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

Iran v US: A war of words, not of bombs and guns

Mark Mardell | 21:40 UK time, Friday, 24 September 2010

Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been at it again. At a news conference today he repeated his call for an investigation into the 9/11 attacks. Despite what the networks insist on broadcasting, he didn't actually say the US government was behind the murderous attacks, he said it was one of three theories and most Americans, and most people, believe it. I'm sure he was well aware most would not bother with this subtlety and today said:

Something happened and that event was the pretext for the invasion of two countries. Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed as a result. Don't you think that that we need to explore the real reason for 9/11... to look at that excuse?

In his interview with the BBC Persian service today, President Barack Obama's anger seemed unfeigned. He said:

It was offensive. It was hateful. And particularly for him to make the statement here in Manhattan, just a little north of Ground Zero, where families lost their loved ones, people of all faiths, all ethnicities who see this as the seminal tragedy of this generation, for him to make a statement like that was inexcusable.

And it stands in contrast with the response of the Iranian people when 9/11 happened, when there were candlelight vigils and I think a natural sense of shared humanity and sympathy was expressed within Iran. And it just shows once again sort of the difference between how the Iranian leadership and this regime operates and how I think the vast majority of the Iranian people who are respectful and thoughtful think about these issues.

So in a sense it played into his hands, the last point his theme of the day. BBC Persian broadcasts to around 10 million people in Iran, and Mr Obama's message was directed at them, an effort to persuade that his quarrel wasn't with them but with their leaders, and in particular their president. He suggested one of the reason the west and Russia were so worried were because of odd outbursts like this.

Then my colleague Bahman Kalbasi asked him what is for many the key question.

For a lot of Iranians who are looking at how this scenario is playing out, many see similarities to the run-up to the Iraq War. You know, a succession of UN resolutions, toughened economic sanctions, on-and-off talk about war and a military strike. What do you say to those who are worried that they'll wake up to a military attack by America or Israel?

Mr Obama replied:

Well, I think what people should remember is that I don't take war lightly. I was opposed to the war in Iraq. I am somebody who's interested in resolving issues diplomatically.

He went on:

So the Iranian government itself has said 'we are not interested in nuclear weapons'. That's their public statement. If that's the case, there should be a mechanism whereby they can assure and prove to the international community, including the IAEA, that that is in fact the case. And if they take those constructive steps in serious negotiations, then not only should there not be a threat of war but there also won't be the sanctions that are currently in place.

This may not be tempting for Mr Ahmadinejad, Iran's 9/11 Truther in Chief, but some in Iran's complex democracy and ruling classes may like the thought of sanctions being lifted. Despite the harsh words and calculated insults even Mr Ahmadinejad did suggest that the European Union set up talks for next month. It is true that his remarks were as cryptic as ever and hedged with caveats. But low-level contacts between Iran and the EU were going on the whole time. The US and the world are in no mood for another war, and Mr Obama would be loathe to be the president to start one. That doesn't mean Israel will not act alone, but I suspect this will remain a war of words for some time to come.

Comments

or register to comment.

  • 1. At 11:12pm on 24 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    "Something happened and that event was the pretext for the invasion of two countries. Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed as a result. Don't you think that that we need to explore the real reason for 9/11... to look at that excuse?"

    The media is being very objective and is not distorting Ahmadinejad's comment in any way. When he tied motive to and the need to "explore the real reason for 9/11" there is only one conclusion we can reach: he accused the US government or special interests of being involved or carrying out the worst case of terrorism ever committed against civilians.

    I am usually in favor of using diplomacy and compromise to solve problems, but in the case of the Iranian regime the best approach are tougher sanctions and helping the Iranian people overthrow their despotic and backawards regime.

    I doubt there will be a war as a result of this or because sanctions are being violated, but it would not bother me a bit if the scope and effectiveness of the sanctions against Iran are expanded to include seizing oil tankers leaving Iranian waters, and stopping any ship bringing cargo to Iran. If they are as self-sufficient as they claim to be they should not have a problems drowning in their pistachios.

    Yesterday was a good day for the USA, we need more days like that. Perhaps Ahmadinejad should come more often; nothing works better than a good laugh to help us forget our econommic and unemployment problems.

    Complain about this comment

  • 2. At 11:31pm on 24 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    I am usually in favor of using diplomacy and compromise to solve problems, but in the case of the Iranian regime the best approach are tougher sanctions and helping the Iranian people overthrow their despotic and backawards regime.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    See how easy it is for anyone to change americans opinion...Gone is the concept of free speech, and gone from the mind of Obama is pragamtism, he reacted in a knee jerk manner to Ahmedinajad's comments, the way, the anti "mega mosque" reacted, or the pro-koranians reacted....The same argument used by all three of them....the anti "megamosque are opposed to the "megamosque" because its two blocks away to ground zero, obama hates the words of ahmedinajad because he said them in a building thats "just a little north of ground zero...

    Complain about this comment

  • 3. At 11:35pm on 24 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Well, I think what people should remember is that I don't take war lightly. I was opposed to the war in Iraq. I am somebody who's interested in resolving issues diplomatically.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Yes, sure thats why he sends drones in pakistan, thats why he is opening up channels for diplomacy with Iran...Having interest to solve issues diplomatically is one thing, showing the motivation to practice his interests is another thing...Even bush was interested in diplomacy with iraq, but he interestingly waged a war...

    Complain about this comment

  • 4. At 11:47pm on 24 Sep 2010, killerdalek wrote:

    Not bombs and guns, but worms as well as words perhaps? Nice going to whoever wrote the SCADA worm, but I sure hope it doesn't end up on my PC!

    Complain about this comment

  • 5. At 11:50pm on 24 Sep 2010, R Wynne wrote:

    Ahmadinajad likes to play to the gallery. Anyone with an interest can see that there are a great deal of American sites that question 911 and who was responsible. I imagine his next move will be to question the legality of the wars that followed 911 and the UN's charter on what constitutes war crimes. Of course he will be pilloried for this too.

    If only he would apply the moral and ethical standards in his own country he wishes other countries to observe about the sanctity of human life he would be seen in a different light. While Iran continues with Stoneage practices his comment carry little weight. They will not persuade the uninterested to look at the actions of their own (and other) governments critically.

    In many ways he is perfect for the administrations that have carried out actions following 911.

    Complain about this comment

  • 6. At 11:57pm on 24 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    And it stands in contrast with the response of the Iranian people when 9/11 happened, when there were candlelight vigils and I think a natural sense of shared humanity and sympathy was expressed within Iran. And it just shows once again sort of the difference between how the Iranian leadership and this regime operates and how I think the vast majority of the Iranian people who are respectful and thoughtful think about these issues.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And this is shared by every american president encourging war, that they try to believe and give impression the leaders are dont represent the people....It is same for him, people oppose his tax cuts and his health policy, He should show his pragmatism on himself because every american, respectful and thoughtful and those who are less respectful and thoughtfull think about these issues, and majority doesnt agree with obama.A contrast between his regime and the people.

    Complain about this comment

  • 7. At 00:03am on 25 Sep 2010, Apolloin wrote:

    Individuals have freedom of speech, but States do not. When Ahmedinajad spoke at the UN he spoke as the State of Iran. It would be easy to simply brand him as the insane head of an insane state, but that would be too simplistic.

    Obama may well be so schooled in real politik that he responds to the hateful diatribe of Iran with a shrug, but he was speaking for the vast majority of Americans who I am sure wanted the little twerp put in his place.

    Complain about this comment

  • 8. At 00:29am on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Individuals have freedom of speech, but States do not. When Ahmedinajad spoke at the UN he spoke as the State of Iran. It would be easy to simply brand him as the insane head of an insane state, but that would be too simplistic.

    Obama may well be so schooled in real politik that he responds to the hateful diatribe of Iran with a shrug, but he was speaking for the vast majority of Americans who I am sure wanted the little twerp put in his place.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Reacting like anti mega mosquers is a shrug? He raised some points, answer them instead of calling him insane...Apllying the same priciple, americans and their president are insane who think in a consipracy theory that iran is developing nuclear weapons..

    Complain about this comment

  • 9. At 00:38am on 25 Sep 2010, AgainstCensorship wrote:


    I believe that what Ahmedinejad said is justified. There is no doubt that 9/11 was a very big event that had profound effects on almost every single human being on planet earth. It is legitimate to have doubts about the official version of the story.

    On a side note, does anyone know why western delegates always walk out when Ahmedinjad says something they don't like? And what does that achieve? I have also seen that at first, the US envoy walked out, followed by the UK one and then other western countries followed suit. Does this mean that if the US envoy hadn't walked out, his British counterpart would have also stayed? And what does that say?

    Complain about this comment

  • 10. At 00:46am on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    he said it was one of three theories and most Americans, and most people, believe it.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    What makes Ahmajad believe it is okay for him to speak for most Americans or even most people?
    After all, when the Green Revolution tried to speak, they were shut down by Ahmajad.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    It was offensive. It was hateful.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    These are very strong words from Obama. Don't think I've heard him or any American President say that another leader was hateful and offensive in my lifetime, even ones they greatly disliked, perhaps past ones did, don't know.

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

    I hope the Iranian people listened to Obama and understood that USA is not against Iran, USA is against the Iranian govt. due to their secretive potential conquest of WMD. If Iran obtains such, there will be nothing held back.

    I have heard the chants from some extremist groups of other countries against USA, Britain and Israel, calling us all Satans and whatnot, burning our flags and drawing crazy drawings. When I hear such things I can't help but wonder, Is there one in the crowd who has love and not hate?

    Complain about this comment

  • 11. At 00:50am on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Abassey,

    What other international leaders deny both the Holocaust and 9/11, declaring they are both fictionally made up for propaganda?

    If I saw Ahmajad, I would walk, out, too.

    The state of Iran deserves respect, but Ahmajad deserves no respect.

    Complain about this comment

  • 12. At 00:52am on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    There is no doubt that 9/11 was a very big event that had profound effects on almost every single human being on planet earth.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    No.According to the book writer, obama seems to be think that usa can absorb another 9/11...

    Complain about this comment

  • 13. At 01:10am on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    No.According to the book writer, obama seems to be think that usa can absorb another 9/11...
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    President Obama knows that USA will fight with all our heart and soul.
    We are simply the best.

    Complain about this comment

  • 14. At 01:47am on 25 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:


    Mouthy runt said;

    "Something happened and that event was the pretext for the invasion of two countries. Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed as a result. Don't you think that that we need to explore the real reason for 9/11... to look at that excuse?"

    This is the best reason to boot the UN into the Atlantic as far as we can kick it.

    It attracts flies.

    Complain about this comment

  • 15. At 02:09am on 25 Sep 2010, Localist wrote:

    To be honest, I remember watching the videos on YouTube about 9/11 and the anomalies surrounding it and finding it quite convincing. What annoys me isn't that people are a little frosty at the suggestions made, but rather that they wouldn't even answer direct questions about specific bits of evidence.

    I mean, just for a minute think, if you were a group of people somewhere within the US hierarchy who had lots of control and wanted to manipulate situations for you own gain, you'd be well aware that if you committed an atrocious crime you'd get away with it because no-one would believe that you'd done it (as has been proven).

    Part of me thinks the US intelligence knew something was going to happen and called the attackers' bluff, but it's possible that some people (not necessarily politicians) were involved in the whole thing. It doesn't help when the main publicisers of the 'ask some questions' viewpoint are the Iranian president and a former professional wrestler, but I definitely agree that a proper investigation with proper answers needs to be had.

    The US government has got away, unaccountably, with taking away lots of lives in the Middle East, so surely the least that can happen is that they could answer a few questions and produce the evidence to once and for all prove that these conspiracy theories haven't got a leg to stand on?

    If you want to look at it, search for the 'Loose Change' video online.

    Complain about this comment

  • 16. At 02:20am on 25 Sep 2010, HabitualHero wrote:

    " There is no doubt that 9/11 was a very big event that had profound effects on almost every single human being on planet earth. "

    Eh? The lives of only a tiny percentage of the almost 7 billion people on this planet were affected by 9/11.

    #13 "We are simply the best."

    On which we can all agree. "At what" is open to debate.

    Complain about this comment

  • 17. At 03:05am on 25 Sep 2010, David S Camacho wrote:

    I know quite a few Americans who believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy that was hatched by Israel and some "sinister" elements within the American government. Although I do not personally believe this is true, neither would I would I be "shocked and awed" to find it was. Maybe Ahmadinejad watches the American "History Channel" and this is where he got this idea from, after all, we are the ones who started this rumor. I was disappointed to hear Obama to bring up the fact it was even more hurtful because he said this near "Ground Zero", yet on the other hand disregard the sentiments of people who don't want an Islamic center in the same neighborhood. He speaks with a "forked tongue".

    Complain about this comment

  • 18. At 03:18am on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Some months ago, the news media reported that American military leaders have all but publically begged President Obama not to order an attack on Iran. This is the most disgraceful and disgusting display I've ever seen. They should be ashamed to wear the uniform of the United States military. These reluctant warriors should not be in the business of fighting wars to defend America as they obviously find the prospect so distasteful that they would rather humiliate themselves and our country than explain why they are not prepared to fight and win if that is what is required of them. Fire them all and get people who are ready to carry out orders to fight if that is deemed necessary to defend Amercia's freedom and interests.

    Complain about this comment

  • 19. At 04:13am on 25 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "5. At 02:09am on 25 Sep 2010, Chris Heward wrote:

    To be honest, I remember watching the videos on YouTube about 9/11 and the anomalies surrounding it and finding it quite convincing. What annoys me isn't that people are a little frosty at the suggestions made, but rather that they wouldn't even answer direct questions about specific bits of evidence."

    It's a little difficult to put into single syllable words (media speak) the technical details and knowledge of structural engineering but I want you to conduct your own little experiment that ought to enlighten you a little bit.

    Go to your local hardware store and get a piece of angle iron and a plumbers candle. A propane torch is a little too hot, a candle is better. Clamp the angle iron horizontally and light the candle and set it so the flame is on the middle of the angle iron. Do this safely please? Leave the candle burning for a hour or so and then come and look at how the angle iron has warped.

    That angle iron is the same basic grade of steel used in those towers and most other steel-framed structures.

    Now imagine that's not a piece of angle iron but the entire structure of a huge skyscraper and that flame isn't in the middle of a little piece of angle iron but a DARN hot inferno more than halfway up the structure and there's literally millions of pounds of weight pressing down on the warping steel.

    Naturally the towers collapsed, I'm only surprised that they managed to hold together as long as they did.

    "I mean, just for a minute think, if you were a group of people somewhere within the US hierarchy who had lots of control and wanted to manipulate situations for you own gain, you'd be well aware that if you committed an atrocious crime you'd get away with it because no-one would believe that you'd done it (as has been proven)."

    I gave up on tin-foil hat theories a long time ago.

    "Part of me thinks the US intelligence knew something was going to happen and called the attackers' bluff, but it's possible that some people (not necessarily politicians) were involved in the whole thing. It doesn't help when the main publicisers of the 'ask some questions' viewpoint are the Iranian president and a former professional wrestler, but I definitely agree that a proper investigation with proper answers needs to be had."

    And if that investigation doesn't agree with your preconceived notions then what? Investigate it again?

    "The US government has got away, unaccountably, with taking away lots of lives in the Middle East, so surely the least that can happen is that they could answer a few questions and produce the evidence to once and for all prove that these conspiracy theories haven't got a leg to stand on?"

    How far backward are you willing to lean to make sure that people who really want to kill you and me or force us into islamic slavery have their opportunity to defame and degrade the finest nation that's ever existed on the planet?

    Did you or did you not see the hordes of islamics dancing in the streets and celebrating the deaths of over three thousand innocent people?

    "If you want to look at it, search for the 'Loose Change' video online."

    I wouldn't waste the electrons.

    Complain about this comment

  • 20. At 04:17am on 25 Sep 2010, Sam Tyler wrote:

    #18

    Interesting that Marcus has finally lowered himself to insulting our men and women in uniform. Something no man of honor could do. But then we knew that when called upon to serve, he hid in France. And now despises the French for hiding him. How sad.

    Craven

    Complain about this comment

  • 21. At 05:26am on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Well at least we can be grateful that President Obama didn't apologize and beg for Ahmadinejad's forgiveness...this time...yet anyway. You'd never know he's not only the leader of the most powerful nation in all human history and the largest national economy that can crush all others but the commander-in-chief of the most powerful military force in history too. Maybe someone should tap him on the shoulder and remind him of it. Hillary, where are you when we need you?

    Complain about this comment

  • 22. At 05:55am on 25 Sep 2010, Apolloin wrote:

    Colonel Artist, I'm not a 'zionist', in fact I support the Palestinians when they aren't being so barbaric that I just wash my hands of the whole situation. I've also visited Dachau, one of the concentration camps. I've spoken to people who witnessed the horror at Belsen and Auschwitz first hand - and not 'Zionists' just ordinary soldiers who saw something that even battle hadn't psychologically prepared them for.

    The Holocaust was not a myth. There's no hard evidence that anyone other than the Terrorists and their backers was involved in 9-11. Al Quaeda took responsibility for 9-11 - had in fact been involved with a prior attempt to blow up the WTC.

    What Ahmedinajad is trying to do is to cover up his own state's massive human rights abuses, nuclear brinkmanship and support for global terrorism. It's obviously worked on some people.

    Complain about this comment

  • 23. At 09:31am on 25 Sep 2010, allmymarbles wrote:

    Ahmadinejad knows he is talking nonsense and Obama knows that Ahmadinejad knows he is talking nonsense, and Ahmadinejad knows Obama knows that Ahmadinejad....

    The message lies in the music, not the lyrics.

    Complain about this comment

  • 24. At 10:11am on 25 Sep 2010, hms_shannon wrote:

    With the passing of the British Empire,America is now the worlds policeman.
    This is a thankless task,as no thanks is given & besides no one ever says thank you.

    This clip is for our American friends with total under standing.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N81Js_SkXak

    Post 20, hello Sam its so good to read your posts again.

    Complain about this comment

  • 25. At 10:21am on 25 Sep 2010, 0xdeadbeef wrote:

    I personally believe that applying Occam's Razor to the Sept 11th attacks would lead to the conclusion that Saudi extremists were definitely responsible.

    However questioning the orthodoxy of the "official" explanation is not wrong, nor insulting to anyone - especially considering the US regime has well-documented form in the practice of using false-flag operations as a pretext for attack. It is just this particular event would of course be in a whole other league of depravity, even for them. We shouldn't for one minute forget the dubious calibre of the people involved in the American regime at the time, certain of whom by the way have more Iranian blood on their hands than the current President of Iran could imagine in his wildest despoto-erotic fantasies.


    What is much less clear is the mechanism by which Al-Q was fingered as responsible - as far as I can see, no-one in that mysterious, shady organisation has ever claimed responsibility, and no evidence whatsoever has ever been made public that ties that organisation to the event. It seems someone in the US regime pointed a finger and that was that. Not good enough, because they are known to lie through their teeth.

    Complain about this comment

  • 26. At 11:00am on 25 Sep 2010, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #15

    I have a problem with 2 aspects of the 9/11 truthers and blamers

    1. There is no proof and no scientific theory of the inside job of 9/11.

    2. This was brought about by islamic terrorists who hate the west, it has nothing to do with our principeled stand with Israel or other policy decisions.

    I still maintain my post from an earlier thread we should have arrest Ahmadejiad the moment he landed as a war criminal, terrorist supoorter and kidnapper.

    Complain about this comment

  • 27. At 11:55am on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 15, Chris

    "Part of me thinks the US intelligence knew something was going to happen and called the attackers' bluff, but it's possible that some people (not necessarily politicians) were involved in the whole thing. It doesn't help when the main publicisers of the 'ask some questions' viewpoint are the Iranian president and a former professional wrestler, but I definitely agree that a proper investigation with proper answers needs to be had"

    The US government received tips regarding an impending attack by Al Qaeda before 9/11, but the information lacked the specificity needed to take preventive action. All we knew is that a terrorist organization was planning to carry out an attack; we didn't know what the terrorists looked like, where or when the attack was going to be carried out or how.

    To suggest that the US government or American special interests were involved in the event is preposterous, particularly when AQ took credit for the event and boasts of its successful accomplishment. Do you remember the attacks in Madrid, London, Bali, Amman and so many other place around the world? Have you forgotten that AQ happily took credit for them and assured the world that more were coming?

    Instead of wasting time on absurd conspiracy theories what we need to do is work together to end terrorism and establish a climate conducive to cultural and religious tolerance, respect for the interests and aspirations of all people, and one where people were together to ensure the survival of the species rather than its eventual destruction.

    Humanity is facing enough problems, natural and self-inflicted, to waste time defending those who have proven time and again that they are intent in spreading terror and misery on everyone including their own.

    Complain about this comment

  • 28. At 12:08pm on 25 Sep 2010, Ronnie wrote:

    Anyone who still thinks a crazed terrorist at the controls of a Boeing 757 jetliner made a series of breakneck maneouvers over the middle of Washington DC, flying just a few feet off the ground and then through the second floor windows into the Pentagon - leaving no aircraft debris on the lawn - and no CCTV cameras managed to catch a glimpse in broad daylight - - needs their head examined. Apparently the whole thing just 'vaporized' according to the official story.

    The simple fact is that Americans want to believe the official story, because to think the unthinkable is, well - unthinkable. It would destroy everything they've been taught to believe about their coutnry and its leaders. The world is a nasty place, all of it. People need to wake up to that - and take back their countries from the self-interested syndicates that run it - for their benefit - not ours.

    Complain about this comment

  • 29. At 12:22pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 2, colonel

    "Gone is the concept of free speech, and gone from the mind of Obama is pragamtism, he reacted in a knee jerk manner to Ahmedinajad's comments, the way, the anti "mega mosque" reacted, or the pro-koranians reacted"

    The fact that we allow a person we dislike to come to our country and deliver a speech filled with innuendo, hate, and designed to inflame passions is a testament to the importance we give to freedom of speech. Can you imagine a US president being allowed to deliver a similar speech in Tehran?

    Perhaps you should listen again to what President Obama said before and after Ahmadinejad's speech. The contrast could not be more remarkable.
    President Obama delivered a measured and pertinent speech focused on the need to pursue common goals, and responded to Ahmadinejad's immature remarks in the measured and focused manner that characterizes his demeanor.

    Incidentally, President Obama demonstrated once again his intelligence and eloquence when he delivered a 33 minutes sppech without tele-prompters or a piece of paper. The best that can be said for Ahmadinejad;s delivery is that he seems to know how to read.

    Many Americans oppose the construction of an Islamic Cultural Center (aka mega Mosque) two blocks from Ground Zero because we find it offensive. The real question should not be our reaction to this proposal, but the rationale behind the insistance to build it there. To many of us this is a deliberate attempt by an Imam and his followers to provoke a predictable reaction and incite hate and intolerance at a time when so many people are pursuing cultural and religious reconciliation.

    I am not sure what you mean by "pro-Koranians" I remember the proposal made by a discredited ANTI-Islamic Pastor, and the robust reaction by Christian and political leaders who managed to persuade him to abandon his message of hate. Could it be that Ahmadinejad borrowed a page from Pastor Jones agenda? Seriously, I suspect Ahmadinejad was talking to his detractors at home rather than us, but not surprisingly it seems his theories have found and have found an audience and a forum they do not deserve.

    Complain about this comment

  • 30. At 12:42pm on 25 Sep 2010, Oldloadr wrote:

    28. At 12:08pm on 25 Sep 2010, Ronnie wrote: Apparently the whole thing just 'vaporized' according to the official story.

    I'm going to jump to the conclusion that you have never been on an aircraft crash investigation. If you had, you would know that even in an open field a lot of the aircraft structure will "vaporize." It's called a Class D fire (burning metal). It happens all the time. I have been at crash scenes where the only recognizable parts left are the main landing gear. Confine the aircraft inside a burning concrete and reinforced steel building full of equipent and furnishings and to the untrained observer, there is not much left that resembles a flying machine.

    Complain about this comment

  • 31. At 1:12pm on 25 Sep 2010, Leviticus wrote:

    Firstly might I ask that the comments on here stop going off on a nationalistic tangent of 'my country is better than your country'?
    It's pointless and only serves to make other people think you are insecure and doubt these things yourself!


    Back on topic.

    With regards to the September 11th attacks themselves:

    @ 19) Actually try that experiment after coating the metal in asbestos and put the candle an inch to the side of the metal not underneath it- then restrict the oxygen supply enough to get blackened smoke. This would more accurately represent the conditions on the day.
    Better yet get a length a yard or two long in a concrete base with a load placed at the top, then set the candle about 2/3 of the way up.
    I'm most interested to know the outcome, I don't have a safe area in my abode to do this myself.

    @ 26) Actually there is probably as much evidence/proof of an inside job as there is for it being terrorists.
    Unfortunately every documentary I have seen on this has been obviously biased in one direction or the other and missed out loads from the other side.

    However, if neither of you will take a look at the evidence for the other side of the argument before drawing your conclusions because you 'won't waste the electrons', then whether or not your current conclusions are correct is irrelevant. All logic, evidence and reason is pointless in a situation where you will not listen to both sides.

    Understanding is a 3 edged sword. Examining only 1 part of the blade and presuming everything about the other 2 is about as usefull as as a chocolate fireguard.


    With regards to Ahmadinejad's comments:

    As noted above by 23, it is the music that counts as much as the lyrics.
    The Iranian President almost certainly said these things to get the response he did- and the ambassadors and diplomats played right into his hands!


    With regards to the way the other diplomats responded to those comments:

    Disgraceful. Regardless of the fact that these were sensitive issues, the simple fact is that an enormous number of people on the planet (rightly or wrongly) do think the WTC attacks had inside help of some form or another.
    That people simply got up and walked out because he noted this simply goes to show that there are far far too many politicians in the world who are suppossed to represent the people but would rather score points with dramatic gestures and play to the crowd than actually represent the views and interests of the populace.

    And in this the Iranian President has already won the battle he was actually fighting.


    As I say, I'm not saying the WTC was or wasn't an inside job, or done entirely by 17 guys armed with nothing but box cutters.
    I'm saying that a very large proportion of the planet believe there is a cover up, and that people whose job it is to present the truth to and represent the public would rather villify a man for saying this than villify him for things he should be brought to account for!

    Complain about this comment

  • 32. At 2:14pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 31, Leviticus

    "And in this the Iranian President has already won the battle he was actually fighting"

    The only battle Ahmadinejad may have won is at home where medieval religious zealots may be rejoicing and endorsing the incoherent diatribe delivered by one of their leaders. I wonder if the paper he was reading was written by the Grand Ayatollah himself or by one of his minions...

    The UN representatives from the USA, Europe, Australia, Canada and some Latin American countries did not walk out because we forced them to do so, they did it spontaneously because they found Ahmadinejad's insinuations disgusting, inappropiate and pointless.

    Conspiracies abound and flourish every time a major tragedy takes place, whether it was the assassination of Presidents Lincoln or Kennedy, Pearl Harbor, or the WTC they are bound to happen. Some have logical arguments and are worth pursuing, others are simply bizarre.

    Denying the effects of the impact of two large planes on the structural integrity of a building, and the subsequent effects of fire caused by spreading combustible fuel on the weakened structure doesn't make sense. Add to that the illogical claim that it was an inside job to divert attention from economic woes when the USA had just had 8 years of incredible growth, 23 million new jobs were created, and we had just enjoyed budget surpluses for the first time in decades does not make sense.

    Let's not forget that the Al Qaeda leadership proudly acknowledged responsibility for 9/11 and has been boasting about it for 9 years.
    I don't know if they were dancing to the music or the lyrics, but I refuse to entertain either.

    Complain about this comment

  • 33. At 2:31pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    The Holocaust was not a myth. There's no hard evidence that anyone other than the Terrorists and their backers was involved in 9-11. Al Quaeda took responsibility for 9-11 - had in fact been involved with a prior attempt to blow up the WTC.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Who cares if holocaust was a myth or not...First you allowed genocide to happen, and now you go after anyone who questions it, What is important, the killing of millions or forcing people to agree that millions were killed, and making it an issue which will lead millions to be killed...Its not as if germans and japanese werent killed in millions at the same time...It was the time of killing in great numbers...Forgetting the rest of millions killed, and focusing on ones who now occupy another group is extremely disgusting..At that time, 2001, alqaida was ben laden, and ben laden denied it at first...So, whatever narrative evolved after his initial denial to american narrative, that the group carried out this thing was actually part of alqaida...The point is , it could have been prevented had the america authorities taken some action...

    Complain about this comment

  • 34. At 2:35pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    The fact that we allow a person we dislike to come to our country and deliver a speech filled with innuendo, hate, and designed to inflame passions is a testament to the importance we give to freedom of speech. Can you imagine a US president being allowed to deliver a similar speech in Tehran?
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Yes. I can. His speech was neither hateful or designed to inflame passions, it was aimed to provoke people into thinking which they dont think...I thought the west, and americans love such provocative people...Atleast thats how they justify everyone who says things full of hate against islam...If you cannot do what you preach others to do, then atleast readjust your sermons...Or you will end up again supporting the troops while preaching that you hate wars..

    Complain about this comment

  • 35. At 2:35pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    To the amorphous entity who has a larger family and more friends than I can dream of, who owns expensive sandals and Armani shoes that are in his will which becomes null and void upon his demise, and who speaks for 1.7 billion moslems (hasn't gone up to 1.8 or 1.9 billion yet has it?);

    I agree with you, America should stop pretending that it is only opposed to the "bad" moslems and likes the "good" moslems. Let's be honest, Islam and America cannot coexist. The conflict is inevitable. It is inherent in the inconsistency of our two views of life that they can never be reconciled. War between them is inevitable. Right now they have the numbers, we have the the technology. We should not wait for them to catch up to us in the area we still have an advantage in. We should face up to it like free men and women and fight the battle on our own terms now while we still have a chance of winning. The longer we wait, the more those chances diminish. I'll bet right not America could still enlist help from China, Russia, and much of Europe but frankly I don't know how much good that would do. We have the means but seemingly no will. They have the will but it seems little means. Russia was beaten up in Chechnya and is still being beaten up by Moslems in the Caucuses and even in Moscow. Britain could hardly handle Argentina nearly thirty years ago and they aren't much better fighters today. For example they surrendered without a shot to the Iranian joke of a navy three years ago without firing a shot upon which the Iranians captured 15 British seamen right off their own warship. If that's not a disgrace I don't know what is. I'd be ashamed to wear a British naval officer's uniform if I was one of them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 36. At 2:41pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    The fact that we allow a person we dislike to come to our country and deliver a speech filled with innuendo, hate, and designed to inflame passions is a testament to the importance we give to freedom of speech. Can you imagine a US president being allowed to deliver a similar speech in Tehran?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Iran pays its share of money to the UN....If UN was in Teharan, he would have allowed the american president to go there...and say whatever he liked inside the UN...I think believe that UN is a platform from where only america and west can critisize and personally attack other leaders...and lie..He had to hear from so many western leaders the rubbish of iran's future nuclear intention, when he denies, they say they cannot trust him, and if he tells you to get your facts staright and tell the world , especially the part of the world has to see the consequences of your conclusions of 9/11. Its his right..and quite rightly so..

    Complain about this comment

  • 37. At 2:42pm on 25 Sep 2010, mabelwhite wrote:

    I dunno ... according to Wiki in 2006 more than a third of Americans thought there was a conspiracy involved in 9/11 perhaps involving the house of saud

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories

    70% think there was a conspiracy behind the Kennedy assassination

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination#Assassination_conspiracy_theories

    Some think Nixon was involved in a conspiracy to fix a campaign, some think Reagan was involved in a conspiracy involving arms, Iran and the Contra and the hostage release, Herbert Hoover was concerned about internal conspiracies and conspired against them, some say there was a conspiracy to assassinate Lincoln.

    Complain about this comment

  • 38. At 2:49pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    To the amorphous entity who has a larger family and more friends than I can dream of, who owns expensive sandals and Armani shoes that are in his will which becomes null and void upon his demise, and who speaks for 1.7 billion moslems (hasn't gone up to 1.8 or 1.9 billion yet has it?);

    It seems to me that it doesn't really matter what people say, what matters is what they do. And right now Mad in the jihad has been doing all of the doing while all we on our side have done is talk. We threaten, we beg, we rant but in the end it amounts to nothing. The sanctions are a joke. What we need to do is a lot less talking an a lot more doing. We can start by using the power of our economic might against Iran. The President could put some teeth in his words by telling every individual, company, and nation that you can do business with iran or the US but not both. If you buy, sell, oar engage in any transactions with Iran you cannot have any business dealings with the US or any company traded on American stock exchanges, no exceptions including China. If that doesn't shut Iran down, then more drastic action should be taken. Talk is not only cheap, it has no effect. Cutting off the largest national economy and national market in the world to someone is another matter altogether.

    Complain about this comment

  • 39. At 2:50pm on 25 Sep 2010, BluesBerry wrote:

    “Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been at it again.”
    This is the way the west wants us to react to Ahmadinejad; it wants us to stop listening. It wants us to link Ahmadinejad with "crazy"!
    Well, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not crazy. He is very well-educated. Ahmadinejad attended the Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST)
    - as an undergraduate student of civil engineering
    - PhD (1997) in transportation engineering and planning from Iran University of Science and Technology, located at Tehran.
    He knows stucture; he knows engineering. So when he calls for an investigation into into the 9/11, we should be listening because Ahmadinejad is talking in his professional field, just like the hundreds of western engineers who have signed documents and pled for a neutral investigation into 9/11.
    What did the President of Iran say today:
    "Something happened" and that event was the pretext for the invasion of two countries. (I believe this too. Something had to happen to ignite and unite the American people, and this something was 9/11.)
    Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed as a result. (And are still being killed)
    Don't you think that that we need to explore the real reason for 9/11... to look at that excuse? (Yes, I agree. We must have the truth, no matter where that may lead. The people who died; the survivors who remain & suffer deserve the truth. If you read the entire 9/11 Commission Report, at the end, you will find yourself unsatisfied.)
    BBC Persian broadcasts to around 10 million people in Iran, and Mr Obama's message was directed at them, an effort to persuade them that his quarrel wasn't with them but with their leaders, and in particular their president. He suggested one of the reason the west and Russia were so worried were because of odd outbursts like this.
    Whose outburst? I found Ahmadinejad calm and rationale; I found Obama outbursting, hateful and obviously deaf to his own words.
    I wonder how the American people would react if President Ahmadinejad delivered a similar message to the American people: My quarrel isn't with Americans but with President Obama and his administration. I suggest one of the reason the Middle East and Palestine are so worried is because of your President's past behavior (or rather lack of behavior because he has done nothing meaningful.) Hmmmm, do you think Americans might get upset?
    Mr Obama: I am somebody who's interested in resolving issues diplomatically. (Is this why sanction after sanction after sanction has fallen on Iranian shoulders?)
    Mr. Obama, where is your open hand, where is your diplomacy, where is your common sense about 9/11?
    It’s true that his (Ahmadinejad's) remarks were as cryptic as ever and hedged with caveats. (Is there another country on the face of the earth that is as cryptic and full of caveats as the United States of America?)
    That doesn't mean Israel will not act alone (Israel will not act alone because her financial and military support come from the United States of America.)

    Complain about this comment

  • 40. At 2:51pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Let's be honest, Islam and America cannot coexist.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    No, they cannot, one is merely a state, a fixed entity, other is a religon, without any geographical boundries..That people compare a country to a religon is extremely funny, especially when they quickly remind everyone else that semite is a race and islam is a religon, so no racism when aimed at muslims..usa cannot even coexist with mexico..and the other small non white countries, regularly forcing them to exist for usa..

    Complain about this comment

  • 41. At 2:53pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    I agree with you, America should stop pretending that it is only opposed to the "bad" moslems and likes the "good" moslems.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You can start this movement and if you do good luck, americans and the west had an extremely successful experiment with such kind of reasoning, germans and the nazis...the german's fault, they somehow internalised this thing...

    Complain about this comment

  • 42. At 3:00pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Have you forgotten that AQ happily took credit for them and assured the world that more were coming?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And do you remember how the spanish ruling party at the time of madrid bombing hid the truth and blamed it on spanish sepratists so that they could be part of the allies....Do you think that the lying prime minister of spain who lost the election, had also hid the truth from the emperor and his vice minister , bush and blair? Those were the pathetic yrs of great lying and americans were all thumping the chests like primtives, however, now, after 9 yrs, they can go back and refelct without being emotional....Obama incited this emotionality once again, because as someone here said, he was not replying to the iranian journalist but to the americans who have his political life in their hands come november..

    Complain about this comment

  • 43. At 3:03pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Perhaps you should listen again to what President Obama said before and after Ahmadinejad's speech. The contrast could not be more remarkable.
    President Obama delivered a measured and pertinent speech focused on the need to pursue common goals, and responded to Ahmadinejad's immature remarks in the measured and focused manner that characterizes his demeanor.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The djin is out of bottle and he turned out to be a fake...His speech was a lecture, a lecture he likes to give to you all, this time you liked it because it was not aimed at you...

    Complain about this comment

  • 44. At 3:06pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

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

  • 45. At 3:09pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 42, colonelartist

    "And do you remember how the spanish ruling party at the time of madrid bombing hid the truth and blamed it on spanish sepratists so that they could be part of the allies"

    Aznar's initial reaction or assumption was influenced by the attacks that ETA carries out periodically throughout Spain. In all likelihood it was more of an overreaction or a simplistic and unfounded conclusion that a deliberate attempt to mislead the Spanish people, and he paid dearly for his error and propensity to jump into conclusions. What is important is that in the end the truth emerged, the Islamic terrorists responsible for planning and executing the attack were arrested, prosecuted and sentenced.

    Your prefer to immerse yourself in fantasy, I prefer to focus on reality.

    Complain about this comment

  • 46. At 3:11pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    To the amorphous entity who has a larger family and more friends than I can dream of, who owns expensive sandals and Armani shoes that are in his will which becomes null and void upon his demise, and who speaks for 1.7 billion moslems (hasn't gone up to 1.8 or 1.9 billion yet has it?);

    "bush and blair? Those were the pathetic yrs of great lying and americans were all thumping the chests like primtives"

    You are correct. We should stop thumping our chests like primitives and start thumping those who threaten our way of life like modern warriors fighting to defend ourselves from an implacable enemy who will stop at nothing to end our civilization and impose their own. It's us or them and we are wasting time and risking much by pretending it is anything less.

    Complain about this comment

  • 47. At 3:13pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Incidentally, President Obama demonstrated once again his intelligence and eloquence when he delivered a 33 minutes sppech without tele-prompters or a piece of paper. The best that can be said for Ahmadinejad;s delivery is that he seems to know how to read.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    So he learnt his speech by heart this time, so what? Its not a debating contests where those who read get some points deducted just because they used help...This without using teleprompters speech of obama maybe a landmark for the americans, as they do talk about it, but to outside world, it has 0 meaning...

    Complain about this comment

  • 48. At 3:15pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 39, BluesBerry

    "Well, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not crazy. He is very well-educated. Ahmadinejad attended the Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST)"

    Ahmadinejad is, indeed, a well educated man. Perhaps he should have stuck to engineering instead of falling prey of a gang of religious zealots whose goal is the advancement of Islam and the preservation of medieval traditions.

    IMHO, Ahmadinejad's speech - if it was even written by him - was intended to improve his popularity and restore his conservative credentials at home. In other words, it was intended for a domestic rather than an international audience...even though it was delivered at the most international institution in the world.

    Complain about this comment

  • 49. At 3:21pm on 25 Sep 2010, Tom wrote:

    The Iranain President is crazy, like-G W Bush crazy. If the US Gov was involved then how exactly did other countries find out and warn the US in advance?

    Now, we apparently have Obama and the Democrats protecting G W Bush and the Republicans! What does Obama and the Democrats gain for protecting Bush and the Republicans?

    The USA is too deaply involved in Iraq and Afganistan for things to return to pre-invasion normality.

    The Iranian President is clever and playing politics. It is known that many people believe 911 to be a conspiracy but most people thought the world was flat and the Earth was centre of the universe too! Just because most people believe one thing does not confirm it as fact.

    Most people are not educated nor experienced life as intelligent officers, demolition individuals or even as politicians. So, why should we value their opinion? You go to a doctor for medical advice and a sergeon for surgery but you wouldn't just go to anyone for advice on thos ematters so why listen to a conspiracy theory?

    I have been around long enough to keep up-to-date about this particular conspriacy and what I see is a conspiracy that evolves. I mean, as soon as something is dis-credited someone from somewhere then creates a new reason how things could have happened. Almost like manipulating things to suit your agenda.

    Then if your not apart of the conspiracy it then ends up in some level of name calling. Apparently I am a CIA-Jewish spy that is secretly ruling the world...

    If there was crime committed other then terrorists it was the US intelligence service for failing in their duty to take all possible threats as serious but hey, it's not everyday we have to blow a plane up out of our skies so who could really see this happening?

    Complain about this comment

  • 50. At 3:22pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    To the amorphous entity who has a larger family and more friends than I can dream of, who owns expensive sandals and Armani shoes that are in his will which becomes null and void upon his demise, and who speaks for 1.7 billion moslems (hasn't gone up to 1.8 or 1.9 billion yet has it?);

    "And do you remember how the spanish ruling party at the time of madrid bombing hid the truth and blamed it on spanish sepratists so that they could be part of the allies....'

    In all fairness to the Spanish, like everyone else they may not have wanted to believe al Qaeda would attack them on their home ground and had reason to blame the Basque separatists but your point is well taken anyway. Among other countries that made the same mistake of thinking al Qaeda wouldn't attack them were Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Pakistan, Britain, Kenya, and the US even after the Cole and the two embassies in Africa not to mention the earlier attack on the WTC in 1995. They didn't get it.

    But it is true that after al Qaeda announced its triumph nearly the entire Spanish population folded up like a cheap tent as did the Italians while only about half the British population did the same. Funny how solidarity with the US in the aftermath of 9-11 melted away when those who pretended to stand with us saw they were under the same gun if they did. Some alliance NATO is. A total sham.

    Complain about this comment

  • 51. At 3:24pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    To advocate a pre-emptive war against an implacable enemy is excellent military strategy and against BBC posting rules.

    Complain about this comment

  • 52. At 3:24pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 37, Mabel

    "...according to Wiki in 2006 more than a third of Americans thought there was a conspiracy involved in 9/11 perhaps involving the house of saud"

    Some of us remain very suspicious of the House of Saud, and for good reason. Most of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis, Osama bin Laden is a Saudi Arabian, and the alleged financiers of AQ were Saudi Wahhsbist princes.

    There is a difference, however, in believing that the House of Saud may have been implicated and suggesting that we did it to ourselves to create a diversion from alleged domestic problems.

    What deserves attention is the readiness of the Bush administration to declare Saudi Arabia a Most Favored Nation for trade purposes a few months after the attack took place. At the risk of being called naive, I believe that decision was influenced mostly by the need to get lucrative contracts and the potential expansion of business deals than because of a 9/11 conspiracy.

    The Bush administration was not the brightest in our young history, and they definitely did not hesitate to use deceit to pursue their goals, but I am convinced that they honestly believed the House of Saud was not implicated in 9/11 and that they were, in fact, the target of the same terrorist organization that attacked us.

    Complain about this comment

  • 53. At 3:26pm on 25 Sep 2010, Anthony Molyneux wrote:


    Oh yes, here we go. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been "at it again" has he Mark? This opening jibe sets the tone for your whole article here. Once again, a stream of Victorian-style colonial-esque condescension towards a foreign leader who has the temerity to stand up for what's right against the relentless brutality of Anglo-American imperial power. Having read through the transcript of Ahmadinejad's speech (something the BBC appear not to have provided, incidentally), i can't find a single thing in it that not reasonable, moderate, measured, and accurate criticism of the US and its closest puppet allies, the UK and Israel. His expressed doubts over 9/11 are fair enough - the official narrative of that day's events stinks to high heaven, quite frankly; anyone with half a brain and even a modicum of understanding of the modus operandi of the US military-industrial-intelligence complex down the years would be questioning what actually happened.

    Tell me, would you ever even dream of beginning an article about Obama or any other of Washington's Caesars with the line "he's at it again"? If only you would - it would be entirely appropriate in the context of yet another US drone massacre of innocent Pakistani women and children, for example. This is the reality of daily life for countless millions all over the world - either working themselves into an early grave in the sweatshops and plantations of America's neo-colonies, or else getting blown to bits by US and British military hardware. Ahmadinejad - for all his faults - is an advocate for these people, and for that at least, he deserves praise. And don't try and convince yourself that his efforts aren't appreciated either. In Pakistan this week they were burning effigies of Obama, not Ahmadinejad, as opinion polls show anti-American sentiment in the country to be running at 83%, and for good reason too; ordinary working people can see world reality staring them in the face even if fat overpaid out-of-touch Whiggish imperial media courtiers can't.

    Yours,

    Dr Anthony Molyneux
    Senior House Officer,
    Ormskirk Hospital, Lancs

    Complain about this comment

  • 54. At 3:30pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    I am quite certain that had there been an internet and a blog such as this one in 1933, KGBBC would have censored any posting suggesting that Britain pre-emptively attack Nazi Germany to prevent it from re-arming.

    KGBBC is so frightened of Islamic mass murdering terrorists it will not even use the world terrorist but prefers the much watered down and therefore inaccurate term "militant" instead. What intellectual cowardice BBC shows. A pathetic excuse for a news organization that pretends to report the truth. A disgrace to Britain's imagined glorious past that never really was.

    Complain about this comment

  • 55. At 3:38pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Aznar's initial reaction or assumption was influenced by the attacks that ETA carries out periodically throughout Spain. In all likelihood it was more of an overreaction or a simplistic and unfounded conclusion that a deliberate attempt to mislead the Spanish people,
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    It was a deliberate attempt, spainish were against sending their troops, you were perhaps to busy supporting your troops...Thats why when the same happened in london, blair had a perfect argument to stand by his emperor bush..but the brits were not at all that against war compared to the spanish, so blair convinced his people with ease..

    Complain about this comment

  • 56. At 3:50pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    colonel

    "...His speech was neither hateful or designed to inflame passions, it was aimed to provoke people into thinking which they dont think..."

    Who made Ahmadinejad a thought provoking agent provocateur? The UN forum that Ahmadinejad addressed was not interested in conspiracy theories or thought provoking ideas, they gathered there to hear world leaders voice their grivances and offer solutions to the many problems that afflict the world today.

    "I thought the west, and americans love such provocative people...Atleast thats how they justify everyone who says things full of hate against islam, If you cannot do what you preach others to do, then atleast readjust your sermons..."

    We hosted Kruschev, Castro, Ahmadinejad and many other leaders that had nothing against Islam and whose policies and actions were not in our best interest or our national security. We did it because we believe in freedom of expression, because we are not afraid to hear what others say about us, and because many of us believe that dialogue and compromise are the best approaches to problem solving. That does not mean we have to accept what others are suggesting or that we must refrain from offering a counter argument.

    "..Or you will end up again supporting the troops while preaching that you hate wars.."

    I support our troops, I do not support the leaders that put them in harm's way and that forced them to carry out a strategy that is unjust and not in our best interest. And, yes, I do hate war.

    Complain about this comment

  • 57. At 4:01pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    but I am convinced that they honestly believed the House of Saud was not implicated in 9/11 and that they were, in fact, the target of the same terrorist organization that attacked us.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This is what ahmedinajad has addressed, the "the tendency to genuinly believe in the beliefs and then sticking up to this, like blair has done.." Time to check the facts against your geneuinly believed beliefs.

    Complain about this comment

  • 58. At 4:04pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Who made Ahmadinejad a thought provoking agent provocateur?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Who made obama the spokesperson of the world, and guardian of peace?

    Complain about this comment

  • 59. At 4:07pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    they gathered there to hear world leaders voice their grivances and offer solutions to the many problems that afflict the world today.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    And Ahmedinajad did just that...Those who reacted in a knee jerk fashion, the leaders, they are used to hearing the same things, and saying the same things...Obama knows exactly what and who causes the world problems, he is lucky that the pakistanis dont and will not speak about the drones he sends to pakistan, and his cia that sponsor terrorism in pakistan...Even you should not believe in what you wrote above..

    Complain about this comment

  • 60. At 4:07pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    PolyPox;

    "Once again, a stream of Victorian-style colonial-esque condescension towards a foreign leader who has the temerity to stand up for what's right against the relentless brutality of Anglo-American imperial power."

    He sure stood up to them in the Streets of Teheran a year ago, didn't he. He showed us a thing or two after his reelection.

    Complain about this comment

  • 61. At 4:13pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    We hosted Kruschev, Castro, Ahmadinejad and many other leaders that had nothing against Islam and whose policies and actions were not in our best interest or our national security. We did it because we believe in freedom of expression, because we are not afraid to hear what others say about us, and because many of us believe that dialogue and compromise are the best approaches to problem solving. That does not mean we have to accept what others are suggesting or that we must refrain from offering a counter argument.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You do no such thing, You didnt invite ahmedinajad or castro or anyone else, its UN..His country is a member of UN. Period. When you invite him in usa, you do exactly what your ivory leadgue proffessors did, degraged ahmedinajad....This happened in usa, not tehran, and that would never happen in university of tehran, where proffossers,invite people in university to mock them...Move on, your anger has no cause...just a 30 yrs hate....and its become extremely poisnious.

    Complain about this comment

  • 62. At 4:15pm on 25 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    32. At 2:14pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    "Let's not forget that the Al Qaeda leadership proudly acknowledged responsibility for 9/11 and has been boasting about it for 9 years."

    _________

    No, St. D, you've got it all wrong. Don't you see how they've pulled the wool over your eyes? The AQ claim of responsibility is all part of the plot.

    I'm surprised they have fooled you so easily.

    Complain about this comment

  • 63. At 4:18pm on 25 Sep 2010, Tom wrote:

    Anthony Molyneux represents what I wrote about earlier in his #53 comment. If your not following the conspiracy you are apart of the conspiracy and open for name calling.

    "Once again, a stream of Victorian-style colonial-esque condescension towards a foreign leader who has the temerity to stand up for what's right against the relentless brutality of Anglo-American imperial power."

    I do not believe super powers throughout history have ever been popular. I doubt the Iranain President should be praised especially for the human rights problem, what's right about that? The USA isn't the best role model but lets not pretend that the Iranian regime is different. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones comes to mind.

    "Having read through the transcript of Ahmadinejad's speech (something the BBC appear not to have provided, incidentally), i can't find a single thing in it that not reasonable, moderate, measured, and accurate criticism of the US and its closest puppet allies, the UK and Israel."

    Here we are everyone, we are either a follower of the conspiracy or considered a puppet of the UK of Isreal. What's reasonable by implying in a international stage that the US may have been directly involved on the mass killings of thousands of people world wide?

    "His expressed doubts over 9/11 are fair enough - the official narrative of that day's events stinks to high heaven, quite frankly; anyone with half a brain and even a modicum of understanding of the modus operandi of the US military-industrial-intelligence complex down the years would be questioning what actually happened."

    Here we are one again - more insults! If your not a follower of the conspiracy your either a puppet of the USA or a person with half a brain.

    Please come back to the real world and leave the playground behind, thank you.

    "This is the reality of daily life for countless millions all over the world - either working themselves into an early grave in the sweatshops and plantations of America's neo-colonies, or else getting blown to bits by US and British military hardware."

    This is irrelevent to the discussion. I guess you brought it up to play up feelings. There are also millions of people in reasonable paying jobs who are providing for their families and enjoying life. They're also not being blown up by US-UK military hardware. How does that little no-brainer make a difference to the dicussion?

    "Ahmadinejad - for all his faults - is an advocate for these people, and for that at least, he deserves praise."

    Praise... for what? The Iranian Pres has not offered solutions to the many problems facing the world. What about climate change, energy demands, food prices, overpopulation and the advacment of medical science to cope with the new diseases that harm the people of this world?

    His contribution is a big fat 0. He's only interested in his support at home.

    "In Pakistan this week they were burning effigies of Obama, not Ahmadinejad, as opinion polls show anti-American sentiment in the country to be running at 83%, and for good reason too; ordinary working people can see world reality staring them in the face even if fat overpaid out-of-touch Whiggish imperial media courtiers can't."

    I believe the people of Pakistan burned Obama effigies because of the USA drone attacks and I see no evidence whatsoever that it is some how evidence that it shows appreciation for the Iranian president. What has Iran done for Pakistan? Who pays most of Pakistans bills? You don't bite the hand that feeds you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 64. At 4:21pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    I support our troops, I do not support the leaders that put them in harm's way and that forced them to carry out a strategy that is unjust and not in our best interest. And, yes, I do hate war.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    People who hate wars, do not support the troops who actually fight the war..they have the guts to say that..without pathetically saying anything..Soldiers who hate the wars and wars which they know is useless refuse to fight..but the good news for you is, this time you will like the leaders who send the troops (which you support)..So you can just relax..

    Complain about this comment

  • 65. At 4:22pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    To the amorphous entity who has a larger family and more friends than I can dream of, who owns expensive sandals and Armani shoes that are in his will which becomes null and void upon his demise, and who speaks for 1.7 billion moslems (hasn't gone up to 1.8 or 1.9 billion yet has it?);

    "Who made obama the spokesperson of the world, and guardian of peace?"

    The Nobel Prize committee. They paid him off right up front for it even though he hadn't done anything yet. Some would consider that it was a quid pro quo, in other words a bribe (a lot of money changed hands) while others like me just considered him a sellout traitor.

    BTW, temperatures in the New York City metro area have been unusually high for this time of year. I attribute it to the enormous mass of hot air spewing out of that accursed building on the East River and I'm not talking about Con Edison's generating plant.

    Hey, I don't suppose I could talk you into putting me in your will as an heir to inherit your Armani shoes could I? I don't expect to actually inherit them since the will would become null and void when you die and they probably wouldn't even fit me anyway but it would be an honor to be cut out of your will upon your death. If I were a Moslem I'd let you do my talking for me, in fact my thinking as well. You seem to fit the parable of the fox and the scorpion to a tee.

    Complain about this comment

  • 66. At 4:28pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    That does not mean we have to accept what others are suggesting or that we must refrain from offering a counter argument.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And calling him a crazy person or saying he shouldnt say those things because it hurts your feelings is your counter arguments? its telling him not to speak what he thinks is important for him to say...Give him the factual information, be pragmatist and remind your leader to do the same...

    Complain about this comment

  • 67. At 4:39pm on 25 Sep 2010, diverticulosis wrote:

    There is no such thing as Al Qaeda.

    Just like there is no such thing as the Mafia.

    Complain about this comment

  • 68. At 4:40pm on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    The biggest irony of all is that the West really wants nothing to do with Iran. Iran is the one who wants something to do with the West, to gain attention from other countries, as they don't have many other ways to garner attention, so they use us as an excuse in a blame-game tone. Ahmjad is looking for the most incendiery things possible, because he wants to be known as the leader of the East.

    But does the East want Ahmjad to be its leader?

    Their sour economy?
    Ahmjad says blame it on the West.
    Their lack of resources and freedom?
    Ahmajad says blame it on the West.
    Why they can't be a world power?
    Ahmjad says blame it on the West.
    Everything is blamed upon the West and it is ridiculous. At some point, Iranians have got to wake up and realize that their leaders are responsible for what Iran is today. If they don't like them, maybe its time for the people to make a stand and to overthrow. If they decide Ahmjad is who they want as their leader, then that is their choice and there will be nothing held back.

    Course' we saw what happened in the Green Revolution to the protesters.
    Do Iranians even have a chance against their Rev. Guard?

    Complain about this comment

  • 69. At 4:45pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    http://september11news.com/OsamaSpeeches.htm

    Wali Khan Amin Shah was captured in Manila. American authorities believe he was working for you, funded by you, setting up training camps there and part of his plan was to plan out the assassination or the attempted assassination of President Clinton during his trip to Manila.

    Wali Khan is a Muslim young man; his nickname in Afghanistan was the Lion. He was among the most courageous Muslim young men. He was a close friend and we used to fight from the same trenches in Afghanistan. We fought many battles against the Russians until they were defeated and put to shame and had to leave the country in disgrace. As to what you said about him working for me, I have nothing to say.

    Ramzi Yousef was a follower of yours. Do you remember him and did you know him?

    After the explosion that took place in the World Trade Center, Ramzi Yousef became a well known Muslim figure. Muslims have come to know him. Unfortunately, I did not know him before this incident.
    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/who/interview.html

    When asked about U.S. accusations of his "collusion" in the attacks in New York and Washington, bin Laden responded, "America has made many accusations against us and many other Muslims around the world. Its charge that we are carrying out acts of terrorism is unwarranted."

    But he then added, "If inciting people to do that is terrorism, and if killing those who kill our sons is terrorism, then let history be witness that we are terrorists."
    http://articles.cnn.com/2002-01-31/us/gen.binladen.interview_1_al-jazeera-qatar-based-network-bin-laden?_s=PM:US

    Now here is a conspiracy theory for you, why do you think he is not being captured alive? Ever thought that evidence against him is so thin that it can be never hold in a court room...

    Complain about this comment

  • 70. At 4:46pm on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    America is a shining beacon in the world- one that makes mistakes, as we are human, but still is beaming brightly and accurately, one that never shuts off, but just keeps going and going...

    Iran is a country whose human rights records are dismal, including what they did to the Green Revolution, past hostage crises, threats toward us and our allies, stating that Holocaust and 9/11 are propaganda, etc. Their beacon is one of glow in the dark strobe light that turns on and off at the touch of a button...

    So who you gonna trust?

    So who you gonna call?

    Ghostbusters!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 71. At 4:48pm on 25 Sep 2010, farjalan wrote:

    Amadinejad's suggestion that a new investigation into the tragedy of 9/11 is a good one. The official story is so obviously flawed that it verges on mockery. Surely a petition signed by upwards of half a million New Yorkers asking for precisely what Amadinejad said should not be entirely overlooked. Even members of the US Congress have asked for it. Like Cynthia McKinney, whose political career has since been destroyed. Why?

    Complain about this comment

  • 72. At 4:48pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    "Who made obama the spokesperson of the world, and guardian of peace?"

    The Nobel Prize committee. They paid him off right up front for it even though he hadn't done anything yet. Some would consider that it was a quid pro quo, in other words a bribe (a lot of money changed hands) while others like me just considered him a sellout traitor.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And it also made arafat the gaurdian of peace...You dont learn from expearinces..

    Complain about this comment

  • 73. At 4:48pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    To the amorphous entity who has a larger family and more friends than I can dream of, who owns expensive sandals and Armani shoes that are in his will which becomes null and void upon his demise, and who speaks for 1.7 billion moslems;

    "You do no such thing, You didnt invite ahmedinajad or castro or anyone else, its UN..His country is a member of UN. Period."

    That is exactly correct. Which raises the question can you think of even one good reason why the US shouldn't tell the UN to pack up and get out of America (which is an entirely different question from asking why America shouldn't pack up and get out of the UN.) I supppose the one reason to keep them there is that their telephones can be easily bugged by the CIA. I would be extremely disappointed if they weren't.

    They do contribute to the local economy but they have helped create a housing shortage in Manhattan and their illegally parked cars jam up the streets.

    On the whole it might be best to just throw them all out lock stock and barrel and then tear that wetched building down....carefully, it's full of asbestos.

    Complain about this comment

  • 74. At 4:50pm on 25 Sep 2010, Tom wrote:

    The sole reason the 911 conspiracy works well is because those supporting the conspiracy are confident in the knowledge that the secrets conducted by the FBI/CIA etc will remain secret.

    Who really believe the USA will allow people to access sensitive information?

    I mean in all honesty maybe the world would be better without secrets between countries but let's be real here.

    Complain about this comment

  • 75. At 4:52pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    To the amorphous entity who has a larger family and more friends than I can dream of, who owns expensive sandals and Armani shoes that are in his will which becomes null and void upon his demise, and who speaks for 1.7 billion moslems'

    "And calling him a crazy person or saying he shouldnt say those things because it hurts your feelings is your counter arguments?"

    Crazy like a fox...or a scorpion. Up to this point he is clearly winning. Reports in the media suggest the West and even Israel is resigned to Iran having nuclear weapons, something it said up until just recently it would not allow to happen. It appears that was just talk as they will do nothing that would be effective to stop it. I heard Israeli President Perez interviewed on TV last night and he was pathetically weak, as bad as Obama.

    Complain about this comment

  • 76. At 4:55pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    LucyJ;

    "The biggest irony of all is that the West really wants nothing to do with Iran. Iran is the one who wants something to do with the West, to gain attention from other countries"

    Will having nuclear weapons after having said he wants a world without America get your attention? Will it get the US government's attention? What does Ahmadinejad have to do to get America to respond to him with more than just another litany of supplications and empty threats?

    Complain about this comment

  • 77. At 4:59pm on 25 Sep 2010, Oldloadr wrote:

    colonelartist, it would appear, has a grievance or 2 with Western Power, in general and the USA in particular. He/she also seems to be the foremost apologist for represive midle eastern regimes, in general and Iran in particular. Now, if I were a betting man, I would bet AED100 that colonelartist is, himself/herself an Islamic Jihadist. Would I be right?

    Complain about this comment

  • 78. At 5:02pm on 25 Sep 2010, Tinkersdamn wrote:

    I have no doubt the 9/11 attack was conducted by Saudi zealots. I'm also sure, after the fact, the event was made to serve as cover for the advancement of public/private empire.

    There's no doubt the 9/11 Kean Commission refused to address certain issues. But to leap to the furthest of unproven conspiracy theories based on this is irrational.

    I've cut massive structural steel beams with an acetylene torch- it doesn't take much. The fire proofing the beams are covered with remain in place entirely for about as long as it takes to have an inspector sign off on the project. The small shudders and shifts of buildings over the years cause constant removal of this material-- not to mention the impact of jets.

    If other actions were taken at any of the sites from that day's events in an effort to mitigate the worst of all possible consequences, I would not be surprised. If acknowledgement of these actions were evaded in an effort to present the public with the simplest of all possible narratives, I would not be surprised. The Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld troika did, after all, give us the Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch narratives. And, considering we may be on the eve of return to a Republican congress, they may have known their audience more well than many of us would like to admit.

    In time we, or our children, will have fuller answers, but I'm confident those fuller answers will not show US collusion prior to the event.

    Complain about this comment

  • 79. At 5:03pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    just a little north of Ground Zero, where families lost their loved ones, people of all faiths, all ethnicities who see this as the seminal tragedy of this generation, for him to make a statement like that was inexcusable.
    And it stands in contrast with the response of the Iranian people when 9/11 happened, when there were candlelight vigils and I think a natural sense of shared humanity and sympathy was expressed within Iran.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And can someone remind him about pakistanis, where people protest and hate his policies towards pakistan, but its leaders support his drone policy and terrorism attacks from the safe havens in afghanistan? the pakistani leadership response to obama's drones stands in contrast with reponponse of pakistani people, who protest and burn his effigies..

    Complain about this comment

  • 80. At 5:14pm on 25 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    51. At 3:24pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    "To advocate a pre-emptive war against an implacable enemy is excellent military strategy and against BBC posting rules."

    ____________

    That's just the thing, isn't it?

    I believe that almost all problems can be solved by thoughtful negotiation between reasonable men.

    But it's pretty tough to make progress with un-reasonable men.

    Given that the 2009 election result was rigged, and the Iranian government was prepared to kill demonstrators, the only way he's likely to leave office is by military force. Except that his power base is the military, so the army isn't likely to remove him.

    Here we have a guy who is an Holocaust denier, and now a proponent of something of the same nature as Holocaust denial in respect of the World Trade Center bombings.

    I'd don't care, particularly that this shows, yet again, that the guy is (in my opinion, at least) a wacko. But what is of far more concern is that it underlines, again, that this is a guy with whom no meaningful negotiations can take place.

    And that makes it much more difficult.

    A hostile government, that, nonetheless, is governed by the rule of law, and that can be removed by the electorate in something that might reasonably be considered free-and-fair elections (not ones where priests get to say who can be a candidate, and then you fudge the results anyway, and threaten the losing politicians and their families with death) might be one where you learn to live with nuclear ambitions.

    But a hostile military dictatorship, run by an Holocaust denier, armed with nuclear weapons is a whole different different thing.

    It leaves only military options. And once that becomes the reality of the situation, in the circumstances, sooner is generally a whole lot better than later.

    The guy has apparently come to the conclusion that western politicians are a bunch of gas-bags who, when it comes down to it, don't have the stomach to do anything. So he's thumbing his nose at them.

    In that impression he will, no doubt, have taken comfort from the decade-long mess in Iraq (a situation aggravated in no small measure by Iranian meddling), and the financial problems now facing America and most other western nations.

    Until that perception changes, the western nations might just as well save their breath - it just makes them look irresolute.

    On the other hand, once they've made a decision that there's no point talking any more, that decision leads directly to the urgency of military intervention, and so there's no point in negotiation even if the stance of the Iranian government changes.

    So either way, there is no way to get from impasse to a positive negotiated result.

    It's a very dangerous, high stakes game of chicken, with no good exit.

    Complain about this comment

  • 81. At 5:14pm on 25 Sep 2010, rodidog wrote:

    71 farjalan,

    "The official story is so obviously flawed that it verges on mockery."

    Please enlighten us with your flawless account of the "true" story of 911 and what caused those buildings to collapse.

    Complain about this comment

  • 82. At 5:17pm on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Now here is a conspiracy theory for you, why do you think he is not being captured alive? Ever thought that evidence against him is so thin that it can be never hold in a court room...
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There is a 90 % chance that bin ladin is dead...and a 10 % chance he is alive and hiding deep in the mountains. I believe he is no longer alive because there are no new messages and the ones that are seem photoshopped and not real, with a stand-in attempt.

    al-Wahliki (I call him al-Wacky), the American born Taliban hiding somewhere in Yemen, who we have proof he was involved in the psycho psychiatrist army shooting and the underwear bomber scheme, is the worst of the worst: an American turned traitor.

    We need to hunt him down for his attempted traitorous terrorist attacks on USA, as he continues to plot and threaten us. This is someone who is not going away, but lays in wait like a hyena stalking a rabbit.

    Complain about this comment

  • 83. At 5:18pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    That is exactly correct. Which raises the question can you think of even one good reason why the US shouldn't tell the UN to pack up and get out of America (which is an entirely different question from asking why America shouldn't pack up and get out of the UN.)
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This question is between you and your goverment to discuss...

    Complain about this comment

  • 84. At 5:21pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    colonelartist, it would appear, has a grievance or 2 with Western Power, in general and the USA in particular. He/she also seems to be the foremost apologist for represive midle eastern regimes, in general and Iran in particular. Now, if I were a betting man, I would bet AED100 that colonelartist is, himself/herself an Islamic Jihadist. Would I be right?
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And your point is?

    Complain about this comment

  • 85. At 5:21pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    "To the amorphous entity who has a larger family and more friends than I can dream of, who owns expensive sandals and Armani shoes that are in his will which becomes null and void upon his demise, and who speaks for 1.7 billion moslems"

    "And it also made arafat the gaurdian of peace...You dont learn from expearinces.."

    I resent the insuation. I am not the Nobel Peace Prize committee. Were it up to me there would be no peace prize as there is no peace and it is a sham.

    As for Arafat he was a self serving corrupt little terrorist who stole money from his own people. His wife inherited his Swiss bank accounts. His Fatah movement was so corrupt the Palestinians voted them out and voted Hamas in. Better honest terrorists than corrupt ones isn't it so? Anyway nobody knows who poisoned him or with what. My guess is it was done with the help of Russia, poisoning has always been among their favorite methods of assassination. If the French doctors or government knew anything about it, they weren't talking.

    Abbas is a joke, he speaks for no one but himself. This is why the Israelis and Americans will talk to him. Hamas has already rejected anything he agrees to. It is an excellent strategy to negotiate with someone who is powerless. When the negotiations inevitably break down as they must, that will justify the next war. What more could we want, Abbas is our perfect stooge. Thats why we like him and need him so much and that is why there is a pretense that progress is being made in the talks. When there is an agreement eventually, Hamas will reject it by launching an attack on Israel. The perfect provocation for another massive counterattack on Gaza, exactly what is wanted. Divide and conquer, a strategy that has worked in the past and can work again.

    Complain about this comment

  • 86. At 5:24pm on 25 Sep 2010, diverticulosis wrote:

    77. At 4:59pm on 25 Sep 2010, Oldloadr wrote:
    "Now, if I were a betting man, I would bet AED100 that colonelartist is, himself/herself an Islamic Jihadist. Would I be right?"

    A better definition is a troll (internet), from Wikipedia:

    In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response[1] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

    Complain about this comment

  • 87. At 5:25pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    I heard Israeli President Perez interviewed on TV last night and he was pathetically weak, as bad as Obama.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    he was also given the same prize as obama, although people say that he demanded the prize and not given..

    Complain about this comment

  • 88. At 5:27pm on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    MAII: Will having nuclear weapons after having said he wants a world without America get your attention? Will it get the US government's attention? What does Ahmadinejad have to do to get America to respond to him with more than just another litany of supplications and empty threats?
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If we have solid proof they or a terrorist led country have obtained real nuclear weapons secretly, we must take them out before they take us out. There is no other solution.

    It is common knowledge that Iran's goal is to destroy the triangle of USA, Great Britain and Israel.

    So if they really do obtain nuclear weapons, we cannot hold back and we must react instantly as soon we have the proof. Use surpise element.

    Who does the world want to be alive and exist?

    USA, Great Britain and Israel...or Iran?

    USA will defend itself and our allies with all means necessary.
    That includes the bomb.

    If we are threatened by a rogue regime with nukes, we will have no choice but to take them out before they take us out. Nothing held back.

    Complain about this comment

  • 89. At 5:28pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Oldloadr;

    "Now, if I were a betting man, I would bet AED100 that colonelartist is, himself/herself an Islamic Jihadist. Would I be right?"

    Reading posting #69 carefully suggests that is entirely true. We may have met our first bonafide out in the open on line jihadist. Fascinating to get inside the other side's mind to see how it works don't you think? And how clever he is too. He has an immediate answer for everything. He appears to have been very well trained.

    Complain about this comment

  • 90. At 5:30pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 61, colonelartist

    "...that would never happen in university of tehran, where proffossers,invite people in university to mock them...Move on, your anger has no cause...just a 30 yrs hate....and its become extremely poisnious."

    Comparing the teaching styles of professors at the University of Tehran to the tolerance we have show when foreign leaders deliver hate speeches on US soil doesn't make sense. A better analogy would be to question what would happen if President Obama, or any other US President, delivered a speech in Tehran questioning the legitimacy of the rise of the Ayatollahs to power.

    Then again, much of what I have heard and read on thus subject the last couple of days doesn't make much sense. I guess that's what happens when we get old, we think pigeons nesting in buildings are planes piloted by terrorists, we even believe organizations such as Al Qaeda exist instead of just believing in the tooth fairy, we believe all the acts of terrorism carried out throughout the world were designed to spread terror and havoc instead of the obvious desire of entertaining the masses with fireworkds, and we even believe the collapse of two skyscrapers damaged the structural integrity of a dozen adjacent buildings. How naive can we be?

    Time to play Lego's with my grandson...or for a senility nap since Mark's thought provoking topics are destroying what is left of my grey mass!

    Complain about this comment

  • 91. At 5:31pm on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    IF wrote: But a hostile military dictatorship, run by an Holocaust denier, armed with nuclear weapons is a whole different different thing.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sounds like another war...some wars end and maybe some never do until one side no longer exists...

    Complain about this comment

  • 92. At 5:32pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    To the amorphous entity who has a larger family and more friends than I can dream of, who owns expensive sandals and Armani shoes that are in his will which becomes null and void upon his demise, and who speaks for 1.7 billion moslems;

    "And can someone remind him about pakistanis, where people protest and hate his policies towards pakistan, but its leaders support his drone policy and terrorism attacks from the safe havens in afghanistan? the pakistani leadership response to obama's drones stands in contrast with reponponse of pakistani people, who protest and burn his effigies.."

    Again correct which is why we should take this opportunity that Allah has sent us by the good fortune of the floods he has visited upon Pakistan to exploit their vulnerability and use our military advantage to far greater effect. They who rejoiced at the attack on America should be made to pay a terrible price for it. Wouldn't that conform to Sharia law amorphous one?

    Complain about this comment

  • 93. At 5:33pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    I'd don't care, particularly that this shows, yet again, that the guy is (in my opinion, at least) a wacko. But what is of far more concern is that it underlines, again, that this is a guy with whom no meaningful negotiations can take place.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Or it could be simply what jewish occupiars do, no one to talk,ergo, no talks...the otherside of your logic, you dont want to talk therefore, you call him crazy..Otherwise, if you care to think, he is not a dictator, he is elected leader with lots of people to give him advice...Just as your obama has lots of people to advice him, and he chooses to get hurt by simple questions, and make them an issue, making an extra effort to give interview to an iranian journalist from bbc...

    Complain about this comment

  • 94. At 5:37pm on 25 Sep 2010, Tom wrote:

    MarcusAureliusII:

    #85.

    Hamas does not want peace and so far has offered 15 years of truce before returning back to war. Is it better to negociate with Fatah or Hamas in this case?

    It is not in the interests of Isreal to negociate with Hamas and I could not support the move personally. I would not choose peace with a group who want to continue war.

    Isreal is stuck between a rock and a hard place and wahtever happens will be wrong in the eyes of the world.

    Complain about this comment

  • 95. At 5:38pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Abbas is a joke, he speaks for no one but himself. This is why the Israelis and Americans will talk to him. Hamas has already rejected anything he agrees to.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This you can ask usa the quartart and the entity....its they who chose him to represent the palestinians...They knew his background, thats why atleast the entity jumped with joy and readily "chose" him as a partner for peace...With hamas, things would have to progress somewhere either forward or backward...and the entity would not have liked it..

    Complain about this comment

  • 96. At 5:40pm on 25 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    58. At 4:04pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Who made obama the spokesperson of the world, and guardian of peace?

    ____________

    Let's see. If I remember correctly it was:

    Neville Chamberlain
    Benito Mussolini
    Paul Renaud, and
    Adolph Hitler.

    Those four were given considerable assistance by Hideki Tojo, Joseph Stalin, the incompetence and corruption of Chiang Kai Shek, and the unstable political gridlock of the Third French Republic that made it incapable of taking resolute action against threats to international security.

    Complain about this comment

  • 97. At 5:41pm on 25 Sep 2010, Oldloadr wrote:

    84. At 5:21pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote: And your point is?

    I'm really surprised you came out of the closet so quickly. My point is, just as you know I have an anti-Islamic bias, I now know, for sure, that you have, not only a pro-Islamic bias, but are in fact a Jihadist, so I know that we will always be adversaries as long as we both live. I also know that you are probably smart enough to know that the conspiracy theories are mostly hogwash (hope the reference to pork doesn't bother you) but you espouse them for pure propaganda purposes, as do most politicians who bring them up. That is why the Pres of Iran constantly denying the holocaust and stirring the conspiracy pot are both germane to the conversation and relevant. He doesn't believe what he is saying either, it's just political demagoguery.

    Complain about this comment

  • 98. At 5:43pm on 25 Sep 2010, Tom wrote:

    If the Iranian Pres. had real reason to believe that 911 was conducted differently from the offical story then evidence should have at least been brought up (thats what a real disucssion does).

    However, all we have is some Pres. from a backwards nation engaging in the conspiracy theories that the masses entertain. The masses in the USA, America(s), Europe and the rest of the world have no experience or training to really comment on the official story of 911.

    Again if evidence points to a different outcome the Iranian Pres. should bring in onto the world stage instead of pandering to the emotional bias of the masses. Logic and rational thinking and a world without prejudice would go a long way.

    Complain about this comment

  • 99. At 5:46pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Oldloadr, let's test him out and find out shall we?

    To the amorphous entity who has a larger family and more friends than I can dream of, who owns expensive sandals and Armani shoes that are in his will which becomes null and void upon his demise, and who speaks for 1.7 billion moslems;

    As I understand the Islamic jihadist's view of the world, there are only four kinds of people in the world according to the holy Qaran.

    There are the true believers of Islam who follow the life proscribed by Allah as told to mankind through the prophet Mohammed.

    There are those who will see the light and become Moslems.

    There are those who will not see the light and must pay taxes to Moslems.

    There are those who are not and will not become Moslems and will not pay taxes to Moslems who therefore must be killed, it is Allah's will and Moslems who kill them will surely go to paradise.

    Is this the way the true jihadist interprets the holy Qaran? Is this your interpretation of it?

    Complain about this comment

  • 100. At 5:49pm on 25 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    89. At 5:28pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    "We may have met our first bona fide out in the open on line jihadist."

    ____________

    Definitely not the first.

    Complain about this comment

  • 101. At 5:50pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 64, colonelartist

    "People who hate wars, do not support the troops who actually fight the war..they have the guts to say that..without pathetically saying anything..Soldiers who hate the wars and wars which they know is useless refuse to fight..but the good news for you is, this time you will like the leaders who send the troops (which you support)..So you can just relax.."

    That may be true in countries where Jihaddists engage in acts of terrorism hoping that someday they may enjoy the company of dozens of virgins, but in my country our sons and daughters join the military because they are determined to defend it and uphold the freedoms and values that are important to us. When their Commander in Chief orders them to fight they do it without question. Refusal is considered treason.

    Thus, responsibility for the pathetic wars in Iraq and Afghanistan should not be levied on the troops that were deployed to fight them, but on the national leaders that declared war and sent our troops to fight them.

    I deplore President Obama's decision to prolong the war in Iraq, his decision to escalate the war in Afghanistan, and his decision to keep the Guantanamo prison camp open, but I support him because I believe his domestic policies will have a positive long term effect on our society and when it is all said and done what is most important to me is what happens at home not what happens thousands of miles away.

    Complain about this comment

  • 102. At 5:58pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    To the amorphous entity who has a larger family and more friends than I can dream of, who owns expensive sandals and Armani shoes that are in his will which becomes null and void upon his demise, and who speaks for 1.7 billion moslems;

    "This you can ask usa the quartart and the entity....its they who chose him [Abbas] to represent the palestinians...They knew his background, thats why atleast the entity jumped with joy and readily "chose" him as a partner for peace"

    Absolutely correct. As I said he's a joke. The only ones to ask if he speaks for the Palestinians is the Palestinians themselves and they answered that when they elected Hamas. Abbas speaks only for himself.

    "...With hamas, things would have to progress somewhere either forward or backward...and the entity would not have liked it.."

    Hamas has made its position clear. It will not accept the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state under any circumstances. Not permantly. And I take them at their word, they say what they mean and we should accept it no matter how unpalatable or frightening we find it. They will not change. Since there can be no peace between the Israeli government as it exists and Hamas, negotiations would be pointless. Israel will not negotiate its own demise and Hamas will not change its position or it would reveal itself as being as corrupt as Fatah. Therefore that leaves only Abbas. Better to carry a harmless old beetle across the river than a scorpion anyway, don't you think?

    Complain about this comment

  • 103. At 5:59pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Comparing the teaching styles of professors at the University of Tehran to the tolerance we have show when foreign leaders deliver hate speeches on US soil doesn't make sense.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Iran pays its due to UN...change the avenue of UN to guantanamobay when you empty it and if it is emptied...I was referring to the university of coloumbia's professors great performance...Bollinger's introduction full of insults while the president sat and listened and his reply,
    At the outset, I want to complain a bit on the person who read this political statement against me. In Iran, tradition requires that when we demand a person to invite us as a -- to be a speaker, we actually respect our students and the professors by allowing them to make their own judgment, and we don't think it's necessary before the speech is even given to come in -- (applause) -- with a series of claims and to attempt in a so-called manner to provide vaccination of some sort to our students and our faculty.

    I think the text read by the (dear ?) gentleman here, more than addressing me, was an insult to information and the knowledge of the audience here, present here. In a university environment, we must allow people to speak their mind, to allow everyone to talk so that the truth is eventually revealed by all. Most certainly he took more than all the time I was allocated to speak. And that's fine with me. We'll just leave that to add up with the claims of respect for freedom and the freedom of speech that is given to us in this country.

    In many parts of his speech, there were many insults and claims that were incorrect, regretfully. Of course, I think that he was affected by the press, the media and the political sort of mainstream line that you read here, that goes against the very grain of the need for peace and stability in the world around us.
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6889





    And here is from 2007,

    The president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, knows how to infuriate the Western world and he did it again last week when he asked to visit ground zero. Ahmadinejad plans to be in New York this week for the U.N. General Assembly meeting. The man who questions the truth behind the Holocaust is expected to demand, once again, the elimination of Israel.

    60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley spoke with Ahmadinejad on Thursday in the garden outside his office in Tehran. Pelley spoke to the president about America's angry reaction to his plan to visit the World Trade Center site. The president told 60 Minutes, in light of the objections, he wouldn't press for it.


    "Sir, what were you thinking?" Pelley asked. "The World Trade Center site is the most sensitive place in the American heart, and you must have known that visiting there would be insulting to many, many Americans."

    "Why should it be insulting," Ahmadinajad said.

    "But when I ask you a question as direct as 'Will you pledge not to test a nuclear weapon?' you act, you dance all around the question. You never say 'Yes.' You never say 'No,'" Pelley points out.

    "Well, thank you for that. You are like a CIA investigator. And you are…," Ahmadinejad replied.

    "I am just a reporter. I am a simple average American reporter," Pelley said.

    "This is not Guantanamo Bay. This is not a Baghdad prison. Please, this is not a secret prison in Europe. This is not Abu Ghraib," Ahmadinejad said. "This is Iran. I'm the president of this country!"

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/20/60minutes/main3282230.shtml

    You dont like when he wanted to visit ground zero, which obama totally forgot or didnt even know, since it was 2007, before he decided to declare himself a candidate, and you dont like him when he questions 9/11's one sided explaination..which is leading to wars and wars..

    Complain about this comment

  • 104. At 6:04pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    That may be true in countries where Jihaddists engage in acts of terrorism hoping that someday they may enjoy the company of dozens of virgins, but in my country our sons and daughters join the military because they are determined to defend it and uphold the freedoms and values that are important to us. When their Commander in Chief orders them to fight they do it without question. Refusal is considered treason.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And perhaps if your soldiers also start hoping for the virgins, they would start thinking more and not be afraid of being labeled as traitors..and you would not have to pathetically send them to their death by supporting the act of war, but opposing the order to go to war...

    Complain about this comment

  • 105. At 6:06pm on 25 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    As for the topic itself,

    Yes, it is a disgrace that the political leader of any country should spout this nonsense, and yes, it is hateful.

    But is it any less connected to reality than the daily fare served up in America by right wing talk radio? Or, indeed, by a number of posters here?

    In the newspaper today there is a report of one of these populist demagogues in which he starts a criticism of President Obama by calling him a socialist, and ends it in the next breath calling him a Nazi.

    It's tough to argue with that kind of logic.
    But that doesn't seem to bother their listeners.

    It's inflammatory.
    It's hateful.
    It's fear mongering.
    It's based on ignorance and prejudice.
    Fairly often it reeks of racism.
    It's utter nonsense.
    It's of no value in advancing rational discussion of public policy issues.

    But somehow or other it is acceptable as part-and-parcel of the right-wing social-conservative mantra in America.

    To that extent there's more than a little bit of a "glass houses" thing going on here.

    So next time it comes to taking offense at the hogwash that comes from that populist demagogue President "Dinner Jacket", just realize that the very same kind of hogwash comes out of the mouths of home-grown American populist demagogues, and is worthy of the same contempt.

    Complain about this comment

  • 106. At 6:06pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Oldloadr;

    "That is why the Pres of Iran constantly denying the holocaust and stirring the conspiracy pot are both germane to the conversation and relevant. He doesn't believe what he is saying either, it's just political demagoguery."

    What makes you think he doesn't believe it? You can't seem to put yourself inside his head, that is the problem with Westerner's trying to confront the challenge of militant Islam. I suggest you go back and read the story of the Fox and the scorpion again and again until it dawns on you that you are the fox and they are the scorpion. Then you will begin to understand the other side and how they think. Do not make the mistake of trying to reason with it or change it, it won't happen, it can't happen, it does not follow a rational thought process. It is not like you at all. Once you do that, then assess the situation and deal with them on their own terms, accept them for what they are. That is the only way to defeat them. The present strategy our governments are using won't work. And you can believe that in some sense colonelartist does actually speak for 1.7 billion Moslems. Think that one over too.

    Complain about this comment

  • 107. At 6:08pm on 25 Sep 2010, Oldloadr wrote:

    101. At 5:50pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote: I deplore President Obama's decision to prolong the war in Iraq, his decision to escalate the war in Afghanistan, and his decision to keep the Guantanamo prison camp open, but I support him because I believe his domestic policies will have a positive long term effect on our society and when it is all said and done what is most important to me is what happens at home not what happens thousands of miles away.

    This is proof, IMHO of what America is all about. My personal beliefs are the exact opposite of what you have just espoused. I hate Obamacare, and taxing to spend more. I'm glad Gitmo is still open (caused as much by Dems as the GOP) and I know from my long association with the people of the Middle East, that to cut and run from either war will just cause more American deaths in the end. BTW, that will be more blind-sided civilian deaths as on 911. At least a GI on the battle field is armed and has a better than even chance on the battle field. The Jihadist, as you may have noticed, prefer asymmetrical warfare, as in suicide bombers, flying planes into buildings, convincing an Army psychiatrist to kill GIs in garrison when they are not armed.
    However, guess what! Instead of laying in wait and ambushing each other, we go to the polls and vote for the politicians we believe will do what we believe is right for our country. For over 220 years, the winners and losers have always abided by the will of the people and we have never had a bloody coup.

    Complain about this comment

  • 108. At 6:28pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    and I know from my long association with the people of the Middle East, that to cut and run from either war will just cause more American deaths in the end. BTW,
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Why didnt you cut your association with the people of middle east before it got long, or you love their money, but you hate everything else about them...

    Complain about this comment

  • 109. At 6:33pm on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Why do they hate us?

    A religion that believes in killing innocent people simply because they do not believe in their religion, refuse to convert or pay taxes is in actuality a murderous, serial killer cult...

    Also, a religion that advocates killing innocent people for their religion is a false prophet...too bad, so sad that the followers do not see their prophet is false and that their idols are also false...

    Complain about this comment

  • 110. At 6:36pm on 25 Sep 2010, Oldloadr wrote:

    106. At 6:06pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote: What makes you think he doesn't believe it?

    I can never prove he doesn't believe it, but my rational brain tells me that a crazy person can get far in life, but seldom a stupid one. I believe Mr. Dinner Jacket is either an egomaniac that uses the Ayatollahs and Islam for his personal power structure, or he is, himself a true believer. That said consider this: If he had any evidence whatsoever to disprove the official account or the events of 911, he would most certainly use it at some point. Also, since he is a holocaust denier, that adds to my suspicion that he doesn't believe what he says about either event. I've talked to several Muslims who claim to not believe the holocaust occurred, but when you press them on it, they will usually say, well maybe Hitler killed 3 million Jews, but certainly not 6 million. Point is, the evidence of the holocaust is unimpeachable, yet he denies it, so why would I believe any of his other theories are really his theories or just useful propaganda. BTW, I live and work on the Middle East. I know the paradigms and culture.

    Complain about this comment

  • 111. At 6:37pm on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    IF, 105, you claim that right-wingers are just as bad as international leaders who threaten to destroy us and our allies, do you realize how insane you sound?

    It is so ironic that someone who claims he is fair, balanced and honest will point his finger at the right, yet never takes a look at the left or is blind to the fact that the right is just as American as the left.

    This is a time when Americans should be uniting against other countries that threaten to destroy us, right or left.

    So why do ultraliberals want to divide America so much>?

    Complain about this comment

  • 112. At 6:48pm on 25 Sep 2010, Oldloadr wrote:

    108. At 6:28pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote: Why didnt you cut your association with the people of middle east before it got long, or you love their money, but you hate everything else about them...

    1. Don't you mean us rather than them?
    2. You made an assumption. I have worked in the ME for years wither as active duty USAF or on contract to the US Army. It is only in the last 2 years that I have actually been paid by the gov't of the country I work in. And yes, the money is nice, since the indigenous population has less work-ethic than even the French so they pay us lots of money to come here and do what they aren't willing to do, completely, for themselves.

    Complain about this comment

  • 113. At 6:59pm on 25 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    105. Interestedforeigner:

    As for the topic itself,

    Yes, it is a disgrace that the political leader of any country should spout this nonsense, and yes, it is hateful.

    But is it any less connected to reality than the daily fare served up in America by right wing talk radio? Or, indeed, by a number of posters here?

    ***************
    To compare the lunatic, Ahmadinejad, with posters here or rightwing media is ridiculous. Can you identify one who has claimed there was no Holocaust? This is the farthest from reality one can get without being committed to a psychiatric institution.

    At a minimum, I'd say their awareness of the importance of individual rights certainly differentiates them. They seem connected enough to make that distinction.

    What you did was use the same type of rhetoric that you complain of.

    Complain about this comment

  • 114. At 7:08pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 107, Oldloadr

    "I hate Obamacare, and taxing to spend more."

    Would you mind telling me what it is that you don't like about healthcare reform? Is it the fact that it eliminate the pre-existing condition clause, that is eliminated caps that allowed insurance companies to deny care when expenses reached a certain level, that is afford portability when people change jobs, that it allows dependent children to stay on their parents insurance until they are 26 years old? Do you oppose these changes?

    Regarding taxes, President Obama's proposal affects those making over $250K a year. The intent is to reduce the federal government budget deficits by eliminating the cause of 1/3 of our fiscal imbalance.

    "I'm glad Gitmo is still open (caused as much by Dems as the GOP) and I know from my long association with the people of the Middle East, that to cut and run from either war will just cause more American deaths in the end. BTW, that will be more blind-sided civilian deaths as on 911"

    If we have conclusive evidence that substantiates the guilt of those imprisoned in Gitmo we should not be afraid to try them in a civilian court, sentence them, and hold them in a federal prison.

    The only cut and run in the Middle East occurred when President Reagan declared the conflicts in that part of the world were not out problem, after over 400 Marines were slaughted at the Beirut airport by a terrorist attack, and he pulled our troops from that part of the world...only to engage in the Iran-Contra fiasco a few months later. Should we name a few more buildings after him?

    Changing strategies in the Persian Gulf does not mean we are cut and running, it means that chasing a few hundred terrorists with a military force of about 160,000 troops equipped and trained to fight formal armies is not working and we need a different tactic to achieve our goals.

    Complain about this comment

  • 115. At 7:13pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 109, Lucy

    "Also, a religion that advocates killing innocent people for their religion is a false prophet...too bad, so sad that the followers do not see their prophet is false and that their idols are also false..."

    I believe Islam stands for the opposite to what you think. Unfortunately, its followers, like the followers of other religions, interpret the teachings of the prophets the way they want to rather than the way they are meant to be.

    Complain about this comment

  • 116. At 7:19pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    LucyJ;

    They were angriest at American troops occupying Saudi Arabia to protect it from Saddam Hussein. They consider Saudi Arabia holy ground and by being there we defiled it. That was bin Laden's explanation for the attack on 9-11. It had nothing to do with Israel. They do not like the massive assault our culture is having on their culture. For example they do not like having Oprah Winfrey on their television sets telling Islamic women about women's issues and women's rights. From their point of view this is dangerous subversion that threatens their patriarchial societies. They do not like the influence our materialism has nor our talk about democracy. This is antithetical to their religion and to their failed dictatorships which maintain control over their populations by force.

    They do not want the 21st century intruding on the 11th century and they will use any and every means they can find to stop us. From their point of view it is a desperate and hopeless struggle but they do have the advantage of widespread ignorance, irrationality, religious fanaticism among Moslems, and our own self doubts and lack of resolve and clarity of thought on their side. They will use our own freedoms against us. That is why the talk about atrocities and torture is so absurd. They would not hesitate to use the most brutal and cruel methods to achieve their ends while they will use our laws and sensibilities to condemn us for selectively using far less brutal methods to uncover their plots. They are neither stupid nor unsophisticated, quite the opposite. They've been playing us like a fiddle and our muddlebrained liberal politicians and bleeding hearts have fallen prey to their tactics. To beat this kind of enemy we must be every bit as brutal and uncompromising as they are until the struggle is over. All that is at stake is the survival of civilization.

    Complain about this comment

  • 117. At 7:32pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    You will notice that colonelartist has stopped responding to my posts. I'm especially diappointed he did not respond to posting number 99 about his view of jihad. But I am not surprised. I don't think he wants to show his hand anymore than he already has. He may regret going as far as he did.

    Complain about this comment

  • 118. At 7:48pm on 25 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    109. At 6:33pm on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    "A religion that believes in killing innocent people simply because they do not believe in their religion, refuse to convert or pay taxes is in actuality a murderous, serial killer cult...

    Also, a religion that advocates killing innocent people for their religion is a false prophet...too bad, so sad that the followers do not see their prophet is false and that their idols are also false..."

    ____________

    Unfortunately, for a period of rather more then 500 years that commentary also applied to various groups who were nominally Christian.

    The struggle that eventually ended that behaviour, and much else, started, roughly speaking, with Martin Luther.

    Complain about this comment

  • 119. At 7:51pm on 25 Sep 2010, qmrfc67 wrote:

    Andrea,

    Words like lunatic serve no purpose. Ahmadinejad is a dangerous, powerful man, but probably not the ultimate power even in his own country. Iran has been ruled by the Mullahs for 30 years and so far they have played a game of rhetorical cat and mouse with the west. They are always prodding, provoking and then running for cover. There is little evidence that they have the desire or the stomach for open, actual conflict. Most of what they do is designed for domestic consumption to maintain their hold on power. They help us in western Afghanistan at the same time as funding Hezbollah in Lebanon. They always do what is in their own best interests. So do we and Israel and Russia and China et al. Their are no altruist in geopolitics (despite Lucy's innocence and naivety.)
    That makes them cynical, mendacious, manipulative and dangerous but not candidates for the funny farm.
    I would certainly use all the same adjectives to describe some very well known radio and tv people here in the US. The difference for me is I'm not scared of the Mullahs or Al Quaida. They can knock down my buildings and they can kill me but they can't defeat me. They can't change the constitution or affect the way I live because we all recognize them as the enemy and pay no attention to them. It is the people who pretend to be my friend who scare me.

    Complain about this comment

  • 120. At 7:51pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    I have a hunch we haven't seen the last of jihad Joe. But will he come back under the same name?

    Complain about this comment

  • 121. At 8:03pm on 25 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    117. At 7:32pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    You will notice that colonelartist has stopped responding to my posts. ...

    ____________

    Or maybe he has just gone to sleep. Even Colonel-wallahs have to sleep sometime.

    Give it at least 24 hours.

    Complain about this comment

  • 122. At 8:05pm on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    MAII: They were angriest at American troops occupying Saudi Arabia to protect it from Saddam Hussein. They consider Saudi Arabia holy ground and by being there we defiled it. That was bin Laden's explanation for the attack on 9-11.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    That is not justification. First off, we were not occupying it, we were only there for several years and not long-term. Second, USA was there to help an apparent friend from a hostile takeover...bin Laden should have been thanking us for keeping their holy ground safe from Sadaam and hostile takeover...

    It sounds like bin-Laden may likely believed it was better for hostile takeover rather than Americans preserving the holy ground for Muslims's future use and keeping it a place where Muslims can go and worship their holy grounds and so on...that may be bin-Ladden's reason, but ironically, USA was preserving the culture of the Middle East...

    Complain about this comment

  • 123. At 8:10pm on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    They do not like the massive assault our culture is having on their culture. For example they do not like having Oprah Winfrey on their television sets telling Islamic women about women's issues and women's rights. From their point of view this is dangerous subversion that threatens their patriarchial societies. They do not like the influence our materialism has nor our talk about democracy. This is antithetical to their religion and to their failed dictatorships which maintain control over their populations by force.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Well, its not our fault that their people want to experience what the world is, rather than just hear sensored broadcasts. This is not about USA's culture- it is about their people having free will. Bob Dylan has a wonderful line in his song, Blowin' In the Wind that says,
    "Yes, n', how many how many years can some people exist
    Before they're allowed to be free?"

    Complain about this comment

  • 124. At 8:17pm on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    qm qrote: The difference for me is I'm not scared of the Mullahs or Al Quaida. They can knock down my buildings and they can kill me but they can't defeat me. They can't change the constitution or affect the way I live because we all recognize them as the enemy and pay no attention to them. It is the people who pretend to be my friend who scare me.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    So you are scared of right wing conservatives and Republicans, but not scared of terrorists?

    Interesting...I am the opposite...I am not scared of right or left wing Americans, but I am scared of terrorists...

    Complain about this comment

  • 125. At 8:30pm on 25 Sep 2010, Tinkersdamn wrote:

    MA II:

    "To beat this kind of enemy we must be every bit as brutal and uncompromising as they are until the struggle is over..."
    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    This sounds too much like the ends justify the means. When we become the very thing we percieve our enemy to be, the truth is, we've lost before the fight is engaged: the "victory" is worthless.

    Complain about this comment

  • 126. At 8:32pm on 25 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "114. At 7:08pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    "Ref 107, Oldloadr

    ""I hate Obamacare, and taxing to spend more.""

    "Would you mind telling me what it is that you don't like about healthcare reform? Is it the fact that it eliminate the pre-existing condition clause, that is eliminated caps that allowed insurance companies to deny care when expenses reached a certain level, that is afford portability when people change jobs, that it allows dependent children to stay on their parents insurance until they are 26 years old? Do you oppose these changes?"

    I oppose all of those. Every single one of those is INTENDED to drive private insurance companies out of business which will leave only Uncle Stali... 'er, Uncle Sugar as sole health care provider - a long time socialist goal.

    (further nonsense snipped)

    Complain about this comment

  • 127. At 8:37pm on 25 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "120. At 7:51pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    I have a hunch we haven't seen the last of jihad Joe. But will he come back under the same name?"

    Probably, maybe the new one will have a slightly better command of the language.

    I wish this was usenet, I'll bet his headers would show a path directly from Iran.

    Complain about this comment

  • 128. At 8:39pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    IF;

    "Or maybe he has just gone to sleep. Even Colonel-wallahs have to sleep sometime.

    Give it at least 24 hours."

    I think people like him are trained to sleep with one eye opened. Anyway I'm disappointed he isn't still here. A first hand opportunity to see jihad close up and in person. He makes it human instead of abstract. Better than any new report could ever be.

    LucyJ;

    "That is not justification."

    In their minds it is. That's all that matters. Your government is doing its best (or at least it was until President Obama interfered) to protect your life by getting to them before they could get to you or me. The more we handcuff our government, the harder their job becomes to protect us and the easier the jihadist's job becomes to kill us. Remember the famous words of Patton; Nobody ever won a war dying for their country. You win a war making the enemy die for his.

    Complain about this comment

  • 129. At 8:40pm on 25 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    113. At 6:59pm on 25 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    What I wrote was:

    "But is it any less connected to reality than the daily fare served up in America by right wing talk radio? Or, indeed, by a number of posters here?"

    ***************
    What Andrea wrote was:

    To compare the lunatic, Ahmadinejad, with posters here or rightwing media is ridiculous. Can you identify one who has claimed there was no Holocaust? This is the farthest from reality one can get without being committed to a psychiatric institution.

    _____________

    The issue is whether right-wing rhetoric is any more connected to reality than the hateful nonsense spouted by President Ahmadinejad.

    At no point did I say that right wing posters or talk radio have indulged in holocaust denial.

    Certainly we have our share of hard right-wing purveyors of anti-semitism (often linked arm-in-arm with support for Israel in the next breath - try figuring that one out) on radio and here.

    There have been holocaust denial posters here. One of them was posting here today, but his postings did not include holocaust denial today. Based on past postings, they will some other day.

    On three occasions I have had postings removed on that basis. On other rather more numerous occasions the BBC moderators have refused to remove Holocaust denial postings.

    The BBC has also frequently refused to remove postings of right-wing hate speech, including hate speech based on racial prejudice and hate speech based on religious prejudice.

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

    What we are looking for here are things that fall into three or four categories:

    (1) outlandish conspiracy theories;
    (2) smears without any basis in fact that are repeated ad nauseum;
    (3) repetitiously attaching a pejorative label to, for example, President Obama or his policies, with no underlying truth or logical basis, usually for the purpose of inflaming prejudice;
    (4) outright lies, particularly ones that are deliberately repeated in the face of clear evidence, typically for the purpose of inflaming prejudice, or for playing on fear and ignorance.

    From my experience, it is the stock-in-trade of right wing talk radio.

    Look at any of the immigration strings, or the health care strings, or the bailout strings. Maybe the best topic for bringing the nut-cases out of the woodwork is gun control. (On gun control it's like bad 1950's science fiction, and even more predictable.) On those topics you find that kind of posting by the dozens. Frequently it is the very same mentality that produces Holocaust deniers, except with a different obsession.

    And as for postings here, and commitment to psychiatric institutions, well, there have been postings here that have met that threshold, for sure.


    And they are no more connected to reality than the incredibly offensive statements of President Ahmadinejad, except that in those cases there is a willing suspension of disbelief.

    Complain about this comment

  • 130. At 8:47pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    LucyJ, qm is a fool. If we lose or are even attacked again, it will be because of Americans like qm. Our founding fathers who risked their live, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to kill the British to convince them to leave would be horrified at the prospect of qms inheriting their legacy to us.

    Complain about this comment

  • 131. At 8:53pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Mr. Mardell;

    "Iran v US: A war of words, not of bombs and guns"

    Aren't you overlooking the missiles, bombs, guns, hezbollah, hamas, and the nuclear weapons behind those words on both sides? Are we and they at war with each other? It certainly seems that way to me. Aren't you interested in which side wins? In the last battle with Britain as I recall, the Iranians captured 15 British seamen in broad daylight on their own ship without a shot being fired to defend them. What do you think the British commander used to fight back with, words? What do you think the Iranian joke of a navy used to capture them. I'm sure it wasn't an invitation to tea.

    Complain about this comment

  • 132. At 8:53pm on 25 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "119. At 7:51pm on 25 Sep 2010, qmrfc67 wrote:

    "Andrea,"

    (snipped)

    "I would certainly use all the same adjectives to describe some very well known radio and tv people here in the US. The difference for me is I'm not scared of the Mullahs or Al Quaida. They can knock down my buildings and they can kill me but they can't defeat me. They can't change the constitution or affect the way I live because we all recognize them as the enemy and pay no attention to them. It is the people who pretend to be my friend who scare me."

    Simple solution to your fear. You spend every nickel you have on leftie socialist programs - until you're broke and can prove it. Then come asking me for money.

    ...and I'll tell you to take a hike - empty handed.

    I'm tired of being raped to finance Democrat programs to create a permanent social underclass guaranteed to always vote Democrat.

    Pick your own pockets for a change.

    Complain about this comment

  • 133. At 8:59pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Tinkersdamn;

    "This sounds too much like the ends justify the means. When we become the very thing we percieve our enemy to be, the truth is, we've lost before the fight is engaged: the "victory" is worthless."

    I don't give a tinker's damn what you think. You are wrong. Your strategy of playing by someone else's rules is a loser. The only rule of war is that there are no rules. Make no mistake, war is being waged against us. We can choose to fight back or not fight back. Fight with one hand tied behind our backs or fight with both fists. I for one am a red blooded American male who prefers to find and kill the enemy as fast and efficiently as possible no matter what it takes and I don't give a tinker's damn what you or your traitorous president thinks about it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 134. At 8:59pm on 25 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "125. At 8:30pm on 25 Sep 2010, Tinkersdamn wrote:

    MA II:

    "To beat this kind of enemy we must be every bit as brutal and uncompromising as they are until the struggle is over..."
    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    This sounds too much like the ends justify the means. When we become the very thing we percieve our enemy to be, the truth is, we've lost before the fight is engaged: the "victory" is worthless."

    Unless you're the one walking away and the buzzards are picking the bones of your foe.

    Complain about this comment

  • 135. At 9:02pm on 25 Sep 2010, qmrfc67 wrote:

    Lucy @124
    No Lucy I'm not scared of terrorists and here's why.
    They know they cannot defeat us militarily so they attempt to terrorize,ie scare us into doing things we don't want to do. If you let them scare you they've already won and I refuse to accept that or play their game.
    Increased govt surveillance (the patriot act), attacks on freedom of religion, getting sucked into foreign entanglements (which Washington warned against) are all examples of their influencing how we conduct our lives. These to me are the true dangers and sadly I see the right wing of the R party as pushing this agenda.
    I say sadly because I am a fiscal conservative and a social libertarian (which is why I agreed with you on an earlier string about our ridiculous war on drugs), the old "establishment" republican philosophy. There was a time when I would have considered voting republican.(McCain in 2000, not 2008). I do in fact intend to vote for Charlie Crist here in Fl as I consider him a good man but he has been pushed out of the R party for being too centrist.

    Complain about this comment

  • 136. At 9:13pm on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    The headline is Iran v US: A War of words, not of bombs and guns.
    What if it was Iran v US: A War of bombs and guns, not words...what would this equal?


    = a quick and successful USA win over Iran...

    Complain about this comment

  • 137. At 9:14pm on 25 Sep 2010, mabelwhite wrote:

    Oh-oh...more conspiracies are afoot

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UstFa8ez-vE

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxgc85yVooI&feature=related

    Complain about this comment

  • 138. At 9:15pm on 25 Sep 2010, qmrfc67 wrote:

    @132 FM

    I don't recall ever asking you for a dime. Nor would I ever. I'm self employed and have always paid my own way and my share of taxes.

    Complain about this comment

  • 139. At 9:22pm on 25 Sep 2010, Tinkersdamn wrote:

    MA II:

    "Your strategy of playing by someone else's rules is a loser..."
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

    A strategy of playing by someone else's rules is indeed a loser, which is my point- if we become the very thing we percieve our enemy to be, we've lost before we've engaged.

    Complain about this comment

  • 140. At 9:30pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    qm;

    "This sounds too much like the ends justify the means."

    Use whatever words you like. I pay my taxes to the government, their number one job is to protect my life. I don't care how they do it, I don't care how you or anyone characterizes it, as genocide or anything else. Just so long as they do it. That is their number one priority. if they can't do that, nothing else matters to me. And least of all your opinion. If they can't do it, give me an plane, teach me to fly it, load it with hydrogen bombs and I'll do it myself.

    Complain about this comment

  • 141. At 9:39pm on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    qm wrote: No Lucy I'm not scared of terrorists and here's why.
    They know they cannot defeat us militarily so they attempt to terrorize,ie scare us into doing things we don't want to do. If you let them scare you they've already won and I refuse to accept that or play their game.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    When I said that I am not scared of left or right wing Americans, but am scared of terrorists, what I mean is that although I may disagree with some of my fellow Americans at times, a disagreement is a whole different thing than a terrorist who wants to murder you for being American. Both American parties should bond together against the terrorists.
    You said earlier that even if terrorists killed you, they still wouldn't have defeated you, to me this makes no sense, as if they killed you, wouldn't this be defeat because they conquered you by doing so?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    qm wrote: Increased govt surveillance (the patriot act), attacks on freedom of religion, getting sucked into foreign entanglements (which Washington warned against) are all examples of their influencing how we conduct our lives. These to me are the true dangers and sadly I see the right wing of the R party as pushing this agenda.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I, too, am against spyware like described in 1984, etc. I do not like those cameras put up at the stoplights to catch people speeding, either. At the same time, we live in a land of post 9/11 and in some circumstances, depending on which it is, we do need increased security measures. Better to have too many than too few.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    qm wrote: I say sadly because I am a fiscal conservative and a social libertarian (which is why I agreed with you on an earlier string about our ridiculous war on drugs), the old "establishment" republican philosophy. There was a time when I would have considered voting republican.(McCain in 2000, not 2008). I do in fact intend to vote for Charlie Crist here in Fl as I consider him a good man but he has been pushed out of the R party for being too centrist.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    I am in support of legalizing marijuana, but not legalizing heroin, cocaine, etc. Marijuana is a plant from the ground that naturally grows. Heroin, cocaine, pills are human synthesized and chemically altered drugs. We would not have so many people in jail, if marijuana were legalized and regulated like tobacco, prescription pills or alcohol. We would not have so many drug traffickers from Mexico if marijuana was legalized. We would have less violence if marijuana was legalized. We could create millions of jobs and make billions of dollars for USA if marijuana was legalized. It is an all around win-win situation...

    Complain about this comment

  • 142. At 9:41pm on 25 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    127. At 8:37pm on 25 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "I wish this was usenet, I'll bet his headers would show a path directly from Iran."

    ___________

    Not likely.
    As far as I can tell from his English, the Colonel is an Urdu speaker, not a Farsi speaker.
    Read more carefully.

    In any case, it is much more likely that his postings are coming from UK or the eastern US.

    However our Colonel seems to have grown up in Pakistan, including some time in the NWFP and, possibly, some time in Quetta. Hard to tell exactly where.

    Complain about this comment

  • 143. At 9:44pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    LucyJ, I hope you enjoy the move Patton as much as I do. Here's the official trailer;

    http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi3499819289/

    We need more Americans like Patton. less like what we've got.

    Complain about this comment

  • 144. At 9:51pm on 25 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    126. At 8:32pm on 25 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "I oppose all of those. Every single one of those is INTENDED to drive private insurance companies out of business which will leave only Uncle Stali... 'er, Uncle Sugar as sole health care provider - a long time socialist goal."

    ____________

    People like you are reason why every man, woman, and child in America pays, on average $ 3500/yr more for healthcare than they would do in every other comparable rich OECD nation.

    You know what?

    If you want to make a gift of $3500/yr from each member of your family to the health insurance and health care industries, you just go ahead and do that.

    But don't stop other people from having a government run system that would save those people roughly $3500/yr.

    If it makes you feel happy, you can go ahead and call it socialism.

    I'm betting that most people would rather have the $3500.

    Complain about this comment

  • 145. At 10:05pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 126, filthy mcnasty

    "I oppose all of those. Every single one of those is INTENDED to drive private insurance companies out of business which will leave only Uncle Stali... 'er, Uncle Sugar as sole health care provider - a long time socialist goal."

    The health and welfare of our society is more important to me than the profitability of private insurance companies (perhaps because I am not a shareholder), but I respect your honesty. Most people hide behind the veneer of cost and the "mandate" and avoid rejecting changes that are acceptable to most people.

    I guess you also support the privatization or dissolution of Social Security, MEDICARE and MEDICAID since those programs are much closer to socialism than the healthcare reform legislation, which leaves private insurance companies in charge of administering healthcare in the USA.

    Complain about this comment

  • 146. At 10:31pm on 25 Sep 2010, U14613024 wrote:

    @ Re: Marcus' Ignorant Bleeding Boring World Analysis and Utter Bull Sheet
    (numbers 18 - 143 of hundreds)
    I see he said it was a war against MTV culture dumbing down the youths on a global scale, too much sex and drugs and rock and roll will blow their mind like afghani heroin .. that's deep man you must think very deeply

    You just talk too much
    Special request
    Stop mind people's business and mind you own
    You torr..orr..orr..or..or..or you talk too much
    danny mangaroo & little u brown - talk too much
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvVkUPYM4Bc

    Complain about this comment

  • 147. At 10:49pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 135, qmrfc67

    "I do in fact intend to vote for Charlie Crist here in Fl as I consider him a good man but he has been pushed out of the R party for being too centrist."

    I plan to do the same. I find his centrist positions and pragmatism very appealing. I have no idea what Meek stands for, and Rubio is too far to the right for me. I also plan to vote for Alex Sink, I refuse to vote for a man with Rick Scott's record.

    I think Sen. McCain could have given Obama a run for his money if he had chosen Crist as his running mate in 08...He made a tactical mistake when he chose Palin and paid dearly for it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 148. At 11:03pm on 25 Sep 2010, qmrfc67 wrote:

    MA
    There is no doubt in my mind that we are at war with Islamic terrorism nor that we should fight it to the end and to victory. I have no moral qualms about killing those who would kill us. Find em and kill em Amen!
    We differ in the tactics we would use. You seem to see them as monolithic and beatable by conventional (or nuclear) war. I see them as a nefarious multi headed serpent living like a virus in just about every country on the planet.
    In order to defeat them we have to strangle their support networks, greatly improve our intelligence networks and covert operations and isolate them from their base, classic anti guerilla warfare. I forget the name of the US army colonel in Vietnam who said "we have to out G the G". As great a general as Patton was he would be the wrong general to fight this war. We need Bedford Forest.

    Complain about this comment

  • 149. At 11:17pm on 25 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "144. At 9:51pm on 25 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    ""126. At 8:32pm on 25 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:""

    ""I oppose all of those. Every single one of those is INTENDED to drive private insurance companies out of business which will leave only Uncle Stali... 'er, Uncle Sugar as sole health care provider - a long time socialist goal.""

    ____________

    "People like you are reason why every man, woman, and child in America pays, on average $ 3500/yr more for healthcare than they would do in every other comparable rich OECD nation."

    Yeah, sure. CBO numbers, right? Or they came from that outfit who's name I can't remember - the one that wrote the bill half of our reps never bothered reading?

    Anyway, I call BS on that.


    "You know what?"

    Yep and who, too.

    "If you want to make a gift of $3500/yr from each member of your family to the health insurance and health care industries, you just go ahead and do that."

    So instead that same money is stolen in higher taxes and then filtered through another huge and well paid government bureaucracy who'll skim a fat chunk off to feed their paper pushers (Gee, I wish someone would pay me $100k to shove paper around...) and what little left will go to the dem's pet insurance companies.

    Sure sounds like a weenier to me...

    "But don't stop other people from having a government run system that would save those people roughly $3500/yr."

    Don't do it with money stolen from me.

    "If it makes you feel happy, you can go ahead and call it socialism."

    Communism, socialism, progressivism. I can't tell the difference anymore.

    "I'm betting that most people would rather have the $3500."

    Complain about this comment

  • 150. At 11:25pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    there are certain times of day when the moderators seem to be away from their job;

    Between the dark and the daylight,
    When the night is beginning to lower,
    Comes a pause in the day's occupations,
    That is known as the Children's Hour.

    I hear in the chamber above me
    The patter of little feet,
    The sound of a door that is opened,
    And voices soft and sweet.

    From my study I see in the lamplight,
    Descending the broad hall stair,
    Grave Alice, and laughing Allegra,
    And Edith with golden hair.

    A whisper, and then a silence:
    Yet I know by their merry eyes
    They are plotting and planning together
    To take me by surprise.

    A sudden rush from the stairway,
    A sudden raid from the hall!
    By three doors left unguarded
    They enter my castle wall!

    They climb up into my turret
    O'er the arms and back of my chair;
    If I try to escape, they surround me;
    They seem to be everywhere.

    They almost devour me with kisses,
    Their arms about me entwine,
    Till I think of the Bishop of Bingen
    In his Mouse-Tower on the Rhine!

    Do you think, o blue-eyed banditti,
    Because you have scaled the wall,
    Such an old mustache as I am
    Is not a match for you all!

    I have you fast in my fortress,
    And will not let you depart,
    But put you down into the dungeon
    In the round-tower of my heart.

    And there will I keep you forever,
    Yes, forever and a day,
    Till the walls shall crumble to ruin,
    And moulder in dust away!

    Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

    I'm afraid the moderators of BBC blogs aren't nearly so endearing. Nevertheless they are children...but only children a mother could love
    :-)

    Complain about this comment

  • 151. At 11:28pm on 25 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "145. At 10:05pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 126, filthy mcnasty

    "I oppose all of those. Every single one of those is INTENDED to drive private insurance companies out of business which will leave only Uncle Stali... 'er, Uncle Sugar as sole health care provider - a long time socialist goal."

    "The health and welfare of our society is more important to me than the profitability of private insurance companies (perhaps because I am not a shareholder), but I respect your honesty. Most people hide behind the veneer of cost and the "mandate" and avoid rejecting changes that are acceptable to most people."

    It's not honesty. It's having some clown in DC decide what insurance companies are ALLOWED to remain in business. Not me picking between what's offered, it's me being handed a list and being told I WILL PICK ONLY FROM THESE. That's BS too.

    And yeah, I should enjoy having the IRS steal my refund (what little there is) because I won't buy their mandated insurance. Heck, that's fair...

    'I don't care who's elected as long as I control who gets nominated to stand for that election.'

    'I don't care what insurance company you're force to buy coverage from as long as I control which insurance companies remain in business.'

    See any difference there? Boss Tweed strikes again.

    "I guess you also support the privatization or dissolution of Social Security, MEDICARE and MEDICAID since those programs are much closer to socialism than the healthcare reform legislation, which leaves private insurance companies in charge of administering healthcare in the USA."

    Since I don't expect to see a nickel of Social Security or medicare or medicaid why the heck not?

    Quit stealing from ME to support crap YOU think is important.

    Complain about this comment

  • 152. At 11:47pm on 25 Sep 2010, crash wrote:

    The UN is a gigantic waste of time it makes congress and the senate look like a well oiled machine why anyone listens to a word blows my mind.

    Complain about this comment

  • 153. At 11:53pm on 25 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Another potentially hot story, the New Black Party Voter Intimidation case

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20100924/ts_csm/328058

    An exerpt:

    The current Civil Rights Commission investigation is specifically focusing on why Justice Department attorneys dropped charges against two New Black Panther Party members who brandished a nightstick at a Philadelphia polling place in 2008.

    For some conservative critics of the Obama administration, the case is seen as a smoking gun – damning proof that the nation's first black president doesn't take black racism seriously.

    More deeply, though, the controversy suggests that two fundamentally different views of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 are coming into conflict. Is it a document aimed at redressing the concerns of all disenfranchised voters, or is it specifically crafted to thwart historic prejudices against minorities?

    Coates accused the Justice Department of kowtowing to civil rights groups like the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, which wanted both the Ike Brown and the New Black Panther Party cases dropped, he said.

    Coates also asked the commission to see the New Black Panther Party case in racially reversed terms. If the Justice Department had dropped a case involving two robed Klansmen patrolling a polling booth, the outcry would have been deafening, he said.




    Complain about this comment

  • 154. At 00:01am on 26 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    This is intense. al-Wacky's father trying to sue the USA govt. and Obama invoking the states secret privilege- good move for Obama.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100925/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_cleric_lawsuit_13

    An exerpt:

    The lawsuit filed on the cleric's behalf seeks to have a court declare that the Constitution and international law bar the government from carrying out targeted killings; seeks to block the targeted killing of al-Awlaki; and seeks to force the U.S. government to disclose the standards for determining whether U.S. citizens can be targeted for death.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    al-Wacky is a traitor to USA. He deserves to be hunted down and captured.

    Complain about this comment

  • 155. At 00:10am on 26 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    The idea that courts should have no role whatsoever in determining the criteria by which the executive branch can kill its own citizens is unacceptable in a democracy," the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights said in a statement. "In matters of life and death, no executive should have a blank check."

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

    Who knew the ACLU was willing to sue USA for targeting an American born terrorist who was involved in the Fort Hood shootings, in which unarmed American soldiers were harmed and died, and involved in underwear bomber, which could have been worse if it had succeeded- fortantely only the bomber himself was hurt that time, but still, why would ACLU stick up for the life of a traitor trying to murder Americans?

    Doesn't this tell us a lot about the ACLU?

    Complain about this comment

  • 156. At 00:47am on 26 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 151, filthy mcnasty

    The government is not going to tell you which insurance company you must pick, you can choose insurance companies the same way we have always done. The only difference is that we are now expected to have private insurance coverage instead of using Emergency Rooms when we have a major problem are being a burden to our society.

    The "mandate", which amounts to $95 a year for those who choose not to have insurance coverage was put in place to prevent people from waiting until they are sick to get a private insurance policy now that pre-existing conditions are no longer an obstacle. In other words, the $95 penalty is designed to protect insurance companies rather than penalize consumers.

    The Obama administration proposed making tax cuts for families earning less than $250K a year permanent. If you are affected by the proposed increases to the wealthiest 2% of our population...I say congratulations, you are a lucky man!

    Complain about this comment

  • 157. At 02:16am on 26 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "156. At 00:47am on 26 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 151, filthy mcnasty

    The government is not going to tell you which insurance company you must pick, you can choose insurance companies the same way we have always done. The only difference is that we are now expected to have private insurance coverage instead of using Emergency Rooms when we have a major problem are being a burden to our society."

    Uh huh. Sure. Who gets to say what insurance companies stay in business and what they're allowed to actually cover? Who gets to say what those remaining insurance companies are to charge for what coverage?

    Once again, I don't care who you vote for as long I get to decide who gets nominated.

    You have no say in which insurance companies are allowed to operate. You have no say in what they're allowed to charge. You have no say in what they cover. You have no say, period.

    Neither do I.

    "The "mandate", which amounts to $95 a year for those who choose not to have insurance coverage was put in place to prevent people from waiting until they are sick to get a private insurance policy now that pre-existing conditions are no longer an obstacle. In other words, the $95 penalty is designed to protect insurance companies rather than penalize consumers."

    Seen any taxes go down lately? Besides, IT'S MY MONEY.

    As soon as the clowns discover that nobody is playing the game they're being FORCED to play and their pet "Approved by the Federal Government" insurance companies discover another group of people that they aren't bleeding the clowns in DC will jack that up as far as they think they can get away with. It won't stay $100 bucks.

    "The Obama administration proposed making tax cuts for families earning less than $250K a year permanent. If you are affected by the proposed increases to the wealthiest 2% of our population...I say congratulations, you are a lucky man!"

    Ever got a paycheck from a poor person?

    If I was one of those constantly skinned 2% I'd be making my money disappear from America - and I'd be following right behind it. Period.

    My love for my country doesn't blind me to the fact that both parties have ruined what we once had. We were once an industrial giant. I'm not going to run down the long, long list of industries that the vermin running this country have utterly destroyed in the last fifty years.

    Health care is next.

    Neither does my love for my country mean I owe you or anyone else anything. You want cradle to grave socialism, great. Find it somewhere else.

    Complain about this comment

  • 158. At 02:30am on 26 Sep 2010, crash wrote:

    The new insurance being forced upon us is going to cost us a lot more money,for starters everybody who currently has insurance,the cost of the insurance policy becomes INCOME at tax time.That is even though the people who have insurance are not the burden on the system.Wait till they start screwing up on their budget estimates and there are massive short falls who do you think is going to pick up the tab ?Like i have said previously the government cannot run the post office,social security,and many other departments are a complete disaster.
    Once the government has driven the health insurance companies into the ground we will be forced to sign up for second rate health care run by people who face no consequence for screwing up because they are employed by good old uncle sam.

    Complain about this comment

  • 159. At 03:50am on 26 Sep 2010, U14613024 wrote:

    panthers 101
    The Panthers established it is not unconstitutional to
    (a) Carry guns in open view
    (b) Call police Pigs (animals)

    Complain about this comment

  • 160. At 05:31am on 26 Sep 2010, mariein wrote:

    One example: The new legislature enacting bans on health insurance caps will cause private health insurance companies to go bankrupt - and quickly. Obama knows this. It’s going to be a horrible dissolve. Guess who will offer to bail them out. So there will be no more private health insurance companies; it’ll all be government-owned. There won’t be any choices. It’s a lie.
    Obama, Pelosi, Reid are the worst things that have happened to us.
    If the government is allowed to distribute our money to welfare programs, people will sit around with no incentive and do nothing for themselves. It's happened before.
    Charitable and private organizations actually get people working. I'm not the only one who believes we can still gain control and turn it all around. Listen to the likes of Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney, and whatever you do, Vote Republican.

    Complain about this comment

  • 161. At 05:37am on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    LucyJ

    Saladin meet Paladin

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgvxu8QY01s

    Have Gun Will Travel

    Richard Boone was one of America's best and most underappreciated actors.

    Complain about this comment

  • 162. At 05:45am on 26 Sep 2010, Andy wrote:

    Normally I'd search to find a keyword, in case my point has already been made. Looking at a map, Iran is surrounded by US forces in once capacity or another. They state they're not in pursuit of a nuclear weapon and are developing nuclear power for civilian purposes as permitted under the auspices of the non-proliferation treaty. As someone who it not well versed in legalese or the language of diplomatic agreements, I'm interested in the question of whether pursuit of a 'Super Electomagnetic Pulse Weapon,' intended to be detonated beyond the atmosphere and not subject any particular target to any physically destructive effect, falls outside the jurisdiction of the non-proliferation treaty? If not, to my mind at least, this would explain the gap between Iranian public representations and their refusal to submit to open inspection, and the continual build up of US forces in the region over the last ten years or so...

    Complain about this comment

  • 163. At 10:38am on 26 Sep 2010, Leviticus wrote:

    > 32. At 2:14pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:
    Ref 31, Leviticus

    "And in this the Iranian President has already won the battle he was actually fighting"

    The only battle Ahmadinejad may have won is at home where medieval religious zealots may be rejoicing and endorsing the incoherent diatribe delivered by one of their leaders.


    And in other Islamic countries- which was the battle he was fighting!

    By way of analogy, it's like having a fixed sports game. Team 1 may have won cos team 2 did so badly- but the prize money they collected was only a fraction of the winnings team 2 collected from the bookies!

    Ahmadinejad doesn't care if the west believes what he says. In fact, he probably said it to deliberately reduce the believability of any conspiricy theory.
    Why? Because the more the west froths and rants about Al Queada and puts into place the same sort of freedom restricting laws with public backing that he has to/ would have to enact and enforce in his own country at gun point, the more he makes our nations similar to his.

    Complain about this comment

  • 164. At 10:46am on 26 Sep 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re #19 "Did you or did you not see the hordes of islamics dancing in the streets and celebrating the deaths of over three thousand innocent people?

    "If you want to look at it, search for the 'Loose Change' video online."



    I watched (on both: BBC and CNN) Palestinian women and children yodelling in joy in Gaza streets.

    [How soon they forget]

    Complain about this comment

  • 165. At 10:50am on 26 Sep 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "Well, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not crazy. He is very well-educated. Ahmadinejad attended the Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST)"


    That's like Mrs. Gorbatchev claiming during a visit to Washington that she was a 'doctor of philosophy', because she studied Marxism-Leninism
    at a Soviet unviersity.

    [and never heard about Husserl, Wittgenstein or Popper]

    Complain about this comment

  • 166. At 11:32am on 26 Sep 2010, CornwallCoastPath wrote:

    Mark,

    I'm puzzled by the "contrast" that President Obama sees between the sympathy shown by the Iranian people to the 9/11 victims at the time, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's present call for an investigation into the attacks.

    There's no contrast, contradiction or inconsistency that I'm aware of between sympathy for the victims of a crime and a desire to know the truth about that crime. In fact, just the opposite - most legal systems around the world define a need to identify the perpetrators of a crime.

    So perhaps you could provide some insight into Obama's "contrast"?

    Complain about this comment

  • 167. At 11:55am on 26 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 157, filthy mcnasty

    There is no point discussing the healthcare reform legislation with you. It is obvious that you have bought the ruse being advanced by the Tea Party and nothing anyone says - or evidence provided - will change your mind.

    I am on MEDICARE and like millions of other Americans I have supplemental insurance through my former employer. Last week I received the typical literature we get before the end of each year offering the option to switch insurance companies, if we wish, and reminding us of all the various healthcare options available. The difference this time is that the pamphlets I received also highlight the additional benefits we are eligible for because of the recent healthcare reform legislation.

    Interestingly, the insurance companies I can choose from (which are selected every year by my former employer, not the government) sound enthusiastic with the changes that are now available and look forward to expanding membership.

    Regarding the issue of taxes, since my income is not even remotely close to $250K I have not been affected in any way and there is no evidence I will be.

    The only thing the tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans have produced since they were implemented are recurring budget deficits because of the subsequent drop in revenues, economic stagnation and eventually the worst recession since the Great Depression, and one of the lowest periods of job growth in our history.

    Insinuating that making tax cuts to the rich will result in job growth is inconsistent with what has taken place since they were put in place. One of the greatest periods of job growth occurred after President Clinton raised taxes in 1992, balanced our budgets leading to budget surpluses, and created a climate of consumer confidence that led to incredible growth, economic stability and the creation of 23 million new jobs. That's the difference between fiscal discipline and Tea Party diatribe.

    Complain about this comment

  • 168. At 12:37pm on 26 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    160. Grateful_Free:

    "One example: The new legislature enacting bans on health insurance caps will cause private health insurance companies to go bankrupt - and quickly. "

    ************
    The Democrats who understand how regulations will create a cage around our private health care industry until it starves must want it to be this way. Why else would they do something that could potentially destroy an industry?

    Eventually a government-led group will determine what services must be covered by insurers. "Outliers" may be out of luck at that point. Their power as consumers will be non-existent.

    As far as I'm concerned, the elephant in the room, which Democrats refuse to acknowledge, is the downside of Democrats' increased regulatory and tax environment. I wonder whether Obama even realized there was a downside to grand government moves. He probably thought that Republicans simply gave businesses what they wanted because they were evil, greedy, etc. No recognition at all about what it takes to keep the business engine running.

    Complain about this comment

  • 169. At 12:48pm on 26 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 157, filthy mcnasty

    "Since I don't expect to see a nickel of Social Security or medicare or medicaid why the heck not?"

    Should I assume that you either don't have elderly parents or grandparents, or that they are wealthy, or that you are planning to care for them and don't need government assistance to do it?

    I have to admit that when I got my first job and I was told I had to pay into Social Security I felt the same way you do. My perception of Social security, and later MEDICARE, changed when the inexorable passage of time forced me to look closer at my retirement options, given that my dreams of someday becoming a millionaire were rapidly turning into an elusive chimera.

    The biggest difference between the Republican and Democratic parties is that the former advocates personal responsibility and the latter believes government has a role in ensuring social well being. Based on my personal experiences the solution lies somewhere in between.

    If I had relied strictly on SS and MEDICARE the most I could afford today was a room in a boarding house and two meals a day in a nearby McDonalds. Instead, I saved, invested, and worked for a corporation that did not pay high salaries but that provided a pension plan that, although small by European standards, it and my SS benefits allow me to live comfortably.

    A Social Security check, and MEDICARE benefits, provide security and continuity to millions of senior citizens, but they are not enough to live with dignity. Since deregulation has allowed corporations to underfund pension plans to the point that many are at risk of default, those SS checks and Medicare are a lifeline to millions of American senior citizens.

    I'll end this by saying that when I was told about having to pay into SS the manager that hired me apologized and told me he hated having to do that because neither him nor I were ever going to see a dime from that organization. That interview took place over 5 decades ago.

    Industrialized nations, and affluent societies such as ours, can not reject social responsibility; and citizens can not ignore personal responsibility. The best approach is somewhere in the middle.

    "Quit stealing from ME to support crap YOU think is important"

    Nobody is stealing from you to support things you don't want. The taxes you and I pay are used to fund our military, our intelligence agencies, air traffic controllers, medical researchers at the Center for Disease Control, the National Weather Service, Border and Port Authorities, NASA, Social Security, MEDICARE, the Treasury, Commerce, Agriculture and many programs and services essential to our national security, our economy and our well being.

    The services you and I get may seem unimportant to you today, but I assure you, sooner or later you will change your mind. The feeling of invincibility you feel today will not last forever.

    What is unacceptable is to demand a strong military, robust intelligence agencies, a government that can respond effectively to whatever catastrophe afflicts us and then refuse to pay for what we get.

    Incidentally, our tax rates are at one of its lowest points in our history, and are much lower than what most industrialized nations pay. Our problem is not that we pay too much, or that a bogey man is stealing from us, the problem is that we do not want to pay for what we demand and expect from our government.

    Complain about this comment

  • 170. At 1:25pm on 26 Sep 2010, MagicKirin wrote:

    Subject: Netanyahu's Speech- United Nations


    How elegantly stated . Hopefully ,as a human of good conscience, you will read this in its entirety. All of us must work continuously and diligently for peace. I received it this morning from a friend who asked that we pass this on to our friends.
    Sylvia


    PM Netanyahu’s Speech at the UN General Assembly, 9/23/2010.


    Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen,

    Nearly 62 years ago, the United Nations recognized the right of the Jews, an ancient people 3,500 years-old, to a state of their own in their ancestral homeland.
    I stand here today as the Prime Minister of Israel, the Jewish state, and I speak to you on behalf of my country and my people.

    The United Nations was founded after the carnage of World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust. It was charged with preventing the recurrence of such horrendous events.
    Nothing has undermined that central mission more than the systematic assault on the truth. Yesterday the President of Iran stood at this very podium, spewing his latest anti-Semitic rants. Just a few days earlier, he again claimed that the Holocaust is a lie.
    Last month, I went to a villa in a suburb of Berlin called Wannsee. There, on January 20, 1942 , after a hearty meal, senior Nazi officials met and decided how to exterminate the Jewish people. The detailed minutes of that meeting have been preserved by successive German governments. Here is a copy of those minutes, in which the Nazis issued precise instructions on how to carry out the extermination of the Jews. Is this a lie?

    A day before I was in Wannsee, I was given in Berlin the original construction plans for the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp. Those plans are signed by Hitler's deputy, Heinrich Himmler himself. Here is a copy of the plans for Auschwitz-Birkenau, where one million Jews were murdered. Is this too a lie?
    This June, President Obama visited the Buchenwald concentration camp. Did President Obama pay tribute to a lie?

    And what of the Auschwitz survivors whose arms still bear the tattooed numbers branded on them by the Nazis? Are those tattoos a lie? One-third of all Jews perished in the conflagration. Nearly every Jewish family was affected, including my own. My wife's grandparents, her father's two sisters and three brothers, and all the aunts, uncles and cousins were all murdered by the Nazis. Is that also a lie?
    Yesterday, the man who calls the Holocaust a lie spoke from this podium. To those who refused to come here and to those who left this room in protest, I commend you. You stood up for moral clarity and you brought honor to your countries.

    But to those who gave this Holocaust-denier a hearing, I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish people, and decent people everywhere: Have you no shame? Have you no decency?
    A mere six decades after the Holocaust, you give legitimacy to a man who denies that the murder of six million Jews took place and pledges to wipe out the Jewish state.
    What a disgrace! What a mockery of the charter of the United Nations! Perhaps some of you think that this man and his odious regime threaten only the Jews. You're wrong.
    History has shown us time and again that what starts with attacks on the Jews eventually ends up engulfing many others.

    This Iranian regime is fueled by an extreme fundamentalism that burst onto the world scene three decades ago after lying dormant for centuries. In the past thirty years, this fanaticism has swept the globe with a murderous violence and cold-blooded impartiality in its choice of victims. It has callously slaughtered Moslems and Christians, Jews and Hindus, and many others. Though it is comprised of different offshoots, the adherents of this unforgiving creed seek to return humanity to medieval times.
    Wherever they can, they impose a backward regimented society where women, minorities, gays or anyone not deemed to be a true believer is brutally subjugated. The struggle against this fanaticism does not pit faith against faith nor civilization against civilization.
    It pits civilization against barbarism, the 21st century against the 9th century, those who sanctify life against those who glorify death.

    The primitivism of the 9th century ought to be no match for the progress of the 21st century. The allure of freedom, the power of technology, the reach of communications should surely win the day. Ultimately, the past cannot triumph over the future. And the future offers all nations magnificent bounties of hope. The pace of progress is growing exponentially.

    It took us centuries to get from the printing press to the telephone, decades to get from the telephone to the personal computer, and only a few years to get from the personal computer to the internet.
    What seemed impossible a few years ago is already outdated, and we can scarcely fathom the changes that are yet to come. We will crack the genetic code. We will cure the incurable. We will lengthen our lives. We will find a cheap alternative to fossil fuels and clean up the planet.

    I am proud that my country Israel is at the forefront of these advances - by leading innovations in science and technology, medicine and biology, agriculture and water, energy and the environment. These innovations the world over offer humanity a sunlit future of unimagined promise.
    But if the most primitive fanaticism can acquire the most deadly weapons, the march of history could be reversed for a time. And like the belated victory over the Nazis, the forces of progress and freedom will prevail only after an horrific toll of blood and fortune has been exacted from mankind. That is why the greatest threat facing the world today is the marriage between religious fanaticism and the weapons of mass destruction.

    The most urgent challenge facing this body is to prevent the tyrants of Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Are the member states of the United Nations up to that challenge? Will the international community confront a despotism that terrorizes its own people as they bravely stand up for freedom?
    Will it take action against the dictators who stole an election in broad daylight and gunned down Iranian protesters who died in the streets choking in their own blood? Will the international community thwart the world's most pernicious sponsors and practitioners of terrorism?
    Above all, will the international community stop the terrorist regime of Iran from developing atomic weapons, thereby endangering the peace of the entire world?
    The people of Iran are courageously standing up to this regime. People of goodwill around the world stand with them, as do the thousands who have been protesting outside this hall. Will the United Nations stand by their side?

    Ladies and Gentlemen,
    The jury is still out on the United Nations, and recent signs are not encouraging. Rather than condemning the terrorists and their Iranian patrons, some here have condemned their victims. That is exactly what a recent UN report on Gaza did, falsely equating the terrorists with those they targeted.
    For eight long years, Hamas fired from Gaza thousands of missiles, mortars and rockets on nearby Israeli cities. Year after year, as these missiles were deliberately hurled at our civilians, not a single UN resolution was passed condemning those criminal attacks. We heard nothing - absolutely nothing - from the UN Human Rights Council, a misnamed institution if there ever was one.

    In 2005, hoping to advance peace, Israel unilaterally withdrew from every inch of Gaza . It dismantled 21 settlements and uprooted over 8,000 Israelis. We didn't get peace. Instead we got an Iranian backed terror base fifty miles from Tel Aviv. Life in Israeli towns and cities next to Gaza became a nightmare. You see, the Hamas rocket attacks not only continued, they increased tenfold. Again, the UN was silent.
    Finally, after eight years of this unremitting assault, Israel was finally forced to respond. But how should we have responded? Well, there is only one example in history of thousands of rockets being fired on a country's civilian population. It happened when the Nazis rocketed British cities during World War II. During that war, the allies leveled German cities, causing hundreds of thousands of casualties. Israel chose to respond differently. Faced with an enemy committing a double war crime of firing on civilians while hiding behind civilians - Israel sought to conduct surgical strikes against the rocket launchers.

    That was no easy task because the terrorists were firing missiles from homes and schools, using mosques as weapons depots and ferreting explosives in ambulances.
    Israel , by contrast, tried to minimize casualties by urging Palestinian civilians to vacate the targeted areas. We dropped countless flyers over their homes, sent thousands of text messages and called thousands of cell phones asking people to leave. Never has a country gone to such extraordinary lengths to remove the enemy's civilian population from harm's way.

    Yet faced with such a clear case of aggressor and victim, who did the UN Human Rights Council decide to condemn? Israel . A democracy legitimately defending itself against terror is morally hanged, drawn and quartered, and given an unfair trial to boot.
    By these twisted standards, the UN Human Rights Council would have dragged Roosevelt and Churchill to the dock as war criminals. What a perversion of truth. What a perversion of justice.
    Delegates of the United Nations, will you accept this farce?
    Because if you do, the United Nations would revert to its darkest days, when the worst violators of human rights sat in judgment against the law-abiding democracies, when Zionism was equated with racism and when an automatic majority could declare that the earth is flat.

    If this body does not reject this report, it would send a message to terrorists everywhere: Terror pays; if you launch your attacks from densely populated areas, you will win immunity. And in condemning Israel , this body would also deal a mortal blow to peace. Here's why.
    When Israel left Gaza , many hoped that the missile attacks would stop. Others believed that at the very least, Israel would have international legitimacy to exercise its right of self-defense. What legitimacy? What self-defense?

    The same UN that cheered Israel as it left Gaza and promised to back our right of self-defense now accuses us -my people, my country - of war crimes? And for what? For acting responsibly in self-defense. What a travesty!
    Israel justly defended itself against terror. This biased and unjust report is a clear-cut test for all governments. Will you stand with Israel or will you stand with the terrorists?
    We must know the answer to that question now. Now and not later. Because if Israel is again asked to take more risks for peace, we must know today that you will stand with us tomorrow. Only if we have the confidence that we can defend ourselves can we take further risks for peace.

    Ladies and Gentlemen,
    All of Israel wants peace.
    Any time an Arab leader genuinely wanted peace with us, we made peace. We made peace with Egypt led by Anwar Sadat. We made peace with Jordan led by King Hussein. And if the Palestinians truly want peace, I and my government, and the people of Israel , will make peace. But we want a genuine peace, a defensible peace, a permanent peace. In 1947, this body voted to establish two states for two peoples - a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Jews accepted that resolution. The Arabs rejected it.

    We ask the Palestinians to finally do what they have refused to do for 62 years: Say yes to a Jewish state. Just as we are asked to recognize a nation-state for the Palestinian people, the Palestinians must be asked to recognize the nation state of the Jewish people. The Jewish people are not foreign conquerors in the Land of Israel . This is the land of our forefathers.
    Inscribed on the walls outside this building is the great Biblical vision of peace: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation. They shall learn war no more." These words were spoken by the Jewish prophet Isaiah 2,800 years ago as he walked in my country, in my city, in the hills of Judea and in the streets of Jerusalem .

    We are not strangers to this land. It is our homeland. As deeply connected as we are to this land, we recognize that the Palestinians also live there and want a home of their own. We want to live side by side with them, two free peoples living in peace, prosperity and dignity.
    But we must have security. The Palestinians should have all the powers to govern themselves except those handful of powers that could endanger Israel .
    That is why a Palestinian state must be effectively demilitarized. We don't want another Gaza , another Iranian backed terror base abutting Jerusalem and perched on the hills a few kilometers from Tel Aviv.
    We want peace.

    I believe such a peace can be achieved. But only if we roll back the forces of terror, led by Iran , that seek to destroy peace, eliminate Israel and overthrow the world order. The question facing the international community is whether it is prepared to confront those forces or accommodate them.
    Over seventy years ago, Winston Churchill lamented what he called the "confirmed unteachability of mankind," the unfortunate habit of civilized societies to sleep until danger nearly overtakes them.
    Churchill bemoaned what he called the "want of foresight, the unwillingness to act when action will be simple and effective, the lack of clear thinking, the confusion of counsel until emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong."

    I speak here today in the hope that Churchill's assessment of the "unteachability of mankind" is for once proven wrong.
    I speak here today in the hope that we can learn from history -- that we can prevent danger in time.
    In the spirit of the timeless words spoken to Joshua over 3,000 years ago, let us be strong and of good courage. Let us confront this peril, secure our future and, God willing, forge an enduring peace for generations to come.
    ###

    Please send this to many others all around the world


    Complain about this comment

  • 171. At 2:06pm on 26 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 166, CornwallCornPath

    "So perhaps you could provide some insight into Obama's "contrast"?"

    Here is my take on this. The 9/11 tragedy was investigated, more than once, by bi-partisan commissions that included Republicans, Democrats, Independents, intelligence officials, and reputable members of our society. The results of those investigations revealed that the attack was carried out by a terrorist organization called Al Qaeda, that its mastermind was Osama bin Laden, that most of the planners, financiers and the terrorists that carried out the attack were/are Saudi Arabians, and that some of the terrorists involved in the attack studied aeronautics at Embry Riddle University in Daytona Beach, Florida. The results of the investigation included pictures of Middle Eastern men boarding the planes involved in the attacks, and their identities were all established and verified.

    The reason Mr. Ahmadinejad raised this issue is not because he cares about the 9/11 victims or because as an intellectual he believes the "truth" should surface, he raised it for political gain at home. Nothing else.

    Some of the contrasts between the Iranian society and ours is that we live in a free country where we can disagree with each other and criticize our government without fear of retribution, while the Iranian people are shot at, incarcerated, and/or abused when they protest peacefully against their despotic regime. The contrast can also be found in the way we accept human weaknesses in our respective countries. In our country an adulteress ends up divorced, in Iran she is stoned to death.

    I suspect those are some of the contrasts that President Obama referred to when he responded to Mr. Ahmadinejad's claims, which most of us find offensive, unsubstantiated, unnecessary and irrelevant to the debate that was supposed to have taken place at the UN.

    Complain about this comment

  • 172. At 2:55pm on 26 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 168, Andrea

    "No recognition at all about what it takes to keep the business engine running."

    What gets the business engine going is consumer confidence, low operating costs, and efficiency; all of which were destroyed by the irresponsible policies of the Bush administration and the effects of decades of fiscal irresponsibility, moving factories, technology and jobs abroad, and deregulation.

    Business prosperity is not achieved - or should not be achieved - by allowing corporations and individuals to exploit consumers or commit fraud. One of the most fundamental responsibilities for government is to care for the security, health and welfare of the citizenry. Giving business carte blanche to commit fraud and enrich themselves at the expense of consumers if not the way to go.

    Insurance companies in the USA are not going bankrupt, they continue to post profits and continue to raise premiums at about a 5% annual rate, the same as before the healthcare reform legislation. The difference is that now they are going to have an additional 30 million customers, which suggests their sales and profits will go up accordingly.

    A system that uses private insurance companies to administer it is not a socialist system. It is capitalism at its best.

    Complain about this comment

  • 173. At 4:05pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    What nethanyahu was thinking...

    Ladies and gentlemen of the west, well done.. we are in this occupation together.. because you and I both know that occupation is not only great for us, but good for you as well. These palestinians or whoever they are, uncivilized, no wonder G-d didnt choose them to be his special people...For 62 yrs these people wanted occupation to end, and we have ended the word occupation from the whole narrative..We have together made the occupation into, "peace and security", thingie, Today, thanks to your support, because you had to support, But just in case you forget why you support us, I will give you this lecture on holocaust. Everyone in the west has internalised that its peace we want, and the word, occupation, has been thrown out of the window. Because now we look like perfect victims..and the people we occupy perfect terrorists.. The only people who still call occupation, occupation, the hamas, we have isolated them. No one points out to me, or even asks me that i have as my allies in the government are just extremists..But, we will not talk about it, so lets just keep on talking about hamas, and iran..Oh, yes, arent we the clever one that today, the stopping of settlements have become the main issue than ending the occupation, look at abbas, who used to demand us to end occupation is now only demanding us to stop building a few settlements...How far we have come, with your help and bigotry...

    Complain about this comment

  • 174. At 4:12pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    The reason Mr. Ahmadinejad raised this issue is not because he cares about the 9/11 victims or because as an intellectual he believes the "truth" should surface, he raised it for political gain at home. Nothing else.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sure, and obama was talking to the spirits of the spirits of the dead native americans...He was talking to the americans. His elections are knocking on the doors, failed to gain support for health and tax cuts, he does what a dying animal does in the last five or seconds of its life, make one last attempt with all the strenght left in it...To the north of ground zero...that was pathetic..being a harvard educated, he should have known that inside UN building, there is no north or south or east or west..atleast not on papers...The real digusting thing was when powel presented his power point seminar/propoganda for iraq war...

    Complain about this comment

  • 175. At 4:26pm on 26 Sep 2010, U14613024 wrote:

    Aren't you all sick of negative Stereotyping?
    Not all Muslims are terrorists. Like not all Americans are Capitalists and Colonialists.
    People are people, doing the best they can, assimilating, integrating, treating others with respect. Governments all over the world are illing.. they prey on disunity amongst different nationalities, nations, religions and tribes. Don't believe the hype and fall for their lies.

    Complain about this comment

  • 176. At 4:29pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    And missing in this north of ground zero discourse, is the question was it correct to walk out of UN session...The delegates dont just walk out of a session without some explaination to do afterwards..

    Complain about this comment

  • 177. At 4:33pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    which most of us find offensive, unsubstantiated, unnecessary and irrelevant to the debate that was supposed to have taken place at the UN.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Most of you find it offensive, because you werent allowed to ask any questions, you were presented the official version, and with systematic bombarded of the official version for so many yrs, you have internalised it so well, now you really believe that its offensive..In reality its your avoidance behaviour...

    Complain about this comment

  • 178. At 4:38pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Norman The Gambler its not the muslims who fell for the hype, the credit for it goes to the westerners...For9 yrs they have fallen prey to their illing governments...and in the 10 yrs, this kind of lecture coming from the westerners is just pointless...You hyped yourself and now you want to unhype...its not always about the westerners. No unhyping unless the westeners hold their leaders accountable for hyping you all up...

    Complain about this comment

  • 179. At 5:03pm on 26 Sep 2010, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #173

    Like the Iranian mullahs Hezbollah and Hamas his words are not someone like you who suffers from cognitive dissoance.

    But it is a challenger to rational leaders who truly interested in peace.

    Complain about this comment

  • 180. At 5:24pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Like the Iranian mullahs Hezbollah and Hamas his words are not someone like you who suffers from cognitive dissoance.

    But it is a challenger to rational leaders who truly interested in peace.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Indeed his spoken words are a challange to anyone who is interested in peace...And the challange is, where does peace fits into all of this...And the exact thoughts which he had when he said that he would make peace with him and gave examples of jordan and egypt..."I will not mention here arafat and rabin because it just doesnt fit...and can you all force saudi arabia to make peace with me, and why dont you press hard enough pakistan to open some sort of relations with us, remember when you forced musharaf, he told his forgein minister to talk to our forgein minister, but then he just backed down because his people found out...Can you hilaray, drone out all those pakistanis who are against it, while you are droning out the pathans...And I quoted churchil, because I just felt like when I was writing the speech, doesnt mean that you have to start start thinking about it as well...just keep on the gemocide of pathans, and I must say, you learnt quickly, kill slowly and stubly, after all we dont want to look like hitler, do we..the idiot, got carried away....but on the other hand if had not got carried away, I would be in europe, and G-d knows what my life would have been like over there...Now, At the end of my speech I know you are going to clap very hard, although I havent said anything new or worth saying..I took everything from my history books taught in our schools...and even though I have said that peace of my country depend on iran, although I know and you know that iran has nothing to do with the actual problem, but I thought I should remind you even though obama yestrerday proved that i dont have to worry, but still...I hope the iranians would walk out of my speech as well...

    Complain about this comment

  • 181. At 5:33pm on 26 Sep 2010, CornwallCoastPath wrote:

    SaintDominick, 171:

    It sounds as though you are satisfied that the commissions did a through job in collecting and analysing all the evidence relating to 9/11. Fair enough - in that case, perhaps you could summarize the commissions' findings in the following areas:

    (1) How did the terrorists manage to evade all the various layers of security - from surveillance and infiltration by the intelligence services to scanning at the airport - that were in place in order to prevent aircraft from being hijacked?

    (2) Once the aircraft had been hijacked, why was the response of the FAA and the US military insufficient to prevent 3 of the 4 aircraft from reaching their targets?

    (4) How did the terrorists manage to acquire the skill level to pilot passenger aircraft to such a degree of precision? Was this included in their studies at Daytona Beach?

    (5) Why did 1 WTC and 2 WTC collapse when they did and how they did?

    (6) Was 7 WTC one of the terrorists' intended targets, or just a very lucky bonus for them? And as with 1 WTC and 2 WTC, what was the reason for its collapse?

    (7) Why is there apparently no clear, publicly available video footage of a passenger aircraft hitting the Pentagon?

    (8) What evidence is there that the named alleged hijackers boarded their respective flights? [It's interesting that you mention "pictures" - the normal process for confirming whether a person was on a particular flight is to look up their name on the airline's passenger name list for that flight].

    You mentioned that Ahmadinejad raised this issue purely for political gain at home. You may well be right. There's one sure way for the US to call his bluff: set up the investigation he's called for, and insist that he attends to present his evidence and subject himself to questioning!

    Complain about this comment

  • 182. At 5:49pm on 26 Sep 2010, _marko wrote:

    The rhetoric in Nethanyahu's and Ahmadinejad's speeches doesn't work nowadays. A bit like the photos of important people having their photos taken shaking hands, meaningless because no one can say what the words or actions actually mean.

    To MagicKirin #179

    RE: cognitive dissonance
    You suffer from this because you believe only certain cultures are superior and do not have to conform to agreed universal laws or definitions.

    Complain about this comment

  • 183. At 6:11pm on 26 Sep 2010, Sugar Hill Street Soul wrote:

    Because of Malcolm X
    White Men got vexed
    They didn't want to see
    Black Man progress

    And all along the way
    Black man have strayed
    Searching to find the way

    I want to know
    How long will it be
    Until you black man see
    The hidden brutality

    (a) Dennis Brown - Malcolm X
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivm_048385Q

    (b) Earl 16 Malcolm X
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13Uy0g0DWlo

    Complain about this comment

  • 184. At 6:17pm on 26 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    167. SaintDominick:

    "The only thing the tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans have produced since they were implemented are recurring budget deficits because of the subsequent drop in revenues, economic stagnation and eventually the worst recession since the Great Depression, and one of the lowest periods of job growth in our history."

    **********
    For you to completely deny the benefits of tax cuts is disingenuous or ignorant. I don't think you are the latter. Why do you think it is that so many economists are discouraging any tax increases right now, even on the rich?

    You can extoll the virtues of "taxing the rich", but, in the end, Obama has created uncertainty in the minds of many Americans. Further tax increases on the heels of increased regulations, the details of which are nowhere to be found and, thus, subject to bureaucratic whims, is a drag on our economy.

    You may believe that this drag is worth it, or like Obama you failed to consider the negative consequences of increased taxes and regulations.

    For a president to be this blind to the consequences of increased taxes and regulations is inexcusable. Instead of explaining what he's doing to address the uncertainty, he's bashing Republicans for trying to do something about it. Brilliant strategy on his part.

    Complain about this comment

  • 185. At 6:19pm on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Jihad Joe you're back. Glad to see you. Two questions. First, what do you say to my request to be put in your will to inherit your Armani shoes even though the will becomes null and void when you die so I won't get them and they likely wouldn't fit me anyway? Second, how about responding to my posting #99 about your interpretation of the Koran?

    I see you are back in true form.

    "For 62 yrs these people wanted occupation to end, and we have ended the word occupation from the whole narrative"

    So from your point of view every square inch of the state of Israel starting in 1948 which is 62 years ago is occupied territory. In other words, none of the land which is Israel's now should belong to them, it belongs to the Palestinians. In other words as Israel exists today, it has no letimate right to exist at all. I just want to be sure I understand your meaning in your posting #173.

    Complain about this comment

  • 186. At 6:20pm on 26 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    181. CornwallCoastPath:

    "You mentioned that Ahmadinejad raised this issue purely for political gain at home. You may well be right. There's one sure way for the US to call his bluff: set up the investigation he's called for, and insist that he attends to present his evidence and subject himself to questioning!"

    **************
    One would expect an intelligent and informed leader to have read the investigations done thus far. Has anyone asked Ahmadinejad if he's read any of these reports? Has he read the 9/11 Commission's report?

    I'd say the burden is on him to not be an ignorant, uninformed person, especially one who is making allegations at the UN.


    Complain about this comment

  • 187. At 6:37pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    So from your point of view every square inch of the state of Israel starting in 1948 which is 62 years ago is occupied territory.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I think I made my point of view very clear..which parts of my posts where I said, the state in order to be called a state has to have clear cut boundries....right from the day one..the entity is a best place for squatters with grandmother clause, at most, its the jewish quarters in the middle of the east.

    Complain about this comment

  • 188. At 6:55pm on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jihad joe, Israel did have well defined borders before 1967. But then having conquered the West Bank, Jerusalem, and Gaza in the genocidal war to throw all of the Jews into the sea, the third of four Arab governments waged against Israel, Jordan and Egypt didn't want those territories back. What were the Israelis to do? Now they were stuck with more Arabs to administer but they didn't want to make it part of Israel. As time went on, it made sense for them to build settlements to make their borders more defendable. And so now Israel holds all the aces. It is larger, it controls the land, it is very well armed, it has a prosperous economy, it is relatively secure, it has the advantage of barrages of useless rockets being fired at it by fools who give them an excuse to say they are victims of terrorists, and they have virtualy the entire US population on their side. What have the Arabs got? Even if Iran devolops an atom bomb, who are they going to use it on? If they attack Israel they will kill all of the Palestinians at the same time. And if they attack the US there is every likelihood that the US military will retaliate by kiling ALL of your friends (Americans themselves will see to those in the US, many have forgotten the anti-Islamic feelings in the US after 9-11.)

    Complain about this comment

  • 189. At 7:02pm on 26 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 184, Andrea

    "You may believe that this drag is worth it, or like Obama you failed to consider the negative consequences of increased taxes and regulations."

    Targeted tax cuts designed to stimulate the economy and create jobs are not only good, they are an absolute necessite, which is why President Obama is proposing tax cuts for small businesses, for corporations that invest and build in the USA, and the reason why he is proposing to penalize companies that move operations abroad.

    What is wrong is to extend or make permanent the tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans which only contributed to fiscal chaos and the eventual collapse of our economy. Nothing positive happened since the tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans were put in place by the Bush administration. In fact, those tax cuts contributed to one of the worst declines in job creation in our history, budget deficits, and a horrible recession. The same occurred in the 1980s when David Stockman's supply side economics was put in place.

    Cutting taxes for the sake of cutting, or in this case, to allow the wealthiest members of our society to buy a new foreign car, gamble in Monaco, or buy new Prada glasses will not help our economy. People like Bill Gates, a man who I admire, does not need tax cuts to know how to invest his $54B fortune or give it away to charity. Billionaires like Bill will invest at home or abroad based on considerations such as ROI, not because Obama is proposing a return to the tax rates that existed in the Clinton era, when we enjoyed one of the greatest periods of growth, prosperity and job creation in our history.

    The people that would benefit from tax cuts are small business owners, which is why the proposed Obama tax reductions or credits to small business are so essential.



    Complain about this comment

  • 190. At 7:28pm on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jihad Joe;

    I must say you are a brave man (for all I know you could be a woman, there's no way for me to know for sure. Do you wear a veil, headscarf, or burka?) I mean with Carnivore, Eschelon, and NarusInsight, and who else knows what out there and your posting #69 surely at least some of the names you mentioned must have lit up a pinball machine or two somewhere. BTW, what about those shoes?

    Complain about this comment

  • 191. At 7:40pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    But then having conquered the West Bank, Jerusalem, and Gaza in the genocidal war to throw all of the Jews into the sea, the third of four Arab governments waged against Israel, Jordan and Egypt didn't want those territories back. What were the Israelis to do? Now they were stuck with more Arabs to administer but they didn't want to make it part of Israel.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    So did Iraq before it conquered kuwait, according to the beleivers of occupied land after 67 theorists, what iraq conquerered should be iraqs, however the very same people within a yr of kuwaits occupation went on to war to liberate the occupied kuwait territory...

    Complain about this comment

  • 192. At 7:41pm on 26 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 181, Cornwall

    "(1) How did the terrorists manage to evade all the various layers of security - from surveillance and infiltration by the intelligence services to scanning at the airport - that were in place in order to prevent aircraft from being hijacked?"

    Security at US airports was very relaxed prior to 9/11.

    "(2) Once the aircraft had been hijacked, why was the response of the FAA and the US military insufficient to prevent 3 of the 4 aircraft from reaching their targets?"

    The FAA, USAF, and intelligence agencies did react, unfortunately, they did not have enough time to prevent planes crashing into the Twin Towers or the Pentagon. By the time the government grounded all flights, ordered the USAF to force any plane that failed to identify itself or was off course to land and, if necessary, shoot them down, it was too late. I guess we could conclude that there was an incredible lack of preparedness, lack of coordination and cooperation between security agencies, and a troubling amount of ambivalence. That is the reason the Department of Homeland Security was created, but functional enhancements such as that take time to plan and implement and can not be done on the fly.


    "(4) How did the terrorists manage to acquire the skill level to pilot passenger aircraft to such a degree of precision? Was this included in their studies at Daytona Beach?"

    If I remember correctly two of the pilots studied aeronautics at Embry Riddle University, one of the most prestigious universities in the world in that field of work. What was truly amazing was the ambivalence or incompetence of the FBI when they were alerted by the ERAU staff about the fact that a couple of Middle Eastern students were not interested in learning how to take off and were only interested in learning how to fly and how to land. Idiocy is not part of what most people would regard as an integral part of a successful conspiracy, and there was plenty of that to go around when this tragedy occurred.

    "(5) Why did 1 WTC and 2 WTC collapse when they did and how they did?"

    The Twin Towers collapsed as a result of large aircraft crashing directly into them, destroying or damaging part of its structure, and spilling combustible fuel through different floors causing extensive fire and intense heat, which further weakened the structure of the buildings. When the impacted floors collapsed the rest of the building could not support the weight and the entire buildings collapsed. The tremors caused by the collapse of two major skyscrapers caused extensive damage to a dozen buildings in the vicinity.

    "(6) Was 7 WTC one of the terrorists' intended targets, or just a very lucky bonus for them? And as with 1 WTC and 2 WTC, what was the reason for its collapse?"

    I don't know, but I suspect OBL may be able to answer that question. Regarding the rest, see above.

    "(7) Why is there apparently no clear, publicly available video footage of a passenger aircraft hitting the Pentagon?"

    I suspect that, in part it was due to the plane disintegrating upon impact, which is not unusual in crashes such as this one, and because of security reasons. These attacks were bad enough, providing terrorists with video or blueprints of the Pentagon or any other US government facility would have been criminal negligence.

    "(8) What evidence is there that the named alleged hijackers boarded their respective flights? [It's interesting that you mention "pictures" - the normal process for confirming whether a person was on a particular flight is to look up their name on the airline's passenger name list for that flight]."

    I did not participate in the investigations and I only have superficial knowledge of what happened, but my understanding is that films from security cameras at the affected airports, passenger lists, car rental records, information from the hotels and/or apartment owners where they stayed prior to the attacks, people that saw them or were in contact with them, and ERAU student records provided the pieces needed to put together the puzzle that led to the identification of the hijackers.

    I find the information provided by our government credible, logical, and judging by the events that have taken place in other places since the 9/11 tragedy occurred I believe the explanation given is very realistic confirms the existance of a well organized terrorist plot designed to cause pain and misery throughout the Western world...before the same organization decided to inflict similar pain and misery on their own people.

    Complain about this comment

  • 193. At 7:50pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Its all part of plan dalet......Now, I know that not even your forefathers or forefathers of anyone else over here would even know what this plan dalet is.....And I am no teacher of history who likes to give lectures on history...so find it yourselves or not, I couldnt care more or even less...You along with your partner interested fellow, can just assume things..and discuss your assumptions between the two of you, an post the result over here..

    Complain about this comment

  • 194. At 7:50pm on 26 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 174, colonel

    "Sure, and obama was talking to the spirits of the spirits of the dead native americans...He was talking to the americans."

    As POTUS, one of his top priorities is to talk to his people, but if you take the time to analyze his speech you will find that it reiterated our unconditional support to Israel, put pressure on Israeli and Palestinian leaders to work together towards a peaceful and just settlement, and put pressure on the government of Iran to allow unconditional IAEA inspections.

    President Obama delivered his speech in a clear, concise and forthright manner, without the poetic flourishes and diversions that characterize Ahmadinejad's preferred form of speech. His demeanor was calm and professional, while Ahmadinejad kept wiping his saliva off his mouth throughout his. Maybe he has a severe case of rabies and was foaming...

    Complain about this comment

  • 195. At 8:00pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    SaintDominick the whimperish reaction of american government towards its own people the fbi,cia imigration authorieis, just doesnt match with the reaction given to the suspects, even their neighbours and anyone who happened to play with them when they were five or six, have been kidnapped and throughly interogated. The four or five yr old children of the suspect whisked off the to unknown place and gone missing.And here you are quite comfortable with the fact that not one person was even charged for incompitencies...Your governments got a beautiful chance to wage wars which they have been itching to do for yrs.. and you got the chance to support the soldiers,

    Complain about this comment

  • 196. At 8:06pm on 26 Sep 2010, dceilar wrote:

    #167 St Dom

    I agree with your analysis on tax cuts for the rich not helping the economy. This was raised in a previous blog of Mark's. People who say that tax cuts for the rich creates jobs are deceitful. There is no evidence to suggest that these tax cuts creates jobs. As you suggested in the previous blog and in #167 all the evidence points to the opposite. This article from the WSJ proves the point:

    The Bush administration created about three million jobs (net) over its eight years, a fraction of the 23 million jobs created under President Bill Clinton’s administration and only slightly better than President George H.W. Bush did in his four years in office.

    Here's the figures:

    President .......... Jobs Created ..... Payroll Expansion
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Truman ............. 8.3 million ......... 20.1%
    Eisenhower ....... 3.5 million .......... 7%
    Kennedy ........... 3.6 million .......... 6.7%
    Johnson ............ 11.9 million ........ 20.8%
    Nixon ................ 9.4 million ......... 13.6%
    Ford .................. 1.8 million ......... 2.3%
    Carter ................ 10.5 million ....... 13.1%
    Reagan .............. 16.0 million ....... 17.6%
    Bush I ................ 2.5 million ......... 2.3%
    Clinton ............... 23.1 million ........ 21.1%
    Bush II ............... 3.0 million .......... 2.3%

    BTW - didn't taxes go up under Clinton?

    (Hat-tip to Saucy Mugwump)

    Complain about this comment

  • 197. At 8:31pm on 26 Sep 2010, Sugar Hill Street Soul wrote:

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

  • 198. At 8:52pm on 26 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "167. At 11:55am on 26 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    "Ref 157, filthy mcnasty

    "There is no point discussing the healthcare reform legislation with you. It is obvious that you have bought the ruse being advanced by the Tea Party and nothing anyone says - or evidence provided - will change your mind."

    I've never been to a Tea Party. I disagree with their approach and think they're being naive if they think they can 'warm and fuzzy' a system back to where it belongs when a full third of the country has now been trained to be dependent on Federal handouts and will fight to the death to continue to pick my pockets to keep the goodies coming.

    I say again: You think you're entitled to the money I earn. You are not.

    Complain about this comment

  • 199. At 9:03pm on 26 Sep 2010, Sugar Hill Street Soul wrote:

    Notes from the Underground..
    ---------------------------------
    They have taken the BLACK Man’s history and bastardized it and then they had the gall to switch roles between himself and the Black Man.

    This is the same gang behind WWI, WWII, Adolf Hitler and all the other squirmishes going on around this planet. They were behind the takedown of Iraq, they are behind what’s going on in Pakistan because they want to get their hands on her nukes, and they are desperately trying to take down Iran. They profit from WAR.

    Complain about this comment

  • 200. At 9:11pm on 26 Sep 2010, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #182
    _marko wrote:
    The rhetoric in Nethanyahu's and Ahmadinejad's speeches doesn't work nowadays. A bit like the photos of important people having their photos taken shaking hands, meaningless because no one can say what the words or actions actually mean.

    To MagicKirin #179

    RE: cognitive dissonance
    You suffer from this because you believe only certain cultures are superior and do not have to conform to agreed universal laws or definitions.

    _____________

    First the fact that you compare a legitimatly elected leader from a progressive democracy to an illegaly elected one from a thugish theocracy whose values and laws go back to the dark ages shows where you are coming from.

    I believe that all nations have the right to defend themselves from terrorist and genociadal forces.

    You and the U.N don't

    Complain about this comment

  • 201. At 9:13pm on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jihad Joe;

    "So did Iraq before it conquered kuwait, according to the beleivers of occupied land after 67 theorists, what iraq conquerered should be iraqs, however the very same people within a yr of kuwaits occupation went on to war to liberate the occupied kuwait territory..."

    So then you would agree that if it was okay for Saddam Hussein to conquer and occupy Kuwait, then it was okay for Israel to conquer and occupy the west bank, gaza, and Jerusalem. Glad we agree on that. Too bad for Saddam Hussein the US wanted to protect Saudi Arabia and the oil exports to Europe, otherwise the US might have left him alone.

    OK, what about the shoes and posting #99?

    Complain about this comment

  • 202. At 9:24pm on 26 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "169. At 12:48pm on 26 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    "Ref 157, filthy mcnasty

    ""Since I don't expect to see a nickel of Social Security or medicare or medicaid why the heck not?""

    "Should I assume that you either don't have elderly parents or grandparents, or that they are wealthy, or that you are planning to care for them and don't need government assistance to do it?"

    You can assume anything you want.

    (snipped)

    "....the problem is that we do not want to pay for what we demand and expect from our government."

    ...the problem is that you don't want to pay for what I demand and expect from our government.

    There, fixed that for you.



    Complain about this comment

  • 203. At 9:24pm on 26 Sep 2010, hms_shannon wrote:

    Hey MarcusAureliusII,We are feeling rather left out at the moment.Why don`t you get your pals to insert that complex computer worm to infected the computers of colonelartist,then you can get back to,insulting us British again,at least we appreciate a good put down & actually understand what you are saying.Sometimes..




    Complain about this comment

  • 204. At 9:28pm on 26 Sep 2010, BK wrote:

    I am no fan of the current Iran or its current President; having said that, why should his question of legitmacy about the 9/11 event raise such a fervor? It is a valid question and observation, particularly for country which has a long history of inventing 'crises' in order to justify action by politicians.

    If the U.S. had no part in the 9/11 events it is a simple matter to simply, dispassionately disregard the blathering of the Iranian mouthpiece...loud and angry protestations by the U.S. Community-Organizer-in-Chief gives credence to the suggestion.

    Complain about this comment

  • 205. At 9:31pm on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jihad Joe;

    During the war with Lebanon, Syria siad that the Golan Heights belong to Lebanon. But I never heard Lebanon's government make that claim. So are Syria and Lebanon amporphous entities whose borders are not fixed but which float around? I think so. OK, you have convinced me not to recognize the nations of Lebanon and Syria. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. And I expect that seeing that this is wo you will no longer recognize them either. BTW, the other day you referred to the amorphous entity as Israel. Was that just a slip of the tongue or do you now accept its existance. You never made that clear when I pointed it out to you.

    BTW, my advice to the fox is not to carry the scorpion across the river. Scorpions can't be trusted to keep their promises, they are self admitted liars as the parable demonstrates.

    Complain about this comment

  • 206. At 9:32pm on 26 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    149. At 11:17pm on 25 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "Yeah, sure. CBO numbers, right? Or they came from that outfit who's name I can't remember - the one that wrote the bill half of our reps never bothered reading?"

    [[No, from that well known socialist rag, The Economist, and probably originally sourced from the OECD]]


    "Anyway, I call BS on that."

    [[And you would be wrong.

    For quick reference, let's take a look at "Health - Highest Health Spending", page 86 of The Economist "Pocket World in Figures" 2007 Edition, Profile Books, London, 2006

    USA 15.2 % of GDP (it has since increased to something closer to 16.5%, but 15.2% is close enough, for now.)

    CH - 11.5
    DE - 11.1
    N - 10.3
    FR - 10.1
    CA - 9.9
    NL - 9.8
    AU - 9.5
    BE - 9.4
    SE - 9.4
    DM - 9.0
    IT - 8.4
    NZ - 8.1
    UK - 8.0 (p.233)
    JP - 7.9 (p.169)
    ES - 7.7 (p.217)
    AT - 7.5 (p.115)
    FI - 7.4 (p.145)
    EI - 7.3 (p.163)

    I believe that more recent figures would show an even greater disparity. See:

    "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care"

    "Consuming just under 10 percent of gross domestic product of most developed nations, health care can form an enormous part of a country's economy. In 2008, health care consumed an average of 9.0 percent of GDP across the OECD countries[13] with the United States (16.0%), France (11.2%), and Switzerland (10.7%)being the top three spenders."

    ____________

    So, on average, in 2007 as compared to all other rich democracies having single payer public health care taken together (i.e., using the OECD as a proxy), and without taking account of the 15% of Americans who lacked health care coverage at the time, America was spending fully 4% of GDP more for health care than the next most expensive large country (i.e., Germany in 2007); something like 6% more than the average for rich countries; and fully 7% more than comparable countries such as the UK, Japan, Spain, Finland, or Austria.

    In 2008 it appears to have been fully 7% above the average.


    7% of a $15T economy, divided by 300m people = $3500 per person, per year.


    You have refer to other people's postings as "BS" when you plainly didn't know what you were talking about.

    An apology is clearly in order.

    However, I've seen how you write, and have a fair idea of both your level of literacy and the strength of your character.




    ---------
    I previously wrote:
    "I'm betting that most people would rather have the $3500."

    I'm still betting that most people would rather have the $3500.

    Complain about this comment

  • 207. At 9:34pm on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jihad joe, I noticed you have defended both Shiite Iran and Sunni Islamists. Do you take a position on one side of the dispute or the other or are you neutral in that argument?

    Complain about this comment

  • 208. At 9:37pm on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    ukawailee, not only is jihad joe much more interesting and has something new to say which you Eurons don't, he's clearly much smarter than you are having beaten all of you every time. Besides, you have no Armani shoes to leave me in your will, have you?

    Complain about this comment

  • 209. At 9:40pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    So then you would agree that if it was okay for Saddam Hussein to conquer and occupy Kuwait, then it was okay for Israel to conquer and occupy the west bank, gaza, and Jerusalem. Glad we agree on that. Too bad for Saddam Hussein the US wanted to protect Saudi Arabia and the oil exports to Europe, otherwise the US might have left him alone
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    That which didnt happen, doesnt happen, so its pointless, that which happened is reality...and the reality is occupation is accepted in the case of one group and was rejected within a yr against another, and both the examples in the middle east....Since it was not okay for iraq to occupy and keep the occupied territory so its not okay for the entity to occupy.Period.

    Complain about this comment

  • 210. At 9:43pm on 26 Sep 2010, dceilar wrote:

    #200 Majik

    We all know that there is only one vote at the UN - the US. The apartheid South Africa were safe knowing they could bank on that vote. When the US changed its policy the regime fell like a house of cards.

    Complain about this comment

  • 211. At 9:50pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    As POTUS, one of his top priorities is to talk to his people, but if you take the time to analyze his speech you will find that it reiterated our unconditional support to Israel, put pressure on Israeli and Palestinian leaders to work together towards a peaceful and just settlement, and put pressure on the government of Iran to allow unconditional IAEA inspections.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And do we believe in the hyporcite? No..As a dear friend of mine once said, "its not about settlemets stupid, its about occupation" settlemets is an evil consequences of occupation, end the occupation, and the settlements automatically end..When obama speaks the narrative of the entities, no matter how unconditional he may try to sound, it just isnt unconditional..The same IAEA which a few days age arab countries resolution to check the entities nuclear storage? Did usa conditionally or unconditionally let outside experts to investigate the 9/11 that it is so keen on the unconditionallity from Iran, its your problem you are paranoid and deny it...not irans...We have seen the unconditional rhetoric once before in case of iraq...and atleast those with one iota of common sense dont want usa's demand on iran..

    Complain about this comment

  • 212. At 9:53pm on 26 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "189. At 7:02pm on 26 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 184, Andrea

    "You may believe that this drag is worth it, or like Obama you failed to consider the negative consequences of increased taxes and regulations."

    "Targeted tax cuts designed to stimulate the economy and create jobs are not only good, they are an absolute necessite, ..."

    To keep Unions employed. To HECK with everyone else.

    "... which is why President Obama is proposing tax cuts for small businesses, for corporations that invest and build in the USA, and the reason why he is proposing to penalize companies that move operations abroad."

    Yep, mustn't let jobs that ought to be Union Jobs get away...

    (snipped)

    "The people that would benefit from tax cuts are small business owners, which is why the proposed Obama tax reductions or credits to small business are so essential."

    Unmitigated runny, smelly green BS. Read that crap. It benefits unions. Nobody else.

    I own a nearly dead NON-UNION trucking company. I install computer networks and POS systems to keep food on the table and the lights on because I can't afford to hire drivers and roll my trucks - and even peddling POS isn't doing so well.

    My little company is for sale. My trucks are for sale. EVERYTHING is for sale. Nobody is buying. Nobody is hiring. Nobody is hauling.

    Things may be great for you but what you're benefiting from has run me out of business.

    Thanks a lot.

    Complain about this comment

  • 213. At 9:54pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    I think so. OK, you have convinced me not to recognize the nations of Lebanon and Syria.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The whole word can unrecognize syria and lebanon, and they wouldnt even care, Entity will because its guilty of not having any borders...

    Complain about this comment

  • 214. At 9:57pm on 26 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 196, dceilar

    "BTW - didn't taxes go up under Clinton?"

    Yes they did, and that coupled with spending cuts and significant increases in government revenue as a result of record job creation resulted in the budget surpluses that Bush II inherited and squandered in record time.

    Incredibly, a large number of our fellow Americans have swallowed the Tea Party ruse and refuse to use the most successful economic model we had in the last several decades and favor one of the worst on record.

    I guess that is a testatement to the effectiveness of political propaganda and the naivete of the electorate.

    Complain about this comment

  • 215. At 9:58pm on 26 Sep 2010, hms_shannon wrote:

    Marcy you seem quite jovial met your match at last have we ?.Sorry
    no Armani shoes to leave you in your my will,but have a fine pair of
    hunter Wellington's that you can have right away, they only leak when it rains..

    Complain about this comment

  • 216. At 10:02pm on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jihad Joe;

    "That which didnt happen, doesnt happen, so its pointless,"

    But it did happen. Saddam Hussein's armies invaded and occupied Kuwait on August 2, 1990. His armies stayed looting, pillaging, burning, killing, torturing until they were thrown out by the Coalition of the Willing the following Spring under UN authorization for whatever that is worth (nothing actually as you well know.) That is an historical fact. There's no denying it. Since that was okay, then the conquest and invasion of the disputed territories was also okay. You can't have it both ways, either both were not okay or both were okay. Since you didn't condemn Saddam Hussein, you should not have a double standard. Scorpions may lie about whether or not they will sting you in the middle of the river but they don't have double standards. Not real scorpions...I mean Moslems. That would make them hypocrites and we know you are not a hypocrite, are you?

    "that which happened is reality...and the reality is occupation is accepted in the case of one group and was rejected within a yr against another, and both the examples in the middle east....Since it was not okay for iraq to occupy and keep the occupied territory so its not okay for the entity to occupy.Period."

    Tough luck for the Palestinians that they didn't have any oil to export to the West for the US or someone to protect. Well that's the luck of the draw I guess. I din't notice anyone coming to Saddam Hussein's defense either. Also the luck of the draw.

    Complain about this comment

  • 217. At 10:03pm on 26 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 195, colonelartist

    "And here you are quite comfortable with the fact that not one person was even charged for incompitencies..."

    I don't recall saying I was comfortable with the level of incompetence, disorganization, lack of cooperation, and/or ambivalence that existed in our intelligence agencies prior to 9/11. IMHO, the people that received the warnings and ignored them or did not take action should have ended up in prison. As a minimum, they should have lost their jobs.

    Complain about this comment

  • 218. At 10:11pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    BTW, the other day you referred to the amorphous entity as Israel. Was that just a slip of the tongue or do you now accept its existance. You never made that clear when I pointed it out to you.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    That day, I was refering to the so called experts....Westerners may choose their words carefully before they say or write anything, its another story that they quickly forget what they say, I always remember what I have said and what others say at different occasions..Although I dont choose to decorate my statemes by carefully choosing the words..Saintdomminck will be reminded next time his obama resort to teleprompteing...

    Complain about this comment

  • 219. At 10:11pm on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jihad joe;

    "The same IAEA which a few days age arab countries resolution to check the entities nuclear storage? Did usa conditionally or unconditionally let outside experts to investigate the 9/11 that it is so keen on the unconditionallity from Iran, its your problem you are paranoid and deny it...not irans..."

    Now you know very well that Israel is not required to submit to inspections of its nuclear facilities because it did not sign the NPT. Iran did and never withdrew. It wants the benefits of being in the NPT without the obligations. Again, Moslems want things both ways, they want a double standard. I'm sure someone who is not a hypocrite such as yourself could not agree with Iran's uncompromising position not to live up to its treaty obligations. Either it should conply or withdraw from the treaty.

    We do know of course that the purpose of the treaty is not merely to facillitate development of peaceful use of nuclear power but to deter proliferation of nuclear weapons because they are so devastating that a nation that feels threatened by an enemy developing them would have every right to a pre-emptive strike to thwart their further development. Therefore under the logic of the NPT both the US and Israel have a right to launch a pre-emptive strike against all of Iran's suspected nuclear facilities wherever they may be and given the suspicions at any time. They do not need ironclad proof, just the reasonable fear is sufficient.

    Complain about this comment

  • 220. At 10:16pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    As a minimum, they should have lost their jobs.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    But they didnt, and you seem to be comfortable with it, as you havent mentioned it at all...They covered up their own incompitencies, not even the constructor companies which build those buildings were questioned, everything quickly covered up in the "they hate us, they attacked us, bla bla bla"...and when someone points out something, you all are so hurt... Thats covering up of the cover up..

    Complain about this comment

  • 221. At 10:18pm on 26 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "206. At 9:32pm on 26 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    "149. At 11:17pm on 25 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "Yeah, sure. CBO numbers, right? Or they came from that outfit who's name I can't remember - the one that wrote the bill half of our reps never bothered reading?"

    "[[No, from that well known socialist rag, The Economist, and probably originally sourced from the OECD]]"

    (makes flying fickle finger of fate gesture ala 'Laugh-in')

    Whoopie!

    ""Anyway, I call BS on that.""

    "[[And you would be wrong."

    When assuming a government is lying through it's teeth one is rarely wrong.

    "For quick reference, let's take a look at "Health - Highest Health Spending", page 86 of The Economist "Pocket World in Figures" 2007 Edition, Profile Books, London, 2006"

    (yawn - snipped)

    "I believe that more recent figures would show an even greater disparity. See:"

    Hardly surprising. My figures show I'm being taxed and ruled and regulated out of business. My accountant thinks I should file for bankruptcy and my lawyer agrees.

    (sorry, I don't do url's.)

    (more snippy)
    ____________

    "So, on average, in 2007 as compared to all other rich democracies having single payer public health care taken together (i.e., using the OECD as a proxy), and without taking account of the 15% of Americans who lacked health care coverage at the time, America was spending fully 4% of GDP more for health care than the next most expensive large country (i.e., Germany in 2007); something like 6% more than the average for rich countries; and fully 7% more than comparable countries such as the UK, Japan, Spain, Finland, or Austria."

    "In 2008 it appears to have been fully 7% above the average."

    What's their income tax rates?

    "7% of a $15T economy, divided by 300m people = $3500 per person, per year."

    I'm impressed. Again, So What.

    "You have refer to other people's postings as "BS" when you plainly didn't know what you were talking about."

    "An apology is clearly in order."

    Ain't gonna happen. I don't apologize to thieves - even thieves-by-proxy.

    "However, I've seen how you write, and have a fair idea of both your level of literacy and the strength of your character."

    Hmm. Sixty years of never asking for or taking a dime from anyone. Self supporting as well as employing over two hundred people over thirty years - despite all the best efforts of lefties trying to skin me. Literate enough that you managed to decipher what I wroted... Never defaulted on a contract, never missed a payroll, never in debt.

    And now I'm nearly out of business. Heck, if I had work I wouldn't be wasting my time sitting here, hoping for a phone call or a bid, while reading this silliness.

    "I previously wrote:"
    ""I'm betting that most people would rather have the $3500.""

    "I'm still betting that most people would rather have the $3500."

    And I'm still betting that nobody will ever see it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 222. At 10:20pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Nato helicopters attacked Pakistan...Lets see how much disgusted obama will be...

    Complain about this comment

  • 223. At 10:25pm on 26 Sep 2010, hms_shannon wrote:

    Marcy,with you and colonelartist so similar in temperament, did your Dad ever serve in the military,in his neck of the woods,just thought I`d ask?..

    Complain about this comment

  • 224. At 10:25pm on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jihad Joe;

    What was interesting about one scorpion turning on another when Saddam invaded the 19th province of Iraq on August 2, 1990 was that Palestinians were there working for the Kuwaitis who had given them employment. During the invasion the Palestinians turned on the Kuwaitis and assisted the Iraqis with the massacre and sacking Kuwait. And what a trail of disaster the Iraqis left there when they departed. It was a sight that might make some Israeli occupiers who left the disputed territories jealous. I think there were 900 oil wells set ablaze. How many oil wells do you think there are in Iran? I'll bet a lot more than 900. How many in the disputed territories? I'll bet none.

    Complain about this comment

  • 225. At 10:37pm on 26 Sep 2010, Rotbart wrote:

    This statement illustrates Obama's confused foreign policy toward Iran and demonstrates why he is percieved as a weak president by America's enemies. First he makes nice to Iran. Presumably George W. Bush was not nice to him and that was the reason for the dictator acting like a bad boy. For his reward Obama is treated with contempt by the Iranian dictator. Next Obama looks the other way while the ordinary Iranians are killed for protesting the stolen election. Now Obama telegraphs to the dictator that the military options are off the table. The dictator now knows that the U.S. has accepted the Iran will get nuclear weapons. One can only imagine the result this will have on the already volatile middle east. Obama is incompetent and we are going to pay a heavy price for it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 226. At 10:39pm on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jihad joe;

    "Nato helicopters attacked Pakistan...Lets see how much disgusted obama will be..."

    Disgusted? If it was NATO he probably ordered it. Besides, who else has anymore than a handful of them there? Certainly not the British. You know all of the NATO targets have to get the OK from all NATO countries, that's why it's so inefficient. It was rediculous in Kosovo. But the drones are another story. I think they are strictly American, not NATO. You have to wonder why they didn't use the drones. We love the drones. See how building model airplanes when you're a kid can turn into something useful? Today Radio Shack, tomorrow the Predator. BTW, do you ever wonder if someone isn't watching....YOU! Hahaha.

    Complain about this comment

  • 227. At 10:53pm on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jihad joe, I can't find anything on the NATO helicoptors. All BBC has is the same story about the drones. What is your source...or are you there watching it live? How do you know they were NATO. They might have been from another country painted to look like NATO. Iran? India? Venezuela. You know Hugo Chavez does like to meddle in a little mischief and have a good chuckle afterwards.

    Complain about this comment

  • 228. At 10:57pm on 26 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    There has been discussion in this string about the effect of tax cuts on the economy.

    This is not, at all, as simple a topic as some might suggest.
    Consider three examples:

    (1) a robustly growing economy, with interest rates in a more normal range of perhaps 4% or 5%; inflation at about 2%; unemployment about 6%, deficit running 3% of GDP; accumulated debt at 40% of GDP; expected economic growth of 3 - 4 % of GDP

    (2) a stagflation economy as in the late 1970's, interest rates at 8%, inflation near 10%, unemployment near 10%; deficit running 3% of GDP; accumulated debt at 60% of GDP; expected nominal growth of 3% of GDP

    (3) a skittish economy with, with interest rates of 1% (i.e., essentially zero), inflation of 1%, unemployment near 10%, deficit running at 6% of GDP; accumulated debt running at 100% of GDP; expected growth or 1.5% of GDP.

    ------------
    *

    In the first case, tax cuts are probably a bad idea, because they are likely to be inflationary in an economy that is going like a house on fire. In fact, it may be time to raise interest rates, or raise taxes to "take away the punch bowl", as the saying goes.

    **

    In the second case, tax cuts may be effective to boost real economic growth, provided that growth in the overall economy is strong enough to cover the real cost of money over the time that this money is borrowed. Here the economy needs the "punch bowl" to be refilled.

    Even then, however, the tax cuts are implicitly being paid for with borrowed money as long as the accumulated debt is greater than zero. If the accumulated debt is relatively low, a short term increase in overall debt as a proportion of GDP is not necessarily harmful.

    ***

    In the third case, the tax cuts are explicitly being paid for with borrowed money, in an economy where there is a fear of deflation; balance sheets are already overloaded with debt; and there is a lack of confidence that future orders will be received. The problem here is that the punch bowl is already full, but nobody is in a mood for dancing, therefore nobody dances, and so nobody wants to drink. In fact, for most of the party-goers this amounts to the morning-after hangover.

    Under those circumstances, households and firms are going to pay down debt, and if they don't have debt they are going to save a pile of cash while they wait to see which way the wind blows. (Which is exactly what we have seen in the huge jump in savings rate, and the improvement in banks' loan loss provisions and capital to assets ratios.) It is unlikely, then, that further "tax cuts", now, are going to be a very effective way to stoke up demand for domestic goods and services in the economy right now.

    In effect, what the tax cuts will be doing is fueling future demand, when what is needed is present demand. But the punch bowl is already full, and nobody is drinking. Making it "more full" isn't going to help. The need is to get people on to the dance floor so that they work up a thirst.

    In those circumstances, raising taxes is also problematic. But if both the deficit and the debt are perceived to be "out of control", then failure to deal with those problems, or actions that make those problems worse without creating counterweight assets, are simply going to undermine business and consumer confidence. It will make the eventual cost of fixing the problem greater, and the time required to solve the problem longer.

    That is, you're now telling people that you've already spent your paycheck like a drunken sailor on a spree, the punch bowl is empty, and now you are asking for an increase in your credit limit so that you can use your credit card to buy more booze. They are correctly concluding that not only should your pay not be raised (i.e., tax cuts) but rather that you are an alcoholic, and it is time for you to be cut off.

    ****

    One way out of this problem is deliberate inflation. But as long as China keeps the Yuan pegged to the dollar, America effectively can't inflate its way out of the problem.

    So, instead, America teeters on the edge of deflation. And in a deflating economy, you cannot rely on consumer demand to work your way out of the problem. On the contrary, in a deflating economy consumer and business fear tend to aggravate the problem.

    In the circumstances, a fair case can be made for both raising taxes and raising public spending in the domestic economy by an equal amount - provided that the public spending creates tangible assets, (or extends the life of existing tangible assets, which amounts to the same thing).

    In effect, the government would be using taxes to force households and firms to expand demand for long term assets in the domestic economy. If those households and firms are ones with high cash flow and low debt exposure, that probably isn't a bad idea. In a situation where households and firms have no confidence in the future, are afraid of deflation, and are afraid to hire more employees, public spending may well be a more effective way to boost demand in the domestic economy than tax cuts.

    It is very, very rare that governments are in a better position to make demand decisions in the marketplace than households and firms, yet this may be one of those occasions: another term for "lack of business confidence", or "lack of consumer confidence" is "fear". "Fear" is, at root, a collective action problem. One of the legitimate reasons for the existence of government is to solve collective action problems. We have an enormous collective action problem.

    (Suddenly I feel like George Bailey trying to face down a run on the bank - "The money is in his house, and your house, and your house...")

    Paul Volcker's great lesson to us all was the importance of expectations in the markets. In the 1980's the issue was inflation. If nobody believes that you are serious about dealing with inflation, then you will have a very tough time wringing it out of the economy.

    Here, the problem is that nobody believes that America has the political will or the self-discipline to address its financial problems forthrightly. And until that changes, these problems are going to continue.

    That expectation is not going to change until Congress shouts, loud and clear, "We are going to raise taxes, a lot; and we are going to cut future entitlements, a lot. Anyone who stands in the way will be run down."

    And to make it stick, they are going to have to gore some sacred cows in a very public manner: deeds speak.

    That would be the equivalent message to the Wartime poster (now considered racist) showing Uncle Sam with a wrench in one hand, rolling up his sleeve with the other, and the caption "Jap, you're next."

    The problem here is that while every voter could understand the imperative of Pearl Harbour, public opinion doesn't seem to be able to recognize that the financial threat now posed to America's future is just as serious.

    As long as there are brain-dead idiots running for election on the "let's-cut-taxes-now-even-though-we-are-running-record-deficits-and-the-debt-needle-is-off-the-chart", the markets are going to conclude that Congress has no sense of responsibility, and won't have for the foreseeable future.


    In the end, that's the bigger problem:
    This alcoholic has way too many enablers.

    Complain about this comment

  • 229. At 11:08pm on 26 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    221. At 10:18pm on 26 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    ""An apology is clearly in order.""

    "Ain't gonna happen. I don't apologize to thieves - even thieves-by-proxy."

    __________

    Excuse me?
    When have I stolen anything from you?

    So rather than acknowledging that you are wrong, and apologizing appropriately, you engage in defamation.

    When questioned about a change in his views, Maynard Keynes famously said:

    "When I am shown to be wrong, I change my opinion. What do you do, sir?"

    Yes, my assessment of your character was right on the money.

    Complain about this comment

  • 230. At 11:08pm on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jihad Joe, you don't seem to be responding to my posts. I am very disappointed. I was sure your insight and prespective would educate us westerners to the inner workings of the Islamic process of thinking and how they view the world.

    C'mon tell us. Sunni vs Shia? You for one, the other, neither, both, haven't made up your mind?

    Non Moslems; convert to islam, pay taxes, or be killed by Moslems who will go to paradise for it, yes or no?

    And most important of all, Armani shoes, will I be in the will or not in the will? You have no idea how much it would mean to me for you to say yes, I will put you in my will which becomes null and void when I die.

    (Maybe he's away at prayer. They have to pray five times a day you know, this could be one of those times. Or maybe he's ducking NATO helicoptors.)

    Complain about this comment

  • 231. At 11:45pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    jihad joe, I can't find anything on the NATO helicoptors. All BBC has is the same story about the drones. What is your source...or are you there watching it live? How do you know they were NATO. They might have been from another country painted to look like NATO. Iran? India? Venezuela. You know Hugo Chavez does like to meddle in a little mischief and have a good chuckle afterwards.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Be patient...30 people killed all declared ofource militants..

    Complain about this comment

  • 232. At 11:49pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Ah i see, BBC is busy with iran...I am not sure the Nato violation of pakistan will ever reach the knees of the westerners...let alone those who support their troops..

    Complain about this comment

  • 233. At 11:51pm on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jihad joe, when the taleban or al Qaeda kill Moslems say with suicide bombs or RPGs or IEDs, is that good or bad? When Sunni kill Shia is that good or bad? When Shia kill Sunni is that good or bad? What do you say to that?

    Complain about this comment

  • 234. At 11:53pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    http://in.news.yahoo.com/137/20100926/760/twl-nato-helicopters-entered-pakistan-to.html

    NATO helicopters entered Pakistan to kill insurgents

    Complain about this comment

  • 235. At 00:05am on 27 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jihad joe, this is what I understand Shia to believe in contrast to other Moslems;

    "Shia Muslims further believe that Ali, Muhammad's cousin and son-in-law, was the first of these Imams and was the rightful successor to Muhammad and thus reject the legitimacy of the first three caliphs.

    Shias regard Ali as the second most important figure after Prophet Muhammad. According to them, Muhammad suggested on various occasions during his lifetime that Ali should be the leader of Muslims after his demise. According to this view, Ali as the successor of Muhammad not only ruled over the community in justice, but also interpreted the Sharia Law and its esoteric meaning. Hence he was regarded as being free from error and sin (infallible), and appointed by God by divine decree (Nass) to be the first Imam. Ali is known as "perfect man" (al-insan al-kamil) similar to Muhammad according to Shia viewpoint. As a result, Shias exclusively use sermons attributed to Ali."

    Is this your belief or do you think this is a false teaching?

    Complain about this comment

  • 236. At 00:25am on 27 Sep 2010, Emps wrote:

    117. At 7:32pm on 25 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
    You will notice that colonelartist has stopped responding to my posts.
    ----------------------
    You may also notice others inc myself stopped responding to your drivel weeks if not months ago.

    Complain about this comment

  • 237. At 00:30am on 27 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jj, thank you for the link.

    "The drone flights have caused resentment in overwhelmingly Muslim Pakistan, where anti-American feeling runs high."

    All the more reason not to send aid to the flood victims. We might save the lives of the very people who would one day attack us, kill us. And then if we learn that we saved those people, we will be angry at them for being ungrateful instead of at ourselves for being so stupid. You see how naive and weak the average western mind is?

    The article went on to say that the helicoptors were Apaches which only the US operates there. They were probably in what is called "hot pursuit" which under our current rules of engagement is permitted. It wlll be interesting to see which the Pakistanis are angrier at, the fox or the scorpion. I say the fox. Surely many of them are at one with the jihadists. You can be sure President Obama is well aware of this incident and will defend it if asked. Anyway when someone is very angry at you it hardly matters if you do something else like this to get him even angrier. The Pakistani government must know that it will have to condemn the US publically while privately sucking it up no matter what they feel. They have plenty of enemies within Pakistan. Should the Taleban actually ever control Pakistan, that alone could trigger total war with the US immediately.

    Complain about this comment

  • 238. At 00:30am on 27 Sep 2010, Emps wrote:

    230. At 11:08pm on 26 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
    jihad Joe, you don't seem to be responding to my posts. I am very disappointed.
    ---------------------------
    Joe ! Tell him your a Brit and work for the BBC. lol..lol..then completely ignore him. Snides deserve snides.

    Complain about this comment

  • 239. At 00:49am on 27 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    The moratorium in the settlements has ended;

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11415719

    "Israel is ready to pursue continuous contacts in the coming days to find a way to continue peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority," Mr Netanyahu said in a statement released just after the moratorium ended.

    He called on the Palestinians to continue the talks, which recently resumed after a 20-month pause and have the strong backing of US President Barack Obama."

    (I thought it was ten months. Was 20 a misprint?)

    Once again Palestinian strategy backfired just as it always does. Just as Saddam Hussein's did. Just as Iran's eventually will. The scorpion always drowns. My hunch is that they stalled until the last minute and then would use resumption of the talks to try to force the Israelis to give in to a demand for extending it demonstrating their control over the process. They probably thought the Israelis would have no choice but to give in to pressure from the Obama administration. No dice, the Israelis didn't fall for it, they called Fatah's bluff. Abbas will have no choice except to walk out or he will be humiliated. One more of President Obama's failed policies. The Nobel Prize committee must be very disappointed. They didn't get their money's worth. Who knows when the next chance will be. Obama's got much bigger fish to fry. The Republicans seem set to take control of Congress away from his party setting the stage for a very difficult election for him in 2012 if we're all still around that long.

    Complain about this comment

  • 240. At 00:54am on 27 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "229. At 11:08pm on 26 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    ""221. At 10:18pm on 26 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:""

    """An apology is clearly in order."""

    ""Ain't gonna happen. I don't apologize to thieves - even thieves-by-proxy.""

    __________

    "Excuse me?"

    No.

    "When have I stolen anything from you?"

    Every time you vote to elect a looter they take from me. If I don't pay they throw me in jail. If I resist I get shot. Theft by proxy.

    "So rather than acknowledging that you are wrong, and apologizing appropriately, you engage in defamation."

    ""However, I've seen how you write, and have a fair idea of both your level of literacy and the strength of your character.""

    Care to clarify?

    "When questioned about a change in his views, Maynard Keynes famously said:

    "When I am shown to be wrong, I change my opinion. What do you do, sir?"

    I ignore leftie economists.

    "Yes, my assessment of your character was right on the money."

    Yeah. It sure was.

    So was mine of you.

    Have a nice day.





    Complain about this comment

  • 241. At 01:02am on 27 Sep 2010, CornwallCoastPath wrote:


    Saint, 192:

    Thanks very much for your detailed reply. In response:

    (1) "Security at US airports was very relaxed prior to 9/11." That simply can't be a complete explanation, even if true. Airport security is just the last link in a long chain of hijack-prevention measures. Others include communication interceptions during the planning stage, etc.

    (2) If what you say is true, that would mean there was something fundamentally wrong with the processes in place for protection of New York and Washington from airborne attack. What if the aircraft had been Russian nuclear bombers?

    (4) Perhaps Daytona Beach is where all US "Top Guns" should be taught from now on - it seems to produce graduates of the most amazing calibre!

    (5 and 6) You don't refer to the relatively brief periods after impact before WTC1 and WTC2 started to collapse, and the extremely short periods (approx 10-15 seconds) between start and finish of collapse of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7. And while it might just be plausible for the dramatic collapse of a skyscraper to be caused by a combination of aircraft impact and fire (although, as I'm sure you know, many people dispute this), the dramatic collapse of a skyscraper (WTC7) due entirely to secondary effects such as tremor and burning debris is surely extremely unlikely. As I understand it, the 9/11 Commission Report didn't mention WTC7 at all.

    For the first few years after 9/11 it didn't occur to me to question the fundamental truth of the official version (although I was aware, from Michael Moore's film and other sources, that we weren't being told the full truth about the connections between the US, Saudi Arabia and the Bush and bin Laden families). But a turning point for me came in about 2005 or 2006, when I became aware for the first time (through a short newspaper article) of the collapse of WTC7. I was shocked by this: how could the complete collapse of a 47-storey building in Manhattan have escaped my notice? It was clear that there was something a bit iffy about mainstream media coverage of 9/11.

    Finally: it's interesting that you describe the "lack of preparedness, lack of coordination and cooperation between security agencies" as "incredible". Many people would regard security agency incompetence as an explanation for 9/11 as, quite literally, incredible. They just don't believe it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 242. At 01:06am on 27 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jj, do you think the US does not irradicate the poppy fields in Afghanistan because heroin addiction is doing so much damage to Iran and Russia? I think there are something like 4 million heroin addicts in Iran, a lot for a country that size. It takes its toll. Taleban kiling Iranians with heroin, how does that strike you? Do you see the Iranian victims of heroin addiction as martyrs dying for the Taliban's jihad?

    Complain about this comment

  • 243. At 01:23am on 27 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    imp, he's still not answering any of my pertinent questions. We don't even know if he's a Shia or a Sunni or even a Sufi Moslem. I had an aunt Sophie once but that was a very long time ago. She was not Moslem.

    Complain about this comment

  • 244. At 01:53am on 27 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "# 240. At 00:54am on 27 Sep 2010, you wrote:

    This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain"

    So when the sheep gets tired of being clipped and then complains about the goats wanting more than the sheep has, it's a problem for the moderators.

    Y'all are pretty funny...

    Complain about this comment

  • 245. At 03:16am on 27 Sep 2010, Sugar Hill Street Soul wrote:

    War of the Words [Extended Version's I, II and III]
    _______________________________________________________________________
    It's kinda strange how everyone hates muslims and calls barack one
    anyway - It's good if theories (in public domain) are discussed / investigated..
    .. Maybe you have to be a mad man (like Lee "Scratch" Perry) to believe..
    _______________________________________________________________________
    ▚▚▚ Political Confusion ▚▚▚ Keep On Moving [Extended Version] ▚▚▚
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_vkeUvbxyY
    _______________________________________________________________________
    ▶ Mighty Aba Shanti ▼ Zulu Warrior ▲ Zulu Warrior ('96' Mix) ◀
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-qIuQZvRGE
    _______________________________________________________________________

    Complain about this comment

  • 246. At 03:54am on 27 Sep 2010, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    222. At 10:20pm on 26 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    "Nato helicopters attacked Pakistan...Lets see how much disgusted obama will be..."

    Let me remind you that our nation was attacked, our civilian citizens and citizens of many other countries were killed, without a specific provocation and without warning, by non-military persons of various middle-eastern origins. Responsibility for this attack was claimed by Al Quaeda, a trans-national organization with it's major leadership and training centers in Afghanistan (most of the perpetrators were Saudi).

    Our president openly declared that every civilized nation had an obligation to find and prosecute those who were involved in this criminal act. Any nation which did not cooperate would be considered to support or harbor these fugitives. The US and its allies would pursue wherever they were, Al Quaeda and those who supported or tolerated the presence of these criminals.

    Pakistan has not been able to, or some in authority there have chosen not to cooperate with the effort to neutralize Al Quaeda and those Taliban who are aligned with it. Allied drone strikes and other activities in Pakistan are part of our efforts to bring these organizations to justice for their crimes against other nations.

    While I can understand the frustration of being attacked by drones unmanned vehicles that strike virtually without warning, a parallel can certainly be drawn to roadside IEDs and other unmanned attacks made by our opponents. In war, you use what works.

    As far as the issue of national sovereignty - The US and several other nations have been attacked in their civilian population centers, by people acting without specific authorization from or reference to their own nations of origin. Sovereignty, of a nation which does not criminalize these acts of mass violence and effectively pursue those who are responsible for them - to purge them or bring them to justice, can not defend them.



    I am sure some will reply with accusations of terrorism by the nations which have responded to the attacks on and after 9/11/01. You see the results of protecting the attackers.

    KScurmudgeon

    Complain about this comment

  • 247. At 04:48am on 27 Sep 2010, U14613024 wrote:

    ⌇War Against War(s) ⌇
    Motives For Politics and Wars have always been dubious (through history) ⌔
    Dubious events ◇ Dubious reporting ◇ Dubious motives ◇ Dubious justifications ◇ Dubious theories ◇ Dubious explanations ◇ Dubious information
    ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅ ┅
    It's a good job I'm anti-wars (before they start)
    I've still got Clean Hands (and Pure In Heart)
    PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST (☮)

    Complain about this comment

  • 248. At 08:40am on 27 Sep 2010, RoseSelavy wrote:


    Worms, Drones, Currency manipulation through QE, BP vs Piper Alpha etc. etc. - the US absolutely takes the biscuit for hypocrisy.

    Complain about this comment

  • 249. At 09:30am on 27 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    228. Interestedforeigner:

    "They are correctly concluding that not only should your pay not be raised (i.e., tax cuts) but rather that you are an alcoholic, and it is time for you to be cut off."

    ********************
    This is what Americans are saying...to the government. Congress is not in a strong position to tell Americans anything at this point. It has lost credibility and proven itself to be incapable of governing. So a cry of "We must raise taxes!", while true, will just make people more likely to disagree.

    Obama's stimulus plan also demonstrated that he's not the responsible keeper of our money like he promised he would be. (Remember those line-by-line checks he promised?)

    In truth, anyone really interested in trying to figure out how to move our economy out of its stall would not be arguing about "tax cuts for the rich" or any tax increases at this point. He would simply leave the cuts in place for a while to not risk further disruption. This is why so many economists are also advocating that they be left in place.

    The fact that Obama is campaigning about "tax cuts for the rich" demonstrates that he is more interested in his "us vs. them" argument than in stabilizing the economy. A true leader wouldn't be sidetracked by politics like he is. He just can't stop himself from being the Democratic politician he is.

    By the way, the very thing Democrats decry most -- ex., a return to the "last 8 years" -- is the one thing that may calm our markets. That does not bode well for the Democrats.

    Complain about this comment

  • 250. At 09:35am on 27 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    RoseSleazy, aren't you forgetting Megrahi?

    Complain about this comment

  • 251. At 10:24am on 27 Sep 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "Nato helicopters attacked Pakistan" - claims a jihadist.


    Nope, they attacked and killed ca 50 armed Muslim fanatics who crossed to Afghanistan and attacked IAF forces there before trying to escape to their safe havens in Pakistan's northwest frontier regions.


    BTW. If British special forces retaliated against IRA factions' attacks would you, or anyone else, claim that "UK attacked Northern Island"?

    Complain about this comment

  • 252. At 10:39am on 27 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    powermeerkat, jihad joe doesn't want to answer any of my questions. Do you think he is afraid to admit the answers to us or to himself? He's turning out to be an intellectual yellow bellied coward. I am most surprised and disappointed. He talked a good game at first but he's turned out to be all bluff and bluster. All he can do is snipe with words from the dark recesses under a rock. He cannot come out and discuss these issues like a man.

    jj, here's another one for you. When jihadists hide among Moslem women and children knowing that if they are discovered these other Moslems will likely also be killed, are they creating martyrs or are they violating islamic law. Is making martyrs of non combatant Moslems by using them as human shields in jihad sanctioned by Allah?

    I see why you don't want anyone to have your expensive sandals or Armani shoes. They might hold them up to your corpse in a show of disrespect after you are dead. What's this with holding the souls of your shoes facing someone being an insult? Is this just an insult to Arab Moslems or to all Moslems? Of course if you are a Pakistani, say a Pashtoon, you are not an Arab. So would exposing the souls of one's shoes to you be something you'd take offense at?

    Complain about this comment

  • 253. At 10:44am on 27 Sep 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re If what you say is true, that would mean there was something fundamentally wrong with the processes in place for protection of New York and Washington from airborne attack. What if the aircraft had been Russian nuclear bombers?"



    A complete misunderstanding.


    NORAD and other similar elements were designed, built and operatated to protect North American air space from aerial attacks from WITHOUT, not from within.

    Prior to 9/11 there wasn't a single case of terrorists or other sick individuals using passenger planes as weapons (flying fuel bombs).

    [the only terrorist actions prior to 9/11 involved hijacking US passenger planes abroad and demanding political or financial ransom for their passengers]

    Since then NORAD SOPs have been changed and specific authorizations issued to USAF how to deal with domestic airliners which, for whatever reasons, refuse to change their course after ordered to do so.


    BTW. Soviet/Russian bombers were never capable of penetrating US airspace.

    And even less now.

    That's why Russia has built its arsenal of ICBMs and SLBMs, which incidentally will be less and less efective as American anti-missile defense technologies are steadily improving and pertinent AMDs systems are being built.

    Complain about this comment

  • 254. At 10:56am on 27 Sep 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re #252

    Anybody who's ever spent any time (other than a couple of weeks long vacations) in the ME knows, that not only Shia hate Sunni and Sunni hate Shia, but that Arabs hate Persians and that Persians despise Arabs considering them intellectually and culturally inferior.
    While Arabs fear that Iran wants to dominate ME, at their expense.

    No wonder many an Arab country has begun to arm itself for a possible (holy?) war against Islamist Republic of Iran; most prominently and effectively, a guardian of Sunni Islam - Saudi Arabia.

    Please, stand by for unavoidable further developments.

    Complain about this comment

  • 255. At 11:07am on 27 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    powermeerkat, I do not understand the concept of an anti-missile missile without a nuclear warhead. I cannot understand the concept of a bullet hitting another bullet directly. It sounds far too risky. A small nuclear warhead weighs only a couple of hundred pounds. A near miss doesn't count except in horseshoes, hand grenades, and nuclear explosions.

    Complain about this comment

  • 256. At 11:08am on 27 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:


    "248. At 08:40am on 27 Sep 2010, RoseSelavy wrote:


    Worms, Drones, Currency manipulation through QE, BP vs Piper Alpha etc. etc. - the US absolutely takes the biscuit for hypocrisy."

    We learned from masters, take a bow...

    Complain about this comment

  • 257. At 11:25am on 27 Sep 2010, Sugar Hill Street Soul wrote:

    9/11 theory
    I think theories claim Muslims were working in collusion with agents from other nations such as US (CIA) and Israel (Mosaad) in covert action / intelligence.
    ______________________________________________________________________
    Hip Hop & Poltics
    -------------------
    Boots Speaks Out About 9-11
    http://www.daveyd.com/bootsonthewarpolitics.html

    The problem that Boots ran into had to do with the front album cover which depicted Boots holding a detonator blowing up the now destroyed World Trade Center. The cover was shot several months ago and was in line with Boot's philosophy of not liking capitalism. The World Trade Towers have been viewed as a symbol of capitalism all over the world. Boot's depiction was designed to symbolize a concept, little did he know that his picture would be eerily prophetic.

    Caller #1 [Kim]: Should the United States be partially accountable if bin Laden was a CIA operative that was trained by the US?

    Boots: We don't know why the US is saying he did it. It could be for other reasons. The main point is the US trains terrorists. We're only up in arms now because this hit us here at home. Millions of people all over the world live in fear everyday

    Caller#2 [Kwame]: You know Saddam Hussein was on the CIA payroll. A lot of people don't know that Kuwait used to belong to Iraq and it was America and Britain that separated them. That's where you get BP gas stations which is British Petroleum Gas... Also your boy Noreaga in Panama. He was part of the CIA.

    Complain about this comment

  • 258. At 11:58am on 27 Sep 2010, Oldloadr wrote:

    There is a fine line between healthy skepticism of government (any gov't) and tin-hat wearing, total paranoia. I'm not sure everyone on this thread has stayed on the sanity reservation. Those of you who see evil in everything the US does; could you tell me what else the voices are saying? Maybe you could give me some lotto numbers... Did it ever occur to you that our gov’t was just as inept before 9/11 as it claimed to be? Anyway, even if the gov’t connected the dots and knew the attack was coming, until it happened what could be done? We could not have attacked Af’stan before we were ourselves attacked. If the attackers had all been rounded up before they killed anybody, they would have eventually got out of jail and the whole thing would have started all over anyway. Remember, this was the 2nd attempt to bring down the towers...

    Complain about this comment

  • 259. At 12:03pm on 27 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Colonel

    Ref. US helicopters launched an attacked in Pakistani territory. I have a simple solution for the Pakistanis, stop harboring terrorists!

    Regarding claims about OBL being a CIA operative, which I suspect was made to insinuate a link to 9/11, while it is true that the US helped the Mujahadeen fight the Soviets by providing them weapons, training and intelligence, the relationship ended immidiately after the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan and the Mujahadeen decided to bite the hand that had been feeding them.

    The relationship that existed during the Soviet occupation in Afghanistan became enmity when Osama bin Laden declared a Fatwa against the USA, in part because of the presence of US military bases near the Holy sites of Mecca and Medina, as well as our support to Israel.

    By the time 9/11 occurred there was no linkage between OBL and any US government agency. Unfortunately for us, our intelligence agencies were engaged in petty rivalries and were not as effective as they should have been.

    Complain about this comment

  • 260. At 12:38pm on 27 Sep 2010, Sugar Hill Street Soul wrote:

    re: connect the dots
    -----------------------
    maybe events should not be separated by the media and everything is connected man woman & children
    it's the same game
    who is to blame?
    they have no shame


    ☁☁
    ▓ ▓ ✈ ✈
    ▓ ▓
    ▓ ▓
    ▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁

    Complain about this comment

  • 261. At 12:41pm on 27 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 241, Cornwall

    "(1) "Security at US airports was very relaxed prior to 9/11." That simply can't be a complete explanation, even if true. Airport security is just the last link in a long chain of hijack-prevention measures. Others include communication interceptions during the planning stage, etc."

    Airport security involves more than cameras, X-ray machines, and airport officials searching for specific items. Intelligence agencies are supposed to provide airport personnel with the data they need to identify and stop potential terrorists before they board a plane. Obviously, that didn't happen.


    "(2) If what you say is true, that would mean there was something fundamentally wrong with the processes in place for protection of New York and Washington from airborne attack. What if the aircraft had been Russian nuclear bombers?"

    I am not an expert on security matters, but in my opinion that was exactly the case insofar as being able to defend our cities against attacks carried out by hijacked civilian aircraft. The problem our military had then, and still has in Afghanistan is that they are equipped, trained, and prepared to fight conventional military forces, not people dressed as civilians, that board planes at civilian airports, hijack civilian planes and strike their targets within minutes of us knowing the planes have been hijacked. You can rest assured that Russian jet fighters would have been downed before they reached US territorial waters.

    Considering the fact that most plane hijackings end with the plane landing at some airport and demanding ransom, the outcome of this specific attack was most likely unthinkable to those that were alerted of a hijacking minutes before the planes crashed into the WTC.

    "(4) Perhaps Daytona Beach is where all US "Top Guns" should be taught from now on - it seems to produce graduates of the most amazing calibre!"

    The USAF and NAVY academies in Colorado Springs and Pensacola produce outstanding pilots. The flaws that became apparent after 9/11 had nothing to do with flying skills or fighting abilities. We simply never envisioned a scenario like this and were not prepared to deal with it.

    "Finally: it's interesting that you describe the "lack of preparedness, lack of coordination and cooperation between security agencies" as "incredible". Many people would regard security agency incompetence as an explanation for 9/11 as, quite literally, incredible. They just don't believe it."

    IMHO, the crash of the hijacked plane in Pennsylvania raises more questions than the collapse of the WT7.

    Perhaps disappointing would have been a better word. I had great respect and extreme confidence in the effectiveness of the CIA, FBI and NSA prior to 9/11. That confidence evaporated when 9/11 took place, at which time I realized the limitations of our intelligence apparatus, the limitations of satellite imagery, listening posts, and traditional intelligence agency tactics and techniques to prevent events such as 9/11 from occurring. Hopefully the creation of the DHS improved the effectiveness of our intelligence agencies. At least they are now sharing information and comparing notes...




    (5 and 6...As I understand it, the 9/11 Commission Report didn't mention WTC7 at all.)

    And all I can give you is a subjective opinion based on probable cause.




    Complain about this comment

  • 262. At 12:59pm on 27 Sep 2010, Sugar Hill Street Soul wrote:

    Saddest thing is whenever there is any here say talk about alleged CIA involvement in world events everyone suddenly falls into line and stops questioning and challenging facts stories and events
    eg .. I hope they know best, it can't be true, you sound crazy Ad Hominem attack

    Complain about this comment

  • 263. At 1:19pm on 27 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 261

    I forgot to say that while I reject the insinuations of an inside job, it would not surprise me if the information we got from our government was "sanitized" to avoid panic and civil unrest or, more likely, out of control retaliation against Muslims.

    Most of the news and reports we get are edited and usually avoid terrifying and bloody scenes. This is true not only for war and terrorist acts, but even for the newscasts that we watch on TV everyday. A notable exception was seeing a young Iranian woman - a protester - choking in her own blood in the streets of Tehran. I wonder why that specific image was allowed by the censors or moderators...

    Complain about this comment

  • 264. At 1:31pm on 27 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 249, Andrea

    "By the way, the very thing Democrats decry most -- ex., a return to the "last 8 years" -- is the one thing that may calm our markets. That does not bode well for the Democrats."

    Have you considered the possibility that the markets remain nervous because of the distinct possibility of a return to the last 8 years? Part of the problem is the insistence of the GOP and a complicit media to focus strictly on the negative. The USA managed to get out of the economic recession that started in December 2007 after 3 consecutive quarters of growth. Unemployment remains high and the recovery is tenuous at best, but continuously drumming the arrival of Armagheddon does not help matter. The most important element for a robust recovery in a consumer oriented economy such as ours is consumer confidence, and the GOP is doint everything in its power to make sure it is not restored.

    Regarding tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, again, take a look at the record, nothing positive came about since those tax cuts were put in place, the only thing they achieved was contribute to larger deficits, economic demise, and unemployment. The way to go is to target tax cuts or credits to small businesses and to corporations that build and hire at home, rather than breaks to the Armani crowd.

    Complain about this comment

  • 265. At 2:04pm on 27 Sep 2010, Invincible_Iceman wrote:

    The US is expecting us to believe that a passport that supposedly "proves" who the attacker of the WTC was happened to survive burning jet fuel while everything around was completely incenerated. Do they think the rest of the world share the same IQ as George W. Bush?

    Complain about this comment

  • 266. At 2:17pm on 27 Sep 2010, Invincible_Iceman wrote:

    ref 246: "Let me remind you that our nation was attacked, our civilian citizens and citizens of many other countries were killed, without a specific provocation and without warning, by non-military persons of various middle-eastern origins. Responsibility for this attack was claimed by Al Quaeda, a trans-national organization with it's major leadership and training centers in Afghanistan (most of the perpetrators were Saudi)."
    _____________________________________

    You need to go back to basics and find out about the origins of who is responsible for the Al-Qaeda being in existence in the first place.

    As far as "without a provocation" goes, althought the civilians of the USA are innocent, they are the ones to are suffering the US government's constant failures.

    CAN ANYONE REMEMBER THE LAST POINT IN HISTORY WHEN THE US WEREN'T AT WAR WITH SOMEONE???

    Complain about this comment

  • 267. At 2:25pm on 27 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    264. SaintDominick:

    "Have you considered the possibility that the markets remain nervous because of the distinct possibility of a return to the last 8 years? "

    ***************
    You are mistaken. The markets remain nervous because of Obama's actions. The media is reporting what people, economists, etc. are thinking. Democrats are the ones complaining about the "last 8 years". That is their campaign slogan. A lot has changed since that was effective.

    You are also mistaken about "nothing positive" coming out of the tax cuts. That is a blanket statement that is disputed by economists. It is a Democratic and myopic viewpoint which starts from the premise that tax cuts for the rich are bad and works backward.

    The last thing our economy needs right now is to fixate on "tax cuts for the rich". This is yet another distraction for our president. He's avoiding.

    Complain about this comment

  • 268. At 2:29pm on 27 Sep 2010, Philly-Mom wrote:

    How did I miss this one on Friday!?!
    Oh yes. That's right. I had a ton of work on my desk, then and now. Alas.


    Hey Mr.Mark:
    Thanks for the summary of what's up.
    I'm really glad this particular banter is still only banter, and I truly hope that - for the sake of all nations involved - that Iran's leadership gets a clue, chills out, and decides to grow up and play nice with the rest of the big nations on the global playground. In fact...


    Dear Iran:
    If you want to play with big kid toys, you better prove you can play nice. Otherwise, you might just shoot your eye out*.

    So, play nice. Don't lie. Play well with others, follow the rules and don't cheat. Oh, and stop hiding things in your bedroom (we know whats in there, silly). THEN, maybe we'll trust you with bigger responsibilities. Okay?

    Love, Mom

    ____
    * obscure reference to the movie "A Christmas Story", which isn't about Christmas at all. It's actually about the annoyance of growing up... and the disgusting truth that adults usually know best, whether you like it or not.

    Complain about this comment

  • 269. At 2:45pm on 27 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 262, Sugar Hill

    "Saddest thing is whenever there is any here say talk about alleged CIA involvement"

    Most Americans have a fair understanding of CIA activities abroad, and some of us regret some of the things we have done, but to suggest that our government was responsible for 9/11 and that DoD personnel at the Pentagon are responsible for the attack against them goes well beyond the dubious logic of conspiracy theories, it is plain fantasy, it is absurd, and it shows that a lot of people throughout the world do not know who we are, how we think and what we value.

    We may disagree on the best approach to solve problems - domestic or international - but when it comes to the security of our country and the preservation of our freedoms and values we are as united as ever.

    Complain about this comment

  • 270. At 2:46pm on 27 Sep 2010, Sugar Hill Street Soul wrote:

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

  • 271. At 2:58pm on 27 Sep 2010, Philly-Mom wrote:


    Dear MAII:
    While I appreciate you appreciation of Henry Waddles Longfellow, I find him to be a little bit annoying because he Mythologized Paul Revere and Hiawatha, setting an unfortunate precedent in American Education that historical subjects should be remembered for the stories about them (regardless of whether they're true) than the actual facts of the matter.

    Hence, we remember Paul for a ride that didn't happen, Washington for a cherry tree that never existed, and Ben Franklin for a kite experiment he never conducted.

    Nonetheless... the poem was lovely. But, since it's a morbidly-dreary rainy autumn morning here in Philadelphia, I actually have Edgar Allen Poe* on my mind:

    -- Quoth the President... Nevermore.

    _________
    * Poe was a native of Philly and is often considered the father of modern suspense and horror literature. If you love ghost stories and ravens, thank an American from Philly.

    Complain about this comment

  • 272. At 3:06pm on 27 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    249. At 09:30am on 27 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    "This is what Americans are saying...to the government. Congress is not in a strong position to tell Americans anything at this point. It has lost credibility and proven itself to be incapable of governing."


    "In truth, anyone really interested in trying to figure out how to move our economy out of its stall would not be arguing about "tax cuts for the rich" or any tax increases at this point. He would simply leave the cuts in place for a while to not risk further disruption. This is why so many economists are also advocating that they be left in place."

    ____________

    I agree that the problem is the perception in the markets that no one is minding the store - or, more precisely, that American legislatures seem structurally incapable of behaving responsibly.

    When Paul Volcker was Fed chairman, he was able to administer fairly harsh medicine to the economy because the economic levers he needed - chiefly the ability to raise interest rates - were within his control. He didn't need Congressional approval to do it. When both the markets and consumers got the message that he wasn't going to alter course, they reacted appropriately, and there followed a period of low inflation and strong real economic growth.

    Here, unfortunately, the steps that are required to re-build the credibility of economic policy all lie in the hands of Congress, and, as a collective body Congress has shown itself simply to be unable to behave responsibly. It's pathetic.

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

    I agree that raising taxes at this point is quite dangerous, since taxes tend to be contractionary, and governments of all stripes in almost all big OECD countries have a record of (a) poor cost control on programs of transfers to individuals; and (b) extremely poor ability to pick winners and losers in commercial markets when engaged in "industrial policy". In short, in both areas governments have a poor (indeed, frequently awful) record of obtaining value for money.

    However, cutting taxes at this point is, oddly and somewhat anomalously, also both contractionary in the short term, and likely to be inflationary in the longer term.

    Ironically, the problem is that whereas we have had a decade, and more, of too much spending and too little saving, we now have the reverse. We need demand in the economy now. But right now firms and households are saving money at a rate unmatched in a generation. That is usually a good thing, but right now it is merely suppressing demand at a time when demand in the domestic economy is desperately needed. Oddly, too, it doesn't seem to be depressing demand (or at least not enough) for e.g., imported Chinese consumer goods. Tax cuts are only going to make that problem worse.

    Right now, in the short term cutting taxes is probably as contractionary as raising taxes to pay down accumulated debt, yet without the benefit of sending a message to markets that the government is serious about tackling economic problems. Oh, the irony in that.

    The thing is individuals are making the rational economic decision: delay investment in big ticket items until the outlook is brighter. At a microeconomic level of individual households and firms, of course that is what makes sense. But at the macroeconomic level of the economy taken as a whole it is merely suppressing demand and thereby prolonging a period of both high unemployment and (not surprisingly) low capacity utilisation.

    Finally, when outlook eventually brightens, there will be this big pool of investment capital looking for a home. When the dam bursts it will give rise to an inflationary bubble as too many dollars chase too few real assets.

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

    In that situation, forcing current demand for long term capital assets is rational policy. If accumulated debt were 30% of GDP, it would be better to borrow to stoke up demand. But when accumulated debt is approaching 100% of GDP that calculation is a whole lot more dicey. The debt overhang is too big. It has to be funded either by specific asset-linked public bond issues or by taxes. Of the two, right now taxes are the better idea.

    In either case, there should be no new public spending unless there are new taxes matched to the spending.

    As for spending, while it needs to be pruned heavily in the long term, in the short term cutting spending merely further cuts demand in the domestic economy. So addressing long term entitlement expectations - e.g., Social Security - is a good idea, since it doesn't reduce current spending, but does significantly reduce future unfunded liabilities.

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

    The problem here remains Congress. Getting Congress to produce rational legislation, with appropriate oversight, without having to bribe congressmen with concessions here and there, is almost impossible.

    So what can be done without Congressional approval?

    Well, on the immediate issue the choice is limited to (a) retaining the Bush tax cuts; or (b) letting them expire as they were supposed to do.

    As you point out, there are economists who believe they should be retained. There are other economists who believe they should be eliminated.

    I tend toward the latter group for three reasons.

    First, letting the tax cuts expire is in line with rational expectations: the tax cuts were designed to expire, and this is merely fulfillment of that policy. Keeping to the original plan is not usually fairly characterized as "disruptive".

    Second, at this point where the economy is too close to deflation for comfort (witness the high savings rate), I believe that the overall effect on current demand in the economy of letting them expire will be more beneficial than maintaining them, as discussed above.

    (A corollary to that is that the usual justification for tax cuts - i.e., leaving more money in the hands of households and firms so that they can make investment and spending decisions in the markets and thereby spur growth (which they almost always do more efficiently than government), doesn't apply here because there is already a huge pool of cash sitting on the sidelines in stand-by mode. The economy doesn't need an even bigger pile of inactive cash.)

    Third, I believe that failure to demonstrate even this minimal level of self-discipline will send an awful message to the markets - i.e., US Government can't exercise self-discipline even when all it has to do is stick to the original plan, without a Congressional vote.

    It isn't by the way, just the government that needs to be getting the message - its consumers generally, most of whom are also voters.

    So maybe the first step is for the government, and for consumers, to attend a meeting:

    "Hello, my name is Uncles Sam, I'm addicted to easy credit and not having to pay taxes."

    Complain about this comment

  • 273. At 3:09pm on 27 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    269. SaintDominick:

    Ref 262, Sugar Hill

    "Saddest thing is whenever there is any here say talk about alleged CIA involvement"

    Most Americans have a fair understanding of CIA activities abroad, and some of us regret some of the things we have done, but to suggest that our government was responsible for 9/11 and that DoD personnel at the Pentagon are responsible for the attack against them goes well beyond the dubious logic of conspiracy theories, it is plain fantasy, it is absurd, and it shows that a lot of people throughout the world do not know who we are, how we think and what we value.

    *************
    Agreed. They not only don't understand us, but they are obsessed with conspiracy theories. Everything means something else. Every action has 20 possible causes. Nothing is as it appears. It seems as though a straightforward answer stands no chance of being believed.

    Plus, lying is acceptable. I suspect it's not called lying but something else. Whatever it is called, it's lying to us.

    Complain about this comment

  • 274. At 3:13pm on 27 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 267, Andrea

    "You are also mistaken about "nothing positive" coming out of the tax cuts. That is a blanket statement that is disputed by economists."

    Would you mind producing evidence or an opinion from a reputable economist indicating that the Bush II tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans did not contribute to 1/3 of our budget deficits, that job creation was minimal after those tax cuts were put in place, that the surpluses that Bush II inherited did not evaporate immediately after the tax cuts were put in place and that the economic bubble those tax cuts created did not contribute to the recession that began in Demcember 2007?

    You may not want to hear about the GOP record, but you should. We don't need a sequel to what happened when the GOP was in charge. Unfortunately for our country the electorate is either suffering from amnesia or have bought into the GOP line the the best way forward is to move backwards.

    Complain about this comment

  • 275. At 3:14pm on 27 Sep 2010, Sugar Hill Street Soul wrote:

    Ripton Hilton (Eek A Mouse) - No Wicked Can't Reign 1978
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59mKuWssnNc

    Eek's best work!
    so why fight a man who's dealing in reality
    by going around robbing him of his vanity

    Complain about this comment

  • 276. At 3:46pm on 27 Sep 2010, Sugar Hill Street Soul wrote:

    @ 273. AndreaNY
    @ 269. SaintDominick

    re: 262 Here Say
    -------------------------
    Sorry I meant "hear say"
    When you both conclude it's just inconceivable such a wicked evil conception could ever be conceived and carried out by Western Powers, can you clarify whether you're being subjective or objective.

    By definition a secret organisation works in secret and there may be secret-secret agents within a secret organisation.

    ☆ Flag Flown High ☆ Serious Time ☆ Nah Badda Tell Me ☆ Nah Badda Dub ☆
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8LkYWU8CMw

    They say I don't have no rights inna babylon
    Because I don't know how the West was won
    Neither I can't change their plan
    The West is controlled by the Klu Klux Klan

    Complain about this comment

  • 277. At 3:48pm on 27 Sep 2010, mariein wrote:

    168. AndreaNY:

    Only a couple of months ago, I came to this conclusion: I realized that in regards the health care system and our economy, Obama knows exactly what he’s doing. It’s intentional. He’s not a bleeding heart. He’s playing with people who have bleeding hearts (some examples post on this forum). His timing was perfect, following the pain and greed we've seen. And he has supporters: I’ve no doubt there are many manipulations going on, with most if not all legislation that is passed now. Sounds great, Kills later. If people don’t finally get it, then we’ll fall. My suggestion is to not accept any credits and freebies coming out of Washington. Anything that’s voluntary, don’t take it; wait, and take the harder road.

    But Obama is used to manipulating the American mindset. When it comes to the middle east, he is lost and incompetent.

    This is a dangerous time for us because Obama is causing all kinds of unforeseen damage that we’ll be reaping in (my guess is) 3 to 4 years.

    So, to the democrat in legislature (to any democrat representatives who aren’t scattering from the destructors, and you’d better prove that you are), I don’t just say NO, I say: GET OUT.

    Complain about this comment

  • 278. At 3:55pm on 27 Sep 2010, Sugar Hill Street Soul wrote:

    More Notes From The Underground
    ---------------------------------------
    They run the world’s banking system. They make the stinking, corrupt laws that bring nothing but misery to our lives.

    I guess bankers were sleeping on the job too and made several honest mistakes to rob the money.

    Cost of Living Prices keep gone up gone up.

    Complain about this comment

  • 279. At 4:08pm on 27 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    267. At 2:25pm on 27 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    "You are mistaken. The markets remain nervous because of Obama's actions. The media is reporting what people, economists, etc. are thinking."

    ____________

    The markets are nervous, for sure, but the actions, or not, of President Obama are but one of many concerns.

    It's a bit of a no-win situation for governments. There is really very little they can do that will make the economy get better fast, but there are lots of things that government can do that will make things worse. For the most part they need to let the economy get on with it. But this is an impatient culture that doesn't like home truths, and doesn't do "waiting" very well.

    In many ways, the best the President can expect to do is be steady.


    ----------

    I might point out that Germany raised the retirement age from 65 to 68, and has an economy that is now tearing along, at least temporarily at 9% annual growth.

    Germany sent the iron-hard message to the markets that it would do whatever was necessary to fix the problem - including raising taxes and big cuts in benefits - and the government was prepared to take the political heat for doing it.

    America?
    Not so much.

    Complain about this comment

  • 280. At 4:12pm on 27 Sep 2010, Philly-Mom wrote:

    @ Sugar Hill Street Soul:
    I read Malcolm X's bio and I got friends who live near 'Malcom X' park here in Philly. Spike did a decent job on the movie, but the book was better. You know, I think Malcolm was right that some folks' worst fear is a Black Man in a Sharp Suit.

    Times have changed a lot, but sometimes it seems they haven't changed enough.
    Some folks still seem to think that powerful black men in suits are crypto-muslims.

    IMHO I figure these folks are Bat-Poop-Crazy Conspiracy Theory Idiots... perhaps some of the same 'Truther' Idiots that Iran's trying to echo.

    Sad, ain't it?
    Fortunately, I think that most folks know Obama ain't no 'muslin' and that these 'conspiracy theories' are a bunch of bull-excrement.

    There's too much xenophobic 'Truthiness' floating around out there, and not enough actual critical thinking skills.


    Now - about Mr. X:
    Malcolm was a 'black-Muslim-supremest' UNTIL he went on hajj and realized that people of all colors and nationalities were Muslim. Now, wouldn't it be nice if ALL the various bickering tribes/nationalities of Islam could have a similar spiritual awakening?
    -- Why can't THEY all get along?

    Yeesh. I keep having flash backs to Europe's 1500's. Ya know what i mean?

    History is repeating itself. This is the age of the Islamic 'Protestant Reformation,' and we really oughta tread very lightly until the religious dust settles.

    Complain about this comment

  • 281. At 4:33pm on 27 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Sugar Hill: The West is controlled by the Klu Klux Klan
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Reverse racism is clearly still alive and well in America.
    Reverse racism exists just as much, if not more, than racism.

    Sadly, many reverse racists, like racists, do not realize that they are the exact same as the one they critize...

    Some reverse racists also don't want to admit they are lighting the torch that so many of all colors have tried to put out...and the light just keeps burning on and on...

    Complain about this comment

  • 282. At 4:43pm on 27 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    PM wrote: You know, I think Malcolm was right that some folks' worst fear is a Black Man in a Sharp Suit.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    And some folks worst fear is getting raped and killed by a black, tan, or white man in a sharp suit...
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    PM wrote: Malcolm was a 'black-Muslim-supremest' UNTIL he went on hajj and realized that people of all colors and nationalities were Muslim. Now, wouldn't it be nice if ALL the various bickering tribes/nationalities of Islam could have a similar spiritual awakening?
    -- Why can't THEY all get along?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Wouldn't it be nice if all the various bickering races/nationalities of USA could have a similar awakening and all get along?

    But we have freedom of speech. We have to follow the laws( unless you're illegal alien under Obaam Admin?), but we don't have to agree. We have the right to agree or disagree, the right to critize or complement, etc. So the rapper can continue singing their rap songs with the scantily clad gyrating females and the white country club member can continue to play golf and smoke stogies.
    Such is the life. You can't say it is okay for one to be racist or not racist and not another...

    Complain about this comment

  • 283. At 4:50pm on 27 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    GF wrote: When it comes to the middle east, he is lost and incompetent.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When it comes to the ME, President Obama is trying to make everyone happy. It is simply not possible for any human to do this.

    The best President Obama can do in the ME is start with two or three countries, then move from section to section (break it up). TO me, the ME has sections which can be more easily helped and some sections which are immoveable or the opposite of flexible. These are the toughest nuts to crack.

    WE should make the best of the ones we can work with and the ones we can't work with will have to be on hold until we figure out just what we want to do. There are many options, but figuring out the most productive is the key. Productive would be to decrease violence and increase stability.

    But we can only help the people there, if they want to be helped.

    Complain about this comment

  • 284. At 4:56pm on 27 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Andrea wrote: Agreed. They not only don't understand us, but they are obsessed with conspiracy theories. Everything means something else. Every action has 20 possible causes. Nothing is as it appears. It seems as though a straightforward answer stands no chance of being believed.

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

    What happens when the truth is really the truth and no one wants to believe it because they only want to believe the worst about us?
    (lies)

    Many of us are just regular people with ordinary lives, like others around the globe.

    We also love, laugh, learn, live and lean on others at times.

    We are awesome, but we are not perfect and while some may be deceptive, the majority of us are honest with good intentions.

    Sometimes it feels like certain peoples from around the world have already pre-determined we are guilty and it does not matter what the truth even really is...

    Complain about this comment

  • 285. At 5:37pm on 27 Sep 2010, Echotheword wrote:

    America took their eye off the ball back in 1977-1984. Iran will always be our enemy. Only time will tell, when Irag will become a democracy state. In 1977, I wore a button that said **** Iran. I see it once and awhile and smile; different year and same old story. I find it unusual that Jihad means "holy war" in Islam. Most people in the 70's knew Pakistan was the country for their terrorist camps; same as today. I am not a General, but it was well notice how politics works in society.
    Another issue as of today; Russia and China agreed to partner up with series of gas supplies, nuclear power, and open an oil pipeline between the countries. Russia and China will build a stronger economy and America will fall behind. America talks a great story, but doesn't implement many things they promise.

    Complain about this comment

  • 286. At 5:53pm on 27 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    276. At 3:46pm on 27 Sep 2010, Sugar Hill Street Soul wrote:

    "The West is controlled by the Klu Klux Klan"

    ____________


    There is racism in America, sure.
    There will be problems with racism in America for a long time to come. But all countries have their share of racists.
    We have no shortage of them posting here.

    However, in my experience of a lot of years dealing with Americans, few countries that I have been in have less systemic racism than America. Very few.

    America has done a lot more than most countries openly to examine the racism in its history, and to come to terms with it as a matter of public importance.

    The idea the the KKK control America is ridiculous.

    Complain about this comment

  • 287. At 6:11pm on 27 Sep 2010, Meredith Poor wrote:

    Iran has 60+ million people belonging to a distinct culture, surrounded by Arabs to the south and west, Indians/Pakistanis to the East, and Russians/Slavs, etc. to the north. Somehow they want to exert power in this situation, and they have nothing to work with. "They" means the leadership - whether the average citizen cares much is hard to tell. The US makes a useful target because it's so far away. In other words, 'we' are being pushed around by these people half a world away, where 'we' is some abstraction of Middle Eastern religions and ethnicities.

    Western influences are pervasive, and the clerics are scared their role in Iranian society is finished. So they empower an absolutist theocratic government, who eventually rules via thugs rather than laws, religious or secular, and the clerics are out of the picture anyway. Better to have a small voice in a large political assembly than no voice at all in a small one.

    Complain about this comment

  • 288. At 6:16pm on 27 Sep 2010, Bro_Winky wrote:

    285. At 5:37pm on 27 Sep 2010, Echotheword wrote:

    America took their eye off the ball back in 1977-1984. Iran will always be our enemy. Only time will tell, when Iran will become a democracy state.

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

    Funny, I seem to recall Iran was a democracy state way back in 1953. That is, until the CIA got involved...

    Why would Iran ever have a grudge against the West?

    Complain about this comment

  • 289. At 6:59pm on 27 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    272. Interestedforeigner

    Re: Markets and tax increases. A few points. This is a unique situation. The term, "unprecedented", is often used to describe it.

    What your logic, which is quite good, fails to consider is what people are feeling in this, specific environment. "Rational expectations" have been blown out of the water, which is not a good thing. Obama's and Democrats' actions have thrown out the playbook, so to speak.

    The emotional state of many people is that they don't know what the government will do next -- and whatever it is, they don't think it will necessarily be good. That's the opposite of hope. It's almost dread.

    There's a reason you don't go into a company and turn it upside down when you "change" it. Everyone stops working and spends time speculating on what will happen next. Many fear a loss of employment. You, essentially, kill productivity until things stabilize. This is what Obama has done to certain sectors of our economy.

    Complain about this comment

  • 290. At 7:32pm on 27 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 276, Sugar Hill

    "The West is controlled by the Klu Klux Klan"

    Since I joined this blog a couple of years ago I read posts claiming the USA is run by the Jewish lobby, neo-cons, liberals, socialists, Nazis, right wingers, the elite, unions, and I now learn we are actually run by the discredited and irrelevant KKK...

    At this rate I am not going to have a choice but to conclude that our government is run by the American people!


    Complain about this comment

  • 291. At 7:45pm on 27 Sep 2010, _marko wrote:

    This might resonate for people who post a lot in blogs, just read the comments:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1#start-of-comments

    Complain about this comment

  • 292. At 7:54pm on 27 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 279, IF

    "America?
    Not so much."

    Can you imagine what will happen to President Obama, or any other president for that matter, if he proposed raising the SS eligibility age to 68 and proposed a tax increase to balance the federal government budget?

    President Obama proposed letting the irresponsible tax breaks given to the top 2% of American wage earners expire and revert to Clinton era levels to help reduce our budget deficits and people are calling a socialist, anti-business, an elitist, and a man intent on punishing the middle class (I wish the heck I could be part of the middle class that makes $250K a year).

    Even the slightest insinuation of changed to Social Security and MEDICARE elicit vicious attacks and pretty much dooms the political career of whomever proposes such audacity. An example is President Obama's decision to discontinue the MEDICARE subsidies to insurance companies and use the 10-year $500B savings to help finance healthcare reform improvements. You would think that conservatives would be delighted and supportive of ending subsidies that can easily be considered fraudulent, instead, they are running political ads condemning that decision.

    It will not be long before we have no choice but to raise the SS eligibility age to 68 or perhaps 69, raise contribution caps substantially, and eliminate early retirement.

    If people refuse to pay for the benefits and services we get the government will have no choice but to look real hard at sacred cows such as expensive "defense" projects, foreign aid, agricultural subsidies, and across the board budget cuts of 5% to 10% for ALL government departments and agencies. We simply can not afford to continue borrowing, adding to the national debt and paying over $200B a year in interest on the debt...and let's not forget the burden that our unfunded liabilities represent on our economy and fiscal solvency. Well, at least Obama is not signing "emergency resolutions" to pay for wars with monopoly money, which he accurately referred to as IOU's...pieces of paper!

    Complain about this comment

  • 293. At 8:00pm on 27 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    284. LucyJ:

    "What happens when the truth is really the truth and no one wants to believe it because they only want to believe the worst about us?
    (lies)"

    ************
    Well, if there's no problem with "lying" or no such thing as a "lie", one cannot have too much respect for "truth".

    Unless, of course, it's all just dissembling.

    Complain about this comment

  • 294. At 8:17pm on 27 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    272. Interestedforeigner

    "Re: Markets and tax increases. A few points. This is a unique situation. The term, "unprecedented", is often used to describe it."

    [[I'm not sure it is unprecedented, but it is certainly rare. The last time was 70 years ago.]]


    "What your logic, which is quite good, fails to consider is what people are feeling in this, specific environment. "Rational expectations" have been blown out of the water, which is not a good thing. Obama's and Democrats' actions have thrown out the playbook, so to speak."

    [[I agree that there has been upheaval, but I also believe that

    (a) President Obama's response to the financial crisis has been well within what I understand to be the range of economic orthodoxy (in fact, roughly speaking I would say he seems to have picked dead-center on the range of economic advice he received, fastened his seat belt, and hoped for the best);

    (b) President Obama's efforts have, thus far, at least not done significant harm, and may have done a fair bit of good in preventing a banking collapse and preventing both GM and Chrysler from going bust; and

    (c) President Obama's efforts, for good or ill, pale in comparison to the enormous problem he inherited on January 20, 2009.

    It simply isn't fair to blame President Obama for the Junior Bush recession. President Obama was dealt a really rotten hand - compare January 1, 2009 to January 1, 2001. I don't know that he has played it brilliantly, but at least he hasn't made any really big errors, or made the situation measurably worse.

    I have a hard time believing that any of the alternative choices - Republican or Democrat - would have done much better, and some in both camps would likely have done far worse.]]

    ----------

    "There's a reason you don't go into a company and turn it upside down when you "change" it. Everyone stops working and spends time speculating on what will happen next. Many fear a loss of employment."

    [[I have lived through this kind of experience before, and that is exactly what happens - the rumour mill runs full time on overdrive, people are paranoid, stop working, cease to co-operate. Been there, done that: "Gee, Mr. Smith, you sure turned this company around. We used to do twice this much business..."]]

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

    "You, essentially, kill productivity until things stabilize. This is what Obama has done to certain sectors of our economy."

    [[Again, I think the bigger cause was the Junior Bush recession. Sales of capital equipment and real estate went soft at least as early as August 2007. Tough to blame that on then-Senator Obama, Senator Clinton, or Senator McCain.]]

    Complain about this comment

  • 295. At 8:17pm on 27 Sep 2010, DenverGuest wrote:

    Tinksdamn #78:
    "If other actions were taken at any of the sites from that day's events in an effort to mitigate the worst of all possible consequences, I would not be surprised. If acknowledgement of these actions were evaded in an effort to present the public with the simplest of all possible narratives, I would not be surprised. The Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld troika did, after all, give us the Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch narratives."

    Unfortunately the geniuses mentioned above, by leaving gaping holes in the storyline, left the door open for all the loonies to come swarming through. What is the major glitch in the human brain that makes people want to believe the worst possible story and not the most likely one? I'm not one to EVER try to commiserate with the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld troika, but on 9/11 they were served up a no-win situation if ever there was one.

    Complain about this comment

  • 296. At 8:22pm on 27 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    292. At 7:54pm on 27 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    President Obama proposed letting the irresponsible tax breaks given to the top 2% of American wage earners expire and revert to Clinton era levels to help reduce our budget deficits and people are calling a socialist, anti-business, an elitist, and a man intent on punishing the middle class (I wish the heck I could be part of the middle class that makes $250K a year).

    ____________

    That's just it, though.

    If the other 98% are such Socialists, then why don't they just elect a Congress full of Socialists, and pass all the socialist legislation they want? "All power to the working proletariat"?

    Must be awful poor voter turnout among those "socialists".

    Complain about this comment

  • 297. At 8:37pm on 27 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    Ref 296, InterestedForeigner

    "If the other 98% are such Socialists, then why don't they just elect a Congress full of Socialists, and pass all the socialist legislation they want?"

    In part because we have a very peculiar idea of what constitutes socialism, and also because part of the electorate is inclined to believe whomever speaks the loudest.

    President Obama and the Democrats allowed the GOP to get the upper hand since healthcare and financial reform were proposed, have relied on intellectual interpretation of policy, and have not done a good job at explaining the benefits of the policies that have been put in place the last year and a half.

    Conversely, the GOP has run an outstanding political campaign, managed to convince the electorate that policies that are beneficial to them are evil, convinced them that the way out of a recession is to prolong tax cuts to the rich and make undefined spending reductions. When someone asks for specifics, they change the subject and get away with it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 298. At 8:38pm on 27 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    294. Interestedforeigner:

    Do you believe the massive changes in health care were necessary for an economic recovery? How about the dealings with GM? Or are you referring to TARP?

    I don't recall blaming Obama for the recession. What I am blaming him for is being unaware of the consequences of the many actions he took. He has created that "organization turned upside down". It is the sign of a leader who doesn't know what he's doing. Just like in a company, it's the sign of a consultant/president/outsider who doesn't know what he's doing. He winds up harming the company for a while, which is where we are with Obama.

    Now, instead of acknowledging the uncertainty he's created, Obama's avoiding it by focusing on tax cuts for the rich. Honestly, isn't there a better use of his time? Couldn't he do more than focus on tax increases for a select few, the money from which will fund, what, about 9 days of deficit? He's missing the point, again.

    Complain about this comment

  • 299. At 8:40pm on 27 Sep 2010, Philly-Mom wrote:


    Ref 276, Sugar Hill
    "The West is controlled by the Klu Klux Klan"

    290. SaintDominick wrote:
    "Since I joined this blog a couple of years ago I read posts claiming the USA is run by the Jewish lobby, neo-cons, liberals, socialists, Nazis, right wingers, the elite, unions, and I now learn we are actually run by the discredited and irrelevant KKK...

    At this rate I am not going to have a choice but to conclude that our government is run by the American people! "

    _______________________
    Absolutely.
    The KKK is a very silly group that is actually hated/belittled/reviled and generally put down by Americans of every age, gender, race, ethnicity, chosen cultural association &/or hue of skin.

    Are there still a dozen or so members around hiding out in the hills? sure.
    Do they vote? sure.

    Fortunately, sane people grossly outnumber them.
    Therefore, I seriously doubt they've ANY political pull at all.

    Racial Prejudice (of ALL types/hues) is Highly Unfashionable.

    Complain about this comment

  • 300. At 8:42pm on 27 Sep 2010, Scott0962 wrote:

    re.#28. At 12:08pm on 25 Sep 2010, Ronnie wrote:
    "Anyone who still thinks a crazed terrorist at the controls of a Boeing 757 jetliner made a series of breakneck maneouvers over the middle of Washington DC, flying just a few feet off the ground and then through the second floor windows into the Pentagon - leaving no aircraft debris on the lawn - and no CCTV cameras managed to catch a glimpse in broad daylight - - needs their head examined. Apparently the whole thing just 'vaporized' according to the official story.

    The simple fact is that Americans want to believe the official story, because to think the unthinkable is, well - unthinkable. It would destroy everything they've been taught to believe about their country and its leaders. The world is a nasty place, all of it. People need to wake up to that - and take back their countries from the self-interested syndicates that run it - for their benefit - not ours."

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

    For the conspiracy theorists who have found something new to excite them after years of failing to come up with the little green men from Roswell: if the American government had planned the 9/11 attacks don't you think they'd have found a better fall guy than some loonies in the deserts of far away Afganistan? I mean really, of all the people on our "folks we dislike" list and of all the countries in the world with exploitable natural resources (remember, we only go to war for oil, you conspiracy theorists said so) why would we pick Afghanistan? Wouldn't we at least have picked a country with a seacoast so attacking it and supplying our troops didn't require us to fly through someone else's airspace? What do you think Bush did, close his eyes, throw a dart at the map then say "There's our fall guy."

    As for leaving debris on the lawn, unless the plane struck the ground outside first there wouldn't be any debris on the lawn. Think about it. Aircraft flying at several hundred miles per hour strikes brick building; do you think the pieces just bounce off the bricks onto the lawn outside? No, their momentum carries them through the bricks and inside the building--simple physics.

    And if the government had planned it don't you think there would be CCTV footage? They'd have made sure there were cameras that "just happened" to be pointing in the right direction--both to feed the images to the media and to satisfy the need to assess the effectiveness of the attack.

    And if there were was no camera footage how do know the plane made "breakneck maneuvers"?

    Go back to Roswell. The story about UFOs and little green men was more believable.

    Complain about this comment

  • 301. At 8:43pm on 27 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    295. DenverGuest:

    "I'm not one to EVER try to commiserate with the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld troika, but on 9/11 they were served up a no-win situation if ever there was one."

    *************
    Bush "inherited" 9/11 (to use the term). He faced the threat of another attack and an economy in shock. He responded. He was judged.

    Obama "inherited" an economy on the brink of collapse. He responded and will also be judged. The thing is that Obama prevented disaster but can't seem to move beyond a particular point.

    I believe it's because he's not of the right mindset to take us to the next level of economic activity. We need a Republican to do that.

    Complain about this comment

  • 302. At 8:46pm on 27 Sep 2010, Scott0962 wrote:

    re. #290. At 7:32pm on 27 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:
    Ref 276, Sugar Hill

    "The West is controlled by the Klu Klux Klan"

    Since I joined this blog a couple of years ago I read posts claiming the USA is run by the Jewish lobby, neo-cons, liberals, socialists, Nazis, right wingers, the elite, unions, and I now learn we are actually run by the discredited and irrelevant KKK...

    At this rate I am not going to have a choice but to conclude that our government is run by the American people!

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

    Shocking isn't it to think that the American people have no one to blame but ourselves for the mess in Washington D.C.? No wonder people want someone else to blame. (My favorite scapegoats are the Democrats and Republicans.)

    Complain about this comment

  • 303. At 8:47pm on 27 Sep 2010, Philly-Mom wrote:

    @ Bro-Winky (288): Ouch.
    *winces and goes for another cup of coffee with which to drown her sorrows*

    Complain about this comment

  • 304. At 9:09pm on 27 Sep 2010, McJakome wrote:

    15. At 02:09am on 25 Sep 2010, Chris Heward wrote:
    "To be honest, I remember watching the videos on YouTube about 9/11 and the anomalies surrounding it and finding it quite convincing. What annoys me isn't that people are a little frosty at the suggestions made, but rather that they wouldn't even answer direct questions about specific bits of evidence."

    Occam's Razor. If that isn't enough, people can not be convinced when they choose to disbelieve everything that might prove their preferred notion wrong. No further proof needed than what is found on this very site.

    Complain about this comment

  • 305. At 9:09pm on 27 Sep 2010, Scott0962 wrote:

    re.#297. At 8:37pm on 27 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:
    Ref 296, InterestedForeigner

    "If the other 98% are such Socialists, then why don't they just elect a Congress full of Socialists, and pass all the socialist legislation they want?"

    In part because we have a very peculiar idea of what constitutes socialism, and also because part of the electorate is inclined to believe whomever speaks the loudest.

    President Obama and the Democrats allowed the GOP to get the upper hand since healthcare and financial reform were proposed, have relied on intellectual interpretation of policy, and have not done a good job at explaining the benefits of the policies that have been put in place the last year and a half.

    Conversely, the GOP has run an outstanding political campaign, managed to convince the electorate that policies that are beneficial to them are evil, convinced them that the way out of a recession is to prolong tax cuts to the rich and make undefined spending reductions. When someone asks for specifics, they change the subject and get away with it.

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

    Actually the Republicans have been fullfilling the duties of the opposition party, namely to oppose the excesses of the party in power. Their biggest accomplishment in the last two years has been to prevent the Democrats from using their filibuster-proof majority to ride rough shod over the democratic process.

    The GOP policy of supporting tax cuts but not really having much else to distinguish them from Democrats is going to hurt them as the campaign heats up. They've wasted two years doing nothing but make knee-jerk opposition to the Democrats when they should have been coming up with a platform of their own and now they're right back where they were in the fall of 2008: they don't like the Democrats' ideas but they don't have any of their own to offer. It's a pathetic performance from what is supposed to be a major political party.

    Statistically the GOP should pick up some seats in Novemeber but they're sure not doing anything to excite the voters--except of course for the Tea Party faction which the establishment Republicans loathe almost as much as the Democrats do because they can't control it.

    As apathetic as the voters are to many Democrats when push comes ot shove they may choose to stay with the devil they know--especially if that devil has seniority and can bring in the earmarks.

    Complain about this comment

  • 306. At 9:26pm on 27 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    305. Scott0962:

    I don't know about that. The Republicans' message is more in sync with voters than it's been for a long time.

    When Independents are saying we want less spending and less government, that's good for Republicans. Likewise, when investors yearn for the days when government wasn't in bed with them, that's not a bad thing either.

    Democrats have pushed voters towards them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 307. At 9:52pm on 27 Sep 2010, Tinkersdamn wrote:

    Re: Denver Guest #295

    "... by leaving gaping holes in the [9/11] storyline, [they] left the door open for all the loonies to come swarming through."

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

    Yes- in this instance, and so many in our history.

    I'm always positively struck by the public leader who has enough faith in the people that he isn't doubtful over our ability to comprehend or deal with the shades of grey that make up our reality and allow for informed judgement.

    Complain about this comment

  • 308. At 10:00pm on 27 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    298. At 8:38pm on 27 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    294. Interestedforeigner:

    Do you believe the massive changes in health care were necessary for an economic recovery?
    [[That's a whole new topic. Not related.]]


    "How about the dealings with GM? Or are you referring to TARP?"
    [[These are legitimate parts of the economic mess.]]

    "I don't recall blaming Obama for the recession. What I am blaming him for is being unaware of the consequences of the many actions he took. He has created that "organization turned upside down"."

    [[I don't think so. What steps has he taken that are outside the range of economic orthodoxy? What steps did he take that any of the other credible candidates of either party could not just as easily have chosen in his shoes?]]

    "It is the sign of a leader who doesn't know what he's doing. Just like in a company, it's the sign of a consultant/president/outsider who doesn't know what he's doing. He winds up harming the company for a while, which is where we are with Obama."

    [[Ok, that might have some force if true, but what actual harm has he done to the economy by mis-handling it? Again, as compared to the available alternatives, I just don't see how he can be criticized for straying outside the reasonable range of economic norms. He picked what looks to me like very middle-of-the-road measures that erred on the side of caution if anything.

    In my view the economy is on the mend, if slowly. If all he did from now on was stay the current course, it might not necessarily turn out badly. I think it would take someone either very brave or very foolish to say they have a sure-fire plan that will work any better.]]

    "Now, instead of acknowledging the uncertainty he's created...",
    [[well, what has he created? I don't believe that President Obama created the present uncertainty that is troubling the markets.]]

    "... Obama's avoiding it by focusing on tax cuts for the rich. Honestly, isn't there a better use of his time? Couldn't he do more than focus on tax increases for a select few, the money from which will fund, what, about 9 days of deficit? He's missing the point, again."

    [[On this we have quite different views.

    I think the real issue here is self-discipline, and I think it has the same kind of importance as Ronald Reagan telling the air traffic controllers to take a hike, or Margaret Thatcher staring down Arthur Scargill.

    I think my views are generally in the center of economic orthodoxy, and I would do the same thing. I would not entertain the thought of extending the Bush tax cuts for a minute. It sends completely the wrong message.

    It's long past time to call a halt to Never-Never Land. Time to turn off the video-games. Strop eating candy. Time for spinach and broccoli. After dinner, it's time for homework, and early to bed.

    The day this becomes effective, my guess is that the Dow-Jones will jump 300 - 500 points, maybe 1000 points. If President Obama backs down, it will fall 1000 points, or more. The disappointment in the markets will be palpable.]]

    Complain about this comment

  • 309. At 10:06pm on 27 Sep 2010, mariein wrote:

    So what I gather, at least on this forum, is that people either believe that the health care reform bill is free of trip wires (and it will happily carry them and their children and their neighbor and the person on the other side of the tracks, and even our economy, into the sunset),

    or they believe that Obama is completely unaware of the trip wires.

    Perhaps this will be its own conspiracy theory debate in 9 years. Or else we’ll all be exceedingly happy and at peace and we’ll know the Obama song by heart. Praise the government.

    Complain about this comment

  • 310. At 10:07pm on 27 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    KScurmudgeon and et al, Allow me to salute you all for your wonderful justification of violation of a country's Sovereignty..You even beat those who justified bombing of laos..Your country was attacked, your agents failed to thwart it despite the fact they were given more than enough information...The information that is click away, and that which will never see the day light in your lifespan, or probably your children's livespan...By then, you will have internalised all the lies that have been thrown out to you..and those who will dare to question it anywhich way, they will be treated, at worse, like ahemdinajad or at worse those who raise up the question of holocaust....Attacking a country is a crime in UN which every country has signed...Its not as if there is no line of communication between pakistanis and the ISAF. Ever wonder who actually give the information about the so called militants who are droned out of tihs world? ever wonder where these things fly from? Do you think that its Obama's better angels who secretly whisper all these information to CIA? Pakistani army is present in that area, what was so threatening that the helicopters of the invaders had to act like soviet union planes? When they did the exactly the same thing, the whole western world used to go crazy about pakistani soverigny...And 30 yrs later, they do it, and people come up with beautiful justifications..comparing the legal armies with the illega lor unlawful combatents.They attack without uniform, using civilian planes, your attack in uniform with military helicopters...An unlawful violation of of a country's airspace is an act of war...It should be your task to stop your country which claims to be everything, not to justify its acts of aggression..

    Complain about this comment

  • 311. At 10:12pm on 27 Sep 2010, McJakome wrote:

    126. At 8:32pm on 25 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:
    "114. At 7:08pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    "Ref 107, Oldloadr

    ""I hate Obamacare, and taxing to spend more.""

    I am begining to understand your ideology, if not to sympathize with it.
    You are anarchists, all government and the works of government are bad by definition.

    It is OK for vampiric insurance companies to suck you dry and then refuse care when you don't have any more blood [er, cash] because they are not the government and are "good" by definition.

    It is OK for pharmaceutical companies to charge you two or three times what they charge citizens of other western countries for the same medicine because they are capitalist and "good" by definition, and who cares what foreigners put up with.

    It was OK for the Bush regime to try to stop US citizens from buying cheaper medicines from Canada because Canada is a "socialist" [ie. bad] country trying to deny "capitalist" [i.e. good by definition] companies a good [even if steep] return on investments [unfortunate that it might result in loss of healt and life to the poor].

    You must own stock in the insurance and pharma companies to believe their lies.

    Complain about this comment

  • 312. At 10:26pm on 27 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    You should also read more closely the UN mandate under witch ISAF works in Afghanistan..ISAF's mandates ends on the afghan side of durand line. Not an inch or cm further than that..They signed on it..They are using safe havens in afghanistan to attack pakistan..For 8 yrs americans used this scenario to force pakistani army to kill its own people, while all the while, cia was using safe havens in afghanistan to train militants and then send them to pakistan to carry on the killings and return to afghanistan..and in the 9 yr when that came out in the open, the Nato indulges in naked aggression in broad day light, infront of everyone..And still there will be millions of americans who would pretend to know why america is hated...they will still say, they hate us just because they do..

    Complain about this comment

  • 313. At 10:32pm on 27 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Most Americans have a fair understanding of CIA activities abroad, and some of us regret some of the things we have done, but to suggest that our government was responsible for 9/11 and that DoD personnel at the Pentagon are responsible for the attack against them goes well beyond the dubious logic of conspiracy theories, it is plain fantasy, it is absurd, and it shows that a lot of people throughout the world do not know who we are, how we think and what we value.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Its your government aka obama who said that no cia agent will be charged..People who are champions in finding loopholes will find and have already found loopholes to extend this mercy to the agents well beyond the mandate of Obama's mercy...

    Complain about this comment

  • 314. At 10:42pm on 27 Sep 2010, McJakome wrote:

    196. At 8:06pm on 26 Sep 2010, dceilar wrote:
    #167 St Dom

    "I agree with your analysis on tax cuts for the rich not helping the economy. This was raised in a previous blog of Mark's. People who say that tax cuts for the rich creates jobs are deceitful."

    I have to disagree with you. The Bush tax cuts were a great creator of jobs for illegal yard crews. Wealthy people don't mow their own yards, they hire landscapers. I saw a marked increase of landscapers under GWB's help the rich regime.

    You know, I have walked by many of those landscapers, and they were invariably speaking Spanish. [In the interest of fairness, I have not walked by a majority but believe that most hire lowest paid, i.e. illegal, workers]. Those who speak of it state they will only hire landscapers who provide a bilingual foreman. [Guess which languages!]

    So, let's look at the record of the "Jobs" president, George W. Bush:
    more jobs for Indians in India [via outsourcing],
    more jobs for Indians in the US [who are to be trained by soon to be fired Americans].
    more jobs for Chinese in China [thanks to outsourcing], etc.

    Thank you so much George W. Bush, American billionares and poor but employed Indians and Chinese will always think kindly of you!


    Complain about this comment

  • 315. At 10:46pm on 27 Sep 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Lucy: " Reverse racism is clearly still alive and well in America.
    Reverse racism exists just as much, if not more, than racism.

    Sadly, many reverse racists, like racists, do not realize that they are the exact same as the one they critize..."




    That's why ANC folks who run South Africa take offense when people are talking about reverse apartheid in that country.

    Complain about this comment

  • 316. At 10:56pm on 27 Sep 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "Anyone who still thinks a crazed terrorist at the controls of a Boeing 757 jetliner made a series of breakneck maneouvers over the middle of Washington DC"





    How embarrassing!


    Pentagon is not in the middle of Washington D.C.

    It's not even in D.C.


    People who don't know rudimentary facts about U.S.should find themselves another forum.

    Perhaps somewhere where women and children were yodelling with joy on hearing about attacks on WTC.

    Complain about this comment

  • 317. At 10:56pm on 27 Sep 2010, McJakome wrote:

    241. At 01:02am on 27 Sep 2010, CornwallCoastPath

    For all that those of your persuasion are seldom shy to charge the US and Americans [not altogether undeserved] of arrogance, you seem unwilling to apply your perception of our arronance in this case.

    And if the US government, employees of said government, and US citizens were so arrogant as to think, "No one would dare attack us in our homeland?" You find it unthinkable, I have found it thinkable since Clinton was president.


    Nor is this unique, as the Japanese counted on American arrogance and disbelief to bring off their attack on Pearl Harbor. Pearl harbor also spawns conspiracy theories because nobody can believe that the arrogant US government [even post Bush] could possibly allow this to happen, ignore warnings about it, and end up fiddling while the Pacific Fleet, the Pentagon or WTC burned.

    Complain about this comment

  • 318. At 11:09pm on 27 Sep 2010, McJakome wrote:

    241. At 01:02am on 27 Sep 2010, CornwallCoastPath wrote

    RE: Saint, 192

    In the 1970s I was a student at the State University of N.Y. in Albany. Areas around the state's capital buildings were cordoned off due to falling rock.

    Now why should the rock facings of government buildings be falling off, you may well wonder. In NY the government and building trades are heavily influenced by a shady international conspiracy, supposedly centered on an island in the Mediterranean.

    In the "City" if you don't give them their "cut" you get a lot of trouble. The city, county and state know better than to cut them out entirely. I am not saying that these "businessmen" are involved, but if they provided poor quality materials for the WTC as they did for the buildings in Albany, they would seem to be at least as likely conspirators as the US government, if not more so.

    In typical conspiracy thinking, the fact that they have not been accused means that there is a strong suspicion that they are guilty.

    I will, of course, not say who they are for very real fear of retribution, capisce?


    Complain about this comment

  • 319. At 11:11pm on 27 Sep 2010, U14613024 wrote:

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

  • 320. At 00:14am on 28 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    jihad joe, you're back. And just when I was beginning to wonder if the choppers got you. BTW, you still haven't answered my many questions about Islam, Sunni, Shia, martyrs, etc. Hope you find the time to tell us because we cannot udnerstand if we are not from the middle east. You told us so yourself.

    "KScurmudgeon and et al, Allow me to salute you all for your wonderful justification of violation of a country's Sovereignty."

    Now we both know that the UN is a bunch of useless blowhard windbags who spew hot air and that so called international law means nothing. After all it was the UN that created the amorphous entity you have come to hate called Israel. And it was the UN that authorized the US led coalition to attack Saddam Hussein for sending Iraqi troops into the 19th province of Iraq. BTW, which side were you on when Iran was sending human wave attacks of unarmed children against Iraq's army and they responded with the poison gas America sold them? So you see, the CIA does have its uses.

    "Its your government aka obama who said that no cia agent will be charged."

    "For 8 yrs americans used this scenario to force pakistani army to kill its own people, while all the while, cia was using safe havens in afghanistan to train militants and then send them to pakistan to carry on the killings and return to afghanistan."

    You call them militants, we call them the Afghanistan army but point well taken. Surely we could hardly charge the very people who were needed to train the afghan army. In a few years they will be the ones flying over Pakistan bombing the Taleban and al Qaeda and killing some innocent women and children whom the Taleban and al Qaeda keep around to make into martyrs for Allah. BTW, what do you feel about that, are jihadis justified in using human shields to turn them into martyrs or is that anti islamic. What about music is that anti islamic the way the taleban said it was too? And what do you think they'd say about your Armani shoes unless you wear them in the cause of jihad. That is why you wear them isn't it, Armani for Allah?

    Complain about this comment

  • 321. At 00:20am on 28 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Jihad Joe;

    I smell a sellout.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11422065

    Abbas looks like he is going to "negotiate" even after the amorphous entitity continues to grow in size after having said he wouldn't. And what is his excuse? Because it is in the interest of American security, he said so because that is what President Obama said. So is Abbas an infidel? Does he speak for the Palestinian people or just for himself? I'll bet you speak for the Palestinian people, after all you speak for 1.7 billion moslems as you told us. And since that just about all of the moslems in the world and the Palestinians are moslems that mean you speak for them. So on their behalf, should Abbas negotioate, walk out, if he does negotiate is he a traitor to Islam and the Palestinians or not?

    Complain about this comment

  • 322. At 00:28am on 28 Sep 2010, U14613024 wrote:

    @sugarhillstreetsoul
    I guess that KKK line got people's back's up
    I was going to break down some lines from
    "African People (Indian Reservation)" for them
    I don't think I'll bother now..them people rough
    Whoah! it's a long story..

    ★ Heavy Reggae (Johnny Reggae) ★ African People (Indian Reservation) ★
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSDjXeYeDso

    Complain about this comment

  • 323. At 00:59am on 28 Sep 2010, american grizzly wrote:

    Well Marcus I did like the remarks about Armani for Allah. But I hear the Muslim women are keen for Victoria's secrets. But Jefferson said " In matters of style swim with the current. But in matters of principal stand like a rock." So I can't blame the Arab men for liking Armani, nor the women for Victoria's.
    But I can blame them for defending their breathern, like everything they do is justified. Like Saddaam's justification on Gassing Kurds. Or The Taliban cutting a hand from a seven year old child for pointing out an IED. Yeah I can pretty much say they are a barbaric lot wrapping themselves in Holy relgion. Thugs is what comes to my mind. This twisted freaks do their propaganda at least respectable states had the stones to walk out on this Nazi spiel from the Iranian (Hezbollah supporting, (because it plays well in their influence in gaining power in the Arab world). Even though I pretty much don't believe in the UN, just a posh palace for government stooges to suck up salaries. A podium for discontent; I suppose but little is ever solved. With this guy as President for Iran, I doubt little will be solved there either. Especially with clowns like Ahmadinejad showing up.

    Complain about this comment

  • 324. At 01:05am on 28 Sep 2010, american grizzly wrote:

    I know lets appoint Ahmaddinejad to Unoosa! I mean once the aliens get aload of him, they will determine this planet doesn't have any intelligent life! Only at the UN :(Truth is stranger than fiction, don't you think?)
    "Is the United Nations set to appoint an obscure Malaysian astrophysicist to act as Earth's first contact for any aliens that may come visiting? Nonsense, said the U.N.

    Mazlan Othman, the head of the U.N.'s little-known Office for Outer Space Affairs (Unoosa), is set to describe her potential new role as chief alien ambassador next week at a scientific conference at the Royal Society's Kavli conference center in Buckinghamshire, England, reported London's Sunday Times. "Nonsense," responded the U.N."

    Complain about this comment

  • 325. At 01:12am on 28 Sep 2010, U14613024 wrote:

    Another war angle is the trafficking of human body parts,,

    And God breathed into man the breath of life and man became a living soul – Genesis 2:7

    It is being acknowledged that in almost every country in the world there is a body-parts broker or a syndicate of persons who deal in the underground movement of human meat. This gang not only deals in human and organ-trafficking, it also deals in drug trafficking, money-laundering, manipulation of currencies, manipulation of the markets, murder, LIES, THEFT, GUILE, DECEIT and whole scale pillaging.

    ... Stay Tuned
    More News At 11

    Complain about this comment

  • 326. At 01:32am on 28 Sep 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    AG;

    "But I can blame them for defending their breathern, like everything they do is justified. Like Saddaam's justification on Gassing Kurds. Or The Taliban cutting a hand from a seven year old child for pointing out an IED. Yeah I can pretty much say they are a barbaric lot wrapping themselves in Holy relgion"

    They aren't that much different from Christians....a thousand years ago. Or Jews three thousand years ago. You heard about those times when who people said an eye for an eye they meant it. Some even in the west still do. Jihad Joe is about as perfect an opportunity to peer backwards into our own ancestors past as we are likely to ever get. That is why I'm so disapppointed in him not answering my question. The twenty-first century is curious to know how the eleventh century would see its situation today. Perhaps you can persuade him to reconcile what to twenty-first century minds is a life of fatal contradictions. Why does the scorpion always sting the fox knowing he will also die and gain nothing? Absolutely perplexing. JJ is right, we can't understand fully but he can try to help by explaining it.

    C'mon jj, be our teacher. Who ever heard of a bashful jihadist?

    Complain about this comment

  • 327. At 01:47am on 28 Sep 2010, sayasay wrote:

    #254, powermeerkat
    “Shia hate Sunni and Sunni hate Shia, but that Arabs hate Persians and that Persians despise Arabs considering them intellectually and culturally inferior.While Arabs fear that Iran wants to dominate ME, at their expense.”

    If you are thinking about a “divide and conquer”, it would not work. The USA tried this in Iraq when they allowed the Sunni and Shiite factions to fight each other, in the belief that they would then be too busy to come together and take on the US army. But having consolidated their respective areas of control, each faction made their power bases independent areas of operation against the occupation forces. The occupation forces impotency was now becoming too glaring as the sectarian violence points to poor law and order policing. And the emergence of sectarian strongholds subverted the USA's objective of a pacified Iraq amenable for national governance. Only on hiring some Sunni militias to fight with the US army was some semblance of order was achieved. It seems hiring of mercenaries to do the dirty war-works will work anytime and anywhere.

    The Shiite peoples relationship with the West ranged from 'inconspicuous disengagement after receiving the prerequisite foreign-aid' like the Egyptians, to outright hostility like the Al Qaida. In between, there are the Lebanese, Saudis, etc. This is where the analogy of mercenaries becomes difficult: who can the USA hire from the Sunnis to fight the Shiites? Or who among the Arabs can be hired or induced to fight the Iranians? Even the Arab-PLO can't be bribed(currently so far) to recognise the State of Israel. Nor a NATO ally like Sunni-Turkey could be induced to co-operate in the USA invasion of Iraq.

    While powermeerkat's shallow assumptions overrated the influence of different Islamic doctrines in geopolitical machinations. In the meanwhile, the Saudis cannot deny access of Mecca to the Shiites, Sufis, Alawites, etc, yet, they have no compunction banning Christians, based on the same Islamic doctrines. Islam is straight-forward on defining the enemy whilst Christianity is firm in 'Love thy enemy'. Or maybe there is really no effect just like the boisterousness of a combined class of Roman Catholic and Protestant biblical students having nothing to do with international politics.

    Complain about this comment

  • 328. At 02:23am on 28 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    308. Interestedforeigner:

    "I don't believe that President Obama created the present uncertainty that is troubling the markets."

    ***********
    This is the only point I disagree with. Well, maybe also about his fixes being centrist moves. I'm unconvinced about the stimulus spending and the GM move with bondholders wasn't kosher.

    Obama could probably raise taxes on anybody he wanted if he, at the same time, agreed to NOT DO ANOTHER THING for the rest of his term. No more regulations. No more taxes after that.

    Once people knew he wouldn't change anything else, they'd probably get moving, at least a little.

    Complain about this comment

  • 329. At 05:27am on 28 Sep 2010, David wrote:

    AmericanGrizzly,

    I've appointed you (at the time being only you..lol) as my official "ok to read" poster on this blog.

    Not stalking, just reading...("not drowning, just waving")

    It's scary to read or watch any non-fiction reporting these days...I do not even turn on MSNBC for fear of finding doom-laden accounts of ...up and coming "doom scenarios.".....

    Over low voter turnout November elections (run, run, run away)

    Complain about this comment

  • 330. At 05:29am on 28 Sep 2010, David wrote:

    Marcus,

    (see above) Have you written any books, lately. Not read, written?

    If you ever write one, I'll buy it and actually read it...but please put true accounts In It.

    :)

    Complain about this comment

  • 331. At 06:12am on 28 Sep 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "Mazlan Othman, the head of the U.N.'s little-known Office for Outer Space Affairs (Unoosa), is set to describe her potential new role as chief alien ambassador next week at a scientific conference at the Royal Society's Kavli conference center in Buckinghamshire, England, reported London's Sunday Times. "Nonsense," responded the U.N."





    A conference dealing with illegal aliens should be held in Juarez.

    A conference on banning US helicopter gunships in Peshawar.

    While a conference on Outer Space Affairs in Roswell.

    And conference on Human Rights and Freedom of Speach - in Tehran.

    [tin foil hats are supplied for free to all participants]

    Complain about this comment

  • 332. At 06:21am on 28 Sep 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "While powermeerkat's shallow assumptions overrated the influence of different Islamic doctrines in geopolitical machinations."


    Hardly: Shia and Sunni don't have to be incited by ony outsiders to slaughter each other: they've been doing it for hundreds of years.
    All by themselves. Willingly.

    And no, U.S. don't have to provoke Arab Sunnis into reining in Shia Iran: Saudi Arabia has been making significant efforts (and spending a lot of its own money) in that regard.

    Please, stand by for another powemeerkat's shallow analysis of the problem in a year's time. :)

    Complain about this comment

  • 333. At 06:26am on 28 Sep 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    JMM: "It was OK for the Bush regime to try to stop US citizens from buying cheaper medicines from Canada because Canada is a "socialist" [ie. bad] country trying to deny "capitalist" [i.e. good by definition] companies a good"






    At 05:14am on 24 Sep 2010, JMeacham wrote on HYS re Arctic imperialism and Canadian capitalism:

    "As for Canada, I can only lament that after being given the Arctic [in 1870] as a gift, they have repaid British generosity by disrespecting the British sailors who sacrificed their lives to map the Canadian Arctic. [...]

    Indeed, Canadian historians, or those purporting to be such, lace their words with rampant anglophobia. Ken McGoogan and Pierre Burton are examples of this boorishness in the colonial fashion. I would hope that an impartial UN tribunal would not reward that either, but in honesty they would probably share the sentiment. To the British readers I must dispel the image of the friendly Canadian; it is as much a myth as a safe Northwest Passage."


    #189. At 05:14am on 24 Sep 2010, JMeacham wrote:]

    Complain about this comment

  • 334. At 09:09am on 28 Sep 2010, U14613024 wrote:

    I agree with some American posters when they say Americans are real nice people (except when they start sabre rattling* and getting into we are ready for War mode)

    It is getting quite scary when everyone starts jumping on Marcuses thing and believing his nastyish nazi-ish bullying tricks when in reality they should send him back to Rome with the Mussolini(**) posse.

    (*)= saber rattling n. A flamboyant display of military power. A threat or implied threat to use military.

    (**)= Benito Amilcare Andrea Mussolini KSMOM GCTE (29 July 1883, Predappio, Province of Forlì-Cesena - 28 April 1945) was an Italian politician who led the National Fascist Party and is credited with being one of the key figures in the creation of Fascism.

    Complain about this comment

  • 335. At 09:37am on 28 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "311. At 10:12pm on 27 Sep 2010, JMM wrote:

    ""126. At 8:32pm on 25 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:
    """114. At 7:08pm on 25 Sep 2010, SaintDominick wrote:

    """"Ref 107, Oldloadr

    """"I hate Obamacare, and taxing to spend more.""

    "I am begining to understand your ideology, if not to sympathize with it.
    You are anarchists, all government and the works of government are bad by definition."

    Libertarian, thank you.

    "It is OK for vampiric insurance companies to suck you dry and then refuse care when you don't have any more blood [er, cash] because they are not the government and are "good" by definition."

    I don't have insurance. I pay cash. If something is too expensive for me to afford or save up for then I do without.

    "It is OK for pharmaceutical companies to charge you two or three times what they charge citizens of other western countries for the same medicine because they are capitalist and "good" by definition, and who cares what foreigners put up with."

    Same as above. If I can't afford to pay cash then I do without.

    "It was OK for the Bush regime to try to stop US citizens from buying cheaper medicines from Canada because Canada is a "socialist" [ie. bad] country trying to deny "capitalist" [i.e. good by definition] companies a good [even if steep] return on investments [unfortunate that it might result in loss of healt and life to the poor]."

    I suspect that you're wrong there and the reason was that pharmaceutical companies contribute large sums of money to politicians in return for special treatment in regulations and laws benefiting them over competitors.

    Someone pays for a service, they expect that service or they go elsewhere.

    "You must own stock in the insurance and pharma companies to believe their lies."

    I don't own stocks or bonds.

    Complain about this comment

  • 336. At 3:05pm on 28 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    335. filthy macnasty:

    When the definition of a libertarian becomes "anarchist", you know something's out of whack. But, then again, democrats are busy setting up their straw men, so now "less government" has become "no government" and "revisiting social security" has become "eliminating social security".

    Very sorry to hear about your business.

    Complain about this comment

  • 337. At 3:38pm on 28 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    Yet more fall-out from China's currency manipulation:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11424864


    It was one thing for the extremely rich, highly developed, urbanized Netherlands economy to have "Dutch Disease", i.e., an over-valued currency due to exploitation of North Sea gas fields, in the 1970's and 80's, but the idea that a semi-developed economy, like Brazil's, should face that problem is bizarre.

    It would no be occurring were it not for the currency tug-of-war between China and America, where the Chinese currency peg against the dollar is distorting the currency markets for all other currencies as well.

    Complain about this comment

  • 338. At 4:04pm on 28 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    MAII wrote: Who ever heard of a bashful jihadist?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Actually, with colonelartist aka mountain dweller, in particular, it seems that the more people ask him questions about Islam and the more people push him on his location, the more bashful he grows.

    I used to ask him some questions about Islam, just being curious and interested to hear what the beliefs were, cause' I've never really talked to any other Islamic people, ever, either, but he said it was wrong for him to talk about Islam with people who did not believe in it.
    Ironically, most Christians I know want to spread the love and word of God, with believers or non-believers, as they have nothing to hide. colonelartist is different- he does not like to talk about his religion or his country. Perhaps he is too worried he will give himself away.
    Course' my personal belief is that he does not have the same loyalty and pride to God and country that many Americans such as myself have...

    From his statements, you can gather some info about him, but who he really is remains a mystery, as he will not discuss his true beliefs and he will not discuss his location, so it makes him a question mark...?
    An unknown...

    He will criticize our country and our allies countries, but he refuses to tell us where his homeland is so that we cannot critizise him.
    It is a one-way street and leads us to the realization that no answer will suffice his questions, as there is no answer that is acceptable for a man such as this, one that is demanding and unforgivable.
    In this aspect, he protects his true motivation and what drives him.

    But I suspect, somewhere in that hardened heart, there is a spark of realization that we are all in the world together and must learn somehow to get along peacefully...

    Complain about this comment

  • 339. At 4:32pm on 28 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Norman wrote: Another war angle is the trafficking of human body parts,,

    And God breathed into man the breath of life and man became a living soul – Genesis 2:7

    It is being acknowledged that in almost every country in the world there is a body-parts broker or a syndicate of persons who deal in the underground movement of human meat.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Glad you are Norman the Gambler and not Norman Bates...

    Organ and human parts trafficking is creepy and on the rise. Of course, much money is to be made, which is what eggs it on. But how could someone really steal another's organs for money?
    To me, it is also devaluation of human life.
    But this is not just one part of the globe, it is all over.
    And in many instances, it is unsafe or unsterile.
    Or the body may reject the new organs.

    Is it real>? The movies say yes. All you have to do is watch Tourista or underground films on such...then, there's films like futuristic Repo Men.

    WE know its real. But there really haven't been many documentaries on such...

    Healthy organs and a sound mind are both underrated...and they are worth more than any amount of money, jewels or gold is...



    Complain about this comment

  • 340. At 4:33pm on 28 Sep 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re #337

    That Brazilian real is not really real has been known to currency traders for quite some time.

    Perhaps Lula can ask his close friend Ahmadinnerjacket for help.

    Complain about this comment

  • 341. At 5:11pm on 28 Sep 2010, Scott0962 wrote:

    re.#96. At 5:40pm on 25 Sep 2010, Interestedforeigner wrote:
    58. At 4:04pm on 25 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Who made obama the spokesperson of the world, and guardian of peace?

    ____________

    Let's see. If I remember correctly it was:

    Neville Chamberlain
    Benito Mussolini
    Paul Renaud, and
    Adolph Hitler.

    Those four were given considerable assistance by Hideki Tojo, Joseph Stalin, the incompetence and corruption of Chiang Kai Shek, and the unstable political gridlock of the Third French Republic that made it incapable of taking resolute action against threats to international security.

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

    You left out the naivete of Woodrow Wilson (also a Nobel Peace Prize winner) in thinking the League of Nations and disarmament treaties could guaruntee peace and of FDR who thought that crippling economic sanctions would force Japan to back off on its war of conquest in China when in fact it convinced Tojo of the need to move quickly to seize the resources Japan needed to prosecute its war and strike at the western powers in the Pacific in an attempt to cripple them badly enough to force their acceptance of Japan's new conquests.

    Complain about this comment

  • 342. At 5:29pm on 28 Sep 2010, Scott0962 wrote:

    re. #338. At 4:04pm on 28 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:
    MAII wrote: Who ever heard of a bashful jihadist?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Actually, with colonelartist aka mountain dweller, in particular, it seems that the more people ask him questions about Islam and the more people push him on his location, the more bashful he grows.

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

    That explains his sensitivity on the subject of Pakistan. Come on colonelartist, 'fess up: you're really Osama bin Laden having a bit of fun tweaking western noses aren't you? I'm sure it beats sitting around the cave waiting for the CIA to find you and wondering when the SEALS will come for you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 343. At 7:33pm on 28 Sep 2010, filthy macnasty wrote:

    "336. At 3:05pm on 28 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    ""335. filthy macnasty:""

    "When the definition of a libertarian becomes "anarchist", you know something's out of whack. But, then again, democrats are busy setting up their straw men, so now "less government" has become "no government" and "revisiting social security" has become "eliminating social security"."

    Does kind make you wonder how short they think our memories are.

    "Very sorry to hear about your business."

    Thanks, I'd swap what's left for forty acres and a mule, right about now.

    Complain about this comment

  • 344. At 7:48pm on 28 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    What happens to bloggers in Iran?

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100928/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_blogger

    Lots o' jail time...
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Scott wrote: That explains his sensitivity on the subject of Pakistan.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    You may be right...colonelartist does seem to have a soft spot for Pakistan.

    USA is more focused on Afghanistan and Iraq, but clearly, Pakistan being on Afghan's border, plays a huge role in all this.
    (See, there is some geography)

    Pak's nukes help to protect them, but like a moth to a flame, it also draws rough ones to that country, as there are some dangerous undesirable terrorists who desire nukes, which means Pakistan has to be tougher than ever to stand up to the terrorists.

    What role do the Taliban play in Pakistan?
    Perhaps they are just as prevalent there as in Afghan?
    Don't really know...but as they share borders...what else do they share?

    Complain about this comment

  • 345. At 00:09am on 29 Sep 2010, Nyabinghi Chants wrote:

    @ 27. SaintDominick
    ...
    ""To suggest that the US government or American special interests were involved in the event is preposterous, """
    ...
    _______________________________________________________________________
    So what you saying 100% without any qualms whatsoever is heads of states may have very small miniscule compunction pricking of the conscience about killing or causing deaths of hundreds of foreign civilians and / or soldiers abroad but could never under any calulating or desperate circumstances ever contemplate sacrificing any US civilian citizens at home or abroad for the good of the country economically or for oil reserves etc hand on your heart promise and swear cross your heart hope to die so help you god type of oath
    _______________________________________________________________________
    Nyabinghi Chants ▀ ▏▌▇ █ ▌ ▄ ▆ ▀ ▏▌▇ █ ▌ ▄ ▆
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPbPmZqRyb0

    Complain about this comment

  • 346. At 01:23am on 29 Sep 2010, McJakome wrote:

    filthy macnasty
    I will agree to your keeping every penny you earn, if in return you agree to never ask for, or accept, one penny's worth of anything my taxes have paid for. Agreed?
    You must, of course, stop using streets and roads that are paid for with my tax money.
    You must agree to never call the police or fire department [supported by my taxes].
    You must not use a public health facility.
    You must not take a plane because they use tax supported airports, and tax supported air traffic controllers.
    You must not use public schools [paid for by taxes] but you are free to spend your hard earned money on private education.
    If you lose your job, you can not apply for unemployment insurance.

    There are many more, but let's just say I don't enjoy paying for self-centered freeloaders, either. My brother had a friend who used fake licence plates and fake licence because he "believed" that the state had no business taxing him. He thought he was "entitled" to use the public roads because he was part of the public.

    It is ok for others to support you, but you have tantrums about paying your fair share. If you want to save all of your money, and not contribute to anyone else's well-being, you could move to Latin America, Africa or some other hell-hole where the rich are not expected to think about others [and being rich means having about $15,000].

    Complain about this comment

  • 347. At 07:44am on 29 Sep 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    "If you want to save all of your money, and not contribute to anyone else's well-being, you could move to Latin America, Africa or some other hell-hole where the rich are not expected to think about others [and being rich means having about $15,000".



    Or, alternatively, to a basket case like Cuba or Venezuela.

    Complain about this comment

  • 348. At 10:07am on 29 Sep 2010, hms_shannon wrote:

    338. At 4:04pm on 28 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    He will criticize our country and our allies countries, but he refuses to tell us where his homeland is so that we cannot critizise him.
    It is a one-way street and leads us to the realization that no answer will suffice his questions, as there is no answer that is acceptable for a man such as this, one that is demanding and unforgivable.
    In this aspect, he protects his true motivation and what drives him.

    But I suspect, somewhere in that hardened heart, there is a spark of realization that we are all in the world together and must learn somehow to get along peacefully...
    ----------------------------
    What a kind hearted lass, able to see good in all .
    After he said he had "Hight Mental Ability's"I though him a 50c short of a
    dollar...

    Complain about this comment

  • 349. At 10:40am on 29 Sep 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    ukwales,

    Re Iran...


    Have you noticed how many F-15s (not to mention other gear) Saudi Arabia has just ordered from U.S.? ;)


    P.S. Sorry to hear about those Typhoon ejection seats many a time not ejecting.

    Complain about this comment

  • 350. At 2:04pm on 29 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    349. powermeerkat:
    ukwales,

    Re Iran...


    Have you noticed how many F-15s (not to mention other gear) Saudi Arabia has just ordered from U.S.? ;)

    *************
    Wasn't our relationship with Saudi Arabia supposed to be all about Bush and his oil cronies?

    Complain about this comment

  • 351. At 2:05pm on 29 Sep 2010, hms_shannon wrote:

    349. At 10:40am on 29 Sep 2010, powermeerkat,
    That will keep the lads in McDonnell Douglas busy for a while which very
    good news.
    If Saudi had hung on a little longer,they could have had all our Tornado`s & Harriers for next to nothing,the A/C,effective for what they do & well looked after.My view,with in reason,an A/C is only as good as the missiles it carries.
    After our defence review the UK will have a much reduced capability.
    As for pressing on with the new aircraft carriers,the UK has never had all its defence needs met,the in depth defence needed for such large
    capital targets,will not be forth coming & will make them vulnerable.
    The RAF will be left with about 100 typhoons,more helicopters,drones,
    new air tankers/transport.
    The navy By most accounts,is pressing ahead with the Astute class sub & the type 45 anti A/C destroyers with about 6 of each ordered,but major cuts to existing vessels.
    The special forces are to be increased,with more helicopters, but most of our main battle tanks Challenger2 & many light armoured vehicles to get the chop.
    Lastly the 4 Vanguard class SSBN subs are to keep going for longer than
    planned,with replace funds coming from existing budget,that is not going
    to happen.At that time,it will be a choice between a Nuclear deterrent,
    or smaller properly equipped conventional forces.I wonder what is your view on that deli-ma?.
    BTW, I think the seats on the Typhoon are made by Martin Baker,with A Lads life at risk,& each A/C costing £60/70 million,they MUST sort it out PDQ.
    PS.The reason Saudi has bought US this time around,is that it wants to
    move closer to America with Iran pushing its luck,call me clinical,but
    I would sell to both of them ;)..

    Complain about this comment

  • 352. At 2:25pm on 29 Sep 2010, Nyabinghi Chants wrote:

    The party is over folks.:
    America and UK must face "painful truths"
    -> such as the Iraq War being "wrong" ...

    please tidy up your mess before you leave

    Complain about this comment

  • 353. At 4:05pm on 29 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Pak's nukes help to protect them, but like a moth to a flame, it also draws rough ones to that country, as there are some dangerous undesirable terrorists who desire nukes, which means Pakistan has to be tougher than ever to stand up to the terrorists.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    So far, its the so called democratic ones that are the moths to the flame.

    The entity tried. India has also tried. and now its the supreme commander of democracy, usa thats is trying get hold of the nuclear assets...The more unstable Pakistan becomes, the closer usa gets to get hold of the nuclear assents...Genius, the danger of nuclear weapons and technology getting in hands of terrorists was at its peak right after the fall of ussr...The terrorists were back then more free and the blackmarket also much more freer...However, I like to salute your obbession about terrorism...because when and if usa manages to get what india and the entity have wish for, the reasons you have given will be used as the main reason..Its good for your leaders that you are already tilted towards this explaination, your leaders will have an easy job.

    Complain about this comment

  • 354. At 4:11pm on 29 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    After he said he had "Hight Mental Ability's"I though him a 50c short of a
    dollar...
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Let me throw a penny at you for your thought..Looks like earning money isnt difficult for you...

    Complain about this comment

  • 355. At 4:30pm on 29 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    The party is over folks.:
    America and UK must face "painful truths"
    -> such as the Iraq War being "wrong" ...
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    usa is the one which is over...Its doing what anyother power has done just before its downfall,in despression they see faults in others and becomes uncontrolably aggressive towards the outside nations, in an attempt to save their last minute superiority...and within the country they turn towards extremism, but justifying it one way or the other..Calling it anything but extremism,until they reach the saturated point which comes fast, as they always are on the fast track..be it progess or detrioration..And when the cracks become large holes, the next available power just overtakes by whatever means that is most suitable at the given time...

    Complain about this comment

  • 356. At 4:54pm on 29 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    That explains his sensitivity on the subject of Pakistan. Come on colonelartist, 'fess up: you're really Osama bin Laden having a bit of fun tweaking western noses aren't you? I'm sure it beats sitting around the cave waiting for the CIA to find you and wondering when the SEALS will come for you.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    My insensitity and unbashfull ends where the certain mindset of the rectoper starts...In other words I am mindful to the receptors of the brains like you and youe your et al here...Certain minds must not be burdened beyond their mindsets..or otherwise it just disintegrates into independent small fragments, it create chaosness, and panic..and owners of the minds do what you and your et als, plus your leaders do...name calling, and emotional jerkness..denying everything,at times ridiculing those who say something else which they probably never heard and never thought about.. thats denying reality..

    Complain about this comment

  • 357. At 6:12pm on 29 Sep 2010, hms_shannon wrote:

    354. At 4:11pm on 29 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    Let me throw a penny at you for your thought..Looks like earning money isnt difficult for you...

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

    Let me throw a penny at you for your thought.

    With you turning up like a bad one, keep it for your self..
    ----------------------

    Looks like earning money is not difficult for you,

    Using that metaphor,I will turn it & say I have earned a shilling or two.

    Complain about this comment

  • 358. At 6:22pm on 29 Sep 2010, Nyabinghi Chants wrote:

    Religious Conspiracy Theories :
    God did not want globalisation.
    In the near future, however, (and it has already begun) God will use men’s thirst for amalgamation, and unrealistic cohesion to usher in the New World Government, which will be ruled by anti-Christ for a short time before his demise.

    Complain about this comment

  • 359. At 7:14pm on 29 Sep 2010, colonelartist wrote:

    But His Majesty Shaikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani, the emir of Qatar, condemned attempts to link Islam with terrorism. He partly blamed the US “War on Terror” declared after September 11.

    “We disagree with the attribution of this so-called terrorism to the Islamic religion because this — in addition to being incorrect — is a historical injustice that is refuted by evidence from recent history.”

    He said “gratuitous violent actions” in the United States, Europe and Asia in the late 20th century were never labelled as being American, European or Asian terrorism. (someone has finally understood) ) yrs later but still not late.

    Malaysia’s Prime Minister Najib Razak told the UN assembly that the world’s 1.5 billion Muslims were offended by “attempts to demonize Islam.”

    He added: “It intensifies the divide between the broad Muslim world and the West.”
    Muslim states press UN to condemn anti-Islam actions
    http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle09.asp?xfile=data/international/2010/September/international_September1292.xml&section=international

    Of all the speeches and presidents, the americans only heard what they wanted to hear, that Ahmedinajad said "9/11 was done by the american government"... He disnt blame the americans, he just blamed the government, he knows that american consitution doesnt preach attacks on their own country,so he didnt blame it, he just blamed a few people, He has nothing against the rest of american people..

    Complain about this comment

  • 360. At 10:23pm on 29 Sep 2010, Nyabinghi Chants wrote:

    THE END IS NIGH
    Therefore do your important paperwork now, this morning because if you leave it until this afternoon you might find it is a bit late, thereby leaving you in a bit of a pickle

    Complain about this comment

  • 361. At 02:03am on 30 Sep 2010, McJakome wrote:

    336. At 3:05pm on 28 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote: [When the definition of a libertarian becomes "anarchist", you know something's out of whack. But, then again, democrats are busy setting up their straw men, so now "less government" has become "no government" and "revisiting social security" has become "eliminating social security".]

    Up to your old propagandist tricks again andrea? I know you are intelligent and well educated, unlike those who buy into the propaganda I really wish you weren't wasting the intellect and education on the wrong causes.

    Are you asserting that whereas anarchists hate government, the libertarians love it? I assume that you know, as well as I do, that the libertarians and anarchists are not single uniform parties, and the extreme libertarian is barely distinguishable from an anarchist.

    As to the other items, be logical, if you are against socialism, and if you believe that President Obama's plan [contrary to all reason and logic] is socialistic and/or communistic, then you have to be against it. GOP/FOX/TEA Partiers regularly say they want to dismantle the socialism and get the government out of health care.

    Therefore, if they are logical, they must want to remove programs that are really much more socialist than the much maligned health care reform.

    That means Social Security, Medicare, Medicade and other "government meddling" in healthcare. The only reason you won't admit this is because the ignorant fools who fall for the lies about President Obama being a socialist aren't so stupid that they would support that program.

    Don't blame me if the masses are too stupid to see through the propaganda that you and others are guilty of spreading. I know perfectly well what will happen if the GOP gets back into power. I also know what is likely to happen when they continue the Bush legacy of running the US into the ground.

    It is already extremely difficult to fix the mess in this country. It will not get better unless we act forcefully and intelligently. Another bout of "Voodoo Economics" [Thanks for the candor President GHWB] and it will be much more difficult, if not impossible. I weep for my country.

    Complain about this comment

  • 362. At 02:49am on 30 Sep 2010, sayasay wrote:

    332, powermeerkat “U.S. don't have to provoke Arab Sunnis into reining in Shia Iran: Saudi Arabia has been making significant efforts (and spending a lot of its own money) in that regard."

    After having seen USA performances in Iraq and Afghanistan, from now on, the Ummah will view any Muslim country overtly doing what pleases USA most, as not only aligned to but a 'slave-soldier' of the USA. If USA saw fit to exclude Israel in its military operations during the First Gulf War, the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq for fear of inciting 'Israel-Muslim' conflagration. And this same USA did not insist that its Muslim allies were present in its Afghanistan and Iraqi invasion forces. Wouldn't these be clues that USA will defer to all Muslim countries' sensitivities?

    Rich Western bankers employed by Lehman Bros., Goldman Sachs, Rothschild, etc are well-known for buying expensive cars, better paintings, bigger mansions, etc. There is nothing sinister about Saudi Arabia, a well-off country buying the most up-to-date fighter planes, state-of-the-art radar systems and more robust bunkers, etc... buying the best is a function of the country's wealth.

    Complain about this comment

  • 363. At 04:25am on 30 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote:

    361. JMM:

    "Up to your old propagandist tricks again andrea? "

    **************
    Propaganda? My goal is not to intentionally mislead or to harm anyone. You might want to re-think this.

    Complain about this comment

  • 364. At 05:08am on 30 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Certain minds must not be burdened beyond their mindsets..or otherwise it just disintegrates into independent small fragments, it create chaosness, and panic..and owners of the minds do what you and your et als, plus your leaders do...name calling, and emotional jerkness..denying everything,at times ridiculing those who say something else which they probably never heard and never thought about.. thats denying reality..
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I agree with colonelartist that some humans minds can only stand so much, which is likely why some terrorists and suicide bombers have difficulty with reasoning and often do not seem to understand wrong from right- they believe what they want to believe and ignore the rest, no matter how much evidence or reality is involved.

    In times like these, all the good and mellow people needs to relax, have fun and chill out. Drink a cool one, listen to your favorite music, converse with friends, live life up, sha la la and sha la li. If there is all stress or all unhappiness, something has got to give. The good thing is, we can always find new goals and the more people like colonelartist say things like usa is done, the more Americans like myself get megaamped, superpsyched up, extra ready to rock it out like no other and to do things that they say we can't do just to do them.

    So please, colonelartist, any time you say negative things about USA, you only make Americans like myself even more proud and in love with our country, because when someone puts us down, it makes us stronger, more resilient and heartier than before because we know who we truly are on the inside, which is why I can say I truly have a clean, clear, aware and positive conscious which produces what my soul naturally projects.
    I can go to bed at night rest assured that my country is awesome.

    Complain about this comment

  • 365. At 05:09am on 30 Sep 2010, LucyJ wrote:

    Did I say awesome?

    I meant...extraordinary :)

    Complain about this comment

  • 366. At 10:54am on 30 Sep 2010, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re: A threat to a civilized world:

    http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/09/29/iran.blogger.sentenced/index.html

    Complain about this comment

  • 367. At 02:53am on 01 Oct 2010, McJakome wrote:

    363. At 04:25am on 30 Sep 2010, AndreaNY wrote RE 361.
    Andrea,
    So you don’t “intend to do harm,” the harm will just be accidental and in no way due to the peddling of political snake oil? If you peddle what you know to be untrue, then you are responsible for the evil that will flow from it [you meaning anyone and everyone, not the second person singular or plural].

    It is amazing that people who seem to speak the same language, have some intelligence and a reasonably good education seem to be constantly miscommunicating. Here is what my definitions are:

    lie of commission: deliberately and knowingly saying or writing something that one knows or has reason to believe is not true.
    lie of omission: deliberately and knowingly saying or writing something that one knows or has reason to believe is not the whole truth, or knowingly giving partial information or withholding information to obtain some result.
    lie of silence: deliberately and knowingly allowing or encouraging someone to believe, say or write something that one knows or has reason to believe is untrue in order to obtain a result that would be less likely if the truth were known.

    Propaganda is making use of these and other techniques to achieve personal or political ends that would be difficult or impossible if the truth were known.

    truth: statements that are objectively verifiable, and/or consistent with other known [and objectively verifiable] facts. Opinion is neither fact nor truth.

    If you say that President Obama is black, that is a gray area. You could look at him, but people might disagree on whether to call him black or dark brown. You could analyze his speech or behaviors as indicators of his affinity to black culture, but people might disagree on that.

    You can look at his writings, speeches, and behavior and try to deduce his thoughts from that, but you can not be sure of what he is thinking. If you call him a “communist” because you really believe that to be true, but with no objective proof, then you are either ignorant of what communist means and or what he has actually done [and how that could be defined as communist], or you are deliberately lying to achieve a political goal. This is propaganda.

    I apply this to myself. It is possible that I might be wrong, of course. You know that I have agreed with you on the issue of Islam and, especially, women’s rights there-under. I have to disagree with the left and PC crowd because I know the truth, and I am also unable to keep silent or omit facts that I know to be relevant. This is true even though it might not promote the “side” that I am more comfortable with. This is my duty as a citizen, and yes I look down on those who are not as faithful to their duties as citizens.

    I have to oppose the lying use of socialist, communist, fascist, etc. because I know what they really mean. I have actually said that I don’t believe George W. Bush to be a Nazi or Fascist. That would be a lie and possibly propaganda. I have said that in my opinion he ranks with Warren G. Harding [GOP] and James Buchanan [Dem.] in the Worst Presidents League. That is my opinion that I can give facts to justify, but it can not be a “fact” itself since it can not be proven objectively.

    If you say that President Obama is a Socialist or a communist, and you probably know just as well as I do what that really means, if you encourage others to believe what you know to be false, then you are what I have said, and I have no need to rethink. It is you who needs to rethink the nature and consequences of your words and actions.

    Are you being truthful, or are you propoting a cause or agenda that would not benefit from truth? Will you tell the truth even if it is not to the advantage of that cause or agenda? Will you not knowingly give incomplete, distorted or false information as fact?

    Even before I bound myself by oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic [and I emphasize the "domestic"] I had already internalized those values I learned in my civics and Problems of Democracy classes. I will not abandon truth and principle, even for the "side" I would be expected to favor. I expect the same of anyone who claims to be a patriotic citizen.

    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.