The government has announced that we can expect a terrorist attack from Osama bin Laden (whom the President swore to bring in “dead or alive” before we couldn’t find him) utilizing a weapon of mass destruction (the kind that Saddam Hussein had when we turned our attention from Afghanistan to bomb Iraq so we could find Saddam’s WMDs except several months later they’re nowhere to be found and Tony Blair is being raked over the coals for it) sometime within the next two years, which would take the current administration well beyond the next election year.
Now of course no one, absolutely NO ONE, would be unpatriotic enough to even consider the notion that a public kept fearing for their lives from terrorists would be even more reluctant to consider trivial matters like the economy and the environment come 2004 and want to stick with the administration which is protecting us all from evil terrorists plans (like 9/11 which happened during that same administration’s watch.) In fact I would be shocked–SHOCKED–to learn of such blatant and cynical manipulation on the part of the government.
PAD
• 
“How EXACTLY have your civil rights been stripped? What are you talking about? What can’t you do today that you could do 5 years ago?”
Anyone notice the new Supreme Court rulings on Miranda rights? Apparently, the right to remain silent no longer exists. Sure, they can’t use what you say against you in a court of law (5th Ammendment still applies at least), but try offering that consolation to Oliverio Martinez, who had an officer was trying to force a confession out of him while he received medical treament for gunshot wounds in the face and spine. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-052703scotus_lat,1,4961137.story
“We are not more secure now than we were before 9-11. Nothing GWB has done has made us more secure, just less free.”
Have there been more hijacked planes that I don’t know about? Any other terrorist attacks on our soil since 9-11?
Its like, dámņëd if there is an attack and dámņëd if there isn’t with some of you.
Childrens prisons found!
Not good enough.
Mass graves.
Not good enough.
Mass Graves filled with children
Not good enough.
Since the previous administration, Europe and the UN all agreed that Saddam possessed the WMDs, the question must be asked: where are they now? Iraq would have produced much better documentation had they been destroyed. Therefore, they are hidden in Iraq, or have been moved out. The fact that we haven’t found them indicates they have been moved out – likely to Syria.
Keep in mind that Syria is probably the worst place it could have gone, too. Syria’s Assad (father of the current ruler) was the architect of many of the problems in the Middle East between the Palestinians and Israel. The schoolwork we keep hearing about that incites hatred of Israel and the US: it got it’s start in Syria. Syria prefers to be patient and work behind the scenes – unlike Iran – which is what makes it so incredibly dangerous. Those WMDs – assuming they exist as most believe – could end up in the hands of Hamas or Islamic Jihad. Is that not also a very frightening concept?
I’d have a lot more sympathy for “Freeing Iraqis from oppressive goverment” if the Iraqi’s has put more than 1/2 ounce of effort into it themselves rather than US doing it for them.
At least in America we started and fought most of our revolutionary war OURSELVES…
You are kidding right? I mean, apart from the factual inaccuracies, i.e. that there have been rebel groups operating on a shoestring against the Baath party basically since its inception, and the French saved our butts in the Revolution (how weird is it to say that?), the thought pattern behind that statement is alarming. If you really think the Iraqis deserved it for not standing up for themselves, I’d hate to see your perspective on domestic violence. But what do I know? I’m just a conservative white male with a law degree who works for the government. In a law enforcement capacity, no less. I could be trampling your rights right now. Hey, it’s fun. Try it. Whee!
Oh, and for what it’s worth, you really don’t use a seatbelt violation to imprison someone on suspicion of selling drugs. You use the seatbelt violation to write someone a ticket for the seatbelt. You then use the fact that the person seems nervous or has a brillo pad sticking out of a hollow tube to search the car, and then you use the drugs you find to arrest someone for selling drugs.
My problem with court cases is that the only time the Supreme Court gets to deal with a case is when the cop’s suspicion is right. Screw the criminals. I’m much more concerned with people like the 84 year old aunt who are searched, but we need the Supreme Court to shift its enforcement mechanism from excluding evidence of actual guilt to civil suits by people who were wrongly harassed.
So Peter, tell us how you really feel about the current administration…
I was using the “seatbelt violation” as an example because I felt it would sufficiently analogize the actions of our government in a way that the lowest common denomanator of minds would understand. David Bjorlin still makes the point that law enforcement and punishment too often happens on suspicion alone, with circumstancial or little real evidence to support it. Any citizen that had it happen to them would be up in arms with civil lawsuits for “harassement”.
It is an analogy that closely parallels how the Bush administration has attempted to warrant the war in Iraq. I for one am glad to see a brutal dictator like Saddam out of the way, but why couldn’t we rally the support of the global community around such a noble cause? I would have had a far less cynical view of this administration’s decision had they just come out and said, “To hëll with Saddam” and go blow him up rather than wrap their actions around a trumped up suspicion that is leaving our government, and the rest of the country with it, in a far worse political position in the global landscape of diplomacy. The USA, being the remaining super-power of our time, has faced a very “dámņëd if you do, dámņëd if you don’t” response from the world. We help people and we’re imposing our imperialist ideals on them… We don’t help and we’re a bunch of fat gluttons wallowing in our own fortunes too much to see the suffering of a people…
At the very least, if we’re going to be dámņëd, we should be dámņëd for doing the right thing. At least that’s a travesty I can live with.
-Jon
Sigh. This makes me long for the days when this war was all about oil, not weapons of mass destruction.
Sigh. This makes me long for the days when this war was all about oil, not weapons of mass destruction.
Well, I think the Iraq thing is only gonna get worse, as evidenced by the continual sniping at US forces and the recent reports that the now-alive-again-Hussien has put a price on the head of ALL Americans.
On a side note, I don’t think Hussein has been in the country since the initial deadline.
Anyway, as far as our freedoms go, look at it from another perspective: Civilian companies and organizations are using the current resolutions such as the Patriot Act to pass laws and resolutions that can, and will restrict how we use the things we buy, and in some cases, what we bought ten years ago. A prime example of this is the proposed “SuperDMCA” bills all around the country. DMCA, for those who don’t know, is Digital Millenium Copyright Act. It’s a good piece of legislation in theory, but the RIAA and MPAA are using the slightly ambiguous wording to try and pass resolutions that will force technology companies to pass ANY new technology though them or Washington to make sure they can control whether or not digital copies can be made. While I agree on the subject of piracy, to an extent anyway, essentially, if we had this bill back in the early eighties, likely we would still be using vinyl. Which isn’t a totally bad thing :).
All of this, so the public is told, is to help curtail illegal use, and development of hardware for that purpose, included the funding of Acts of Terror(tm).
Aside from the absurdity of curtailing technological advancement in the name of stopping illgal acts, and said acts funding Acts of Terror(tm), the Patriot Act and the DMCA together can do alot towards curtialing our freedoms.
Look, I know that things like drug money and blackmarket goods CAN and DO in fact support terror, so do perfectly legal activities run by less-then-legal people.
I’ll leave ya with food for thought. At the tail end of the Great Depression, FDR declared the entire nation to be in a state of emergency, essentially giving him the presidential power to do what he needed to do to get the country back on its feet. In fact, it’s well known that FDR did ALOT of quasi-legal things to get our country going again. The only problem with the above (cuz, y’know, getting outta the Depression was GOOD :), is that FDR died before repealing the state of emergency, and we’ve been under it ever since, as no other president has seen fit to repeal it.
PS.I’ll add my thanks for the great discussions Peter!
Further reinforcing my belief The Authority should be a political farce. All of this is cannon fodder for a good writer, who could take both the liberal and conservative sides and spin it into something readable and plot-filled. I mean, a superpower with the ability to level small countries and the world turning against it? Sounds familiar to me. The Authority lets you have more civil rights, though.
Pat D. writes:
“Spending is up, the stock market is rebounding (and not through speculation), interest rates are low, and companies are staring to hire again.”
Spending is up because of two things. One is the massive rebates the auto companies are using to get their cars to sell. Two is that people have *not* spent for so long that they have to spend now to get stuff they absolutely must have. One can only wear tattered clothing for so long. Appliances get old and need to be replaced.
The stock market is not, I repeat, not rebounding. It is floudering. The government has done little to boost the economy. Tax cuts do little to boost the economy. The stock market is barely at 8000. It was at 10,950 the Monday before the election. It is down 27% since the election of Bush and cronies. I don’t blame all of this on Bush, but the market is influenced by public perception. And every time the market starts to rise, the Bush administration comes out with another public warning about how dire everything is. The market is up a couple-three hundred the last couple weeks and now they say “a major attack with WMD is imminent”. Anything to scare the populace into believing that the end is near and letting the government do even more immoral things to this country.
Interest rates are low. This is true. And still the economy lingers on the precipice of recession/depression.
“Companies are starting to hire again” is just plain bull. Unemployment is up again this last month. Wal-Mart may be hiring. McDonalds may be hiring. These jobs are at subsistance wages. One cannot feed a family on these wages.
He also said:
“I guess you won’t be buying a hydrogen car?”
Most people won’t be able to afford these cars. They will not be priced at a decent price range for 20-50 years. In addition, there are pollution problems with these cars, too.
Pat D. also wrote that our host, Peter David, is a hack writer. Pat is entitled to his opinion, but Peter makes quite a good living being a writer. I would venture a guess that most people who read Peter’s writings think that he is a pretty good writer.
My suggestion to Pat D. is that if you don’t like it here, lessen the stress in your life and take a vacation from this site. Maybe a rest from this place would help you become a nicer person.
‘Have there been more hijacked planes that I don’t know about? Any other terrorist attacks on our soil since 9-11?’
No, and there weren’t any b4 9-11 either. The fact that there hasn’t been any attacks since 9-11 doesn’t mean we are any safer as a society.
I truly believe that if al-queda decided to attack again tomorrow, NOTHING GWB has implemented would stop them.
‘Are only those who die during an American invasion worthy of your sorrow?’
I wont even justify that with a response.
‘Michael Moore is the Rush Limbaugh of the left.’
And God bless him for it.
**Have you bought a book in the last 18 months? Well the government can put the person who sold it to you in jail until he or she tells them what book it was or they get a lawyer to get them out.
To answer your question: “Buy a book without fear of getting someone in trouble for selling it to you and not telling someone about it.” **
Two things: The scope of the Patriot Act is to PREVENT crimes and specifically Terroism. ANY security measure is going to have to be restrictive in order to be effective.
Second: the government could put ANYONE in jail before or after 9/11 for not complying with a subpoena to obtain records.
That said, the PATRIOT ACT does NOT require ANYONE to KEEP records on what people read or buy. It simply removes the NEED to acquire a subpoena to obtain the records that your bookseller, library, etc., ALREADY KEEPS. Most people will readily give up said information anyway to the police if they inquire AOL, for instance, will happily cooperate with the police in giving up e-mail information and where you go online. The Phone company will eagerly supply the police with all your phone calls, and the bank will comply with your bank records. That stuff is ALREADY in place. Yes, you need a subpoena, but that’s mainly a protection for the businesses that keeps the records in the first place. Many libraries, for example, have decided to delete that information after a certain length of time.
What bothers me more is knowing that the library was keeping that information in the FIRST place.
And did you know that auto dealers are required to NOTIFY the police if you come in and pay CASH for a new car?
Or that the police can confiscate your money if you’re found with more than 10,000 dollars on you? EVEN IF you weren’t doing anything wrong.
I’ve read the PATRIOT ACT, and yes, it’s uncomfortably broad and vague, but while it doesn’t give anyone any NEW powers, it does remove some roadblacks and protections from old ones.
Yes, the PATRIOT ACT maskes me uncomfortable, but anyone who claims that the Bush Administration is doing anything different that ANY OTHER adminstration is either un-informed, or a bald faced liar.
As an aside, does anyone know whether the term is “bald faced liar” or “bold faced liar”? I’ve used both, but which one is correct?
Steve, I would like to point out that the WTC was car-bombed before 9/11. Oh, and how about Oklahoma City? Foreign or domestic instigation of attacks to insight terror is still terrorism.
“The stock market is barely at 8000”
Hey ALLEN!
The stock market is over 9000. Has been for almost a week. Sort of makes me ignore the rest of your post when you start out your post with either a BLATENT untruth, whether intentionally, or not.
It’s been a full day and PAD has only received 65 (66 in a second) comments. Back in my day, PAD would have been over a hundred by now. Someone is losing his touch. 😉
MikePB wrote
Anyway, as far as our freedoms go, look at it from another perspective: Civilian companies and organizations are using the current resolutions such as the Patriot Act to pass laws and resolutions that can…
– – – snippage – – –
Did I miss a meeting, or since when does civilian companies and organizations have the ability to pass laws and resolutions?
Did I miss a meeting, or since when does civilian companies and organizations have the ability to pass laws and resolutions?
Technically, they don’t. What they can do is pass policy statements which in the absence of other laws on the subject have the force of law in DEALING WITH THAT COMPANY OR ORGANIZATION.
For examplke and because I know it so well, the FCC cannot make laws. However, they CAN make regulations and policies. For example, there is no LAW that says Fox News, or ABC or CNN can’t own sixty radio stations, one hundred TV stations and five newspapers EACH. But FCC Rules and Regulations say they can’t. In the absence of a specific law on the subject, what the FCC says goes. Same thing with a department store. If they say you can’t do something in their store, or they have a specific policy on the matter, like no refunds, you literally have to go to court to get your money back. Don’t believe me? Buy a plane ticket then try to get your money back, you can literally be arrested demanding your money back even if they’re blatantly in the wrong. And That’s not a law.
>>Did I miss a meeting, or since when does civilian companies and organizations have the ability to pass laws and resolutions? <<
Jeff?
They gained that ability when they realized that money talks. Those who do make the laws can’t listen to everyone, so they listen to those who can afford to make themselves heard.
That may not be true law-making power, but it’s pretty close.
Dale
“Have there been more hijacked planes that I don’t know about?”
Which just proves that one can be a fanatic yet not be totally clueless. They understood the concept that, having done it once, doing it a second time would probably be harder, so they’d bide their time and do something else. Bush’s measures didn’t necessarily have anything to do with this.
If you need any further evidence, consider the Soviet Union which had what was supposedly the most sophisticated and impenetrable air defence systems in the world. Yet a [German?] kid in a Cessna managed to land unopposed in Red Square. You honestly think that, if someone wanted to badly enough they couldn’t still do it in the U.S.?
“I truly believe that if al-queda decided to attack again tomorrow, NOTHING GWB has implemented would stop them.”
Precisely. Little is impossible to someone who is willing and ready to die for their cause. Look at WW I and Ferdinand’s assassination. Security was there a-plenty. Didn’t help.
“What bothers me more is knowing that the library was keeping that information in the FIRST place.”
Makes sense to me a library would keep track of which books were borrowed if only to know which they should keep in stock as per demand. WHO borrowed them (past the date of return, of course) is another matter.
“Oh, and for what it’s worth, you really don’t use a seatbelt violation to imprison someone on suspicion of selling drugs.”
It could be called what we [in Canada] refer to as an ‘Al Capone’ law. ie, if you have enough laws and by-laws cluttering up the landscape, you can trip up someone you don’t like when you know you can’t get him on the major offenses you wish you could nail them on.
Our gun registry is considered such, though the politicos won’t admit it. When the cops can do a search of one’s home without a warrant because an anonymous source has called in saying “I saw them with a gun I think they didn’t register”, it makes the police’s job a lot easier to uncover other violations in the midst of the search. Rights? Who needs them?
Well, the FCC is not a civilian organization. It’s part of the federal government. So, when they pass a rule or regulation, it may be treated like a law, but it isn’t one unless congress passes a law following the FCC’s findings. Following the example set, the FCC regulates how many broadcast operations a company owns. They won’t allow a company to purchase more than the limit.
And about the comment about “money talks”, well…that’s nothing new. It’s been that way forever, and won’t change anytime soon. However, it’s up to the representatives to decide if what they do is in the best interest to the public, or their own wallets. But congress alone to decide on what to put forward as a law and for the president to sign. A lobbying group may be pushing things, but they don’t pass the laws.
I love it when you all get huffy about your leaders being Machiavellian. Face facts they are politicians and they manipulate, its what they do. I am a member of society and in our country leaders seem to be pulling the same shifty tricks that your lads are. Guess we are all in the same boat. Heres what our leaders did in the last election. They used the racist and backwardly conservative fear filled mentality of the aging population against us in the last elections. A boat load of people were travelling as refugees from a war torn country and “supposedly” chucked some of their kids overboard in order to slow down our coast guard. It was a political scheme (i.e. a lie) that got the liberal conservative party a swing in votes away from a popular democratic party (labour for those in the know about Australian politics). Making the refugees seem inhuman by saying they were willing to chuck the kids overboard in order to escape the authorities was apparent to any reasonable human. The refugees were desperate people fleeing a country in order to make a better life for their children, so using them as decoys would defeat the purpose of the trip. The whole affair reeked of social Darwinism aiming to engender a difference in our status as human allowing for some harsh anti-refugee legislation. So Australia in its blissful, but chosen, ignorance was sucked into electing a party that were not wanted. Clever ploy-and it worked.
Guess we all are in the same boat- well- maybe just the adults.
What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad’s regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs.” — Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002
“The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow.” — Bill Clinton in 1998
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.” — Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
The Truth. Part 2
“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” — Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002
“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” — Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
“Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production.” — Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998
The truth Part 3
“His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region, and the security of all the rest of us.
What if he fails to comply, and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made?
Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction.
And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he’ll use the arsenal.”
– President Clinton, February 17, 1998
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/17/transcripts/clinton.iraq/
The Truth Part 4 Hans Blix special
“Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance — not even today — of the disarmament, which was demanded of it and which it needs to carry out to win the confidence of the world and to live in peace.”
– Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
January 27, 2003
Addressing the UN Security Council
http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocusnewsiraq.asp?NewsID=354&sID=6
—
“The nerve agent VX is one of the most toxic ever developed.
13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the Iraqi Air Force between 1983 and 1988, while Iraq has declared that 19,500 bombs were consumed during this period. Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 tonnes. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we must assume that these quantities are now unaccounted for.”
– Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
January 27, 2003
Addressing the UN Security Council
http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocusnewsiraq.asp?NewsID=354&sID=6
—
“The recent inspection find in the private home of a scientist of a box of some 3,000 pages of documents, much of it relating to the laser enrichment of uranium support a concern that has long existed that documents might be distributed to the homes of private individuals. … we cannot help but think that the case might not be isolated and that such placements of documents is deliberate to make discovery difficult and to seek to shield documents by placing them in private homes.”
– Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
January 27, 2003
Addressing the UN Security Council
http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocusnewsiraq.asp?NewsID=354&sID=6
—
“I have mentioned the issue of anthrax to the Council on previous occasions and I come back to it as it is an important one.
Iraq has declared that it produced about 8,500 litres of this biological warfare agent, which it states it unilaterally destroyed in the summer of 1991. Iraq has provided little evidence for this production and no convincing evidence for its destruction.
There are strong indications that Iraq produced more anthrax than it declared, and that at least some of this was retained after the declared destruction date. It might still exist. Either it should be found and be destroyed under UNMOVIC supervision or else convincing evidence should be produced to show that it was, indeed, destroyed in 1991.”
– Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
January 27, 2003
Addressing the UN Security Council
http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocusnewsiraq.asp?NewsID=354&sID=6
That last one you posted there was interesting, Anthony. Meanwhile, let me have a go in posting a news link or two from The Jerusalem Post, even though it does require registration, but it’s worth it. Let’s see…
Don’t let the Bad Guys get away with murder(editorial)
Dance puppets, dance!
Oh, I probably should’ve included some of the text on the OP-ED menu like Anthony X did on his posts. In the case of the editorial I linked to, the text reads as: “The presidency of George W. Bush will be judged by whether he walks the same failed Mideast policy path as Bill Clinton.” Just if you’d like an interesting quote from the article for starters, folks.
Now, let’s see if I can offer up another link from the paper…
JPost Editorial: Guess who Drew the Roap Map?
The UN’s member states insist that blowing up Israelis is one thing, terrorism another.
Now, here’s another good one against Bush:
JPost Editorial: George W. Clinton
“The Bush team’s response to the latest spasm of Palestinian violence? Turn up the pressure on Israel”
Yes, some of these links I’ve posted also have what to do with the bombings committed by the Hamas against Israeli citizens that took place this week.
Okay, and here’s another one…
JPost editorial: Middle East History for Dummies
“How did it come to pass that the Jews ‘occupied’ the ‘West Bank’?”
And I’d really appreciate it if everybody would take note of the fact that historically and even today, the correct name for the “west bank” is the Judean Desert. Thank you.
Still more…
JPost editorial: The Region: Main Roadblock to Peace
“Eighty percent of Palestinians in the territories insist that their rights and needs ‘cannot be taken care of as long as the State of Israel exists’-“
And now, one more, from…Mark Steyn of the Spectator of London!
JPost editorial: What’s going on in those sofa factories?, By Mark Steyn
I guess that’s enough for now.
Okay, so if Bush and his cronies fail at re-election…can we just ignore them in the history books since they were never actually elected by the people?
Grem-
Did I miss a meeting, or since when does civilian companies and organizations have the ability to pass laws and resolutions?
You are absolutly right. Except for lobbyists, which hold more power than anyone should be comfortable with. Most of the laws passed over the last decade where first proposed in some way shape or form by lobbyists.
However, it’s up to the representatives to decide if what they do is in the best interest to the public, or their own wallets. But congress alone to decide on what to put forward as a law and for the president to sign.A lobbying group may be pushing things, but they don’t pass the laws.
Sadly, the way it works is labbyists talk to representatives, who then get them an audience with Congress, who hear them. Unfortunatly, I think most of the real decisions are made behind closed doors with piles of money.
Maybe I’m being too cynical. I dunno, but it scares the heck outta me that in a year or two, I may not be able to go out and buy a CD and play it, becasue I don’t own a CD player, just a computer and my CD-ROM drive, simply because a few Hollywood yahoos have enough money to buy congressional votes. 🙁
Alan Coil said:
“My suggestion to Pat D. is that if you don’t like it here, lessen the stress in your life and take a vacation from this site.”
NotePAD: Love it or leave it!
If only there were some sort of flag for you to wave . . .
We haven’t found Hussein either. Does that mean he didn’t exist?
Of course he exists. I’ve seen the photos of him shaking hands with Ðìçk Cheney
Of course he exists. I’ve seen the photos of him shaking hands with Ðìçk Cheney
Yeah, but that evidence is almost twenty years old. Got any new intel on him? But perhaps we need to give our troops more time..?
Do I have more intel on Saddam Hussein. Perhaps, but I’ll take a cue from the President and not say anything so that you won’t know the truth one way or the other.
Also, I’m neither the one who said the goal was to capture him (or Bin Laden, for that matter) nor am I the one who said the war was over, despite that goal not being met.
Hmm…A Bush in the White House leaving a job in Iraq unfinished…why do I have a strong sense of deja vu?
Did I miss a meeting, or since when does civilian companies and organizations have the ability to pass laws and resolutions?
You are absolutly right. Except for lobbyists, which hold more power than anyone should be comfortable with.
Unless they’re lobbyists one happens to agree with. Then we call them “public interest groups.”
I wrote:
“The stock market is barely at 8000”
I was wrong. I goofed. It is near 9000. That is about 18% less than 10,950. The stock market would have to go up about 23% from 9000 to get back to 10,950.
JErry then wrote:
“Hey ALLEN!
The stock market is over 9000. Has been for almost a week. Sort of makes me ignore the rest of your post when you start out your post with either a BLATENT untruth, whether intentionally, or not.”
I wrote down the wrong number when I figured out the percentages. Then I typed them wrong, too. It was late at night and I was tired. I erred.
And by the way, JErry, my name is spelled Alan, not Allen. Look at my post just above your post. Also, the word is spelled ‘blatant’, not ‘blatent’.
Alan Coil said:
“My suggestion to Pat D. is that if you don’t like it here, lessen the stress in your life and take a vacation from this site.”
Styer wrote:
“NotePAD: Love it or leave it!
If only there were some sort of flag for you to wave . . .”
My suggestion was for a vacation from the site, not that he go away and never come back.
“Love it or leave it!” may possibly be a trademarked phrase. I’ve heard it used frequently lately and I’ve seen it on a bumper sticker.
David Bjorlin opined:
Unless they’re lobbyists one happens to agree with. Then we call them “public interest groups.”
Heh 🙂 or “special interest groups”
Gawd, gotta love it.