Hey Admin

[ormonde]

"Making deals with the enemy is a little more than "speaking out" and "free speech"."

I agree with that...but then the U.S. government (particularly Reagan and George the first) made "Plenty" of deals with Saddam - so who's the hypocrite. See the attached jpeg.

"you aren't going to fight any war in support of this country"

I would stand and fight, as I believe any committed citizen of this country would do if our actual "Sovereignty" were threatened - that is an invasion by an organized force as defined per the Charter of the United Nations. As horrible as 9-11 was, you can't call it an invasion - like we invaded Iraq.

[ormonde]

For an interesting read regarding U.S. clandestine policy regarding Iraq in the Reagan-Bush 1 era visit:

http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/congress/1992/h920914g.htm

[rsquirell]

Get it through your head...911 was the first time since the War of 1812 the homeland was attacked. Pearl Harbor was a territory when it was attacked...and fewer people died...and most of them were military. We used Sadam as a surrogate during the '80's to contain Iran, who was trying spread fundamentalism throughout the middleeast. That UN you're going to fight for is the very organization I'm concerned about losing sovereignty to. Your sit-ins and peaceful demonstrations in the early 60's were going to succeed because the Republicans have always supported King's "dream" of equality...and were using the images of southern democrats standing in the school house door with baseball bats as political wedge issues. Northern democrats (JFK) were embarrassed, and had to bring heavy pressure (read FBI, Troops, etc) to calm their southern bretheren down...it was costing Northern Democrats votes. Republicans kept their hands clean and sat on the sidelines laughing at the "family squabble" between the Democrat factions. But when those peaceful demonstrations turned into riots during LBJ both parties stood firm together. Note...the only sections of town you burned were your own houses and businesses...it would have been a bloodbath had you tried that a few blocks down in the white areas. Like you, Bobby Seals reverred in communism, too, and fled to Cuba when charged for some of his Black Panther killings. After 2 years in the "peoples paradice" he came home to stand trial...preferring American jail to the life he found there. Life under communism IS slavery ( unless you are high up in the party...then it's quite good). If we lose our constitution and bill of rights we ALL become slaves (and you lose your new-found freedom to "speak your mind"...what little there is of it.) This country is the US...not the UN.

[rsquirell]

I'm not the only one saying Kerry is a traitor

[ormonde]

"Get it through your head...911 was the first time since the War of 1812"

I completely understand that, but it still can't be defined as an "Invasion" - that is in the traditional manner by an organized military force from a "Definable" state - unless you want to get critical and say because 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi, then we should have gone to war with Saudi Arabia not Iraq. But Saudi Arabia is left out of the picture. I think you know as well as I do that groups like Al-Qeada operate within the meaning of that old term from the 60's called "Leaderless Resistance". The "Affinity Groups" use to operate like that in they only planned certain operations with people they trusted. We are not going to win against these guys by "Bombing" other countries. We will certainly create more terror using that approach, as that has indeed been the case. There is more terror now in the aftermath of 9-11, not less. In the same way, when the IRA set off bombs in London one response of the British government could have been to "Bomb" Boston - where most of the funding for the IRA comes from. We realize that would be criminal idiocy. However, Bush has done some good in cutting off funding for terror via the Treasury Department - I'll give him some credit there.

"Like you, Bobby Seals reverred in communism, too"

I don't know why you are so hung up in believing that I'm a communist, but if you believe it, then so be it. I'm NOT against "Rich" people - I don't think the poor should "Steal" from the rich, but likewise I don't believe the rich should steal from the poor either. I'm not really against "Corporations" per se, but I think the corporate structure should be less authoritarian - for example they should allow workers to form unions if they wish without being threatened with losing their jobs. There should also be a better "Wage" standard than there presently is. I also believe that our tax dollars should pay "Most" (not all) of our healthcare. I just don't see how these things are not considered to be fundamental in protecting the general welfare of the common person - as the "Preamble" of the Constitution states. I don't believe in "Bolshevism" where essentially "Uneducated" people take over by the use of violence because they don't know any better. I believe "Madison" was partially on the right track in the Constitutional Conventions when he said the "Smart" guys should be in control, but you can be "Smart" and not be "Wealthy" (that's the part I don't agree with). When it comes to work, all the American people want, or anyone else in the world for that matter is a "Level Playing Field" - That's All.

[rsquirell]

The Terror War started when that Great democrat President and Nobel Peace Prize winner Jimmy Carter decided to oust that right-wing dictator the CIA had installed... that nasty Shah of Iran, and replaced him with that good religious man (like himself)...the Allatola Khomeni. That eliminated the only "true friend" and reliable oil source we had in the Gulf. Since then we've searched for other sources for imported oil (we have to import due to democrat "Environmental Policies" preventing drilling in this country) and, until recently, 75% of our imports started coming from Venezuela. Then Castro's protege, Chavez, won their election...the election had an exit poll that showed the Venezuelans voted 2/3 against Chavez...but the count showed 2/3 had voted for him...hmmmmm-sound fishy to you? Jimmy Carter didn't raise an eyebrow when he certified the results. Our recent rise in gas prices is directly related to this election ( as we now have to import from other places.) Back to Iran...the Allatola promply thanked his benefactor (Carter) by declaring a Holy War (Jihad) on the Great Satan (us), taking our embassy and holding its staff for over a year. He also set up his own terror army (Hezbollah) and encouraged muslims all over the world to teach, support and actively take part in terror acts. We looked at him as "the mouse who roared" and chose to ignor his terror pin-pricks...until he attacked our homeland with disasterous results on 911. Stopping this war is not within our power...Bush only recognized that a war had been waged on us for the past twenty years. Bush declared a war on TERROR (Not Osama, Not the Taliban, Not Afghanistan, Not Sadam, Not Iraq) AND THE STATES THAT SPONSOR TERROR (which he identified as the "Axis of Evil".) I'll finish this post when I get back from work.

[admin]

I know I said I wouldn't post here again (and I haven't read any of the other posts here), but I couldn't resist posting this article link:

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041108&s=facts

100 facts and 1 opinion about the why Bush shouldn't be re-elected, every fact source links to the source(s). Everything is covered, from education to terrorism. The 1 opinion:

If the past informs the future, four more years of the Bush Administration will be a tragic period in the history of the United States and the world.

[ormonde]

"If the past informs the future, four more years of the Bush Administration will be a tragic period in the history of the United States and the world."

No doubt...

[rsquirell]

Our first goal in the "War on Terror" was to shut Osama down...which meant taking Afghanistan. For this we needed a staging base...The CIS (Russia) gave us one in the North...and we approached Pakistan for one on it's flank. Musharif was approached with two options...cooperate or be the first country "liberated" (we had...and still have...a willing ally in India should he choose the latter option.) After Afghanistan we wanted to drive a wedge in the center of the "Axis of Evil" (Kuwait provide the staging area for Iraq.) The REAL target is Iran (where this all began)...and now we have staging areas on the North (CIS) East (Afghanistan) and West (Iraq)...soon the fun will begin ( if bush is elected). Syria and Lebanon are collateral...and we can take THAT area in a week. Afghanistan just had free elections and is now under self-rule...Iraq will follow in January.

[rsquirell]

Martin Luther King first came under scrutiny by the FBI when it was disclosed a close personal adviser, Samuel Levison, was a member of the Communist Party. The History Channel did an expose on him during "Black History Week". Many of MLK's ideas (and yours) are communistic. Read your previous posts...it's all gimme, gimme, gimme. Whatever happened to the "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" democrats? "All we want is a level playing field"...save that for the naive. Republicans bought into MLK's "all I want is Equality" B.S. when they pushed the Civil Rights Act of 1964... and LBJ rubbed their noses in it when he bought the black vote with "Affirmative Action"...proving that what you really wanted was racism in reverse. "Level Playing Field?"...the playing field has been tilted in your direction for the past 40 years...what have you done with it? You are not willing to fight to defend this country during time of war...a whole platoon of black truck drivers deserted last week...yet you want us to give you the key to the candy store...and are willing to sell the republic down the river in order to get it.

[ormonde]

""Level Playing Field?"...the playing field has been tilted in your direction for the past 40 years"

Well, you know that is ridiculous...where have all the (good) jobs gone since this president took office? Over 3 million manufacturing jobs lost since 2000 - I know some of that occurred under Clinton. And now the same thing is happening with service sector jobs. And Bush said in the final debate, "Go back to College" there is a lot of "Pell" grants out there. OK - tell that to an engineer with 20+ years of experience who lost their job to "Go back to College" C'mon rsquirell, what do you think happens every time there is a big corporate merger, or when a big company decides to ship off overseas? PEOPLE LOOSE JOBS!

[rsquirell]

And that's the President's fault? Clinton signed NAFTA. I feel your pain Ormonde...my brother designed the MMU for the MC68000...as well as 32-bit and 64 bit main products for nearly every chip manufacturer in the country...and he's been on the street for over a year. I've been a Technical recruiter for hardware/software types for 30+ years...and haven't seen anything moving in the computer industry since Aug '01 ( a month before 911). But electing a traitor isn't going to solve that problem. The jobs really didn't go overseas...nobody in the world is developing innovative new products...they're just repackaging and selling last year's product trying to keep costs down.

[setarip]

To rsquirell

"a whole platoon of black truck drivers deserted last week"

I presume you are referring to the REFUSAL by a group of soldiers, only SOME of whom happened to be other-than-white, to transport fuel through and to a more dangerous than most area in Iraq - because the vehicles were inadequately armored (and the fuel may have been contaminated and, therefore, useless to whomever might receive it, had it been successfully delivered)

1) This is NOT desertion

2) Yes, they refused a direct order - WITH JUSTIFICATION (The reverse logic, applied by Lt. Calley at the massacre of civilians at My Lai in Vietnam - "I was just following orders - proved to be a failed defense at his trial)

3) Their concerns/fears have been acknowledged by the "brass - and it appears that they'll only be receiving reprimands for refusing to go on what might be viewed as a potential suicide mission

Did I miss something here?

A) Are you posting as an openly racist person? Several of your diatribes certainly indicate that this is the case. These forums, notwithstabding this category's "Off Topic" title, are no place for exhibiting such prejudices


B)Sounds like you believe Senator Joe McCarthy's witchhunts were justified...

[ormonde]

"they're just repackaging and selling last year's product trying to keep costs down."

And by no means am I excusing Clinton for the passage of NAFTA. That's why "WE" the "PEOPLE" have the right to throw out anybody that resides in the "White House" who acts like a criminal and enriches themselves and their friends out on their "BUTTS".

[ormonde]

"And that's the President's fault?"

ABSOULUTLY! The president signs and enacts legislation as well as shapes public policy – but the president has decided to turn a blind eye and let the corporations (especially the ones connected to him and Cheney and other close people in the Administration) fleece us.