SCSL said:Can't we all just get along?
NO... That only happens at that Freelander Forum for Sexually Confused (PC) folks.
Cindy Sheehan?
- Thread starter Jake
- Start date
NO... That only happens at that Freelander Forum for Sexually Confused (PC) folks.
K
KEJ
Guest
Eric N. said:Never happen... She doesn't wheel it.. Now if it broke down and you had a flatbed tow truck then you might be able to winch it with her standing next to you....
People always have different opinions.. That's what makes us, well, us...
LOL, now this has all taken a funny turn, and I mean that in the friendly-funny kind of way.
Eric, I'd love to wheel it, but time is a constraint. I'm always hoping, which is why I'm still hanging out on Discoweb hoping to learn something.
Now, even though I don't wheel, can't someone help me winch my crack pipe outta my ass?
KJ
karen
my milemarker can get that crack pipe outa your ass better then a little warn smoker,but because a crack pipe is a little smoker maybe it would be more appropriate
we need to be in IRAQ...but I still think your cool
Thom
my milemarker can get that crack pipe outa your ass better then a little warn smoker,but because a crack pipe is a little smoker maybe it would be more appropriate
we need to be in IRAQ...but I still think your cool
Thom
I have been reading this thread all day and I would like to say something regarding pride. I want thank everyone for this thread. You see I served during the Gulf War and as time as gone by and my life has moved on, I had lost the pride I had once felt from serving with squadron VA-52 with the U.S. Navy.
I worked as a Plane Captain on A-6 intruders. A "PC" is issued a plane and their name is painted on the side. My aircraft was number 510, much like my disco this plane became my property, my responsibility and my friend. I know that everyone here can understand what it's like to have a machine as a partner. The pride that I felt standing on the bow of the U.S.S. Kittyhawk with my jet behind me, knowing I was going to defend those that can't defend themselves, although I was putting myself in danger, was a feeling that words just can't touch.
I want you all to remember that today, as we speak there is sailor standing in front of his jet, or a soldier next to his tank, looking out at the horizon that has the exact feeling I just described. Would you like to be the one tell him to his face that his effort is meaningless and his actions unwanted? We want to be there because we believe in that freedom. Don?t use us as an excuse to protest. I knew exactly what I was doing.
I worked as a Plane Captain on A-6 intruders. A "PC" is issued a plane and their name is painted on the side. My aircraft was number 510, much like my disco this plane became my property, my responsibility and my friend. I know that everyone here can understand what it's like to have a machine as a partner. The pride that I felt standing on the bow of the U.S.S. Kittyhawk with my jet behind me, knowing I was going to defend those that can't defend themselves, although I was putting myself in danger, was a feeling that words just can't touch.
I want you all to remember that today, as we speak there is sailor standing in front of his jet, or a soldier next to his tank, looking out at the horizon that has the exact feeling I just described. Would you like to be the one tell him to his face that his effort is meaningless and his actions unwanted? We want to be there because we believe in that freedom. Don?t use us as an excuse to protest. I knew exactly what I was doing.
I love this thread. I think people like Karen and Sheehan are what we need to see more of.
They spur on more peolpe to vote and to tell the media that they don't speek for me.
As a side note I just want to say to all that have and that are serving to keep my freedom. Thank you and God bless you.
They spur on more peolpe to vote and to tell the media that they don't speek for me.
As a side note I just want to say to all that have and that are serving to keep my freedom. Thank you and God bless you.
Last edited:
Brian & Matt, you guys know me fairly well so you know I'm about the farthest thing from a bleeding heart.
I understand and agree with 100% of your sentiments on this issue.
All I'm saying, is from a strategic point of view, we need to take a close look at how we are operating in this theatre, and in the war in terror in general. I'm hardly alone, even among the far-right, in holding this view. And I'm pretty damn far-right,,, "radical" doesn't really describe it,,,more like, reactionary right. The active-duty military may feel great about what we are doing. But that doesn't mean we are conducting an efficient operation. Nor does it imply a coherent approach to the greater problem. We must always seperate the issue of foreign policy from the personalized issue of service, the military, etc. Otherwise we confuse the goals of our foreign policy.
As for some of the other posts, to imply that one should not or cannot have an opinion on this unless they are in the theatre is absurd. Strategy & Policy are set by civilians. As they should be. These civilians are appointed by our elected representatives and, as such, we have accountability to the citizenry. We all have ownership of our foreign policy. We are all stakeholders. Often, this will mean you hear opinions you don't like, even shrill cliches from the left. These are mere distractions. Don't let them keep you from objectively assessing our foreign policy.
Now, with that also comes enormous responsibility,,,, it's easy to point out where many on the left have shirked that responsiblity. However, many on the right are as much to blame if we absolve ourselves of the obligation to think & to analyze. I'm not critical of Bush and this operation because I lack support for our country, my party, or our President. I'm critical of Bush and this operation BECAUSE I SUPPORT our country, my party, and my president. As for support for the troops,,, who does't support the troops? It's a moot point, irrelevant to the strategic questions.
Of course,,,this is all IMHO. But people are too emotional on this issue. And that's how quagmires get started,,, I don't want to find the right tarnished by a cluster-fuck in Iraq simply because they didn't want to "give in" to the left & augment the tactics. Next time a soldier is murdered by an irregular who was given safe haven in a mosque, start asking questions about our tactics and demanding rules of engagement that favor our servicemen & women, not our enemy.
I understand and agree with 100% of your sentiments on this issue.
All I'm saying, is from a strategic point of view, we need to take a close look at how we are operating in this theatre, and in the war in terror in general. I'm hardly alone, even among the far-right, in holding this view. And I'm pretty damn far-right,,, "radical" doesn't really describe it,,,more like, reactionary right. The active-duty military may feel great about what we are doing. But that doesn't mean we are conducting an efficient operation. Nor does it imply a coherent approach to the greater problem. We must always seperate the issue of foreign policy from the personalized issue of service, the military, etc. Otherwise we confuse the goals of our foreign policy.
As for some of the other posts, to imply that one should not or cannot have an opinion on this unless they are in the theatre is absurd. Strategy & Policy are set by civilians. As they should be. These civilians are appointed by our elected representatives and, as such, we have accountability to the citizenry. We all have ownership of our foreign policy. We are all stakeholders. Often, this will mean you hear opinions you don't like, even shrill cliches from the left. These are mere distractions. Don't let them keep you from objectively assessing our foreign policy.
Now, with that also comes enormous responsibility,,,, it's easy to point out where many on the left have shirked that responsiblity. However, many on the right are as much to blame if we absolve ourselves of the obligation to think & to analyze. I'm not critical of Bush and this operation because I lack support for our country, my party, or our President. I'm critical of Bush and this operation BECAUSE I SUPPORT our country, my party, and my president. As for support for the troops,,, who does't support the troops? It's a moot point, irrelevant to the strategic questions.
Of course,,,this is all IMHO. But people are too emotional on this issue. And that's how quagmires get started,,, I don't want to find the right tarnished by a cluster-fuck in Iraq simply because they didn't want to "give in" to the left & augment the tactics. Next time a soldier is murdered by an irregular who was given safe haven in a mosque, start asking questions about our tactics and demanding rules of engagement that favor our servicemen & women, not our enemy.
S
Snwbord24
Guest
Wall Street Journal
August 18, 2005
Pg. 10
'Cindy Sheehan Does Not Speak For Me'
By Ronald R. Griffin
I lost a son in Iraq and Cindy Sheehan does not speak for me.
I grieve with Mrs. Sheehan, for all too well I know the full measure of the agony she is forever going to endure. I honor her son for his service and sacrifice. However, I abhor all that she represents and those who would cast her as the symbol for parents of our fallen soldiers.
The fallen heroes, until now, have enjoyed virtually no individuality. They have been treated as a monolith, a mere number. Now Mrs. Sheehan, with adept public relations tactics, has succeeded in elevating herself above the rest of us. Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida declared that Mrs. Sheehan is now the symbol for all parents who have lost children in Iraq. Sorry, senator. Not for me.
Maureen Dowd of the New York Times portrays Mrs. Sheehan as a distraught mom standing heroically outside the guarded gates of the most powerful and inhumane man on earth, President Bush. Ms. Dowd is so moved by Mrs. Sheehan's plight that she bestowed upon her and all grieving parents the title of "absolute moral authority." That characterization epitomizes the arrogance and condescension of anyone who would presume to understand and speak for all of us. How can we all possess "absolute moral authority" when we hold so many different perspectives?
I don't want that title. I haven't earned that title.
Although we all walk the same sad road of sorrow and agony, we walk it as individuals with all the refreshing uniqueness of our own thoughts shaped in large measure by the life and death of our own fallen hero. Over the past few days I have reached out to other parents and loved ones of fallen heroes in an attempt to find out their reactions to all the attention Mrs. Sheehan has attracted. What emerges from those conversations is an empathy for Mrs. Sheehan's suffering but a fundamental disagreement with her politics.
Ann and Dale Hampton lost their only child, Capt. Kimberly Hampton, on Jan. 2, 2004, while she was flying her Kiowa helicopter. She was a member of the 82nd Airborne and the company commander. She had already served in Afghanistan before being deployed to Iraq. Ann Hampton wrote, "My grief sometimes seems unbearable, but I cannot add the additional baggage of anger. Mrs. Sheehan has every right to protest . . . but I cannot do that. I would be protesting the very thing that Kimberly believed in and died for."
Marine Capt. Benjamin Sammis was Stacey Sammis's husband. Ben died on April 4, 2003, while flying his Super Cobra helicopter. Listen to Stacey and she will tell you that she is just beginning to understand the enormousness of the character of soldiers who knowingly put their lives at risk to defend our country. She will tell you that one of her deepest regrets is that the world did not have the honor of experiencing for a much longer time this outstanding Marine she so deeply loved.
Speak to Joan Curtin, whose son, Cpl. Michael Curtin, was an infantryman with the 2-7th 3rd ID, and her words are passionately ambivalent. She says she has no room for bitterness. She has a life to lead and a family to nurture. She spoke of that part of her that never heals, for that is where Michael resides. She can go on, always knowing there will be that pain.
Karen Long is the mother of Spc. Zachariah Long, who died with my son Kyle on May 30, 2003. Zack and Kyle were inseparable friends as only soldiers can be, and Karen and I have become inseparable friends since their deaths. Karen's view is that what Mrs. Sheehan is doing she has every right to do, but she is dishonoring all soldiers, including Karen's son, Zack. Karen cannot comprehend why Mrs. Sheehan cannot seem to come to grips with the idea that her own son, Casey, was a soldier like Zack who had a mission to complete. Karen will tell you over and over again that Zack is not here and no one, but no one will dishonor her son.
My wife, Robin, has a different take on Mrs. Sheehan. She told me, "I don't care what she says or does. She is no more important than any other mother."
By all accounts Spc. Casey Sheehan, Mrs. Sheehan's son, was a soldier by choice and by the strength of his character. I did not have the honor of knowing him, but I have read that he attended community college for three years and then chose to join the Army. In August 2003, five months into Operation Iraqi Freedom and after three years of service, Casey Sheehan re-enlisted in the Army with the full knowledge there was a war going on, and with the high probability he would be assigned to a combat area. Mrs. Sheehan frequently speaks of her son in religious terms, even saying that she thought that some day Casey would be a priest. Like so many of the individuals who have given their lives in service to our country, Casey was a very special young man. How do you decry that which someone has chosen to do with his life? How does a mother dishonor the sacrifice of her own son?
Mrs. Sheehan has become the poster child for all the negativity surrounding the war in Iraq. In a way it heartens me to have all this attention paid to her, because that means others in her position now have the chance to be heard. Give equal time to other loved ones of fallen heroes. Feel the intensity of their love, their pride and the sorrow.
To many loved ones, there are few if any "what ifs." They, like their fallen heroes before them, live in the world as it is and not what it was or could have been. Think of the sacrifices that have brought us to this day. We as a country made a collective decision. We must now live up to our decision and not deviate until the mission is complete.
Thirty-five years ago, a president faced a similar dilemma in Vietnam. He gave in and we got "peace with honor." To this day, I am still searching for that honor. Today, those who defend our freedom every day do so as volunteers with a clear and certain purpose. Today, they have in their commander in chief someone who will not allow us to sink into self-pity. I will not allow him to. The amazing part about talking to the people left behind is that I did not want them to stop. After speaking to so many I have come away with the certainty of their conviction that in a large measure it's because of the deeds and sacrifices of their fallen heroes that this is a better and safer world we now live in.
Those who lost their lives believed in the mission. To honor their memory, and because it's right, we must believe in the mission, too.
We refuse to allow Cindy Sheehan to speak for all of us. Instead, we ask you to learn the individual stories. They are glorious. Honor their memories.
Honor their service. Never dishonor them by giving in. They never did.
Mr. Griffin is the father of Spc. Kyle Andrew Griffin, a recipient of the Army Commendation Medal, Army Meritorious Service Medal and the Bronze Star, who was killed in a truck accident on a road between Mosul and Tikrit on May 30, 2003.
August 18, 2005
Pg. 10
'Cindy Sheehan Does Not Speak For Me'
By Ronald R. Griffin
I lost a son in Iraq and Cindy Sheehan does not speak for me.
I grieve with Mrs. Sheehan, for all too well I know the full measure of the agony she is forever going to endure. I honor her son for his service and sacrifice. However, I abhor all that she represents and those who would cast her as the symbol for parents of our fallen soldiers.
The fallen heroes, until now, have enjoyed virtually no individuality. They have been treated as a monolith, a mere number. Now Mrs. Sheehan, with adept public relations tactics, has succeeded in elevating herself above the rest of us. Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida declared that Mrs. Sheehan is now the symbol for all parents who have lost children in Iraq. Sorry, senator. Not for me.
Maureen Dowd of the New York Times portrays Mrs. Sheehan as a distraught mom standing heroically outside the guarded gates of the most powerful and inhumane man on earth, President Bush. Ms. Dowd is so moved by Mrs. Sheehan's plight that she bestowed upon her and all grieving parents the title of "absolute moral authority." That characterization epitomizes the arrogance and condescension of anyone who would presume to understand and speak for all of us. How can we all possess "absolute moral authority" when we hold so many different perspectives?
I don't want that title. I haven't earned that title.
Although we all walk the same sad road of sorrow and agony, we walk it as individuals with all the refreshing uniqueness of our own thoughts shaped in large measure by the life and death of our own fallen hero. Over the past few days I have reached out to other parents and loved ones of fallen heroes in an attempt to find out their reactions to all the attention Mrs. Sheehan has attracted. What emerges from those conversations is an empathy for Mrs. Sheehan's suffering but a fundamental disagreement with her politics.
Ann and Dale Hampton lost their only child, Capt. Kimberly Hampton, on Jan. 2, 2004, while she was flying her Kiowa helicopter. She was a member of the 82nd Airborne and the company commander. She had already served in Afghanistan before being deployed to Iraq. Ann Hampton wrote, "My grief sometimes seems unbearable, but I cannot add the additional baggage of anger. Mrs. Sheehan has every right to protest . . . but I cannot do that. I would be protesting the very thing that Kimberly believed in and died for."
Marine Capt. Benjamin Sammis was Stacey Sammis's husband. Ben died on April 4, 2003, while flying his Super Cobra helicopter. Listen to Stacey and she will tell you that she is just beginning to understand the enormousness of the character of soldiers who knowingly put their lives at risk to defend our country. She will tell you that one of her deepest regrets is that the world did not have the honor of experiencing for a much longer time this outstanding Marine she so deeply loved.
Speak to Joan Curtin, whose son, Cpl. Michael Curtin, was an infantryman with the 2-7th 3rd ID, and her words are passionately ambivalent. She says she has no room for bitterness. She has a life to lead and a family to nurture. She spoke of that part of her that never heals, for that is where Michael resides. She can go on, always knowing there will be that pain.
Karen Long is the mother of Spc. Zachariah Long, who died with my son Kyle on May 30, 2003. Zack and Kyle were inseparable friends as only soldiers can be, and Karen and I have become inseparable friends since their deaths. Karen's view is that what Mrs. Sheehan is doing she has every right to do, but she is dishonoring all soldiers, including Karen's son, Zack. Karen cannot comprehend why Mrs. Sheehan cannot seem to come to grips with the idea that her own son, Casey, was a soldier like Zack who had a mission to complete. Karen will tell you over and over again that Zack is not here and no one, but no one will dishonor her son.
My wife, Robin, has a different take on Mrs. Sheehan. She told me, "I don't care what she says or does. She is no more important than any other mother."
By all accounts Spc. Casey Sheehan, Mrs. Sheehan's son, was a soldier by choice and by the strength of his character. I did not have the honor of knowing him, but I have read that he attended community college for three years and then chose to join the Army. In August 2003, five months into Operation Iraqi Freedom and after three years of service, Casey Sheehan re-enlisted in the Army with the full knowledge there was a war going on, and with the high probability he would be assigned to a combat area. Mrs. Sheehan frequently speaks of her son in religious terms, even saying that she thought that some day Casey would be a priest. Like so many of the individuals who have given their lives in service to our country, Casey was a very special young man. How do you decry that which someone has chosen to do with his life? How does a mother dishonor the sacrifice of her own son?
Mrs. Sheehan has become the poster child for all the negativity surrounding the war in Iraq. In a way it heartens me to have all this attention paid to her, because that means others in her position now have the chance to be heard. Give equal time to other loved ones of fallen heroes. Feel the intensity of their love, their pride and the sorrow.
To many loved ones, there are few if any "what ifs." They, like their fallen heroes before them, live in the world as it is and not what it was or could have been. Think of the sacrifices that have brought us to this day. We as a country made a collective decision. We must now live up to our decision and not deviate until the mission is complete.
Thirty-five years ago, a president faced a similar dilemma in Vietnam. He gave in and we got "peace with honor." To this day, I am still searching for that honor. Today, those who defend our freedom every day do so as volunteers with a clear and certain purpose. Today, they have in their commander in chief someone who will not allow us to sink into self-pity. I will not allow him to. The amazing part about talking to the people left behind is that I did not want them to stop. After speaking to so many I have come away with the certainty of their conviction that in a large measure it's because of the deeds and sacrifices of their fallen heroes that this is a better and safer world we now live in.
Those who lost their lives believed in the mission. To honor their memory, and because it's right, we must believe in the mission, too.
We refuse to allow Cindy Sheehan to speak for all of us. Instead, we ask you to learn the individual stories. They are glorious. Honor their memories.
Honor their service. Never dishonor them by giving in. They never did.
Mr. Griffin is the father of Spc. Kyle Andrew Griffin, a recipient of the Army Commendation Medal, Army Meritorious Service Medal and the Bronze Star, who was killed in a truck accident on a road between Mosul and Tikrit on May 30, 2003.
The Western world needs to wake up. This war is bigger than Iraq. Iraq is just one piece of the puzzle in the bigger military / psych ops war. Iraq was justified. History will write that the 9/11 Commission was staffed to block real fact finding. There's much that the American people do not know.
The Belmont Club has a good perspective on this:
http://fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/
From Sunday, August 14, 2005 - The Provincial West
Terrorism Unveiled describes the growth of Islamism in Central Asia. Expansionist Russia and its successor, the Soviet Union, temporarily established a land empire over traditionally Muslim Central Asia. The collapse the Soviet Union began a process of decolonization second in size only to the liquidation of European empires in Asia and Africa following the Second World War. It was an emerging entity in search of a unifying consciousness, which Islam was determined to provide.
. . . . Osama bin Laden may have sensed the opportunity to unlock a vast Muslim region, not just Afghanistan, following Soviet defeat in the 1980s. It is a feat he may hope to repeat on a global scale by defeating the United States. ....
. . . . Although Islamic arms in Iraq have met only with military defeat, they have been much more successful in showing that the Western world lacks the will to resolutely oppose the emergence of a Global Caliphate. The Sunday Times says it is because President Bush declared war while refusing to name the enemy. . . .
. . . . While Islamist leaders have grasped the situation in the broadest strategic outlines, Western political systems continue to conceive the problem in the narrowest possible terms. The enemy consists of a few troublemakers within the 'Religion of Peace'; the war is confined to Iraq, or at least to that portion of the Sunni Triangle where most fighting takes place; the legitimacy for any force consists solely of denying Saddam Hussein arsenals of weapons of mass destruction under UN resolutions. Lawyers wrangle over whether it is appropriate to commingle intelligence investigations with criminal probes. Great Britain asks whether it is allowed to expel those sworn to destroying it.
Historically, most catastrophic defeats -- at Gaugamela or France in 1940 -- have not been consequent to inferiority in arms but to infirmity of concept. Defeat occurs first of all in the mind. By that standard the Global Caliphate is well on its way to imposing its will on Western politics which is intent, like some demented person, on rearranging objects on a green baize table.
The Thursday, August 18, 2005 Memory Lane article revisits the 1930's, the appeasement of Hitler, the Left and today's terrorism. Cindy Sheehan is a tool in the Left's desire to appease terrorism.
But is this the end result of the Left's inability to address evil?
Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - Memento
The Guardian recently said that Iran had 25 times more uranium refining capacity than it has admitted to the UN, according to an Iranian who runs Strategic Policy Consulting, a Washington-based think tank. Alireza Jafarzadeh, an exiled Iranian dissident who in 2002 helped to uncover almost two decades of covert Iranian nuclear activity, said the centrifuges - rotating machines used in separation processes - were ready to be installed at Iran's nuclear facility in Natanz. ... The Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which is holding an emergency meeting on Iran later today, did not comment on the centrifuge allegations. ...
..... None of these revelations matter because virtually no Western politician can ever use force again to prevent a regime, even one openly dedicated to terrorism, from acquiring weapons of mass destruction. The subject is verboten because the Left has declared it so. Unless something radically changes, it is only logical to prepare for the consequences of this head-in-the-sand policy, a possible catastrophe beside which September 11 will diminish into insignificance. Perhaps this event is already inevitable and those future victims beyond saving. But even so, it is important to begin the work of opening our eyes now, so that we might avoid the blindness which took the world of the 1930s and the 1990s over a cliff. Some mental disease in Western culture has allowed it to stand idly by while evil grew to monstrous proportions around and within it; an infirmity dignified with the name of pacifism. Perhaps it has already killed some of us reading this post; and the least we can do, if our final moments come, is to realize why we died.
The Belmont Club has a good perspective on this:
http://fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/
From Sunday, August 14, 2005 - The Provincial West
Terrorism Unveiled describes the growth of Islamism in Central Asia. Expansionist Russia and its successor, the Soviet Union, temporarily established a land empire over traditionally Muslim Central Asia. The collapse the Soviet Union began a process of decolonization second in size only to the liquidation of European empires in Asia and Africa following the Second World War. It was an emerging entity in search of a unifying consciousness, which Islam was determined to provide.
. . . . Osama bin Laden may have sensed the opportunity to unlock a vast Muslim region, not just Afghanistan, following Soviet defeat in the 1980s. It is a feat he may hope to repeat on a global scale by defeating the United States. ....
. . . . Although Islamic arms in Iraq have met only with military defeat, they have been much more successful in showing that the Western world lacks the will to resolutely oppose the emergence of a Global Caliphate. The Sunday Times says it is because President Bush declared war while refusing to name the enemy. . . .
. . . . While Islamist leaders have grasped the situation in the broadest strategic outlines, Western political systems continue to conceive the problem in the narrowest possible terms. The enemy consists of a few troublemakers within the 'Religion of Peace'; the war is confined to Iraq, or at least to that portion of the Sunni Triangle where most fighting takes place; the legitimacy for any force consists solely of denying Saddam Hussein arsenals of weapons of mass destruction under UN resolutions. Lawyers wrangle over whether it is appropriate to commingle intelligence investigations with criminal probes. Great Britain asks whether it is allowed to expel those sworn to destroying it.
Historically, most catastrophic defeats -- at Gaugamela or France in 1940 -- have not been consequent to inferiority in arms but to infirmity of concept. Defeat occurs first of all in the mind. By that standard the Global Caliphate is well on its way to imposing its will on Western politics which is intent, like some demented person, on rearranging objects on a green baize table.
The Thursday, August 18, 2005 Memory Lane article revisits the 1930's, the appeasement of Hitler, the Left and today's terrorism. Cindy Sheehan is a tool in the Left's desire to appease terrorism.
But is this the end result of the Left's inability to address evil?
Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - Memento
The Guardian recently said that Iran had 25 times more uranium refining capacity than it has admitted to the UN, according to an Iranian who runs Strategic Policy Consulting, a Washington-based think tank. Alireza Jafarzadeh, an exiled Iranian dissident who in 2002 helped to uncover almost two decades of covert Iranian nuclear activity, said the centrifuges - rotating machines used in separation processes - were ready to be installed at Iran's nuclear facility in Natanz. ... The Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which is holding an emergency meeting on Iran later today, did not comment on the centrifuge allegations. ...
..... None of these revelations matter because virtually no Western politician can ever use force again to prevent a regime, even one openly dedicated to terrorism, from acquiring weapons of mass destruction. The subject is verboten because the Left has declared it so. Unless something radically changes, it is only logical to prepare for the consequences of this head-in-the-sand policy, a possible catastrophe beside which September 11 will diminish into insignificance. Perhaps this event is already inevitable and those future victims beyond saving. But even so, it is important to begin the work of opening our eyes now, so that we might avoid the blindness which took the world of the 1930s and the 1990s over a cliff. Some mental disease in Western culture has allowed it to stand idly by while evil grew to monstrous proportions around and within it; an infirmity dignified with the name of pacifism. Perhaps it has already killed some of us reading this post; and the least we can do, if our final moments come, is to realize why we died.
KEJ said:Now, even though I don't wheel, can't someone help me winch my crack pipe outta my ass?
KJ
Does it still have some crack ( no pun intended ) in it? If so I could help out with that but, you'd have to share..
K
KEJ
Guest
Man, if I could just get ONE face to face with the president -- any president -- I would be pretty well satisfied.
Not many "ordinary" people get any chance to walk around in public with, meet in private with, and talk closely with the president of the U.S. When you get that chance, don't blow it. Sheehan blew it on her first meeting with the president -- obviously she got cold feet or something, because now she wants to meet again to "re-neg" on her previous statements to him.
Anyone who says that's not a big deal is really uneducated about just what it takes to be the president. Even Clinton didn't take time off when he was meeting with Monica, he just shoved her under the desk while talking to world leaders on the phone.
So, what would you expect the POTUS to do if he meets her? Would 5 minutes be enough? Would she go home after 30 minutes? Would she demade that their conversation be taped? What does she want to say to him that the entire US press corps hasn't already put on the air? Would it make the POTUS any better in your eyes? Why? What good could it possibly do for him to meet with her AGAIN??!!
Not many "ordinary" people get any chance to walk around in public with, meet in private with, and talk closely with the president of the U.S. When you get that chance, don't blow it. Sheehan blew it on her first meeting with the president -- obviously she got cold feet or something, because now she wants to meet again to "re-neg" on her previous statements to him.
Anyone who says that's not a big deal is really uneducated about just what it takes to be the president. Even Clinton didn't take time off when he was meeting with Monica, he just shoved her under the desk while talking to world leaders on the phone.
So, what would you expect the POTUS to do if he meets her? Would 5 minutes be enough? Would she go home after 30 minutes? Would she demade that their conversation be taped? What does she want to say to him that the entire US press corps hasn't already put on the air? Would it make the POTUS any better in your eyes? Why? What good could it possibly do for him to meet with her AGAIN??!!
S
syoung
Guest
When I worked at Andrews AFB, I was with the group that provides security to AF-1. I often had the chance to talk to very high profile people including the First Family (although back then it was the Clintons). Colin Powell would ALWAYS be in the mood to talk cars- he was/is a Volvo fanatic and apparently some commercial on TV had one of his old Volvos in it... Clinton had a Mustang (65 I think) that he would get all mushy about- and the fact that he never got to use it. SecDef Perry had a fondness for M series Bimmers.
All guys like cars, it seems. That's really about all we talked about except airplanes.
If you DO get a chance to talk to the POTUS- talk about cars...
All guys like cars, it seems. That's really about all we talked about except airplanes.
If you DO get a chance to talk to the POTUS- talk about cars...
B
BeachRover
Guest
As a father of 2 children, I can understand her pain and suffering. I can even understand the "questioning" that is going on in her mind; no parent ever dreams of having one of their children die before them. But, her son made a concious decision to join the military. He fully understood (or should have) that at any given moment he could be shipped into a hostile enemy environment and asked to carry out the orders of the United States President, right or wrong.
My father served in the US Army, active duty, in WWII, Korea and Viet Nam. He was wounded in action on 3 different occasions and lost untold numbers of friends and 2 brothers to war. He was never an officer, Sargeant Major, when he retired. He was stricken with cancer about a month after this whole situation began and he followed very closely as long as he was able. Shortly before he became unable to speak any longer I talked with him about the war. He said that as awful as war was, it was something that would always exist. And as long as war existed, no matter where in the world it may occur, someone would be looking to the United States for help; and we would go. We have always gone and we always will.
I am truly sorry for the loss of her son and and any other person whose life is lost to war but do they not make the choice to serve knowing the risk? I think they do, and I am proud of each of them for their choice and thank them for providing the freedoms that we have today.
My father served in the US Army, active duty, in WWII, Korea and Viet Nam. He was wounded in action on 3 different occasions and lost untold numbers of friends and 2 brothers to war. He was never an officer, Sargeant Major, when he retired. He was stricken with cancer about a month after this whole situation began and he followed very closely as long as he was able. Shortly before he became unable to speak any longer I talked with him about the war. He said that as awful as war was, it was something that would always exist. And as long as war existed, no matter where in the world it may occur, someone would be looking to the United States for help; and we would go. We have always gone and we always will.
I am truly sorry for the loss of her son and and any other person whose life is lost to war but do they not make the choice to serve knowing the risk? I think they do, and I am proud of each of them for their choice and thank them for providing the freedoms that we have today.
syoung said:
SYOUNG, though I usually have no disagreement in what you say, and maybe I am taking this wrong, but...
It seems like you are implying this guy should have stayed out of this particular foray...c'mon, this country is founded on brave young men who have NOT stayed out of the fight. It took people like this found our country, and has taken people like this to make our country a place worth living in. I hope you were not making light of ths young man's contribution, especially as you have stated you were former military yourself. Whether you are a mechanic, cook, etc, all have a duty to their comrades to help is they can or are able. This guy sounds like a medal recipient to me, going above and beyond his normal military role to try to make a difference to his comrades.
Sounds to me like she is dishonering her son. He sacrificed his life, and she has ensured he is remembered not as he should be. He, though he may have been a mechanic, died as a warrior, something she will never understand. There were times in the past when people had a little more respect for the fighters among us when she would have been killed for demonzing her son's chosen affiliation and cause.
As for why the USA is there, if you don't immediatly see or understand, quit trying and travel a bit. See how people like these terrorists gan grab a country by the balls. These simpler people lead a fragile life, and can be easily lead.
What makes our country great is we are taking the path less traveled, and staying there and resisting even the most common of sense to protect those that were not at fault. While at the same time gradually eliminating the problem.
Our boys are there risking their lives for strangers, sure, but their is no greater cause. It's a war, allright. There is simply no place anymore for huge fields filled with tanks and infantry slugging it out. And as you should be figuring out, people who have been kept out of the loop for years don't simply turn over a country when they lose.
The honorable and pure way is always the hardest way, and we as a people have forgotten that long ago, but our leader has not. I think that in a few decades Iraq will be a much better place to live for all our trouble.
Cheers,
Kennith
As for why the USA is there, if you don't immediatly see or understand, quit trying and travel a bit. See how people like these terrorists gan grab a country by the balls. These simpler people lead a fragile life, and can be easily lead.
What makes our country great is we are taking the path less traveled, and staying there and resisting even the most common of sense to protect those that were not at fault. While at the same time gradually eliminating the problem.
Our boys are there risking their lives for strangers, sure, but their is no greater cause. It's a war, allright. There is simply no place anymore for huge fields filled with tanks and infantry slugging it out. And as you should be figuring out, people who have been kept out of the loop for years don't simply turn over a country when they lose.
The honorable and pure way is always the hardest way, and we as a people have forgotten that long ago, but our leader has not. I think that in a few decades Iraq will be a much better place to live for all our trouble.
Cheers,
Kennith
KEJ said:LOL! BTSOM, Eric! Until yesterday I didn't even know I owned one!
KJ
What's BTSOM stand for???
K