I understand the plane was headed back towards Washington DC. Does
Dick have ouija board or something?
wasn't the assumption that it was going to crash into a gov't building
in DC?
at any rate it is now a made for tv movie which just seems weird to
me.
In the spirit of the day, I got a vanity plate with a variation of "LET'S
ROLL" for my motorcycle. Made me feel good to pull the double entendre. When
I handed the application to the Motor Vehicle person, she stared at it
quizzically, then smiled, and said 'got it'.....
Let's never forget our heroes.. especially those ordinary people, who when
give the choice, rose to the occasion.
Arne
..
..
What do you think - the hijackers were going to fly the plane to DC and land
it and let everyone off??????
Of course not - they were going to crash it into something like the White
House or Capitol. They have the 20th hijacker in custody (Moussaoui) who
was supposed to be on that plane - don't you think it is likely that he has
told them what the plans were???
<> wrote in message
news:
>
>
> I understand the plane was headed back towards Washington DC. Does
> Dick have ouija board or something?
>
"Arne" <> wrote in message
news:ZH%Ue.18022$
> In the spirit of the day, I got a vanity plate with a variation of "LET'S
> ROLL" for my motorcycle. Made me feel good to pull the double entendre.
> When
> I handed the application to the Motor Vehicle person, she stared at it
> quizzically, then smiled, and said 'got it'.....
>
> Let's never forget our heroes.. especially those ordinary people, who when
> give the choice, rose to the occasion.
>
And let's never forget that such people live amongst us and are ever ready to
enter the line of fire to do what is right. KM
OBQ:
"We don't have to turn to our history books for heroes. They're all around
us. Don't let anyone tell that America's best days are behind her that the
American spirit has been vanquished. We've seen it triumph too often in our
lives to stop believing in it now."
~ Ronald Reagan
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
<> wrote in message
news:
>
> I understand the plane was headed back towards Washington DC. Does
> Dick have ouija board or something?
>
No, but he is privvy to more information than the elite mainstream media is
willing to spoon feed to you. If you want to hate Dick Cheney, no one can
stop you, but, if this is your excuse for hating him no one can accept your
words as rational. I know, I know, you're going to claim you don't hate him
and hope no one notices your hate-speech. But, you can always bash Bush if
that tactic fails. Again, rational thinkers will express weariness at your
Bush-bashing, but the Leftwing will offer kudos. KM
OBQ:
"I censored myself for 50 years... Now I wake up and I ask myself 'Who do I
hate today?'"
~ 82 year old columnist and former UPI correspondent Helen Thomas, speech,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology on November 14, 2002. She suffered her
first ever snub in a Presidential press conference last night, when Bush
didn't call on her.
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
"JJ" <> wrote in message
news:
> What do you think - the hijackers were going to fly the plane to DC and
> land it and let everyone off??????
>
> Of course not - they were going to crash it into something like the White
> House or Capitol. They have the 20th hijacker in custody (Moussaoui) who
> was supposed to be on that plane - don't you think it is likely that he
> has told them what the plans were???
Funny how they keep changing their story about who
the supposed 20th hijacker was. Just how many 10th
hajackers do they need?
alohacyberian wrote:
> <> wrote in message
> news:
> >
> > I understand the plane was headed back towards Washington DC. Does
> > Dick have ouija board or something?
> >
> No, but he is privvy to more information than the elite mainstream media is
> willing to spoon feed to you. If you want to hate Dick Cheney, no one can
> stop you, but, if this is your excuse for hating him no one can accept your
> words as rational. I know, I know, you're going to claim you don't hate him
> and hope no one notices your hate-speech. But, you can always bash Bush if
> that tactic fails. Again, rational thinkers will express weariness at your
> Bush-bashing, but the Leftwing will offer kudos. KM
>
There has become an overall nastiness in this country. I don't know
what started it, I won't begin to theorize, but people ( including
myself ) are alot more angry and hateful than 20 years ago. The
original poster of this thread thought they would trash Cheney, and the
usual suspects would pounce on him/her and the usual suspects would
agree with what they wrote. They didn't take into account that there
are certain things that you can't get on Bush, Cheney... Clinton,
Gore... or anyone else about and have anyone agree with you. That
stems from the nasty tone I spoke of... people have not liked every
President in history for one reason or another, but over the last 20-30
years, people have become increasingly nasty and vile to each other.
I don't know where or when it started, or how to turn it back the other
way, maybe someone smarter than me can give an opinion.
wrote:
people have not liked every
> President in history for one reason or another, but over the last 20-30
> years, people have become increasingly nasty and vile to each other.
> I don't know where or when it started, or how to turn it back the other
> way, maybe someone smarter than me can give an opinion.
Things are no different today than they were in 1776 or 1860 or 1945.
Americans have always been at each other's throats over politics and
social policy. It's a natural state of affairs Pat, don't let it bother
ya. It's no worse today than it's ever been.
<> wrote in message
news:
>
> I don't know where or when it started, or how to turn it back the other
> way, maybe someone smarter than me can give an opinion.
>
This is too easy - who wants to take it?
JH
<> wrote in message
news:
>
>
> There has become an overall nastiness in this country. I don't know
> what started it, I won't begin to theorize, but people ( including
> myself ) are alot more angry and hateful than 20 years ago.
It started with Reagan and his class warfare and assault on the middle class
in favor of the upper class, not to mention his economic policies that sent
the finances of this country into the toilet so the rich could pay fewer
taxes and reap greater benefits.
JH
Gumboman wrote:
> It started with Reagan and his class warfare and assault on the middle class
> in favor of the upper class, not to mention his economic policies that sent
> the finances of this country into the toilet so the rich could pay fewer
> taxes and reap greater benefits.
Yeah.....when Carter was President, we all held hands and sang Kumbaya.
"Joe" <> wrote in message
news:
>
> wrote:
> people have not liked every
>> President in history for one reason or another, but over the last 20-30
>> years, people have become increasingly nasty and vile to each other.
>> I don't know where or when it started, or how to turn it back the other
>> way, maybe someone smarter than me can give an opinion.
>
>
> Things are no different today than they were in 1776 or 1860 or 1945.
> Americans have always been at each other's throats over politics and
> social policy. It's a natural state of affairs Pat, don't let it bother
> ya. It's no worse today than it's ever been.
Sheesh, just look at the feud between two ideological Founding Brothers such
as Jefferson and Adams.
Hamilton and Jefferson...
The smear campaign that was geared towards Jefferson.
You're right...it's been around since our country's first days.
I think the only President who came closest to being truly revered by all
was Washington.
After that...no one was immune to mud-slinging...
"Joe" <> wrote in message
news:
>
> wrote:
> people have not liked every
> > President in history for one reason or another, but over the last 20-30
> > years, people have become increasingly nasty and vile to each other.
> > I don't know where or when it started, or how to turn it back the other
> > way, maybe someone smarter than me can give an opinion.
>
>
> Things are no different today than they were in 1776 or 1860 or 1945.
> Americans have always been at each other's throats over politics and
> social policy. It's a natural state of affairs Pat, don't let it bother
> ya. It's no worse today than it's ever been.
Yes, I've heard it said by those who study things such as newspaper
editorials that the "weird" time in our history was post WW2 to Reagan, that
it was a period of unusual courtesy. Most of what is now said about GWB, for
example, was said about Lincoln, who is now considered one of our greatest
presidents.
Mike
"Joe" <> wrote in message
news:
>
> Gumboman wrote:
> > It started with Reagan and his class warfare and assault on the middle
class
> > in favor of the upper class, not to mention his economic policies that
sent
> > the finances of this country into the toilet so the rich could pay fewer
> > taxes and reap greater benefits.
>
> Yeah.....when Carter was President, we all held hands and sang Kumbaya
Yep. I so miss those days of double digit inflation.
Mike
"No Spam" <> wrote in message
news:NA5Ve.11125$
>
> "JJ" <> wrote in message
> news:
> > What do you think - the hijackers were going to fly the plane to DC and
> > land it and let everyone off??????
> >
> > Of course not - they were going to crash it into something like the
White
> > House or Capitol. They have the 20th hijacker in custody (Moussaoui)
who
> > was supposed to be on that plane - don't you think it is likely that he
> > has told them what the plans were???
>
> Funny how they keep changing their story about who
> the supposed 20th hijacker was. Just how many 10th
> hajackers do they need?
When have they changed their story? Everybody they have in custody,
including Khalid Sheik Muhammad, who planned the entire thing, says that
Moussoui was #20.
Mike
<> wrote in message
news:
> I don't know where or when it started, or how to turn it back the other
> way,
You could stop posting bald-faced lies. That might help.
> maybe someone smarter than me can give an opinion.
I'll resist the temptation to pick up the straight line.
In article <gJbVe.270$>, "MichaelC"
<> wrote:
>"Joe" <> wrote in message
>news:
>>
>> wrote:
>> people have not liked every
>> > President in history for one reason or another, but over the last 20-30
>> > years, people have become increasingly nasty and vile to each other.
>> > I don't know where or when it started, or how to turn it back the other
>> > way, maybe someone smarter than me can give an opinion.
>>
>>
>> Things are no different today than they were in 1776 or 1860 or 1945.
>> Americans have always been at each other's throats over politics and
>> social policy. It's a natural state of affairs Pat, don't let it bother
>> ya. It's no worse today than it's ever been.
>
>Yes, I've heard it said by those who study things such as newspaper
>editorials that the "weird" time in our history was post WW2 to Reagan, that
>it was a period of unusual courtesy. Most of what is now said about GWB, for
>example, was said about Lincoln, who is now considered one of our greatest
>presidents.
>
Good point, Mike. However, history tells us that Lincoln wrote his own
notes and G. W. obviously don't.
--
R.L.Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
remove _ from e-mail adr
"??R.L.Measures" <> wrote in message
news:
> In article <gJbVe.270$>, "MichaelC"
> <> wrote:
>
> >"Joe" <> wrote in message
> >news:
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >> people have not liked every
> >> > President in history for one reason or another, but over the last
20-30
> >> > years, people have become increasingly nasty and vile to each other.
> >> > I don't know where or when it started, or how to turn it back the
other
> >> > way, maybe someone smarter than me can give an opinion.
> >>
> >>
> >> Things are no different today than they were in 1776 or 1860 or 1945.
> >> Americans have always been at each other's throats over politics and
> >> social policy. It's a natural state of affairs Pat, don't let it bother
> >> ya. It's no worse today than it's ever been.
> >
> >Yes, I've heard it said by those who study things such as newspaper
> >editorials that the "weird" time in our history was post WW2 to Reagan,
that
> >it was a period of unusual courtesy. Most of what is now said about GWB,
for
> >example, was said about Lincoln, who is now considered one of our
greatest
> >presidents.
> >
> . Good point, Mike. However, history tells us that Lincoln wrote his own
> notes and G. W. obviously don't.
Budgets were much tighter back then..... :-)
Mike
Arne wrote:
> In the spirit of the day, I got a vanity plate with a variation of "LET'S
> ROLL" for my motorcycle. Made me feel good to pull the double entendre. When
> I handed the application to the Motor Vehicle person, she stared at it
> quizzically, then smiled, and said 'got it'.....
>
> Let's never forget our heroes.. especially those ordinary people, who when
> give the choice, rose to the occasion.
Todd Beamer was not a hero. He and the other people on that plane who
decided they were going to take the plane back had a mission. A
mission they failed miserably at.
I bet "they rolled" alright. All over that field near Shanksville, PA.
And as far as his wife Lisa trying to trademark "Let's Roll" that was
just a greedy little biddy trying to make more money off the "tragedy".
She had already gotten the survivor's insurance from the airline so
she should have been happy to get that.
Todd was a Plagiarist (notice the large 'P'). He was not the first to
utter those words, so there is no way that people can try to make a
hero out of him and his sorry widder Lisa think she might have a claim
to it.
Thanks for letting me straighten you out Arne.
Kathy
(with Ken slapping me a high five)
>
> Arne
> .
> .
JJ's response to me and Ken:
************************************************************ **************************************
What do you think - the hijackers were going to fly the plane to DC and
land
it and let everyone off??????
Of course not - they were going to crash it into something like the
White
House or Capitol. They have the 20th hijacker in custody (Moussaoui)
who
was supposed to be on that plane - don't you think it is likely that he
has
told them what the plans were???
<> wrote in message
news:
************************************************************ **************************************
You seem to be indicating that the people in Washington DC at that time
were more important than the people on that plane. Tsk, tsk.
Kathy AND Ken
All groups that have been discussing 9/11 Dan from the "good ol' USA"
view. And to give them another viewpoint, Ken and I decided we would
post our alternative view. Good enough for you? Or do you need some
more schooling?
Kathy
Mike said:
************************************************************ ************************************
Yes, I've heard it said by those who study things such as newspaper
editorials that the "weird" time in our history was post WW2 to Reagan,
that
it was a period of unusual courtesy. Most of what is now said about
GWB, for
example, was said about Lincoln, who is now considered one of our
greatest
presidents.
Mike
************************************************************ ************************************
That's right mike....just let them spoon feed you now.....
Kathy AND Ken
Oh, but they were. They saved potentially 100s of lives. They failed to land
the plane safely, but knowing they were going to die if they did nothing,
they acted as best they could. They pulled together, developed a plan and
attempted to execute it.
Bottom line; they tried. In my book, they are heroes.
But, you are welcome to look at it in your sick, little way, if you
wish.....
Arne
..
..
<> wrote in message
news:
>
> Arne wrote:
>> In the spirit of the day, I got a vanity plate with a variation of "LET'S
>> ROLL" for my motorcycle. Made me feel good to pull the double entendre.
>> When
>> I handed the application to the Motor Vehicle person, she stared at it
>> quizzically, then smiled, and said 'got it'.....
>>
>> Let's never forget our heroes.. especially those ordinary people, who
>> when
>> give the choice, rose to the occasion.
>
> Todd Beamer was not a hero. He and the other people on that plane who
> decided they were going to take the plane back had a mission. A
> mission they failed miserably at.
>
> I bet "they rolled" alright. All over that field near Shanksville, PA.
>
>
> And as far as his wife Lisa trying to trademark "Let's Roll" that was
> just a greedy little biddy trying to make more money off the "tragedy".
> She had already gotten the survivor's insurance from the airline so
> she should have been happy to get that.
>
> Todd was a Plagiarist (notice the large 'P'). He was not the first to
> utter those words, so there is no way that people can try to make a
> hero out of him and his sorry widder Lisa think she might have a claim
> to it.
>
> Thanks for letting me straighten you out Arne.
>
> Kathy
> (with Ken slapping me a high five)
>
>>
>> Arne
>> .
>> .
>
My schooling continues and will until I die. Learning is my main priority in
life. It has give me the patience to deal with people like you.--
Arne
..
..
<> wrote in message
news:
> All groups that have been discussing 9/11 Dan from the "good ol' USA"
> view. And to give them another viewpoint, Ken and I decided we would
> post our alternative view. Good enough for you? Or do you need some
> more schooling?
>
> Kathy
>
Forgot, given that the heroes on flight 93 died, I do appreciate that they
took with them 4 very disappointed terrorists, who were probably really
pissed off that all they destroyed was a field in Pennsylvania....
Arne
..
"alohacyberian" <> wrote
> <> wrote in message
>> I understand the plane was headed back towards Washington DC. Does
>> Dick have ouija board or something?
>>
> No, but he is privvy to more information than the elite mainstream media
> is willing to spoon feed to you. If you want to hate Dick Cheney, no one
> can stop you, but, if this is your excuse for hating him no one can accept
> your words as rational. I know, I know, you're going to claim you don't
> hate him and hope no one notices your hate-speech. But, you can always
> bash Bush if that tactic fails. Again, rational thinkers will express
> weariness at your Bush-bashing, but the Leftwing will offer kudos. KM
Maybe Dicky gets more information than us, maybe not, but we know we can't
believe anything he says.
Here is a statement rational only in the context of making up fairy tales to
lead the American people into an irrational war.
"On the nuclear question, many of us are convinced that Saddam will acquire
such weapons fairly soon." Dick Cheney, before the second Iraq war.
"Joe" <> wrote in message
news:
>
> Gumboman wrote:
>> It started with Reagan and his class warfare and assault on the middle
>> class
>> in favor of the upper class, not to mention his economic policies that
>> sent
>> the finances of this country into the toilet so the rich could pay fewer
>> taxes and reap greater benefits.
>
> Yeah.....when Carter was President, we all held hands and sang Kumbaya.
>
LOL! And when Carter was president about 50 American hostages were held in
Iran for 444 days (they were released the day Reagan was inaurgurated), the
Dow was languishing around 700 and the prime rate was above 20%. Of course,
Americans were so disappointed with Reagan that when he ran for re-election,
he won 49 out of 50 states in the Electoral College. I wonder how he did that
by getting only the votes of the rich. And how many votes did Carter get when
he ran for re-election? ;-) KM
OBQs:
"We've heard a great deal about Republican 'fat cats,' and how the
Republicans are the party of big contributions. I've never been able to
understand why a Republican contributor is a 'fat cat' and a Democratic
contributor of the same amount of money is a 'public-spirited
philanthropist.'"
~ Ronald Reagan
"If Ronald Reagan is re-elected, accidental nuclear war becomes a
mathematical certainty."
~ Dr. Helen Caldicott, 1984
"The taxpayer -- that's someone who works for the federal government but
doesn't have to take a civil-service exam."
~ Ronald W. Reagan
"Liberals said Reagan was dangerous and his rhetoric scary. They ridiculed
him as an idiot for believing the Soviet Union could be toppled. They opposed
him on every front--strengthening the military, aiding and arming
anti-Communist rebels around the world, invading Grenada, preparing to win a
nuclear war, building a nuclear shield, and waging a spiritual crusade
against Soviet totalitarianism. Reagan said the Soviet Union was an evil
empire and we would prevail. He called the ball, the shot, and the pocket,
and he won the game. But, now we're supposed to believe he was lucky.
Liberals lie about Reagan's victory because when Reagan won the Cold War, he
proved them wrong on everything they had done and said throughout the Cold
War. It is their last defense to fifty years of treason."
~ Ann Coulter, _Treason - Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on
Terrorism_, Crown Forum: New York, 2003, page 190
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
"Arne" <> wrote in message
news:u5mVe.18260$
> My schooling continues and will until I die. Learning is my main priority
> in life. It has give me the patience to deal with people like you.--
> Arne
> .
"Without education, we are in a horrible and deadly danger of taking educated
people seriously."
~ G. K. Chesterton
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
"John Bonanno" <> wrote in message
news:
> "alohacyberian" <> wrote
>> <> wrote in message
>>> I understand the plane was headed back towards Washington DC. Does
>>> Dick have ouija board or something?
>>>
>> No, but he is privvy to more information than the elite mainstream media
>> is willing to spoon feed to you. If you want to hate Dick Cheney, no one
>> can stop you, but, if this is your excuse for hating him no one can accept
>> your words as rational. I know, I know, you're going to claim you don't
>> hate him and hope no one notices your hate-speech. But, you can always
>> bash Bush if that tactic fails. Again, rational thinkers will express
>> weariness at your Bush-bashing, but the Leftwing will offer kudos. KM
>
Maybe he got it from the Clintons or Democrat Senator Tom Daschle. KM
>
> Maybe Dicky gets more information than us, maybe not, but we know we can't
> believe anything he says.
> Here is a statement rational only in the context of making up fairy tales
> to lead the American people into an irrational war.
>
> "On the nuclear question, many of us are convinced that Saddam will acquire
> such weapons fairly soon." Dick Cheney, before the second Iraq war.
>
"We do know that Iraq has weaponized thousands of gallons of anthrax and
other deadly biological agents. We know that Iraq maintains stockpiles of
some of the world's deadliest chemical weapons, including VX, sarin and
mustard gas. We know that Iraq is developing deadlier ways to deliver these
horrible weapons, including unmanned drones and long-range ballistic
missiles. And we know that Saddam Hussein is committed to one day possessing
nuclear weapons. If that should happen, instead of simply bullying the Gulf
region, he could dominate it. Instead of threatening only his neighbors, he
would become a grave threat to U.S. security and to global security. The
threat posed by Saddam Hussein may not be imminent. But it is real. It is
growing. And it cannot be ignored."
~ Senator Tom Daschle, October 2000
"Good evening. Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike
military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces.
Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons
programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors. Their purpose
is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the
interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world. Saddam
Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with
nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons...."
~ President William Jefferson Clinton, from transcript, " President Clinton
explains Iraq strike", December 16, 1998
~
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that
Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons
stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also
given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.
It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to
increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep
trying to develop nuclear weapons."
~ Senator Hillary Clinton (Democrat, NY), October 10, 2002
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
<> wrote in message
news:
> Arne wrote:
>> In the spirit of the day, I got a vanity plate with a variation of "LET'S
>> ROLL" for my motorcycle. Made me feel good to pull the double entendre.
>> When
>> I handed the application to the Motor Vehicle person, she stared at it
>> quizzically, then smiled, and said 'got it'.....
>>
>> Let's never forget our heroes.. especially those ordinary people, who when
>> give the choice, rose to the occasion.
>
> Todd Beamer was not a hero. He and the other people on that plane who
> decided they were going to take the plane back had a mission. A
> mission they failed miserably at.
>
Preventing the aircraft from reaching its intended target was hardly a
failure. And they were heroes in the eyes of decent, wholesome people who
appreciate the hundreds of lives that may very well have been saved. Can you
imagine what would have happened if the same sort of heroes had been on the
two planes that crashed into the World Trade Center. 3,000+ lives would have
been saved, two buildings saved and the likes of you woujld have say the
failed miserably. Such views are stupefying. KM
OBQ:
"We don't have to turn to our history books for heroes. They're all around
us. Don't let anyone tell that America's best days are behind her that the
American spirit has been vanquished. We've seen it triumph too often in our
lives to stop believing in it now."
~ Ronald Reagan
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
<> wrote in message
news:
> JJ's response to me and Ken:
>
> You seem to be indicating that the people in Washington DC at that time
> were more important than the people on that plane. Tsk, tsk.
>
No, he didn't imdicate any such thing. You created something out of thin air,
falsely attributed to him and proceded to argue against your own invention.
Rational people don't fall for those tactics. KM
OBQ:
"The wicked are always suprised to find that the good can be clever."
~ Luc de Clapiers de Vauvenargues
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
"Arne" <> wrote in message
news:uhmVe.18262$
> Forgot, given that the heroes on flight 93 died, I do appreciate that they
> took with them 4 very disappointed terrorists, who were probably really
> pissed off that all they destroyed was a field in Pennsylvania....
>
Yeah, but, the terrorists probably weren't nearly as pissed off as the people
who refuse to see the civilian passengers on Flight 93 as heroes! ;-) Keep
the faith, baby! KM
OBQ:
"As an Iraqi Australian who is proud to be a citizen of this wonderful
country, I salute you. My heart is with you and also with the people in my
beloved Iraq. ...
"Dear Australian soldiers, remember this: every individual Iraqi has been
wounded physically or emotionally. You are on a sacred mission. You are on a
mission to bring a smile to a child's face. You will help relieve the elderly
of their agonies. You will help pave the road to a new life. You will give
hope to thousands of mothers who lost their beloved ones in the dark torture
chambers of the regime. Your names will be recorded as heroes in the bright
lists of history. You will help restore the weeping face of humanity with
your good deeds."
~ Hadi Kazwini
~
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
William Innes wrote:
> Sheesh, just look at the feud between two ideological Founding Brothers such
> as Jefferson and Adams.
> Hamilton and Jefferson...
> The smear campaign that was geared towards Jefferson.
> You're right...it's been around since our country's first days.
> I think the only President who came closest to being truly revered by all
> was Washington.
> After that...no one was immune to mud-slinging...
It really is one of the more fascinating aspects of American History,
how we have survived as a nation this long....lol. I don't think we'll
ever be as divided as we were during the pre-Civil War period. At least
we don't have Senators thrashing each other with baseball bats. In
fact, in many ways, our politics today are tamer than in other ages. We
have no significant third party, and the two parties which do exist
pretty much meet the needs of most Americans.
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 09:56:09 GMT, "alohacyberian"
<> wrote:
><> wrote in message
>news:
>> Arne wrote:
>>> In the spirit of the day, I got a vanity plate with a variation of "LET'S
>>> ROLL" for my motorcycle. Made me feel good to pull the double entendre.
>>> When
>>> I handed the application to the Motor Vehicle person, she stared at it
>>> quizzically, then smiled, and said 'got it'.....
>>>
>>> Let's never forget our heroes.. especially those ordinary people, who when
>>> give the choice, rose to the occasion.
>>
>> Todd Beamer was not a hero. He and the other people on that plane who
>> decided they were going to take the plane back had a mission. A
>> mission they failed miserably at.
>>
>
>Preventing the aircraft from reaching its intended target was hardly a
>failure. And they were heroes in the eyes of decent, wholesome people who
>appreciate the hundreds of lives that may very well have been saved. Can you
>imagine what would have happened if the same sort of heroes had been on the
>two planes that crashed into the World Trade Center. 3,000+ lives would have
>been saved, two buildings saved and the likes of you woujld have say the
>failed miserably. Such views are stupefying. KM
>OBQ:
Umm. It seems likely that they knew they were going to die only
because the two planes had already crashed into the WTC, which they
had heard about. If the folks on the first two planes had known they
were about to fly into the WTC, I suspect they might have done
something. Doing something because you're going to die otherwise may
still be brave, but there wasn't much of an option left.
Now what about the 100,000 or so Iraqi folks that we killed so that
our neo-cons can fulfill their plan to rule the world? Are we going to
be reading their names anytime soon?
wrote:
> You seem to be indicating that the people in Washington DC at that time
> were more important than the people on that plane. Tsk, tsk.
If you think of this terrorist attack as an act of war, you will see why
they chose Washington DC as a target and not, say, Disney World.
Congress was in session that morning. Had the plane destroyed the
Capitol Building, it might have killed dozens of Congressmen and
Senators. I don't know how many Congresspeople were attending the
sessions that day but if a majority were there then we came close to
losing our Government, because:
There's a flaw in our Constitution in that there is no way to appoint
temporary replacements for your Representatives in case they're killed.
(There is a way to appoint temporary replacements for your Senators.)
Had the House of Representatives been wiped out, it would have
decapitated the Federal Government. There would have been NO WAY to
pass laws anymore. There wouldn't have been a way for Congress to
authorize military force or anything else because all that requires a
vote of both houses of Congress.
The passengers on Flight 93 probably prevented the total decapitation of
the U.S. Government. Think about it.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
I certainly hope not. For one thing, I'm not sure I have a font for Arabic
and also, they were not in airplanes.... and they were not in the USA....
things close to home are always more important.....
And, what's with all this x-posting crap... I need a new rule..
Arne
..
..
"dgk" <> wrote in message >
> Now what about the 100,000 or so Iraqi folks that we killed so that
> our neo-cons can fulfill their plan to rule the world? Are we going to
> be reading their names anytime soon?
JJ wrote:
> What do you think - the hijackers were going to fly the plane to DC and land
> it and let everyone off??????
>
> Of course not - they were going to crash it into something like the White
> House or Capitol. They have the 20th hijacker in custody (Moussaoui) who
> was supposed to be on that plane - don't you think it is likely that he has
> told them what the plans were???
By now our intelligence and law enforcement agencies are pretty sure the
intended target was the Capitol. It's a big target and from the air,
it's a lot easier for a novice pilot to spot than the White House is.
And Congress was in session that morning.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
"Steven L." <> wrote in message
news:L1AVe.657$
> wrote:
>
> > You seem to be indicating that the people in Washington DC at that time
> > were more important than the people on that plane. Tsk, tsk.
>
> If you think of this terrorist attack as an act of war, you will see why
> they chose Washington DC as a target and not, say, Disney World.
>
> Congress was in session that morning. Had the plane destroyed the
> Capitol Building, it might have killed dozens of Congressmen and
> Senators. I don't know how many Congresspeople were attending the
> sessions that day but if a majority were there then we came close to
> losing our Government, because:
>
> There's a flaw in our Constitution in that there is no way to appoint
> temporary replacements for your Representatives in case they're killed.
> (There is a way to appoint temporary replacements for your Senators.)
>
> Had the House of Representatives been wiped out, it would have
> decapitated the Federal Government. There would have been NO WAY to
> pass laws anymore. There wouldn't have been a way for Congress to
> authorize military force or anything else because all that requires a
> vote of both houses of Congress.
>
> The passengers on Flight 93 probably prevented the total decapitation of
> the U.S. Government. Think about it.
I guess you don't remember: at the first sign of trouble, Congress ran like
rats with their tails between their legs. It was inspiring to see our
so-called leaders skedaddle like the President.
-herb
PS: Please don't cross post.
On 9/13/05 6:28 PM India Time, _Steven L._ wrote:
> wrote:
>
>
>>You seem to be indicating that the people in Washington DC at that time
>>were more important than the people on that plane. Tsk, tsk.
>
>
> If you think of this terrorist attack as an act of war, you will see why
> they chose Washington DC as a target and not, say, Disney World.
>
> Congress was in session that morning. Had the plane destroyed the
> Capitol Building, it might have killed dozens of Congressmen and
> Senators. I don't know how many Congresspeople were attending the
> sessions that day but if a majority were there then we came close to
> losing our Government, because:
>
> There's a flaw in our Constitution in that there is no way to appoint
> temporary replacements for your Representatives in case they're killed.
> (There is a way to appoint temporary replacements for your Senators.)
>
> Had the House of Representatives been wiped out, it would have
> decapitated the Federal Government. There would have been NO WAY to
> pass laws anymore. There wouldn't have been a way for Congress to
> authorize military force or anything else because all that requires a
> vote of both houses of Congress.
>
> The passengers on Flight 93 probably prevented the total decapitation of
> the U.S. Government. Think about it.
>
>
Good case.
For 225 years, you lived with this hole? ("Not appoint
temporary replacements for your Representatives in case
they're killed.")
I am sure that your legislature must have filled this hole
ever since. Tell me they haven't.
Herb wrote:
> "Steven L." <> wrote in message
> news:L1AVe.657$
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>You seem to be indicating that the people in Washington DC at that time
>>>were more important than the people on that plane. Tsk, tsk.
>>
>>If you think of this terrorist attack as an act of war, you will see why
>>they chose Washington DC as a target and not, say, Disney World.
>>
>>Congress was in session that morning. Had the plane destroyed the
>>Capitol Building, it might have killed dozens of Congressmen and
>>Senators. I don't know how many Congresspeople were attending the
>>sessions that day but if a majority were there then we came close to
>>losing our Government, because:
>>
>>There's a flaw in our Constitution in that there is no way to appoint
>>temporary replacements for your Representatives in case they're killed.
>> (There is a way to appoint temporary replacements for your Senators.)
>>
>>Had the House of Representatives been wiped out, it would have
>>decapitated the Federal Government. There would have been NO WAY to
>>pass laws anymore. There wouldn't have been a way for Congress to
>>authorize military force or anything else because all that requires a
>>vote of both houses of Congress.
>>
>>The passengers on Flight 93 probably prevented the total decapitation of
>>the U.S. Government. Think about it.
>
>
> I guess you don't remember: at the first sign of trouble, Congress ran like
> rats with their tails between their legs.
The Congresspeople were *ordered* out of the building by the Secret
Service and Capitol police, who feared for their safety. As for
President Bush, it was Richard Clarke (beloved of the antiwar crowd
these days) who gave the order to the Secret Service to evacuate him to
a safe location.
None of this is any different from Cold War plans that had been in place
for decades. Under a program dubbed "Continuity of Government," if a
nuclear attack were imminent, the following would all be evacuated to
secure locations: President and his Cabinet; Congressmen and Senators;
the Supreme Court; and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
Alt.Quotations does not welcome cross-posting.
-----
Graham J Weeks=A0 M.R.Pharm.S.=A0
10201 quotes 654 topics 2452 authors indexed 903=A0 links=A0
/ Our church=A0
Daily quotes=A0
My blog
------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------=
----
The Gospel versus the Revolution - Groen van Prinsterer
------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------=
----
"Steven L." <> wrote in message
news:EeGVe.9579$
> Herb wrote:
>
> > "Steven L." <> wrote in message
> > news:L1AVe.657$
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>You seem to be indicating that the people in Washington DC at that time
> >>>were more important than the people on that plane. Tsk, tsk.
> >>
> >>If you think of this terrorist attack as an act of war, you will see why
> >>they chose Washington DC as a target and not, say, Disney World.
> >>
> >>Congress was in session that morning. Had the plane destroyed the
> >>Capitol Building, it might have killed dozens of Congressmen and
> >>Senators. I don't know how many Congresspeople were attending the
> >>sessions that day but if a majority were there then we came close to
> >>losing our Government, because:
> >>
> >>There's a flaw in our Constitution in that there is no way to appoint
> >>temporary replacements for your Representatives in case they're killed.
> >> (There is a way to appoint temporary replacements for your Senators.)
> >>
> >>Had the House of Representatives been wiped out, it would have
> >>decapitated the Federal Government. There would have been NO WAY to
> >>pass laws anymore. There wouldn't have been a way for Congress to
> >>authorize military force or anything else because all that requires a
> >>vote of both houses of Congress.
> >>
> >>The passengers on Flight 93 probably prevented the total decapitation of
> >>the U.S. Government. Think about it.
> >
> >
> > I guess you don't remember: at the first sign of trouble, Congress ran
like
> > rats with their tails between their legs.
>
> The Congresspeople were *ordered* out of the building by the Secret
> Service and Capitol police, who feared for their safety. As for
> President Bush, it was Richard Clarke (beloved of the antiwar crowd
> these days) who gave the order to the Secret Service to evacuate him to
> a safe location.
>
> None of this is any different from Cold War plans that had been in place
> for decades. Under a program dubbed "Continuity of Government," if a
> nuclear attack were imminent, the following would all be evacuated to
> secure locations: President and his Cabinet; Congressmen and Senators;
> the Supreme Court; and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System.
Nobody can order Congress to leave the Capitol nor the President to fly
anywhere he doesn't want to. I know this administration always has someone
else to blame but you know very well where the buck stops.
I believe security is important but I also believe leadership is important.
It's not so much that they ran as it is that they were seen to be running.
-herb
----------------------------------------
BY POPULAR DEMAND!!!
I've made a poster-sized image of this graphic, and it is now available
at Cafe Press.
Can we wait even a SECOND longer?
-----------------------------------------
"dgk" <> wrote in message
news:
> On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 09:56:09 GMT, "alohacyberian"
> <> wrote:
>><> wrote in message
>>news:
>>> Arne wrote:
>>>> In the spirit of the day, I got a vanity plate with a variation of
>>>> "LET'S
>>>> ROLL" for my motorcycle. Made me feel good to pull the double entendre.
>>>> When
>>>> I handed the application to the Motor Vehicle person, she stared at it
>>>> quizzically, then smiled, and said 'got it'.....
>>>>
>>>> Let's never forget our heroes.. especially those ordinary people, who
>>>> when
>>>> give the choice, rose to the occasion.
>>>
>>> Todd Beamer was not a hero. He and the other people on that plane who
>>> decided they were going to take the plane back had a mission. A
>>> mission they failed miserably at.
>>
>>Preventing the aircraft from reaching its intended target was hardly a
>>failure. And they were heroes in the eyes of decent, wholesome people who
>>appreciate the hundreds of lives that may very well have been saved. Can
>>you
>>imagine what would have happened if the same sort of heroes had been on the
>>two planes that crashed into the World Trade Center. 3,000+ lives would
>>have
>>been saved, two buildings saved and the likes of you would have said they
>>failed miserably. Such views are stupefying. KM
>>OBQ:
>
> Umm. It seems likely that they knew they were going to die only
> because the two planes had already crashed into the WTC, which they
> had heard about. If the folks on the first two planes had known they
> were about to fly into the WTC, I suspect they might have done
> something. Doing something because you're going to die otherwise may
> still be brave, but there wasn't much of an option left.
>
> Now what about the 100,000 or so Iraqi folks that we killed so that
> our neo-cons can fulfill their plan to rule the world? Are we going to
> be reading their names anytime soon?
>
That mythhical 100,000 figure that an unnamed propagandist pulled out of thin
air (or his "nether throat") has never been substantiated by any plausible
source on the planet. Such melodramatic hysteria is laughable. Nonetheless,
it's always amazed me that those who toss about that exaggerated
pseudo-statistic, are completely insouciant about the fact that Saddam
Hussein daily raped, tortured, maimed and slaughtered massive numbers of
people whose total numbers make 100,000 look like child's play. And the
self-same souls are noticeably silent concerning the mass graves in Iraq.
Nonetheless the vast majority of Iraqis will be thankful for the allied
invasion till the day they die. KM
OBQ:
"Some are born mad. Some remain so."
~ Samuel Beckett
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
alohacyberian wrote:
> "dgk" <> wrote in message
> news:
>
>
> That mythhical 100,000 figure that an unnamed propagandist pulled out of thin
> air (or his "nether throat") has never been substantiated by any plausible
> source on the planet. Such melodramatic hysteria is laughable. Nonetheless,
> it's always amazed me that those who toss about that exaggerated
> pseudo-statistic, are completely insouciant about the fact that Saddam
> Hussein daily raped, tortured, maimed and slaughtered massive numbers of
> people whose total numbers make 100,000 look like child's play. And the
> self-same souls are noticeably silent concerning the mass graves in Iraq.
> Nonetheless the vast majority of Iraqis will be thankful for the allied
> invasion till the day they die. KM
> OBQ:
> "Some are born mad. Some remain so."
> ~ Samuel Beckett
100,000 may be too many but it is probably more than 25,000. The point
you are missing is that no one is counting. To the Americans it does not
matter. They are only Iraqis, after all. All foreigners are expendable.
If it was an American they would be brought back for burial in a flag
draped coffin and their names read out solemnly. An Iraqi death is not
even a statistic to the US.
As for mythical numbers of massive killings where is the proof of
Saddam's involvement? At his proposed "trial" they seem to have only
come up with charges about 146 deaths and they remain to be proved. How
does that compare with Bush's 25,000 plus, documented for all to see in
the media?
The current rate of deaths in Iraq is about 25 a day. This shows the
total inability of 150,000 US troops and the supposed legitimate elected
government of Iraq to maintain any sort of law and order since they
destroyed Saddam's government. Of course Saddam had to maintain control
of three opposing ethnic and religious groups by armed force but at
least he was successful for 30 years whereas the US troops have not had
a day's peace since they invaded. And things are not getting any better.
The best bet for the US is to give Saddam his old job back, with
compensation for the invasion. He could definitely teach them a thing or
two about running Iraq.
"alohacyberian" wrote
> "dgk" <> wrote >>
Now what about the 100,000 or so Iraqi folks that we killed so that
>> our neo-cons can fulfill their plan to rule the world? Are we going to
>> be reading their names anytime soon?
>>
> That mythhical 100,000 figure that an unnamed propagandist pulled out of
> thin air (or his "nether throat") has never been substantiated by any
> plausible source on the planet. Such melodramatic hysteria is laughable.
> Nonetheless, it's always amazed me that those who toss about that
> exaggerated pseudo-statistic, are completely insouciant about the fact
> that Saddam Hussein daily raped, tortured, maimed and slaughtered massive
> numbers of people whose total numbers make 100,000 look like child's play.
> And the self-same souls are noticeably silent concerning the mass graves
> in Iraq. Nonetheless the vast majority of Iraqis will be thankful for the
> allied invasion till the day they die. KM
Your callow sang froid amazes me.
The "mythhical" (sic) 100,00 figure was "pulled out of thin air" by Les
Roberts, epimediologist at Johns Hopkins, writing in the British medical
journal, the Lancet.
Some thought the number was overly conservative.
Saddam and Bush are two of a kind.
They belong in adjacent cells in Iraq, both awaiting trials for war crimes.
Your arguments are always pulled out of thin air; or your ass.
"Dear Mr. Kirby and Ms. Dejevsky,
"I was disappointed to hear that you felt our study was in some way
dismissed by Jack Straw's anemic response to our report in the Lancet last
November. Serious reviews of our work and the criticisms of it were run in
the Financial Times, the Economist, the Chronicle of Higher Education
(attached above) and the WSJ [Wall Street Journal] Online on August 5th.
Closer to home, John Rentoul of the Independent solicited a response to the
Jack Straw letter last Nov. 21st and we responded with the attached letter
[Not provided here]. I am told that it was printed by your paper.
"Many people, like Ms. Dejevsky, have used the word extrapolation to
describe what we did. When I hear people use that word they mean what is
described in my Webster's Unabridged: '1. Statistics. to estimate the value
of a variable outside its tabulated or observed range.' By this definition
and the one I hear used by everyone on this side of the Atlantic, we did not
extrapolate. We did sample. We drew conclusions from within the confines of
that universe from which we sampled. Aside from a few homeless and transient
households that did not appear in the 2002 Ministry of Health figures or
households who had been dissolved or killed since, every existing household
in Iraq had an equal chance that we would visit them through our
randomization process.
"I understand that you feel that the sample was small: this is most
puzzling. 142 post-invasion deaths in 988 households is a lot of deaths, and
for the setting, a lot of interviews. There is no statistical doubt
mortality is up, no doubt that violence is the main cause, and no doubt that
the coalition forces have caused far more of these violent deaths than the
insurgents (p<.0000001).
"In essence this is an outbreak investigation. If your readers hear about a
sample with 10 cases of mad cow disease in 1000 British citizens randomly
tested, I am sure they would have no doubt there was an outbreak. In 1993,
when the US Centers for Disease Control randomly called 613 households in
Milwaukee and concluded that 403,000 people had developed Cryptosporidium in
the largest outbreak ever recorded in the developed world, no one said that
613 households was not a big enough sample. It is odd that the logic of
epidemiology embraced by the press every day regarding new drugs or health
risks somehow changes when the mechanism of death is their armed forces.
"The comments of Ms. Dejevsky regarding representativeness '(it seemed small
from a lay perspective (i remember at the time) for the conclusions being
drawn and there seemed too little account taken of the different levels of
unrest in different regions. my main point, though, was less based on my
impression than on the fact that this technique exposed the authors to the
criticisms/dismissal that the govt duly made, and they had little to counter
those criticisms with, bar the defence that their methods were standard for
those sort of surveys.)' are also cause for concern because she seems to
have not understood that this was a random sample.
"By picking random neighborhoods proportional to population, we are likely
to account for the natural variability of ethnicity, income, and violence.
Her words above strongly suggest that the Falluja numbers should be
included, rather than being used to temper the results from the other 32
neighborhoods. Please understand how extremely conservative we were: we did
a survey estimating that ~285,000 people have died due to the first 18
months of invasion and occupation and we reported it as at least ~100,000.
"Finally, there are now at least 8 independent estimates of the number or
rate of deaths induced by the invasion of Iraq. The source most favored by
the war proponents (Iraqbodycount.org) is the lowest. Our estimate is the
third from highest. Four of the estimates place the death toll above
100,000. The studies measure different things. Some are surveys, some are
based on surveillance which is always incomplete in times of war. The three
lowest estimates are surveillance based.
"The key issues are supported by all the estimates that attribute deaths to
the various causes: violence is way up post-invasion and the Coalition is
responsible for many times more deaths than are the insurgents. The exact
number is less important that these two indisputable facts which helps us to
understand why things are going badly and how to fix them.
I hope these thoughts are helpful.
Sincerely,
Les Roberts" Letter, found here:
Project Censored Number Two most ignored story of the year:
2. Media coverage fails on Iraq: Fallujah and the civilian death toll
Decades from now, the civilized world may well look back on the assaults on
Fallujah in April and November 2004 and point to them as examples of the
United States' and Britain's utter disregard for wartime rules of
engagement.
Not long after the "coalition" had embarked on its second offensive, U.N.
High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour called for an investigation
into whether the Americans and their allies had engaged in "the deliberate
targeting of civilians, indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks, the
killing of injured persons and the use of human shields," among other
possible "grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions ... considered war
crimes" under federal law.
More than 83 percent of Fallujah's 300,000 residents fled the city, Mary
Trotochaud and Rick McDowell, staffers with the American Friends Service
Committee, reported in AFSC's Peacework magazine. Men between the ages of 15
and 45 were refused safe passage, and all who remained - about 50,000 - were
treated as enemy combatants, according to the article.
Numerous sources reported that coalition forces cut off water and
electricity, seized the main hospital, shot at anyone who ventured out into
the open, executed families waving white flags while trying to swim across
the Euphrates or otherwise flee the city, shot at ambulances, raided homes
and killed people who didn't understand English, rolled over injured people
with tanks and allowed corpses to rot in the streets and be eaten by dogs.
Medical staff and others reported seeing people, dead and alive, with melted
faces and limbs, injuries consistent with the use of phosphorous bombs.
But you wouldn't know any of this unless you'd come across a rare report by
one of an even rarer number of independent journalists - or known which
obscure Web site to view for real information.
Of course, the media blackout extends far beyond Fallujah.
The U.S. military's refusal to keep an Iraqi death count has been mirrored
by the mainstream media, which systematically dodges the question of how
many Iraqi civilians have been killed.
Les Roberts, an investigator with the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of
Public Health, conducted a rigorous inquiry into pre- and post-invasion
mortality in Iraq, sneaking into Iraq by lying flat on the bed of an SUV and
training observers on the scene. The results were published in the Lancet, a
prestigious peer-reviewed British medical journal, on Oct. 29, 2004 - just
four days prior to the U.S. presidential elections. Roberts and his team
(including researchers from Columbia University and from Al-Mustansiriya
University in Baghdad) concluded that "the death toll associated with the
invasion and occupation of Iraq is probably about 100,000 people, and may be
much higher."
The vast majority of those deaths resulted from violence - particularly,
aerial bombardments - and more than half of the fatalities were women or
children, they said.
The State Department had relied heavily on studies by Roberts in the past.
And when Roberts, using similar techniques, calculated in 2000 that about
1.7 million people had died in the Congo as the result of almost two years
of armed conflict, the news media picked up the story, the United Nations
more than doubled its request for aid for the Congo, and the United States
pledged an additional $10 million.
This time, silence - interrupted only by the occasional critique dismissing
Roberts' report. The major television news shows, Project Censored found,
never mentioned it.
Sources: "The Invasion of Fallujah: A Study in the Subversion of Truth,"
Mary Trotochaud and Rick McDowell, Peacework, Dec. 2004-Jan. 2005; "U.S.
Media Applauds Destruction of Fallujah," David Walsh, www.wsws.org (World
Socialist Web site), Nov. 17, 2004; "Fallujah Refugees Tell of Life and
Death in the Kill Zone," Dahr Jamail, New Standard, Dec. 3, 2004; "Mortality
before and after the 2003 Invasion of Iraq," Les Roberts, Riyadh Lafta,
Richard Garfield, Jamal Khudhairi and Gilbert Burnham, Lancet, Oct. 29,
2004; "The War in Iraq: Civilian Casualties, Political Responsibilities,"
Richard Horton, Lancet, Oct. 29, 2004; "Lost Count," Lila Guterman,
Chronicle of Higher Education, Feb. 4, 2005; "CNN to Al Jazeera: Why Report
Civilian Deaths?" Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, April 15, 2004, and
Asheville Global Report, April 22-28, 2004.
Where are you originally from Steven? Lithuania? Just curious.....
Kathy
(with Ken laughing in the background)
Yeah...they tried mightily and failed miserably. Oh, and thanks for
top posting Arne.
You insufficient little man. Bring it on back if you want to "talk"
about it some more. But Ken and I don't think you have it in you.
Arne strained mightily when he gave birth to:
> Oh, but they were. They saved potentially 100s of lives. They failed to land
> the plane safely, but knowing they were going to die if they did nothing,
> they acted as best they could. They pulled together, developed a plan and
> attempted to execute it.
>
> Bottom line; they tried. In my book, they are heroes.
>
> But, you are welcome to look at it in your sick, little way, if you
> wish.....
>
> Arne
> .
> .
> <> wrote in message
> news:
> >
> > Arne wrote:
> >> In the spirit of the day, I got a vanity plate with a variation of "LET'S
> >> ROLL" for my motorcycle. Made me feel good to pull the double entendre.
> >> When
> >> I handed the application to the Motor Vehicle person, she stared at it
> >> quizzically, then smiled, and said 'got it'.....
> >>
> >> Let's never forget our heroes.. especially those ordinary people, who
> >> when
> >> give the choice, rose to the occasion.
> >
> > Todd Beamer was not a hero. He and the other people on that plane who
> > decided they were going to take the plane back had a mission. A
> > mission they failed miserably at.
> >
> > I bet "they rolled" alright. All over that field near Shanksville, PA.
> >
> >
> > And as far as his wife Lisa trying to trademark "Let's Roll" that was
> > just a greedy little biddy trying to make more money off the "tragedy".
> > She had already gotten the survivor's insurance from the airline so
> > she should have been happy to get that.
> >
> > Todd was a Plagiarist (notice the large 'P'). He was not the first to
> > utter those words, so there is no way that people can try to make a
> > hero out of him and his sorry widder Lisa think she might have a claim
> > to it.
> >
> > Thanks for letting me straighten you out Arne.
> >
> > Kathy
> > (with Ken slapping me a high five)
> >
> >>
> >> Arne
> >> .
> >> .
> >
<> wrote
> Where are you originally from Steven? Lithuania? Just curious.....
>
> Kathy
> (with Ken laughing in the background)
I knew a couple named Kathy and Ken. They did a lot of laughing in the
backround too!
When you say "kathy_andor_ken" does that imply that you are capable of
screwing yourself? If so, please, don't let me stop you.
Where were your grandparents from? Bangladesh? How did population control
miss those polluters?
"David Wilkinson" <> wrote in message
news:dge5oq$isj$
> alohacyberian wrote:
>> "dgk" <> wrote in message
>> news:
>> That mythhical 100,000 figure that an unnamed propagandist pulled out of
>> thin air (or his "nether throat") has never been substantiated by any
>> plausible source on the planet. Such melodramatic hysteria is laughable.
>> Nonetheless, it's always amazed me that those who toss about that
>> exaggerated pseudo-statistic, are completely insouciant about the fact
>> that Saddam Hussein daily raped, tortured, maimed and slaughtered massive
>> numbers of people whose total numbers make 100,000 look like child's play.
>> And the self-same souls are noticeably silent concerning the mass graves
>> in Iraq. Nonetheless the vast majority of Iraqis will be thankful for the
>> allied invasion till the day they die. KM
>> OBQ:
>> "Some are born mad. Some remain so."
>> ~ Samuel Beckett
> 100,000 may be too many but it is probably more than 25,000. The point you
> are missing is that no one is counting. To the Americans it does not
> matter. They are only Iraqis, after all. All foreigners are expendable.
>
I never stated that, hinted at it or even implied it. You have created
something out of thin air, falsely attributed it to me and then argued
against your own dishonest invention.
And if Americans really felt the way you claim they do, they would never have
participated in the invasion of Iraq, but, rather allowed Saddam Hussein to
continue his bloodbath. If what you say is true, the Americans wouldn't have
arrested Saddam Hussein and turned him over to Iraq for prosecution. If what
you say is true, Americans would not have allowed the Iraqis to form their
own government and vote in their own elections. Your remarks are
oversimplified, hysterical melodrama that no rational person would find
credible. KM
OBQ:
"Ordinarily he was insane, but he had lucid moments when he was merely
stupid."
~ Heinrich Heine
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
<> wrote in message
news:
> Yeah...they tried mightily and failed miserably. Oh, and thanks for
> top posting Arne.
>
> You insufficient little man. Bring it on back if you want to "talk"
> about it some more. But Ken and I don't think you have it in you.
>
But, you aren't discussing the messages, you are attacking the messenger. Ad
hominem is not only petty and puerile, it's boring. Though it does give an
indication of your ability to discuss the topic under discussion. KM
OBQ:
"Rudeness is a weak man's imitation of strength."
~ Eric Hoffer
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
alohacyberian wrote:
> "David Wilkinson" <> wrote in message
> news:dge5oq$isj$
>
>>alohacyberian wrote:
>>
>>>"dgk" <> wrote in message
>>>news:
>>>That mythhical 100,000 figure that an unnamed propagandist pulled out of
>>>thin air (or his "nether throat") has never been substantiated by any
>>>plausible source on the planet. Such melodramatic hysteria is laughable.
>>>Nonetheless, it's always amazed me that those who toss about that
>>>exaggerated pseudo-statistic, are completely insouciant about the fact
>>>that Saddam Hussein daily raped, tortured, maimed and slaughtered massive
>>>numbers of people whose total numbers make 100,000 look like child's play.
>>>And the self-same souls are noticeably silent concerning the mass graves
>>>in Iraq. Nonetheless the vast majority of Iraqis will be thankful for the
>>>allied invasion till the day they die. KM
>>>OBQ:
>>>"Some are born mad. Some remain so."
>>> ~ Samuel Beckett
>>
>>100,000 may be too many but it is probably more than 25,000. The point you
>>are missing is that no one is counting. To the Americans it does not
>>matter. They are only Iraqis, after all. All foreigners are expendable.
>>
>
> I never stated that, hinted at it or even implied it. You have created
> something out of thin air, falsely attributed it to me and then argued
> against your own dishonest invention.
>
> And if Americans really felt the way you claim they do, they would never have
> participated in the invasion of Iraq, but, rather allowed Saddam Hussein to
> continue his bloodbath. If what you say is true, the Americans wouldn't have
> arrested Saddam Hussein and turned him over to Iraq for prosecution. If what
> you say is true, Americans would not have allowed the Iraqis to form their
> own government and vote in their own elections. Your remarks are
> oversimplified, hysterical melodrama that no rational person would find
> credible. KM
> OBQ:
> "Ordinarily he was insane, but he had lucid moments when he was merely
> stupid."
> ~ Heinrich Heine
When was the last American government expression of regret for killing
100,000 people in Iraq or for killing any one of them, come to that? Or
for the average 25 a day being killed now or for the 189 killed in one
day a couple of days ago?
What gave America the right to invade a foreign country that posed no
threat to itself and had never attacked America or harmed it in any way?
And don't say Iraq had WMDs. There was no evidence for that whatsoever
and America and the UK knew it and invented lies about them to try to
make a case.
If America is pretending to be a self-appointed world policeman why is
it so selective about which country it attacks? Why Iraq and not China,
Zimbabwe, North Korea, Ethiopia, or a dozen or so other African
dictatorships, or Saudi Arabia or half a dozen other absolute monarchys
all with dismal human rights records?
Two reasons: 1)Oil and 2)It was small and weak enough not to put up much
of a fight (and was known NOT to have WMDs).
No one would claim Saddam was a nice man but it is part of war to
demonise the opponent to try to justify the attack and inspire the
troops. The so-called "bloodbath" will probably prove as ephemeral as
the WMDs.
If you think Iraq will actually make western-style democracy work then
you get the Nobel Prize for naivety. Is it working now? Have either of
the interim governments had the slightest respect from the people and
brought peace and prosperity? Do you actually believe US government
propaganda? Or Fox news?
wrote:
> Yeah...they tried mightily and failed miserably.
What would YOU have done and consider right under the circumstances?
Please debate about the issue & do not shoot at the speaker, lest there
will not be any one left around you.
I guess my response to Arne was not politically correct enough for you.
Come on back when you want to talk about your "heroes" who fell far
short on the mission they selected to perform.
Kathy AND Ken
There you go crawling into your shell again alohacyberian when
confronted with the truth. Just like a turtle.
Kathy
wrote:
> I guess my response to Arne was not politically correct enough for you.
> Come on back when you want to talk about your "heroes" who fell far
> short on the mission they selected to perform.
>
> Kathy AND Ken
Oh Kathy, I am very pleased that Ken shares your opinion. I do not care
about "politically" correct. What care for is having a fair debate of
ideas based upon the available information, without having participants
trying to intimidate, harrass or otherwise bully and / or want to
exclude somebody.
Ken and you might step down from your Olympus and mingle with us poor
limited humans in explaining exactly what you would have been expecting
from the people you did call "heroes", in order to give them the
absolution of having perfomed the mission.
Another debate could be, what other issue would you have recommended?
Dear Kathy and Ken, I shall greatly appreciate receiving you kind
precise answers to my questions ASAP, as I am already getting a stiff
neck and eye burns looking so high above me directly into your
sunshine. :-)
PLEASE STOP CROSS POSTING
wrote:
> wrote:
>
>>Yeah...they tried mightily and failed miserably.
>
>
> What would YOU have done and consider right under the circumstances?
>
> Please debate about the issue & do not shoot at the speaker, lest there
> will not be any one left around you.
>
--
Amazing Grace's Eclectic Quotation Collection
*125,000 quotations, proverbs, by people of all philosophies, ages and
cultures. CD-ROM For more info. or free sample of one category, send a
personal e-mail: (remove shoes)
. . . Grace McGarvie . . .
. . Plymouth,Mn. 55447 U.S.A.
Amazing Grace wrote:
> PLEASE STOP CROSS POSTING
I never crosspost at all at anytime & anywhere, never ever ever, I
swear, unless the message I am responding to had originally been
crossposted: in fact like yours here and now.
P.S. I would expect more grace from an Amazing Grace: why do you shout
at me?
"David Wilkinson" <> wrote in message
news:dggd7a$l6n$
> alohacyberian wrote:
>> "David Wilkinson" <> wrote in message
>> news:dge5oq$isj$
>>>alohacyberian wrote:
>>>>"dgk" <> wrote in message
>>>>news:
>>>>That mythhical 100,000 figure that an unnamed propagandist pulled out of
>>>>thin air (or his "nether throat") has never been substantiated by any
>>>>plausible source on the planet. Such melodramatic hysteria is laughable.
>>>>Nonetheless, it's always amazed me that those who toss about that
>>>>exaggerated pseudo-statistic, are completely insouciant about the fact
>>>>that Saddam Hussein daily raped, tortured, maimed and slaughtered massive
>>>>numbers of people whose total numbers make 100,000 look like child's
>>>>play.
>>>>And the self-same souls are noticeably silent concerning the mass graves
>>>>in Iraq. Nonetheless the vast majority of Iraqis will be thankful for the
>>>>allied invasion till the day they die. KM
>>>>OBQ:
>>>>"Some are born mad. Some remain so."
>>>> ~ Samuel Beckett
>>>
>>>100,000 may be too many but it is probably more than 25,000. The point you
>>>are missing is that no one is counting. To the Americans it does not
>>>matter. They are only Iraqis, after all. All foreigners are expendable.
>>
>> I never stated that, hinted at it or even implied it. You have created
>> something out of thin air, falsely attributed it to me and then argued
>> against your own dishonest invention.
>>
>> And if Americans really felt the way you claim they do, they would never
>> have participated in the invasion of Iraq, but, rather allowed Saddam
>> Hussein to continue his bloodbath. If what you say is true, the Americans
>> wouldn't have arrested Saddam Hussein and turned him over to Iraq for
>> prosecution. If what you say is true, Americans would not have allowed the
>> Iraqis to form their own government and vote in their own elections. Your
>> remarks are oversimplified, hysterical melodrama that no rational person
>> would find credible. KM
>> OBQ:
>> "Ordinarily he was insane, but he had lucid moments when he was merely
>> stupid."
>> ~ Heinrich Heine
>
> When was the last American government expression of regret for killing
> 100,000 people in Iraq or for killing any one of them, come to that? Or for
> the average 25 a day being killed now
Uh, the pseudo-statistic of 100,000 is laughable as is your 25 daily
hysterical melodrama. KM
OBQ:
"It is a far, far better thing to have a firm anchor in nonsense than to put
out on the troubled seas of thought."
~ John Kenneth Galbraith
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
<> wrote in message
news:
> wrote:
>> I guess my response to Arne was not politically correct enough for you.
>> Come on back when you want to talk about your "heroes" who fell far
>> short on the mission they selected to perform.
>>
>> Kathy AND Ken
>
> Oh Kathy, I am very pleased that Ken shares your opinion. I do not care
> about "politically" correct. What care for is having a fair debate of
> ideas based upon the available information, without having participants
> trying to intimidate, harrass or otherwise bully and / or want to
> exclude somebody.
>
> Ken and you might step down from your Olympus and mingle with us poor
> limited humans in explaining exactly what you would have been expecting
> from the people you did call "heroes", in order to give them the
> absolution of having perfomed the mission.
>
> Another debate could be, what other issue would you have recommended?
>
> Dear Kathy and Ken, I shall greatly appreciate receiving you kind
> precise answers to my questions ASAP, as I am already getting a stiff
> neck and eye burns looking so high above me directly into your
> sunshine. :-)
>
Your hopes will never be achieved when dealing with such elitists. ;-) KM
OBQ:
"There is but an inch of difference between the cushioned chamber and the
padded cell."
~ G. K. Chesterton
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
<> wrote in message
news:
> There you go crawling into your shell again alohacyberian when
> confronted with the truth. Just like a turtle.
>
LOL! Once again you demonstrate your inability to either respond to the
issues under discussion or do anything other than make personal attacks. No
amount of money, influence, persuasion or words can possibly paint elite
Leftwing Liberals in a worse light than they gladly portray themselves. Keep
up the good work, its benefits are felt on election day! ;-) KM
OBQ:
"People seem not to see that their opinion of the world is also a confession
of character."
~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
"David Wilkinson" <> wrote in message
news:dggd7a$l6n$
> alohacyberian wrote:
>> "David Wilkinson" <> wrote in message
>> news:dge5oq$isj$
>>>alohacyberian wrote:
>>>>news:
>>>>That mythhical 100,000 figure that an unnamed propagandist pulled out of
>>>>thin air (or his "nether throat") has never been substantiated by any
>>>>plausible source on the planet. Such melodramatic hysteria is laughable.
>>>>Nonetheless, it's always amazed me that those who toss about that
>>>>exaggerated pseudo-statistic, are completely insouciant about the fact
>>>>that Saddam Hussein daily raped, tortured, maimed and slaughtered massive
>>>>numbers of people whose total numbers make 100,000 look like child's
>>>>play.
>>>>And the self-same souls are noticeably silent concerning the mass graves
>>>>in Iraq. Nonetheless the vast majority of Iraqis will be thankful for the
>>>>allied invasion till the day they die. KM
>>>>OBQ:
>>>>"Some are born mad. Some remain so."
>>>> ~ Samuel Beckett
>>>
>>>100,000 may be too many but it is probably more than 25,000. The point you
>>>are missing is that no one is counting. To the Americans it does not
>>>matter. They are only Iraqis, after all. All foreigners are expendable.
>>>
>>
>> I never stated that, hinted at it or even implied it. You have created
>> something out of thin air, falsely attributed it to me and then argued
>> against your own dishonest invention.
>>
>> And if Americans really felt the way you claim they do, they would never
>> have participated in the invasion of Iraq, but, rather allowed Saddam
>> Hussein to continue his bloodbath. If what you say is true, the Americans
>> wouldn't have arrested Saddam Hussein and turned him over to Iraq for
>> prosecution. If what you say is true, Americans would not have allowed the
>> Iraqis to form their own government and vote in their own elections. Your
>> remarks are oversimplified, hysterical melodrama that no rational person
>> would find credible. KM
>> OBQ:
>> "Ordinarily he was insane, but he had lucid moments when he was merely
>> stupid."
>> ~ Heinrich Heine
>
> What gave America the right to invade a foreign country that posed no
> threat to itself and had never attacked America or harmed it in any way?
>
Uh, Iraq was in violation of 17 enforceable United Nations resolutions which
allowed for armed invasion and Iraq was non-compliant with the Safwan Accords
which were signed by Saddam Hussein himself and which allowed for military
invasion in the event of their non-compliance. KM
>
> If America is pretending to be a self-appointed world policeman why is it
> so selective about which country it attacks? Why Iraq and not China,
> Zimbabwe, North Korea, Ethiopia, or a dozen or so other African
> dictatorships, or Saudi Arabia or half a dozen other absolute monarchys all
> with dismal human rights records?
>
Simply, because none of those countries are in violation of enforceable
United Nations resolutions and are not noncompliant with things like the
Safwan Accords. Pretty simple, huh? KM
OBQ:
"People seem not to see that their opinion of the world is also a confession
of character."
~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
<> wrote in message
news:
>I guess my response to Arne was not politically correct enough for you.
>
Uh, "political correctness" is the milieu of elitist Leftwing Liberals and is
hardly something thinking people would find useful. You very clumsily
attempted to dodge the fact that the last words you wretched up (and
understandably snipped) were totally devoid of any commentary about the issue
under discussion, but, were rather personal slurs and name-calling ad
hominem. You spout off in the manner of a second rate scholar in a second
rate academy where the standard is emulating parrots, which shortly produces
ennui. KM
OBQ:
"Only mediocrity can be trusted to be always at its best."
~ Sir Max Beerbohm
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more:
"alohacyberian" <> wrote in message
news:XqmXe.272096$
> <> wrote in message
> news:
>>I guess my response to Arne was not politically correct enough for you.
>>
> Uh, "political correctness" is the milieu of elitist Leftwing Liberals and
> is hardly something thinking people would find useful. You very clumsily
> attempted to dodge the fact that the last words you wretched up (and
> understandably snipped) were totally devoid of any commentary about the
> issue under discussion, but, were rather personal slurs and name-calling
> ad hominem. You spout off in the manner of a second rate scholar in a
> second rate academy where the standard is emulating parrots, which shortly
> produces ennui. KM
Oh, my...
> OBQ:
> "Only mediocrity can be trusted to be always at its best."
> ~ Sir Max Beerbohm
> --
> (-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
> visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
> to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
> about Hawaii, Israel and more:
>
>
>
"alohacyberian" <> wrote in message
news:XqmXe.272096$
> <> wrote in message
> news:
>>I guess my response to Arne was not politically correct enough for you.
>>
> Uh, "political correctness" is the milieu of elitist Leftwing Liberals and
> is hardly something thinking people would find useful. You very clumsily
> attempted to dodge the fact that the last words you wretched up (and
> understandably snipped) were totally devoid of any commentary about the
> issue under discussion, but, were rather personal slurs and name-calling
> ad hominem. You spout off in the manner of a second rate scholar in a
> second rate academy where the standard is emulating parrots, which shortly
> produces ennui. KM
> OBQ:
> "Only mediocrity can be trusted to be always at its best."
> ~ Sir Max Beerbohm
> --
> (-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
> visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
> to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
> about Hawaii, Israel and more:
>
>
"GREYFACE
In the year 1166 B.C., a malcontented hunchbrain by the name of
Greyface, got it into his head that the universe was as humorless as
he, and he began to teach that play was sinful because it contradicted
the ways of Serious Order. "Look at all the order about you," he
said. And from that, he deluded honest men to believe that reality
was a strait jacket affair and not the happy romance as men had known
it.
It is not presently understood why men were so gullible at that
particular time, for absolutely no one thought to observe all the
_disorder_ around them and conclude just the opposite. But anyway,
Greyface and his followers took the game of playing at life more
seriously than they took life itself and were known even to destroy
other living beings whose ways of life differed from their own.
The unfortunate result of this is that mankind has since been
suffering from a psychological and spiritual imbalance. Imbalance
causes frustration, and frustration causes fear. And fear makes a bad
trip. Man has been on a bad trip for a long time now.
It is called THE CURSE OF GREYFACE.
Bullshit makes
the flowers grow
& that's beautiful." from P R I N C I P I A - D I S C O R D I A, HOW I FOUND
GODDESS AND WHAT I DID TO HER WHEN I FOUND HER, THE MAGNUM OPIATE OF
MALACLYPSE THE YOUNGER,Wherein Is Explained Absolutely Everything Worth
Knowing About Absolutely Anything
"alohacyberian" <> wrote in message
news:XqmXe.272096$
> <> wrote in message
> news:
>>I guess my response to Arne was not politically correct enough for you.
>>
> Uh, "political correctness" is the milieu of elitist Leftwing Liberals and
> is hardly something thinking people would find useful. You very clumsily
> attempted to dodge the fact that the last words you wretched up (and
> understandably snipped) were totally devoid of any commentary about the
> issue under discussion, but, were rather personal slurs and name-calling
> ad hominem. You spout off in the manner of a second rate scholar in a
> second rate academy where the standard is emulating parrots, which shortly
> produces ennui. KM
> OBQ:
> "Only mediocrity can be trusted to be always at its best."
> ~ Sir Max Beerbohm
The Children of the Night--Edward Arlington Robinson
For those that never know the light,
The darkness is a sullen thing;
And they, the Children of the Night,
Seem lost in Fortune's winnowing.
But some are strong and some are weak, --
And there's the story. House and home
Are shut from countless hearts that seek
World-refuge that will never come.
And if there be no other life,
And if there be no other chance
To weigh their sorrow and their strife
Than in the scales of circumstance,
'T were better, ere the sun go down
Upon the first day we embark,
In life's imbittered sea to drown,
Than sail forever in the dark.
But if there be a soul on earth
So blinded with its own misuse
Of man's revealed, incessant worth,
Or worn with anguish, that it views
No light but for a mortal eye,
No rest but of a mortal sleep,
No God but in a prophet's lie,
No faith for "honest doubt" to keep;
If there be nothing, good or bad,
But chaos for a soul to trust, --
God counts it for a soul gone mad,
And if God be God, He is just.
And if God be God, He is Love;
And though the Dawn be still so dim,
It shows us we have played enough
With creeds that make a fiend of Him.
There is one creed, and only one,
That glorifies God's excellence;
So cherish, that His will be done,
The common creed of common sense.
It is the crimson, not the gray,
That charms the twilight of all time;
It is the promise of the day
That makes the starry sky sublime;
It is the faith within the fear
That holds us to the life we curse; --
So let us in ourselves revere
The Self which is the Universe!
Let us, the Children of the Night,
Put off the cloak that hides the scar!
Let us be Children of the Light,
And tell the ages what we are!
alohacyberian wrote:
> "David Wilkinson" <> wrote in message
> news:dggd7a$l6n$
>
>>
>>What gave America the right to invade a foreign country that posed no
>>threat to itself and had never attacked America or harmed it in any way?
>>
>
> Uh, Iraq was in violation of 17 enforceable United Nations resolutions which
> allowed for armed invasion and Iraq was non-compliant with the Safwan Accords
> which were signed by Saddam Hussein himself and which allowed for military
> invasion in the event of their non-compliance. KM
>
But Saddam had no WMDs of any type and had almost completely disarmed
except for a few old Russian tanks and some small arms by the time of
the US/UK invasion. This was confirmed by the UN inspectors who had
spent months checking and had found no arms at all. And, of course, the
US knew this anyway from constant over-flying of Iraq with spy planes
and from satellite observations.
As a result the UN Security Council had refused to sanction an invasion
and several members, including France and China had made it clear they
would veto any such resolution. There was no legal justification for the
invasion.
Like Bush at the time you just don't want to know this as it makes the
US into an aggressor, invading for its own foreign policy reasons, which
had nothing to do with UN resolutions.
All the US could do was denigrate the UN because it opposed the war. It
is still gunning for the UN because it will not do what it is told by
the US. How dare 96% of the world disobey the other 4%! The latest US
move is to put in John Bolton to try to bully the UN into submission but
like all Bush's actions that is a failure too.
>>If America is pretending to be a self-appointed world policeman why is it
>>so selective about which country it attacks? Why Iraq and not China,
>>Zimbabwe, North Korea, Ethiopia, or a dozen or so other African
>>dictatorships, or Saudi Arabia or half a dozen other absolute monarchys all
>>with dismal human rights records?
>>
>
Those with any assets worth having are just too big to attack. Even
North Korea has a million troops under arms and would be anything but a
pushover and might well have nuclear arms they are not telling about.
Others like Zimbabwe may be murdering and starving and torturing its
people, destroying their dwellings and fiddling the elections but they
have no oil or other assets worth pinching so there is no point in
invading them.
> Simply, because none of those countries are in violation of enforceable
> United Nations resolutions and are not noncompliant with things like the
> Safwan Accords. Pretty simple, huh? KM
> OBQ:
> "People seem not to see that their opinion of the world is also a confession
> of character."
> ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
John Bonanno wrote:
> > "Only mediocrity can be trusted to be always at its best."
> > ~ Sir Max Beerbohm
>
> The Children of the Night--Edward Arlington Robinson
> For those that never know the light,
> The darkness is a sullen thing;
> And they, the Children of the Night,
> Seem lost in Fortune's winnowing.
>
> But some are strong and some are weak, --
> And there's the story. House and home
> Are shut from countless hearts that seek
> World-refuge that will never come.
>
> And if there be no other life,
> And if there be no other chance
> To weigh their sorrow and their strife
> Than in the scales of circumstance,
>
> 'T were better, ere the sun go down
> Upon the first day we embark,
> In life's imbittered sea to drown,
> Than sail forever in the dark.
>
> But if there be a soul on earth
> So blinded with its own misuse
> Of man's revealed, incessant worth,
> Or worn with anguish, that it views
>
> No light but for a mortal eye,
> No rest but of a mortal sleep,
> No God but in a prophet's lie,
> No faith for "honest doubt" to keep;
>
> If there be nothing, good or bad,
> But chaos for a soul to trust, --
> God counts it for a soul gone mad,
> And if God be God, He is just.
>
> And if God be God, He is Love;
> And though the Dawn be still so dim,
> It shows us we have played enough
> With creeds that make a fiend of Him.
>
> There is one creed, and only one,
> That glorifies God's excellence;
> So cherish, that His will be done,
> The common creed of common sense.
>
> It is the crimson, not the gray,
> That charms the twilight of all time;
> It is the promise of the day
> That makes the starry sky sublime;
>
> It is the faith within the fear
> That holds us to the life we curse; --
> So let us in ourselves revere
> The Self which is the Universe!
>
> Let us, the Children of the Night,
> Put off the cloak that hides the scar!
> Let us be Children of the Light,
> And tell the ages what we are!
Absolutely beautiful John. I am sure that many lurkers on this NG shall
have appreciated being able to read some positive cultural contribution
to viewing the problems of the world, elevating greatly the pityful
level of aggressive and rude postings a few people enjoy to impose on
others.
Educated unbiaised people of the world unite against the tyranny of
fanatics and liberate this NG from mediocrity!