BBC BLOGS - Mark Mardell's America
IN ASSOCIATION WITH
« Previous | Main | Next »

All over bar (a lot of) shouting?

Mark Mardell | 12:57 UK time, Thursday, 24 December 2009

It was the first time for more than 100 years that the US Senate had voted on Christmas Eve. This is not the end, but it is the furthest such a bill on healthcare reform has ever got in the US. As President Obama has pointed out, it was Teddy Roosevelt and his Bull Moose Party which first campaigned on the issue in 1912.

The Republicans will continue to fight it. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said that when senators got home for the first time since Thanksgiving, they would "get an earful" because of the "widespread opposition to this monstrosity."

The tension was punctured a little when the man who has been driving this whole process, Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid, voted the wrong way. Laughter rippled through the chamber and he put his head in his hands before changing his vote. He has said that when it is over he is going home to Nevada to "watch my rabbits eat my cactus". The strain is beginning to show.

But it is not over yet. Now the Democratic members of the House of Representatives will have their say. This bill has to be merged with the one that they passed in early November.

The House bill includes the public option and a different way of paying for the changes. Some are making it clear that they think the Senate should be made to go back to the drawing board.

My feeling is that President Obama will make sure that doesn't happen. He wants a victory, and he wants this over.

I suspect that the compromises and deals that went into the making of the Senate bill are like some complex child's toy, where if you remove one element the whole thing collapses. So there will be some minor tinkering with the bill but the essential elements won't change.

This is merely a hunch. If left-wing Democrats really want to play hard ball, if they really feel that the bill is so awful that it is not worth having, then they could still bring the whole thing crashing to the ground. I suspect it is all over bar the shouting, but there will be an awful lot of shouting before we're done.


Comments

or register to comment.

  • 1. At 1:12pm on 24 Dec 2009, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    This is not the end.
    It is not even the beginning of the end.
    It is, though, perhaps, the end of the beginning.


    Someday America will have a proper, single payer public system.

    Complain about this comment

  • 2. At 1:44pm on 24 Dec 2009, expatinct wrote:

    Perhaps one day soon my friend's mother can get medical treatment. She suffered a stroke recently, but cannot get insurance due to a pre-existing condition. She fell down as the stroke happened and broke some fingers which she is ignoring as she cannot afford the hospital bill for her overnight stay: broken fingers are a minor issue for her.

    Complain about this comment

  • 3. At 1:45pm on 24 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    The final debate in the House of Representatives, where most of its members are not millionaires like their counterparts in the Senate, is bound to be lively, to put it mildly. Hopefully, strong leadership and guidance from President Obama will persuade the left wing of the Democratic party to consider the wisdom of incremental progress over such a dramatic change in socio-political direction, otherwise this bill is doomed and the current Democratic majority will come to an end in November 2010 or 2012 at the latest. The latter is the real reason for the GOP opposition to the Senate bill, which conceded just about everything the GOP demanded...except for Magic's tort reform...


    Complain about this comment

  • 4. At 2:06pm on 24 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain

  • 5. At 2:21pm on 24 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 4, Magic

    Well, we are in full agreement on this one!

    Complain about this comment

  • 6. At 2:22pm on 24 Dec 2009, washuotaku wrote:

    Mark, I totally agree with you, the left-wing could bring the whole thing down... they have been bickering about it for a while now how the Senate version was crafted. My feeling is that since they made it this far, it will probably resemble more like the Senate version than the House version; if it morphs towards the House version, they will loose support of key senators. So the question is, will the left-wing Dems bit there tounge and go along with it? If they follow-through in killing there own health care bill, the Republican party will gain heavaly in the coming mid-term election.

    Complain about this comment

  • 7. At 2:47pm on 24 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #3 and 5

    On 3 Dominick someone has a problem with the post celebrsting a father being reunited with his son.

    On 5 They also rejected cross state health insurance purchases

    Complain about this comment

  • 8. At 2:49pm on 24 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    One thing that could kill this bill or at least modify drasticly is if Mass Voters ignore party affiliation and vote Scott Brown in.

    Seperate from healthcare he is a lot better choice than Matha Cokley

    Complain about this comment

  • 9. At 2:50pm on 24 Dec 2009, frayedcat wrote:

    left and right wings? Is that really what it is about? Does "right" equal special interest lobbies dedicated to ensuring profits for the insurance and banking industries? You know without both wings you'll just fly in circles.

    Complain about this comment

  • 10. At 2:54pm on 24 Dec 2009, amerika_first wrote:

    If the Dems were smart (which I doubt very much) they would swallow the bitter pill and pass it as is. I would agree most of the House members are not millionaries as their counter parts in Senate are. I am truly hoping that they will scuttle their own ship from within. The GOP has not been blameless thru this whole process. They are as petty and pork filled as the Dems are. The elections in 2010 could bring change, but not the change that they expect. Hear our voices now or you will hear our voices in the election. When is a bribe not a bribe? When it is done in Congress!!!!

    We are disgusted with the pork filled bills, that comes out of both houses. Stop spending our money as if it was nothing during a recession or face the consequences in the fall of 2010. The current congress is a poster child for term limitations.

    Complain about this comment

  • 11. At 3:29pm on 24 Dec 2009, Whetherperson wrote:

    Mark, sorry you're 'over there' rather than getting transparency for 'us' in Brussels. But USians should know that this is a splendid opportunity. I was once an 'expert' in Brussels, Paris (OECD) and everywhere around. The USians are no friends of mine - but, but, they could not do better than to follow what is being suggested. Good luck sincerely to the new thinking there, and Happy New Year.

    Complain about this comment

  • 12. At 4:01pm on 24 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #8. MagicKirin: "Seperate from healthcare (Scott Brown) is a lot better choice than Matha Cokley"

    I assume you mean Martha Coakley. If Santa brings you anything other than a lump of coal, let's hope that it's a spell check and a Google link which will show you the correct spelling for such people.

    For British readers, the lump of coal is an American "gift" for bad boys and girls. There's a lot to go around this year!

    Complain about this comment

  • 13. At 4:30pm on 24 Dec 2009, Rollo the ApeBoy wrote:

    There will be little or no change. The modern American business model, and believe me, "Medicine" is business and nothing but, is based on profit obtained by "jobbbing" the system. Insurance corporations, which currently control medicine as practiced in the US, are experts at this, as is "Big Pharma", the other half of medicine. Don't get your hopes up.

    Complain about this comment

  • 14. At 4:47pm on 24 Dec 2009, Scott0962 wrote:

    The left wing Democrats will stamp their feet and pout but in the end they won't prevent passage of the reconciled bill. They know this is the closest they've ever been to achieving their goal and that once passed they have a foot in the door and can keep coming back to eventually get what they want one piece at a time.

    Equally important, they don't want to let the Republicans off the hook by becoming the grinch that stole health care when it was within their grasp.

    Complain about this comment

  • 15. At 5:04pm on 24 Dec 2009, Scott0962 wrote:

    At 4:01pm on 24 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:
    "For British readers, the lump of coal is an American "gift" for bad boys and girls. There's a lot to go around this year!"

    In the interest of the environment Santa was going to switch to giving bad boys and girls a pair of wool socks until someone pointed out that wool comes from sheep and they emit methane which is worse than CO2 for the environment. Santa's still giving out lumps of coal but he's also buying carbon credits and donating to research into clean coal technology.

    Complain about this comment

  • 16. At 5:15pm on 24 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    12 this reader likes a few lumps of coal at christmas. I just got 3 tonnes of coke(not a brand or a drug) (which is derived from coal"

    Complain about this comment

  • 17. At 5:16pm on 24 Dec 2009, Martin Ellis wrote:

    Evidently, this bill isn't everything many liberals had hoped for, and many bribes had to be handed out just to get it this far. On the other hand, it is very important for Obama to have a victory to point to now so that he can move on to bigger and better things. Just as for Copenhagen - better something than nothing, however unsatisfactory to idealists. What is really on trial here is the whole cumbersome system of government in the USA. What was intended to serve as checks and balances on political power is now mainly providing checks and balances in the financial sense. Somehow, the USA has to find a safe way to reform its decision-making process and make it a bit more democratic!

    Complain about this comment

  • 18. At 5:38pm on 24 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #1.Interestedforeigner:

    This is not the end.
    It is not even the beginning of the end.
    It is, though, perhaps, the end of the beginning.


    You might have given Winston Churchill credit for for this statement, the same Churchill who voted against the NHS Act in 1946.

    "Someday America will have a proper, single payer public system."

    At about the same time as Britain imposes more charges on NHS patients. No longer is all care free at the point of need, regardless of means, as was originally intended.

    #16. cheesefuller: "this reader likes a few lumps of coal at christmas. I just got 3 tonnes of coke(not a brand or a drug) (which is derived from coal.)

    A by-product of coal-gas production, seen everywhere in the UK before natural gas was discovered in the North Sea. How can anyone who lived in Britain forty years ago and more forget the gas works in some part of town or the ubiquitous "gasometers" which dotted the country? Gas poisoning was a favourite of murderers both real and fictional. Ah, the good old days!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 19. At 5:39pm on 24 Dec 2009, Stephanie_Diane wrote:

    This whole thing is ridiculous. An article in Wall Street Journal recently pointed out that this is the first time Congress has ever tried to ram something down our throats with such strong opposition. Their arrogance is astounding. 67% of Americans don't want this bill. They tell us that we the American people can't possibly know what we want so they are going to give us what they think we need. President Obama promised that there would be no more bribes and earmarks on bills, but Harry Reid says that if the senators don't have something important to them in this bill, they are bad senators. The bribery and corruption associated with this is truly disgusting. I can't wait to see what happens in the midterm elections this year.

    Complain about this comment

  • 20. At 6:00pm on 24 Dec 2009, Rich Infield wrote:

    What I say to any Brits out there is this; the existing healthcare system in the USA is immoral and bankrupt. As somebody brought up under the NHS who has lived under the US system for 20 years, I dream every day of the NHS. Whilst I hold my nose at the lack of a public option, the Democrats are making an honest attempt to make healthcare a right as opposed to a privilege. The rest of the civilized world reached this conclusion years ago but America has never really known it as an option.

    The irony is that the Republicans' partisanship - together with Obama's coaxing - has ultimately solidified the Democratic caucus (Joe Leiberman notwithstanding). At this point, the Democrats only need to recall some of the crassness of the opposition to get something acceptable out of conference.

    Complain about this comment

  • 21. At 6:10pm on 24 Dec 2009, oldnat wrote:

    18. David Cunard
    "At about the same time as Britain imposes more charges on NHS patients"

    Pedant alert!

    Britain doesn't have an NHS to impose charges on. England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland (which is outwith Britain) each have their own (and different) NHS systems.

    End of alert.

    More to the point, the care that was "originally intended" has changed enormously. I wouldn't be too sure that Tom Johnstone (who created the original model for the NHS in the Clyde Valley) would have supported a system which allowed the pharmaceutical companies to constantly increase their profits by designing drugs which primarily increase their profits, rather than necessarily meeting need.

    Complain about this comment

  • 22. At 6:56pm on 24 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    "20. At 6:00pm on 24 Dec 2009, Rich Infield wrote:
    What I say to any Brits out there is this; the existing healthcare system in the USA is immoral and bankrupt. As somebody brought up under the NHS who has lived under the US system for 20 years, I dream every day of the NHS. Whilst I hold my nose at the lack of a public option, the Democrats are making an honest attempt to make healthcare a right as opposed to a privilege. The rest of the civilized world reached this conclusion years ago but America has never really known it as an option. "

    Only been here 10 years but feel the same.
    happy Christmas

    Complain about this comment

  • 23. At 7:00pm on 24 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    21. oldnat: "Pedant alert! &c.

    The National Health Service Act of 1946 covered England and Wales, the Scottish NHS was created in the following year; there were no charges for anything when it came into force in July 1948. I don't know why you consider that the original model for the NHS was created in the Clyde Valley, it was the result of the Beveridge Report.

    Today, NICE decides what drugs are beneficial and provide most reward for the money charged. They negotiate with drug manufacturers to provide medication for the NHS services.

    "the care that was "originally intended" has changed enormously."

    Thanks to Mrs Thatcher. Blair promised to repeal some of her administration's more egregious changes, but never did so. He was guilty, to quote Winston Churchill, of 'terminological inexactitudes' with his 1997 campaign promises, a trait he has continued to display, notably in his reasoning for joining the invasion of Iraq.

    Complain about this comment

  • 24. At 7:35pm on 24 Dec 2009, shiveringofforgottenenemies wrote:

    It is time for the pork barrel to come out once again. The Democratic Senators secured pork for their states, but now it is time for the Democratic Representatives to secure pork for their individual districts, and some of those districts positively THRIVE on pork!

    The house, because of the number of representatives is the land of the fence-sitters. There will be a great deal of posturing but in the end a magic "reconciliation" will emerge like a well-practiced rabbit out of the magicians hat! Obama will smile and bow and tell us that what we have witnessed is not a cheap bit of leger de main but an historic moment! The dirty deed will be done!

    Complain about this comment

  • 25. At 7:47pm on 24 Dec 2009, oldnat wrote:

    23. David Cunard
    "it was the result of the Beveridge Report"

    The Beveridge Report outlined the concept of free medical care, but did not outline the details of the system. Nye Bevan's implementation for England & Wales was based on the model developed in the Clyde Valley by the then Secretary of State for Scotland, Tom Johnstone. During the war, hospitals had been nationalised, but primary care remained private (I was born under that system!). Half of Scotland was already covered by a state-funded health system serving the whole community and directly run from Edinburgh - the Highlands and Islands Medical Service had been set up in 1912. Johnstone persuaded GPs in the Clyde Valley to accept contracts to provide primary care on a similar but extended model.

    NICE only applies to England (maybe Wales & NI take their advice as well - I don't know). In Scotland drug approval is handled by the Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC).

    Practitioners both north and south of the border do, however, take cognisance of the reports from each system.

    Of course, the original system enshrined the current medical arrangements as being free. We don't disagree on that. When charges were first introduced into all the NHS systems in the UK by Labour in the 1960s, that was the first recognition that any Health system was a potential bottomless pit for funding due to the new medical procedures and drugs being introduced. My point was simply that Johnstone (or Bevan) would not have written an open cheque for whatever drugs the pharmaceutical companies cared to develop.

    Complain about this comment

  • 26. At 7:54pm on 24 Dec 2009, McJakome wrote:

    The fault that I find with even the original Obama plan is NOT that it was socialist, but that it wasn't socialist enough! But what is socialist?

    We have socialist highways, especially the Interstates, which nobody wants to dispense with. When a midwestern state tried to outsource [privatize] a toll road to a european company there was massive popular resistance.

    We have a socialist post office [i.e. inefficient, overpriced, with far too many drones] that most would want reformed not gotten rid of.

    We have socialist police and armed forces [although GWB tried to privatize it, *Blackwater anyone?* and few Americans think that privatization was a good idea].

    We have socialist medicine for the poor, the military and the elderly. Nobody wants that privatized.

    The problem is that Socialism and Communism are bogeymen to Americans who fear what they do not know. AND the vested interests [insurance and pharma industries] take full advantage of that fear and their freedom to broadcast lies, distortions and scary propaganda to confuse the American public.

    So yes, a foot in the door even if inadequate is better than no reform at all. After all, no one wants FDR's programs cancelled now that they know them. President Obama MUST implement a massive public information campaign to explain what socialist does and does not mean, and to explain CLEARLY and HONESTLY to the American public what is needed, what is intended, and what the special interests have blocked.

    Complain about this comment

  • 27. At 7:55pm on 24 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    DC and old nat.
    thank god they do not just do what the drug companies say.
    here there are drugs for conditions that are not really a condition.
    dry eyes use this drug don't lower the AC and the heating, thereby saving the planet a little take a drug costing it more.

    Complain about this comment

  • 28. At 8:09pm on 24 Dec 2009, funniinnit wrote:

    Obamah = big pharma, big pharma = national socialists (operation paperclip), national socialists have always been funded by international bankers, the bankers who backed and fuelled all wars and revolutions to date have an agenda. To them, you and me are parasitic by nature, the goyim, human (slave of the sun god HU, see patrick jordan), sold at birth by "registration" (look that word up in Blacks). Whilst big P are good at saving lives you have to evaluate their agenda,(see auschwitz) their agenda is not to heal, it is to kill you profitably. If it were not so we would not have vaccines that contain mercury, squalene, aluminium etc., in fact we would have no vaccines at all, their efficacy is zero.
    SO a health care programme is nothing other than a more efficient eugenics and euthanasia programme. Ask Bill Gates, he should know, certainly many hundreds of thousands of Africans know. And now its the Americans turn to have help denied if they aren't up to scratch on all their killer shots...
    Q: Is it street drugs or prescription drugs that kill most americans each year?

    Complain about this comment

  • 29. At 8:28pm on 24 Dec 2009, Craig Comerfrod wrote:

    I find the bill deeply pathetic. Somehow, the Democrats have been subsumed by the lobbying of profiteering medical interests and have forgotten how important it is that an economy has healthy people.
    The debate is not over; just starting.
    It's about time that the elected representatives of the US stopped thinking about the rosy color of their personal finances and started thinking about the people who elected them to govern, and not the pharmaceutical industry, nor the private healthcare industry.

    People die because they can't afford care. Do you guys get it? How many people have to die?

    Complain about this comment

  • 30. At 8:46pm on 24 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    Craig
    I understand your frustration. I'm with you to a large extent. but get real. Many democrats were for reform. A few Dem and ALL the republicans seem to be against it.

    We had a discussion on paying less to them in power.
    Apparently Plato is against it so we should forget that.

    As to the last question.
    "How many"
    I suspect it is quite a few. Count those that object without reason. That's about it.
    Still it will happen in time, there may still be world left when it happens.



    Funnit
    LOL Prescription.
    easy.
    but wait you seem a little paranoid about the drugs out there. I can't be reading it right. it looks as if you think immunisation doesn't work?
    So my tetanus shot was a waste of time?
    I should forgo it and see just how locked my Jaw will become a I shift around the scrap heap.

    Complain about this comment

  • 31. At 8:49pm on 24 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #29
    People die because they can't afford care. Do you guys get it? How many people have to die?

    __________________-

    You are assuming that the goverment plan especially this one will do more good than harm. According to polls the American people do not agree.

    Complain about this comment

  • 32. At 9:00pm on 24 Dec 2009, fat_ganesh wrote:

    Like so many Americans, the knee-jerk response is spend now and worry about paying later. Most of the rest of the world knows the USA is bankrupt already, yet our congress is raising the debt ceiling to over $12 trillion. That is over $36,000 for every many woman and child in the USA.

    Many say let the rich pay for it, but there aren't enough rich to bear this burden.

    What is wrong with this picture when high income finance people are moving to a communist country (China) because the taxes are lower?

    Everyone in the USA would like to have free medical care, free housing, govt. subsidized purchases of new cars, govt. giving people downpayments for houses, etc etc. but the money isn't there folks.

    The typical rant then starts attacking the last president and that he put us in the spot, and so on. It really doesn't matter. It is the spot we are in, and when you are in a hole you should stop digging.

    Complain about this comment

  • 33. At 9:01pm on 24 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 19, Stephanie

    "Their arrogance is astounding. 67% of Americans don't want this bill."

    Unfortunately, you are right and there is no doubt in my mind that the Democrats will pay dearly for their "arrogance" in November 2010 and in 2012.

    The insurance and pharmaceutical industries, and their "conservative" supporters, have done such a wonderful job at distoring this legislation - regardless what its final version may be and how many concessions are made to please the right wing - that no matter how beneficial healthcare reform is to our society it will be viewed as undemocratic, costly, and ineffective by most voters.

    President Obama deserves much of the blame for his ambivalence on this issue and his failure to articulate the benefits of healthcare reform to an audience convinced that we have the best system in the world and that any change, no matter how small, is a step backwards.

    I am amazed by the cynicism of those who voice concern over the cost of what is being proposed - approximately $80B a year - but had no problem voting and supporting legislation that authorized ONE TRILLION DOLLARS for our war in Iraq.

    Why is it that a bill that reduces medical cost for middle class families, provides access to most Americans, reduces the cost of drugs for seniors on MEDICARE, eliminates the horrendous pre-existing condition clause and limits the amount of co-pays and out-of-pocket expenses, adds choice and promotes competition is considered an unacceptable move towards socialism (whatever that means), while we don't hesitate to go bankrupt spending borrowed money on crusades?

    Is it that our poor and the lower middle class do not deserve better, or is the need to provide a bonanza to corporate America so important that waging war takes priority over the audacious goal of improving the standard of living of all our citizens?

    Complain about this comment

  • 34. At 9:12pm on 24 Dec 2009, fat_ganesh wrote:

    SaintDom

    Respectfully, I agree and simultaneously disagree. I agree the case for these bills has been inadequately communicated.

    However, that is because:

    1) the bill is so busy worrying about WHO pays for healthcare, it does nothing to bring down costs. Shifting the bill to someone else (the government) is not going to help out the average person in the USA. If there were solid proposals in the bill to lower the cost of healthcare, you would find more support.

    2) The bill has been largely kept secret, because of its size and because of all the pork within it.


    If the bill allowed cross state border insurance competition, put controls on drug prices, or otherwise found ways to cut costs, you would find much more support. If that stuff is in there, they should tell us about it.


    Complain about this comment

  • 35. At 9:21pm on 24 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    David Cunard, Saint Dominick and Philly Mom and any other liberal

    I am curious about what you think of whats been going on in the Senate. I am very discouraged by American politics and the Americans who are ignorant. It is demoralizing to see the corruption of the insurance companies and their ability with their lobbyists to control health services for Americans. And the kind of deals that have been made with someone like Ben Nelson are disgusting.

    It looks like a government run on bribery at all levels.

    Paul Krugman and some others are saying this is the best deal we can get now and it can be made better in the future. ( Paul Krugman also backed Hillary Clinton like you did David.)

    The other western nations have had universal health care for decades now..and the statistics show how that access to health care has affected their national health with better outcomes...
    Anyway the whole system looks corrupt to me now...I am just disgusted...If the US is a world leader what must the other western nations be like? because imo the US has a very corrupt political and economic system.

    Complain about this comment

  • 36. At 9:31pm on 24 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 34, fat_ganesh

    "...the bill is so busy worrying about WHO pays for healthcare, it does nothing to bring down costs."

    In my opinion, cost should have been the main topic of debate as most of the rest involves medical care improvements that only insurance and pharmaceutical executives and shareholders would object to.

    Cost happens to be the area where, I believe, President Obama dropped the ball. We needed more clarity and substance to better understand how this bill is going to be funded, instead, we were offered ambiguities that leave more questions than answers.

    I think I speak for most people when I say that most Americans understand there is no such a thing as a free ride, and paying for the changes that are being proposed is not an exception to that rule. However, suggesting that a system that according to the CBO will cost approximately $80B a year will somehow pose an undue burden on our society and our economy while we currently spend $3.6 trillion a year on healthcare, and have spent one trillion in Iraq is more than just disingenous.

    The big problem is not that universal healthcare would have been too costly, but the fact that it would have been so cost effective that it would have put private insurer out of business, and in a capitalist society like ours that is a big no/no.

    Complain about this comment

  • 37. At 9:32pm on 24 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #29 At 8:28pm on 24 Dec 2009, Craig Comerfrod

    They clearly do not care about the lives of Americans. These people do not care about American lives.

    Think of this ..who would dare to publicly ask God to hurt someone that is opposed politically..unless that person did not believe in God to begin with? These people say they believe in God while they ignore the most basic commandments. They lie repeatedly knowing that they lie...They do not believe in a God at all. They believe in power and money.

    For example:

    "Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) went to the Senate floor to propose a prayer. "What the American people ought to pray is that somebody can't make the vote tonight," he said. "That's what they ought to pray."

    It was difficult to escape the conclusion that Coburn was referring to the 92-year-old, wheelchair-bound Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.V.) who has been in and out of hospitals and lay at home ailing. "

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/21/robert-byrds-death-seemin_n_399038.html

    Complain about this comment

  • 38. At 9:37pm on 24 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #33 Saint Dominick

    They want the money to be used for war not for the health of poor Americans.
    People have trouble seeing what is obvious. Why do you think they care ? Why would they care?

    Complain about this comment

  • 39. At 9:44pm on 24 Dec 2009, amerika_first wrote:

    Liberl left wing wroteWhilst I hold my nose at the lack of a public option, the Democrats are making an honest attempt to make healthcare a right as opposed to a privilege.

    Today I reread the Bill of Rights and I don't recall health care as being a right. We are fortunate that Thomas Jefferson and other Masons wrote the Bill of Rights as self evident truths and not granted by a government. What the goverment gives it can also tax and take away. Thomas Jefferson once wrote when Citizens of the Republic fear the government then you have tyranny and when the government fears the citizens then you have freedom. I am looking forward to the formation of a Jeffersonian political party known as the Party of the Citizens of the Republic (not to be confused with Republicocrats)or party of the entitlements or the party of the best darn telepromter readers.

    Complain about this comment

  • 40. At 9:53pm on 24 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #39 amerika first

    "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
    Declaration of Independence primarily written by Jefferson

    Jefferson was a Deist, Episcopalian and Unitarian.

    The right to Life is an unalienable Right..and to my mind that means citizens should be receiving health care in a wealthy society that can afford to give health services to all American citizens.

    Complain about this comment

  • 41. At 9:57pm on 24 Dec 2009, fat_ganesh wrote:

    Saint Dom:

    Respectfully, sir, I believe the costs will be much higher. Most estimates put the cost at $1.2 trillion over 10 years. Government estimates of cost are always lower than the end result. In this case, I believe it amounts to a big lie they are telling us to try to underplay what they are doing.

    $80 billion is what I believe the initial tax increase in the bill is. The rest is to be funded by fictional savings from medicare and other yet to be specified cuts.

    By the way, why is there no tort reform in the bill?

    No, there is no magic accounting that suddenly what was costing over $3 trillion dollars will now cost $80 billion.

    Complain about this comment

  • 42. At 9:59pm on 24 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #25.oldnat: "During the war, hospitals had been nationalised"

    I believe you are referring to the Emergency Medical Service which co-ordinated hospitals and payments thereto. But they weren't actually nationalised as we know the term today - or in 1948. I can find no reference to Mr Johnston having any interest in health care or that the government of the day based its implementation of the NHS Act on something which originated north of the border. Methinks Scottish national pride is at work!

    Some charges were introduced in the early fifties (a reason for Bevan's resignation) and continued under subsequent Conservative governments - and those of "New Labour". As the (American) saying goes, "there's no such thing as a free lunch."

    Complain about this comment

  • 43. At 10:08pm on 24 Dec 2009, funniinnit wrote:

    cheesefuller @30
    Re your tetanus shot,
    TETANUS

    Tetanus is very rare in developed countries.

    Caused by improper cleaning of wounds. If caught it is serious, but it is actually very, very difficult to contract.


    It is not possible to gain natural immunity to tetanus.


    Any raised antibody levels post vaccine, are attributable to the adjuvants in the vaccine itself. Even these antibodies wane and disappear within 5 – 10 years.

    (i.e. It is pointless to give vaccine for tetanus. If it was really necessary to give everyone immunity to tetanus, there would be boosters for adults, especially those who are more at risk such as those who work in close contact with the soil, like farmers. Also, I found out, that in WW2 22 British soldiers got tetanus. 11 had been vaccinated, and died. 11 had not been vaccinated, and lived!)

    If you research smallpox in Africa you will find that the disease is spread via the vaccine and in case you doubt this then please ask yourself why those aids sufferers NOT treated with anti retro virals live a full life whilst those given the drugs die.....

    Complain about this comment

  • 44. At 10:21pm on 24 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    stdom. and fat,
    all that worry about how and who before the "should we debate".

    get the house and senate on " should every american be able to visit the doctor." first. then get them to argue about how and who.

    39
    Yep we pay for war and will pay for prisons en mass, but no health care.
    We have people complaining like the merKan who " don't recall health care as being a right"

    but think welfare includes trips to space ,a war any where including two within the USA(terror drugs).
    but not healthcare.


    Or did you miss that" general welfare ".

    We went through this before . General welfare could only exclude health care if you didn't understand what general welfare means.

    "They believed that their citizens had the right and should be educated no matter their circumstance or status in life."from the bad wiki.

    This was at a time when doctors were considered along with snake oil sales men and the such. Not a great respect for the medical profession in those days really. All that body snatching and dissecting.
    Not a lot different from today really.
    Except these days we really despite what some suggest can put some faith in what even the normal medical professionals do. Most kill less than they save.
    most do a pretty good job.
    At the time Jefferson was into all being educated . To have an equal chance.

    He didn't mention Doctors , but if he lived today, and saw what good can come about from doctors (not necessarily in the USAJibe) being accessible to all, in a nation that pollutes and contaminates all. I think he would stretch his feelings on Education out to include health care.
    When Kids have cancers directly attributable to toxins in the places they live and workers die from cleaning up military waste we have a duty to protect them. The toxins Are produced by industry all the time. With a health care system the state has a stake in keeping the poisons out of the system.
    Sure there will be false alarms occasionally but better safe than sorry.

    An amazing amount of research is done with data compiled from national systems.

    General welfare includes health.

    Complain about this comment

  • 45. At 10:28pm on 24 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #36
    "Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) went to the Senate floor to propose a prayer. "What the American people ought to pray is that somebody can't make the vote tonight," he said. "That's what they ought to pray."

    It was difficult to escape the conclusion that Coburn was referring to the 92-year-old, wheelchair-bound Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.V.) who has been in and out of hospitals and lay at home ailing. "

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/21/robert-byrds-death-seemin_n_399038.html
    ______________________

    Wrong and what would you expect from the Huffington Post far less inflamatory than the rhetoric from Reid comparing Republican opponents to those who opposed the end of slavery.

    The Dems have played corrupt politics from stealing the MN Senate seat, rewriting the Mass sucession law so Patrick could appoint a Senator to replace Kennedy to the sleazy Chicago backroom deals that produced Obama.

    Complain about this comment

  • 46. At 10:30pm on 24 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    43

    Well done Crazy or just for laughs.

    Funny thing is that in the states you could probably be sued for those comments if on a TV show. People reading and believing them could end up dead.
    funny but really very irresponsible.

    Complain about this comment

  • 47. At 10:59pm on 24 Dec 2009, funniinnit wrote:

    @46 cheesefuller

    Funny thing is, if nobody talks the truth no-one hears the truth and yet the facts still stand, you have been in the grips of the banking whores all along and their second best favourite extermination tool after war is big P(the word pharmacist means poisoner). NOW, if you really want to find out what this health care scam is all about google beyosoco. Nothing is about what it seems to be about, check it out......
    The rabbit hole gets deeper, nothing is as it seems.....

    Complain about this comment

  • 48. At 11:08pm on 24 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #33
    Why is it that a bill that reduces medical cost for middle class families, provides access to most Americans, reduces the cost of drugs for seniors on MEDICARE, eliminates the horrendous pre-existing condition clause and limits the amount of co-pays and out-of-pocket expenses, adds choice and promotes competition is considered an unacceptable move towards socialism (whatever that means), while we don't hesitate to go bankrupt spending borrowed money on crusades?
    ________________-

    Because most of us in the middle class don't believe the bill will. We also think the quality of healthcare and the rules governing insurance coverage would be worse.

    Complain about this comment

  • 49. At 11:08pm on 24 Dec 2009, funniinnit wrote:

    @45 MagicKirin

    Why talk of dems and reps when you, like all other "democracies" ("the voters decide nothing,those who count the votes decide everything" ..Stalin) have had a single party system since you took on a national debt to the bankers. The romans were the same, the bankers tell the puppets in the senate, the parliament, the where ever - what to do, what taxes to impose ( your taxes don't go to your govt (greek..mind control) they go straight to the bankers. One power base is all you have ever had symbolised by an eagle, one Brain Two wings. No health care programme exists, it is a programme of euthanasia designed by eugenicists. Beyosoco..

    Complain about this comment

  • 50. At 11:15pm on 24 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #45 Magic

    One of the groups most hurt by the lack of health care are the blacks and the greatest opposition to universal health care is coming from states that once had slavery.

    The Civil War is still having an effect upon America and you are siding with the South.

    Reid is right.


    There is absolutely no reason why the US with all its wealth could not cover the basic health needs of every American citizen...Other western nations have done it using a number of different systems..but America is unable to offer basic health care to every American and some of the people who get ill lose everything they have in bankruptcy...even after paying money to insurance companies.

    This is outrageous and there is no excuse for this.

    Complain about this comment

  • 51. At 11:26pm on 24 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    "Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all the Republicans can come up with is, 'slow down, stop everything, let's start over.' If you think you've heard these same excuses before, you're right."


    "When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said 'slow down, it's too early, things aren't bad enough' "When women spoke up for the right to speak up, they wanted to vote, some insisted they simply, slow down, there will be a better day to do that, today isn't quite right."

    Harry Reid

    The Republicans are the party of No.

    Complain about this comment

  • 52. At 11:35pm on 24 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    This is to back up my claim that the black population is particularly hard hit by a lack of health care in the US

    http://news.ncmonline.com/news/view_article.html?article_id=3a76c3a9f555f41d5c2328b02a0a3eff

    Number of Blacks Without Health Insurance Soars
    Oct 14, 2003

    "One in five African Americans had no health insurance last year compared to one in ten whites, according to data from the Census Bureau obtained by Sun Reporter Publishing Co."

    "Civil rights leaders and Black community activists said the race gap illustrates a need to move on a national health care plan at a time when poverty rates are rising. "

    Complain about this comment

  • 53. At 11:42pm on 24 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    funnit.
    what truth.
    paranoid you are. seek the force.

    do you seriously think that smallpox was spread by the "big P' as opposed to eradicated.?
    interesting.
    those milk maids were no saviours after all.

    Complain about this comment

  • 54. At 11:47pm on 24 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    funninnit. not really.
    seems you are using the BBC to promote your web site on youtube. or are you not related.

    it's not the rabbit hole that gets deeper. just the droppings.
    ;)

    Happy Conspiracymas

    Complain about this comment

  • 55. At 11:55pm on 24 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    magic

    that quote about Coburn wishing for Byrd to be unable to make the votes in the Senate...goes back to Dana Millbank of the Washington Post

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/20/AR2009122002872.html?hpid=topnews

    "Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the number-two Democratic leader, went to the floor to complain about Coburn's unholy prayer, which followed an unsuccessful request from Democrats for an earlier vote because of Byrd's "significant health problems." Said Durbin: "When it reaches a point where we're praying, asking people to pray, that senators wouldn't be able to answer the roll call, I think it has crossed the line.""


    "Byrd was wheeled in, dabbing his eyes and nose with tissues, his complexion pale. When his name was called, Byrd shot his right index finger into the air as he shouted "aye," then pumped his left fist in defiance."

    Byrd is 92 years old...and the vote was at 1 am

    Complain about this comment

  • 56. At 11:59pm on 24 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 48, Magic

    "Because most of us in the middle class don't believe the bill will. We also think the quality of healthcare and the rules governing insurance coverage would be worse."

    The reason most Americans oppose this bill is because its sponsors - including the President - have allowed the opposition to get the upper hand, distort reality, and exploit our worse human weaknesses and biases to demonize a change that will be beneficial not only to our society, but to corporate America as well.

    The best measure to evaluate the quality of a healthcare system is to determine longevity and infant mortality, and the USA lags behind most developed nations on both counts.

    How can the "rules governing insurance coverage" be worse? Are you suggesting the pre-existing condition clause should be retained? That exhorbitant premiums, co-pays and out-of-pocket expenses are a good thing for patients? That portability will somehow harm citizens when they lose their jobs? That including millions of people who don't have insurance is bad for them and our society?

    Would you care to explain why long overdue regulatory policies are bad for the rules governing insurance coverage? I readily admit they are going to have a negative impact on the bottom line - profits - and investor's ROI, but definitely not for the consumer.

    Complain about this comment

  • 57. At 00:01am on 25 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    What would be truly poetic justice is if Scott Brown is elected to Kennedy's old seat.

    Then he could fillbuster this bill and the Dems would have to deal in a bipartsian manner.

    This would create a good bill unlike the one we have now.

    Complain about this comment

  • 58. At 00:02am on 25 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #52 an 55

    Which cioval rights leaders?

    As far as Byrd he is a misreable human being , a fomer member of the KKK, a racist and no tears should be shed when he passes.

    Complain about this comment

  • 59. At 00:04am on 25 Dec 2009, oldnat wrote:

    42. David Cunard
    "I can find no reference to Mr Johnston having any interest in health care or that the government of the day based its implementation of the NHS Act on something which originated north of the border."

    Have a look at the Cathcart Report, and memoirs of the influence that Jennie Lee had on Bevan's thinking.

    Methinks Anglo-centrism is at work!

    For a history of the Scottish NHS see

    http://www.60yearsofnhsscotland.co.uk/history/birth-of-nhs-scotland/scotland-in-1948.html

    Complain about this comment

  • 60. At 00:35am on 25 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 57, Magic

    "This would create a good bill unlike the one we have now."

    Considering that conservatives already managed to kill the public option and forced the Dems to introduce language that prohibits public funding for abortion what else do you want to see to make this a good bill?

    I remember you complained about patients being able to sue medical service providers in cases of malpractice. Is that what it would take to make this a good bill? What exactly do you think should be taken out or added to make it a good bill?

    You may want to leave yourself a little wiggle room, it won't be long before Republicans say they were actually in favor of some of the things that were taken out, particularly if the public sees benefit in what is being implemented next year and in subsequent years.

    Let's face it if a man that referred to religious leaders as agents of intolerance can turn around a couple of years later and select Sarah Palin as his running mate, what would stop him and the rest of the gang from becoming champions of the public option if the public decides it is in our best interest?

    Complain about this comment

  • 61. At 00:36am on 25 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    Mr. Mardell

    As an American I had no understanding what "All over bar the shouting" meant and looked it up here :
    http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/all+over+bar+the+shouting.html

    So I will trade you another idiom..

    It ain't over till the fat lady sings...

    I have been shocked by what has been going on...in my own nation...but if I go on about it I'll be moderated...

    Suffice it to say that some Americans are very upset ...and wonder about who is in control in America...

    Now I'll try to forget what my government is like and go wrap some presents...and try to feel Christmassy..(even though there are so many Grinches and Scrooges...) America sometimes feels like your nation at the time of Dickens...

    Complain about this comment

  • 62. At 00:44am on 25 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #59. oldnat: "Have a look at the Cathcart Report, and memoirs of the influence that Jennie Lee had on Bevan's thinking."

    Nothing there that I could find about Johnston, but I'm open to being educated about it. Jennie Lee was married to Bevan and of course she had an influence! I would guess that her Scottish experiences were passed along and taken note of, along with much other input, but I still haven't found anything to suggest that Mr Johnston was ever intimately involved in healthcare or that Bevan singlehandedly based his approach on what the Scots had done.

    Now that in Europe it is actually Christmas Day, and thus the First Day of Christmas, may I wish everyone a Merry Christmas. With regret, this time tomorrow it will be almost the end of it in America. By Monday, trees will be seen tossed out; not for Americans are there Twelve Days of the holiday. A few of we traditionalists keep going until Twelfth Night, but we're few and far apart.

    Complain about this comment

  • 63. At 01:19am on 25 Dec 2009, ann arbor wrote:

    Re: 45 Magic,

    Thank you Magic.

    With that said, I can sleep better.

    Unless the 2010/2012 elections succumb to vote tampering and election fraud, I think the whole lot will be systematically thrown out.

    I think the Congressional provision to exclude themselves from their healthcare plan should be revoked.

    Complain about this comment

  • 64. At 01:42am on 25 Dec 2009, U14273708 wrote:

    Get Ready For The Yanks To Start Whinging! Get ready for it folks, I predict we are literally days, if not hours away from listening to the biggest dose of ...

    Complain about this comment

  • 65. At 01:45am on 25 Dec 2009, oldnat wrote:

    62. David Cunard
    "I still haven't found anything to suggest that Mr Johnston was ever intimately involved in healthcare"

    Merry Xmas to you! Some Scots/English traditions do still continue in the US. My son just phoned to check how to turn the turkey carcass into the best possible stock for Scotch Broth for Hogmanay.

    I think I may have identified the source of confusion. As Secretary of State for Scotland 1941-45, Tom Johnston created the basis of post war Scotland. He was responsible for all aspects of Scots Government, and the Clyde Basin Scheme was one of his pet projects. While he moved onto his most favoured project - the Hydro Board - in 1945, he remained the pre-eminent Scots politician. He continued to have huge influence over Westwood and Woodburn (who actually oversaw the introduction of the Scottish NHS). Scottish politics doesn't run on English lines!

    As to the influence of the Clyde Basin Scheme (and other Scottish experiments in social medicine) on Bevan's scheme for England and Wales, I can't find much online - anglocentrism isn't new! However, if you can access sources such as Horder : "HEALTH AND SOCIAL WELFARE 1945-1946" then the crucial nature of these evidentially based projects on Bevan are quite clear.

    Complain about this comment

  • 66. At 02:23am on 25 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #45. MagicKirin: "The Dems have played corrupt politics . . . "

    We seem to have forgotten a problem in Florida not so many years ago - under a Republican Governor and his Secretary of State.

    Complain about this comment

  • 67. At 02:42am on 25 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    60 St D
    "Let's face it if a man that referred to religious leaders as agents of intolerance can turn around a couple of years later and select Sarah Palin as his running mate, what would stop him and the rest of the gang from becoming champions of the public option if the public decides it is in our best interest? "


    He who givith the rope;)

    Complain about this comment

  • 68. At 05:06am on 25 Dec 2009, powermeerkat wrote:

    What change will this sham lead to?

    A change of a majority in U.S. Congress come November.

    Before Dems manage to pass a bill requiring all Americans to buy GM (government owned) cars or face a penalty.


    BTW. Mark... The bill hasn't been passed on "Christmas Eve".

    For thanks to PC activists we no longer have Christmas.

    The Senate version has been passed on the eve of Holiday Season.

    Complain about this comment

  • 69. At 05:09am on 25 Dec 2009, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re #57

    Don't worry, Magic!


    Now the Senate version will have to be reconciled with the statist House one.

    I, for one, just can't wait to watch the process. :-)

    Complain about this comment

  • 70. At 05:51am on 25 Dec 2009, rodidog wrote:

    #56 SaintDominick

    The best measure to evaluate the quality of a healthcare system is to determine longevity and infant mortality, and the USA lags behind most developed nations on both counts.

    Yes and No. The U.S. ranking is misleading. The U.S. counts all births if they show any sign of life. Other countries have different definitions for live births based on minimum weight, size or prematurity. If the baby is born alive and later dies, but does not meet the minimum definition, that live birth is not counted among their infant mortality rate. In regards to longevity in the U.S., I believe it's more a reflection on lifestyle choices people make rather than our quality of health care.

    Have a happy holiday!



    Complain about this comment

  • 71. At 07:20am on 25 Dec 2009, dopplganger wrote:

    the process of legislation is long and pretty droll...
    nothing that we didnt all know before.
    i do find comfort in the growing fury over the bribes and pandering.

    personally i like about 20% of the health care "reform."
    i believe in a regulated capitalism.
    before they were forced to abide by the epa, auto manufacturers claimed one could get up to couple hundred miles per gallon. that was only 30 years ago.
    i want regulation over insurance industry and caps on malpractice suits.

    i want the fed to stay out of state business. culture state to state varies wildly. where im from, in north dakota they routinely see budget surplus and stays pretty uneventful.
    i now live in california, where politicians ego supersede all, the state is near bankrupt(despite wealth) and i have yet to see a single problem solved. they care more about gay marriage and climate "change" than roads, water, and energy.

    i dont believe the fed can competently unify the states with such trash.
    the fed deficit is the only "crisis" i see.


    Complain about this comment

  • 72. At 08:01am on 25 Dec 2009, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    # 19. At 5:39pm on 24 Dec 2009, Stephanie_Diane wrote:

    This whole thing is ridiculous. An article in Wall Street Journal recently pointed out that this is the first time Congress has ever tried to ram something down our throats with such strong opposition. Their arrogance is astounding. 67% of Americans don't want this bill. They tell us that we the American people can't possibly know what we want so they are going to give us what they think we need. President Obama promised that there would be no more bribes and earmarks on bills, but Harry Reid says that if the senators don't have something important to them in this bill, they are bad senators. The bribery and corruption associated with this is truly disgusting. I can't wait to see what happens in the midterm elections this year.
    _______________________________

    I think you must agree (but maybe not) that most Americans are fed up with the accelerating and unjustified cost of our poor medical service, considering tens of millions are getting no regular service and charge their tabs to the rest of us when they have a need.
    Bribery and corruption are endemic to congress under either party's leadership, and intrinsic to our health care system's operation, as has been evident this year.

    That being the case, and the Republicans having lost control through the generally disgusting performance of Bush and Cheney, I propose we all hold our noses, break a century's logjam and start where we can with the congress we have, since we can do something. If this is put off again, the acrimony will only be more toxic in the next battle. If your or the Republicans can persuade the people how to improve it, more power to you. So I agree with -

    # 20. At 6:00pm on 24 Dec 2009, Rich Infield wrote:

    What I say to any Brits out there is this; the existing healthcare system in the USA is immoral and bankrupt. As somebody brought up under the NHS who has lived under the US system for 20 years, I dream every day of the NHS. Whilst I hold my nose at the lack of a public option, the Democrats are making an honest attempt to make healthcare a right as opposed to a privilege. The rest of the civilized world reached this conclusion years ago but America has never really known it as an option.

    33. At 9:01pm on 24 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    The insurance and pharmaceutical industries, and their "conservative" supporters, have done such a wonderful job at distoring this legislation - regardless what its final version may be and how many concessions are made to please the right wing - that no matter how beneficial healthcare reform is to our society it will be viewed as undemocratic, costly, and ineffective by most voters.

    President Obama deserves much of the blame for his ambivalence on this issue and his failure to articulate the benefits of healthcare reform to an audience convinced that we have the best system in the world and that any change, no matter how small, is a step backwards.

    Is it that our poor and the lower middle class do not deserve better, or is the need to provide a bonanza to corporate America so important that waging war takes priority over the audacious goal of improving the standard of living of all our citizens?
    _______________________________

    St Dom has given the most cogent comments I have seen. Our greatest problem seems to be that we cannot rank our national priorities in any sensible way. Obama's understanding is good - his rhetorical skills are very good, but somehow he hasn't made us understand the meaning of this issue. So the rats are able to distract us from the fire in the hold of the ship.

    62. At 00:44am on 25 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    Now that in Europe it is actually Christmas Day, and thus the First Day of Christmas, may I wish everyone a Merry Christmas. With regret, this time tomorrow it will be almost the end of it in America. By Monday, trees will be seen tossed out; not for Americans are there Twelve Days of the holiday. A few of we traditionalists keep going until Twelfth Night, but we're few and far apart.
    ______________________________

    Ah, but we have partied since the end of November already, we have Thanksgiving after all.
    Being an anachronist, I will try to hold out for twelfth night, but most of us are so weary that a cold and empty January 2 is beginning to have an appeal.

    May this be a joyous day for you all -

    KScurmudgeon

    Complain about this comment

  • 73. At 09:50am on 25 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #66
    , David Cunard wrote:
    #45. MagicKirin: "The Dems have played corrupt politics . . . "

    We seem to have forgotten a problem in Florida not so many years ago - under a Republican Governor and his Secretary of State.

    ____________________

    That old line? Every recount analysis including by the Miami Herald showed Bush won. The corruption wasa democratly appointed FL Supremem Court overstepping it's authority.

    Complain about this comment

  • 74. At 10:30am on 25 Dec 2009, theDoodler wrote:

    Like you, a recent arrival in America, it has been interesting to see the healthcare bill chugging through the US democratic process. Both sides, it seems to me have hugely entrenched positions. Each has merit. The Republicans can point out the perils of taking the market out of the system by providing universal healthcare. And they only have to look at the UK's public option, the beacon that is the supposedly beloved NHS, to see that it can also be a totem for bloat and inefficiency. Ultimately, whatever the Democrats say to counter the Republican points, they have one unassailable fact on their side: 46 million people who reside in the USA (whether legally or illegally) have no genuine access to healthcare. The present bill will not solve all of this. It may, in its current guise, demand a big bag full of extra cash. But bigger (ie, more coverage) will be better because the fairness it will bring is only fitting for the world's richest nation. Once the bill is passed Americans should then start doing what they have proved so capable of doing over the last 140 years: taking a system and honing it through their drive, innovation and force of effort. If they have any sense the Democrates in the House should not impede this end. Just get the thing passed and into being.

    Complain about this comment

  • 75. At 11:37am on 25 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 73, Magic

    "That old line? Every recount analysis including by the Miami Herald showed Bush won. The corruption wasa democratly appointed FL Supremem Court overstepping it's authority."

    Actually, most of the media and government officials in Florida acknowledge Gore won by a narrow margin. The Miami Herald, a paper in a Cuban-American ultra-right wing Republican bastion is one of the exceptions.

    Complain about this comment

  • 76. At 11:44am on 25 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 70, rodidog

    "I believe it's more a reflection on lifestyle choices people make rather than our quality of health care."

    Yes, longevity is influenced by several factors ranging from lifestyle to weather to preventive medical care, but the latter should not be dismissed and, I believe, plays a major role in us lagging European countries on this measure.

    There is no question, however, that our obsession with work, spending much of our free time mowing lawns and doing house chores, our addiction to fast food, and the tendency of so many Americans to drive rather than walk all play a major part in our dismal longevity rate.

    Merry Christmas to you all!

    Complain about this comment

  • 77. At 12:29pm on 25 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #75
    SaintDominick wrote:
    Ref 73, Magic

    "That old line? Every recount analysis including by the Miami Herald showed Bush won. The corruption wasa democratly appointed FL Supremem Court overstepping it's authority."

    Actually, most of the media and government officials in Florida acknowledge Gore won by a narrow margin. The Miami Herald, a paper in a Cuban-American ultra-right wing Republican bastion is one of the exceptions.

    ___________________

    Here is a source that is generally anti Bush pro Democrat

    http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/12/politics/12VOTE.html

    Why can't Democrats get over the fact that Gore lost, when it comes to stealing recounts the Dems are Masters of it.



    Complain about this comment

  • 78. At 5:28pm on 25 Dec 2009, stephen wrote:

    This Christmas morning my Republican family discussed this reform.While myself and wife are covered one of my daughters is losing her insurance January because her company is dropping coverage and the other daughter hasn't had coverage since she got too old to be on my company policy. I have a sister in law with out coverage.She is hoping to make it to 65 to get coverage by Medicare and one of my nieces had to drop her coverage because it would cost too much to include her on her husbands policy. He is covered and their children. A choice she had to make as one of them had to be dropped due to the increase cost and the constrains of the family budget.One brother like me is covered and another who is not. I have strongly support health care reform and am sorely disappointed in the Republican party.They have put partisan interest above the national interest. A lot of people which will be helped by this reform have by a massive propaganda effort funded mainly by the insurance interest been misled. They will figure it out eventually and Republican politicians will suffer for years for being on the wrong end of history.

    Complain about this comment

  • 79. At 7:11pm on 25 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 77, Magic

    "...when it comes to stealing recounts the Dems are Masters of it."

    I wish that was the case, but a casual look at the party affiliation of former Presidents and the party that has controlled Congress for most of the past 30 years suggests otherwise.

    Complain about this comment

  • 80. At 7:13pm on 25 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    A lot of people which will be helped by this reform have by a massive propaganda effort funded mainly by the insurance interest been misled. They will figure it out eventually and Republican politicians will suffer for years for being on the wrong end of history.
    __________________

    No the propganda has been by the Democrats who claim that quality care will be maintained and most of us wil be paying less. Most americans have seen through the Democrats because only the left wing is heavily in favor of it.

    there was no biparsianship and it stinks of the corrupt chicago political machine.

    Complain about this comment

  • 81. At 8:07pm on 25 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #77. MagicKirin: "Here is a source (The New York Times) that is generally anti Bush pro Democrat"

    Apparently you read the headline, not the article, which states "the consortium . . . found that Mr. Gore might have won if the courts had ordered a full statewide recount of all the rejected ballots".

    As is said, the devil is in the detail, and the detail shows that a Gore victory was a likelihood.

    *****************************************************************

    It does seem a pity that on Christmas Day, a public holiday observed by the majority of Americans, Mark could not have written something positive about the festival as celebrated in the USA. Even with the separation of Church and State, Christmas is a fixture on the political calendar despite the recent trend to remove the term in favour of "the Holidays". At #72. KScurmudgeon noted "we have partied since the end of November already, we have Thanksgiving after all" - but the British have partied as well and still keep Christmas until January. Except for the song (carol?) The Twelve Days of Christmas I have never seen anything else in American life which observes it. Gadflies such as Bill O'Reilly complain about phrases such as "Merry Christmas" being excised from the language, but never about the remaining eleven days. It seems remarkably hypocritical, especially since we are always reminded that Chanukah lasts for eight days and Kwanzaa for seven. If nothing else I would have thought it a commercial opportunity to extend the festivities.

    Complain about this comment

  • 82. At 8:47pm on 25 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 78, stephen

    I have similar experiences regarding healthcare coverage. I am among those fortunate enough to have enjoyed employer-provided healthcare most of my life, and I now have MEDICARE and supplemental insurance to cover most of my medical expenses. Unfortunately, that is not the case for other family members.

    My youngest son lost his medical insurance when the company he worked for went bankrupt earlier this year. His son, one of my grandsons, has cerebral palsy and seeing them without coverage for a couple of months was truly terrifying. Fortunately, my son found another job and it offers insurance coverage, but since my grandson's CP is a pre-existing condition anything related to it is not covered. When my grandson was born, a little over 3 months premature, he spent 3 months in a neo-natal ward near Baltimore where he received excellent care. The bill was well over $100,000. A charity and family members pitched in to preclude foreclosure and bankruptcy. A couple of years ago I paid over $6,000 for a wheelchair lift to put him in the family's mini-van because he is now too old and heavy to be carried or lifted.

    My only granddaughter married a car salesman earlier this year. Neither has insurance coverage and my daughter and son-in-law pay hundreds of dollars a month for all her medications (she has serious emotional problems). Incredibly, my daughter and her husband, both staunch right wing Republicans, continue to insist that universal healthcare is wrong, that each person should pay their own way, and that if someone can't afford to pay insurance premiums it is their problem. My son-in-law is a devout Christian evangelical...

    The perception of healthcare reform shared by many of our fellow citizens is influenced by many factors ranging from inadequate explanations by the Administration regarding the benefits of what is being proposed, to deliberate distortions by the opposition, and a very effective campaign by the insurance and pharmaceutical industries to destroy or, as a minimum, weaken the new legislation. Obviously, they succeeded in their quest, and remain intent to distance themselves from what is left hoping the electorate will reward them for their ideological decision.

    The importance of socio-political convictions should not be discounted. There are many, including members of my family, that would rather die or suffer unnecessarily than accept a "socialist" program that has as its basis collective responsibility to ensure all members of our society receive one of our most fundamental needs: medical care.

    As I am sure you already know, there are many Magics in our country and, sadly, their extreme views are more common than some posters in this forum think. Effective misinformation campaigns find fertile ground among them on topics such as healthcare reform, environmental issues, gun control, immigration, foreign influences and anything that remotely alters or challenges their pre-conceived ideas of what is best for us.



    Complain about this comment

  • 83. At 8:51pm on 25 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #81
    David Cunard wrote:
    #77. MagicKirin: "Here is a source (The New York Times) that is generally anti Bush pro Democrat"

    Apparently you read the headline, not the article, which states "the consortium . . . found that Mr. Gore might have won if the courts had ordered a full statewide recount of all the rejected ballots".

    As is said, the devil is in the detail, and the detail shows that a Gore victory was a likelihood.

    _______________

    I did read the article and it said if all of the districts had counted the ballots the way the two pro districts did Gore might win.

    ref #79

    Dominick here are two examples where a Republican won the initialy won and the recount by a Dem controlled board went to the Democrats

    2008 MN Senate race
    eatly 2000 decade Washington State Governor's race

    Please give an example opposite to that.

    P.S. doing this post during Celtic-Magic halftime.

    Complain about this comment

  • 84. At 8:54pm on 25 Dec 2009, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    78. At 5:28pm on 25 Dec 2009, stephen wrote:

    This Christmas morning my Republican family discussed this reform.While myself and wife are covered one of my daughters is losing her insurance January because her company is dropping coverage and the other daughter hasn't had coverage since she got too old to be on my company policy. I have a sister in law with out coverage.She is hoping to make it to 65 to get coverage by Medicare and one of my nieces had to drop her coverage because it would cost too much to include her on her husbands policy. He is covered and their children. A choice she had to make as one of them had to be dropped due to the increase cost and the constrains of the family budget.One brother like me is covered and another who is not. I have strongly support health care reform and am sorely disappointed in the Republican party.They have put partisan interest above the national interest. A lot of people which will be helped by this reform have by a massive propaganda effort funded mainly by the insurance interest been misled. They will figure it out eventually and Republican politicians will suffer for years for being on the wrong end of history.

    and -

    80. At 7:13pm on 25 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    No the propganda has been by the Democrats who claim that quality care will be maintained and most of us wil be paying less. Most americans have seen through the Democrats because only the left wing is heavily in favor of it.
    there was no biparsianship and it stinks of the corrupt chicago political machine.
    ______________________

    Magic -

    I have quoted Stephen's note in it's entirety because I would like you to consider it in detail, and what it implies for our country, our distribution of access to health services, and our priorities as a society.

    Stephen's piece is well written and to the point - I take it the people he is talking about are competent and contributing members of the community. And yet perhaps half of his group do not have adequate coverage either because their employers do not offer it or they cannot afford to participate.

    As you can see and perhaps have seen on your own, the days of near universal coverage through the workplace are over because the costs steadily accelerate beyond the growth of the whole economy. Employers who once often paid 100 percent of the cost now increase the employees' share with each new contract, reduce the coverage, or drop it altogether because they must to stay in business.

    If you are a friend of the business community I should think you would be fighting to reduce this burden and demand fair return for this investment.

    If you have not experienced a significant medical need, I pray you live long enough to need insurance coverage to pay for it - and that at that time you have the coverage you need and expect. Then you will also know that health care is about as important a 'natural right' as there is. It is fully as important as any political matter.

    The technological wonders we have available are not cheap, and when the insurance is inadequate to cover the cost our compassionate society will see the work is done, at least in emergencies, and you and I will pay the balance due.

    I believe it is time to rate this as a national concern that is now way beyond another opportunity for partisan wrangling. We are paying more than any other nation per capita, and the outcomes for the nation are abysmal. Unnecessary illness and death sap our strength as a nation, as corruption and collusion draw off hundreds of billions from our economy each year without adequate performance to justify the investment.

    As you say it is not realistic for the Democrats to attempt a solution without the input and buy-in of the Republicans, it is equally true that you only make the difficulty much greater by approaching it with cluster bombs and land mines.

    With respect, please stop this angry and thoughtless vituperation and start showing us what will solve the problem.

    On Christmas day in cold Kansas

    KScurmudgeon

    Complain about this comment

  • 85. At 9:40pm on 25 Dec 2009, McJakome wrote:

    To: Mark Mardell, KScurmudgeon, StaintDominick, David Cunard, Rodidog, bepa, friends, Romans, Britons, countrymen, all readers and contributers, and persons of good will.

    Peace, Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas, etc.

    Complain about this comment

  • 86. At 10:36pm on 25 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #84

    as somone who is self employed and has to pay my own health insurance in full.


    I would love to see something that would lower costs. But Mass is suppose to be a test example f required healthcare.

    Despite the economy I do not get any help from the goverment and my health insurance keeps going up.

    So I am skeptical of a plan that was done in secreat. Is there anything that would give me a benefit like a major tax write off?

    Small business those employing 10-50 employees get hit hard on this plan.

    If the goverment would cut other than miltary and essentailservices people salaries by 20% (what the Irish PM is doing) and let no such federal worker make more than a 100K a year; I could take this more seriously.

    2 auto executives from GM were forced out yet Barney Frank keep his salary and he did far more harm to the economy.

    Complain about this comment

  • 87. At 10:41pm on 25 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 83, Magic

    What is wrong with a recount when the result of an election is so close that it could have gone either way. Both of the recounts you mentioned were monitored by state officials, representative of both parties, and the media. The 2000 election notwithstanding, I would say that our electoral system is quite good, fair and serves us well. Please desist in your efforts to portray our country as a banana republic.

    Enjoy the game!



    Complain about this comment

  • 88. At 11:13pm on 25 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #87
    SaintDominick wrote:
    Ref 83, Magic

    What is wrong with a recount when the result of an election is so close that it could have gone either way. Both of the recounts you mentioned were monitored by state officials, representative of both parties, and the media. The 2000 election notwithstanding, I would say that our electoral system is quite good, fair and serves us well. Please desist in your efforts to portray our country as a banana republic.

    Enjoy the game!

    ___________________-

    well I did enjoy the game.

    But in both cases there was favorable selective counting for the Democrat so that is my problem.

    Complain about this comment

  • 89. At 11:51pm on 25 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 86, Magic

    "Small business those employing 10-50 employees get hit hard on this plan."

    The main beneficiaries of the proposed legislation are those that do not have healthcare at the present time AND small businesses. Under the Senate version of this legislation the latter are going to get tax credits to help them with the cost of providing healthcare to their employees.

    "If the goverment would cut other than miltary and essentailservices people salaries by 20% (what the Irish PM is doing) and let no such federal worker make more than a 100K a year; I could take this more seriously."

    The salaries earned by government employees lag those paid to persons with similar education and experience working in private industry by a substantial amount. If it wasn't for the stability of government work and the benefit package offered by the federal government, the attrition rate would be so high some agencies would not be able to operate.

    Why should a judge, lawyer, engineer, medical doctor and other professionals working for the federal and state governments earn less than $100K a year? Are you aware of the fact that their counterparts in private industry make at least three times that amount? I am surprised a conservative like you is in favor of socialist salary caps.

    If the government employees you are referring to are our elected officials, I would say their salaries are adequate considering the benefits they enjoy and the prestige associated with their positions, which often allow them to get lucrative jobs in private industry or as lobbyists when they retire.

    If anything, the federal government GS and SES pay scales should be revised upwards to attract more qualified and experienced professionals.

    Complain about this comment

  • 90. At 00:21am on 26 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Magic, the following is a quote of what was discussed during a recent meeting between small business owners and Sens. Harkin and Landrieu:

    "Currently, small businesses pay up to 18% more per employee to receive the same healthcare coverage as a large business. Health premiums have increased more than 74% for small businesses over the last eight years.

    The Senate’s health care bill will create an exchange system that specifically targets small business owners and the self-employed with a shop exchange, where states assist small businesses that choose to use the exchange. States that elect to do so will also get technical assistance."

    Complain about this comment

  • 91. At 00:34am on 26 Dec 2009, John_From_Dublin wrote:

    # 84 KScurmudgeon wrote: [To Magic the Mendacious Mushroom]

    "With respect, please stop this angry and thoughtless vituperation and start showing us what will solve the problem.

    On Christmas day in cold Kansas"

    With respect, KS, the history of his postings show clearly that it will be a cold Christmas day in Hell before he does either.

    Attempts to address him with clarity, evidence and logic are laudable but ultimately futile.

    Complain about this comment

  • 92. At 03:28am on 26 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #84. KScurmudgeon: "(MagicKirin) With respect, please stop this angry and thoughtless vituperation and start showing us what will solve the problem.

    On Christmas day in cold Kansas."

    Perhaps, being Jewish, MK does not observe Christmas and consequently has no Christmas spirit. Even the miracle of Chanukah eludes him since he throws no light on the subject.

    Complain about this comment

  • 93. At 05:04am on 26 Dec 2009, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    88. At 11:13pm on 25 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #87SaintDominick wrote:
    Ref 83, Magic

    What is wrong with a recount when the result of an election is so close that it could have gone either way.
    Enjoy the game!

    But in both cases there was favorable selective counting for the Democrat so that is my problem.
    ______________________________

    What good is a recount when the margin of error - in 2000 in Florida for the most salient example - is greater than difference in validated ballots? The margin of error when counting ballots is at minimum the number of them that do not have determinate markings - remember hanging chads and all that? The mechanical voting system in use at that time was not designed for such a close outcome - with a margin of a few thousand, certainly - of a few hundred, very likely there would be the sort of outcome that we had. At that point a clear winner is not possible.

    Everyone did their very best, I am sure, at that point to get as precise a determination as possible - but there were too many ballots that could only be rejected. It was either accept what they had, call a revote, or bring in the courts. I'm not surprised that it came down to the supreme court - the country was getting upset over it all, and declaring openly that a really close and important national election hung on a technical matter of precision of measurement would have jeopardized faith in the process itself. We are trying to develop direct electronic tabulation to avoid this sort of debacle, now that we seem to be able to tune campaigning to such a fine point.

    V.P Gore showed great quality and respect for his country by accepting the outcome when he did. This is not yet a banana republic - largely due to his honor and good sense.

    This is not a country where you fight to the death for power - you will get your chance again in 4 years, or now, two years and forty-six weeks.

    KScurmudgeon
    civil, because we must be or loose it all.

    Complain about this comment

  • 94. At 05:32am on 26 Dec 2009, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    Thanks for your straight forward answer.

    86. At 10:36pm on 25 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #84

    as somone who is self employed and has to pay my own health insurance in full.

    You are fortunate. If we all could do that, and if we shopped and compared cost and performance for ourselves, this problem would never have developed.
    ______________

    I would love to see something that would lower costs. But Mass is suppose to be a test example f required healthcare.
    Despite the economy I do not get any help from the goverment and my health insurance keeps going up.

    Considering your position, I would like to suggest that together we break the medical cabal, what ever that may require. These increases decade after decade that exceed the growth of the economy would break any industry that was still subject to competition.
    _______________________________

    So I am skeptical of a plan that was done in secreat. Is there anything that would give me a benefit like a major tax write off?

    Pres. Obama promised an unprecedented openness, and then let Congress off the hook. I like his deference to constitutional forms, but he has let them play at their politics when there is work to be done for the nation. Shame on them all. Can you agree?
    _______________________________

    Small business those employing 10-50 employees get hit hard on this plan.

    We shall have to see how it plays out.
    __________________________________

    If the goverment would cut other than miltary and essentailservices people salaries by 20% (what the Irish PM is doing) and let no such federal worker make more than a 100K a year; I could take this more seriously.

    Here you lose me completely. We need the best people available in all these positions. Reducing waste and keeping the focus on the specific mission statement would pay for all of this, but that is more difficult in any organization than your suggestion to cut pay.


    We shall see the good and the bad of it in time - I am hopeful because at least the doors will soon be torn from the hinges.

    KScurmudgeon

    Complain about this comment

  • 95. At 07:55am on 26 Dec 2009, powermeerkat wrote:

    "What is wrong with a recount when the result of an election is so close that it could have gone either way."?



    So we should have had a recount in 1960 as well, partcularly after it's been proven than certain bootlegger by the name Joe Kenndy was buying votes for his sonny, and that a lot of stiffs were voting for JFK in the Windy City.

    Complain about this comment

  • 96. At 09:23am on 26 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #94
    Here you lose me completely. We need the best people available in all these positions. Reducing waste and keeping the focus on the specific mission statement would pay for all of this, but that is more difficult in any organization than your suggestion to cut pay.
    ____________________-

    My reaction to that is the same as when the financial frims justified bonus to keep so called good people:

    Where are they going to go? Tim Gietner for instance would not be missed, Valarie Jarret won't be missed.

    I am glad you agree about the inefiency and waste that is why I don't want the goverment taking over healthcare

    Complain about this comment

  • 97. At 09:25am on 26 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #93
    V.P Gore showed great quality and respect for his country by accepting the outcome when he did. This is not yet a banana republic - largely due to his honor and good sense
    _____________

    Actually gore should have follwed the example of a true statesman Richard Nixon who did not contest the 60 election. When another crooked Chicago political machine stole the election.

    Complain about this comment

  • 98. At 09:30am on 26 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #89 and 90

    #89
    see my comment on 96, I don't think many are doing a good job and could easily be replaced. You are missing the point we are being asked to sacrfice but they are not. Barney Frank and Chris dodd should be fined millions of dollars for being the prime creators of this mess.

    90 excusem e if I don't take the word of a La Senator who was bribed for her vote and one of the most liberal members of the Senate.

    When I see how myinsurance will go down a reasonable amount, call me.

    Complain about this comment

  • 99. At 1:48pm on 26 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 93, KScurmudgeon

    "It was either accept what they had, call a revote, or bring in the courts."

    Considering the circumstances and the importance of what was at stake the best option, in my opinion, would have been a re-vote using paper ballots.

    Since this is all history and, therefore, can not be changed the best thing we can do at this point is learn from experiences like this, and consider the consequences of the excesses and ill-conceived policies made by our government and us as a society.

    Contrary to what Magic suggests the likes of Sen. Dodd, Frank or the infamous Lt. Col. Oliver North are not responsible for domestic or foreign policy, the President of the United States and Congress are.

    Single members of Congress have opinions and some are more influential than others, but to suggest that two senators that were in the minority for much of the time deregulation and borrowing decisions were made during the last 30 years are responsible for our economic woes suggest Magic does not understand the causes or severity of our economic crisis or is so determined to shift blame to others that he does not hesitate to make the most outlandish claims without basis to support them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 100. At 2:34pm on 26 Dec 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    Well after fighting, bruised, and bleeding over the same piece of ground. I see even those I have not on occassion agreed with agree. That a majority of Americans are disgusted with this mess. As an independent it is refreshing to see that bad legislation is recognized, along with blatent corruption. I don't just blame Obama, take a hard look at those intrenched in Congress and the Senate. Using every slimy trick in the book to pour this perfume on this Pig legislation to pimp it to the American public and the world. Meanwhile we elect the least qualified to these positions, fail to review the politicians history, and continue to vote them in on a bumper sticker slogan. Hope and Change! Well hope we can change these porkers in the next election. Jesse Ventura, Ross Perot, John Anderson, any choice would be refreshing after the party hacks. Yes even any BUll MOOSE.

    Complain about this comment

  • 101. At 3:15pm on 26 Dec 2009, KingLeeRoySandersJr wrote:

    Your topic has a lot of thick white paint on it. I don't think that the past or the present was or is anything the way it is wrote up in history and programed the world's citizens. Log ago it was much easier to fool the public. Today, some are just a bit wiser.

    The people who say enough is enough, give us the same insurance the President and Congress have, have been removed and tucked away from the worlds eyes. Those who have better sense know it too.

    What gets me, is that when such large ventures are handed to the people in the disguise of doing something better, it doesn't happen. The providers of this idea make a fortune and it just doesn't fan out as it is being boasted to the people. And it that is just what it will end up being, less than what it should be. While the cream of the top is ladled off and secured for the politicians that receive the best of medical care.

    The words over 200 years ago still ring true said by one of the very politicians who knew this quote to be true..

    "You can fool some of the people some of the time but not all the people all of the time!"

    Complain about this comment

  • 102. At 3:41pm on 26 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #97. MagicKirin: "Actually gore should have follwed the example of a true statesman Richard Nixon who did not contest the 60 election."

    No, if Mr Bush had been a true statesman, he would have conceded the election to Mr Gore. But then of course, for different reasons, neither Nixon nor Bush were statesmen.

    Complain about this comment

  • 103. At 4:06pm on 26 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #102
    No, if Mr Bush had been a true statesman, he would have conceded the election to Mr Gore. But then of course, for different reasons, neither Nixon nor Bush were statesmen.
    ____________________

    Show how little you know.

    Since every recount showed Bush why should he have ever conceeded?

    As far as Nixon Watergate overshadows all he did including opening relations with China. And if Ted Kennedy had not been such a petty man we would have had a healthcare plan 40 years ago.

    Both Nixon and Bush are statesman not a product of the sleazy Chicago political machine.

    Complain about this comment

  • 104. At 6:14pm on 26 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 103, Magic

    "And if Ted Kennedy had not been such a petty man we would have had a healthcare plan 40 years ago."

    I was wondering how long it was going to take you to morph yourself into an advocate of healthcare reform.

    The late Sen. Kennedy was an avid supporter of healthcare reform, and played a significant role in the efforts undertaken during the Clinton Administration to end the pervasive stranglehold that the insurance companies have on our society...only to see the whole thing collapse under pressure from "conservatives" intent on maintaining the status quo.

    You can bet the rhetoric of those that have opposed healthcare reform will shift with the wind dependent on how the American public reacts to the changes that are being made. If public opinion changes in favor of reform, don't expect any more talk about death panels, infanticide, euthanasia, or the demonization of the British and Canadian systems.

    Instead, the opponents that have not only refused to participate in the crafting of this legislation, but continue to say NO, will not hesitate to take credit for what has been accomplished if they think it is politically wise to do so.

    The most prevalent bipartisan trait in politics is cynicism...


    Complain about this comment

  • 105. At 6:14pm on 26 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #103. MagicKirin: "if Ted Kennedy had not been such a petty man we would have had a healthcare plan 40 years ago."

    And you wouldn't have liked it either.

    "Both Nixon and Bush are statesman . . ."

    No, they are (were) politicians. Churchill was a statesman, FDR and possibly LBJ, but Nixon and Bush - never.

    Complain about this comment

  • 106. At 6:17pm on 26 Dec 2009, brad wrote:

    It has been suggested that the first question in the debate about health care should be as follows
    If two citizens,one rich and one poor contract the same fatal but curable disease is it morally proper for the society to allow one to die and the other to live when the only difference is that one is able to afford health insurance?
    It seems to me that this is an important question which has been thus far avoided. Instead of approaching this as a moral issue we have treated it as an economic issue and thus have felt free to politicize
    the debate. While the economic problems are large both in severity and importance they are second to the moral issue.

    In regards to the economic problems I would point out that for profit insurance spend 20% of expenses on administrative costs while most not for profit systems spend in the range of 4% to 7% on administrative costs.
    This is a huge savings that is certainly achievable. Look at the administrative costs of the VA system or Medicare in the U.S. or the administrative cost of private not for profits in Germany or Switzerland

    brad

    Complain about this comment

  • 107. At 6:58pm on 26 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #104 and 105

    Kennedy even admidts in his autobiography that it was his mistake not to work with Nixon on reform. Weather I would have agreed or not; with a far more intelligent man than Obama, Nixon would have produced a better result.

    Living in Massachusetts i know how petty and corrupt the Kennedy family is.

    Complain about this comment

  • 108. At 7:00pm on 26 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #105
    No, they are (were) politicians. Churchill was a statesman, FDR and possibly LBJ, but Nixon and Bush - never.
    _______________-

    Again showing your lack of knowledge, LBJ was far more corrupt than Nixon and FDR prolonged the depression and tried to increase the members on the Supreme Court when they ruled against him.

    Complain about this comment

  • 109. At 7:17pm on 26 Dec 2009, rodidog wrote:

    #93 KScurmudgeon,

    I'm not surprised that it came down to the supreme court - the country was getting upset over it all, and declaring openly that a really close and important national election hung on a technical matter of precision of measurement would have jeopardized faith in the process itself. We are trying to develop direct electronic tabulation to avoid this sort of debacle, now that we seem to be able to tune campaigning to such a fine point.
    -------------------------------
    I believe the issue was that individuals began using more liberal methods to determine the intentions of the voter which varied from the official rules governing such determinations. For a true determination of the outcome in Florida, a re vote for the entire state should have occurred. Since that was not going to happen, the only fair process, IMO, was to utilize the rules for determining voter intentions as agreed upon before the election. This is what the U.S. Supreme Court decided which over turned the Florida Supreme Court's decision to change the rules after the vote occurred.


    V.P Gore showed great quality and respect for his country by accepting the outcome when he did. This is not yet a banana republic - largely due to his honor and good sense.
    -------------------------------
    I respected him when he originally conceded a close election loss, even though he won the popular vote. I even felt it fair when he unconceded and requested a re vote when realizing how close the votes were in Florida. He lost my respect when he took the case to the courts. In the end, he did not concede a anything. He had no more options left and respecting the final outcome is hardly a great quality worthy of respect.



    Complain about this comment

  • 110. At 7:32pm on 26 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #108. MagicKirin: "Again showing your lack of knowledge"

    And you show your lack of tolerance. Democrats, Palestinians and probably Christians are always wrong in your book. Considering that his career had numerous blemishes, I'm surprised you didn't dismiss Winston Churchill.

    Complain about this comment

  • 111. At 7:54pm on 26 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    Kscur and all.
    America is SO busy claiming it's holiday version of the "world" series ,"thanks giving" that it seems the spirit is used up by Christmas.

    America takes Christmas and trashes it for commerce then up holds Thanksgiving as the National holiday.
    I think it is the puritan bit that wants to ignore the winter solstice.

    PS on the spirit of christmas. why is it every year at this time when people are celebrating that people get killed in raids some obviously think they can get away with while the wlrd slumbers. At least Iran Ain't in a new war yet. still there is time this year.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8431328.stm

    How is this relevent ?
    I don't really know but it is another Christmas present the world can do without.
    Please Jewish Americans please write to your aipac rep and senator and all and say. hey How about at least letting the christmas celebrations end.
    (I'd prefer peace though)fat chance

    Complain about this comment

  • 112. At 8:09pm on 26 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #110
    David Cunard wrote:
    #108. MagicKirin: "Again showing your lack of knowledge"

    And you show your lack of tolerance. Democrats, Palestinians and probably Christians are always wrong in your book. Considering that his career had numerous blemishes, I'm surprised you didn't dismiss Winston Churchill.

    _______________-

    Ah I see because I critize certain Democrats that menas all and since Obama, Reid, Pelosi and Kennedy are all Christians I must now hate all Christians.

    As far as Palestinians any adult Palestinian who willingly supports the terrorist group Hamas is worthy of being hated.

    Complain about this comment

  • 113. At 8:15pm on 26 Dec 2009, John_From_Dublin wrote:

    # 103 MagicMushroom:

    "Show how little you know."

    Yup - that's certainly Magic's philosophy, which he adheres to with quite startling consistency.

    "Both Nixon and Bush are statesman not a product of the sleazy Chicago political machine."

    So let's see - MagicMushroom worships Nixon, the bitter, twisted, mendacious tax-dodging crook with a burning hatred of liberals, who loved to use smear and innuendo against his enemies, of which he kept a long list

    And Bush II, the 'Decider', ignorant, arrogant, with a tenuous relationship with the English language, firmly divorced from reality, an extreme right winger who falsely claimed to be a compassionate conservative.

    [While hating 'crooks' and 'phonies' like Mandela, Tutu, Gore and Obama.]

    Why are we not surprised?

    Complain about this comment

  • 114. At 8:30pm on 26 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #112. MagicKirin: "since Obama, Reid, Pelosi and Kennedy are all Christians I must now hate all Christians."

    In case you didn't watch/read/hear the news, Senator Kennedy is dead.

    Complain about this comment

  • 115. At 8:37pm on 26 Dec 2009, oldnat wrote:

    114. David Cunard
    "Senator Kennedy is dead."

    Since when did the likes of Magic let such a triviality get in the way of hating someone?

    Complain about this comment

  • 116. At 9:21pm on 26 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #115. oldnat: "Since when did the likes of Magic let such a triviality get in the way of hating someone?"

    Your Transatlantic humour is much appreciated! And since it's Boxing Day, it's off to the panto we go, or would do if it was available; I must check to see if there are any DVDs of them. By the way, today is not only Boxing Day, but the Second Day of Christmas.

    Complain about this comment

  • 117. At 9:23pm on 26 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref # 113,114,115 Of course I know Ted is dead. Far too much news time and far too glowing obituries were in the media. But as these were the four I had criticized recently and you made the christian generlization I was merly responding.

    Complain about this comment

  • 118. At 9:25pm on 26 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 119. At 9:43pm on 26 Dec 2009, hms_shannon wrote:

    #116,
    Your Transatlantic humour is much appreciated!And since its Boxing Day,its off to the PANTO we go,or would do if it was available;I must check to see if there are any DVDs of them.By the way, today is not only Boxing Day,but the Second Day of Christmas.


    OH NO IT ISN'T....

    Complain about this comment

  • 120. At 9:52pm on 26 Dec 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    Watch the money!
    " Back in June, Jeremy Scahill reported on these findings: “According to new statistics released by the Pentagon, with Barack Obama as commander in chief, there has been a 23% increase in the number of ‘Private Security Contractors’ working for the Department of Defense in Iraq in the second quarter of 2009 and a 29% increase in Afghanistan….”

    "The long term cost of the Afghanistan war will then likely be in the range of $55 to $70 billion per year (with average monthly troop levels of 4000 in Iraq and 67,500 in Afghanistan according to the Congressional Research Service projections). This is based upon the CBO projection that maintaining a deployment of 75,000 troops will cost somewhere between $55 billion and $70 billion per year from 2013 onward (on a slightly more optimistic note, the CBO projects that it will cost somewhere in the range of $25 billion to $32 billion per year if U.S. troops levels are reduced to 30,000)."
    Second, pressure must be exerted to prevent any expansion of the U.S. military force in Afghanistan and then to reverse troop levels in that country. Approximately 69,000 troops are currently deployed to Afghanistan. McChrystal will likely seek an additional 15,000 to 45,000 troops. President Obama will most likely decide about troop levels in Afghanistan by the end of this year.

    "And this is where the wave of substantive (though imperfect) healthcare reform comes crashing upon the shoals of warfare. Keep $100 billion in mind—the projected cost for each year of healthcare reform—as you read the following based upon reports from the Congressional Research Service and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO)." Jeff Leys

    Gentleman roll the presses, don't just show me the money, find the money, or print more.

    Complain about this comment

  • 121. At 11:13pm on 26 Dec 2009, oldnat wrote:

    119. ukwales
    "OH NO IT ISN'T..."

    LOL!

    Incidentally, I hope you are all aware that Boxing Day was the day that you gave gifts to your social inferiors. So here's a present for you all ....!

    Complain about this comment

  • 122. At 00:18am on 27 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #121. At 11:13pm on 26 Dec 2009, oldnat: 119. ukwales "OH NO IT ISN'T..." LOL!"

    In the same spirit, maybe the Obama Administration could take the panto setting further with a couple of choruses of There's a Hole in My Bucket, Dear Barry, Dear Barry!

    A friend of mine once asked the late impressario, David Merrick, why he never had produced a pantomime. 'Too expensive' came the reply. This year, perhaps the panto is in Congress; there many similarities.

    Complain about this comment

  • 123. At 00:46am on 27 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 106, Brad

    "It seems to me that this is an important question which has been thus far avoided."

    I agree with you 100%, but how can we expect people that are purportedly pro-business and oppose legislation that would reduce corporate operating costs by as much as 20% to support reform based strictly on moral considerations?

    The fact that the insurance and pharmaceutical industries oppose healthcare reform, and the public option in particular, is understandable. Lert's face it, if universal healthcare is implemented that would mean the end of the for-profit insurance companies, and they know it. What is disturbing is the obstinacy of "conservative" members of Congress who I am sure are well aware of the benefits of providing medical care to all citizens, both from a social and business perspective. I find their position the ultimate expression of ideological radicalism, political opportunism, and lack of moral values.

    Complain about this comment

  • 124. At 02:39am on 27 Dec 2009, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    18. At 5:38pm on 24 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    "You might have given Winston Churchill credit for for this statement, ..."
    __________

    Yes, perhaps. But who doesn't recognize those words?

    Complain about this comment

  • 125. At 03:21am on 27 Dec 2009, amerika_first wrote:

    On this day, I will avoid my usually disparging and snide comments. I wish to extend a well intended offer of Christmas Cheer and a Happy New Year. Being of russian ancestory, I celebrate Orthodox Christmas, so it would be unkind for me to offer anything but Christmas cheer and many good wishes for my liberal cousins across the pond. I know that I will never convert you, but maybe time will open you eyes to the fact that citizens are better off with the lowest amount of government interference in their lives. God Bless and Merry Christmas.

    Complain about this comment

  • 126. At 04:56am on 27 Dec 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    Is Boxing day sort of like the Dhimmi in Islam? The Noble Koran 98:6
    "Verily, those who disbelieve (In the relgion of Islam, the Koran and Prophet Muhammad)from among the People of the Scripture (Jews and Christians)and Al-Mushrikun will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures." Is that the same as Boxing day those that are second class? Hmmm, food for thought. Maybe healthcare will cover severing of hands and such once Islamic Sharia law becomes Universal? Will the NHS cover the Nigerian terrorists burns or will the US pick up the medical tab? Now that it is a fundemental right of all humans, except in certain Islamic type countries when it concerns infidels. Crazy world. But I still have my Father Christmas 45 of the KInks. Boxing day, never heard of it?

    Complain about this comment

  • 127. At 05:27am on 27 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #124. Interestedforeigner: "But who doesn't recognize (Churchill's) words?"

    My guess is that none under the age of fifty will know them.

    Boxing Day - supposedly a day when staff opened their "Christmas boxes", their employers having celebrated the previous day. I can well remember people speaking of their "Christmas box" when in fact they meant gift. I wouldn't have classified them as "social inferiors" as did OldNat, but perhaps they were so considered in Victorian times. In any case, it's a day of conviviality, sports, eating and drinking, today with the added temptation of post-Christmas sales, in the American manner.

    Complain about this comment

  • 128. At 06:04am on 27 Dec 2009, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    111. At 7:54pm on 26 Dec 2009, cheesefuller wrote:

    Kscur and all.

    America takes Christmas and trashes it for commerce then up holds Thanksgiving as the National holiday.
    I think it is the puritan bit that wants to ignore the winter solstice.
    _________________________________

    Christmas became a commercial event in the 1840s - and yes, Virginia, Santa Claus was right in the middle of it.

    Following the ancient English custom of going round the town or village in groups to sing, greet and offer good wishes to their betters and any others likely to be able to reciprocate with treats and alcohol (the wassail bowl), Americans had improved the custom by forming rowdy, drunken crowds that broke into store fronts, bashed down doors, and sometimes set fires. The shopkeepers and civic leaders of New York hit on the idea of changing the emphasis from libations and carousing to children and home, and taking the traditions of St. Nicholas the gift giver and the Dutch Sinter Klaus, who gave small gifts to children, I believe on twelfth night, An American legend was written up, illustrated, and widely published.

    In this case, thank goodness that commercialism won out, or Christmas might have become Mardi Gras in December.

    At first glance it is simply the profanation of a sacred holy day - but profane does only mean without God, which is who we have become to large extent. Also, New York was our first great profane city, i.e. founded without a religious dedication or intent, unlike Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore and many others.


    PS on the spirit of christmas. why is it every year at this time when people are celebrating that people get killed in raids some obviously think they can get away with while the wlrd slumbers. At least Iran Ain't in a new war yet. still there is time this year.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8431328.stm
    How is this relevent ?
    I don't really know but it is another Christmas present the world can do without. Please Jewish Americans please write to your aipac rep and senator and all and say. hey How about at least letting the christmas celebrations end.
    (I'd prefer peace though)fat chance
    _______________________________
    It appears that radical Islam prefers to attack their own civilian pilgrims on their holy days, although this may only be because they don't seem to have any other big gatherings - no football, for example. We could argue this makes these radicals the consummate secularists of the day.

    It comes down to what you make of it, yourself.

    KScurmudgeon
    who has been having a quiet, peaceful holiday, not without some joy, and is thankful for it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 129. At 06:35am on 27 Dec 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    Thanks for the definition of Boxer day David. Interesting. Orthodox Christmas is 7 Jan. So Happy Christmas, Merry Christmas here in the States. Rozhdyestvo. Orthodox Christianity which split off the big Christian tree in 1054. Dyed Moroz will be there first though. Lets hope this year is better, than it has been lately.

    Complain about this comment

  • 130. At 1:11pm on 27 Dec 2009, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    127. At 05:27am on 27 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    "#124. Interestedforeigner: "But who doesn't recognize (Churchill's) words?""
    "My guess is that none under the age of fifty will know them."
    ----------

    A sad comment on the schools system?
    Or perhaps upon all of us more generally?
    __________

    "Boxing Day - supposedly a day when staff opened their "Christmas boxes", their employers having celebrated the previous day. I can well remember people speaking of their "Christmas box" when in fact they meant gift. I wouldn't have classified them as "social inferiors" as did OldNat, but perhaps they were so considered in Victorian times. In any case, it's a day of conviviality, sports, eating and drinking, today with the added temptation of post-Christmas sales, in the American manner.
    ----------

    Prior to WWI, and to a lesser extent even in the inter-war period, a significant portion of the British population was "in service". We sometimes think of the great household in "The Remains of the Day", or Upstairs Downstairs, or the Forsythe Saga, or in the Bentinck Hotel, but even families of relatively modest wealth had a maid or manservant. "Service" and emigration were two ways in which Britain's then excess of manpower was soaked up in the wider economy. It does make you wonder about the missed potential for productivity growth in that economy.

    For people "in service", Christmas Day could easily be one of the most demanding days of the year, since they provided the army of manpower required for all that entertainment. As David says, Boxing Day was then the day off for all sorts of staff, tradesmen, and so on. And yes, it was reflective of the class system. We may not necessarily be comfortable with facing that aspect of it, even now. But that is one of the factors that drove the growth of the Labour party, and, in the end, the eclipse of the Liberal Party - and Churchill's eventual need to re-rat.

    Complain about this comment

  • 131. At 5:13pm on 27 Dec 2009, oldnat wrote:

    127. David Cunard
    "I wouldn't have classified them as "social inferiors" as did OldNat"

    The giving of presents to servants, tradesmen etc was a 19th century development. I was referring to the earlier, and even more stratified society of England (Christmas wasn't celebrated in Scotland till the 1950s).

    Originally, on Boxing Day the aristocracy would give gifts to the local gentry for example.

    Complain about this comment

  • 132. At 7:50pm on 27 Dec 2009, AndreaNY wrote:

    3. SaintDominick: "The latter is the real reason for the GOP opposition to the Senate bill, which conceded just about everything the GOP demanded...except for Magic's tort reform..."

    ****************

    It's not just Magic's tort reform. Are you aware of how much "defensive testing" goes on, especially in the ER? There are no statistics available but ask anyone who works in an ER and they will tell you about the excessive testing that takes place there.

    It's very curious that Democrats would cry about Republican stonewalling yet fail to include this one consistent demand of Republicans.

    Complain about this comment

  • 133. At 8:53pm on 27 Dec 2009, bill whiting wrote:

    The process of getting the health care bill to it's current stage has been a demonstration of the worst in backroom bargains and dishonesty in politics. This law is a bad medicine for America. Our national government has no business providing or controlling health care. If the dirty politics and backroom dealing is the only way to get this bill passed, I think it's a demonstration that this is the wrong direction.

    Complain about this comment

  • 134. At 9:14pm on 27 Dec 2009, U14273708 wrote:

    Ha ha ha ha ha
    They just
    Laugh After Them (*)
    Wicked men
    The wicked man days are so over

    (*)=Blood Shanti

    Complain about this comment

  • 135. At 01:37am on 28 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 132, Andrea

    Legislation to limit frivolous law suits is desperately needed but in my opinion it does not belong in a medical bill, if nothing else because unnecessary and costly lawsuits take place daily in every city in the USA for reasons other than medical malpractice.

    Such legislation will most likely be as complex as the healthcare reform bill that is being debated as it must have provisions to allow recourse for victims of malpractice and wrongdoing as well as protection against frivolous legal action.

    Complain about this comment

  • 136. At 02:04am on 28 Dec 2009, oldnat wrote:

    132. AndreaNY
    "how much "defensive testing" goes on, especially in the ER?"

    My brother, who did regular spells as a doctor in ER in Connecticut, reckoned that the excessive use of X-Rays, simply to avoid litigation, was a negative in terms of health care.

    Complain about this comment

  • 137. At 04:00am on 28 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #136. oldnat: "My brother, who did regular spells as a doctor in ER in Connecticut, reckoned that the excessive use of X-Rays, simply to avoid litigation, was a negative in terms of health care."

    And now we are told that these, especially from CAT scans, can be a cause of cancer. As a boy I remember x-ray machines in shoe shops, used in order to check the fit, and there being a printed admonition that they should not be used for more than a few seconds, the exact time being forgotten. So in those far off days it was realised that although x-rays had a positive use, excessive exposure was dangerous. I was always worried that something dreadful would befall my feet!

    I imagine that nowadays such devices are forbidden in shops because of the hazards associated with exposure, and yet body scans and localised radiographs are common enough as to possibly be dangerous. Perhaps we should all wear radiation detectors!

    Complain about this comment

  • 138. At 06:54am on 28 Dec 2009, powermeerkat wrote:

    If 1 mm X-raying was applied at the airports I and other U.S. taxpayers wouldn't have to pay for medical treatment at Ann Arbor hospital of an Islamic terorist whose banker-daddy could easily afford to pay for his treatement.

    Complain about this comment

  • 139. At 3:33pm on 28 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    Nice stuff sofa king. keep the feet up and rested;)


    old nat when given that multi pronged test when a kid for the BCG jab i showed a positive result.
    Either I had TB or I was slightly resistant.

    Born in parochial Malaysia as it happens;) so chances were immunity was in me. That was hen the X rayed me. because in the UK they kept records and can tell how many times someone gets an X ray.
    They still consider it dangerous.
    here they do dental X rays all the time . it seems with no concern . I Know you will know more on this considering the family connections.
    But that central recording will be seen as Big bro by many here.
    Personally I'd rather not have to keep all my medical records safe as I travel around through life.


    138 Meow.

    If americans had cared more about Knives and box cutters before 9/11 as British security did (because of them IRA bombers and terrorists) then we would not be in this situation.
    . Unless of course the terrorists got a first class ticket where the cabin crew would have provided them with a steak knife.

    Complain about this comment

  • 140. At 3:38pm on 28 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    meow
    and the guy that reports his son as a possible terrorist gets a bill.
    maybe he should have kept quiet. with the hope the guy does manage to detonate, then he will not have the medical bills.


    Great thinking .
    Meow.

    Complain about this comment

  • 141. At 4:22pm on 28 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    "Our national government has no business providing or controlling health care. "

    Bill 133

    I have this stuff that I SWEAR will cure all your ill. If you give me
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l91ISfcuzDw
    I will let you have some.
    It really works.

    Seems expensive. but what is a guaranteed cure worth. a cure for all problems that ail you.

    If you can't be bothered to buy some then it is your own fault that you die in the end.

    My kitty makes more of this fresh medicine every day. He is the cat that laid the golden Rocca.
    Labradors swear by it.

    Get it now while stocks last this kitty will not live for ever, supplies are limited.

    Complain about this comment

  • 142. At 4:30pm on 28 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    On Churchill's words. maybe we are just getting over the with that everything he said was worth listening to.

    Sure he was a great war time leader but he was not really a nice person it would seem and there is little evidence to say he was much of anything but a great rabble rouser.
    Which was what we needed in a war .

    His famous "I'll be sober and you still a hag " (yep I did change that a LITTLE:) quote was just another example of the love of quotes . Yep funny as hell. Does anyone remember the Issues being debated.
    Not much more than a bully trying to play the popular card the witty guy.

    I bet he looked around the room at his buddies and winked and nodded.
    But did it really prove what he was trying to prove?

    Or was he trying to prove he was funny and funny should win the debate?

    Complain about this comment

  • 143. At 5:53pm on 28 Dec 2009, BienvenueEnLouisiana wrote:

    142: I'm not all that read up in the sayings of Churchill beyond what I can find in a Google search, but I think the reason so many people aren't familiar with his sayings is due more to the passage of time rather than bad or inadequate education. Those speeches were made nearly 70 years ago now; only the most important, relevant, and powerful speeches survive in the public consciousness for longer than a generation. Most politicians come and go without really leaving such a permanent mark, but a lucky few get one or two speeches or sayings which will forever be remembered and associated with them. Some speeches like Bush Sr's "Read my lips, No new taxes" and Clinton's "I did not have sexual relations with [Monica Lewinsky]" are remembered for a time, but are forgotten after a few decades; others like Kennedy's "Ich bin ein Berliner", Reagan's "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall", and at least one of Bush Jr's Bushisms will likely last considerably longer.

    Anyways, I anxiously await whatever comes out of the reconciliation process in Congress, and I wish everyone a happy new year.

    Complain about this comment

  • 144. At 7:50pm on 28 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 142, cheesefuller

    If we look carefully enough into the lives and performance of every leader we could, almost without exception, find flaws as well as exceptional attributes in each of them, but in my book leaders like Churchill, FDR, and Eisenhower stand well above what passes for statesmen nowadays.

    I still remember sitting next to my parents in our tiny apartment in Brooklyn listening to FDR's speeches on the radio, and watching short clips of Churchill, Eisenhower, Patton and our troops in the World News they used to show before the movies in absolute awe. Now, when a world leader speaks on TV we lament the interruption of our favority sitcom.

    They may not have been perfect, but they were definitely the right men in the right jobs for one of the most difficult times in the history of humanity.

    Complain about this comment

  • 145. At 9:59pm on 28 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    First

    Thank you to the brave Dutch passenger who prevented another terrorist bombing.

    Second Janet Napolitano's orginal comments show her divorced from reality saying that the security measures worked.

    Third we should follow the Israeli example of airport security including profiling. Tell the ACLU their oppinions are not wanted as they seem more concerned about philosphy than people dying.

    Complain about this comment

  • 146. At 10:14pm on 28 Dec 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Yesterday our clueless Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said "the system worked." Well today she admitted it didn't. In fact it fell flat on its face.

    Yesterday our clueless President said the terrorist was a lone wolf. Today it's clear he was strongly affiliated with al Qaeda.

    What can we expect in the way of homeland security when the White House can't even keep an uninvited guest from crashing one of its own parties? How can people like those running our government possibly expect to prevent terrorists all over the world from bombing our planes, entering our country, acquiring nuclear weapons and using them on us?

    One day when those who thought that our free and open society could remain just as it was without even temporary compromises to some liberties and not again become a tragic victim of terrorists determined to destroy us are proven wrong, our democracy will come to an end. The replacement will be a frightful and frightening dictatorship that will know no bounds, no restraint around the world. And in response at home, a large part of our population will take the law into its own hands and go berserk. How can the government stop or even control it when there are over 200 million firearms in private hands? Those who stand in the way of shoot now ask questions later pre-emptive vigilante justice will themselves become victims of it. What's happening now is a terrible mistake.

    Complain about this comment

  • 147. At 11:12pm on 28 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 145, Magic

    "Third we should follow the Israeli example of airport security including profiling."

    We do, the problem is that most countries don't, and security in some countries is so lax it is a miracle incidents like this don't happen more often.

    A solution may be to request greater security, including profiling and screening, before passengers can board a plane destined for the USA. If a country refuses to comply, cancel all flights from that country to the USA. Obviously, there would be retaliation, but considering the circumstances doing nothing is not an option.

    Complain about this comment

  • 148. At 11:25pm on 28 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    Ref #147

    Actually the reason the terrorist did not go through the advanced scanner is because it is prohibited on U.S flights thats to the ACLU and The Obama justice dept directives.

    Along with the fact the CIA is not doing the interogation shows where this administrations priorties lie, especially with the friends of terrorists and criminals Eric Holder.

    Complain about this comment

  • 149. At 11:25pm on 28 Dec 2009, McJakome wrote:

    133. At 8:53pm on 27 Dec 2009, bill whiting wrote:
    "Our national government has no business providing or controlling health care. If the dirty politics and backroom dealing is the only way to get this bill passed, I think it's a demonstration that this is the wrong direction."

    So it is much better all around that rich CEO's get bonuses for failing to provide medical service paid for, or for cash [overpriced]? And if you don't have it, to beg for help on the streets and, if you don't get it, sorry you are dead? And this in a "Christian country."

    The sickest thing is that removing the bloat built into the private insurance system would result in cost savings for hospitals, small business and consumers. The downside being that the insurance execs would have to lower their monetary expectations, do without the private jet and forgo the 7th or 8th home. My heart bleeds for those poor execs!

    Complain about this comment

  • 150. At 01:21am on 29 Dec 2009, AndreaNY wrote:

    146. MarcusAureliusII:

    "Yesterday our clueless Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said 'the system worked.'"

    ***************

    Clueless is exactly how she appeared. She should be replaced.

    Complain about this comment

  • 151. At 01:26am on 29 Dec 2009, AndreaNY wrote:

    135. SaintDominick:

    Ref 132, Andrea

    Legislation to limit frivolous law suits is desperately needed but in my opinion it does not belong in a medical bill, if nothing else because unnecessary and costly lawsuits take place daily in every city in the USA for reasons other than medical malpractice.
    *******************

    These bills are not simply "medical bills". There's plenty in there, including, in one of them, something about rebating insurance company profits above a certain percentage. (The WSJ had an op-ed piece on it a few days ago.)

    There's really no good reason that Democrats ignored Republican demands for tort reform.

    Complain about this comment

  • 152. At 01:53am on 29 Dec 2009, oldnat wrote:

    151. AndreaNY
    "There's really no good reason that Democrats ignored Republican demands for tort reform."

    I really don't understand "tort reform". Someone like to explain it to me?

    Complain about this comment

  • 153. At 02:20am on 29 Dec 2009, AndreaNY wrote:

    152. oldnat: "I really don't understand "tort reform". Someone like to explain it to me?"

    ************************

    I am referring to setting limitations on the conditions under which one can sue and on the amounts awarded by juries. The goal would be to prevent doctors from having to practice defensive medicine.

    Complain about this comment

  • 154. At 02:25am on 29 Dec 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    "First kill all the lawyers." William Shakespeare
    Sounds ok to me. How come sharks won't eat lawyers? Professional courtesy. Healthcare will never be fair or cheap. The reasons most were ignored. 2000 some odd pages of mumbo jumbo, button, button who has the button. Hide the costs, increase government, spread the wealth among the government. When the the healthcare bill becomes the bill$$$$$$$$$. It will all be over, face it the kids are screwed. Out of control government, no incentive for the future, stagnation, decline. A Christmas gift for America's enemies. We need good legislation, good legislators, not the clowns in both parties. What a pathetic mess, the world is LMAO on the US. Meanwhile Japan, China, and Russia land the contracts for Iraq's oil needs. Russia will upgrade and modernize its Nuclear capabilities, but still cut. Meanwhile we face off the Islamic Fundimentalists with hope, unity, and values? Chesty Puller must be rolling in his grave!

    Complain about this comment

  • 155. At 02:26am on 29 Dec 2009, oldnat wrote:

    153. AndreaNY
    "The goal would be to prevent doctors from having to practice defensive medicine. "

    That sounds reasonable - but I presume it's more complicated than that since I can't see why the Democrats would oppose such a provision. I'm still confused!

    Complain about this comment

  • 156. At 02:42am on 29 Dec 2009, AndreaNY wrote:

    155. oldnat:

    "That sounds reasonable - but I presume it's more complicated than that since I can't see why the Democrats would oppose such a provision. I'm still confused!"

    **************************

    Yes, it is puzzling, especially since Obama went on record so often talking about reducing health care costs. Defensive medicine definitely drives up costs.

    The claim is that Dems are beholden to trial lawyers and, thus, won't mess with their high malpractice case fees. I suspect to them it's a Republican issue, which means they can ignore it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 157. At 02:57am on 29 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #148. MagicKirin: "Actually the reason the terrorist did not go through the advanced scanner is because it is prohibited on U.S flights "

    That's the reasoning the Dutch authorities gave, which was than contradicted by the American. More to the point is how and why someone on a watch list, barred from Great Britain, was not automatically flagged at check-in. He should never have made it to the gate, let alone boarding. The airline itself must bear some of the responsibility.

    Complain about this comment

  • 158. At 04:13am on 29 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #157

    But the more important question is why he was not put on the no fly list with all the warnings including by his father. In addition to buying a one way ticket with cash.

    It seems pretty clear that Obama's soft touch makes no differnt to Islamic terrorists. It is time to take the gloves off.

    George Bush was right in this War on Terrorism You are either with us or against us.

    Eric Holder is against us.

    Complain about this comment

  • 159. At 04:55am on 29 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #158. MagicKirin: " the more important question is why he was not put on the no fly list with all the warnings including by his father. In addition to buying a one way ticket with cash.

    It seems pretty clear that Obama's soft touch makes no differnt to Islamic terrorists. It is time to take the gloves off."

    I can't see that Mr Obama's influence would extend to the Netherlands and the Dutch airports. In an earlier post you blamed the lack of scanning, now it's some imagined "soft touch". Why not ask the question of the Dutch authorities who were responsible for letting him into the lounge area after ticketing? It seems to me that you would blame the present Administration for any problem that arises in the world. Do we blame President Bush for 9/11? After all, it was on his watch. Reasonable people do not, yet you would target Mr Obama at the slightest opportunity.

    Complain about this comment

  • 160. At 08:43am on 29 Dec 2009, wolfvorkian wrote:

    I am referring to setting limitations on the conditions under which one can sue and on the amounts awarded by juries. The goal would be to prevent doctors from having to practice defensive medicine.

    Andrea - and just how much defensive medicine do the doctors practice?

    Complain about this comment

  • 161. At 08:49am on 29 Dec 2009, wolfvorkian wrote:

    George Bush was right in this War on Terrorism You are either with us or against us.

    Magic.. George Bush blew it at Tora Bora... remember? Or did he do really well there - what do you think?

    Complain about this comment

  • 162. At 09:51am on 29 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #159
    It seems to me that you would blame the present Administration for any problem that arises in the world. Do we blame President Bush for 9/11? After all, it was on his watch. Reasonable people do not, yet you would target Mr Obama at the slightest opportunity.
    _______________

    First I said Obama approach won't change the minds of Islamic terrorists. I balme them. But go on the main HYS board and you will see a number of posters primarily from moslem nations and from European nations blaming the U.S for their foriegn policy as the reason for the attack. Which does not cover why Mumbia was ttacked.

    As far as blaming Obama considering he has blamed Bush for everything during his first year he deserves some blame for crippeling our intillgence and investigative abilities.

    Complain about this comment

  • 163. At 10:43am on 29 Dec 2009, D R Murrell wrote:

    Magic – Can you point to where in the time Obama has been in office he has crippled the intelligence services? I don’t recall any move to cut their budgets or change their mandates. This is just an example of no matter how complex the system you have, sometimes that system will fail. In the end neither the US, Israel nor any other country can stop every determined individual who want to make a statement by blowing themselves and/or someone else up.

    Surely if this is the fault of Obama and his administration, then by that logic Bush Junior was even more at fault? No can claim that Al Qaeda was not an existing threat they had attacked American interests previously, including on American soil. If Obama has crippled the US intelligence service (through some occult manner) then surely Bush must have done something even worse. To be fair if you are going to blame someone for not preventing one attack then you must blame everyone who fails to prevent an attack.

    In the end neither Obama or Bush can be blamed for either attacks, systems were in place on both occasions and on both occasions these systems failed. Luckily this time so did the terrorist.

    Complain about this comment

  • 164. At 12:39pm on 29 Dec 2009, PartTimeDon wrote:

    Ref #158 Magic
    George Bush was right in this War on Terrorism You are either with us or against us.
    Does that include the thousands of civilians who were carpet-bombed in the early years of both insurgencies because a suspect terrorist was hiding in their village? Way to win hearts and minds.
    How do you end this with an attitude like that? When George Bush said it it was looked upon as either ignorance gleaned from thinking that America could defeat terror like a bad guy in a John Wayne movie or a cynical reasoning for the suppression of the rights and freedoms of civilians both within America (patriot act) and within Iraq and Afghanistan (being bombed / shot).
    It's supposed to be a fundamental American right to say "you got it wrong" which you have no trouble exercising against Obama. Or does that mean you've decided now that you're against "us" (whoever that is).

    Complain about this comment

  • 165. At 12:57pm on 29 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #163
    Can you point to where in the time Obama has been in office he has crippled the intelligence services?


    ___________________-

    Here is one example instead of having the Chrismass terrorist being interogated by the CIA, he has been provided a lawyer and will provide no information. Eric Holder who should have never been confirmed is treating this as a crime instead of a war. Janet Napolitano still resists acknowledging this is a War against terrorism.

    Complain about this comment

  • 166. At 2:09pm on 29 Dec 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Canard;

    "It seems pretty clear that Obama's soft touch makes no differnt to Islamic terrorists. It is time to take the gloves off."

    Anyone with a brain who wasn't deaf, dumb, and blind or living in a cave these last nine years knew it wouldn't work. It was stupid to try but then what else would you expect from someone whose only prior expertise was as a community organizer and as a law journal editor? He read the law, tried to organize the terrorist community to conform to it....and he fell flat on his face. Just like everything else he's doing. At this rate he'll be a one termer for sure. One sixth of the largest economy in the world being turned upside down on passage of a bill the Senate didn't even have time to study and debate. Small wonder even party loyalty wasn't enough to persuade enough Senators to impose cloture on a promised Republican filibuster. It took bribes to a Senator from Nebraska to finally win even that.

    "I can't see that Mr Obama's influence would extend to the Netherlands and the Dutch airports."

    I remind you that unlike EU nations the US is still sovereign over its own territory. It can impose any conditions it sees fit in allowing foreigners to enter the US legally. If foreign governments don't comply, they don't get clearance to send aircraft or anything or anyone here and could be shot down if they try. If it violates international treaties already signed but is considered vital to US security, then the US abrogates the treaty exercising its escape clause.

    DR M

    "Can you point to where in the time Obama has been in office he has crippled the intelligence services?"

    Have you forgotten that under the President's approval the Justice Department will investigate the activities including capture, imprisonment, and interrogation of terrorists by CIA and others in the security and intelligence sector who performed their duty under orders by the previous administration with approval of that administration's attorneys? Have you forgotten that they may be at risk of having broken the law and be prosecuted anyway? That they may have to pay for their own legal defense out of their own pockets? In their minds your security now comes second to their own self interests in staying out of court, out of prison thanks to the Obama Administration. The Obama Administration has done crippling damage to the US intelligence and security community. Not only that, the investigations threatened to compromise foreign sources that needed to maintain their secrecy by exposing them making it questionable if there will be full cooperation in the future. The damage has been done. It may take generations to repair it. For this alone the Obama Administration may go down in history as one of the worst this nation has ever seen. Destroying our national security defenses just when they should have been beefed up for the sake of public opinion polls about the fairness of our methods such as GITMO. If we are successfully attacked again by al Qaeda, it will be a reminder that we got what we deserved by electing such an incompetent.

    Complain about this comment

  • 167. At 3:04pm on 29 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    "They may not have been perfect, but they were definitely the right men in the right jobs for one of the most difficult times in the history of humanity."

    St dom yep. like I said. in a war we need a rabble rouser to get the people going. Churchi did well.
    He was a good war time leader.

    but he was also from what I have seen,(we did Have to study the old guy) (not just marsh arab bombing) a bit of a jerk.
    I see nothing to suggest he was a fountain of wisdom just a good war time leader.
    He was rejected in Peace for a reason. I suspect it is because he was not such a good leader during peace.


    We could also say that Hitler was a great leader in a war, but he was, no one doubts ,more than just a bit of a jerk.

    There is the problem with quoting people all the time. Original thought is better .Imo.


    On no fly lists.
    It seems that not long ago people from the right side of this debate(political right) were saying the "no fly list" and "terrorist watch lists" were a breach of our rights as americans. Some suggested limiting guns to people on those lists.
    we had a flood of americans saying that the lists were wrong. that anyone could be put on them . that without trials they are put on them , why should someone be restricted because of a list that is unconstitutional.


    Well that was when it was un sales that were being debated in connection to these lists.
    Now they are all" hell why not take notice of these lists more"

    because if one cannot restrict gun sales to the people on these lists then how does one make the case to prevent them being sold a plane ticket.

    Complain about this comment

  • 168. At 3:08pm on 29 Dec 2009, frayedcat wrote:

    OMG sort out the fruit salad - apples to one side, oranges to the other. If an act is terrorism, then it is stateless...a crime, not a war. Organized international crime.

    http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2009/May/09-ag-525.html

    Complain about this comment

  • 169. At 4:35pm on 29 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #162. MagicKirin: "But go on the main HYS board . . ."

    You mean to say you contribute to other blogs and on-line discussions? I have neither the time nor inclination to sit at my computer all day. You wrote earlier that you are self-employed; if you had salaried employment you would not have (or should not have) the freedom to write so frequently. Your time might be better employed learning to spell, an exercise which would have the benefit of making your pronouncements appear reasonable.

    #166. MarcusAureliusII: Canard "It seems pretty clear that Obama's soft touch makes no differnt to Islamic terrorists. It is time to take the gloves off."

    You credit me for something I did not first write - your pal MagicKirin made the statement and I quoted it.

    "the US is still sovereign over its own territory. It can impose any conditions it sees fit in allowing foreigners to enter the US legally."

    As far as I am aware, Holland is not an American territory or dependency. It cannot force The Netherlands to comply with its requests. It can only impose its will within its own airspace, not over international waters. It is reported that the would-be bomber was on the British list and not permitted to enter the United Kingdom but that his name did not show on the American equivalent. Had Northwest the information, no doubt the incident would not have occurred.

    With regard to shooting down an American aircraft, that would be unethical and illegal over international waters. And what would be the point of it if everyone on board were to be killed by "friendly fire"? Your suggestion makes no sense. Dead is dead, however it occurs, and the US would be vilified at home and abroad.

    Complain about this comment

  • 170. At 4:45pm on 29 Dec 2009, squirrelist wrote:

    147. At 11:12pm on 28 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    A solution may be to request greater security, including profiling and screening, before passengers can board a plane destined for the USA. If a country refuses to comply, cancel all flights from that country to the USA. Obviously, there would be retaliation, but considering the circumstances doing nothing is not an option.

    Just popped in briefly, while checking I've still got a flighgt home and I can take all my winter woollies and chrissy prezzies (including liquid ones) with me . . .

    Aren't people getting a little hysterical? I have a perfectly obvious solution. You restrict all flights to the USA to naturists. No bombs up people's sleeves or in their underwear.

    Alternatively, you make everybody change into a disposable paper boiler suit at check-in. I'm sure the fashion-conscious among us would soon be able to pay a bit extra for a Dolce & Gabbana or Paul Smith one. . . It's much simpler and only a small added inconvenience to the pestiferous process now.

    (Except probably for me --I had to take my blasted shoes off at Stanstead on the way out, which is not easy for someone like me, and meant I was late getting to the departure gate, but what set the alarm off was I suspect not my shoes but a bit of stainless steel in my spine the NHS kindly put in years ago . . I can just imagine them bringing in full body scanners and me having to prove somehow it's not a surgically-implanted detonator. . .)

    It really is time people grasped that mostly they run a far greater risk of dying unpleasantly every time they get into a car. As in the French village where I'm staying these hols: another five teenagers killed, one in a coma, last month. Again. That's over 20 in the last five years from a village of less than 2,000 people now. I am a damn sight more nervous about being in a car around there than about being on a plane.

    Complain about this comment

  • 171. At 5:18pm on 29 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    Well said that squirrel.

    Could I have my suit with tiger stripes on it?

    Sorry to say your temporary spokesman was killed earlier this month;(

    Complain about this comment

  • 172. At 6:11pm on 29 Dec 2009, PartTimeDon wrote:

    Janet Napolitano still resists acknowledging this is a War against terrorism.
    Good! It about time someone in the US had the stones to point out that the notion of a war on terror is just stupid.

    Complain about this comment

  • 173. At 6:22pm on 29 Dec 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    Ref. 169, David Cunard:

    "As far as I am aware, Holland is not an American territory or dependency. It cannot force The Netherlands to comply with its requests."

    Oh, yes, it can. The U.S. can simply deny landing rights to flights out of Holland until the Dutch Government complies.

    Not that I'm advocating such a policy, mind you. The Dutch are our allies after all. Anything that would hurt the Dutch economy even as an indirect consequence of terrorist activity would be handing our enemies a victory.

    Complain about this comment

  • 174. At 6:26pm on 29 Dec 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    Ref. 164, PartTimeDon:

    "Does that include the thousands of civilians who were carpet-bombed in the early years of both insurgencies because a suspect terrorist was hiding in their village?"

    I'm not aware of USAF using carpet bombing even once since Vietnam. Do you have a reference?

    Complain about this comment

  • 175. At 6:40pm on 29 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #172
    PartTimeDon wrote:
    Janet Napolitano still resists acknowledging this is a War against terrorism.
    Good! It about time someone in the US had the stones to point out that the notion of a war on terror is just stupid.

    _____________

    Than what would you call it. We have people who are not part of any recognized commiting homicide bombing on civilian targets.

    You probaly thought that the trains to the concetration camps were relocations, or that the Death March was a leval 5 hike!

    Complain about this comment

  • 176. At 7:20pm on 29 Dec 2009, frayedcat wrote:

    Can we also start "wars" on ignorance, prejudice, and plaid polyester pants?

    Complain about this comment

  • 177. At 7:26pm on 29 Dec 2009, Tino wrote:

    "It about time someone in the US had the stones to point out that the notion of a war on terror is just stupid."

    Perhaps we should declare a war on Islam instead?

    Complain about this comment

  • 178. At 7:49pm on 29 Dec 2009, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    144. At 7:50pm on 28 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:
    "..., but in my book leaders like Churchill, FDR, and Eisenhower stand well above what passes for statesmen nowadays."

    "They may not have been perfect, but they were definitely the right men in the right jobs for one of the most difficult times in the history of humanity."
    __________

    They were larger than life.

    Giants.

    Complain about this comment

  • 179. At 7:55pm on 29 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #73. Andy Post: "The U.S. can simply deny landing rights to flights out of Holland until the Dutch Government complies."

    Conversely, the Dutch can deny landing rights to all aircraft originating in the United States. America is not the only nation in the world which can make demands. My guess is that there are far more American citizens and residents flying to Europe (and back) than Europeans flying to the United States. It follows then that the losers would be Americans and American airlines, not Europeans. You may not recall, but British airspace was similarly compromised with the bombing over Scotland, at Lockerbie. In that, and this, particular case, it was an American airline which was deleterious in its duty of care.

    Complain about this comment

  • 180. At 8:45pm on 29 Dec 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    Ref. 179, David:

    "America is not the only nation in the world which can make demands."

    No, of course not, but American demands still carry significantly greater economic weight. We're still the world's ultimate consumer, and let's face it, the customer's always right (even when we're wrong... which we have been with disturbing frequency lately). After all, the world is filled with potential vendors. A market in the U.S. is still economic nirvana to developing countries. China reaffirmed that.

    "My guess is that there are far more American citizens and residents flying to Europe (and back) than Europeans flying to the United States."

    That would be my guess, too, although I'm not sure the margin is all that wide. I argue, though, that that would mean Europe would suffer more. Europe would be in the position of losing income that the U.S. already is already doing without.

    All of this is moot to my way of thinking anyway. Why ever would either side want to do this? The Dutch aren't in favor of al Qaeda using their country as a launching pad for attacks against the U.S. If Washington identified a gap in its security, the Hague wouldn't need to be pressured to close it. They'd do it post haste, and I doubt we'd even know of it. And the converse is equally true.

    Complain about this comment

  • 181. At 8:56pm on 29 Dec 2009, AndreaNY wrote:

    160. wolfvorkian: "Andrea - and just how much defensive medicine do the doctors practice?"

    **************
    Good question. There isn't a recent statistic on it. I'm not sure you can assess its cost by studying medical malpractice awards and lawsuits, though. I think the behavior of providers drives the costs up. How many of those scans are done to protect against the patient suing the doctor later on for missing something?

    It's odd that this wasn't addressed by Democrats, especially since Obama, at one point, seemed serious about reducing waste. Reducing wasteful spending seems to have taken a backseat to "reform". Go figure.

    Complain about this comment

  • 182. At 8:57pm on 29 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #180. Andy Post: "American demands still carry significantly greater economic weight."

    I don't believe that is true today. Except for the sad case of Tony Blair, Europe doesn't jump when America tells it to.

    Complain about this comment

  • 183. At 9:15pm on 29 Dec 2009, frayedcat wrote:

    #181 - medical malpractice tort reform is introduced in the bill in form of state demonstration grants - this should please those of the aileron droit since tort law is a states right and a matter of state common law for negligence (not federal), as is medical licensure and regulation. You can read the current version of the bill online if you like

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d111:6:./temp/~bssCdac::

    And you can ask yourself the question -- what remedy should a patient have who checked into the hospital for a blood test, and left with a lobotomy for example? None? If we had national health care, there would be a form of governmental immunity from damages....but with private for-profit (a lot of profit) care shouldn't the patient who was harmed get a piece of those profits for such a harmful mistake? Isn't a lot of the profit landing in the lap of the insurance companies thru premium payments both from the medical providers and the patients....Or should the States be a little tougher on qualifying and regulating medical care quality..costs...insurance rates?

    Complain about this comment

  • 184. At 9:15pm on 29 Dec 2009, AndreaNY wrote:

    179. David Cunard:

    "In that, and this, particular case, it was an American airline which was deleterious in its duty of care. "

    ****************

    Some airlines have turned security over to the government. It's unclear whether American Airlines has done so. Meanwhile, the Transportation Security Administration has no offical head at this point.

    Complain about this comment

  • 185. At 10:14pm on 29 Dec 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    Ref. 182, David:

    "I don't believe that is true today. Except for the sad case of Tony Blair, Europe doesn't jump when America tells it to."

    Check this out:

    http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/top/dst/2009/10/balance.html

    Click through the country names on the list. The graphs show that the trend is a return to business as usual (which I find a tad alarming given the lack of action in Washington to curtail Wall St.'s irresponsible behavior).

    Although it's a common assertion, I debate whether Europe ever jumped when America told it to, except maybe right after the war when the U.S. had the money Europe needed to rebuild, and even then France, the largest European country with the largest European city (excluding Russia), vigorously asserted its independence. For that matter Spain (neutral during the war) never kowtowed to us, either. Nor the Swiss for that matter (until recently). And even the U.K. saw fit (properly in my opinion) not to join us in Vietnam, even though the U.S. would have welcomed the help.

    Moreover, the current world financial system is as much a creation of the British as it is of the Americans. It's hard to explain how London could be the financial capitol of the world otherwise. The Empire may have failed, but the business relationships forged in that era lived on and the U.K. made good use of them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 186. At 10:22pm on 29 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 175, Magic

    "Than what would you call it."

    In my opinion this problem requires a two-prong policy. We need to find Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaida hierarchy that remains intent in carrying jihad against us. We also need to determine the root causes of the hatred and address it in a manner that demonstrates respect for the rights and beliefs of other cultures.

    Unfortunately, we have been doing the opposite to what should be done, and instead of reducing the threat of terrorism we have exacerbated the problem to the boiling point.

    Trying to capture a few hundred fanatics with a huge military force and the most sophisticated and lethal weapons in existence is simply ineffective. Our military is designed to fight formal armies, not elusive civilians running from one cave to another at night, and tending their goats or camels during the day. The solution is to infiltrate Al Qaeda using spies to find its leaders and then use rapid deployment forces to destroy its leadership, organizational and funding capabilities.

    Engaging in what many people regard as a cultural war can only make matters worse than they already are, they may please a certain ally in the Middle East that must be jumping up and down in joy every time our drones destroy apartment buildings and kill school children, but I seriously doubt anyone else is too impressed by what we are doing.

    Last, but not least, we must improve security at home, not only at airports and ports but also along our northern and southern borders and all coastal areas.

    Complain about this comment

  • 187. At 10:22pm on 29 Dec 2009, McJakome wrote:

    176. At 7:20pm on 29 Dec 2009, frayedcat wrote:
    "Can we also start 'wars' on ignorance, prejudice, and plaid polyester pants?"
    Bravo! President Lyndon Johnson [no doubt a favorite of our American nationalist posters] declared a "War on Poverty" with a resulting comic retort by a "poor person" on Laugh In, "Why are they making war on us?"
    American local administrations also often declare war on: pornography, prostitution, Halloween mischief, etc. FOX "news" claims that librals are conducting a War on Christmas, or on religion or on Christianity.

    Thats a lot of war talk. According to my Webster's [i.e. American English] dictionary: War -n. 1. armed conflict between nations or factions within a nation.

    for purists, that is one of several definitions, and the others are more general. This one excludes terrorism on two counts, as being an object of war. And common sense does too, for how is it possible to make war on an idea, or a sense of grievance?

    The "War on X" is a glib propaganda ploy that is even convincing to some people [like myself, initially] who should know better. The only effective way to counter ideas or ideology is with ideas and [non-military] actions.

    Complain about this comment

  • 188. At 10:30pm on 29 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 170, Squirellist

    "You restrict all flights to the USA to naturists."

    Let's not forget Timothy McVeigh...

    The truth is that no matter how hard we try, there will always be dangers and people intent on harming us, our allies, and their fellow citizens.

    Under the present circumstances the best we could do is to focus strictly on the terrorist organization that is threatening our security, and address the reasons for the anti-American feelings that currently exists in some many countries around the world by understanding the reason (s) for the hatred and addressing it pragmatically and with long term goals in mind, instead of the knee jerk reactions that have dominated our foreign policy since 9/11.

    Complain about this comment

  • 189. At 10:45pm on 29 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    Although I know some on this board will have to take a racial cheap shot.

    We and other Western countries should take instruction from Israel which does profiling and does not care what groups like the ACLU think.

    There has not been a sucessful airport terrorist or hijacking in Israel in over 30 years.

    Like it or not Plaestinian apologists; terrorists who are Moslems are trying to blow up planes, not Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddihts or atheists

    Complain about this comment

  • 190. At 11:37pm on 29 Dec 2009, frayedcat wrote:

    Israel airport security looks pretty oppressive - not the way one would prefer to live if one lived in a free country ... at peace. It looks like they use strip searches more than profiling....

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Gurion_International_Airport

    Complain about this comment

  • 191. At 11:39pm on 29 Dec 2009, oldnat wrote:

    189. MagicKirin
    "Although I know some on this board will have to take a racial cheap shot."

    Why should anyone need to do so, when you regularly do that?

    Complain about this comment

  • 192. At 11:55pm on 29 Dec 2009, PartTimeDon wrote:

    Ref 174# Andy Post
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1631533.stm

    Complain about this comment

  • 193. At 00:16am on 30 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    frayedcat wrote:
    Israel airport security looks pretty oppressive - not the way one would prefer to live if one lived in a free country ... at peace. It looks like they use strip searches more than profiling....

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Gurion_International_Airport

    _____________

    Efficent and more concerned about people saftety souncd like a responsible approach.

    And if you go to countries like Syria or Yemen, israel has every right to question you. Remember traveling on a plane is a privilidge not a right.

    Complain about this comment

  • 194. At 00:26am on 30 Dec 2009, PartTimeDon wrote:

    Ref 175# Magic
    "Than what would you call it. We have people who are not part of any recognized commiting homicide bombing on civilian targets."
    I have a number of names for it but I'll settle for "An Exercise in Futility". Tell me how you win?

    You probaly thought that the trains to the concetration camps were relocations, or that the Death March was a leval 5 hike!
    Putting aside the non sequitor (and spelling), how dare you make such a disgusting accusation!
    The invasion of Iraq has caused 600,000 war related civilian deaths not including deaths due to disease or illness caused by the the break down of basic services early on. It has caused the relocation of a further 1.5 million people. If you can defend this war, you're a lot closer to justifying anything the Nazis did than I'll ever be.

    Complain about this comment

  • 195. At 01:20am on 30 Dec 2009, John_From_Dublin wrote:

    # 169 David Cunard wrote: [to MagicMushroom]

    "Your time might be better employed learning to spell,"

    True

    "an exercise which would have the benefit of making your pronouncements appear reasonable."

    'Reasonable'? No. Mildly less ludicrous - perhaps.

    Complain about this comment

  • 196. At 01:28am on 30 Dec 2009, Sam Tyler wrote:

    #189

    Hmmm, an interesting point.

    Muslims are trying to blow up planes, therefore we should racially profile Muslims for security.

    Which works. Except with folks like Richard Reed and Jose Padea you'd assume they are Rastafarian or Catholic based on their background So you'd have to ask them 'Are you a Muslim?'.

    That would work.

    In the mean time perhaps we could all fly naked?

    Oh yeah, now we're talking.

    Det. Insp. Ron Craven

    Complain about this comment

  • 197. At 01:47am on 30 Dec 2009, Sam Tyler wrote:

    #166

    What a delightful rant!

    To be fair you should apply your own logic to the previous administration. Both were in power when a single whack job got on board a plane and tried to bring it down. Neither the shoe bomber or the pants bomber succeeded, partly due to passenger action and partly due to incompetence.

    In both cases security at airports was breached. In both cases the plot (and others foiled on both administrations watch) failed. By this measure each administration is equally culpable.

    Of course, if Obama does go the next 7 years without another 9/11 then his, like every other administration since Pearl Harbor, can be said to have not been asleep at the switch.

    Oh yes, except one.

    Ron

    Complain about this comment

  • 198. At 01:56am on 30 Dec 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    So which is it? Janet Napolitano said in the media all day Sunday that the system worked. President Obama said today there was a systematic breakdown. When Napolitano spoke Sunday was she lying to the American People trying to create a political coverup to what has obviously turned out to be one absolute fiasco or was she so ignorant and incompetent that she didn't know failure when she saw it? Which is it? The story won't even begin to go away until she goes away. She is symptomatic of what is wrong with the Obama Administration over a wide range of areas where desparately needed expertise simply isn't there. And when it is, it isn't listened to anyway such as sending only 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan when the top expert General McCrystal asked for 40,000. I predict Napolitano will be gone within a month. She doesn't know a hill of beans about national security. Go home Janet, find something to do you understand or where incompetence is accepted as the norm and won't wreck the country.

    Canard, the US can and does set the rules of who may enter the US and what procedures must be followed to be allowed legal entry. If foreign governments or private companies (including American companies) don't comply, they can and should be denied right of entry. If it is a commercial airliner and it takes off without permissoin of the US, it should be told to turn back. If it cannot be forced to turn back or forced down in some neutral territory that will accept it, then upon entering US air space, it should and most likely will be shot out of the sky on orders of the President of the United States on the assumption that it might constitute a terrorist attack. BTW, if you fly over certain areas of Washington DC such as private pilots have been warned against, you may be shot down also. I think these are now standing orders and don't require a presidential approval on each occasion. You'll recall that heads rolled when Air Force One flew over Manhattan without authorization a few months ago (President Obama was not on board and did not authorize that overflight.) It might also have been shot down. The decision for that overflight was just one more example of the incompetence of President Obama's administration. But then what do you expect when his entourage working with the Secret Service can't even keep uninvited people from successfully gate crashing a party at the White House. This administration looks like a hopeless cause. One term only if he isn't impeached first.

    Complain about this comment

  • 199. At 02:13am on 30 Dec 2009, Sam Tyler wrote:

    #198

    Even funnier.

    Obama bad because 10,000 troops less than asked for in Afghanistan. Bush not bad when he sent 250,000 fewer troops than asked for to Iraq.

    Obama bad because Secretary says stupid thing. Bush not bad when Rumsfeld, Cheney et al say many stupid things and refuse to resign. Using that standard the entire Bush administration should have been gone just on New Orleans alone. Include himself. Hell of a job, Brownie.

    As for Air Force One being shot down over Manahttan, do you think the two F16's escorting it would have been the right panes to do the job, or should they have called some others in?

    It is true that this administration has been more likely to hold it's appointees accountable than the last, which is good. But that tends to be a party thing in the US anyway. Eliot Spitzer resigns, Mark Sanford hangs on in there.

    I do find the impeachment idea interesting. If the Republicans are hugely successful in next years mid terms, assuming the recovery is slow enough to allow for folks to still be feeling bad from the recession (a distinct possibility) they can take the house, but not the Senate. So the hope that a Democratic Senate would impeach Obama unless they had photographs of him in a John Rigas style party is remote and unlikely to the point of fantasy.

    It is amazing how desperate the crazies have got in the desire to see our President fail. The next 7 years are going to be fun.

    Ron

    Complain about this comment

  • 200. At 03:02am on 30 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #198. MarcusAureliusII: "Canard, the US can and does set the rules of who may enter the US and what procedures must be followed to be allowed legal entry."

    As do all sovereign nations; the United States is not the only country to regulate admission. Indeed, the Nigerian was refused a British visa and thus he could never enter the United Kingdom, the same fate that has befallen American citizens when they are deemed unsuitable. Why this young man was granted an American visa beggars belief.

    "If it is a commercial airliner and it takes off without permissoin of the US, it should be told to turn back."

    Now we are getting into the realms of fantasy. Neither nations, airports nor airlines require "permission of the US" to fly anywhere. An aircraft might be barred from landing on American soil, but I hardly think that blowing up an airliner full of American travellers returning home would achieve anything other than ridicule and international condemnation. Indeed, if non-Americans were aboard, for argument's sake Chinese or Russian, a state of war, the conventional kind, could swiftly occur. Think 'Lusitania'.

    Answer me this: what would be the point of the American Air Force destroying an American-made aircraft full of American citizens when it was not entirely confident that the plane would be destroyed by one of its passengers? If it is to be blown up, what difference would it make who does it - the US air-force would not have saved one solitary life and might have destroyed more people than could have been killed. There is such a thing as overkill.

    Complain about this comment

  • 201. At 07:40am on 30 Dec 2009, Tino wrote:

    "determine the root causes of the hatred"

    They say, themselves (therefore this is primary source knowledge), that their motivation is religious. We do not need to 'determine' anything, unless you are arrogant enough to think you know better than they do what motivates them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 202. At 08:36am on 30 Dec 2009, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    201. At 07:40am on 30 Dec 2009, Tino wrote:
    "determine the root causes of the hatred"
    They say, themselves (therefore this is primary source knowledge), that their motivation is religious. We do not need to 'determine' anything, unless you are arrogant enough to think you know better than they do what motivates them.
    __________________________________

    Tino - you use the word 'religious' as if by itself it explains everything. I hope you didn't mean that.

    It seems to me and to many other commentors that these jihadists hate the West for a number of reasons.

    If you have 'primary source' information you can help us all by telling us about them, so we will be better able to appreciate their perspective and perhaps address the causes of this hatred.

    KScurmudgeon

    Complain about this comment

  • 203. At 09:47am on 30 Dec 2009, D R Murrell wrote:

    Magic – Sorry going back a bit here, but why should the prisoner have been handed over the CIA? The CIA mandate is to deal with external threats, which being Nigerian this man was, but the actual attack was attempted inside the USA. Other agencies hold the jurisdiction in that instance, say the FBI, NSA or day I say it Homeland Security which was set up just for this type of thing. Also why shouldn’t the man be given legal advice and counsel? Surely that is the right of everyone arrested in the US, American citizen or not?

    Marcus – I’m sorry if a member of the CIA is accused of breaking international law, including the Geneva Convention (which the USA was a primary signatory) that member must be investigated and if necessary prosecuted. No agency within a modern democracy can be seen to act above and beyond the law, there must be accountability. I understand that security agencies do act beyond the mandates that set them up, do things that most reasonable people would believe wrong. These black ops, wet jobs and the such are all done under the cover of plausible deniability, the knowledge that if these actions are discovered that the perpetrators acted alone and without the protection of their agency.

    The argument that agents or soldiers were simply ‘following orders’ hasn’t held water since 1945, again at the insistence of the USA. Also why should the US population pay for the defence of someone accused of breaking their laws?

    KSC – One of the main reasons that jihadists hate the West is because they see their way of life threatened. They are made up of people who cannot cope with the rapid change of society and culture around them and blame the West, who appears to embrace this change. They are the disenfranchised and confused, even those who appear to be from privileged backgrounds, who cling to things that don’t seem to change. For many religion becomes the bedrock of their sense of identity the one constant in a confusing changing world. These people mistakenly believe that religion does not change, just like every other social construct, not realising that the interpretation of their beloved religion has been twisted to promote specific political goals.

    All religions can be used to legitimise killing the unbeliever, the Old Testament has more calls to arms and worse punishments to be handed out to the unbeliever than the Koran. Fundamentalism has been on the rise in all the Abrahamic religions for over a century, in Christianity it can be seen in the evangelical movement typified worst by certain pro-lifers who, ignoring the inherent hypocrisy, see nothing wrong in attacking and killing doctors who perform abortions. In Judaism certain branches of Zionism did carry out terrorism before the formation of Israel (sorry Magic but its well documented), now certain Judaic religious schools are causing concern in Israel by producing soldiers who are refusing to follow orders. Armed religious conservatives produced by conservative religious schools sounds familiar. In Islam it is the Jihadists.

    The Jihadists seem the worst to us because they are the outsiders and because of their numbers. Christian fundamentalists are smaller in number and either say things people tend to actually agree with or are seen as a bit of joke. Islamic fundamentalists seem to be without end, partly because Islam is a major religion, especially in poor or more obviously unfair areas of the world, and partly because unlike many only nominal Western Christians the majority of Muslims still actually believe. It is hard to get many fundamentalist Christians because other than possibly Christmas it’s pretty difficult to find that many of the faithful. The West is secular, which is why it is such a threat to the Islamic way of life, within a couple of generations the West has gone from a position of being almost entirely Christian believers to where practicing Christians are almost the minority. Secular West with its money and toys must be very attractive to the young, to the Islamic faithful it must almost seems as a deliberate attempt to undermine their traditional way of life (in some case it is a deliberate attempt).

    The West is the Great Satan because it tempts the faithful into idolatry and sin, so some of the faithful see it as their sacred duty to take the fight to the minions of this encroaching evil, basically to us.

    Complain about this comment

  • 204. At 09:59am on 30 Dec 2009, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    193. At 00:16am on 30 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    frayedcat wrote:
    Israel airport security looks pretty oppressive - not the way one would prefer to live if one lived in a free country ... at peace. It looks like they use strip searches more than profiling....
    -
    Efficent and more concerned about people saftety souncd like a responsible approach. And if you go to countries like Syria or Yemen, israel has every right to question you. Remember traveling on a plane is a privilidge not a right.

    ____________________________________


    Here I entirely agree with Magic -

    The level of second guessing, excited concern, and after the fact scrutiny we are seeing implies that we expect Homeland Security and the developed world to provide one-hundred percent protection for the travelling public.
    Although millions are being spent, the present system is clearly intended mainly to give an illusion of security to the public, while setting in place a randomized deterrent " Better not try it, we might be looking" to potential terrorists. No one is prepared to interrupt anyone's travel plans significantly.
    Making grandmothers and Western business travelers take off their shoes and stand for a wand is for show, so that people all over the world won't panic and stop buying airline tickets.

    I hear that there are two primary lists of potential airline terrorists - persons of concern, about five million, and the no-fly list, about half a million. The persons of concern are so numerous that they can buy tickets for cash, take no luggage, and perhaps even make it a one-way trip, and no one takes notice. There are a score or so of concerns that will get you on the list, including hanging out with jihadists and outlaws in Yemen, studying bomb making, giving angry speeches in public calling on the faithful to destroy Westerners, and the like: checking a large enough number of these boxes might get you special attention.

    One of these five million got a ticket and got onto an airplane from Amsterdam to Detroit, and except for some technical problems would have blown up the plane on Christmas.

    While we have documented reasons to question the motives of five million or so people - doubtless ninety percent of them and more are innocent well-meaning folks, will not commit terrorist activities, probably don't know they are on our list, and should be left free to do as they wish. But we have seen a small number of those who fit the description take action and attempt or succeed in attacking innocent travelers and earning their martyrdom by terror.

    Because we are unwilling to offend the flying public, we are not making the efforts we can to identify and stop active threats.

    We should put two and two together and evaluate the profiles of those we know have stepped out to act (bought a ticket and prepared an attack, for example). Using this data as a set of templates, we could review the files of the persons of concern as a set, sort them for threat level, and then track these individuals for activities that might indicate a move to an attack - like buying international tickets, applying for a visa to a target nation, contact with persons known to be threats, etc. Tickets for international travel should be immediately restricted for these people until specific approval is granted to them, based on clear understanding of the purpose of their trip. Reasonable special requirements could be made - submit all luggage for examination a day or two before departure, no carry on luggage, full personal search - as terms for an otherwise normal flight.
    They should be interviewed respectfully and with full privacy under the explicit presumption that they are innocent, but their right to travel to a secured nation would be based on a careful evaluation and an individual approval.

    This would offend a lot of people, but probably 4,500,000 or more would find they were never bothered, and 500,000, if they chose to visit in the West, would have to identify themselves, answer questions, and go through a thorough search before departure. The price of a secure trip.

    Isn't this what we all expect, if we think about it? Profiling is never perfect, and this isn't exactly perfect liberty, but the sham program we have had to date hasn't even secured us from our fears, and there is more to fear, apparently, than fear itself.

    KScurmudgeon

    Complain about this comment

  • 205. At 09:59am on 30 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #203
    Sorry going back a bit here, but why should the prisoner have been handed over the CIA? The CIA mandate is to deal with external threats, which being Nigerian this man was, but the actual attack was attempted inside the USA. Other agencies hold the jurisdiction in that instance, say the FBI, NSA or day I say it Homeland Security which was set up just for this type of thing. Also why shouldn’t the man be given legal advice and counsel? Surely that is the right of everyone arrested in the US, American citizen or not?
    __________________

    First since he an enemy combant so he does not have the right to a U.S paid lawyer. the CIA can use harsher interogation methods than the justice dept.

    Complain about this comment

  • 206. At 10:24am on 30 Dec 2009, D R Murrell wrote:

    Magic – ‘Since he (is) an enemy combatant’ – No he is not, he was not captured fighting the only combat he saw was the passenger and aircrew throwing him to the floor. He is a failed lone bomber, a terrorist, to even suggest he is a soldier of some kind gives him more legitimacy than he deserves. Unless you are going to suggest that everyone who plants a bomb is an enemy combatant, and I don’t recall the Unabomber ever being described as such, you have to treat him the same as every other loon who thinks blowing people up is a good way to deliver a message.

    Again it is illegal for the CIA to act within the US, just as it would for MI6 in the UK. He has to turned over to the appropriate, and legal, authorities.

    Complain about this comment

  • 207. At 10:29am on 30 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    It is true that this administration has been more likely to hold it's appointees accountable than the last, which is good. But that tends to be a party thing in the US anyway. Eliot Spitzer resigns, Mark Sanford hangs on in there.

    (Don't play the noble card with the Democratic party, charlie Rangel and chris Dodd haven't resigned. As far as Sanford he should)

    (As far as appointees who should be dismessed Napolitano for incomptence and Holder for failure domesticly to prosecute people of group that he is politically allied to: ACORN and the Black Panthers and pushing to make terrorism a crime issue instead of a war issue)

    I do find the impeachment idea interesting. If the Republicans are hugely successful in next years mid terms, assuming the recovery is slow enough to allow for folks to still be feeling bad from the recession (a distinct possibility) they can take the house, but not the Senate. So the hope that a Democratic Senate would impeach Obama unless they had photographs of him in a John Rigas style party is remote and unlikely to the point of fantasy.

    It is amazing how desperate the crazies have got in the desire to see our President fail. The next 7 years are going to be fun.

    (Impeachment can't happen because of bad decision and spending too much time golfing. But unless things change we will only have to endure 3 years more)

    Complain about this comment

  • 208. At 11:00am on 30 Dec 2009, D R Murrell wrote:

    Marcus – I’m slightly confused what would Obama be impeached for?

    Only two US presidents have ever been impeached*, Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, both acquitted and ever since the Johnson trial the established precedent is that a president cannot be impeached solely on political grounds.

    * Obviously it would have been three but Nixon did the ‘honourable’ thing and resigned before any impeachment was announced. Okay he jumped ship because he knew he would be found guilty.

    Complain about this comment

  • 209. At 12:42pm on 30 Dec 2009, PartTimeDon wrote:

    Ref# 206 D R Murrell.
    If apprehended on US soil, Homeland Security is resonsible any potential terror suspects until the facts are established. If it is not seen as terrorism, the FBI then take over.
    For Magic to get his wish and let the CIA torture the suspect, the plane would have to have been diverted to land outside the US, in a country which was willing to hand over the suspect to the CIA and either allow interrogation on their soil, or allow the suspect to be "rendered" to somewhere that did.

    Complain about this comment

  • 210. At 1:03pm on 30 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 200, David

    "Indeed, if non-Americans were aboard, for argument's sake Chinese or Russian, a state of war, the conventional kind, could swiftly occur. Think 'Lusitania'."

    The definition of terrorism depends largely on who the victims are. Luis Posada Carriles, the Cuban terrorist and CIA operative that blew up a Cuban airliner in 1976, was released from jail in 2007 after a brief incarceration on immigration charges, and now enjoys the comforts of life and the full protection of the law on the USA. After all, he only killed 73 Cubans and Venezuelans...

    The Nigerian terrorist involved in the latest incident should not be called an enemy combatant, he tried to carry out an act of terrorism and insinuating he is a fighter captured in the batteflied gives him a stature - and rights under international law - that he does not deserve, regardless of what Alberto Gonzalez and Magic may think enemy combatant means.

    Complain about this comment

  • 211. At 1:16pm on 30 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #209 and 210

    First the CIA can do harsher interogations that are not considered torture, unless you follow guideline by the ACLU.


    He has no right to a lawyer under U.S law.

    Complain about this comment

  • 212. At 1:18pm on 30 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    You probaly thought that the trains to the concetration camps were relocations, or that the Death March was a leval 5 hike!
    Putting aside the non sequitor (and spelling), how dare you make such a disgusting accusation!
    The invasion of Iraq has caused 600,000 war related civilian deaths not including deaths due to disease or illness caused by the the break down of basic services early on. It has caused the relocation of a further 1.5 million people. If you can defend this war, you're a lot closer to justifying anything the Nazis did than I'll ever be.

    _______________-

    First the accusations are quite accurate.

    Second regarding the liberation of Iraq the majority killed are the results of the Islamic terrorists. So stop blaming the U.S for homicide deaths!

    Complain about this comment

  • 213. At 1:40pm on 30 Dec 2009, D R Murrell wrote:

    Magic – I suppose the 3,200 to 4,300 civilians killed directly by the invasion don’t really count then. These figures are given up to 20th October 2003 by a US study and do not include any killed by later insurgents and/or terrorists. These are specified as non-combatants, so those who did not raise arms against the Coalition. As this is a study by a Coalition nation I would guess these figures are conservative. The Iraq Body Count project (which will of course be ignored since they are obviously a wet liberal lot) gives the civilian death toll of 17,338 as of 1st May 2003.

    Irrespective that is at least 3,200 men, women and children who died as a direct result of our bogus war. Bogus because as is becoming clearer and clearer those in power knew the claimed justifications for this war were overplayed, not supported by the relevant security agencies* or were simply lies**.

    * MI6 told Blair before the invasion that there were serious doubts about the original claims, which were not the actual claims he stated as evidence for the war. By the way MI5, as you have claimed previously never made any claims, as MI5 is internal security and would not have any role in spying on Iraq.

    ** There was never going to be any credible link between Saddam and Al Qaeda, Saddam was secular Sunni (as was the ruling Baathist Party) and Al Qaeda are Shiite, they hated Saddam and publicly said so.

    Complain about this comment

  • 214. At 1:58pm on 30 Dec 2009, PartTimeDon wrote:

    First the CIA can do harsher interogations that are not considered torture, unless you follow guideline by the ACLU.
    He has no right to a lawyer under U.S law.
    ____________________________
    Just cos some politically motivated shirt defines it as something different, doesn't mean it isn't torture.
    Also, in the civilised world we call people like this "criminal suspects" and they are afforded the right of a lawyer so that they can stand trial and be proven to have broken the law or not and face justice. If he was American he'd have the right to a lawyer even if had done exactly the same thing.

    Second regarding the liberation of Iraq the majority killed are the results of the Islamic terrorists. So stop blaming the U.S for homicide deaths!
    _____________________________
    No. Saddam for all that he was a brutal dictator was able to keep terrorists in check. He also keep hospitals open and clean water running.
    He should have been replaced the way Milosevic was, or the way the Ayatollah looks like he's going to be. Put a Mcdonalds (or Hallal equivalent) on every corner, flood the place with music and films and media that trumpets freedom, democracy, equal rights and a better standard of living. I doubt it would have prevented bloodshed or even civil war, but it would not be the cradle of terrorism it has become and that is all down to the war. The previous US administration is the main culprit for this and must take most of the blame for the those deaths.

    Complain about this comment

  • 215. At 2:09pm on 30 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 211, Magic

    "First the CIA can do harsher interogations that are not considered torture, unless you follow guideline by the ACLU.


    He has no right to a lawyer under U.S law."

    The definition of what constitutes torture was not established or influenced by the ACLU, regardless of how much you hate an organization determined to protect and preserve our Constitutional rights.

    Article 5 of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (the third Geneva Convention of 1949) condemns the use of torture, and the fourth Geneva Convention expands the scope of protection under international law. The USA was not only among the 145 countries that ratified these treaties, we were actually one of their main sponsors when the goal was to demonize and protect ourselves against the commies.

    To circumvent international law the Bush Administration, with its duplicitous Attorney General (Alberto Gonzalez) as its architect, established a new policy to be applied strictly to Muslim prisoners that denies them the rights afforded to POWs by labeling them "enemy combatants". By implication, Hitler's and Mussolini's troops were neither our enemies or combatants, and neither were the Red Chinese we fought in North Korea, the NVA, etc.

    This cynical, arrogant and cowardly violation of international law, not to mention our own Constitution, and the so-called "Patriots" Act handed Al Qaida the greatest victories they could have ever imagined.

    Complain about this comment

  • 216. At 2:13pm on 30 Dec 2009, John_From_Dublin wrote:

    # 194 PartTimeDon wrote: [to MagicMushroom]

    "Putting aside the non sequitor (and spelling), how dare you make such a disgusting accusation!"

    This is par for the course. He hurls around accusations of anti-Semitism like confetti. Defamation and mendacity are his middle names.

    Andd hiz spellling are knot verry gud ether.

    Complain about this comment

  • 217. At 2:14pm on 30 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 212, Magic

    "Second regarding the liberation of Iraq the majority killed are the results of the Islamic terrorists. So stop blaming the U.S for homicide deaths!"

    According to the Pentagon, we spent 25,000 munitions during the invasion of Iraq, and many more since then. Considering the sophistication of the weapons used and the excellent training of our troops, I think it is fair to assume they all reached their intended targets.

    You are right, however, we don't kill Iraqis or Muslims, we just "take them out"...

    Complain about this comment

  • 218. At 2:14pm on 30 Dec 2009, PartTimeDon wrote:

    214# Quick correction: Saddam did fund terrorism against Isreal. The setence should have read:
    Saddam for all that he was a brutal dictator was able to keep terrorists in check in his own country.

    Complain about this comment

  • 219. At 2:18pm on 30 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 213, D R Murrell

    "MI6 told Blair before the invasion that there were serious doubts about the original claims, which were not the actual claims he stated as evidence for the war."

    The CIA did the same when they desperately tried to remove references to nuclear capabilities from President Bush's State of the Union address only to see them put back in again by Dick Cheney.

    Bad intelligence may have been a factor in the decision to invade Iraq, but that deficiency had more to do with physical impairments between W's ears than inefficiencies in our security organizations.

    Complain about this comment

  • 220. At 2:40pm on 30 Dec 2009, D R Murrell wrote:

    Saint – It will to our countries eternal shame that neither Bush nor Blair will ever be forced to give a true account for their actions. Maybe we should try and claim that they were enemy combatants (or some such equally meaningless definition).

    Complain about this comment

  • 221. At 2:50pm on 30 Dec 2009, powermeerkat wrote:

    If U.S. hasn't invaded and occupied Algieria, China, Egypt, Indonesia, Libya, Nigeria, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Yemen, there would not been those countries' frustrated citizens joining jihad and terrorist ranks, right? :)

    Complain about this comment

  • 222. At 3:10pm on 30 Dec 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    D R u M

    I think it is long overdue for America to jettison the entire notion of international law as naive, counterproductive, inadequate, and unequally applied. It brings neither justice nor security as it was intended to, instead it is just a political club to be trotted out when it suits someone's convenience and then put back into hiding when it doesn't...or worse is counter to their own notions of what is right and should be done in the world. Al Qaeda is a violation of international law. Hamas is a violation of International law. Hezbollah is a violation of international law. So are North Korea, Iran, the Taleban, Al Aqsa Martyr's Brigade. So were four wars to destroy Israel. I don't see any of them in the dock in the Hague, awaiting trial, or even indicted. So what is the point really? Just as one more excuse for leftists of the world to bash America and Israel when those two countries defend their own national security which is their right.

    Iam Wrong;

    I have criticized the Bush Administration severely. And the Clinton Administration before it. And the Bush Administration prior to Clinton all when they deserved it. I spare no one who is Wrong whatever their political stripe. For example, when the attacks on 9-11-01 occurred, the Bush Administration was preoccupied with the morality or immorality of cloning embryonic stem cells, hardly an earth shattering issue that should preoccupy America's government to the exclusion of its national security. When the US was attacked, it was very slow to react. This was hardly surprising as the Bush administration had given strong indications of its lethargy and impotence during the spy plane incident with the Chinese only a couple of months after Bush took office. President Bush's passivity in the face of aggression became clear immediately, the cause of failures later on. The correct response would have been to blow up the US plane with a missile as soon as it had been forced to land on Chinese territory so that its top secret electronics could not be stolen and to demand immediate release of the crew with a threat to cut off all economic relations immediately should the Chinese shown any resistance. The attack from Afghanistan should have met with a massive response as soon as it happened, that very night in fact sealing off all of the escape routes to Pakistan using bombers stationed in Diego Garcia and cruise missiles, a tac nuke strike on ToraBora, and a bombing campaign followed by a massive invasion. Instead the US waited for one month begging the Taleban to give up Bin Laden so that it would not have to attack. As a result, he and much of his organization escaped to Pakistan laughing all the way where Bush allowed them sanctuary for the remainder of his term in office. In the invasion of Iraq, the US should not have waited for yet one more redundant UN resolution to cover Tony Blair's domestic political derriere, the military campaign should have begun without Britain if necessary in the fall of 2002. As punishment for lack of support, the US should have cut off all ties with France, Germany, Belgium, and Luxembourg and precipitated a crisis in NATO demanding immediate comprehensive support for the efforts in both Afghanistan and Iraq or threatened to walk out. I believe the US should still pull out of NATO as it does not serve America's national self interest to remain in it. If Europe thinks it is worth defending, it should see to it and pay for it itself. Personally I don't think it is but its own worst enemy that can't be defended against by the US anyway is itself.

    Complain about this comment

  • 223. At 3:15pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    177 Tino
    You have continually attacked those of the Muslim faith. and now you try to pretend that for you the war on terror is not yet a war on Islam.
    You know full well that many americans like you see it as a war on Islam.
    a crusade then you say there are only muslim fundamentalists.
    as you call for war on a religion.
    or is it tongue and cheek.
    Given your past comments if you did not mean it a a radicals call for war then you should make that clear.

    If not I think the Mods should re read it and ask them selves"is this acceptable"
    "will this cause offence.
    it certainly should.



    173 and Andy the dutch could also say

    "get your american plane out of here.
    It will leave Skip on time . If you do not wish to let it land then that will be on your heads"
    after all it is Their airport.

    to all that complained a couple of weeks ago thatthe no fly list was a travesty on american freedom.
    that peopel should not be restricted from owning guns because they are on the list.

    Do you Gun toters still think that is the case?


    Oh and TORA BORA.

    Complain about this comment

  • 224. At 3:22pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    Naked nibbler;) on the plane.

    They sit you down and give you a meal
    "would you like some wine"
    Wino's on planes can't drink from plastic so they get GLASS.
    Still naked with glass mini bottle in hand and a wine glass in the other.
    Would you like a knife to cut your stake seeing as you are in first class.
    Why thank you.


    Some headphones(nice strong wire)
    yippee I'll take a gross.

    Anything else sir.
    "a fork" certainly sir.


    so with a broken bottle a headphone garrotte and a steak knife the plane was taken over by a naked man.
    Oh wait. just before landing"do you need a pen to fill in the required visa forms and customs forms"
    yes please , I hear they are used as a weapon and army folk are sometimes trained in the use of said ball point pen.
    (well they taught a bunch of kids from the CCF)

    Naked but armed on a plane.


    At least these days we know people will do something.
    as they did on this flight.
    which kinda proves my point that most of the security paranoia (no knitting needles , but here's your customs pen) is just that and when it come down to it the best way to stop violence is for people to stand up and stop it.

    Box cutter or not.

    Complain about this comment

  • 225. At 3:44pm on 30 Dec 2009, D R Murrell wrote:

    Nero* – So you advocate the US ignoring the international law it pushed through, in part to protect its own interests, and becoming an international rogue state? Fine, if the country who was a primary signatory of the Geneva Conventions wants to become an effective bully dictatorship on the world stage, see what happens. The US should be able to do what it wants when it wants, as should everyone else. Let’s watch the world decay into anarchy, for the couple of months before the Earth burns in radioactive flames.

    Hamas, is not a nation state. Hezbollah is not a nation state. NK is a pariah state, as is Iran, though I am less sure that state is really fair on Iran. Your choice is to make the US emulate NK?

    What is the point of international law? Ask the US which is one of the primary driving forces in maintaining it post WWII. God damned leftist American’s trying to impose social order on the world!

    * Until you learn to read, the u would follow the M not the R, you shall remain Nero, the petty little emperor wannabe.

    Complain about this comment

  • 226. At 3:54pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    175
    "You probaly thought that the trains to the concetration camps were relocations, or that the Death March was a leval 5 hike!"
    no but the train scheduling was run on IBM equipment.


    180 and andy you could create a WHOLE world that hates America. not just the enemies you have now.

    America is not THAT powerful and the dream could be dropped by international consensus at any time. the debts could be called in .
    Products could be made that do not appeal to Americans...green products.; )
    If the world wants to make green products and the rest of the world wants to buy them. America could get left out of the loop. as the whining brat .

    agreed that the dutch authorities will work with america. they all do. they all introduced biometric data on the passports to appease america.

    181 Adrianny

    How come no one ever says how many malpractice suits really exist and how many are frivolous.
    Only once has anyone brought anything on that topic to this debate. and it showed that there were not very many and that the whole issue is exaggerated. That the insurance industry for mal-practice just charges those ridiculous rates to doctors because they can, they can because so many believe the hyped lies that the frivolous suits cost doctors not the frivolous pricing structure dreamed up by the accountants at "mal practice coverage are us ".

    reality check.
    even with a free consultation at the ambulance chaser most people cannot afford to take on the doctors supported by the hospital lawyers.

    These suits are greatly exaggerated by those in the industry

    Are you in the industry you rarely care about any other issue when posting here.



    Complain about this comment

  • 227. At 3:58pm on 30 Dec 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    Ref. 192, PartTimeDon:

    Ok, thank you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 228. At 4:00pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    201. At 07:40am on 30 Dec 2009, Tino wrote:
    "determine the root causes of the hatred"

    "They say, themselves (therefore this is primary source knowledge), that their motivation is religious. We do not need to 'determine' anything, unless you are arrogant enough to think you know better than they do what motivates them."

    You have continually been arrogant enough to claim you know what motivates others. here you do it again while at the same time deriding those that do.
    are you just knocking yourself?

    Admitting to your arrogance.
    I have heard religion mentioned AND I have heard that americans taking over their country as an excuse.
    As we pile "help" to Yemen we create new terrorists.
    We do not dry the well up.


    Complain about this comment

  • 229. At 4:05pm on 30 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 221, powermeerkat

    "If U.S. hasn't invaded and occupied Algieria, China, Egypt, Indonesia, Libya, Nigeria, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Yemen, there would not been those countries' frustrated citizens joining jihad and terrorist ranks, right? :)"

    Perhaps, but the likely outcome of such scenario is that our nemesis would have simply moved elsewhere. Should we invade the entire world?

    The problem, as I am sure you already know, is that we are not fighting countries, or government sponsored initiatives, but a radical ideology embraced by fanatics determined to inflict pain on the infidels and on those whose presence in their countries they do not accept.

    Complain about this comment

  • 230. At 4:08pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    187 JMM.
    And that war on drugs.
    I hope all the prisoners are being treated according to the geneva convention.
    if they were wearing suitable hippy pot head clothing when arrested.
    or the battalion of the crack heads colours. The dreads of defilement.

    All recognised uniforms of the Army of drug users.

    GHERKIN

    WHEN DID THE UK "ALLOW" A TERRORIST ATTACK ON A PLANE ?"

    It is not Only Israel that has a clean record.
    PS conscription of all the people is a pretty radical infringement on the lives of those conscripted. "forced labour" is what I call it;)

    "
    And if you go to countries like Syria or Yemen, israel has every right to question you. Remember traveling on a plane is a privilidge not a right."

    And yet when the British say" we don't want your minister of death" they get a load of flack. Itis not their right.
    but you would say it was in that case.
    cheap shooter.

    Complain about this comment

  • 231. At 4:25pm on 30 Dec 2009, PartTimeDon wrote:

    Ref# 222 MA2
    Nullify international law? Did you just give me the green light to download all the American music and movies I want and not pay for it? Or did you just give the okay to Chaves to nationalise every remaining US industry in Venezela without comensation? International law works quite nicely in the US's favour most of the time.
    No-one disputes the legality or the moral justification for the war in Afghanistan. The Taleban were that country's government and their assistance of Al Quaeda constituted an act of war.
    Just out of interest, what do you think would have happened if Mulah Omar had surrendered as US troops accumulated the border?
    A tactical nuke in Tora Bora within a day of 9/11 as retaliation? Okay now you're in space cadet territory. It took Bush almost week to start making "we will tract down whoever is responsible" speeches. You've also shown a callous disregard for civilian lives.
    And how does America pull out of Europe exactly? The military presence is no longer strategically useful (I suspect the Isrealis might get a bit nervous as Germany might see a need for its own military defences). Put up and embargo? You'd impoverish yourselves at the same time and China and Russia would rush in to fill the vaccuum.

    Complain about this comment

  • 232. At 4:30pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    194
    Part time Don
    " If you can defend this war, you're a lot closer to justifying anything the Nazis did than I'll ever be."

    He is very much closer to adolf than you .
    Has suggested a final solution several times. nuking the arabs.back when that was hillery's , moose mother and Cains plan.

    196 Ian ,Correct
    "So you'd have to ask them 'Are you a Muslim?'. "

    And then you breach the laws of America.
    I raised this point with a few gherkins earlier but they seem to keep forgetting that no one HAS to declare religious persuasion.
    And if they do start discriminating against Muslims,as they did after the initial trade tower basement bombing , they will miss the next home grown guy, and be engaging in a holy war.
    Holy because they are taking One religion and attacking it.


    " The next 7 years are going to be fun.

    Ron"

    Class! that'll get the legion up out of bed;)

    Here's to 7 more years.


    Complain about this comment

  • 233. At 4:36pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    I see no evidence that Obama's admin lessened the rules on the watch lists to allow this guy through.
    I would ask two questions to make sure when asking all the others.

    Was the person who was told that worked for the state department a true patriot or a fake.
    Have they accepted the oath of their new president and would they say the same oath again now that Obama is in. From some of the letters here and some of the republicans I have met I would question their loyalty.
    would they let a treat trough to prove a point?
    Not saying anyone did, just that it has not been discounted because it has been thought of just discounted.
    then there is the issue of
    Did they want him in the USA so they could have him. Did they underestimate the time frame the bomber was working in and were they trying to get him here.

    Conspiracy theory maybe but to blindly say "no can't be" doesn't make it so.

    Complain about this comment

  • 234. At 4:40pm on 30 Dec 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    Ref. 221, powermeerkat:

    "If U.S. hasn't invaded and occupied Algieria, China, Egypt, Indonesia, Libya, Nigeria, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Yemen, there would not been those countries' frustrated citizens joining jihad and terrorist ranks, right? :)"

    Help me out, would you? So, Libya was America's first foreign intervention (the shores of Tripoli and all that), Algeria was occupied during World War II (although I believe the opposition to those military actions came from Axis forces, not the indigenous peoples) and China during the Boxer rebellion, but when did the U.S. occupy the rest? I've googled as best I can but can't find any information on the others.

    Complain about this comment

  • 235. At 4:41pm on 30 Dec 2009, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re #229

    My point was that we are in a no-win situation.

    If islamic jihaddists can't find any other excuse to conduct terrorist attacks against us, they always remind us of Crusades as a good enough reason.

    And there are plenty of madrassas and Muslim clerics operating freely in the West to create more fanatical recruits to their "cause".

    And plenty of 'useful idiots' in our midst to let them do just that.

    Complain about this comment

  • 236. At 4:43pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    214 part time don

    once the US and coalition took over the country they took the responsibility.
    All the deaths are theirs.

    Complain about this comment

  • 237. At 4:49pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    "Al Qaeda is a violation of international law. Hamas is a violation of International law. Hezbollah is a violation of international law. So are North Korea, Iran, the Taleban, Al Aqsa Martyr's Brigade. So were four wars to destroy Israel. I don't see any of them in the dock in the Hague, awaiting trial, or even indicted. "

    Mostly erroneous

    Because until ISRAEL a nation you left off that list is on trial the rest will look like hypocrisy.

    Complain about this comment

  • 238. At 4:52pm on 30 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Magic,

    "And if you go to countries like Syria or Yemen, israel has every right to question you."

    Does this mean governments in Muslim countries have the right to question anyone that travels to Israel?

    Of course not, what a preposterous notion! One thing is for Israel to do things like this, another for a Muslim country to follow their example. Infringement on human rights and democratic ideals must be consistent with the "me good, you bad" premise, otherwise they constitute another example of terrorism.

    Complain about this comment

  • 239. At 4:56pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    If you would like to understand one part of America (my part) then read this article:

    http://www.alternet.org/politics/144791/america_the_traumatized%3A_how_13_events_of_the_decade_made_us_the_ptsd_nation

    America the Traumatized: How 13 Events of the Decade Made Us the PTSD Nation

    some selected quotes with my comments:

    The history of the US is based in the genocide of the native Americans and a slavery that went on for more than 200 years.

    ""the sins against humanity that created our nation: the genocide of the people who were here before the Europeans came, and the building of the nation on the backs of involuntary laborers who were tortured, abused and even killed for their trouble."

    The US Supreme Court selected Bush as the president with a split along political lines on the court. If there had been more liberals the decision might have gone to Gore who won 500,000 more of the popular vote nationally.

    ""The Supreme Court essentially overruled the State of Florida's right to see its disorderly election to a conclusion, throwing the election to Bush and stomping on the states' rights conservatives so championed until the high court intervened to grant them the presidential candidate of their choice. A subsequent study found that Gore won the popular vote by more than 500,000 votes."

    Everyone knew that New Orleans was going to be hit by a hurricane..but the government was unprepared.

    ""There was no food or water in the Morial Convention Center, where as many as 20,000 had gathered for refuge at the direction of city officials. Television captured the desperation: children begging for help, mothers begging for food for their children. If national television crews could find their way there, we wondered, then why couldn't federal emergency responders?""

    So what is the future for the US?

    "Untreated PTSD, according to Raymond B. Flannery, a clinical psychology professor at Harvard Medical School, can lead to "increased industrial accidents, social and community disorganization, lost productivity, and intense psychological distress. The toll in human suffering is enormous..." In other words, unless we deal with this, America's Decade of Trauma may just be the opening act to a cataclysmic century."

    Imo the US is no longer a democratic republic..but an oligarchy run by the wealthy and powerful who have successfully infiltrated the Republican party and have also made head way into the Democratic Party.

    Guess I will have to learn how to live in this mess and forget my naive ideas about democracy and fairness and the rule of law...Its everyman for himself now. No wonder people are buying guns.

    The tipping point for me was seeing Americans denied health care and dying...while the wealthy gained greater wealth.

    They couldn't even give people health care!

    Complain about this comment

  • 240. At 5:05pm on 30 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #222. At 3:10pm on 30 Dec 2009, MarcusAureliusII: "I think it is long overdue for America to jettison the entire notion of international law as naive, counterproductive, inadequate, and unequally applied . . . Al Qaeda is a violation of international law. Hamas is a violation of International law. Hezbollah is a violation of international law . . ."

    You forget the IRA and its offshoots, financially supported by Americans, and its rabble-rousing members permitted on American soil. The United Kingdom faced terrorism on a daily basis and yet you conveniently omit it. But of course, being European, in your book it is of no consequence.

    Complain about this comment

  • 241. At 5:05pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    If it had not been for the father..that kid might have been successful.

    Thank God that the father had the values to turn in his own son rather than allow innocent people to die.
    But the father had Muslim values based in the Koran.

    Body scanners should be used at every airport.

    Complain about this comment

  • 242. At 5:12pm on 30 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #238
    SaintDominick wrote:
    Magic,

    "And if you go to countries like Syria or Yemen, israel has every right to question you."

    Does this mean governments in Muslim countries have the right to question anyone that travels to Israel?

    Of course not, what a preposterous notion! One thing is for Israel to do things like this, another for a Muslim country to follow their example. Infringement on human rights and democratic ideals must be consistent with the "me good, you bad" premise, otherwise they constitute another example of terrorism.

    _____________________-

    Stop being PC.

    Can you name a time that an Israeli or a Jew has hijacked or tried to turn a plane into a missle.

    sorry the threat is from Islamic terrorists; not Jews, right wing christians, atheists.

    Complain about this comment

  • 243. At 5:13pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    "Untreated PTSD, according to Raymond B. Flannery, a clinical psychology professor at Harvard Medical School, can lead to "increased industrial accidents, social and community disorganization, lost productivity, and intense psychological distress. The toll in human suffering is enormous..." In other words, unless we deal with this, America's Decade of Trauma may just be the opening act to a cataclysmic century."
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Nice one, the oppressors dont get PTSD, they have other illness which makes them justify their previous oppressive acts while they critisize others for doing the same acts, ergo, atom bomb has become WMD, but the americans will always justify its use..However, ironically I was almost wiped out of this world for suggesting that jews actually didnt need a country but psychiatrists for the treatment of their PTSD because of the traumas they had at the hands of europeans...

    Complain about this comment

  • 244. At 5:14pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    235
    Meow. we maybe in a No win situation. so why continue fighting if we are .?
    As Part time Don reminds some we did drop rather a lot of bombs on "the taliban" for not taking the Bin out on trash day when we asked them to.

    I suggest that IF we can stop making people HATE us by bombing them senseless.(see sense) then we can maybe have a chance of something working.
    maybe.

    I would suggest less military involvement and more X boxes all around.
    ANd if culturally acceptable we should produce loads of Yurts with good wool insulation and distribute them. a winner all round. nice warm earthquake proof homes for all. maybe
    Just that they don't seem to appreciate the bombs.
    I am sure if they were delivered by truck without being dropped they could find some uses for them.


    Maybe.

    Water purifiers and in some cases water.
    Then there is a radical Idea.
    Try GW and Dick and Tony and Donny (alberto can be tried in the USA) at the Hague.

    I suspect that IF we did there would be a great outpouring of love from the easy. People saying "my god they really do care about us and our plight a bit.

    Then we could still expect a few crazy people to bomb us. but not many, I'd take the gamble.

    234 lol Andy.

    you need the "special" his Story book

    Complain about this comment

  • 245. At 5:24pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8418150.stm

    DC this bit may interest you.
    Note those ready to attack Nobel winning Carter read to the end for a reason as to why carter was screwed as a non Irish guy and had problems saying the right thing as president.
    I'd like to ask him about this issue.

    I used to look under the car to see if those catholics (lol I am raised catholic)had put a boom under it. they planned to once.
    Idaho they were from. I bet they would get by a watch list easy


    Bepe it was the dude sitting next to him that saved the day. it will be next time . probably

    as to body scanners.
    they can be made to have less graphic pictures .


    lets not all forget that 9/11 happened because the rules allowed box cutters. though first class dining is closer to the cockpit.

    Complain about this comment

  • 246. At 5:25pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    "I think it is long overdue for America to jettison the entire notion of international law as naive, counterproductive, inadequate, and unequally applied . . . Al Qaeda is a violation of international law. Hamas is a violation of International law. Hezbollah is a violation of international law . . ."

    You forget the IRA and its offshoots, financially supported by Americans, and its rabble-rousing members permitted on American soil. The United Kingdom faced terrorism on a daily basis and yet you conveniently omit it. But of course, being European, in your book it is of no consequence.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Its in fashion in the west.....Such trends come and go in the west..sometimes its the soviets, other times it was the shia's now its wahabis and the muslims..the yardstick to measure the westerner's love for democracy and freedom of speech is now called "anti muslim attitude", the more a westerner cristizes muslims and islam, the more free and democratic he is considered..

    Complain about this comment

  • 247. At 5:29pm on 30 Dec 2009, PartTimeDon wrote:

    Ref #236 Cheese
    once the US and coalition took over the country they took the responsibility.
    All the deaths are theirs.
    _____________________
    Going a bit far for me.
    I would separate the notion of blaming the US/Coalition as nations from blaming the administrations/governments who actually took the decision to launch the war.

    Complain about this comment

  • 248. At 5:33pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    Bepa "Guess I will have to learn how to live in this mess and forget my naive ideas about democracy and fairness and the rule of law...Its everyman for himself now. No wonder people are buying guns."

    yep they are trying to ensure there is no chance of a peaceful outcome. because as the Radio and TV tell me. "the second coming is happening" "the end times MUST be allowed to happen""the rapture will be upon us"

    and they scream Muslim fundamentalists while voting and polyticking for war and death.
    for lack of compassion and self-righteousness.
    These are my fellow americans, on the 700 club, the coral ridge hour, and a host of other religious stations on both radio and TV.
    They broadcast. not cable broadcast these shows and wonder "where the muslims get the idea that we are at war with their religion"

    These are the scariest of people be they Muslim ,Christian ,or Rasta.


    Complain about this comment

  • 249. At 5:39pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    If it had not been for the father..that kid might have been successful.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Its not as if the father told the authorities that his son is going to take some chemical stuff on board that plane..the man's attempt failed..you dont know why the father apporached the americans, who knows he just wanted to scare his son and stop him from getting involved in something more serious. But then again, he should have known better than to apporach the americans, the FBI and CIA is extremely good at letting harmless acts happen so that they can show how efficient they are..Otherwise all the americans had to do was to cancel this man's visa to usa when the father approached them..If that seemed a hard work to american authorities, then they should have put his name on the no fly to america list..If the authorities had done that, the guy wouldnt have been able to fly to usa by any airline, let alone an american one..Someone set a perfect stage for this act..

    Complain about this comment

  • 250. At 5:48pm on 30 Dec 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Ding Don

    "You've also shown a callous disregard for civilian lives."

    Not for American civilians. As for those who live in enemy territory, their lives being in jeopardy should be reason enough for them to fight those who would put it there, their so called leaders. Take Hamas for example. Those people are the Palestinian civilians' worst enemy. It is they who put the civilian population in jeopardy. Hamas, Al Aqsa Martyr's brigated, the people who fire rockets at Israeli civilians, and their like. But those are the people whom they chose as their national heros. They take responsibility for the consequences to themselves, not anyone else.

    If we had fought WWII according to the rules so called international law imposes, the Axis would have won. I never read of any remorse among the British for the vast number of what were likely unnecessary civilian deaths in Dresden after the RAF fire bombing. That was no better than Hiroshima or Nagasaki. The terror of war among civilians is what makes it a thing to be avoided. By trying to sanitize it, clearly an impossibility, you handicap the side that is "civilized" if such a word can be applied to a nation at war.

    So the support of some Americans for the IRA justifies European support for Hamas, Hezbollah, and the continued hatred it has always had for Jews. I am hardly surprised, in fact I judged Europe to be on the whole anti-semitic and it was clearly affirmed during my two years living there so long ago. It hasn't changed, if anything it's gotten even worse.

    D R u M;

    A pullout of American troops from Europe and a renunciation and escape from all restrictive treaties on the US including NATO, WTO, NAFTA, and a host of others would be in the best interest of the American people IMO. Not in the best interest of multinational corporations but that is of no concern to me. If GE wants to be a Chinese corporation, fine, let them admit that they are an agent of a foreign government. See how many US contracts they get.

    Complain about this comment

  • 251. At 6:02pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:



    #243 colonelartist

    The oppressors are pathological and have no emotions for the people they rule. Why should they care if Americans are dying from no health care. Forbes recently had an article about how productivity will suffer. Imo this is economic slavery. if you want health care maybe you will get it if you work...but if you get sick you better have someone in your family with health care..

    "I was almost wiped out of this world for suggesting that jews actually didnt need a country but psychiatrists for the treatment of their PTSD because of the traumas they had at the hands of europeans..."

    I agree that many Jews have PTSD but I do think that there should be an Israel. My problem is that so many American Jews ( but not all by any means..America is very lucky to have Russ Feingold and many others who are Jewish) are supporting Israel rather than America. Someone like Senator Lieberman wants America to put its resources into a military rather than health care for Americans so that America can defend Israel. The people who support Israel are imo fanatics and highly active. For some, in their minds Israel and the US are one. But they are using the American system which is very open to bribery to push their own agenda..which is to protect Israel with American military force.

    Complain about this comment

  • 252. At 6:03pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #249 colonelartist

    The son was in Yemen learning from Al Queda and the father knew that. I did make an error because the father was not listened to ...There are a number of unanswered questions in my mind about who is in the CIA and what they are doing

    It might be a good idea to consider this form of terrorist activity pathological and place people with these kinds of murderous thoughts and plans into protective custody in mental institutions. That might be one way to stop them when they are uncovered by family members.

    Complain about this comment

  • 253. At 6:05pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #248 cheesefuller

    yup...they are fanatics. They are changing their own religions to suit their own strange versions (visions) of God. Each one of the religious texts have passages that would stop this madness

    Complain about this comment

  • 254. At 6:09pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    Not for American civilians. As for those who live in enemy territory, their lives being in jeopardy should be reason enough for them to fight those who would put it there, their so called leaders. Take Hamas for example. Those people are the Palestinian civilians' worst enemy. It is they who put the civilian population in jeopardy. Hamas, Al Aqsa Martyr's brigated, the people who fire rockets at Israeli civilians, and their like. But those are the people whom they chose as their national heros. They take responsibility for the consequences to themselves, not anyone else.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And, you can use the same reason to understand how american and the british leaders put the lives of their citizens in jeopardy because of their policies in the muslim world...your leaders are your worst enemies..You also choose your national heros from among those who directly and indirectly fight the muslims in other countries..Sometimes ofcorce you make up untrue stories of heroism but thats another thing...

    Complain about this comment

  • 255. At 6:12pm on 30 Dec 2009, Sam Tyler wrote:

    #222

    Wonderful insult! Congratulations, I haven't heard that since 4th grade.

    Just to pick on a few obvious issues with your strategy, dropping a tactical nuke on a mountainous area like Tora Bora would at best be ineffective and at worst just turn the entire world against us. The mountains tend to muffle the blast. You could have fried a few goats though.

    We couldn't launch a massive invasion of Afghanistan because if you look at a map you'll find none of the countries on it's borders really like us. Those that we could pay off don't have sea ports to support the logistical needs of such a force and building up in that part of the world would inevitably create diplomatic if not an actual shooting crisis with Russia.

    Taken with the rest of your strategy, including cutting ties and dismantling NATO, one can only draw one of two conclusions:

    - You are an anti American agitator trying to push views that would result in the isolation of America, the separation of us from our allies and the weakening of pour great nation. In which case we are wise to your Jedi mind tricks and those of your kin on this blog. The real America is not the America you and other US haters want us to be. And we never will be, thanks to our Constitution and checks and balances; or:

    - A military wanna be who didn't serve his country but spends his days watching the Military Channel and thinking that they know how to strategize and conduct campaigns on a global scale because they watched 'Patton 3-D'last night. Someone whose life didn't really work out the way they planned.

    BTW, if you have to hide behind a pseudonym, choosing a Roman Emperor does indicate a little bit of a Napoleon complex. Choosing the one who allowed the Pax Romana to expire and Roman Empire to begin to collapse for an American blog is a real give away that that is what you want for America, subconsciously or consciously. That would indicate option 1, but I'd be delighted if you really fit option 2.

    Happy New Year!

    Complain about this comment

  • 256. At 6:17pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    The son was in Yemen learning from Al Queda and the father knew that. I did make an error because the father was not listened to ...There are a number of unanswered questions in my mind about who is in the CIA and what they are doing
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Ok, now I understand, I think it has to do with closing down of your gauntanamo bay prison...the only left over prisoners over there are from yemen, the forces in usa who dont want the prison to be closed just conviently coughed up this episode...Now, let me know, when mr justified war aka obama closes this prison..

    Its not as if in yemen alqaida has its proffessors in chemistery who give crash courses in how to make bombs, that kind of crash courses are given in usa, as in how to learn to fly a commericial airline without learning to land it. The guy had some background in chemistry....those who study chemistry do know which stuff to mix togher to make some firecrackers...

    Complain about this comment

  • 257. At 6:25pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #245 cheesefuller

    The people who see the body scans should be women over 60 : ) ...As a group they could care less about what people look like nude. Its a boring job that spends all day looking at nude people : )

    Complain about this comment

  • 258. At 6:31pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    The americans as in the people who are getting a lot out of this "muslim the terrorist" hoopla are these days extremely anti yemeni..courtesy, the army captain who had corresponded with some yemeni so called extremist who is now dead some says thanks to usa..this anti yemeni trend is seasonsal, reason the gunatanamo bay closing controversy..

    Complain about this comment

  • 259. At 6:37pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 260. At 6:37pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    It might be a good idea to consider this form of terrorist activity pathological and place people with these kinds of murderous thoughts and plans into protective custody in mental institutions. That might be one way to stop them when they are uncovered by family members.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    How many american planers of war against afghanistan and iraq had family members who apporoached any authorities telling them that their relatives were going to war by telling people all sorts of lies?

    Pitching family members against each other is what anti-christ is supposed to do, so says the bible...son against father, brother against brother..thats the sign of end of the world, according to your bible..

    Complain about this comment

  • 261. At 6:38pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    257 come now I know some of those over 60 will be looking real close when the right person steps in;)

    Complain about this comment

  • 262. At 6:39pm on 30 Dec 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Iam Wrong;

    A tac-nuke blast at the mouth of a cave would take out every living thing in a network of interconnected caves like Tora Bora if only by just sucking all the oxygen out of it. One or a few daisy cutters might do just the same. Ever hear of paratroopers? The first thing to do would have been to capture the airports such as they are. But much could have been accomplished from the air as we saw in Kosovo. Yes there would have been logistical problems. Turkey would have gotten a lot of arm twisting. So would and should Pakistan have. We were much much to soft on Pakistan.

    "would result in the isolation of America, the separation of us from our allies and the weakening of pour great nation."

    We would be much better off without our so called allies. With allies like France and Germany we don't need enemies as the saying goes. If nothing else Iraq showed us who our friends aren't. Far from weakening us, we'd be much stronger without having to subsidize the defense of Europe. Let them spend their own money. The US was far better off when it was isolated. President Washington warned America against the very kind of entanglements in Europe we are in now. A rats nest of intrigues, hatreds, and every one of them insanely jealous of us. Just imagine if we hadn't gone into Kosovo and knocked out Serbia, Greece and Turkey might have gone to war with each other over it. They very nearly did. It might have re-ignited WWI where ancient scores were never settled.

    Beepa-Beepa, it must really frost you that the overwhelming majority of Americans are 100% behind the defense of Israel against the countries around them who tried to destroy it in four wars of annihilation and two terrorist campaigns that ultimately failed. Which side did you root for in those four wars, the side that lost? Funny how the Christian right is now more pro-Israeli than many Israelis are themselves. To them a war in which Israel will conquer its neighbors is a necessary part of the fulfillment of biblical prophesy before the second coming. Whatever floats their boat.

    Complain about this comment

  • 263. At 6:39pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    either way I hope my application to join TSA gets accepted;)

    Complain about this comment

  • 264. At 6:47pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #256 colonelartist

    Don't you go into denial too. This young man was british and he was radicalized in Britain even as he was going to one of the world's best universities in London and had a wealthy father.

    You have a problem in Britain and you are going to have to look at what is happening with disaffected people within your schools.

    There are people in Guantanamo who are completely innocent ..but they are mixed in with people who would kill. Some of these people now have imo gone insane with the conditions in that prison. How to straighten all this out now after the use of torture and the lack of regard for justice is a very knotty problem.

    Complain about this comment

  • 265. At 6:51pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #261 cheesefuller

    Well ok Brad Pitt and George Clooney will have some special consideration.
    ( In truth most mature women care about the personality and mind more than the physique..imo... : ) )

    Complain about this comment

  • 266. At 6:56pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #262 marcus

    You are not listening carefully. You only hear what you want to hear.

    Why do you think Lieberman is called the Senator from Tel Aviv? I know it must be anti semitism..thats the answer ...Anyone who criticizes anyone Jewish or any Israeli action..they are an anti semite and they support the arabs...there now you don't have to listen or think any more...

    You may now continue with your attacks upon the Europeans because of what happened in WWII

    Complain about this comment

  • 267. At 6:59pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    The US was far better off when it was isolated.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You mean when it could hide its crimes? do the covert operations? give the false impression to the people in far off countries that the americans were really what bush claimed, the beacon of light etc etc? the myth of americanism is all broken...everyone, the common street vendors in far off countries now have seen the true colors of america and its ism...and they all collectively say and i quote the second half of Rumi's famous quote because "yes I can" that when you eventually see through the veils to how things really are, you keep on saying to yourself again and again, this is not like we thought it was"...The people have seen through the veils of american values, principles and traditions...it was all a facade..

    Complain about this comment

  • 268. At 7:04pm on 30 Dec 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    beepa-beepa;

    "There are people in Guantanamo who are completely innocent ..but they are mixed in with people who would kill. Some of these people now have imo gone insane with the conditions in that prison."

    Being isolated in a cell with a Moslem prayer rug, a copy of the Koran, and a guard watching over you knowing if you really pray to Allah five times a day I suppose could do that to you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 269. At 7:05pm on 30 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #266
    Why do you think Lieberman is called the Senator from Tel Aviv? I know it must be anti semitism..thats the answer ...Anyone who criticizes anyone Jewish or any Israeli action..they are an anti semite and they support the arabs...there now you don't have to listen or think any more...

    ______________________

    Who reputable calls Lieberman that that is like calling the late Senator Kennedy the Senator from Dublin.

    He is an easy target because he is an Orthodox Jew who is prominent on foriegn relations matters in the Senate.

    You have to wonder with many Arab nations intolerance against Jews what would have been the response if Gore had won and he sent Liebermann to Saudi Arabia.

    Complain about this comment

  • 270. At 7:10pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    Don't you go into denial too. This young man was british and he was radicalized in Britain even as he was going to one of the world's best universities in London and had a wealthy father.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    he was a nigerian..who went to not so great anymore, britain to study..He was young educated guy who probably also saw that what he was given impression about that country and its people was just a facade..and when young, sensitve inteligent mind decodes that then it can do what this man or those young educated 9/11ers did...doesnt take a rocket scientist to decode this compexity of a mind that expects the ultimate fair world...A simple way to avoid such things is to tone down the impressions you give about your society because some people really believe in what american or british society claims of better than other civilization and when they go to such places with high expectations the disppoiment is great...of which you cannot even imagine...

    Complain about this comment

  • 271. At 7:13pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    Why do you think Lieberman is called the Senator from Tel Aviv? I know it must be anti semitism..thats the answer ...Anyone who criticizes anyone Jewish or any Israeli action..they are an anti semite and they support the arabs...there now you don't have to listen or think any more...
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Question. How come israel doesnt become one of the states of usa?
    Answer. Because if it became one of usa's states it will have one or two senators to represent it, now it has the whole senate of usa to represent it..

    Complain about this comment

  • 272. At 7:16pm on 30 Dec 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Bepa-Beepa;

    "You may now continue with your attacks upon the Europeans because of what happened in WWII"

    I lived in Europe nearly 30 years after WWII was over and saw anti-Semitism there with my own eyes. Very nasty stuff.

    BTW, I would not have Senator Lieberman as President or Vice President. That is a full time job that requires someone to be prepared to give his best effort every day of the week. But calling him an agent of a foreign government is outrageous. Where did you get that, in The Bund? From George Lincoln Rockwell?

    Complain about this comment

  • 273. At 7:22pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    Being isolated in a cell with a Moslem prayer rug, a copy of the Koran, and a guard watching over you knowing if you really pray to Allah five times a day I suppose could do that to you.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    when you are in prison , you are not a free man, and when you are not a free man, you cannot participate in the worldly affairs and when you cannot participate in worldly affairs G-d will not judge you at all..so if you pray or not read koran or not, has no real consequences...its the captors who will be judged as they are the ones in control...water boarding, sexual abuse, sense deprivation, copy of koran and praying rugs in guantanamo bay constitue torture when the intention is to make prisoners go insane..

    Complain about this comment

  • 274. At 7:24pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #260 colonelartist

    I like the part of the Bible where Christ says to love your enemy..its not love your friend ..its love your enemy.

    (ok ok I can't do it.but thats what Christians are supposed to do...anyway its a goal)

    Anyway it is very difficult to stop someone in your family from committing a crime...The brother of the Unibomber had the same dilemma. If the US were truly guided by Christian principles then people would feel pain about those who have committed crimes. But the US is a vengeful nation that wants to punish and kill...sorry to say that...but there is not much compassion for others.

    Yes you are right he was Nigerian...You can read about the young Nigerian here:

    selected quotes

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/30/world/europe/30nigerian.html?scp=8&sq=london&st=cse

    "Britain remains a nation of deep Islamic ferment, where a young man like Mr. Abdulmutallab can become radicalized, perhaps without notice."

    "Mr. Abdulmutallab’s engagement with radical Islam clearly hit a crisis for his family by Nov. 19, when his father, among Nigeria’s richest and most prominent men, visited the American Embassy there to express concern about the radicalization of his son, who had disappeared, perhaps to Yemen.

    But a snapshot of Mr. Abdulmutallab’s formative years in London, from 2005 to 2008, reveals a central difficulty in preventing future terrorist attacks: Friends, relatives, a teacher and fellow Muslim students say they cannot point to a trigger moment in recent years in which an amiable and privileged young man, devout if also disaffected, aspired to mass murder. Their best guess — one shared by investigators — is that the road to radicalization ran less through Yemen, where he studied Arabic as a teenager and apparently later prepared for a suicide mission, than through the Islamic hothouse of London."

    "Investigators are now, in fact, turning a sharper and retrospective eye to the passage in Mr. Abdulmutallab’s life that began immediately after his summer in Sana, Yemen, in 2005, when he enrolled as a $25,000-a-year mechanical engineering student at University College London. In recent days, officials in Washington and London have said they are focusing on the possibility that his London years, including his possible contacts with radical Muslim groups in Britain, were decisive in turning him toward Islamic extremism."

    .............

    I think you have a problem in Britain

    Complain about this comment

  • 275. At 7:30pm on 30 Dec 2009, griffip wrote:

    How are we suppose to pay for this universal benefit? The outrageous social program we call social security is currently under funded and will soon be overwhelmed with the baby-boomers. I think healthcare should be placed in the hands of charitiable oranizations --- like religions and the Shriners do an excellent job of providing free healthcare to children just expand these programs. It should not be placed in the hands of the Federal Government!

    Complain about this comment

  • 276. At 7:35pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    You have to wonder with many Arab nations intolerance against Jews what would have been the response if Gore had won and he sent Liebermann to Saudi Arabia.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Can you for a second forget your "what would have been the response if he had visited saudi arabia if he had been elected as the vice president" hypothetical question, and tell me what was the response when he visited saudi arabia in 2002? or when he visited other muslim countries, including pakistan this year? He is to american politics what peres has become to israel's politics...a horse that can be traded by any party if the price is right..

    Complain about this comment

  • 277. At 7:35pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #269 Magic

    Kennedy was not well liked by the Roman Catholic hierarchy in Boston. Lieberman is well regarded in Israel. Its about religion, not nationality.

    Lieberman is going against his own earlier statements about health care for Americans because he knows there isn't enough money to have all this weaponry and war and have health care. He wants the weapons to help Israel and because of his alliance with the Republicans is now called a traitor by many Democrats. The Democrats want him off as leader of the homeland committee but Lieberman has positioned himself cleverly.

    .......

    Two wrongs don't make a right...and sometimes there are no good guys.
    Its a grey world

    Complain about this comment

  • 278. At 7:36pm on 30 Dec 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    colonel Sanders;

    "...constitue torture when the intention is to make prisoners go insane."

    They were insane long before they were even captured. How do you think they wound up in GITMO in the first place? These weren't choir boys, they were trained terrorists. The one released to Britain BBC interviewed a few months ago was quite chatty...until he was asked what he'd been doing in Pakistan in the periods before he was captured. At that point he clammed up hard and fast. If he hadn't himself, his lawyer who was with him would have ordered him to. That topic was not open for discussion.

    Complain about this comment

  • 279. At 7:44pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    I think you have a problem in Britain
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Britain has a problem in britian I have no problem in britain..and the problem that britian has in britian, it has to solve itself..and the solution is not cosmetic surgery like blair did when he conviently blamed islam for the bombings in London...the problem is bigotry among the leaders and apathy among its citizen and their insistance that they are the civilized people, and their justification of going to wars, their inability to hold their leaders accountable for the mess they create in iraq and afghanistan...and their refusal to warn students like this guy, to divide everything they have heard about its civilized civilzation, the ultimate belief in human rights, the freedom of speech and ultimate fairness and equality, by 2 when they enter britain. They have to learn to tone down their PR campaign so that the gap between reality and false impression doesnt exist..

    Complain about this comment

  • 280. At 7:45pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #275 griffip

    EVERY other western nation has provided health care..why hasn't the US? They have been doing this for decades. These are not new untried systems of managing health care and none of them want what we have in the US.

    and if you are worried about the federal government ..some of the other nations are using private companies..like Switzerland.

    But what is happening is that the Republicans and some Democrats are weakening any federal programs so that corporations can come in and pick up the pieces.

    So what wrong with America that we can not do what other western nations have already done?
    ( Hint: the word "corporations" should appear in your answer)

    Complain about this comment

  • 281. At 7:48pm on 30 Dec 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Beepa-Beepa

    Your comments remind me of the kind of talk I would expect from the ANP. In fact it would hardly surprise me to learn that you are a member yourself. That kind of talk doesn't carry much weight anymore in America, it's a dying breed. But in case you doubt it, just get a photo of the current President of the United States. But before you look at it, sit down, you may be in for a shock.

    Complain about this comment

  • 282. At 8:01pm on 30 Dec 2009, hms_shannon wrote:

    274 bepa
    "I think you have a problem in Britain"

    Blinking heck bepa! what do you mean only a problem...

    Complain about this comment

  • 283. At 8:16pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    But the US is a vengeful nation that wants to punish and kill...sorry to say that...but there is not much compassion for others.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Every one is vengeful except a few good people like me...USA as a nation can take revange through hook and by crook by its army...if tomorrow its army fails to take revenge on your behalfs then the americans as individuals wiil take matters in their own hands and do exactly what these individuals whom you call islamic terrorists are doing...and to be very honest, if you went to yemen or to those countries which are forced to do what america wants them to do, you will also start to have radicalised thoughts about your own country...You have to live for a while in the countries whose people are at the receiving end of western tyranny to get the first hand taste of whats its like...Only then you will appreciate and even wonder why the majority of people in those countries dont do what a few like this man, do...In usa, two buildings were destroyed and the whole nation cried revenge with one voice and gathered behind bush to attack afghanistan and then iraq and keep quiet at drone attacks in pakistan, and even yemen..and on the other hand, you have millions of iraqis and afghanis, yemenis and pakistanis , palestinians and somalies who despite the fact that their houses and place of employments and hospitals, roads and whole infrastructures destroyed still resist the united front against their destroyers...

    Complain about this comment

  • 284. At 8:36pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    It was the first time for more than 100 years that the US Senate had voted on Christmas Eve.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    if US senate had been efficient the rest of the year, they wouldnt have to impress ordinary citizen by just voting (easiest task) on christmas eve...there are poor people in usa who had to work, real work and not just say, "yes" and "NO" on christmas day..

    Complain about this comment

  • 285. At 8:45pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    It was the first time for more than 100 years that the US Senate had voted on Christmas Eve.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    and this remind me of the the hoopla like promise created by the democrats senate in 2008 to keep the session continue through the weekend when it signed the bush withdrawing of troops from iraq bill...In the end everyone disperssed to enjoy the weekend..

    Complain about this comment

  • 286. At 8:50pm on 30 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 284, Colonelartist

    We don't have to go back 100 years to find unorthodox voting in the U.S. Senate. When the GOP had a majority 3 years ago they used to hold unannounced votes in the middle of the night, weekends, or Holidays to marginalize the minority.

    Complain about this comment

  • 287. At 8:52pm on 30 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 288. At 9:07pm on 30 Dec 2009, Sam Tyler wrote:

    #262

    LOL. Yes you are, you could have stopped at the first line.

    So, Tora Bora, the alleged huge cave complex and secret base a la James Bond movie villains. Unfortunately in the real world villains don't build huge complex bases with highway signs showing the way or on secret islands. The Tora Bora 'complex' includes a number of unlinked caves and the stuff the CIA did in the 80's. If you had nuked the old CIA base on 9/12 you would have killed a few lichens and a lot of bats. And if it had been a real super base? There are ways to protect such a location from a nuclear blast, NORAD has just such a system.

    And dropped nuclear fallout on the locals just before, in a brilliant move, you dropped paratroopers on their airfields. Then tried to resupply them by air, one presumes? And what then? They hold the airfields as long as they can while our heavy lift capability has just enough capacity to maybe keep them fighting for a couple of weeks, assuming the transports can get through.

    There is a reason this wasn't done. It's a stupid idea.

    I did like your idea of twisting Turkeys arm to help and allow passage of men and materials. I assume the supplies would then be driven the 1,000 miles across Saddam's Iraq and Iran to get to the fighting in Afghanistan?

    All of which has a teaching point:

    Maps are very important to real Generals.

    Complain about this comment

  • 289. At 9:17pm on 30 Dec 2009, McJakome wrote:

    213. At 1:40pm on 30 Dec 2009, D R Murrell wrote:
    to MagicKirin “There was never going to be any credible link between Saddam and Al Qaeda, Saddam was secular Sunni (as was the ruling Baathist Party) and Al Qaeda are Shiite, they hated Saddam and publicly said so.”

    Oops! Whilst telling others to get their facts straight, you seem to have managed quite a big blooper yourself. Osama bin Laden is not only a Sunni, but a Wahabbi, the Sunni sect that not only thinks Shiites are heretics, but also condemns any Sunni who disagrees with the Wahabbi interpretation of Islam. Zawahiri is an Egyptian and member of the Muslem Brotherhood, also a Sunni group.

    You are correct that they hated Saddam, but that was because he was a Baathist. While they had support from the Soviets, and were sometimes referred to as Arab Socialists, their roots go back to Germany’s National Socialists [some socialists, eh?].
    He was hated for secularism and foreign contacts.

    • 238. At 4:52pm on 30 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:
    Magic,

    "And if you go to countries like Syria or Yemen, israel has every right to question you."

    “Does this mean governments in Muslim countries have the right to question anyone that travels to Israel? Of course not, what a preposterous notion! “
    Another blooper? Unless things have changed in the Middle East since my last sojourn, not only do the regimes there question anyone who might have visited Israel, they refuse entry to anyone who might have contact with Israel or who might be Jewish. In Saudi Arabia, a person with a grudge against a colleague would have a friend from Israel send a postcard to the unfriend. This resulted in interrogation and deportation.
    A violation of human rights, in Saudi Arabia, really!?
    McJakome

    Complain about this comment

  • 290. At 9:40pm on 30 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #289“Does this mean governments in Muslim countries have the right to question anyone that travels to Israel? Of course not, what a preposterous notion! “
    Another blooper? Unless things have changed in the Middle East since my last sojourn, not only do the regimes there question anyone who might have visited Israel, they refuse entry to anyone who might have contact with Israel or who might be Jewish. In Saudi Arabia, a person with a grudge against a colleague would have a friend from Israel send a postcard to the unfriend. This resulted in interrogation and deportation.
    A violation of human rights, in Saudi Arabia, really!?
    McJakome
    ______________

    see my comment #242 which explains the difference between Israel and nation which have a terrorist presence or Syria and Iran which activly support terrorism.

    Complain about this comment

  • 291. At 9:42pm on 30 Dec 2009, McJakome wrote:

    262. At 6:39pm on 30 Dec 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote to Iam Wrong;
    “President Washington warned America against the very kind of entanglements in Europe we are in now.”

    Four points.
    1. We should have been more faithful to the warnings left by our founding fathers, especially Washington.
    2. Washington would not have approved of our entangling alliance with Israel, either.
    3. Senator Lieberman is also sometimes called the Senator from the Insurance Industry.
    4. Unfortunately, we have no choice but to help protect Israel unless we want to be complicit in Holocaust Part II. I heard it directly and in person from the lips of Muslims, “We must kill all the Jews, even women and children.” When I reminded them that the Koran demands respect for “People of the Book,” I was told that since “the Jews of today are not the Jews of Mohammad’s time,” they are not protected. I have a feeling the same goes for the Christians of today as well.

    McJakome

    Complain about this comment

  • 292. At 9:45pm on 30 Dec 2009, McJakome wrote:

    213. At 1:40pm on 30 Dec 2009, D R Murrell wrote:
    to MagicKirin “There was never going to be any credible link between Saddam and Al Qaeda, Saddam was secular Sunni (as was the ruling Baathist Party) and Al Qaeda are Shiite, they hated Saddam and publicly said so.”

    Oops! Whilst telling others to get their facts straight, you seem to have managed quite a big blooper yourself. Osama bin Laden is not only a Sunni, but a Wahabbi, the Sunni sect that not only thinks Shiites are heretics, but also condemns any Sunni who disagrees with the Wahabbi interpretation of Islam. Zawahiri is an Egyptian and member of the Muslem Brotherhood, also a Sunni group.

    You are correct that they hated Saddam, but that was because he was a Baathist. While they had support from the Soviets, and were sometimes referred to as Arab Socialists, their roots go back to Germany’s National Socialists [some socialists, eh?].
    He was hated for secularism and foreign contacts.

    • 238. At 4:52pm on 30 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:
    Magic,

    "And if you go to countries like Syria or Yemen, israel has every right to question you."

    “Does this mean governments in Muslim countries have the right to question anyone that travels to Israel? Of course not, what a preposterous notion! “
    Another blooper? Unless things have changed in the Middle East since my last sojourn, not only do the regimes there question anyone who might have visited Israel, they refuse entry to anyone who might have contact with Israel or who might be Jewish. In Saudi Arabia, a person with a grudge against a colleague would have a friend from Israel send a postcard to the unfriend. This resulted in interrogation and deportation.
    A violation of human rights, in Saudi Arabia, really!?

    Complain about this comment

  • 293. At 10:20pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #292 JMM

    There are around one Billion Muslims in the world. How many of them have you spoken to?

    The Muslims I know are not interested in killing anyone.

    Complain about this comment

  • 294. At 10:21pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #282 ukwales

    I thought you British liked understatement...
    but wait you are Welsh...

    Complain about this comment

  • 295. At 10:33pm on 30 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #293
    bepa wrote:
    #292 JMM

    There are around one Billion Muslims in the world. How many of them have you spoken to?

    The Muslims I know are not interested in killing anyone.

    ____________________

    But do they publicly denounce those who misuse Islam to justify terrorism. That is what non moslems would like to hear. I've said it many times let Prince Abdullah prove it by going to Israel as a gesture of peace and solidarity against terrorism.

    Complain about this comment

  • 296. At 10:43pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    the reason people call lieberman the senator from telaviv is because he acts like it. Swapping parties because the support for Israel might not be enough that was a give away.



    JMM I have heard numerous americans say they would like to see all the muslims killed. a few that say the same about jews and one here who says the same about everyone not him.
    Crime is committed by the living and so life should be a crime. but that last one at least was in a comic book.
    (Judge Death )

    I have heard plenty of muslims say no to war, and yes to peace.
    the assertion you make is the one that keeps letting you down.It smacks of someone looking from one side only.

    Complain about this comment

  • 297. At 10:47pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    The Jerusalem Post is a conservative newspaper in Israel and this article is questioning what has been going on.

    http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1261364551818&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

    selected quotes

    "The question we have to ask ourselves is this: If anybody treated us like we're treating the people in Gaza, what would we do?"

    "If another country sent F-16s, Apache helicopters, white phosphorous, drones, tanks and battalions into Israel, if any nation bombed and killed over here like we bombed and killed in Gaza, then rubbed our noses in it afterward, would we want to make peace with them?"

    "In fact, their elected leaders are fanatical, murderous Jew-haters sworn to Israel's destruction. That's extremely important to remember, and we do. But what we don't want to remember, what we make 100 percent sure to forget, is that we do all sorts of hateful things to Gaza that they don't do to us, and that this is the way it's been since 1967."

    "f we Israelis could go to Gaza and see in person what we've done to that place and its people, would we be capable of empathy? If we thought of our children living in a country that was just like postwar Gaza, would we allow ourselves to think what we might do?"

    "And we have to stop doing to them what we would never allow anyone to do to us. Otherwise, we Israelis have no conscience, and little by little we become capable of anything."

    ...............

    Now if those kinds of questions are going on in Israel..how long before those questions appear in the US?

    And the US is unable to provide health care for all Americans..but it can provide weaponry for Israel? to destroy the people on the Gaza?




    Complain about this comment

  • 298. At 10:47pm on 30 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    295 GHERKIN YES THEY DO DENOUNCE AND YOU HAVE BEEN SHOWN THE EVIDENCE YOU AND ALL HERE HAVE SEVERAL TIME BEEN SHOWN THOSE DENOUNCEMENTS.

    THE CONTINUAL REPETITION OF THIS LIE IS SPAM. NOTHING BUT SPAM. WHEN YOU CAN REFUTE THE CONVERSATION YOU LEFT FROM BACK THEN THEN WE SHOULD CONTINUE THIS DISCUSSION BUT REPEATING THIS LIE IS OFFENSIVE .

    NO ONE HAS TO GO ANYWHERE. EVERY TIME YOU DREAM ANOTHER REQUEST. WHY SHOULD ANYONE GO TO ISRAEL THEY HAVE ALREADY CONDEMNED THE ATTACKS AS AN AFRONT TO ISLAM.

    Complain about this comment

  • 299. At 11:12pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    There was never going to be any credible link between Saddam and Al Qaeda, Saddam was secular Sunni (as was the ruling Baathist Party) and Al Qaeda are Shiite, they hated Saddam and publicly said so.”

    Oops! Whilst telling others to get their facts straight, you seem to have managed quite a big blooper yourself. Osama bin Laden is not only a Sunni, but a Wahabbi, the Sunni sect that not only thinks Shiites are heretics, but also condemns any Sunni who disagrees with the Wahabbi interpretation of Islam. Zawahiri is an Egyptian and member of the Muslem Brotherhood, also a Sunni group.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Prisoners of your own narratives and assumptions...Since you belong to a civilization that had to be anti islam in order to justify what the usual west is doing in its usual western way to the islamic world. Otherwise, any tom dick and harry understands that people who are fighting the usual western way come in all shapes and religious background...Just as your soldiers, your political leaders, your mediamen, your finace people and ordinary citizens, some are cons, others liberals, some leftists other rightys, some protestents others catholics, some change their sect like blair and hide it so that they dont lose their prime ministership...Since you vcolunarily accepted the "islam causes terrorism" argument now you are forever cursed to go from sect to sect in order to justify your wars..

    Complain about this comment

  • 300. At 11:13pm on 30 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #298
    cheesefuller wrote:
    295 GHERKIN YES THEY DO DENOUNCE AND YOU HAVE BEEN SHOWN THE EVIDENCE YOU AND ALL HERE HAVE SEVERAL TIME BEEN SHOWN THOSE DENOUNCEMENTS.

    THE CONTINUAL REPETITION OF THIS LIE IS SPAM. NOTHING BUT SPAM. WHEN YOU CAN REFUTE THE CONVERSATION YOU LEFT FROM BACK THEN THEN WE SHOULD CONTINUE THIS DISCUSSION BUT REPEATING THIS LIE IS OFFENSIVE .

    NO ONE HAS TO GO ANYWHERE. EVERY TIME YOU DREAM ANOTHER REQUEST. WHY SHOULD ANYONE GO TO ISRAEL THEY HAVE ALREADY CONDEMNED THE ATTACKS AS AN AFRONT TO ISLAM.

    _______________


    Temper Temper

    Actions speak louder than words.

    Let Abdullah who claims to have a peace plan go to Israel. Have him close all the hate spewing Madrasa.

    Talk like your statements are cheap.

    Complain about this comment

  • 301. At 11:22pm on 30 Dec 2009, allmymarbles wrote:

    As long as Congress is being paid off by the pharmaceutical industry and helath insurers, there is no hope whatever for reasonably-priced efficient health care. Rather than what they are foisting on us, I would prefer no health insurance at all. Prices would drop precipitously and the medical community would treat us with the interest and care (and respect) we pay for. I had to go outside the HMO and pay a private doctor for proper diagnosis and treatment. Do I resent that? You bet!

    I hope this thing doesn't pass, but I know it will.

    Complain about this comment

  • 302. At 11:28pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    And the US is unable to provide health care for all Americans..but it can provide weaponry for Israel? to destroy the people on the Gaza?
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Gaza is a beyond repair, Now wait for israel's unilateral withdrawal of a few kilometers in east jerusalam..these four years israel will luxourously build apaprtment buildings and gater communities all over east jerusalam as its un-conditional supportive party the democrats in usa fight their just wars elsewhere in the muslim world..and like a good and effective supplier, israel will supply enough episodes to usa which will allow usa to continue the war on terrorism, until it reaches iran, while it will continue to eat up land..if G-d really promised the land to jews as their claim their torah says so, He would have sent an extra verse written on the slab of stone that " O, people who live in israel and claim that you are the children of israel, if you were really children of Jacob, you would know that I promised you a land, I didnt give you a promise you to be squatters" or something like that..This is a bad english translation of the would be, could be hebrew verse..

    Complain about this comment

  • 303. At 11:36pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    Let Abdullah who claims to have a peace plan go to Israel. Have him close all the hate spewing Madrasa.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Its not Abdullah who is insisting that israel recognize his country, its the political leaders in israel who wants Addullah to recognize their country, so Abdullah has given them simple conditions, take them or leave them, its israel's choice..If it wants Abdullah to recognize it, then it has to show that its worth recognition..

    Complain about this comment

  • 304. At 11:56pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    Let Abdullah who claims to have a peace plan go to Israel.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And If Abdullah had read this line, he would have laughed his good natured laugh and had softely said, ( I say softley because he is a soft spoken person) that both israel and usa the two hyper preachers of peace should first go to hamas and hezbullah, and then to iran, and then to taliban with their peace plans...By the way Abdullah is not like hilary who can first support something (vote for iraq war) and then do a U-turn and say that it was not this kind of war she voted for. if israel wants abdullah to recognize it, then it should show him the final product..with anchoured boundries not a free floating entity...that changes its shapes every year...And then its up to Abdullah to recognize it or not depending on if he likes the final product..

    Complain about this comment

  • 305. At 00:04am on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    colonelartist wrote:
    Let Abdullah who claims to have a peace plan go to Israel. Have him close all the hate spewing Madrasa.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Its not Abdullah who is insisting that israel recognize his country, its the political leaders in israel who wants Addullah to recognize their country, so Abdullah has given them simple conditions, take them or leave them, its israel's choice..If it wants Abdullah to recognize it, then it has to show that its worth recognition..

    __________________

    I noticed you dd not address the Madrasas. But Abdullah wants to be credited with what he considered a great peace paln which says Israels goes back to 67 and the Arab nations will recognize Isreal.

    That shows very little courage that Sadat showed and why Abdullah is a petty little man with none of the abilites of say Prince Bandar who knew his country was foolish not to have relations with Israel.


    It is the Saudi and most Arab nations who have to prove themselves wortthy of being considered a worthy friend to a progressive nation like Israel

    Complain about this comment

  • 306. At 00:19am on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    I noticed you dd not address the Madrasas. But Abdullah wants to be credited with what he considered a great peace paln which says Israels goes back to 67 and the Arab nations will recognize Isreal.

    That shows very little courage that Sadat showed and why Abdullah is a petty little man with none of the abilites of say Prince Bandar who knew his country was foolish not to have relations with Israel.


    It is the Saudi and most Arab nations who have to prove themselves wortthy of being considered a worthy friend to a progressive nation like Israel
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    you can notice whatever you want to, and much more, but the day your leaders ban chruch schools and the jews their midrashas and yeshiva, the hindus their temples and the budishts their tempels, is the day you should expect Abdullah to ban madrasas in his country..Abdullah doesnt want any credit, he doesnt need to recognize israel, the only reason why he says he would recognize it because of palestinians..Saddat is not abdullah, Saddat was lucky he died early, otherwise he would have ended just like King Hussain, who also recognized israel but when he saw the usuall ways of israel, he regreted....thats why he despite being extremely sick up to his last days tried to convience americans to do something...

    Complain about this comment

  • 307. At 00:28am on 31 Dec 2009, Tino wrote:

    201 KScurmudgeon

    "Tino - you use the word 'religious' as if by itself it explains everything. I hope you didn't mean that.

    It seems to me and to many other commentors that these jihadists hate the West for a number of reasons.

    If you have 'primary source' information you can help us all by telling us about them, so we will be better able to appreciate their perspective and perhaps address the causes of this hatred.

    KScurmudgeon"

    Their bylaws (Al-Qaeda):
    [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

    Seems rather clear to me what their motivations are. Global jihad so that Islam reigns supreme.

    Complain about this comment

  • 308. At 00:40am on 31 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #302 colonelartist

    It is possible that the Palestinians are actually descended from a group that thousands of years ago lived in the area as also the modern Jews are descended from the same group.

    If that can be proved with DNA that might make some people pause to think about what they are doing...but its almost impossible to reason with religious fanatics.

    "Recent genetic evidence has demonstrated that Palestinians as an ethnic group represent modern "descendants of a core population that lived in the area since prehistoric times,"[13][14]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_people

    "A study in October 2000 showed the majority of Palestinians tested were found to have DNA of that of Jews. The conclusion of the DNA results is as follows:According to historical records part, or perhaps the majority, of the Moslem Arabs in this country descended from local inhabitants, mainly Christians and Jews, who had converted after the Islamic conquest in the seventh century AD (Shaban 1971; Mc Graw Donner 1981). These local inhabitants, in turn, were descendants of the core population that had lived in the area for several centuries, some even since prehistorical times (Gil 1992). On the other hand, the ancestors of the great majority of present-day Jews lived outside this region for almost two millennia. Thus, our findings are in good agreement with historical evidence and suggest genetic continuity in both populations despite their long separation and the wide geographic dispersal of Jews.[102]"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_people#DNA_and_genetic_studies

    Using science it looks like the Palestinians were there thousands of years ago and many were descended from the same groups as the Jews except the Jews migrated and intermarried...and they have genes that are not from the area...they have European genes.

    At least that is my reading of it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 309. At 00:54am on 31 Dec 2009, AndreaNY wrote:

    226. cheesefuller:

    181 Adrianny

    How come no one ever says how many malpractice suits really exist and how many are frivolous.
    Only once has anyone brought anything on that topic to this debate. and it showed that there were not very many and that the whole issue is exaggerated. That the insurance industry for mal-practice just charges those ridiculous rates to doctors because they can, they can because so many believe the hyped lies that the frivolous suits cost doctors not the frivolous pricing structure dreamed up by the accountants at "mal practice coverage are us ".

    reality check.
    even with a free consultation at the ambulance chaser most people cannot afford to take on the doctors supported by the hospital lawyers.

    These suits are greatly exaggerated by those in the industry

    Are you in the industry you rarely care about any other issue when posting here.

    **************

    My information is based on comments from doctor friends and doctors' comments, which appear often at the NY Times blog and in articles all over the web. Also, NPR did a great series on health care, in which several docs described how they are forced to protect themselves.

    The information on defensive medicine is there if you're open to it. You seem to have made up your mind.

    I comment when it suits me. No need to concern yourself.

    Complain about this comment

  • 310. At 00:55am on 31 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 292, JMM

    My point, which I did not articulate clearly enough, was that if Magic believes Israel is doing the right thing when they interrogate people that have traveled to Islamic Republics, he must feel the same way about the interrogations carried out in Islamic countries on people that have visited Israel.

    Our trading partners in the region, especially Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, the second largest recipient of US foreign aid are led by despots as cruel and immoral as the Zionists in Israel.



    Ref 307, Tino

    "If you have 'primary source' information you can help us all by telling us about them, so we will be better able to appreciate their perspective and perhaps address the causes of this hatred."


    The initial rationale for Jihad declared by Al Qaeda against the West was the presence of American troops in Air Force bases near the Holy cities of Mecca and Medina. To their credit, the Bush Administration quietly withdrew our troops from those bases, but when we decided to invade Afghanistan and Iraq the justification for Jihad was extended to our presence and actions in those countries.

    In summary, the hatred is motivated primarily by our presence in countries where we are not welcomed, by our actions, and by the social and political influence we exert on those countries. Our unconditional support to Israel further exacerbates the problem, but based on what I have read on this subject it does not seem to be the main reason for the attacks carried out against us, against our allies, and against our interests in the region.

    Complain about this comment

  • 311. At 00:55am on 31 Dec 2009, Tino wrote:

    My post (307) linked to their bylaws but just do a google search and find them yourself I suppose.

    Complain about this comment

  • 312. At 00:59am on 31 Dec 2009, Tino wrote:

    203 D R Murrel

    Do you have *any* evidence for your assertions. I am getting tired of seeing westerners attempt to provide motivation for the terrorists without consulting what they say. Are you all truly so arrogant you think you know better than they do why they fight?

    Complain about this comment

  • 313. At 01:09am on 31 Dec 2009, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    So, once again, another blog string disappears down the Levantine rat-hole.
    It was supposed to be about US healthcare.

    Time for another string, Mark.

    Complain about this comment

  • 314. At 01:20am on 31 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    Malpractice Statistics


    "A recent study by Healthgrades found that an average of 195,000 hospital deaths in each of the years 2000, 2001 and 2002 in the U.S. were due to potentially preventable medical errors."

    "Researchers examined 37 million patient records and applied the mortality and economic impact models developed by Dr. Chunliu Zhan and Dr. Marlene R. Miller in a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in October 2003. The Zhan and Miller study supported the Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) 1999 report conclusion, which found that medical errors caused up to 98,000 deaths annually and should be considered a national epidemic.[7]

    Get that?

    More than 90,000 people die every year because of mistakes and its a national epidemic.

    and there is more...

    "A 2006 follow-up to the 1999 Institute of Medicine study found that medication errors are among the most common medical mistakes, harming at least 1.5 million people every year. According to the study, 400,000 preventable drug-related injuries occur each year in hospitals, 800,000 in long-term care settings, and roughly 530,000 among Medicare recipients in outpatient clinics. The report stated that these are likely to be conservative estimates. In 2000 alone, the extra medical costs incurred by preventable drug related injuries approximated $887 million – and the study looked only at injuries sustained by Medicare recipients, a subset of clinic visitors. None of these figures take into account lost wages and productivity or other costs.[9]"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_malpractice#Statistics

    MORE THAN ONE MILLION People are HURT by the MEDICATIONS THEY TAKE!!!

    Oh yeah this is a great medical system...unless you are ill.

    And we must have a bad educational system because Americans seem unable to look up information on the internet and evaluate it.


    Complain about this comment

  • 315. At 01:23am on 31 Dec 2009, Tino wrote:

    234 Andy Post

    "Help me out, would you? So, Libya was America's first foreign intervention (the shores of Tripoli and all that), Algeria was occupied during World War II (although I believe the opposition to those military actions came from Axis forces, not the indigenous peoples) and China during the Boxer rebellion, but when did the U.S. occupy the rest? I've googled as best I can but can't find any information on the others."

    I am pretty sure his point, which I agree with, is that if they motivation for the terrorists is our 'occupation' then why are people from all of those countries fighting us? That is why you cannot find the info - we never invaded them.

    In addition, our first foreign 'intervention' is still extremely telling in my opinion. Even then we could not understand why they would attack us without being provoked. Their ambassador had this to say:

    "It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every muslim who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy's ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once."

    Sound familiar to anyone? This is, and has always been, their motivation for attack. It is religious, as I have been saying and will continue to say until someone actually provides compelling evidence in the other direction. Again, anyone's thoughts or opinions conjured from thin air do not mean anything. Provide *PRIMARY SOURCE* evidence, please.

    Complain about this comment

  • 316. At 01:25am on 31 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    A doctor should lose his/her license if proven guilty of malpractice.

    The injured person should gain lifelong medical care ... heh ..that sounds like universal health care..and in Sweden that is what they do...if a doctor is found guilty of malpractice he/she loses his/her license.

    When there is a court case its to take away the license...its not for money.


    Complain about this comment

  • 317. At 01:38am on 31 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #315 Tino

    http://www.terrorism-research.com/goals/

    The Intent of Terrorist Groups

    A terrorist group commits acts of violence to -

    Produce widespread fear

    Obtain worldwide, national, or local recognition for their cause by attracting the attention of the media

    Harass, weaken, or embarrass government security forces so that the the government overreacts and appears repressive

    Steal or extort money and equipment, especially weapons and ammunition vital to the operation of their group

    Destroy facilities or disrupt lines of communication in order to create doubt that the government can provide for and protect its citizens

    Discourage foreign investments, tourism, or assistance programs that can affect the target country’s economy and support of the government in power

    Influence government decisions, legislation, or other critical decisions

    Free prisoners

    Satisfy vengeance

    Turn the tide in a guerrilla war by forcing government security forces to concentrate their efforts in urban areas. This allows the terrorist group to establish itself among the local populace in rural areas

    ..
    "religiously oriented and millenarian groups typically attempt to inflict as many casualties as possible. Because of the apocalyptic frame of reference they use, loss of life is irrelevant, and more casualties are better. Losses among their co-religionists are of little account, because such casualties will reap the benefits of the afterlife. Likewise, non-believers, whether they are the intended target or collateral damage, deserve death, and killing them may be considered a moral duty. The Kenyan bombing against the U.S. Embassy in 1998 inflicted casualties on the local inhabitants in proportion to U.S. personnel of over twenty to one killed, and an even greater disparity in the proportion of wounded (over 5000 Kenyans were wounded by the blast; 95% of total casualties were non-American ). Fear of backlash rarely concerns these groups, as it is often one of their goals to provoke overreaction by their enemies, and hopefully widen the conflict. "

    ......

    So what's your point? Terrorism is a variant of warfare.

    ........

    http://www.terrorism-research.com/

    "Terrorism is not new, and even though it has been used since the beginning of recorded history it can be relatively hard to define. Terrorism has been described variously as both a tactic and strategy; a crime and a holy duty; a justified reaction to oppression and an inexcusable abomination. Obviously, a lot depends on whose point of view is being represented. Terrorism has often been an effective tactic for the weaker side in a conflict. As an asymmetric form of conflict, it confers coercive power with many of the advantages of military force at a fraction of the cost. Due to the secretive nature and small size of terrorist organizations, they often offer opponents no clear organization to defend against or to deter. "

    Complain about this comment

  • 318. At 01:38am on 31 Dec 2009, AndreaNY wrote:

    314. bepa: No one is questioning whether the number of medical mistakes should be reduced. Quality measures, I presume, are being implemented and were designed to do just that.

    I was referring to the number of unnecessary tests done by docs to protect themselves in the event of lawsuits. Nowhere is the number of these tests quantified; yet, doctors continuously describe their efforts to protect themselves.

    Complain about this comment

  • 319. At 01:40am on 31 Dec 2009, AndreaNY wrote:

    311.Tino: The source information is very unsettling. Robert Spencer has published a great deal of it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 320. At 01:55am on 31 Dec 2009, Tino wrote:

    ""religiously oriented and millenarian groups typically attempt to inflict as many casualties as possible. Because of the apocalyptic frame of reference they use, loss of life is irrelevant, and more casualties are better. Losses among their co-religionists are of little account, because such casualties will reap the benefits of the afterlife. Likewise, non-believers, whether they are the intended target or collateral damage, deserve death, and killing them may be considered a moral duty. The Kenyan bombing against the U.S. Embassy in 1998 inflicted casualties on the local inhabitants in proportion to U.S. personnel of over twenty to one killed, and an even greater disparity in the proportion of wounded (over 5000 Kenyans were wounded by the blast; 95% of total casualties were non-American ). Fear of backlash rarely concerns these groups, as it is often one of their goals to provoke overreaction by their enemies, and hopefully widen the conflict. ""

    Should answer your question: "So what's your point? Terrorism is a variant of warfare."

    The point is that the above paragraph seems to slip right by people. Their motivation is Islam, they say this openly. Westerners keep trying ti 'figure out what motivates them' as if they are lying to us when they say it is their religious duty to kill us.

    Complain about this comment

  • 321. At 02:00am on 31 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #318 AndreaNY

    When doctors see me their eyes light up with dollar signs. I have good health insurance and the smallest complaint means a test.

    This isn't defensive medicine ..its a way to make money

    The wrong people are doctors. Too many of them are motivated by money.

    There should be an influx of new doctors into the system to bring down the payments and the new doctors should have their training paid for. No one should start out as a doctor with huge debts. There should also be more women doctors.

    Complain about this comment

  • 322. At 02:09am on 31 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 323. At 03:11am on 31 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    Tino

    The Muslim religion does not tell people to kill others. Terrorism is an extreme form of warfare ..that many different groups have used. In Britain they had the IRA as a terrorist group. There are terrorist groups that are not connected to any religion. Its just that now we are seeing an extremist group that is using the Muslim religion and distorting the religion... But the purposes behind the use of terrorism are not some notion about religion. At base the struggle is about power and land and resources.

    Complain about this comment

  • 324. At 03:27am on 31 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    re: #322

    Ok I will try to put in my own words what I read at:
    http://www.naturalnews.com/012291_medicine_unnecessary_surgery_surgeries.html

    There is a view that many of the surgeries being performed in the US are actually unnecessary. It is thought by some that it might be as high a number as 7.5 million surgeries a year..which seems high to me...but there is some indication that too many surgeries are occurring.

    There is a book coming out in Jan 2010 , "Death by Medicine", by Gary Null that will go in depth into how the medical profession has been corrupted by financial gain...

    http://www.amazon.com/Death-Medicine-Gary-Null/dp/1607660024/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1262229450&sr=8-1

    And imo its the same basic problem that we keep facing in the US. The corporations have become too strong and there is not enough government regulation, to protect the interests of American citizens.

    There is big money to be made in drugs and in medical supplies, hospitals etc...and its a feeding frenzy that is going unabated. The problem is not the government which has lost its ability to regulate. The problem is that the incentive for money is too strong.

    Complain about this comment

  • 325. At 03:49am on 31 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #264. bepa: "Don't you go into denial too. This young man was british . . . "

    Incorrect - and what's more, he had been denied a visa to re-enter Britain. One would have thought that the United Kingdom and the United States would share a list of such undesirables and act upon it. Had the flight been to Heathrow, he would never have proceeded beyond the ticket desk, let alone Customs & Immigration and the departure lounge. The problem is not simply one of explosives and metal detection, but of communication - why didn't the two nations compare notes? Had they done so, all of this would have been avoided.

    Complain about this comment

  • 326. At 04:40am on 31 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #325 David

    i don't know why they are not communicating...but a guess... Possibly the lists are too long and the risks of different people are not being assessed properly?

    There were so many warning signals with this young man..thank God no tragedy occurred.

    But Britain does have a large number of disaffected Muslim youth. Why this particular person went astray..nobody seems to know why. He was smart, he had money...he had a future..and thats all gone now.

    I guess the one good thing that may come out of it is that there will be greater security measures take.

    You may have written about this David..but i might have missed it..Do you back the health bill as it is coming out of the Senate or the House? I don't know what to make of it. it looks like a nightmare..but Paul Krugman says it can be worked with...that social security when it first came out wasn't well written either and it was expanded over time.

    It is my belief that the Republicans and some of the Democrats will sabotage the bill with bad legislation and they are willing to let Americans die so that the corporations will have control over health care in America. So I am pessimistic...


    Good night...

    Complain about this comment

  • 327. At 05:06am on 31 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #326. bepa: "I don't know why they are not communicating...but a guess... Possibly the lists are too long and the risks of different people are not being assessed properly?"

    I can't think that there are great numbers of those who are actually denied a visa; the name would have popped up on a computer or at the very least (retro and analogue) the lack of a visa when he checked in would have caused him to be denied travel. I would have thought that the British would have notified their American counterparts that a visa (and thus UK entry) had been denied. If he was a threat of any kind to the UK, he must have been a threat to the USA.

    "Do you back the health bill as it is coming out of the Senate or the House? I don't know what to make of it. It looks like a nightmare."

    I think we have to wait until the two bills are aligned to see exactly what is proposed. 10% of something is better than 100% of nothing and, like the British NHS Act, it can be amended over time. A foot in the door, the thin end of the wedge, may be the best that can be done for now.

    Complain about this comment

  • 328. At 05:37am on 31 Dec 2009, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    267. At 6:59pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    The US was far better off when it was isolated.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You mean when it could hide its crimes? do the covert operations? give the false impression to the people in far off countries that the americans were really what bush claimed, the beacon of light etc etc? the myth of americanism is all broken...everyone, the common street vendors in far off countries now have seen the true colors of america and its ism...and they all collectively say and i quote the second half of Rumi's famous quote because "yes I can" that when you eventually see through the veils to how things really are, you keep on saying to yourself again and again, this is not like we thought it was"...The people have seen through the veils of american values, principles and traditions...it was all a facade..

    And again you wrote -

    279. At 7:44pm on 30 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    I think you have a problem in Britain
    --------------------------------------- and their insistance that they are the civilized people, and their justification of going to wars, their inability to hold their leaders accountable for the mess they create in iraq and afghanistan...and their refusal to warn students like this guy, to divide everything they have heard about its civilized civilzation, the ultimate belief in human rights, the freedom of speech and ultimate fairness and equality, by 2 when they enter britain. They have to learn to tone down their PR campaign so that the gap between reality and false impression doesnt exist..

    ______________________________________

    Colonelartist, thank you for the fascinating comments.

    I didn't suppose you were so naive to believe any nation was made only of purity and honor. I still do not suppose you are naive.

    You may be speaking about these youths, however, explaining the shock that I do suppose any person feels when they see the seamy underside of human life. Do some Muslims go through life believing they can go find perfection in this world? Is that possibly a motive to destroy oneself, to seek death through the destruction of innocents?

    Are only Muslims innocent?

    KScurmudgeon

    Complain about this comment

  • 329. At 05:43am on 31 Dec 2009, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    224. At 3:22pm on 30 Dec 2009, cheesefuller wrote:

    Naked nibbler;) on the plane.
    ...........

    Brilliant!! Laughed all over myself!

    KScurmudgeon

    Complain about this comment

  • 330. At 06:02am on 31 Dec 2009, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    239. At 4:56pm on 30 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    Imo the US is no longer a democratic republic..but an oligarchy run by the wealthy and powerful who have successfully infiltrated the Republican party and have also made head way into the Democratic Party.
    ________________________________

    America has always been an oligarchy run by the wealthy and powerful. Always. So has every country that could call itself such. The ancient Athenian democracy was an oligarchy, but leadership was subtle enough to let the people do stuff that didn't matter to them. Somebody has to lead, and only the wealthy and powerful generally know enough to keep it together.

    But in spite of the organization of power, America has developed the largest and wealthiest middle class in history, the wealthiest blue collar class, and yes, the richest and smallest class of 'poor' in history.

    How did that happen? Very few of our wealthy families came here that way.

    This, by the way, is my answer to Colonelartist's assertion that America is a lie.

    Here, most of us make of it what we will.

    KScurmudgeon

    Complain about this comment

  • 331. At 06:24am on 31 Dec 2009, Tino wrote:

    Bepa

    "The Muslim religion does not tell people to kill others. Terrorism is an extreme form of warfare ..that many different groups have used. In Britain they had the IRA as a terrorist group. There are terrorist groups that are not connected to any religion. Its just that now we are seeing an extremist group that is using the Muslim religion and distorting the religion... But the purposes behind the use of terrorism are not some notion about religion. At base the struggle is about power and land and resources."

    They are not distorting anything. They can, and definitely do, point to passages in the Qur'an and Hadith to justify their actions. They are not grossly misinterpreting anything. There is a sound basis for jihad against non-Muslims in order to convert them.

    Again, who are you to say what they are doing it for? You are making up a reason with no justification because it makes 'sense'. I would prefer to assume that they are not lying when they say religion is their motivation.

    Complain about this comment

  • 332. At 09:25am on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #306
    you can notice whatever you want to, and much more, but the day your leaders ban chruch schools and the jews their midrashas and yeshiva, the hindus their temples and the budishts their tempels, is the day you should expect Abdullah to ban madrasas in his country..
    _________________-

    None of those religous school encourage hate and terrorism. Saudi Madrasas do. If Sadat were alive he would first be glad that Egyptians were dying for Palestinians who don't want peace. He would also see the threat of Iran as a devout Moslem he would be a powerful against Islamic terrorism.


    I see the moderators are starting to censor again

    Complain about this comment

  • 333. At 10:03am on 31 Dec 2009, D R Murrell wrote:

    Magic – Your two points seem to conflict: Sadat would be glad that Egyptians were dying for Palestinians who don’t want peace. He would also be anti-Islamic terrorism.

    Since you pretty much equate Palestinian with terrorist, or at least terrorist sympathiser, I cannot see the logic of his supporting his countrymen dying for terrorist supporters but being a powerful something against terrorism.

    I suspect that you are not fully awake yet and in rushing your response you have missed out some vital words that make your post logically sound, including what something Sadat would be against Islamic terrorism.

    Complain about this comment

  • 334. At 11:20am on 31 Dec 2009, D R Murrell wrote:

    Tino – So the answer about terrorism is that it’s just about religion, specifically the failings of Islam. Fine except of course Islam does not have the monopoly on religious terrorism

    Sikh – ISYF, who carried out the bombing of Air India Flight 182 (1985) until 9/11 the worst aircraft terror attack on record. Like the ISYF the Kalistan Commando Force (regarded as the worst of the Kalistan organisations) is regarded as a terrorist group by most countries, particularly Canada.

    Hindu – The Indian police say that the Hindu Jagran Manch was behind the 2008 bombings of Malegaon & Mondasa.

    Judaism – Lehi was regarded by the British as the worst of the Zionist groups, behind a number of attacks, including one the Israeli PM had to apologise for. Formally dissolved in 1948, many of its membership joined the IDF and its leadership pardoned. A number of this membership then went on to have political careers including becoming PM. Magic I know you may disagree that this was terrorist organisation, however, the Israeli government of the day agreed with me. 5 months after its formal dissolution 4 members of Lehi assassinated Count Folke Bernadotte the UN ambassador in Jerusalem. This caused enough outrage that the Lehi organisation was banned three days later by the Israeli government.

    The only major religion I could not get an organisation name for was Buddhism, though a number of sources said that the idea that there were no Buddhist terrorist groups was an urban myth.

    So every major world religion has members who use it as an excuse to commit terrorism, so to use your reasoning Tino all religions support terrorism. This has two faults; firstly according to the 2009 Terrorist Threat Map which is on the wall by my desk (need the information for work) there are as many nationalist or ideology (almost entirely left wing, which will please Nero) terrorist groups active as religion based. This would suggest that people who are going to become terrorists choose an organisation which fits to their own ideology. Again it is either wanting to promote or prevent change that links all these groups together.

    Secondly in any of the major world religions only a tiny minority ever use it as an excuse to promote violence. This suggests that is the individual that is at fault not the religion. If Islam really was the threat you are trying to make out then we would be facing over a billion terrorists, not a few hundred. Yes parts of the Koran do promote violence against the unbeliever, so does the OT the basis of Christianity and Judaism. I know originally Sikhs saw themselves as holy warriors, part of the reason that one of the five sacred K’s is a blade. Shintoism, did during the Shoganate promoted an acceptance of violence.

    Saying that Jihadism is just ‘religion stupid’ ignores why only certain adherents of the Islamic faith feel that way. Magic’s favourite terrorist target the Palestinians are in the main Muslim (though not exclusively) but their terrorism is based as much on nationality as it religion. Religion is only ever part of the problem unless you have *any* actual evidence to prove otherwise!

    Complain about this comment

  • 335. At 11:43am on 31 Dec 2009, Leo_Naphta wrote:

    MAII,

    Again with the 'anti-semitic Europe' rambling? How many times are you going to play that card? I'm amazed that you still think those two years in France in the 1970s can give you anything of a representative image of Europe. Not to mention that the anti-semitism you refer to, always comes back to the one anecdote about the waiter not wanting to serve you because there was a Jew with you. Am I right?

    You're getting quite boring, please invent some new stories.

    Also, nobody picked up on that Luis Posada Carriles comment some way up the page? Painful stuff, isn't it. By the way, I'd recommend Adam Smith: "The Power of Nightmares" (You can find it online) to the slightly more hysterical under the posters here. It's not completely correct, obviously, although it sets the bar a bit higher than say, Michael Moore. It does provide with some interesting suggestions, and if you want to get some clarification on facts that are incorrect, I can also refer you to the review by 'The Nation' of the movie, which can be found online.

    Complain about this comment

  • 336. At 12:44pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #333
    D R Murrell wrote:
    Magic – Your two points seem to conflict: Sadat would be glad that Egyptians were dying for Palestinians who don’t want peace. He would also be anti-Islamic terrorism.

    Since you pretty much equate Palestinian with terrorist, or at least terrorist sympathiser, I cannot see the logic of his supporting his countrymen dying for terrorist supporters but being a powerful something against terrorism.

    I suspect that you are not fully awake yet and in rushing your response you have missed out some vital words that make your post logically sound, including what something Sadat would be against Islamic terrorism.

    __________________

    Error on the BBC web sight I checked I put were not dying.

    But the original point to Bepa was that leaders in moslem countries like Abdullah do not do enough to fight islamic terrorism and make peace.

    Complain about this comment

  • 337. At 12:45pm on 31 Dec 2009, PartTimeDon wrote:

    The book "Why do People Hate America" is worth a look:
    http://www.bookreview.com/$spindb.query.listreview2.booknew.7225
    The thing that surprised me was the assertion that Palestinians (and most other peoples in the middle east) are convinced that Americans hate them. This is mostly because America gives Israel defense aid of more money per capita than your average Palestinian earns in a year.

    Complain about this comment

  • 338. At 12:48pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #334

    DM you seem to ignore that the majority of terrorist attacks right now and all the attempted airplane bombings are from Islamic terrorists.

    Not other religions. Why don't the leaders of major countires with Moslems majorities come out and say we denounce terorism, Iran who sponser terrorism Hamas and Hezbollah which commit terorism and that is wrong against followers of any religion?

    Complain about this comment

  • 339. At 1:08pm on 31 Dec 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    338. At 12:48pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #334

    DM you seem to ignore that the majority of terrorist attacks right now and all the attempted airplane bombings are from Islamic terrorists."

    Except for the death squads of Colombia, the gangs of the Congo, the slaughters of the Tamils, the murderers of the Mong and others (Karens etc) in Burma.

    Islamic terrorism compared to these mass massacres and murders hardly feature.

    The Colombian death squads have virtually annihlated native American groups (following the istorical example of their white US backers).

    Opps sorry these terror victims are not white are they?

    And of course the Israeli brutal c occupation of 4 million people which sees killings of unarmed civilians, burning of religious buildings and starvation every day.

    "Not other religions. Why don't the leaders of major countires with Moslems majorities come out and say we denounce terorism, Iran who sponser terrorism Hamas and Hezbollah which commit terorism and that is wrong against followers of any religion"

    Why does the Chief Rabbi of the UK state "Israel we are proud of you" when it starves children? What right do US citizens have to support fanatical religious gangs who beat Palestinian women and conduct "pogroms" (according to the Israeli PM)

    Complain about this comment

  • 340. At 1:16pm on 31 Dec 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    337. At 12:45pm on 31 Dec 2009, PartTimeDon wrote:
    The book "Why do People Hate America" is worth a look:
    http://www.bookreview.com/$spindb.query.listreview2.booknew.7225
    The thing that surprised me was the assertion that Palestinians (and most other peoples in the middle east) are convinced that Americans hate them. This is mostly because America gives Israel defense aid of more money per capita than your average Palestinian earns in a year."


    If you had seen your children killed by a US cluster bomb delivered by a US trained pilot who intends on living in the US as soon as he can get the visa,

    or had your property stolen by a half brained yank who beleives he has the right to steal your property because of a religion he no longer practises (and in many cases even despises - its astonishing how many so called Western jews seem to actually despise the religion and those who actually take it seriously - unless it comes to beating a Palestinian).

    You might then understand why the Palestinians (or any other group of human beings treated in a similar way) are not fond of the US.

    Complain about this comment

  • 341. At 1:21pm on 31 Dec 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    336. At 12:44pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #333
    D R Murrell wrote:
    Magic – Your two points seem to conflict: Sadat would be glad that Egyptians were dying for Palestinians who don’t want peace. He would also be anti-Islamic terrorism."

    He would also be anti democractic. He was a brutal anti democractic, neo- fascist, dictator.

    He did a great deal of harm.

    Dictators generally do.

    "I suspect that you are not fully awake yet and in rushing your response you have missed out some vital words that make your post logically sound, including what something Sadat would be against Islamic terrorism."

    If only Israel would give up state oppression of 4 million people then much so-called terrorism (which to Israel includes throwing stones or building a house or showing any kind of disapproval of being dispossessed) would diminish.

    No people in the world, including US native Americans who were all called "savages" and subjected to genocide if they dared to stand up for themselves agree they should vanish.

    Complain about this comment

  • 342. At 1:21pm on 31 Dec 2009, frayedcat wrote:

    IMO Religion is just a tool used to manipulate people 'opiate of the masses' 'n all. If you look at the profile of suicede bombers they are disenfranchised - the religion is used to give them a sense of belonging and purpose. The American revolutionaries used religion to motivate people to war, Britain used it - the Queen is there by divine right. It ain't just Islam. Follow the money - I'll betcha at the end of the trail you'll find the source has a much more mundane motivation for financing terrorism (power/money) than worship.

    Complain about this comment

  • 343. At 1:26pm on 31 Dec 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    332. At 09:25am on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #306
    you can notice whatever you want to, and much more, but the day your leaders ban chruch schools and the jews their midrashas and yeshiva, the hindus their temples and the budishts their tempels, is the day you should expect Abdullah to ban madrasas in his country..
    _________________-

    None of those religous school encourage hate and terrorism. Saudi Madrasas do. If Sadat were alive he would first be glad that Egyptians were dying for Palestinians who don't want peace. He would also see the threat of Iran as a devout Moslem he would be a powerful against Islamic terrorism."

    Really you obviously have not heard of the Rabbinacal school which was attended by the zionist assassin of the Israeli PM - an act of terrorism. The Israeli govt comtemplated closing this place down.

    Heard of the Sinhalese Buddhists who preach the holiness of war against the Tamils and the inferiroity of Tamil Culture?

    Oh and NI Never been to a Unionist Orange church in the marching season have you?


    I see the moderators are starting to censor again"

    You need a lot of censorship. Hatred against ethnic group, and cultures should be completely censored - even non-white ones.

    Complain about this comment

  • 344. At 2:16pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 345. At 3:00pm on 31 Dec 2009, PartTimeDon wrote:

    343 and 344
    Both sides need to be held responsible for their actions.
    Israel has a right to defend itself, but there is absolutely no justification for expanding the settlements. At least not one that doesn't stem from outright religious zealotry or even racism. Just as there is no justification for Hamas and Hezbollah targeting civilians that doesn't stem from the same kind of zealotry and racism.
    Neither side's political leadership is going to acknowledge the other's position. If Hamas or Hezbollah did, the cash and arms from Syria and Iran would dry up. Just as if an Israeli politician acknowledged his country was in the wrong, that would be tantamount to conceding the next election.
    How about you both come up with a suggestion about how the situation gets fixed? Not an easy task, but it might generate some original discussion. Or you could just point fingers and throw blame around while people keep getting killed.

    Complain about this comment

  • 346. At 3:49pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #345
    PartTimeDon wrote:
    343 and 344
    Both sides need to be held responsible for their actions.
    Israel has a right to defend itself, but there is absolutely no justification for expanding the settlements.
    _____________________

    First Israel has made several attempts including an overly generous one by former PM Barak. But the arrogance of the international community to dictate what is Israeli land is incredible.

    How come there was not a continued international outcry when Russia partitioned Georgia.

    The reason peace worked with Egypt and Jordan, Israel had willing partners.

    Complain about this comment

  • 347. At 3:58pm on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    Israel has a right to defend itself, but there is absolutely no justification for expanding the settlements. At least not one that doesn't stem from outright religious zealotry or even racism. Just as there is no justification for Hamas and Hezbollah targeting civilians that doesn't stem from the same kind of zealotry and racism.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Defend itself from what? the people it has occupied? Its not as if women, children and men in the west bank or gaza are all soldiers, when it kills and destroys those people, then someone or some group will retaliate, and in this case, its hamas...Before someone says that israel has the right it defend, they have the duty to ask israel to show them its borders...A country that has failed to show any fixed borders in 60 yrs has no right to even say that it has a right to defend itself..

    Complain about this comment

  • 348. At 4:12pm on 31 Dec 2009, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    Mark, it's time for a new string.

    Here is a suggestion for a new topic:

    Canada has just had a second "Hugo Chavez Moment".

    Last year, in a moment of really dodgy Constitutional propriety the government shut down Parliament to avoid being pushed out of office.

    That was Hugo Chavez Moment No. 1

    Hugo Chavez Moment No. 2 came yesterday.

    This year the government is shutting down Parliament again to avoid embarrassing public discussion of complicity of Canadian forces in the torture of Afghan detainees.

    The Chief of Defense staff has already had to do an about-face in public testimony before Parliament, and it appears that at least one Minister of the Crown may have misled Parliament in respect of the Government's foreknowledge of the fate of Afghan detainees turned over to the Afghan security services. The response to Parliamentary demands for discovery of documents have been risible: page after page of blacked out text. Parliament has now demanded production of documents pertaining to the matter without redaction of text. The government wishes to avoid this at almost any cost.

    So, given last year's precedent, on December 30 in the midst of the Christmas holidays, when the country is in Florida, the Dominican Republic, Cuba; on the slopes skiing, or off bloated with Turkey and hung-over at Grandma's house visiting, the Harper government announces that it is shutting down Parliament until the Winter Olympics are over. This will be followed by a Speech from the Throne (i.e., Queen's Speech) on the first day back, and a budget on the second day.

    No prize for guessing that there will be a request for dissolution on the third day back, thereby neatly sidestepping any possibility of publication of embarrassing testimony.

    How is this done? By calling a vote in the House?
    Hardly. The Prime Minster simply asks the Crown to prorogue the House, and the Governor General is obliged to comply.

    For our American friends, it is as if, during the Watergate era, President Nixon had been able to close the doors of the House and Senate, thereby locking the congressmen and senators out of the building, and so to terminate the hearings.

    This in a Parliamentary democracy.
    And we sometimes wonder why The Economist groups articles on Canada with those on tinpot dictatorships in South America.

    So craven, and yet so entirely typical of the current government.

    Complain about this comment

  • 349. At 4:23pm on 31 Dec 2009, PartTimeDon wrote:

    346.
    How come there was not a continued international outcry when Russia partitioned Georgia.
    __________
    I see you've chosen to continue playing the blame game. I didn't expect anything more to be honest. More to the point, just cos there are other bad guys around isn't an excuse for Israel to act as it does.

    First Israel has made several attempts including an overly generous one by former PM Barak. But the arrogance of the international community to dictate what is Israeli land is incredible.
    ___________
    The colonel is right that Israel has a duty to define its borders and can't reasonably expect its neighbours to even think about Israel as a peaceful neighbour until it does. Even more so because it is engaging in a blatant land grab into Palestinian controlled territory at the same time. What happens in 20 years time when all the fertile land inside this idiotic wall has been colonised? I suppose you'd have no problems moving it again and taking a bit more.

    Complain about this comment

  • 350. At 4:23pm on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    Do some Muslims go through life believing they can go find perfection in this world? Is that possibly a motive to destroy oneself, to seek death through the destruction of innocents?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You should have ended your post after the first question.the rest is the perfect example of western mindset...and yes, compared to westerners, muslims are innocent...No matter what you say, the fact is, that its the west that is occupying two muslim countries, one group is under occupation supported by the west..fourth one is under constant western drone attacks..the fifth one is under constant harassament by the west...the sixth and 7th are under sanctions, the 9th one is being destroyed and on and on..

    Complain about this comment

  • 351. At 4:26pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    GHERKIN 300

    IT DOES NOT TAKE A TEMPER TO PRESS CAPS LOCK. WHAY IS IMPORTANT IS THAT YOU HAVE SPAMMER YOUR COMMENTS AD NAUSEUM. EVERY TIME YOU HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO HAVE LIED AND IGNORED THE FACTS PRESENTED TO YOU EARLIER.
    AND THE BBC MODS LET YOU WAIT TWO WEEKS THEN START UP WITH THE SAME LIES AGAIN AND AGIAN AND AGIAN.
    FOR TWO YEARS YOU HAVE CONSTANTLY REPEATED YOUR LIES EVERY WEEK IF POSSIBLE. YOU HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE WRONG AND YOU SCULK OFF THEN RETURN WITH THE SAME LIES.
    WHY SHOULD CAPS LOCKS NOT BE USED THE MODERATORS WHO HAVE SAID IN THEIR RULES THAT SPAM IS NOT ACCEPTABLE HAVE FOUND THE NAUSEATING HATEFUL BAITING COMMENTS FROM ACCEPTABLE.

    YOUR POSTS ARE SPAM SPAM SPAM.
    SPAAM SPAM SPAM SPAM. THEY SHOULD BE REMOVED SO THAT THIS BLOG DOES NOT JUST KEEP TURNING THE SAME REPETITIOUS CIRCLE
    SPAM SPAM SPAM.
    EVEN THOSE WITH TRUTH ON THEIR SIDE DON'T DO THIS TO EVERY SINGLE CONVERSATION.BUT TOO HAVE CONSTANTLY REPEATING SPAM THAT IS BASED ON YOUR CRAZY THOUGHTS AND IS RIDICULOUS. ANY SELF RESPECTING NEWS ORGANISATION WOULD SEE THAT AND BAN YOU.

    YOU COMPLAIN ABOUT CENSORSHIP. WHEN DID YOU GET BANNED FROM THE SERVER DESPITE CONSTANT HIJACKING OF IT?

    Complain about this comment

  • 352. At 4:27pm on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    The reason peace worked with Egypt and Jordan, Israel had willing partners.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    No, the reason the peace has worked so far are the billions of dollars which usa pays to egypt and jordan....the rest of the countries dont need american money so they have no interest in buying this peace...

    Complain about this comment

  • 353. At 4:34pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    313 IF no it is anew year.
    get rid of the ghrerkin. it became un-entertaining a long time ago. now it is the same old sad racist in the corner saying the same racist jokes to provoke.But no we have to pander to that hate, thanks. as I get banned again why is it only one side gets banned.

    .

    but then americans believe their freedom of voice is more important than civilisation.

    what spineless organisation says carry on to him

    Complain about this comment

  • 354. At 4:38pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    Why can the mods not accept that they have removed comments for denying the holocaust. please remove equally untrue comments about all muslims terrorists, or all terrorists are muslims.
    this slander is repeated without evidence against evidence as a way of attacking all muslims time and time again and just feeds hate and racism.
    It feeds americans feeling justified in going to war with muslims. we have two wars because no one can stop allowing the news networks to be spokespeople for the national front.
    Get a grip BBC take your site back and not just by banning me for daring to yet again say enough racism on the BBC.

    Complain about this comment

  • 355. At 4:41pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    Gherkin until you are posting under a new name stop complaining about censorship. Mods make him get a new name.
    see if he can figure it out. give us a break.

    Complain about this comment

  • 356. At 4:58pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    309 Adrienny
    I see you could provide no back up to your claim that frivolous suits cost so much.
    you don't even address the comment that maybe they charge loads of insurance because they can get away with it.
    No one can because the evidence that should be there for the insurance industry to claim their rates is just not available. Because it is not true.

    As to you knowing doctors etc. again which ones, how do I know they have any more idea of what is going on in the real world as opposed to their fantasy world.
    hell many american doctors thought america was free of death panels, but reality was they were the only country with them.

    Just because they studied better than MA at medical school does not make them any smarter than MA about why things happen.
    They may see the costs and accept them and worry about suits because they are ignorant.

    Are your friends the doctors the same ones that can't get to grip with the Idea that americans die earlier .


    Bepa points out loads of malpractice problems in the USA under the well we can charge that one so lets make a problem.
    Prescription drugs kill way more than all the heroin and crack combined. and yet we go to war to prevent those deaths while we encourage and protect the criminals that over prescribe.

    I am still waiting to see that statistics that show there are all these frivolous suits that so many keep claiming are bankrupting the system(after of course the racially motivated and totally unfounded lie hat immigrants are bankrupting the system).


    PS we know why you post so don't try to fool us.

    You post about comments made on blogs anonymous comments. hell I could be writing them for all you know.

    there is an old saying about proving a positive and not proving a negative.
    you always ask peopel to prove that the law suits are not crippling the system. scientifically impossible, but you never prove they are.
    If all these vast wealth off doctors are so concerned do you not think there would be some evidence to prove the positive comment that "frivolous law suits are crippling doctors costs"

    Not that they pay X or Y but a reason they should be charged that rate.
    SOME evidence that law suits raise costs. com'on. two years you have not been able to do that . not once.

    Complain about this comment

  • 357. At 5:25pm on 31 Dec 2009, seanspa wrote:

    Some evidence on tort reform and doctors insurance costs.

    Complain about this comment

  • 358. At 5:30pm on 31 Dec 2009, seanspa wrote:

    Or maybe not. Censorship or bad linking?

    Maybe the crude copy and paste will work.

    http://medicaleconomics.modernmedicine.com/memag/Medical+Economics/2008-Exclusive-SurveymdashMalpractice-premiums-Dro/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/532640

    Complain about this comment

  • 359. At 5:31pm on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    this slander is repeated without evidence against evidence as a way of attacking all muslims time and time again and just feeds hate and racism.
    It feeds americans feeling justified in going to war with muslims. we have two wars because no one can stop allowing the news networks to be spokespeople for the national front.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It all came rushing back — the “War with Islam?” graphics, the terrorism experts, the breathless reports of a “suspicious van” parked near Times Square, and Chris Matthews mincing no words when describing the Al Qaeda threat.


    "They’re the enemy. They’re going to use any means they can to get us,” he said Tuesday on “Hardball” before moving on to the next segment and what’s being done to keep “killers off our airplanes.”


    Whether online or on air, many journalists and networks stars gave up their holiday vacations to participate in round-the-clock coverage of the plot to blow up Northwest Airlines Flight 253. And given “systemic failure” cited by President Barack Obama it’s understandable that the media would devote the majority of its resources to the unfolding drama, presenting a clearer picture of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the 23-year-old Nigerian at the center of the story, and how intelligence agencies didn’t connect the dots before a near-catastrophe over Detroit.


    Later that night on Fox, Karl Rove took issue with Obama’s early statements and treatment of the threat while speaking with Tucker Carlson, a fill-in host for Sean Hannity. “Please, Mr. President, don't play us for suckers,” Rove said. “This is not an isolated extremist. It is part of an international conspiracy which struck us on 9/11 and has been attempting to hurt us every day since then.”


    Judy Miller, the former New York Times reporter whose stories on faulty intelligence are commonly included among the biggest blunders in pre-Iraq War coverage, criticized embattled Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano as someone who “has been allergic to the idea of combating terrorism since the day that she was appointed.”


    At the same time over on MSNBC, host Rachel Maddow mocked Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula for claiming that the attempted bombing Friday was a response to recent air strikes, noting that factually the dates don’t add up. “So, nice try nihilist dirtbags,” Maddow said, “but it`s back to remedial propaganda class for you.”


    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/31073.html

    Complain about this comment

  • 360. At 5:35pm on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    Get a grip BBC take your site back and not just by banning me for daring to yet again say enough racism on the BBC.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    BBC's country is at war with the muslims.You cannot expect BBC to stop letting people post anti islam or muslim posts..

    Complain about this comment

  • 361. At 5:37pm on 31 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #353. cheesefuller: " why is it only one side gets banned."

    Probably because in these days of over-sensitivity and British political correctness, the BBC and its employees don't wish to "offend" Jewish and other religious minorities, despite the rules stating that offensive posts may be removed. The only way forward may be to constantly press the complaint button when the offending material is posted. It may not be censorship by the Moderators, but censorship by the Community. If someone was posting frequent homophobic rants, they would be removed post-haste or other posters would complain. Perhaps it's time to take the rules into our own hands?

    Complain about this comment

  • 362. At 5:41pm on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    IMO Religion is just a tool used to manipulate people 'opiate of the masses' 'n all.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    No. not religon, but belief...whatever it might be...The belief that democracy is the best thing in the whole world is what has led the west occupy two countries...And given Obama, Mr just warrior, the idea of just wars..

    Complain about this comment

  • 363. At 5:48pm on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    Perhaps it's time to take the rules into our own hands?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Its not as if you are under occupation for over sixty yrs or as if the western allies have allied with the criminals and waged wars in your countries on false premises...Little things start to make you think to take rules into your own hands, now imagine how those including this nigherian youth must have felt and thought...

    Complain about this comment

  • 364. At 5:50pm on 31 Dec 2009, squirrelist wrote:

    354. cheesefuller

    I agree; I'm sick and tired of the US media's simplistic confusions about who is Arab, who is Muslim, and all the rubbish that's constantly unthinkingly repeated here.

    According to the NYT (which someone quoted) there is a 'ferment of radical Islam' (or some similar phrase) in Britain (in an 'underclass in Whitechapel' which showed how little their 'correspondents' know of London (where I might remind everyone I live) is getting to be portrayed as some kind of terrorist training ground; we're told we are any moment to become subject to Sharia Law when believers in Islam are actually a small minority of the population and my continent is ridiculously referred to as 'Eurobia'. . .

    Message to Americans: if you want someone to hate and dehumanise, fine, go ahead if it takes that to make you happy and feel secure. Just stop trying to export this ignorant mish-mash of mistaken ethnography, hatred and fear-riddled prejudice.

    It sickens me.

    Complain about this comment

  • 365. At 5:50pm on 31 Dec 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    346. At 3:49pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #345
    PartTimeDon wrote:
    343 and 344
    Both sides need to be held responsible for their actions.
    Israel has a right to defend itself, but there is absolutely no justification for expanding the settlements.
    _____________________

    First Israel has made several attempts including an overly generous one by former PM Barak. But the arrogance of the international community to dictate what is Israeli land is incredible."

    The arrogance of Israelis to presume to rule over 4 million people and discriminate between its own population on the basis of religion is reminiscent of another age.

    "How come there was not a continued international outcry when Russia partitioned Georgia."

    Georgia brutally attacked the Ossetians with US encouragment. It won't do so again.

    The international community needed to censor the US wide-boy would-be dictator of Georgia.

    "The reason peace worked with Egypt and Jordan, Israel had willing partners."

    And the US was willing to bribe both countries and support dictators.

    Israel is not interested in peace, it was built on war and the only peace it understands is the peace of conquest.

    Only firm sanctions will bring its extremist, far right politicians to their senses and preserve the country.

    Complain about this comment

  • 366. At 5:51pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    interesting article seanspa

    I notice they have no answers to the question either.

    Again it seems that hospitals should take the insurance costs and hire those doctors they see as best at keeping people healthy.
    No where does it mention frivolous suits. just that the system is fixed in Texas by denying people their right to fair treatment.
    There is no evidence supporting the claims of law suits being filled.In essence they admit that small time docs get charged more for no reason.

    That the industry gets away with what it can.
    So now in Texas some guy gets 4 million in hospital bills set up by a doc that screwed up and he can claim for what he likes but that will not be taken into consideration.
    Texas as an example of anything to do with civilisation is a good joke.

    These measures are voted for by the people of the state. And we are talking the state that brought us GW bush.

    Still waiting.

    Complain about this comment

  • 367. At 5:58pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    DC and Squirrelist.
    I have tried taking it into my own hands and not in the same manner that Gherkin and MA do every day as they post.

    As you see I am no longer myself.
    This was a result of me trying.
    I have been banned 20 times now.

    Yet this situation continues.
    Yes I can come back andf I may get banned again for this post. but not once have those two been banned. and they pretend to be fair about it.
    If my posts disappear of no longer appear it is because yet again I was banned.
    Time please MArk. enough is enough.
    the BBC is not here to promote hate.
    If the americans want to hate so much let them hate themselves. at least it might be justified.

    I know I can say little that I will be cut off and others remain.again and again.

    Squirrelist good to see you back.

    Complain about this comment

  • 368. At 6:01pm on 31 Dec 2009, PartTimeDon wrote:

    Ref 358. Seanspa
    This is not relevant. Doctors are personally expected to have malpractice insurance but this is an overhead that they cover themselves and they themselves must be found to be culpable for there to be a payout. No-one is proposing to change the current law in this regard.
    On a corporate level, there is in fact quite a lot of legal protection preventing lawsuits directly against healthcare insurance firms. Specifically, they are allowed to fix prices and are exempt from federal investigation. Even now the bill the senate passed will not outlaw price fixing, it just requires justification.

    Complain about this comment

  • 369. At 6:04pm on 31 Dec 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    "It feeds americans feeling justified in going to war with muslims. we have two wars because no one can stop allowing the news networks to be spokespeople for the national front."

    The National Front doesn't exist in the U.S., and there really isn't really anything like it (the Klan doesn't have its own political party). We have plenty of hate groups, but they're not experiencing anything nearing acceptance by the general populace.

    We're not in a war against Islam or Muslims. If so, we'd be in the middle of World War III, and judging by the size of their population, most of our troops would be in Indonesia (where, actually, America is doing a little better as far as public opinion is concerned).

    Also, there'd be many times more Muslims in the fight (against us) if it were actually a war on their religion. In fact, one of the surprising things about the conflict is how few of the billion or so Muslims in the world are actually fighting against us.

    Which is also the best argument against the assertion that all Muslims believe in the tactics and goals of the extremists. They clearly don't or we'd be under constant attack.

    The Muslims I know (albeit that they're all American citizens) want the U.S. to behave in a more egalitarian manner. They don't see why if we can come to the rescue of the Jews, we can't come to the rescue of the Palestinians as well... unless, of course, Americans feel that they are somehow inferior to the Jews. They do not accept my assertion that we've painted ourselves into a corner and have limited options.

    Muslims don't like or condone the behavior of the extremists, but they're going to clam up about it until America at least acknowledges the injustices in Palestine for which we have been footing the bill.

    Finally, the U.S. cannot fight a religious war. It's unconstitutional. The First Amendment proscribes it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 370. At 6:06pm on 31 Dec 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 371. At 6:11pm on 31 Dec 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    359. At 5:31pm on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:
    this slander is repeated without evidence against evidence as a way of attacking all muslims time and time again and just feeds hate and racism.
    It feeds americans feeling justified in going to war with muslims. we have two wars because no one can stop allowing the news networks to be spokespeople for the national front.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It all came rushing back — the “War with Islam?” graphics, the terrorism experts, the breathless reports of a “suspicious van” parked near Times Square, and Chris Matthews mincing no words when describing the Al Qaeda threat. "



    It never gets these morons that Al Queda must be amazed and thrilled at how it is able to put the breeze up the US and reduce its politics to quivering hysteria.

    Even Stalin never quite achieved this.

    Complain about this comment

  • 372. At 6:11pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #365
    Simon21 wrote:
    346. At 3:49pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #345
    PartTimeDon wrote:
    343 and 344
    Both sides need to be held responsible for their actions.
    Israel has a right to defend itself, but there is absolutely no justification for expanding the settlements.
    _____________________

    First Israel has made several attempts including an overly generous one by former PM Barak. But the arrogance of the international community to dictate what is Israeli land is incredible."

    The arrogance of Israelis to presume to rule over 4 million people and discriminate between its own population on the basis of religion is reminiscent of another age.

    (Moslems and folowers of other religions have full rights in Israel, you keep forgeting Israel was attacked in 67. Besides considering the descration of Jewish sights by Moslem rulers last century, Jerusulem can not be entrusted to a Palestinian goverment)

    "How come there was not a continued international outcry when Russia partitioned Georgia."

    Georgia brutally attacked the Ossetians with US encouragment. It won't do so again.

    (According to Russia and those Europeans which need oil from Russia. Does it give Russia the right to parttion Georgia)



    "The reason peace worked with Egypt and Jordan, Israel had willing partners."

    And the US was willing to bribe both countries and support dictators.

    (You really are ignorant of history Sadat made the oveture and Jimmy Carter was a hinderance not a help to the process)

    Israel is not interested in peace, it was built on war and the only peace it understands is the peace of conquest.

    (and that why they gave back the valuble mineral rights in the Sinai?)






    Only firm sanctions will bring its extremist, far right politicians to their senses and

    Complain about this comment

  • 373. At 6:15pm on 31 Dec 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    349. At 4:23pm on 31 Dec 2009, PartTimeDon wrote:

    The colonel is right that Israel has a duty to define its borders and can't reasonably expect its neighbours to even think about Israel as a peaceful neighbour until it does. Even more so because it is engaging in a blatant land grab into Palestinian controlled territory at the same time. What happens in 20 years time when all the fertile land inside this idiotic wall has been colonised? I suppose you'd have no problems moving it again and taking a bit more.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Of course if Israel was remotely serious about peace it would not be sponsering settlers to steal land and attack the Palestinians - burning mosques, beating old women etc.

    If you want peace with someone you hardly continue planting religious fanatics right in the middle of the country you are supposed to want peace with.

    Complain about this comment

  • 374. At 6:19pm on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    (Moslems and folowers of other religions have full rights in Israel, you keep forgeting Israel was attacked in 67. Besides considering the descration of Jewish sights by Moslem rulers last century, Jerusulem can not be entrusted to a Palestinian goverment)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And you and the jews keep on forgetting that the west 60 yrs ago killed millions of jews in europe...and yet, israel has not only close relationships with germany but rest of the europeans who allowed millions to die in their backyard..if israel can have relations with germany and poland, then it should have no problems with the countries among which it chose to be created..

    Complain about this comment

  • 375. At 6:22pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    David Cunard wrote:
    #353. cheesefuller: " why is it only one side gets banned."

    Probably because in these days of over-sensitivity and British political correctness, the BBC and its employees don't wish to "offend" Jewish and other religious minorities,
    _______

    Are you two serious? The minutes you call Iran a terrrorist sponsering state or Hezbollah or Hamas terrorists on the main HYS sight it is rejected by the moderators. Claiming it breaks house rules.

    Only Wikipedia is more PC and more intolerant in who they are banning. It serves Jimmy Wales right that they need money.

    Complain about this comment

  • 376. At 6:26pm on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    It never gets these morons that Al Queda must be amazed and thrilled at how it is able to put the breeze up the US and reduce its politics to quivering hysteria.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    i am not sure alqaida must be amazed, because almost everyone in alqaida had worked closely with CIA, they know how american mind works...they know that americans are incompetent, thats what they made advantage of in 2001 in september, waltzed their way inside usa, got the training and were able to excecute their plan...So far, we havent seen one single CIA person resigned because of this incompetency...they are at the end of decade busy blaming islam just as they did at the start of decade. Who knows these CIA guys expected this guy to come to usa and repeat the sept 11 thingie, thats why they allowed him to travel to usa...You dont know the dirty games of the intelligence agencies on which democracy functions..

    Complain about this comment

  • 377. At 6:26pm on 31 Dec 2009, seanspa wrote:

    PartTimeDon, the relevance is that doctors have to pay for the insurance and we have to pay for doctors. It is an additional cost. If the liability was limited in some way then insurance premiums would reduce. That for me is what tort reform is. It is NOT about denying injured parties justice, it is about reducing the potential for overly high jury awards out of all proportion to the injury.

    For me this is an issue NOT because these huge payouts are awarded regularly, it is because the almost unlimited nature of their potential inevitably leads to high insurance premiums for doctors. Which we all end up paying for.

    I am not a spokesman for the insurance industry. I just want to see healthcare more affordable. Actual malpractice is another issue altogether and in my opinion is not addressed by massive punitive damages awards that insurance companies pay, not doctors.

    Complain about this comment

  • 378. At 6:35pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    Andythe national front inAmerica are the Palin supporters. real simple you can pretend otherwise but it won't change the issue.
    the BBC is not here to promote hate every day .

    Simon you're doing no good.

    andy"Which is also the best argument against the assertion that all Muslims believe in the tactics and goals of the extremists. They clearly don't or we'd be under constant attack."
    we all know this yet again every blog is on this topic you once said you stood against blah blah. you are way late to the battle to tell those that have been here for so long. others thought it hilarious you claimed to" stand up for the truth when no one else did." line you spouted out.OK maybe the words were ot quite that but the message was funny and clear.


    But flood the posts with crap again.Debate to hell and watch the whole blog still be gehrkins private hate site for another year.
    believe me I am with you or your friends that america should stop supplying the weapons but again that is irrelevant. we will never be able to discuss what can be done when the points get lost in the constant spam that is gherkn.
    "Muslims don't like or condone the behavior of the extremists, but they're going to clam up about it until America at least acknowledges the injustices in Palestine for which we have been footing the bill.

    Finally, the U.S. cannot fight a religious war. It's unconstitutional. The First Amendment proscribes it."

    yes yes yes but try to focus.

    the war on terror is a convienient name for a war on Islam. Bush admitted it and many posting here suggest that is why the support it.
    so enough with the race baiting crap from the BBC. let Fox try to incite that hatred they do a good job of it as it is.
    Colonel time for you to quieten down. unless you too are a paid agent like some of the others.

    Complain about this comment

  • 379. At 6:37pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    Gherkin you are still majickirin. you have not been banned. if you did your employer would be notified that you are a pain in the but and you would be threatened with action against you e mail account.
    this has not happened to you. so please do shut up

    Complain about this comment

  • 380. At 6:44pm on 31 Dec 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    Ref. 376, colonelartist:

    "i am not sure alqaida must be amazed, because almost everyone in alqaida had worked closely with CIA..."

    I know that's true of some of the Taleban (those that are still alive from the '80s -- not a great number), but al Qaeda? I don't think so. I don't know what al Qaeda ever offered that the U.S. could have wanted.

    "...they know that americans are incompetent..."

    That's the pot calling the kettle black. They've had eight years, and they still can't come up with a reliable detonator. Right now they're looking more like bumbling idiots than criminal masterminds. I found their claims of success at getting the bomb aboard the flight desperate and rather pathetic. What a bunch of clowns.

    I'm sure I'm not the only American who has given some thought about what targets I would attack if I were the enemy. It's not hard to come up with a list that would hurt the economy of the country badly and are nearly impossible to defend. They haven't attacked even one so far. It makes me think they don't know much about the country at all.

    As far as enemies go, America has had much, much more to fear from those that have come before.

    Complain about this comment

  • 381. At 6:44pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    sean did you see the limits in those texas cases. do you think that will cover the costs of treatment and loss of enjoyment and life for those crippled by neglect and negligence.
    How about reforming it like this.
    we stop saying "loss of earnings" is appropriate to what was being earned. How is the pump attendant proven to not have the potential to make billions.
    we assume that today he earns little and will continue.
    so he gets less and the rich guy who looses earnings gets millions because he is "worth so much".

    Can I cut your legs off by mistake and then tell you how much you can expect from me as compensation.
    Can I feed your kid pills that will make him commit suicide and then claim "we didn't know" sorry he earned nothing and so is worthless.


    really you belong here .

    That article and your comments don't answer the question about the legitimacy of the claims by the industry.

    they can be left to fend for themselves.
    glad to see you are becoming a true american

    Complain about this comment

  • 382. At 6:45pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref
    #379 cheesefuller wrote:
    Gherkin you are still majickirin. you have not been banned. if you did your employer would be notified that you are a pain in the but and you would be threatened with action against you e mail account.
    this has not happened to you. so please do shut up

    ________________________

    Read the post I was refering to Wikipedia

    But HYS is very PC

    Complain about this comment

  • 383. At 6:48pm on 31 Dec 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    Ref. 378, cheesefuller:

    'others thought it hilarious you claimed to" stand up for the truth when no one else did." line you spouted out.OK maybe the words were ot quite that but the message was funny and clear.'

    Oh, c'mon, you can do better than that.

    Here, have some rope. I dare you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 384. At 6:49pm on 31 Dec 2009, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    377. At 6:26pm on 31 Dec 2009, seanspa wrote:

    PartTimeDon, the relevance is that doctors have to pay for the insurance and we have to pay for doctors. It is an additional cost. If the liability was limited in some way then insurance premiums would reduce. That for me is what tort reform is. It is NOT about denying injured parties justice, it is about reducing the potential for overly high jury awards out of all proportion to the injury.

    For me this is an issue NOT because these huge payouts are awarded regularly, it is because the almost unlimited nature of their potential inevitably leads to high insurance premiums for doctors. Which we all end up paying for.
    __________

    The other big cost driver in the equation is that fear of claims leads to the practice of defensive medicine: the avoidance of possibly better treatments because of slightly higher risks, and the over-abundant use of only marginally relevant tests. Testing for every possible condition may by laudably thorough, but it comes at a price. Doing ten tests where three ought to be sufficient is not only expensive, it also means that waiting times for testing increase.

    Complain about this comment

  • 385. At 6:51pm on 31 Dec 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    E372. At 6:11pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    Both sides need to be held responsible for their actions.
    Israel has a right to defend itself, but there is absolutely no justification for expanding the settlements.
    _____________________

    First Israel has made several attempts including an overly generous one by former PM Barak. But the arrogance of the international community to dictate what is Israeli land is incredible."

    The arrogance of Israelis to presume to rule over 4 million people and discriminate between its own population on the basis of religion is reminiscent of another age.

    (Moslems and folowers of other religions have full rights in Israel, you keep forgeting Israel was attacked in 67. Besides considering the descration of Jewish sights by Moslem rulers last century, Jerusulem can not be entrusted to a Palestinian goverment)

    You keep forgetting Israel has admitted to attacking in 1967 and has admitted deliberately terrorising Palstinians in 1948. So you have no arguement.

    No moslem ruler ever insisted that Jewish houses should be bulldozed because of the colour and ethnicity of the inhabitants.

    Finally no moslem, christian, buddhist will ever be allowed to rule Israel. Unlike in a civilised democracy.

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

    "How come there was not a continued international outcry when Russia partitioned Georgia."

    Georgia brutally attacked the Ossetians with US encouragment. It won't do so again.

    (According to Russia and those Europeans which need oil from Russia. Does it give Russia the right to parttion Georgia)

    Are Georgians allowed to commit virtual genocide because it suits the US? Shelling civilians in the middle of the night? Firing at appartments filled with civilians with tanks?

    I thought only Israelies were allowed to do this?

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

    "The reason peace worked with Egypt and Jordan, Israel had willing partners."

    And the US was willing to bribe both countries and support dictators.

    (You really are ignorant of history Sadat made the oveture and Jimmy Carter was a hinderance not a help to the process)


    You can't even follow an argument. My point still stands in case you haven't noticed.

    The US openly gives billions to prop up Mubarak's murderous thugs and Jordan's "monarchy". It even helps the Saudi's torture opponents of its regime.

    The US and Israel oppose democracy in the ME.

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

    Israel is not interested in peace, it was built on war and the only peace it understands is the peace of conquest.

    (and that why they gave back the valuble mineral rights in the Sinai?)

    The "valuable minerals" yet to be found apparently. Israel gave up Sinai because it was ordered to by the US which wanted to detach Egypt from the USSR as was. Lke a good little client state Israel obeyed.

    But do tell us more about these "valauble minerals"? SUre they are not a Likud fantasy?






    Only firm sanctions will bring its extremist, far right politicians to their senses and

    Complain about this comment

  • 386. At 6:54pm on 31 Dec 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    376. At 6:26pm on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:
    It never gets these morons that Al Queda must be amazed and thrilled at how it is able to put the breeze up the US and reduce its politics to quivering hysteria.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    i am not sure alqaida must be amazed, because almost everyone in alqaida had worked closely with CIA, they know how american mind works...they know that americans are incompetent, thats what they made advantage of in 2001 in september, waltzed their way inside usa, got the training and were able to excecute their plan...So far, we havent seen one single CIA person resigned because of this incompetency...they are at the end of decade busy blaming islam just as they did at the start of decade. Who knows these CIA guys expected this guy to come to usa and repeat the sept 11 thingie, thats why they allowed him to travel to usa...You dont know the dirty games of the intelligence agencies on which democracy functions.."

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

    You know all you need to know about US intelligence when you are told that the 9/11 crew learned to fly in the US without any questions being asked, any checks etc. Just hand over the cash and we will show you how to fly a jumbo.

    In most countries you would not be able to drive a bus without some greater controls.

    Complain about this comment

  • 387. At 6:57pm on 31 Dec 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    375. At 6:22pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    David Cunard wrote:
    #353. cheesefuller: " why is it only one side gets banned."

    Probably because in these days of over-sensitivity and British political correctness, the BBC and its employees don't wish to "offend" Jewish and other religious minorities,
    _______

    Are you two serious? The minutes you call Iran a terrrorist sponsering state or Hezbollah or Hamas terrorists on the main HYS sight it is rejected by the moderators. Claiming it breaks house rules.

    Only Wikipedia is more PC and more intolerant in who they are banning. It serves Jimmy Wales right that they need money."



    But you are allowed to post material about Palestinians, native Americans, blacks,Colombian Indians etc which see you permanently banned from more responsible sites.

    Complain about this comment

  • 388. At 6:59pm on 31 Dec 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    Ref. 383, my own post:

    By the way, if anyone else wants to pick up that gauntlet, I'm game (and bored). Let fly!

    Complain about this comment

  • 389. At 7:01pm on 31 Dec 2009, seanspa wrote:

    Jack, you are making things up. I never said anything remotely close to your characterisation. I said that unlimited punitive damages, which gives the insurance industry an excuse to raise costs we all pay for, are a problem. I never once said that justice should not be served and malpractice tackled. The two are not one and the same.

    Complain about this comment

  • 390. At 7:03pm on 31 Dec 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    361. At 5:37pm on 31 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:
    #353. cheesefuller: " why is it only one side gets banned."

    Probably because in these days of over-sensitivity and British political correctness, the BBC and its employees don't wish to "offend" Jewish and other religious minorities, despite the rules stating that offensive posts may be removed. The only way forward may be to constantly press the complaint button when the offending material is posted. It may not be censorship by the Moderators, but censorship by the Community. If someone was posting frequent homophobic rants, they would be removed post-haste or other posters would complain. Perhaps it's time to take the rules into our own hands? "


    The BBC's attitude to the Israeli/Palestinian question is quite disgracefull.

    Mark Thompson's refusal to allow charity appeals for war injured Palestinian children was scandalous.

    Allowing Israeli far right politicians to air their extremist frequently racist views is also appalling

    Complain about this comment

  • 391. At 7:06pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    Andy there is not a lot to say you have said nothing. I assume you don't agree that you pretended to stand alone in a fight against the extremists on this blog?
    that you made an effort when others did not.
    LOL that is funny.

    You can hand the rope over I'll take it.
    I dare you to consistently take on Gherkins lies.



    GHERKIN
    . I was referring to your constant lies and then claims you are censored HERE. screw wiki If you had tried to post there no wonder they stopped it.
    HYS is full of comments recommended by a legion . that could go belly up if the muslim world did the same thing. maybe they should. they should all get together and post and complain and recommend as you and your fellows do.
    I have been censored many many times you have had a few comments removed.

    Complain about this comment

  • 392. At 7:10pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    389 there you go with the name the name that can't be named. well done sean.

    Malpractice insurance"tort reform" is a red herring you know it.
    -------------------------------------------------------

    Andy you ref your post of nothing above. what do you expect?
    What is your question what gauntlet do you the sole defender of freedom ask?

    Complain about this comment

  • 393. At 7:12pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    387 simon well said.
    he gets away with what would get most posters banned. any one supporting that view gets treated as well.
    But counter them and your off.


    Complain about this comment

  • 394. At 7:17pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    Sporry sean it was not you that picked the texas example as proof that costs are lowered by not allowing the victims an open jury verdict.
    as if the premade rules can cope with knowing that later on the costs are going to triple and th victim will be left without the resources to live a decent life.
    No where does that study show the important part of the equation.
    How much PROFIT are these companies making and where does that all go.
    the share holders how much do they make to insure the Doc.
    5 % 10 % 15% 20%

    at what rate of profit can we say. "wait a minute it is not the suits that are driving these costs but the desires for profitable returns."

    This is what no one is addressing as they look desperately to justify the lock step reasoning that "frivolous law suits are crippling the industry."


    Complain about this comment

  • 395. At 7:37pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #387
    But you are allowed to post material about Palestinians, native Americans, blacks,Colombian Indians etc which see you permanently banned from more responsible sites.


    ____________________

    So if I post something that criticize a Palestinian who is a terrorist or supports terrorism, don't recall ever criticizing native americans.

    I criticize black and white, Jews etc. The religion or ethnicicy is irrelvant unless they use it to justify their actions.

    Complain about this comment

  • 396. At 7:40pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    Putting aside your feelings on the healthcare bill; what are people's thoughts on the threat from 16 State AGs who have threatened a lawsuit if the special Nebraksa situation is not taken out of the final bill.

    Does the argument have merit?

    Complain about this comment

  • 397. At 7:46pm on 31 Dec 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    395. At 7:37pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #387
    But you are allowed to post material about Palestinians, native Americans, blacks,Colombian Indians etc which see you permanently banned from more responsible sites.


    ____________________

    So if I post something that criticize a Palestinian who is a terrorist or supports terrorism, don't recall ever criticizing native americans."


    Oh your cavalier attitude towards the genocidal Colombain death squads and your ubnfortunate remarks about modern Native Americans in the US (I think "so called" were your words?)

    And which Palestinians have you praised, ever?

    "I criticize black and white, Jews etc. The religion or ethnicicy is irrelvant unless they use it to justify their actions."

    Really how many Israeli jews have you criticised? Ever? In fact what action of Israel have you ever criticised?

    Is that even normal behaviour when talking about a whole country?


    Complain about this comment

  • 398. At 8:21pm on 31 Dec 2009, Andy Post wrote:

    "I assume you don't agree that you pretended to stand alone in a fight against the extremists on this blog?"

    I'm rarely alone in the stances I take (and, boy, when I am do I hear about it). I'm mister mainstream. I think people find that boring. I need to be more entertaining. So, I've been toying around with being more strident in my posts to see if I can't get a rise out of someone. So far, no luck... except from you, but that's not panning out either.

    I think I'm being ignored off the island. I wish it weren't so, but fair's fair. I can't complain.

    Who the heck is Gherkins? I don't see a login with that name.

    Complain about this comment

  • 399. At 8:36pm on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    The western mainstream has once again become extremist...Only extremists can support occupations and drone attacks..

    Complain about this comment

  • 400. At 8:49pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    Gherkin, Einstein would be the one I direct all the Gherkin comments to.
    context dear.
    how long have you been defending freedom here , and you didn't notice who Gherkin was.
    Then you would have us think you clever? that is funny.
    Are you sure you are not alone here or with just one others standing against the bull?
    Let me tell you as one not in the mainstream. weekend warriors look as fake as they are.
    Have at it dude.

    308 Bepa
    yep
    Most victims of anti semetism are not really that semetic. but those they accuse of anti semitism ,are.
    strange world.

    397Simon "Really how many Israeli jews have you criticised? Ever? In fact what action of Israel have you ever criticised?"
    he can't it would be anti "semetic".

    Complain about this comment

  • 401. At 9:02pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #398 and 400

    I did say Jews:

    Norm Chomsky Jeanene Garafalo, Barbara Striesand, Norm finklestien.

    Of the Israeli Jews: I have criticized Barak for being too much of an appeaser and FM Liberman for painting Israeli Arabs with the terrorist brush.

    Complain about this comment

  • 402. At 9:10pm on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    Israeli Arabs
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Israeli arabs? what sort of new group of people are these? either you are an israeli or you are an arab...

    Complain about this comment

  • 403. At 9:14pm on 31 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    As the first decade of the 21st Century ends, perhaps there really is such a thing as karma after all!

    Complain about this comment

  • 404. At 9:25pm on 31 Dec 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    401. At 9:02pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #398 and 400

    I did say Jews:

    Norm Chomsky Jeanene Garafalo, Barbara Striesand, Norm finklestien."

    Hmm a list of names have to do a bit better than this. When and were and why?


    Of the Israeli Jews: I have criticized Barak for being too much of an appeaser"

    An appeaser who drops bombs on children?

    Who exactly is he appeasing? The God of slaughter?


    "FM Liberman for painting Israeli Arabs with the terrorist brush."

    Oh right. You do not do this all the time of course with "moslems" and "Palestinians" and "a-rabs".

    Didn't you state a few postings ago that you wanted Moslems to apologise for the lattest nutter? Forgotten your own postings?

    Isn't that blood-guilt?

    I.e. should the Israeli PM aplogise on behalf of jews for jewish terrorists and murderers - including the one who shot Israel's PM or the one convicted recently?

    Should Obama apologise on behalf of the world's blacks for Rwanda? OJ Simpson?

    Complain about this comment

  • 405. At 9:42pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 406. At 9:46pm on 31 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    #331 Tino

    You are not a religious scholar. But there is as much variety within the Muslim religion as within the Christian religion.

    Can you understand mathematics? There are ONE BILLION muslims in the world.

    If one/tenth of one percent of the one billion were terrorists that would be one million terrorists.
    If 10 percent of all Muslims were terrorists there would be 100 million terrorists.

    There are not 100 million terrorists..If there were then we would have much more severe problems ...much worse than we have now. I doubt that there are one million terrorists.

    The vast majority of Muslims do not like these terrorists either and if anything they are as afraid of them as we are...

    But you need to read some about the Muslim religion by people who are not caught up in hating Muslims.

    http://www.spaceandmotion.com/religion-islam-muslim-islamic-quran.htm

    These are some quotes from that link

    "Allah has revealed to me that you should adopt humility so that no one oppresses another."
    (Riyadh-us-Salaheen, Hadith 1589)

    "Even as the fingers of the two hands are equal, so are human beings equal to one another. No one has any right, nor any preference to claim over another. You are brothers. "(Final Sermon of Muhammad)

    "There is no official authority who decides whether a person is accepted to, or dismissed from, the community of believers, known as the Ummah ("Family"). Islam is open to all, regardless of race, age, gender, or previous beliefs. It is enough to believe in the central beliefs of Islam. This is formally done by reciting the shahada, the statement of belief of Islam, without which a person cannot be classed a Muslim. It is enough to believe and say that you are a Muslim, and behave in a manner befitting a Muslim to be accepted into the community of Islam."

    ...........

    The Muslim religion is very open to change and unfortunately the terrorists have used the religion and its adaptability for their own purposes. If the west were smart we would be backing Imams who opposed the extremists ( Hear that CIA?)

    There are also parts of the Bible that can be used as a justification for murder. "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" ( http://www.religioustolerance.org/wic_bibl2.htm ) was used to put women on stakes and set them on fire.

    "Again, who are you to say what they are doing it for? You are making up a reason with no justification because it makes 'sense'." Tino quote

    The link I originally gave you was from experts in the US who have studied terrorism. When I write something I generally look up what experts are saying and then evaluate that information from my own life perspective. I don't just make things up because I think that is the way it should be...And you can trace back what I am reading by following the links so that you can make up your own mind.

    So what are the Five Pillars of Islam? If you criticize the religion you should at least know its basic tenets.

    Complain about this comment

  • 407. At 10:28pm on 31 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    I am reading posts and after reading wikipedia its clear that there is misinformation about al-Qaeda.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

    "According to a number of sources there has been a "wave of revulsion" against Al Qaeda and its affiliates by "religious scholars, former fighters and militants" alarmed by Al Qaeda's takfir and killing of Muslims in Muslim countries, especially Iraq."

    "My brother Osama, how much blood has been spilt? How many innocent people, children, elderly, and women have been killed ... in the name of Al Qaeda? Will you be happy to meet God Almighty carrying the burden of these hundreds of thousands or millions [of victims] on your back?"
    quote from Saudi sheikh Salman al-Ouda

    "The numbers supporting suicide bombings in Indonesia, Lebanon, and Bangladesh, for instance, have dropped by half or more in the last five years. In Saudi Arabia, only 10 percent now have a favorable view of Al Qaeda, according to a December poll by Terror Free Tomorrow, a Washington-based think tank.[148]"

    ....................

    And this is the man whose religious ideology underpins al Qaeda:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb
    Sayyid Qutb

    and there have been criticisms of Qutb from within the Muslim religion:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb#Criticisms

    "They have accused Qutb of amateur scholarship, overuse of ijtihad, innovation in Ijma (which Qutb felt should not be limited to scholars, but should be conducted by all Muslims[49]), declaring unlawful what Allah has made lawful,[50][51] assorted mistakes in aqeedah (belief) and manhaj (methodology)[52], and of lack of respect for Islamic traditions, for prophets and for early Muslims."

    .............

    Looks to me like the Muslim religion is very varied with many points of view and can be open to interpretation.

    Complain about this comment

  • 408. At 10:38pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    lol DC Karma would have been his insurance ran out last week and they asked him to return when dying.



    Bepa.
    In Uganda they are debating the murder by the state of people for being gay.
    this is normally used as a reason to rightly deride the Iranian gov. but in Uganda it is Christians that are pushing it.
    Backed by religious zealots from the family.
    that Christian organisation that sometimes seems to not be very Christian about things.


    And tino like you say is certainly no Scholar. Prefers the out comes to be predetermined by himself and based on his interoperation of his predetermined outcome.

    Like Newt on the weekend he is of the"look at THESE three terrorists"" see they are all muslims""all terrorists are muslim" ilk.
    Still coming to terms with Americans attacks on the UK

    Case closed no need for a trial. (he really HATES trials because justice is best served whatever way he likes)
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8418150.stm

    Complain about this comment

  • 409. At 10:41pm on 31 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 405, Magic

    "Barak gave into almost every arafat demand and still did not get a peace treaty."

    I have not been keeping up with all the postings the last day or so because of family commitments, but if the "Barak" you are referring to is President Barack Obama I feel compelled to remind you that our young President was not in office or in the Senate when Arafat was alive and negotiating peace treaties with the duplicitous Israeli Zionists.

    Were you perchance thinking of President Reagan, the Great Appeaser of Lebanon? Of course not, cut and run and diplomatic negotiations are only a problem when a Democrat is involved. I suspect the targets of your criticism was most likely President Carter...

    Simple who?

    Welcome back Simon!

    Complain about this comment

  • 410. At 10:43pm on 31 Dec 2009, U14270171 wrote:

    bepa it is a shame that with all the work you have done that backs all the work done in the past on this site, that in two weeks Gherkin will be starting the whole lie off again.
    and the "mods" will watch as another thread gets ripped up and another person gets beaten somewhere or killed as a result of hate formed in a very small part here on the BBC.
    Vile really.
    so with glad tidings to you I say.
    Merry new year

    Complain about this comment

  • 411. At 10:48pm on 31 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:

    There have been so many negative comments about the Muslim religion that have been allowed, it seems fair to have some quotations from the Koran, the Hadith and religious scholars.

    "If anyone harms (others), God will harm him, and if anyone shows hostility to others, God will show hostility to him." Sunan of Abu-Dawood, Hadith 1625.

    "Those who believe (in the Quran), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians...and (all) who believe in God and the last day and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve." The Qur'an, 2:62

    "Religion is very easy and whoever overburdens himself in his religion will not be able to continue in that way. So you should not be extremists, but try to be near to perfection and receive the good tidings that you will be rewarded." Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 38

    "It is better for a leader to make a mistake in forgiving than to make a mistake in punishing." Al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 1011

    "(Each one) of you should save himself from the fire by giving even half of a date (in charity). And if you do not find a half date, then (by saying) a pleasant word (to your brethren)." Sahih Bukhari, Volume 2, Hadith 394.

    " '...what is the best type of Jihad [struggle].' He answered: 'Speaking truth before a tyrannical ruler.' " Riyadh us-Saleheen Volume 1:195

    Complain about this comment

  • 412. At 10:59pm on 31 Dec 2009, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 375, Magic

    "Are you two serious? The minutes you call Iran a terrrorist sponsering state or Hezbollah or Hamas terrorists on the main HYS sight it is rejected by the moderators. Claiming it breaks house rules."

    I have read many postings critical of Iran, Syria, and organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah on HYS and this blog for months. I suspect the BBC HYS moderators choose postings based on merit and adherence to established norms of conduct. If a HYS posting is identical to previous posting and does not add anything constructive to the debate they ignore it.

    I would also like to remind you of the many postings you have made accusing the Presidents and leaders of other countries, as well as their countries and an entire culture, of criminal activities ranging from totalitarianism to terrorism.

    The truth is that the BCC allows more debate and opposing views that most of our media. Can you imagine calling FOX, the Rush Limbaugh radio show or any other right or left wing media outlet and trying to interject some of the opposing views that are discussed daily on this blog? The host's reaction will go like this: If the caller's comments are in line with his/her socio-political leanings the caller will be allowed to speak, if not, the host will immediately start shouting and within seconds the caller will be off the air.

    Complain about this comment

  • 413. At 11:03pm on 31 Dec 2009, Sam Tyler wrote:

    #405

    Have you considered that what you want is the equivalent of asking all Rabbi's to deny the Holocaust? Given that is somewhat unlikely to happen, what's the point in yelling about it all the time? It just makes you look like Ahmedadinajobbi in Iran.

    Just something to consider

    Complain about this comment

  • 414. At 11:04pm on 31 Dec 2009, Tino wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 415. At 11:05pm on 31 Dec 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #408. cheesefuller: Interesting link to a BBC article. I was struck by the fact that, thirty years ago, Margaret Thatcher (the British "twin" of Ronald Reagan) wrote "The Americans must be brought to face the consequences of their actions". Considering everything which has happened in more recent times, her remark seems unhappily prescient.

    Complain about this comment

  • 416. At 11:08pm on 31 Dec 2009, Tino wrote:

    cheese,

    "And tino like you say is certainly no Scholar. Prefers the out comes to be predetermined by himself and based on his interoperation of his predetermined outcome.

    Like Newt on the weekend he is of the"look at THESE three terrorists"" see they are all muslims""all terrorists are muslim" ilk.
    Still coming to terms with Americans attacks on the UK

    Case closed no need for a trial. (he really HATES trials because justice is best served whatever way he likes)"

    Can you at least try to make sense? I would respond but I have no idea what you said.

    Complain about this comment

  • 417. At 11:37pm on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    "Barak gave into almost every arafat demand and still did not get a peace treaty."


    I have not been keeping up with all the postings the last day or so because of family commitments, but if the "Barak" you are referring to is President Barack Obama I feel compelled to remind you that our young President was not in office or in the Senate when Arafat was alive and negotiating peace treaties with the duplicitous Israeli Zionists.

    Were you perchance thinking of President Reagan, the Great Appeaser of Lebanon? Of course not, cut and run and diplomatic negotiations are only a problem when a Democrat is involved. I suspect the targets of your criticism was most likely President Carter...
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Barak as in Ehud barak, the prime minister of israel at the camp David, born under the name of Ehud Brog, hebrewed the name to barak when he joined IDF.....He didnt offer anything, just what he knewed arafat could never accept, he wanted arafat to accept that millions of palestinians refugees dont have the right to return, he said he would continue the settlements and everything that which we see happening...the pro-occupation including clinton as in bill started this " arafat was given more than he asked for" thingie...Clinton got all red and blue in his face when arafat refused and told him that if he didnt accept this, usa will move its ambassy to jerusalam....

    Complain about this comment

  • 418. At 00:04am on 01 Jan 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 417, colonelartist

    Thank you for the clarification.

    Magic, I apologize for jumping into conclusions. Like I said, I have not been following the latest thread very closely because of Holiday related activities, and assumed - incorrectly - that your criticism was directed at President Obama.

    Complain about this comment

  • 419. At 00:06am on 01 Jan 2010, McJakome wrote:

    203. At 09:47am on 30 Dec 2009, D R Murrell wrote:
    “The West is the Great Satan because it tempts the faithful into idolatry and sin, so some of the faithful see it as their sacred duty to take the fight to the minions of this encroaching evil, basically to us.”

    Quite true, and they include aiding Israel as an added proof of our evil intent. Having accurately pinpointed the crux [no pun intended] of the matter, you are now left with an apparently insoluble conundrum. If our way of life, and our philosophical and religious orientations are what provokes them, then we seem to have only two choices, give up our ways [and become Muslim] or do what they suspect us of doing, force them to accept our ways. Do you see any other possible resolution?

    Complain about this comment

  • 420. At 00:07am on 01 Jan 2010, U14270171 wrote:

    tino do you think the rubbish you write makes any sense?
    well written hate is it?

    I am sorry if it is beyond your ability to grasp what was being said. then there is a hell of a lot that is beyond your abilities.
    the ability to understand the purpose of a trial. that one evades you it seems. Sorry if the sentences do not all start with capitals. but most have a full stop.

    let me break it down" "And tino like you say is certainly no Scholar. Prefers the out comes to be predetermined by himself and based on his interoperation of his predetermined outcome."
    bepa says you are no scholar. I agreed. then I could add some words for you if you must. "TINO prefers the..." interpretation was miss-spelled. but then I have noticed you do the same occasionally. the rest I just suspect is beyond your abilities.
    The newt would be Newt gitrich on meet the press this weekend, where he suggested" "look at THESE three terrorists"" see they are all muslims""all terrorists are muslim"

    sorry sounded like you. glad to see Mayor bloomers took him to task for it at the time.
    Something people have been banned from doing on this site before.

    Really I should have seen if anyone else got it. I suspect you are not very good at evaluating information that has not already been predetermined for you by whoever you are independent from.


    You say "as an atheist"
    well you are an atheist that uses religious bigotry as excuses to go to war. That makes you worse than both the Christian fundamentalists and the Muslim fundamentalists.

    But then you still think people responsible for thousands of deaths do not need to be tried.By your reasoning Gerbils the nazi would be let free .(yes wild claim to make against another but he sees no reason for trials unless it is foreigners being tried ).


    "Christians seem to have moved beyond actually following those verses. "
    despite living in USA and having all them religious teachings on TV and radio to avoid you somehow missed the 700 club and the Coral ridge ministry CRM.TV always going on about the LITERAL truth in the bible.

    Those that quote chapter and verse to justify the abuse of gay people or people who are not Christians. those that literally believe YOU will not have a hope and are unworthy because you have not found God.
    It does not seem that your skin is so thick but others do get offended by "you are a sinner and are destined for hell"
    I guarantee I could get on the national news IF I WANTED TO just by walking into the right church and saying the wrong thing.
    Catholics and Protestants were fighting over in religious terms the thought that the "body of Christ" is being taken too literally.

    "413

    Well said.
    He is It has been suggested before that maybe he works for some terrorist organisation to incite people to jihad.

    415 DC I found that article very interesting.
    but as you know I have taken the attacks by Christian fundamentalist terrorists seriously.

    All Around the world they are promoting their hate. The animosity towards gays in the world is encouraged in a huge way by Christian religions.
    Most using Old testament to justify their warped versions of what Christ said.
    As if the peaceful hippy never existed.The dude lived with 12 Guys. who are they kidding;)


    BEPA.
    Excellent work.
    time to keep that scrap book just to re post these comments of yours when the question is raised again.
    last time I tried answering gherkins "latest" question with the old answer (because the question has and has not changed) I was removed for spamming.Yet the original spam was still sitting in plain sight.



    Complain about this comment

  • 421. At 00:09am on 01 Jan 2010, U14270171 wrote:

    if gherkin makes you a "reasonable offer" run.

    Complain about this comment

  • 422. At 00:29am on 01 Jan 2010, U14270171 wrote:

    lol St D.
    no worries save the post it will be appropriate soon I fear.

    Complain about this comment

  • 423. At 00:32am on 01 Jan 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    “The West is the Great Satan because it tempts the faithful into idolatry and sin, so some of the faithful see it as their sacred duty to take the fight to the minions of this encroaching evil, basically to us.”

    Quite true, and they include aiding Israel as an added proof of our evil intent. Having accurately pinpointed the crux [no pun intended] of the matter, you are now left with an apparently insoluble conundrum. If our way of life, and our philosophical and religious orientations are what provokes them, then we seem to have only two choices, give up our ways [and become Muslim] or do what they suspect us of doing, force them to accept our ways. Do you see any other possible resolution?
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    So your way of life is sin and idoltary? is this what you are trying to admit? and is this the way of life you are trying to force on afghans and the rest of occupied muslims?

    Complain about this comment

  • 424. At 00:47am on 01 Jan 2010, BienvenueEnLouisiana wrote:

    412:
    "The truth is that the BCC allows more debate and opposing views that most of our media. Can you imagine calling FOX, the Rush Limbaugh radio show or any other right or left wing media outlet and trying to interject some of the opposing views that are discussed daily on this blog? The host's reaction will go like this: If the caller's comments are in line with his/her socio-political leanings the caller will be allowed to speak, if not, the host will immediately start shouting and within seconds the caller will be off the air."

    Spoken like someone who doesn't actually listen to talk radio.
    That radio format provides an invaluable service to millions of people and the characterized stereotype is more fitting of TV pundits. Talk Radio host's careers live and die by the number of listeners and callers, so naturally the hosts don't have the luxury of arguing with callers for longer than a few mins. That being said, if you actually listened to talk radio you would notice that both liberals and conservatives have a chance to voice their opinions and few calls end the way you described. However, if a caller is immediately confrontational the host will likely cut the call short; wouldn't you? Be honest now.

    Complain about this comment

  • 425. At 00:58am on 01 Jan 2010, BienvenueEnLouisiana wrote:

    420 cheesefuller to 416 Tino:
    "I am sorry if it is beyond your ability to grasp what was being said. then there is a hell of a lot that is beyond your abilities."

    I hate to be captain obvious, but this is a bit of a harsh reaction to Tino's post.
    At least you attempted to explain your post.

    Complain about this comment

  • 426. At 01:06am on 01 Jan 2010, frayedcat wrote:

    I think it is ridiculous to think Islam and other religions cannot co-exist, Islam grew side by side with Judaism. Abhraham is the ancestor of Mohammed. Doesn't the Koran say: "Prosperous is he who purifies himself, and remembers the name of his Lord and prays! Nay! But ye prefer the life of this world, while the hereafter is better and more lasting. Verily, this was in the books of yore, the books of Abraham and Moses."

    Islamists can identify and undo their own hypocrites, just as Americans can get rid of a few 'round here - it's the same battle. The religions have the same basic tenets for right and wrong. Extremists are looking for a fight, either for their own gain or as tools for hypocrites - but true believers don't attack just because of a contrary belief - they teach.

    Complain about this comment

  • 427. At 01:17am on 01 Jan 2010, frayedcat wrote:

    'n another thing....anybody notice the recent undergarments bomber turned strange while at university in England...like Bin Laden...what are you brits doing to these youths? Is it the wimmen?

    Complain about this comment

  • 428. At 01:17am on 01 Jan 2010, squirrelist wrote:

    419. At 00:06am on 01 Jan 2010, JMM wrote:

    "Do you see any other possible resolution?"

    Yes. People (goes for ColonelArtist, too) could just get to grips in the new decade with the idea that the most blinkered of Islamic fundamentalists are a very tiny minority of believers in Islam.

    Complain about this comment

  • 429. At 01:21am on 01 Jan 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    I think it is ridiculous to think Islam and other religions cannot co-exist, Islam grew side by side with Judaism. Abhraham is the ancestor of Mohammed. Doesn't the Koran say: "Prosperous is he who purifies himself, and remembers the name of his Lord and prays! Nay! But ye prefer the life of this world, while the hereafter is better and more lasting. Verily, this was in the books of yore, the books of Abraham and Moses."

    Islamists can identify and undo their own hypocrites, just as Americans can get rid of a few 'round here - it's the same battle. The religions have the same basic tenets for right and wrong. Extremists are looking for a fight, either for their own gain or as tools for hypocrites - but true believers don't attack just because of a contrary belief - they teach.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Does it ever occur to you and yours that before islam, you all used to get lethal against communism...Not having the guts to face the soviets directly you used the same muslims who had the same qualities against the communism...Why was the west so silent about islam for the most part of the last century or the century before that, or before it......Even those in israel werent talking about islamist militants, or islamist terrorism they used the word palestinian terrorists...Admit it, going anti islam has served you all a great purpose thats why you quote koran sometimes telling muslims how it teaches them to fight or as you say kill, other times quoting it to tell them that killing is against koranic teaching...But not once ever have you bothered to find out if its islam that makes them fight you, or your occupation and oppression...We all know that the gravity of power and energy has moved to the east, and thats why like flies the west has gathered in the east, afghanistan, because its near the black gold, China and Iran...

    Complain about this comment

  • 430. At 01:25am on 01 Jan 2010, McJakome wrote:

    385. At 6:51pm on 31 Dec 2009, Simon21 wrote
    Re: E372. At 6:11pm on 31 Dec 2009, to MagicKirin:

    “The US and Israel oppose democracy in the ME.”

    This is true, though the list of countries is way too short [by France and the UK at the very least]. And the reason is that the alternatives to the “devils we know” are devils of the Baathist, Taleban and Wahabbi variety.

    The conservative [irrespective of the political orientation] governmental approach is to try to avoid destabilization [note how marvellously well Bush’s departure from this worked out!] and support even noxious governments whose actions can be predicted and possibly manipulated.

    The “New World Order” differs very little from the old world order of balancing, stabilization, trade, etc. The only difference tends to be which powers are great and which are not at a given moment.

    New and destabilizing powers [like revolutionary France or the US by mid19th Century] are encouraged [or forced] to get with the program, and as doing so is generally in the new power’s self-interest, it generally results in the return to order.

    By the way, the BBC Americas page has a very interesting link to the Montana Constitution. Those who want to know what Americans think and do about their governments should take a look. It is about 200 years younger than Massachusetts venerable Constitution, but it shows a remarkably consistent [over time and distance] and persistent American attitude toward and practice of democratic governance.

    Complain about this comment

  • 431. At 01:27am on 01 Jan 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Yes. People (goes for ColonelArtist, too) could just get to grips in the new decade with the idea that the most blinkered of Islamic fundamentalists are a very tiny minority of believers in Islam.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    There is no such thing as islamic fundamentalist or islamic fundamentalism...its a term used in christianity, because in christianity they had to make a divide between fundamentalists and modern christian when fundamentalists including the popes were killing people for even telling them that earth was not flat....islam does not share this with christianity....the sharia law or caliphate which everyone is scared of now, was in practice, muslims progressed both in natural science, social sciences and as a society....Just dont mix fundamentalism of chritianity, the dark ages, with the fundamentalism of islam...

    Complain about this comment

  • 432. At 01:31am on 01 Jan 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 424, Bienvenue

    "However, if a caller is immediately confrontational the host will likely cut the call short; wouldn't you? Be honest now."

    I listen often to NPR radio broadcasts and they do, indeed, allow their guests to voice their opinions, often without interruption regardless of what those opinions may be. I also listen to CNN, when animated debates sometimes turn into what seems like common brawls and, I confess, I listened to Rush Limbaugh once and found his show so disgusting I lost my appetite...a circumstance that doesn't happen often!

    Happy New Year!

    Complain about this comment

  • 433. At 01:39am on 01 Jan 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    This is true, though the list of countries is way too short [by France and the UK at the very least]. And the reason is that the alternatives to the “devils we know” are devils of the Baathist, Taleban and Wahabbi variety.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Taliban, wahabis and baathists all have the right to try exactly the same in the west, you muddle in their countries, they do the same in yours...Simple...Its easier for you to just write without blinking what sort of alternatives you would like in the countries where you never go to, but when someone speaks about having caliphate, you all scream as if you appoint the government of your choices in their country...

    Complain about this comment

  • 434. At 01:43am on 01 Jan 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    356. cheesefuller:

    That's one long rant. Defensive medicine is real. Do your own homework if you want to be informed.

    Profit is built into every single step of our health care system. It's kind of silly to impugn all the players in a capitalistic sytem because they seek to make money. Wrong complaint for our system.

    Complain about this comment

  • 435. At 01:57am on 01 Jan 2010, BienvenueEnLouisiana wrote:

    432 SaintDominick:

    Happy New Years to you too! and the same to everyone here.

    Complain about this comment

  • 436. At 02:09am on 01 Jan 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    428. squirrelist:

    "Yes. People (goes for ColonelArtist, too) could just get to grips in the new decade with the idea that the most blinkered of Islamic fundamentalists are a very tiny minority of believers in Islam"

    *********************
    Who cares how many or few Muslims are extremists? And, quite frankly, Tino is right. It's tiresome to hear everyone go on about why terrorists do what they do. People snap on their image of the victim/criminal like little outfits on that Color-form game.

    Even Obama got into the act, attributing it to poverty and a lack of options. To him, terrorists were like poor inner-city Chicago youths. Why not? What's one more "root cause"?

    If it's radicalized Muslims who are trying to kill us, let's at least acknowledge who they are and listen to what they, themselves, give as their reason. This last guy was pretty clear about his reasoning:

    "I imagine how the great jihad will take place, how the muslims will win (Allah willing) and rule the whole world and establish the greatest empire once again."...

    And if we have to die for that to happen, so be it. Seems rather clear.

    Complain about this comment

  • 437. At 02:11am on 01 Jan 2010, bepa wrote:

    #410 cheesefuller

    To be truthful I don't read every post and if someone writes in all caps I skip over a post like that.

    Happy New Year and a wish of peace and happiness in the new year for all : )

    Complain about this comment

  • 438. At 02:20am on 01 Jan 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    If it's radicalized Muslims who are trying to kill us, let's at least acknowledge who they are and listen to what they, themselves, give as their reason. This last guy was pretty clear about his reasoning:

    "I imagine how the great jihad will take place, how the muslims will win (Allah willing) and rule the whole world and establish the greatest empire once again."...

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You are trying to kill them and they are trying to kill you, now explain to me, why you think that they and not you are an extremist? In the west majority is extremist, or as they say the mainstream, in the muslim countries its the opposite...Why do you think the majority of muslims would not support their extremists and support the western extremists?

    Complain about this comment

  • 439. At 02:28am on 01 Jan 2010, bepa wrote:

    #414 Tino

    It might be that your opinions are based upon anti Muslim propaganda. Have you considered that? If you have been listening to propaganda..then shouldn't you be trying to find that out?

    Also although someone might wish something bad to happen that does not mean they will do something wrong. In a war the opposing side is often happy when misfortune hits their opponents. There were also some Chinese who were in the US when 9/11 occurred and they cheered when the towers came down. If you had been reading or listening in 2001 many Muslims could not believe that Muslims had killed innocent people. There was some denial. So there were many reactions.

    Different Muslims interpret the Koran differently. They may all believe it is the exact word of God but how to understand the Koran varies and there are religious scholars in the Muslim religion who give various interpretations. .

    It wouldn't matter what religion the people in the ME are because the forces that are propelling them are not coming from their religion. What sometimes happens is someone has a thought or some belief and then incorporates that into his/her religion and next he/she believes this is God's will. The thought came from the person not from God...( There was an article I read recently about that ..but I don't remember the title or where I read it...but basically people will change a religion to suit their own beliefs)

    Genital mutilation is done in Africa by not only some Muslims but also some Christians. It is something in the African culture that has nothing to do with the religions but has been integrated into the religions.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_cutting#Cultural_and_religious_aspects

    "... Al-Azhar Supreme Council of Islamic Research, the highest religious authority in Egypt, issued a statement saying FGM/C has no basis in core Islamic law or any of its partial provisions and that it is harmful and should not be practiced."

    Coptic Pope Shenouda, the leader of Egypt's minority Christian community, said that neither the Quran nor the Bible demand or mention female circumcision.


    I think you should read the wiki article about al-Queda..the al-Queda group does not recognize other Muslims as being Muslim. They consider other Muslims to be what Christians would call back sliders. .. and so in their twisted view they can kill them too. This is a minority group that is not following traditional Muslim values..thats why they are called extremists.

    Honor killings are wrong...but...you would be surprised to know that there are Muslim feminists who are concerned about the way women are treated in the ME.

    Imo the US using the death penalty is very primitive and is some sort of national catharsis...and the death penalty is still supported by many even after it is pretty certain that innocent people have been executed. You can't get much more primitive than killing an innocent person for some sort of underlying psychological group catharsis.

    I am still astounded by the percentages of Americans who do not believe in evolution....because it conflicts with their own interpretation of the Bible.

    Do you say the pledge of allegiance with "under God"? How do you deal with that?

    Complain about this comment

  • 440. At 02:33am on 01 Jan 2010, Simon21 wrote:

    436. At 02:09am on 01 Jan 2010, AndreaNY wrote:
    428. squirrelist:

    "Yes. People (goes for ColonelArtist, too) could just get to grips in the new decade with the idea that the most blinkered of Islamic fundamentalists are a very tiny minority of believers in Islam"

    *********************
    Who cares how many or few Muslims are extremists?"


    Yeh kill em all eh? What did General Sherman say about dead Indians? Seems he's got a few followers beyond Adolf who used to quote him.

    "And, quite frankly, Tino is right. It's tiresome to hear everyone go on about why terrorists do what they do."

    Yeh annihlate a billion people and get any survivors to wear yellow crescents in camps.

    "People snap on their image of the victim/criminal like little outfits on that Color-form game."

    Yeh we all now that causes don't exist. You don't get cancer from smoking, getting drunk and driving is no problem.

    "Even Obama got into the act, attributing it to poverty and a lack of options. To him, terrorists were like poor inner-city Chicago youths. Why not? What's one more "root cause"?"

    Yeh why bother trying to understand the causes? It will only help you fight better and survive longer. Who cares about that?

    "If it's radicalized Muslims who are trying to kill us, let's at least acknowledge who they are and listen to what they, themselves, give as their reason. This last guy was pretty clear about his reasoning:

    "I imagine how the great jihad will take place, how the muslims will win (Allah willing) and rule the whole world and establish the greatest empire once again."..."

    Yeah and he's a nut. David Koreishi murdered (and raped) women and children because he claimed to be the son of God. Marshall Appleton butchered his followers because of aliens coming from round the sun. Yank crazies.

    "And if we have to die for that to happen, so be it. Seems rather clear."

    Fanatics and loonies always are. That's why we must continue to understand them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 441. At 02:34am on 01 Jan 2010, U14270171 wrote:

    Adrienny
    "And, quite frankly, Tino is right. "" It's tiresome to hear everyone go on about why terrorists do what they do."
    really , see people think they are clear but they are not.
    Are you saying tino is right in his racist generalisations or that the following sentence was right?

    It really is tiresome to hear you all go on about why they fight. You guys keep telling us (OK normally you stay as quiet as possible except for medical issues) why they fight. You guys keep telling us "they are opposed to christians , they wan to ....Etc etc"
    so please if you wish to critisise people for always saying why they fight do attack the one who does it more often than not. gherkin or his new buddy tino.

    Do not however think we are all as simple as you and the bad outlook think we are or seem to be yourselves. Do remember we can remember that those rabid anti muslim radicals keep repeating these comments as to the reasons jihadists fight.Then you say stop telling me why the do this.
    You start it and won't drop it you are irrational.

    You dismissive comments on the causes of terrorism show as much insight as your comments on the health issues.


    " 434. At 01:43am on 01 Jan 2010, AndreaNY wrote:
    356. cheesefuller:

    That's one long rant. Defensive medicine is real. Do your own homework if you want to be informed.

    Profit is built into every single step of our health care system. It's kind of silly to impugn all the players in a capitalistic sytem because they seek to make money. Wrong complaint for our system."

    I am not doubting defensive medicine is real Show me?
    You decieve again.
    If I keep it short and crusty you complain. I take the time to treat you in a manner that is way above what you deserve and you complain again.
    You do not however adress the question of profits. in a reasonable manner.
    You admit that they are there to make money. But if you told the people in an honest fashion the reasons behind many costs on health care, YOUR STOCK PRICES AND RETURNS then they would puke on your feet.

    The most profitable industry even over computers is the medical industry and the medical insurance industry.
    But I admit that is just what I heard on the TV and radio so who knows, OPB/NPR are pretty bias ,ain't it?

    So you still have not addressed the concern about profits leading the price increases and those frivolous suits that you all dream about.
    Just go on the "you commie" did you miss the bit where I went through a list of profits starting at a reasonable return rate going up to plain greedy. You wish all to go bankrupt because they cannot afford health care so a very few can make obscene profits at the expense of the national economy.

    Cool well let the trash collectors do the same thing.



    America was sold "homeland security" underBush because they thought they were getting safer. They were sold a war or two for the same bull reasons.
    I do not have much faith in your or most of america's ability to live in the real world.
    I don't understand why. maybe it is the over prescribed anti depressants you all need to get over being in america.

    Complain about this comment

  • 442. At 02:37am on 01 Jan 2010, bepa wrote:




    Listening to the rantings of a lunatic will not give you much understanding of why they are insane.

    People who will commit suicide to kill innocent people are insane.
    To understand why they are insane can not be answered by them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 443. At 02:40am on 01 Jan 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    If you had been reading or listening in 2001 many Muslims could not believe that Muslims had killed innocent people. There was some denial. So there were many reactions.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Once you get rid of this muslim and islam argument, you will see that those who did this were from saudi arabia,only one from UAE and one from egypt...Saudi arabia.the people over there are as much fighting their dictators whom they believe serve americans than his own citizens, plus the presence of american soldiers... Instead of admiting the american authorities gave this islamic and muslim argument which is so internalised in the minds of americans and the west that they cannot think anything else..Without this argument, bush would never had been able to attack afghanistan, iraq and obama never could come up with the "just war" argument at the nobel peace cermoney...

    Complain about this comment

  • 444. At 02:44am on 01 Jan 2010, U14270171 wrote:

    Bepa here we go again I know we have discussed this many times in response to the same lies that are being answered to the same liars today.

    those who want to say that muslims are the only ones who go to war for religion.


    The death penalty is against the ten commandments but more importantly just plain wrong,hey its a moral decision , you don't like it "go to hell" I think is the required punishment.
    If one says Ah it's murder we get told.
    "an eye for an eye murder in defence...
    OK it's not defence if the guy/gals in jail. so the eye . thats religion. Many laws are based on religion but the death penalty being excused because of some ancient text.Thats religious fundamentalism.
    I oppose all death penalties, be it on a muslim baby in the crib at home next door to 'someone'

    here's the one that will get me banned as the mods try to pull it.


    The war in the middle east. the "rat hole" as IF calls it.
    that is not just about muslims saying they want to be muslims. in fact that is not it at all.
    It is because your favoured ISRAEL says "accept we are a JEWISH nation.
    So That seems to me to be a religious basis for a continue campaign of bombings and starvation of a neighbouring peoples.

    So don't tell me that no one else goes to war over religion

    Complain about this comment

  • 445. At 02:46am on 01 Jan 2010, Simon21 wrote:

    414. At 11:04pm on 31 Dec 2009, Tino wrote:
    Bepa,

    "The vast majority of Muslims do not like these terrorists either and if anything they are as afraid of them as we are..."

    If the majority of Muslims do not like these terrorists then why do they cheer when attacks happen. The general populace in the ME was handing out candy to kids and celebrating 9/11."

    Really no one was able to find evidence of this. It was an antisemetic slur.

    Hitler claimed jews rejoiced when christians and aryans were killed. That was a lie too.

    " They do not - outside of, FINALLY, the most recent attack - cooperate with law enforcement. They make wishy-washy denouncements ultimately followed by "omg backlash!" when the backlash they are so concerned with either never happens or is so minor in comparison. They make bigger deals out of burned Qur'ans than the slaughter of innocent thousands. "

    Gibberish. Who are they? Lynching a few moslems would be OK in your eyes cos they's all responsible?

    "There are also parts of the Bible that can be used as a justification for murder. "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" ( http://www.religioustolerance.org/wic_bibl2.htm ) was used to put women on stakes and set them on fire."

    You are absolutely correct. Fortunately, Christians seem to have moved beyond actually following those verses."

    Really. Well don't go to the COngo, Rwanda, NI, Uganda. Millions have died there at Christian hands. And are still dying.

    "This is comforting to me as I am an atheist."

    But not a very informed one.


    "Christians believe the Bible is - except for very few protestant denominations - open to interpretation as it is believed to be the word of God but filtered through man."

    Hmmm but the Lord's resistance Army systematically rapes children none the less.

    "The Qur'an is regarded as the literal word of Allah. This is directly contradictory to your statement that Islam is open to change."

    No because the literal word of God is open to interpretation. As you would know if you have ever met a moslem or two.

    "If that were true, how do you explain: death for apostates, genital mutilation, honor killing, etc? The terrorists still act like the Barbary pirates we had our first major problems with a couple of hundred years back. The rest of the Ummah still seems intent to tacitly approve of these actions."

    Like all jews approve of the killing of Palestinian children?

    The blood guilt - some are responsible so all are responsible. One of Adolf's ideas again.

    Maybe President Obama should apologise for all the crimes committed by blacks including Bokassa and Mugabe? Why is he silent? Hmmmm.

    Complain about this comment

  • 446. At 02:52am on 01 Jan 2010, Simon21 wrote:

    Complain about this comment

    405. At 9:42pm on 31 Dec 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #404

    "Barak gave into almost every arafat demand and still did not get a peace treaty."

    Ehud is responsible for the deaths of far more innocent people including babies than all of Hamas combined.

    "What I wanted is for Moslem leaders to unequivocly denounce Islamic terrorism which includes Hamas and Hezbllah which very few will."

    You want them to admit "blood guilt" for something they haven't done?

    You beleive jews should apologise for the death of Christ?

    You beleive President Obama should apologise for Rwanda?

    Simple answer do you beleive in the blood guilt?

    Have you ever heard of the Holocaust and the reasons given for it? Look em up

    Complain about this comment

  • 447. At 02:52am on 01 Jan 2010, bepa wrote:

    Tito and others

    This article is about feminism in the Muslim world and be sure to read the quote at the end about the different types of feminists. There are complex divisions in the Muslim world.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_feminism

    "It aims for the full equality of all Muslims, regardless of gender, in public and private life. Islamic feminists advocate women's rights, gender equality, and social justice grounded in an Islamic framework."

    "Advocates of the movement seek to highlight the deeply rooted teachings of equality in the Quran and encourage a questioning of the patriarchal interpretation of Islamic teaching through the Quran (holy book), hadith (sayings of Muhammad) and sharia (law) towards the creation of a more equal and just society.[2]"

    "There are subtle yet substantial differences to be noted between the terms 'Islamic feminist', 'Muslim feminist' and those regarded as 'Islamists'. Islamic feminists ground their arguments in Islam and its teachings[48], seek the full equality of women and men in the personal and public sphere and can include non-Muslims in the discourse and debate.
    Differently, Muslim feminists are people who consider themselves Muslims and feminist but who may use arguments outside Islam, for example, national secular law or international human rights agreements, to counter gender inequality. Islamists are advocates of political Islam, the notion that the Quran and hadith mandate an Islamic government. Some Islamists advocate women's rights in the public sphere but do not challenge gender inequality in the personal, private sphere [49]."

    Complain about this comment

  • 448. At 02:52am on 01 Jan 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    People who will commit suicide to kill innocent people are insane.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Give them the weapons...Sitting inside the tanks, they will kill the innocent people like your military does, and you would not call them insane..Simple and easy solution..You fight for your beliefs, they fight for theirs, you fight with what weapons you have, and they fight with what weapons they have...

    Complain about this comment

  • 449. At 02:58am on 01 Jan 2010, Simon21 wrote:

    Barak as in Ehud barak, the prime minister of israel at the camp David, born under the name of Ehud Brog, hebrewed the name to barak when he joined IDF.....He didnt offer anything, just what he knewed arafat could never accept, he wanted arafat to accept that millions of palestinians refugees dont have the right to return, he said he would continue the settlements and everything that which we see happening...the pro-occupation including clinton as in bill started this " arafat was given more than he asked for" thingie...Clinton got all red and blue in his face when arafat refused and told him that if he didnt accept this, usa will move its ambassy to jerusalam...."


    CLinton also lied to Arafat and Brog couldn't deliver. And that is before you get to Albright whose memoir about how the hook nosed semite (arafat)frightened the childen has to be read to be beleived.

    Arafat's greatest weakness was trusting the Americans. He made up for some of it by his courageous stand at the end of his life (the US wanted him to flee, but he remembered how the US had gone back on its promises at Sabra and Shatilla when he had been guaranteed that innocent lives would be protected if he left, the US and Israel then turned over thousands to blood-crazed neo nazis).



    Complain about this comment

  • 450. At 03:02am on 01 Jan 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    There is no such thing as feminism in islam..In islam if you are a female then you are a female, and if you are a man then you are a man...Just because women in the west had to burn their bras to acheive their feminism, doesnt mean that muslim women have the same need...Just focus on your own society... you liberated the western woman's body, now its time to free her mind as well..

    Complain about this comment

  • 451. At 03:05am on 01 Jan 2010, Simon21 wrote:

    406. At 9:46pm on 31 Dec 2009, bepa wrote:
    #331 Tino

    You are not a religious scholar. But there is as much variety within the Muslim religion as within the Christian religion."

    You wont get much sense on these boards about the moslem religion. Anymore then you would have got a good idea of the jewish faith from Der Sturmer (we already have one poster calling for "blood-guilt" to be attached to all moslems).

    Accordong to Tino Christianity is a peacefull faith. This will come as news to the Congolese and Rwandans etc.

    Apparently because Christians in London Mississippi do not lynch their black (and jewish and catholic) neighbours anymore then all is rosy the world over.

    Complain about this comment

  • 452. At 03:09am on 01 Jan 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    447. bepa: Feminism is not really evident, though is it? Women in Islamic countries lack rights and protections.

    Complain about this comment

  • 453. At 03:13am on 01 Jan 2010, bepa wrote:

    #448 colonelartist

    I am not a militarist. Have you seen the film "Avatar"? it seemed like such a condemnation of some of the things done by America..and yet it was made by Americans...

    Imo the only justification for killing is to save others from death...but even a definition like that can be broadened and manipulated to suit some very evil purposes...

    Complain about this comment

  • 454. At 04:03am on 01 Jan 2010, bepa wrote:

    #452 Andrea

    Yes there are feminists who are Muslim. They are like Rosa Parks and and demanding their rights. There were many who went before Rosa Parks..she was the one who broke through into the media and became famous...but there were others before her who would not give up their seat...

    These kinds of movements have many people who are involved and eventually someone breaks through and then change occurs..

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirin_Ebadi

    "In the last 23 years, from the day I was stripped of my judgeship to the years of doing battle in the revolutionary courts of Tehran, I had repeated one refrain: an interpretation of Islam that is in harmony with equality and democracy is an authentic expression of faith. It is not religion that binds women, but the selective dictates of those who wish them cloistered. That belief, along with the conviction that change in Iran must come peacefully and from within, has underpinned my work." [4]
    Shirin Ebadi... Nobel Peace Prize winner

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shukria_Barakzai

    In 2002 Shukria Barakzai founded Aina-E-Zan (Women’s Mirror), a national weekly newspaper. Her mission was to "improve the understanding and knowledge of Afghan women in society”[4] (see Civic Journalism and Advocacy journalism). She began the publication without any resources, lacking even a computer and access to a printing press, hoping to encourage women to fight for their own rights, and to build a strong democracy and civil society.[5]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asra_Nomani

    ""We are standing up for our rights as women in Islam. We will no longer accept the back door or the shadows, at the end of the day, we'll be leaders in the Muslim world. We are ushering Islam into the 21st century, reclaiming the voice that the Prophet gave us 1400 years ago"."
    Asra Nomani

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asma_Gull_Hasan
    Asma Gull Hasan is a Republican (sigh..well ...what is... is)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malalai_Joya
    "They will kill me but they will not kill my voice, because it will be the voice of all Afghan women. You can cut the flower, but you cannot stop the coming of spring."[1]
    Malalai Joya

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Association_of_the_Women_of_Afghanistan
    Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan
    If you see videos of the treatment of women by the Taliban..probably it was a woman in this organization who risked her life and took the video.
    Some members of this organization come to the US and give talks...

    A list of Muslim feminists:
    Leila Ahmed
    Qasim Amin
    Benazir Bhutto, former Prime Minister of Pakistan and Chairperson of the Pakistan Peoples Party
    Zaib-un-Nissa Hamidullah
    Shirin Ebadi
    Fatima Mernissi
    Nawal el-Sadaawi
    Huda Shaarawi
    Kartini (Indonesian)
    Irshad Manji
    Asra Nomani
    Shahla Sherkat
    Elaheh Koulaei
    Taslima Nasrin (secular but of Muslim origin)
    Fatima Ahmed Ibrahim
    Tahar Haddad


    And there are Muslims who are liberals within Islam

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_movements_within_Islam

    These are their beliefs:

    "The autonomy of the individual in interpreting the Qur'an and Hadith.

    A more critical and diverse examination of religious texts, as well as traditional Islamic precedents.

    Complete gender equality in all aspects, including ritual prayer and observance.

    A more open view on modern culture in relation to customs, dress, and common practices. Though certain rules on modesty amongst men and women are still self-enforced as a result of the Qur'an's injunction against immodest dress.

    The individual use of ijtihad (interpretation) and fitrah (natural sense of right and wrong) is advocated.

    Complain about this comment

  • 455. At 04:10am on 01 Jan 2010, bepa wrote:

    And these are women who headed majority Muslim nations:

    Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan,
    Mame Madior Boye of Senegal,
    Tansu Çiller of Turkey,
    Kaqusha Jashari of Kosovo,
    Megawati Sukarnoputri of Indonesia
    Bangladesh, the first nation that had one female head-of-state follow another, Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina.

    Complain about this comment

  • 456. At 04:11am on 01 Jan 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    The Israelis are doing an excellent job separating the West Bank from Gaza. Congratulations, you're all doing very well. The continued rule of Hamas, infiltration by al Qaeda and Hezbollah into Gaza has even alarmed the Egyptians which is why they built their huge wall. I think the prospect of a Palestinian state is much further off than it's been in a very long time, since the beginning of Oslo in fact. Happy New Year to all of America's friends in Israel. Shalom to you all.

    Complain about this comment

  • 457. At 04:27am on 01 Jan 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    It is appropriate of all patriotic Americans to express their unreserved gratitude to all of the men and women of the United States Armed Forces around the world and to those who work in the intelligence community for risking their lives and at times sacrificing their lives to protect our freedom. Happy new year to you all and to your families who support you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 458. At 04:49am on 01 Jan 2010, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 348 Interestedforeigner-

    "Last year, in a moment of really dodgy Constitutional propriety the government shut down Parliament to avoid being pushed out of office."

    Mark

    I agree with Interestedforeigner. We need a new thread and the second prorogue of Parliament in Canada in a year's time is some interesting political maneuvering by the Stephen Harper government.

    Take a trip to Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. The Rideau Canal Skateway may be open in a few days (if the weather stays cold enough). Rent a pair of ice skates; buy a Beaver Tail (a fried pastry) and an order of poutine (french fries covered with cheese curds and topped with hot gravy to melt the curds); and find out what Canadians think about this latest prorogue.

    Don't worry about the cold. It's a dry cold. You won't even notice it!

    You may also find it interesting that this is the third time Stephen Harper's minority government has called a proroque in the past three years.

    If nothing else; by posting a thread about the Canadian Government you will find out just how much, or how little, my U.S. brethren know about the government and politics of our Canadian neighbor.

    Call ahead. Get an interview with the Governor-General, Michaelle Jean. She is quite an intelligent and interesting representative of the Queen.

    Put the North in North America. Go North! Young man!

    Complain about this comment

  • 459. At 05:03am on 01 Jan 2010, David Cunard wrote:

    #458. publiusdetroit: "We need a new thread"

    Mark, are you reading any of this? We need a new thread.

    Complain about this comment

  • 460. At 05:11am on 01 Jan 2010, publiusdetroit wrote:

    David Cunard! Thank you for your support!

    Complain about this comment

  • 461. At 05:32am on 01 Jan 2010, Sam Tyler wrote:

    Happy New Year to all!

    May it bring you peace, prosperity, happiness, good health, success in your endeavours, the comfort of family and friends, and possibly the new thread that you deserve.

    Unless, of course, you spend your time wishing others ill. In which case may the Yule log slip from your fire and burn your house down.

    Ron

    Complain about this comment

  • 462. At 05:44am on 01 Jan 2010, Sam Tyler wrote:

    #448

    Artist,

    A soldier fights to kill their enemies. No doubt innocent civilians are sometimes killed, but they seek to fight those who would fight. Western armies have been remarkably restrained in the last 50 years, incurring casualties in every theatre including WWII to save innocent lives. In no instance has a western armed force turned on civilians under orders to do so. There are some few examples of units going rogue and doing so, notably in Vietnam, but none under orders. Suicide bombers attack civilians under orders form their 'Leaders'.

    A man who sends the weak minded to kill civilians is a coward twice over. He lacks the nerve to fight a fighter, and the courage to do so himself. By all of the laws of man and God, no matter your religion, such a man is condemned. There is no religious teaching that say 'Slaughter the innocents, for you have not the cojones to fight for yourself'. Besides which, if you take the folks willing to kill themselves for you and have them do it, at some point Darwin kicks in and you run out of materiel.

    Pathetic really. Ask my old buddy Jedburg.

    Ron

    Complain about this comment

  • 463. At 05:53am on 01 Jan 2010, U14270171 wrote:

    461 that was where I was tending to go. good one. may I add some petroleum to the carpet?

    Complain about this comment

  • 464. At 05:56am on 01 Jan 2010, Sam Tyler wrote:

    #457

    Hmmm.

    'The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.'

    The first duty of every Patriot is to serve their country, not pull a Dick Cheney and publically praise our brve men and women in uniform while privately having 'other priorities' when called to duty.

    Serve first, then there is no need to bare ones chest with overt Patriotism at the wrong time. Veterans Day is the time to honor our living, Memorial Day our fallen.

    Ron



    Complain about this comment

  • 465. At 06:02am on 01 Jan 2010, Sam Tyler wrote:

    #461

    Monsieur Fromage,

    I believe at New Year you may wish whatever accelerants your heart desires, so long as those wishes are made in good faith.

    Happy New Year,

    Craven

    Complain about this comment

  • 466. At 06:16am on 01 Jan 2010, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    350. At 4:23pm on 31 Dec 2009, colonelartist wrote:

    Do some Muslims go through life believing they can go find perfection in this world? Is that possibly a motive to destroy oneself, to seek death through the destruction of innocents?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You should have ended your post after the first question.the rest is the perfect example of western mindset...and yes, compared to westerners, muslims are innocent...No matter what you say, the fact is, that its the west that is occupying two muslim countries, one group is under occupation supported by the west..fourth one is under constant western drone attacks..the fifth one is under constant harassament by the west...the sixth and

    ___________________________

    I did think about stopping with the first sentence - and wish I had. would you consider just answering to that? - It would be a more useful conversation for me.

    To me, innocence is not always a matter guilt. It can be idealism and purity.

    KScurmudgeon,

    Complain about this comment

  • 467. At 06:24am on 01 Jan 2010, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Mark

    More reasons to go to Canada and investigate this current proroque:

    1) Canadian politicians. Michael Ignatieff, leader of the Liberal party. Jack Layton, leader of the New Democratic Party (Interesting character). Elizabeth May, leader of the Canadian Green Party (Campaigned from trains during last National election).

    2) Back bacon with your eggs for breakfast.

    3) Canada military forces have suffered more losses in Afghanistan then any other conflict or peace-keeping action since the Korean War.

    4) Canadians are friendly. (My Canadian friends always want me to mention this):-D (Hint: They become even more talkative after a few brews and shots of Canadian Club Whiskey).

    5) The current proroque extends until the end of the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics. (China cut factory production during the Olympics to reduce smog. Stephen Harper shuts down Parliament until after the Olympics to...). Smoke and mirrors?

    6) Montreal. Prize of "La Belle Provence". Just a couple hours drive from Ottawa. Brush up on your French; then forget about half of it. They speak Quebocais in the Provence of Quebec. A lot like Parisian French. Bring your sense of humor with you.

    7) Quebec politics. It's a very different way of looking at things you learned in Ottawa.

    8) While in Montreal you will find food so good for the waistline you will want to wear it when too full to eat any more. May want to bring along a belt extender.

    9) Hockey! The National religion. Go see the "Habs" play on home ice in Montreal. The passion of world football with a quiet Canadian reserve. ;-)

    Complain about this comment

  • 468. At 07:54am on 01 Jan 2010, Tino wrote:

    Simon21

    "Really no one was able to find evidence of this. It was an antisemetic slur."

    Really? So when I saw them on the news cheering over the 9/11 attacks and handing out candy to kids in celebration that never happened? Please - I saw it with my own eyes.

    "Accordong to Tino Christianity is a peacefull faith."

    Not quite what I said at all. I really do not like Christianity much - or any religion for that matter. The fact still remains that I am in little to no danger of being blown up by a Christian terrorist. That is my point.

    Bepa,

    "It might be that your opinions are based upon anti Muslim propaganda. Have you considered that? If you have been listening to propaganda..then shouldn't you be trying to find that out?"

    No, my opinions are based on my own readings of the Qur'an, terrorist mission statements/charters/by-laws (Al-Qaeda and Hamas primarily), and what they themselves have said. I vastly prefer looking at primary source material rather than whatever nonsense gets filtered down through third parties. And guess what? It does not paint a pretty picture.

    "Gibberish. Who are they? Lynching a few moslems would be OK in your eyes cos they's all responsible?"

    Every Muslim. Can you name me the last time they flipped one of their own over to law enforcement? I could very well be wrong but I cannot think of another instance.

    "Different Muslims interpret the Koran differently. They may all believe it is the exact word of God but how to understand the Koran varies and there are religious scholars in the Muslim religion who give various interpretations."

    Excellent point, but I would submit that interpretation can only go so far.

    "Do you say the pledge of allegiance with "under God"? How do you deal with that?"

    Excellent question. Yes, I do say the full and complete pledge of allegiance. I do not believe in God, so I suppose that portion means nothing to me, but I say the full pledge out of respect for my country.

    "I am still astounded by the percentages of Americans who do not believe in evolution....because it conflicts with their own interpretation of the Bible."

    I agree completely. One of my friends has this view and actually yelled at his girlfriend because she believed in evolution...one of the most ridiculous things I ever had to witness...

    As for your links to feminists in Islam, those women are quite courageous. A lot of them, however, must speak out in the West only or face death at the hands of their 'brothers'. The fact remains that Islam is not at all friendly to women. Hopefully these women will change that.

    cheese,

    "Are you saying tino is right in his racist generalisations or that the following sentence was right?"

    For the last time, ISLAM IS NOT A RACE. I don't care if they are a white/black/asian Muslim - they need to do more to help fight terrorism.

    Complain about this comment

  • 469. At 08:00am on 01 Jan 2010, David Cunard wrote:

    #460. publiusdetroit: David Cunard! Thank you for your support!

    Alas, there's none so deaf as those who will not hear. Or in this case, there's none so blind as those who will not see!

    Complain about this comment

  • 470. At 09:56am on 01 Jan 2010, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #412
    The truth is that the BCC allows more debate and opposing views that most of our media. Can you imagine calling FOX, the Rush Limbaugh radio show or any other right or left wing media outlet and trying to interject some of the opposing views that are discussed daily on this blog? The host's reaction will go like this: If the caller's comments are in line with his/her socio-political leanings the caller will be allowed to speak, if not, the host will immediately start shouting and within seconds the caller will be off the air.

    __________________

    If you go on the main BBC HYS sight as opposed to Marc's or Justins they don't. When ever the word terrorist is apllied to Iran, Hamas or Hezbollah it is rejected.

    I don't listen to Rush, when i listen to talk radio it is local as opposed to national and they allow opposing oppinions. as far as Fox they give a pretty wide range of voices access, far more than PBS. The most hateful is liberal talk: Ed shultz, Randi Rose who engage in personal attacks inclduing name calling on appereance.

    Complain about this comment

  • 471. At 12:27pm on 01 Jan 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 470, Magic

    "The most hateful is liberal talk: Ed shultz, Randi Rose who engage in personal attacks inclduing name calling on appereance."

    Since I seldom listen to PBS (I prefer NPR) and have never heard of Ed Schultz (other than the former statesman) or Randi Rose, I'll have to take your claim at face value.

    Bear in mind that what you find hateful is most likely perfectly acceptable and logical to others and, conversely, what you consider acceptable is hateful or offensive to people with views and values different than yours.

    I have no reason to doubt your claim that you never listen to the Rush radio show, but I find it amazing that as soon as that gentleman utters a new epithet to describe a liberal Democrat you immediately repeat it on this blog. The latest example was the word "charlatan" which you used in the same context as good ole Rush to describe former VP Al Gore. Interestingly, my son-in-law, who readily admits he listens to Rush and considers him one of a few media commentators he trusts, used the same term to describe Gore the same day you did. A coincidence no doubt!

    In my opinion, Dick "college deferment" Cheney is a more deserving person to be called a charlatan than just about anybody else in the USA.

    Nice Latin word though...


    Complain about this comment

  • 472. At 12:34pm on 01 Jan 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 468, Tino

    "Can you name me the last time they flipped one of their own over to law enforcement? I could very well be wrong but I cannot think of another instance."


    Careful Tino, it will be a cold day in Hell before the USA "flips" one of its own to The Hague or anyone else; and this includes not only terrorists like Timothy McVeigh and Posada Carriles, but former high US government officials who many people throughout the world believe should stand trial in an International Court of Justice.

    Complain about this comment

  • 473. At 1:34pm on 01 Jan 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 466, KScurmudgeon

    "To me, innocence is not always a matter guilt. It can be idealism and purity."

    I never traveled to Islamic countries, and have had limited contact with Muslims throughout my life, but I suspect that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are no different from everyone else.

    Aside from religious and cultural imperatives, I would not be surprised if their priorities include supporting their families, finding and holding on to a job that provides the means to satisfy their basic needs and the personal goals, educating their children, worrying about health and social issues, etc.

    Unfortunately, economic and political priorities require an enemy to sustain our level of "defense" spending and our policies, and after the collapse of the Soviet Union there was no option but to find another nemesis. The fact that most Islamic countries are, at best, developing nations and often lack the resources or capabilities to defend themselves from foreign aggression is no obstacle to the ability of effective propaganda campaigns to transform them into supermen poised to destroy the most powerful nations in the world and impose their will on us. As preposterous as those claims are, many people accept them without question, the same way we thought Grenada, Nicaragua or El Salvador posed an unacceptable threat to the security of the USA.

    I think it is interesting to consider that while we don't hesitate to claim that Islamic countries or culture are intent on imposing their views on the West and are determined to expand their sphere of influence to Europe and the USA, it is the West who through history has invaded Islamic countries and tried to impose its values on them.

    From the days of the medieval crusades, to President Bush's crusade, it is the West that has maintained a presence - physical, financial, and cultural - in the Muslim world, and it is us that support the expansionist policies of Israel to the detriment of people who have shared the land with their fellow Jewish Semitic neighbors for millennia only to see tens of thousands of European Ashkenazi Jews move in and displace them from their ancestral homes.

    Those that insinuate aggressive behavior by people that feel threatened in their own homes should consider what we would do under similar circumstances. Would Americans submit passively to a Chinese invasion of the USA or would we resist using all means at our disposal? Would we accept foreign interferrence in our internal affairs, including regime change and banning specific political parties the way we did in Iraq?

    The cynicism or arrogance we exhibit when we condemn attacks on our troops by "foreigners" are a reflection of the same mentality that influenced the actions of the Romans, British, Spaniards and others long ago when they believed they had a divine or social right to impose their will on others. We simply don't call it an empire and prefer to surround ourselves in an aura of righteousness that often includes killing those that oppose our presence and wisdom in order to liberate them from themselves.

    Arguably, ending their lives is, indeed, a form of liberation from the travails of reality but I find the logic of our justifications flawed, immoral and a dangerous precedent.

    Did some people in the Middle East dance in the street and celebrate the ability of fellow Muslims to carry out the 9/11 attack? Yes they did, and I was deeply offended - enraged is a better word - by their behavior, but to suggest that an entire culture that includes a billion people share those extreme views or feelings is an exaggeration, as well as a simplification of the root causes of the animosity that so many people throughout the world - not just Muslims - feel towards us.

    We would be well served to reflect and consider what we are doing before we pass judgment on others.

    Complain about this comment

  • 474. At 1:36pm on 01 Jan 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    440. Simon21:

    436. At 02:09am on 01 Jan 2010, AndreaNY wrote:
    428. squirrelist:

    "Yes. People (goes for ColonelArtist, too) could just get to grips in the new decade with the idea that the most blinkered of Islamic fundamentalists are a very tiny minority of believers in Islam"

    *********************
    Who cares how many or few Muslims are extremists?"


    Yeh kill em all eh?

    **************************

    Whatever are you talking about? Kill who? It's the dimestore psycho-babble about root causes and the silly defensiveness that leads to foolish conclusions like yours that get tiresome.

    If saying it's Muslims who are terrorists leads to an accusation that the speaker wants to kill all Muslims, then it's not really worth discussing, is it?

    Complain about this comment

  • 475. At 1:59pm on 01 Jan 2010, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #471

    I would say NPR would also be less willing to have conservative voices.

    Fresh Air
    On Point
    NPR News editorials are all liberal.

    I have called Al Gore many things, but I don't need Rush to tell me that; since I know professionally so many real experts who hold Gore in disdain.

    And no to those who ask who; I am not going to jepordize their proffessional careers by saying who.

    Complain about this comment

  • 476. At 2:00pm on 01 Jan 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Craven with a big nose, a bigger mouth, and no brain;

    If you must know, I requested a pre-induction physical during the Vietnam War. I was denied entry into the Armed Forces for medical reasons and reclassified 4F. Among them were that I have flat feet, no arches. I could not walk 5 miles let alone 50. I had hopes of becoming a jet fighter pilot and was thinking about the USAF.

    Complain about this comment

  • 477. At 2:12pm on 01 Jan 2010, Simon21 wrote:

    476. At 2:00pm on 01 Jan 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
    Craven with a big nose, a bigger mouth, and no brain;

    If you must know, I requested a pre-induction physical during the Vietnam War. I was denied entry into the Armed Forces for medical reasons and reclassified 4F. Among them were that I have flat feet, no arches. I could not walk 5 miles let alone 50. I had hopes of becoming a jet fighter pilot and was thinking about the USAF"


    Ho Chi Minh's gain was our loss eh Captain America?

    I bet he was trembling at your imminent arrival - I bet the US forces were a bit worried too.

    Complain about this comment

  • 478. At 2:16pm on 01 Jan 2010, Simon21 wrote:

    474. At 1:36pm on 01 Jan 2010, AndreaNY wrote:


    "Whatever are you talking about? Kill who? It's the dimestore psycho-babble about root causes and the silly defensiveness that leads to foolish conclusions like yours that get tiresome."

    Whereas killing people regardless is a lot more fun eh?

    "If saying it's Muslims who are terrorists leads to an accusation that the speaker wants to kill all Muslims, then it's not really worth discussing, is it?"

    If the speaker makes such an idiotic assertion and cannot see the obvious implication of their comment they are incapable of discussion are they not?

    Should all catholics in NI be killed because of the IRA?

    All southern whites because of the KKK?

    Hey try something new for 2010 - think before you write.

    Complain about this comment

  • 479. At 2:22pm on 01 Jan 2010, Simon21 wrote:

    470. At 09:56am on 01 Jan 2010, MagicKirin wrote:

    "If you go on the main BBC HYS sight as opposed to Marc's or Justins they don't. When ever the word terrorist is apllied to Iran, Hamas or Hezbollah it is rejected."

    Unfortunately they also reject it in connection with the IDF and settlers. Though like the Israeli PM they do agree that the Israeli settlers have conducted progroms against semitic Palestinians and beaten old women with baseball bats - oh and burnt mosques inscribing Nazi slogans in Hebrew on the wall.

    Nazi slogans in Hebrew - only in Israel.

    "I don't listen to Rush, when i listen to talk radio it is local as opposed to national and they allow opposing oppinions. as far as Fox they give a pretty wide range of voices access, far more than PBS. The most hateful is liberal talk: Ed shultz, Randi Rose who engage in personal attacks inclduing name calling on appereance."

    Who produced a song about Obama being a magic negro (not a human being - a negro)? Personal attack?

    Complain about this comment

  • 480. At 2:26pm on 01 Jan 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    475. MagicKirin:
    ref #471

    I would say NPR would also be less willing to have conservative voices.

    Fresh Air
    On Point
    NPR News editorials are all liberal.

    **********************
    I would agree up to a point. I listen only to NPR. They have a decent range of views, mostly left-leaning but circumspect. Some hosts hold left-leaning views, which is evident in their questioning, but they seem to be trying to understand other perspectives, and their guests will contradict their assumptions.

    The best thing about Obama and a democratic Congress is that everything is open for discussion -- and to criticism -- again. It's not just carping at Bush, which has freed up the NY Times reporters to actually report again. I'm glad to have the newspaper back.

    Complain about this comment

  • 481. At 2:26pm on 01 Jan 2010, John_From_Dublin wrote:

    # 476 MarcusAureliusII

    "Craven with a big nose, a bigger mouth, and no brain"

    Apparently that's the title of MAII's autobiography......

    Complain about this comment

  • 482. At 2:33pm on 01 Jan 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    476. MarcusAureliusII: Like the root causes of terrorism, your motivations are known with certainty to all here. You're just another "Cheney" to them. ;-)

    Complain about this comment

  • 483. At 2:37pm on 01 Jan 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Refm Magic

    My favorite NPR program is the Diane Rehm radio show and I can assure you that I have never heard her interrupt or shout down any guest who expressed views other than her own. Her questions are pointed and she doesn't hesitate to challenge her guests when they make generalizations or facile accusations without evidence to back them up, but her behavior is definitely very different from what I hear on other media.

    I watched a program hosted by Sandy Crowley, a CNN senior political correspondent, who filled in for Larry King last night and when her four guests were asked about President Obama's performance the only one that interrupted the other guests was a Republican strategist (his surname is Holt) after voicing his opinion uninterrupted when he was asked similar questions.

    The problem with some "conservatives" is that while they like to portray themselves as champions of free speech, their determination to preserve that right is limited to those who share similar ideology or values to them. As a result, any media outlet that has the audacity of allowing both conservative and liberal points of view to be broadcasted or printed is automatically labeled liberal. In truth, and particularly when we compare our media to their European counterparts, there is no such a thing as liberal media in the USA and, for that matter, we don't really have liberal politicians either.

    Make no mistake, both our media and our politicians are determined, without the slightest ambiguity, to preserve our security, culture, and values and will go to any extent to achieve that.

    If in doubt, take a look at any history book and research the political affiliation of the U.S. Presidents that got is involved in some of our bloodiest international conflicts. While you are at it, try to figure out who initiated most acts of aggression against Third World countries or miniscule islands, and the political affiliation of the President that decided to cut and run after a devastating attack on US forces.

    While there is no doubt that our politicians have different approaches to problem solving, and that our media - and us as a society -are divided in our opinion of what is best for our country and how to achieve our national goals, make no mistake, when called we all respond the same way. That is the reason when the so-called "liberals" react angrily when "conservatives" question their patriotism.



    Complain about this comment

  • 484. At 2:39pm on 01 Jan 2010, Simon21 wrote:

    468. At 07:54am on 01 Jan 2010, Tino wrote:
    Simon21

    "Really no one was able to find evidence of this. It was an antisemetic slur."

    Really? So when I saw them on the news cheering over the 9/11 attacks and handing out candy to kids in celebration that never happened? Please - I saw it with my own eyes."

    So it must be true?

    You do know when the IRA s completed one of its activities it was "known" in the UK that cheers were heard in certain bars in the US.

    We have also been told the Israeli ruling clique rejoiced at 9/11 also - it meant they could attack and kill more Palestinians.

    A US reporter was directed to film these cheering crowds in Cairo. She nonplussed her superiors by saying she could find none.

    Use your sense more than your impaired sight

    "Accordong to Tino Christianity is a peacefull faith."

    Not quite what I said at all. I really do not like Christianity much - or any religion for that matter. The fact still remains that I am in little to no danger of being blown up by a Christian terrorist. That is my point."

    Oh so as long as Tino is alright terrorism does not exist? Well Mr America you are not the bellweather of terrorism. Christians have slaughtered far more innocents than any group of Moslem extremists (and are still doing so) but hey the victims are not pure white - so that's OK is it.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Bepa,

    "It might be that your opinions are based upon anti Muslim propaganda. Have you considered that? If you have been listening to propaganda..then shouldn't you be trying to find that out?"

    No, my opinions are based on my own readings of the Qur'an, terrorist mission statements/charters/by-laws (Al-Qaeda and Hamas primarily), and what they themselves have said. I vastly prefer looking at primary source material rather than whatever nonsense gets filtered down through third parties. And guess what? It does not paint a pretty picture."


    And you speak Arabic do you? Amazing. Classical Arabic at that. Guess what I do not beleive you.

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

    "Gibberish. Who are they? Lynching a few moslems would be OK in your eyes cos they's all responsible?"

    Every Muslim. Can you name me the last time they flipped one of their own over to law enforcement? I could very well be wrong but I cannot think of another instance.

    Really. Interesting. You haven't heard of the CIA's torture trips to Syria, Morrocco, Saudi Arabia?

    Not heard of Blood Guilt either have you. Read Mein Kampf in German to learn what this is in a modernish context.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "Different Muslims interpret the Koran differently. They may all believe it is the exact word of God but how to understand the Koran varies and there are religious scholars in the Muslim religion who give various interpretations."

    Excellent point, but I would submit that interpretation can only go so far.

    Meaningless. This is the point at issue. Claiming all moslems take the Quaran literaly is an anti semetic slur. Like claiming all Catholics take the word of the pope literally.

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

    "Do you say the pledge of allegiance with "under God"? How do you deal with that?"

    Excellent question. Yes, I do say the full and complete pledge of allegiance. I do not believe in God, so I suppose that portion means nothing to me, but I say the full pledge out of respect for my country.

    "I am still astounded by the percentages of Americans who do not believe in evolution....because it conflicts with their own interpretation of the Bible."

    I agree completely. One of my friends has this view and actually yelled at his girlfriend because she believed in evolution...one of the most ridiculous things I ever had to witness...

    As for your links to feminists in Islam, those women are quite courageous. A lot of them, however, must speak out in the West only or face death at the hands of their 'brothers'. The fact remains that Islam is not at all friendly to women. Hopefully these women will change that."

    Odd that so many women are keen on it then isn't it? Or are women naturally stupid according to you.

    You know some women think ubiquitous Pornography (one of the US' largest industries), pedophilia (practically rampant), licensed rape (conviction rates being ludicrously low), child trafficking (a growing business) such are found in many Western Societies are pretty appalling to.

    Hearing people talk about women in Islam (especailly those who do not want to go about barely dressed for the pleasure of various voyeurs) is usually hilarious.





    "Are you saying tino is right in his racist generalisations or that the following sentence was right?"

    For the last time, ISLAM IS NOT A RACE. I don't care if they are a white/black/asian Muslim - they need to do more to help fight terrorism.

    Complain about this comment

  • 485. At 2:42pm on 01 Jan 2010, Simon21 wrote:

    475. At 1:59pm on 01 Jan 2010, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #471

    I would say NPR would also be less willing to have conservative voices.

    Fresh Air
    On Point
    NPR News editorials are all liberal.

    I have called Al Gore many things, but I don't need Rush to tell me that; since I know professionally so many real experts who hold Gore in disdain.

    And no to those who ask who; I am not going to jepordize their proffessional careers by saying who."


    So you won't mind therefore if your comments are dismissed in the same way as Robespierre's unread list and McCarthy's never explained list of commies were.

    It's an old right and communist tactic to claim to have names which are never read or given out

    Complain about this comment

  • 486. At 2:43pm on 01 Jan 2010, Sam Tyler wrote:

    #476

    Hmmm, the Limbaugh play. 'I wasn't fit to serve. If I had been I would have been John McCain'.

    You could have joined the Peace Corps, or served in any number of other ways. But you didn't. You went to France.

    Johnson was onto something. There is noting worse than the false chest thumping public patriotism of those who seek to aggrandize themselves through it, and think themselves greater than others because of it. They cheapen themselves and they cheapen our nation. They misquote our Founding Fathers (just an FYI, when Washington, and Jefferson, spoke of foreign entanglements they were discussing staying out of war between England and France and seeking both as trading partners and allies, not withdrawing into isolationalism. Quite the opposite, the Lumber trade needed to supply both countries Navies in order to help fund the expansion of our states inland and the growth of our economy) and twist facts to support their corrupted view of the world.

    The true patriot serves. A true patriot thanks our service men and women in person for their service face to face whenever (s)he comes across them.

    Shouty sentiments on a blog or the radio merely betray the scoundrel.

    Craven

    P.S. Keep the insults coming, my Godson is writing them down for next semester.

    Complain about this comment

  • 487. At 2:49pm on 01 Jan 2010, Sam Tyler wrote:

    #480

    Andrea,

    I respectfully beg to differ.

    NPR certainly has lifestyle and magazine shows that have left leaning contributors (I'm thinking David Sidaris and Sarah Vowell on This American life) and Fresh Air took some flak after Terry Gross pointed out some of Bill O'Reilly's inconsistencies in a combative interview (the complaint was that Al Franken, at the time a comedian, was given a nice chat while O'Reilly was cross examined. The defense was O'Reilly was, at the time, a political figure and distorted facts on hois show. An interview with Franken once he joined Air America would have been more combative). However I find their news coverage adheres to a very high journalistic standard and that if one party / voice is represented so are others.

    NPR is often said to be left leaning because it does, unfortunately, stick to facts. If you are working with your own facts from Fox or talk radio, then you would perceive it to be biased.

    Craven

    Complain about this comment

  • 488. At 2:50pm on 01 Jan 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 489. At 3:05pm on 01 Jan 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    I knew if I mentioned my medical infirmity it would be ridiculed by the infantile minds of the left and Europeans. I fully expected it and I wasn't surprised one bit. Fast too. I know what kind of people you are which is why I detest you so much.

    Craven, I like to think I seved my country in other ways which suited my talents. While the peace corps was admirable training youngsters who didn't know anything to go overseas to teach people how to fish or grow potatoes, or install a well pump after they'd learned how themselves, I used my talents to help build a nuclear power plant. Looks like that industry might just come back to life again. It is the one source of electrical power we have which is reliable enough and large enough to serve our modern society without producing CO2 as a biproduct. Here's to more nukes in 2010.

    Complain about this comment

  • 490. At 3:11pm on 01 Jan 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    478. Simon21: "Hey try something new for 2010 - think before you write."

    ****************

    How about you do the same. I have said or implied nothing about killing and yet you manage to argue with me as if I did.

    If you have a problem acknowleding Islamic extremists, that's your own issue.

    Complain about this comment

  • 491. At 3:28pm on 01 Jan 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    It was less than two years ago that Hillary Clinton said that Barack Obama was not fit to be Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States. Recent events have proven again that at least this one time in her life she was right. A successful attack on the US on American soil by terrorists due to his failure to make America's security his top priority will be his undoing. No other issue or responsibility comes close in importance.

    Complain about this comment

  • 492. At 3:32pm on 01 Jan 2010, squirrelist wrote:

    489. At 3:05pm on 01 Jan 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    "I knew if I mentioned my medical infirmity it would be ridiculed by the infantile minds of the left and Europeans. I fully expected it."

    Ah. Another example of 20/20 hindsight. All together, now:

    'Cos of fallen arches
    I dream my dreams away.
    'Cos of my flat arches,
    On cobblestones I lay.
    Ev'ry night you'll find me,
    Tired out and worn.
    Happy when the daylight comes creeping,
    Heralding the dawn.

    Sleeping when it's raining,
    And sleeping when it's fine,
    I hear the trains rattling by above.
    Pavement is my pillow,
    No matter where I stray.
    Because of fallen arches
    I dream my dreams away.

    Complain about this comment

  • 493. At 3:33pm on 01 Jan 2010, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #487

    Terry Gross took flak because she was suppose to be interviewing O'rielley about his new book. she decided to bring up a panel discussion where poor Pat Schroeder had to moderate between Al Franken who was already working on his books attacking others and Air america and O'rieley.

    ref #483

    Dominick I suggest you watch Fox. A frequent contributor on Hannity is bob beckel who is treated with respect.

    On the Factor- Juan Williams, alan colmes and a woman whose name escapes me but is a liberal talk show host are on frequently.

    In regard to questioning patriosm of certain liberals : Yes as a moderate I question Norm chomsky Danny Glover and Dick Durbin and Jimmy Carter's patriotism

    Complain about this comment

  • 494. At 3:39pm on 01 Jan 2010, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #467
    publiusdetroit wrote:
    Mark

    More reasons to go to Canada and investigate this current proroque:

    1) Canadian politicians. Michael Ignatieff, leader of the Liberal party. Jack Layton, leader of the New Democratic Party (Interesting character). Elizabeth May, leader of the Canadian Green Party (Campaigned from trains during last National election).
    (You might mention the Western provinces political situation where their voice has long been ignored)

    2) Back bacon with your eggs for breakfast.
    (Canadian style bagel much tastier than NY)

    3) Canada military forces have suffered more losses in Afghanistan then any other conflict or peace-keeping action since the Korean War.

    4) Canadians are friendly. (My Canadian friends always want me to mention this):-D (Hint: They become even more talkative after a few brews and shots of Canadian Club Whiskey).

    5) The current proroque extends until the end of the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics. (China cut factory production during the Olympics to reduce smog. Stephen Harper shuts down Parliament until after the Olympics to...). Smoke and mirrors?

    6) Montreal. Prize of "La Belle Provence". Just a couple hours drive from Ottawa. Brush up on your French; then forget about half of it. They speak Quebocais in the Provence of Quebec. A lot like Parisian French. Bring your sense of humor with you.

    7) Quebec politics. It's a very different way of looking at things you learned in Ottawa.

    8) While in Montreal you will find food so good for the waistline you will want to wear it when too full to eat any more. May want to bring along a belt extender.
    (Food is great and don't forget the Jazz festival so Marc make a summer trip too)

    9) Hockey! The National religion. Go see the "Habs" play on home ice in Montreal. The passion of world football with a quiet Canadian reserve. ;-)
    (Except when they play the Boston Bruins than the fans can rival Philly fans)

    Complain about this comment

  • 495. At 3:39pm on 01 Jan 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Doubled over in Dublin;

    Why don't you go write a poem or something. And while you're at it, have some more liquid inspiration. No reason to stop celebrating the new year just because the sun has risen. With any luck you can stretch it out to Saint Patty's day.

    Complain about this comment

  • 496. At 3:54pm on 01 Jan 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    458, 459, 460, 467, Publius and David

    Thanks.

    Publius: The rink isn't frozen yet, and may not be for some time. The weather has been too warm.

    ---------

    Mark, it's time for a new string. As Publius says: "Put the North in North America"

    ---------

    Another topic might by the free ride that the IOC keeps getting from the press. Three weeks ago the City of Vancouver tried to shut down an art gallery's work because it was critical of the Olympics. About the same time the border guards were trying to stop a woman from crossing because they feared she was going to give a speech critical of the Olympics.

    Beijing, eat your heart out - we have modern day Nazis here, too, including those who have organized the most farcical "Olympic Relay" of all time (little or no actual running, just a series of flights and road trips between advertising phot ops. Better keep those protestors off-camera. Shallow. Cynical. Sleazy. Jingoistic.

    Yep, that's the Olympics, all right.

    Complain about this comment

  • 497. At 3:59pm on 01 Jan 2010, Sam Tyler wrote:

    #488, 489

    There you go again making up your own version of reality. No one ridiculed your infirmities. I merely observed the characteristics of a false Patriot. If you place yourself in that category then indeed I did ridicule you, but for that and not any shortcomings of the body.

    As for working in the Nuclear Industry, you can tell yoruself day and night that that was serving your country. It wasn't. No ifs buts or maybes.

    Working for private industry to get a pay check is serving yourself. Nothing wrong with that, we all have to do it at some point. Dressing it up as some grand patriotic action is delusional. It's like saying 'I served my country because I pay my taxes'.

    You could have served in so many ways. By becoming a government employee, by giving time to feed the homeless, counsel the less fortunate, being a Big Brother / Big Sister, joining the Salvation Army. Or if you couldn't find it in your soul to give time, give money. You did none of those things. Rather you choose to pretend your employment was service. How sad.

    On the subject of McCain, had we been foolish enough to elect him I very much doubt he would seek revenge on Vietnam 40 years later. He is a statesman above all else. His choice for VP, not so much.

    Craven

    Complain about this comment

  • 498. At 4:35pm on 01 Jan 2010, publiusdetroit wrote:

    Ref 496 Interestedforeigner-

    "Publius: The rink isn't frozen yet, and may not be for some time. The weather has been too warm."

    Mark will still be able to munch on poutine and a Beaver Tail even if the canal isn't open for skating yet.

    Do you think the Harper government will face a no-confidence vote launched by a more united Liberal and NDP parties once the prorogue is over in March?

    Complain about this comment

  • 499. At 4:48pm on 01 Jan 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 500. At 4:48pm on 01 Jan 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    ravin' Cravin;

    "You could have served in so many ways. By becoming a government employee"

    Waste my life as one more uselesss government flunky employee? Never. I've given money to charity....office politics in large American corporations. The management has their quotas and benchmarks (metrics) to meet. No real choice.

    And to think I might have flown an F-16 over Hanoi. Just Imagine what targets "I" would have picked out, what international incidents I would have created, what a court marshall I would have endured. After I'd gotten out of prison, I'd have been elected to public office for sure :-) When you're young, you don't think much about being captured or dying. The battle pumps too much adrenalin into your blood to think about those things. I saw a piece on TV about a woman who flies a B-2 Stealth bomber. All she'd need is the go ahead from the President and wild horses couldn't keep her from nuking Moscow or wherever else he sends her. When I saw it, I remembered and thought "I know just how she must feel." Seems to me there are some targets in the tribal areas of Pakistan that could use our attention. In Iran too. I think the day of manned military aircraft is almost over. I think in the not too distant future, all such missions will be fought using remote guided weapons platforms.

    Complain about this comment

View these comments in RSS

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.