually reactionary president.

You are aware, i presume that the conservative movement acts to de-select Republican candidates in favour of those who closer reflect their politics? Furthermore, people (like me) can disagree strongly with them without accusing them of fratricide like an hysteric.

"I thank God every day..."

If God matters to you, i feel obliged to point out that, as a Christian, that Jesus of Nazareth would not endorse misrepresenting opponents, insulting people viciously for no reason or the bombing of Lebanon. And that a commitment to peace, social justice, truthfulness and the marginalised are an important part of the Gospels. None of us are perfect, and certainly not me, but check out your conscience.

Tell the truth Corn, You are really a "Muppet" created by the late Jim Henson, and being fed lines by Howard Dean,---aren't you?

Alex said: "The scandal that involved making plumes of smoke in Beiruit look slightly different with Photoshop? That scandal? Have you seen the altered photograph compared to the original - they are virtually identical."

I guess in YOUR world Alex, embellishment is alright? How about a lie? PPlease don't point to OTHER 'bad behaviour', ---let's deal with YOUR "white lie",--OK?

Change the photo, a little, then the next guy changes it a little, ---see where I am going?

I am a REAL Christian, and believe a lie, IS A LIE! No matter how small! Apparently YOUR Bible doesn't say, "--ALL liars shall have their part in the lake of fire!"

You also cite the "non-reconstruction" of New Orleans. You really are a lib arenb't you?

All the billions of tax dollars including MINE will NOT reconstruct N.O. The people need to HELP THEMSELVES. We are not going to do it for them completely!

ALL the other affected areas are doing MUCH better, with LESS dollars because the people there are HELPING! The N.O. peopl,e even voted Nagin back in office! Incredible!

150,000 N.O. refugees are STILL in Houston, TX. MORE than 50% still have no job. Houstonites are getting fed up with them. They DID NOT take them to raise.

These people have gotten used to your party's policy of, "cradle to grave" protection.

Wake up from your "Kool Aid" nap.

Alex said: "The scandal that involved making plumes of smoke in Beiruit look slightly different with Photoshop? That scandal? Have you seen the altered photograph compared to the original - they are virtually identical."

I guess in YOUR world Alex, embellishment is alright? How about a lie? PPlease don't point to OTHER 'bad behaviour', ---let's deal with YOUR "white lie",--OK?

Change the photo, a little, then the next guy changes it a little, ---see where I am going?

I am a REAL Christian, and believe a lie, IS A LIE! No matter how small! Apparently YOUR Bible doesn't say, "--ALL liars shall have their part in the lake of fire!"

You also cite the "non-reconstruction" of New Orleans. You really are a lib arenb't you?

All the billions of tax dollars including MINE will NOT reconstruct N.O. The people need to HELP THEMSELVES. We are not going to do it for them completely!

ALL the other affected areas are doing MUCH better, with LESS dollars because the people there are HELPING! The N.O. peopl,e even voted Nagin back in office! Incredible!

150,000 N.O. refugees are STILL in Houston, TX. MORE than 50% still have no job. Houstonites are getting fed up with them. They DID NOT take them to raise.

These people have gotten used to your party's policy of, "cradle to grave" protection.

Wake up from your "Kool Aid" nap.

The scandal that involved making plumes of smoke in Beiruit look slightly different with Photoshop? That scandal? Have you seen the altered photograph compared to the original - they are virtually identical. And the bombing of Beiruit therein was hardly a fabrication unless you wish to argue Reuters also destroyed large districts of the Lebanese capital just to make Ehud Olemrt look bad.

Nice try, Mr. Higgins, but there were far more examples of media phauxtography going on in Lebanon, and it doesn't involve photoshopping. Deal with the fact that the global media were complicit with Hezbollah and professional Islamic propagandists like "Green Helmet Guy" in digging up corpses of children (in violation of Islamic law, I might add) and displaying them as fresh kill by the evil IDF. And here'another case where the gullible global media played the useful idiots to the sophisticated Hezbollah propaganda arm concerning the supposedly IDF rocketing of the Red Cross ambulance. It's examples like that that I find reprehensible and the media has demonstrated a troubleseome slowness in correcting these transparent Islamofascist propaganda piece.

Instead of spending my time debunking the rest of your self-righteous, holier-than-thou "analysis", let me ask you a simple question:

1) Do you believe that America is at war with an implacable enemy that has long been committed to the destruction of Israel, America and western civilization?

2) If you do, do you believe that the methods and goals this enemy practices in directly targeting innocent civilians for maximum effect to advance its fascist, religious ideology is absolutely indefensible?

3) Can you answer any of these questions without using the weasel word "but"?

I'm getting very tired of the radical left crying its crocodile tears about the 3000 Americans who were unceremoniously butchered by murderous Islamofascist thugs on 9/11 and then say in the next breath, "...BUT America brought this on herself blah, blah, blah." Just like Bush/America haters to use the: Let's blame girls for wearing short skirts when they are murdered by apostate priests."

I'm just surprised you didn't launch into some gilded sophistry about how America's response to jihadism has been "disproportionate".

BTW, as to your faux outrage at me using terms like "moonbats", I find that particularly hypocritical when people on your side of the aisle never miss a chance to use descriptive terms like "rightwing nuts", "reich-wingers", "Rethuglicans", "KKKhristian kkkonservatives", "kkknuckledragging neanderthals" ad nauseam. And I find this far more egregious given that liberals such as yourself claim to be so enlightened, so progressive, so compassionate, and so full of love and peace. I mean, after all, we're only hateful conservatives and its our nature to be the way we are, right? You people tell us that every day, right? So how can you possibly condemn us for merely being true to our nature as a bunch of insensitive, falsely religious rednecks, right? Give it some thought, Higgins.

Clean up your own house before condemning others for the mess in their house.

"Perhaps leaking Plame's name was a whistle-blowing effort to expose disinformation published by Wilson in the New York Times."

Mishu, a whistleblower gives information to a journalist because they can expect to be punished for complaining to their superiors, and have no other outlet to complaint.

Clearly this dilemma of low-level public servants does not apply to the office of the Vice President or the White House Chief of Staff, Republican or Democrat.
________________________________________________

"I guess in YOUR world Alex, embellishment is alright? How about a lie? PPlease don't point to OTHER 'bad behaviour', ---let's deal with YOUR "white lie",--OK?

'Change the photo, a little, then the next guy changes it a little, ---see where I am going?"

I didn't say that embellishment was alright - this is something you attributed to me. Altering a photograph for a newspaper for any reason is unethical, and Reuters actually fired the photographer responsible. I have no problem stating that rather obvious point, nor was there any lie in my statement, white or otherwise.

Hankmeister however suggested that Reuters as an organisation tried "to make it appear that the Israelis were targeting innocent Lebanese civilians".

This is outright false since A) Reuters fired the journalist for photo-shopping the picture and B) the picture in any case did not change in any substantial way that could have made any political point about the Israeli Air Force's conduct. As you will see if you compare the two.

Do you also believe that it is wrong to lie by accusing Reuters, as an organisation, of altering the picture for political purposes. Or is that OK with you? In which case, spare us the fake-outrage about "LYING".

Digital mainpulation of photographs - again - is unacceptable. But much, much more so is hyping such an incident in order to ignore evidence of war crimes. Which are provided in the HRW report, among others.

"You also cite the "non-reconstruction" of New Orleans. You really are a lib arenb't you?"

Oh no! I've betrayed myself by confessing to being bothered about the state of New Orleans! And not blaming the victims - though i see you count yourself as a victim since a tiny fraction of your taxes may have been used for their benefit.

Compare your utterly heartless and prejudiced remarks about the people of New Orleans with your earlier assertion, "I am a REAL Christian".

Since we're into Bible-quoting, check out Matthew 25 and how you are supposed to respond those in need. There is nothing in the Gospels about compassion being conditional or reluctant.

"These people have gotten used to your party's policy of, "cradle to grave" protection."

I am not a member of the Democratic Party, which in any case abandoned its commitment to cradle-to-grave welfare when Clinton signed up to the Republican Congress' anti-welfare lgeislation.

And who do you mean by "these people"? How dare you make such a crass, cruel assumption about the New Orleans victims of Hurricane Katrina?

"Wake up from your "Kool Aid" nap."

Yawn, another piece of unoriginal cliched abuse.

Hankmeister however suggested that Reuters as an organisation tried "to make it appear that the Israelis were targeting innocent Lebanese civilians".

That's a lie, you INFERRED it. Of course Reuters, AP, Al Jazeera don't have to organizationally do anything, they merely follow their biases and seek out those "experts" who and photo ops that will say what they want to put on the air. You're extremely naive if you don't think this doesn't happen with some frequency and it always airs on the liberal side of the aisle ... imagine that. Reuters et al don't have to fake anything, they can leave to the propmen (in this case, Hezbollah propagandists) who are anti-Israeli and anti-American to do the dirty work of staging propaganda pieces.

Now how do I know this, you might ask? I used to be in the field of photo-journalism (under a nom de plume) nearly thirty years ago. I've seen it first hand even back then: the anti-conservative bias and the framing of stories by selecting (i.e. "editing") eyewitnesses who tell the same story you want to see, SOP. And without fail the liberal journalist will give the liberal view far more airtime or column inches and then throw in the conservative viewpoint as almost a mere afterthought.

Have you ever wondered why on most round table discussion shows there always seems to be two liberals, the liberal "moderate" host, and one conservative ... except at Fox where they are typically evenly divided. I bet you haven't.

So its little wonder we have such egregious examples of reporting like we did with the major news networks during Katrina. Here's an excellent post-analysis of how the lamestream media blew the Katrina coverage with its hyperbolic partisanship and subsequent unwillingness to even admit that it was local and state officials who were the first responders and responsible for any evacuation plans in cases of natural disaster.

Yeah, FEMA dropped the ball too, but that's all one heard 24/7 for the first few weeks, it was FEMA's and Bush's fault. Totally unprofessional, totally disgusting, and I see the major news networks have yet to apologize for their own failures in accurately portraying this tragedy. And now this cadre of "journalists" are "CELEBRATING the one year anniversary of Katrina" (their words). Un-freakin'-believable.

Ever wonder whey the media continues to inundate us with Katrina images yet are loathed to show any more footage of Americans jumping out of burning buildings on 9/11 JUST DAYS AFTERWARDS! Don't tell me there isn't an agenda or axes to grind among 85% of journalists who are virtually card-carrying liberals. If I was a liberal I'd be very concerned I was getting the real truth (whatever that may be from day to day in relativistic liberal land) about a story because it would be my natural inclination to agree with how the liberal media is presenting it. Of course the radical left believes the liberal media isn't radical enough which shows you how out of the mainstream they are.

However, as a conservative, I'm not only exposed to the story being spun by the liberal media, but I also seek out responsible, alternative news sources who give me a different perspective ... and sometimes that perspective isn't even necessarily conservative. At that point I can make up my mind with respect to competing news sources. Liberals typically deceive themselves in thinking that they are truly independent thinkers since even their view of conservativism or the conservative worldview is always filtered through some liberal institution like the news media or some whacko, left-wing professor. Think about it, Higgins.

BTW, Higgins, when it comes to political credentials, I'm neither Republican or Democrat. I consider myself a independent conservative/libertarian.

Here's a little test, out of the last eight presidential elections, how many times did you vote for the man who won? I missed only one time. I guess that makes me mainstream...how about you?

Hankmeister, you got back to me...

"...as to your faux outrage at me using terms like "moonbats", I find that particularly hypocritical when people on your side of the aisle never miss a chance to use descriptive terms like "rightwing nuts", "reich-wingers", "Rethuglicans", "KKKhristian kkkonservatives", "kkknuckledragging neanderthals" ad nauseam."

But you will notice that i didn't use any of those terms - none of them. Sometimes i tell other people not to as well, but i can't spend my whole life doing that.

You did, however, use abusive terms to describe anyone to your left. If you think it is wrong for anyone else to do it, then why not stop?

"Nice try, Mr. Higgins, but there were far more examples of media phauxtography going on in Lebanon, and it doesn't involve photoshopping..."

But it was the Reuters incident you referred to - and you accused the entire organisation, whose journalists, btw, risk their lives in warzones and confront horrible deaths on a daily basis, of lying for political reasons.

There are other incidents - you have just mentioned the case of the re-shooting of the dead boy at Qana. I saw that footage and it was ugly, but it in no way alters the fact that the boy was killed by the IAF, nor is it defensible to use such incidents as a distration from the reality of death and destruction in the Lebanon War.

Again, i point you to the HRW report.

Next, you have some questions for me.

"1) Do you believe that America is at war with an implacable enemy that has long been committed to the destruction of Israel, America and western civilization?"

It's just too complicated for that framework. Bin Laden and groups who identify him have declared war on the US, wish the destruction of Israel and have a number of other political ambitions, such as the seizure of power in Arabia and Egypt.

Other groups such as Hamas and Hizbollah are part of quite separate conflicts and it is wrong to confuse them.

The US is also involved in other conflicts, such as Colombia, which have no connection with this. More obviously it is also at war in Iraq which is connected in the sense that some Bin Ladenists have seized on the opportunity to inflict damage on the US army while they remain there.

To talk about war against Western Civilisation is an exaggeration. Bin Laden did not declare on Sweden or Portugal.

That's a partial answer, there is so much to say to describe the present conflict(s) and who is involved.

"2) If you do, do you believe that the methods and goals this enemy practices in directly targeting innocent civilians for maximum effect to advance its fascist, religious ideology is absolutely indefensible?"

Yes.

3) Can you answer any of these questions without using the weasel word "but"?

That one is already answered for you, isn't it? The first one needed elaboration, the second one could have an unequivocal answer.

So do you get to set the tone for the discussion and ensure that no other topic can be raised? Anyone can do that.

Try these out and let's see where we end up:

1) Is it legitimate for a president to violate the Constitution and ignore a federal court?

2) Is the use of torture acceptable?

3) Is it acceptable to use white phosphorous as a weapon in a built-up urban area?

4) Since the invasion of Iraq was in no sense a military response to 9/11, is it acceptable to conflate the two as the president and his supporters constantly do?

"I mean, after all, we're only hateful conservatives and its our nature to be the way we are, right? You people tell us that every day, right? So how can you possibly condemn us for merely being true to our nature as a bunch of insensitive, falsely religious rednecks, right? Give it some thought, Higgins."

No, i know conservatives who are quite generous in their personal lives and all people, except total fanatics or the completely self-absorbed, are usually responsive to criticism of their ethics.

Are you saying that when you resort to abuse is that being true to your nature? Is that who you are? I hope not. Give that some thought, if you please.

Enough already, later maybe.

Oh, just before we go...

"BTW, Higgins, when it comes to political credentials, I'm neither Republican or Democrat. I consider myself a independent conservative/libertarian."

"Here's a little test, out of the last eight presidential elections, how many times did you vote for the man who won? I missed only one time. I guess that makes me mainstream...how about you?"

Well, just for corrections, first i haven't been around for that many elections, since i'm 25. Second, i'm a born Australian living for some time in England. Right now i live in London.

I lived in the USA when i was much younger and take a big interest in US politics since it impacts on British politics very heavily. BTW, i should say i'm fine with you expressing opinions about England or Australia.

I joined the British Labour party when i was 16, but left in protest over Iraq and Tony Blair's leadership. I wouldn't join any political party now and i vote for various progressive candidates in elections depending on the issues at stake - usually Labour, Green.

(NOT for George Galloway, btw, who is a Stalinist and a reactionary and shoots off to your country every so often in order to perjure himself before senate committees...)

I'm well to the left of the mainstream, here or in the US, but what matters to me ultimately (i hope) are the facts and the rights of individuals, not how many people agree with me. If someone thinks i'm wrong about something, fine, let's debate and see. But there's a lot of stuff i'm plain sick of and feel the need to challenge.

The (apparent) fact that Armitage was the original "leaker", and that Fitzgerald knew this from the start, yet charged Armitage with nothing, only proves that there was never any underlying crime. In other words, the entire Fitzgerald investigation was a fraud. If I understand these facts correctly, then the only possible explanation for the investigation is that it was politically motivated. Plame was not a covert agent, Fitzgerald knew it, and anyone who wanted to was entirely free to say anything about her at all.

Seems to me the real crimes here are malicious prosecution by Fitzgerald and the willful lies that Joe Wilson spread.

Tell me Mr. Higgens, since you're obviously sick of the ongoing fight against Muslim extremism in the Iraqi and Afghani theaters of operation and given you believe America has only made the problem worst and since America's actions "impacts heavily on British politics heavily" (something I won't argue since what America did from 1940 thru 1945 clearly had a large impact on the British people and their politics even to this day), tell me what are YOU are doing to help win this war against jihadists besides standing on the sidelines and pointing fingers of blame at your leaders?

Now I'm assuming you see a problem with militant Islam because if you don't, then this will be a fruitless exercise for both you and me to try and rationally discuss very real issues if you haven't figured out the truth about radical Islam in the five years since 9/11.

I believe you are telling me that you reject a military solution when addressing the issue radical Islam around the globe. Now, if it isn't perfectly clear to you yet, the vast majority of armed conflicts around the world involve Muslims. We see Muslim fundamentalists fighting, and in many cases, murdering Hindus, Taoists, Buddhists, Jews, Christians, atheists and pagans. Where are the armed conflicts between Christians-Hindus? Jews-Buddhists? Taoists-Pagans? Animists-Atheists? There are none. What is the common denominator in most of the armed conflicts, exclusive of civil wars, around the world? Islam.

Islam is not a race, so it can't be said killing or targetting radical Muslims is "racist". From the very beginning (read the real history books, not the PC stuff) Islam was a unifying political ideology attempting to unify various Arab tribes while pretending to be a religion. Just like liberalism is a religion pretending to be a political ideology. But enough of this.

If it's the case you don't support at least a partial military solution to winning the peace by defeating western civilization's enemies on battlefield Earth, then what are YOU doing to put some feet on your desire to bring peace to the world? The last time I checked, in Britain and America there is no age limit or physical to pass to volunteer to be a human shield for peace. Where are the armies of like-minded liberals fanning out across the globe to prove their serious intentions about world peace? Sorry, but I ain't seein' it. And if people like you aren't doing your share as human shields, then I find it rather strange that you somehow expect peace to "breakout". Is this not so?

I don't understand how you or anyone else on the left can complain about going mano a mano with murdering Islamofascists when those on your side of the aisle stand on the sidelines, offer your self-righteous criticisms and continue availing yourselves of the very comforts and opportunities that the standing armies of both Great Britain and America have given its citizenry the last twoo hundred years.

Ever hear of Kantian nihilists? Well, that's precisely what has become of those who bite the hand that keeps them secure from threats abroad, because I certainly don't see any liberal human shields standing between me and troublemaking Islamofascists. Until then I'm going to trust in the military option however imperfectly it is conducted.

"take a big interest in US politics since it impacts on British politics very heavily"

Remember when the Guardian started their campaign to influence the US election since it impacts on British politics very heavily? They had letter drive to readers in Clark County, Ohio that backfired magnificently. They plan was to send letters from snarky British socialists to regular guys and gals in Clark County telling them who to vote for. Essentially, "Dear American Redneck, I can't believe you ignorant..."

You just don't see f***ups like that everyday and it appears really helped Clark County and Ohio go for Bush. What still interests me about it is how they could be so uninformed about American politics that they thought it might work.

So, in loving memory of that helpful bit of British meddling here is Iowahawk's take on it:

Dear England Newspaper Person,

How are you? I am fine. I have to say I really enjoy you're loveable moptop "Rock and Roll" combos like the Beatles. There really groovie, or as you say "fab gear"! I can see why they drive all the "birds" "mad."

Anyhoo, thanks alot for the election advice and stuff. Boy, you made some really good points (even tho I didn't understand all the confusing England-style words) but Reverend Falwell said on the Fox TV that G-d will punish us with commies and terrorist and negros and AIDS, etc., if we don't elect President Bush.

So, I guess I'm pretty much still undecided. But also, I lost my job when the Halliburton men closed down the local factory, and then we had to sell the trailer to pay for Dave Jr's Army funeral after he got kilt fighting against the Iraq commies. Tell you what -- how about sending me $300? That way I can vote for Kerry with a clean consius, and pay for Bible lessons for little Duane and Tammy Fay.

You're Pal,

Dave in Ohio

PS - please send the money in American money, and not youre thuppences and so forth. They only take American money at the Wal Mart.

Don't look now, but your pants are on fire.

Try to read your Bible WITHOUT trying to spin it.

Jesus would NEVER KEEP helping those who WILL NOT help themselves!

Only the foolish such as you!---AND with someone ELSES money. That is what libs and socialists like you want.

I contribute money each and every payday. Some went to Katrina victims, but no more after the good citizens of N.O. reelected the main problem again! Fool me once--------you know.

Funny hearing you stick up for Corn and ALSO claim to be Christian----does Corn approve of this? Oh---that's right, you libs were told to SOUND Christian now, right?

I actually heard Biden saying this weekend, "I pray that happens-----!" He said it twice when asked by Chris Wallace, "Is it possible things could actually improve in Iraq?"

Biden face kind of twisted when he said, "I pray---"

Kind of like what I imagine yours does when you say, "I am a Christian!"

Instead of pointing to your lie, (that is there for all to see, EXCEPT YOU), I will simply repeat for you to douse your pants. lol

You and your other "Corn Flakes"!

BTW, Corn was actually the idiot lib who started this whole "outing fiasco".

Come out of your Muppet closet with Tinky Winky, Corn, and show us a REAL outing.

Plamegate: Another Hitch-Slap

First Juan Cole, now Michael Isikoff and David Corn. Christopher Hitchens nimbly points out the hypocrisy and sheer chutzpah of Isikoff and Corn being instrumental players in ginning up allegations that Plamegate was a blatant Bush administration hit job, and then turning around (and making money on a book, no less) and fingering Richard Armitage as Novak's original source. In other words, there was never any "there there."

This is how Corn responded on his blog last night after Hitchens' story went up:

A bunch of emails arrived today from people asking for (or, demanding) a response to Christopher Hitchens' attack in Slate on me and my coauthor Michael isikoff. I'm going to refrain from taking the bait, as we prepare for next week's release of our book. HUBRIS has plenty in it to discomfort anyone taking his or her cues from my former colleague.

Interesting. Corn's credibility is disappearing faster than a martini in Hyannisport and he says he is not going to "take the bait" - which is a euphemism meaning he won't "answer legitimate questions." Corn concludes by saying that his book is "far more about the fraudulent selling of the war than the leak case." The question at hand, however, is the media's fraudulent selling of the leak case and David Corn's central role in it.

Plamegate is turning out to be, as some have long suspected, exactly the opposite of what we've been led to believe. It was not a revenge-inspired hit job by the Bush administration, but an example of D.C.'s insider culture at its worst: a public, partisan, and dubious attack launched in the op-ed pages of the country's biggest newspaper, followed by innocent gossip between a reporter and a high-level official (and the subsequent shameful silence of that official, influenced by interdepartment fears and rivalries), followed by a firestorm of media speculation and innuendo, followed by an investigation, followed by an indictment for obstruction of justice over a crime that was never committed, followed by revelations that the whole thing wasn't what it was portrayed to be by critics of the administration and the media.

Posted by Tom Bevan at 07:58 AM | Send to a Friend | Email Author | Print | Permalink

levan: This the CORN site, NOT Porn site.

Although it is just as disgusting!