zap -

im not going to hammer on any of them any more, what i will do from now
on is talk to them in the way that they are accustomed to being talked
to- like a loving father to an idealistic child. i will point out their
lies or misunderstandings of the situation- whatever the topic- but as
far as the soldier support crap theyre bltching about-- screw them, dont
want their support dont need it, and laughing to myself at the
condensending attitudes that they pretenciously cast out as fact, when
it is nothing more than inuendo conjecture and purposeful disceptions.
but hey thats another day right, any who- im out man, hae a good night.

peace , bring the love


doc

I just can't stand the hatred. Too many people are throwing spears with
words that go well out of the context of the discussion. A few people
have trampled threads, spewing crap and they don't care whether or not
you understand them. They just want someone to hear them and engage in a
war of words. They are bullies. I harbored no anger for anyone until I
finally got fed up with it yesterday with bearnwhiskey and let him have
it. That was wrong and I stooped to his level. I have regretted it all
day. That's not like me at all. When I have jabbed someone in the past,
it was with a humorous intent, albeit at someone elses expense, mine is
a warped and twisted sense of humor. There will be others that come
through the bar doors swinging before they have had their first drink so
it is all in how we handle them. I'm not going to try to reinvent the
wheel. How have you long-time members dealt with it?
Steve

zapster steve

i dunno if i could be considered a long time member(cause im far from
it) however, i would say that some of those people you are speaking
about ARE! so some advice from me, that i have used in the past before
being dragged down into the sewer was to take the high road, i'll be on
that road from now on, let them spout, let it role off your back like
water off a ducks. you can shake your head, but can not shake the
stupidity out of some people (as much as we want to sometimes)

peace- may it always be a monkey, crawling out of your ass. hahaha.


doc

Whats up doc, and Zap?

hey brother, just discussing how to get back on the white horse i rode
in on. hahahaha.

heading to bed for the night, have to get up in a few hours for work,
you know the deal, we do more before sun up than most people do all day,
hahaha.

het hope the school stuff is going good for you, yucky!

doc

Im liking it, thanks!

More before 5 in the morning than most of us do in a day!!LMAO

good night man,,peace..

and you know thats the truth doc. I looked and we had both laughed after
saying that, but you know its the truth!!!

hahaha we'll keep that an unbelieved
secret that only those who have been there actually know! hahaha

alright brother, im out - peace

This warrior is tired
Body: ----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
I am just posting this and will not make any other comment on this post
Trizar


Joe Repya, Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Body: I'm Tired

Two weeks ago, as I was starting my sixth month of duty in Iraq, I was
forced to return to the USA for surgery for an injury I sustained prior
to my deployment. With luck, I'll return to Iraq to finish my tour.

I left Baghdad and a war that has every indication that we are winning,
to return to a demoralized country much like the one I returned to in
1971 after My tour in Vietnam. Maybe it's because I'll turn 60 years old
in just four months, but I'm tired:

I'm tired of spineless politicians, both Democrat and Republican who
lack the courage, fortitude, and character to see these difficult tasks
through.

I'm tired of the hypocrisy of politicians who want to rewrite history
when the going gets tough.

I'm tired of the disingenuous clamor from those that claim they 'Support
the Troops' by wanting them to 'Cut and Run' before victory is achieved.

I'm tired of a mainstream media that can only focus on car bombs and
casualty reports because they are too afraid to leave the safety of
their hotels to
Report on the courage and success our brave men and women are having on
the battlefield.

I'm tired that so many Americans think you can rebuild a dictatorship
into a democracy over night.

I'm tired that so many ignore the bravery of the Iraqi people to go to
the voting booth and freely elect a Constitution and soon a permanent
Parliament.

I'm tired of the so called 'Elite Left' that prolongs this war by giving
aid and comfort to our enemy, just as they did during the Vietnam War.

I'm tired of antiwar protesters showing up at the funerals of our fallen
soldiers. A family who's loved ones gave their life in a just and noble
cause, only
To be cruelly tormented on the funeral day by cowardly protesters is
beyond shameful.

I'm tired that my generation, the Baby Boom -- Vietnam generation, who
have such a weak backbone that they can't stomach seeing the difficult
tasks through
to victory.
I'm tired that some are more concerned about the treatment of captives
than they are the slaughter and beheading of our citizens and allies.

I'm tired that when we find mass graves it is seldom reported by the
press, but mistreat a prisoner and it is front page news.

Mostly, I'm tired that the people of this great nation didn't learn from
history that there is no substitute for Victory.

Sincerely, Joe Repya, Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
101st Airborne Division

This needs to get all over the U S A.

sorry bear but i continue to support my troops in iraq. Today i woke up
FREE as an american. God bless our troops!!!

you will only know freedom when you have nothing to protect.freedom only
comes to you when you have no fears so if you need soldiers to protect
you from your fears you have no freedom.watt do you fear?AND why

Do you have to hate Bush to support the troops? I was noticing that in
my childhood I was taught a certain level of tolerance for those I
disagree with.

People love to call the pretext for the war a lie. In doing so they
ignore the facts, or perhaps their politics make it desirable for them
to lie about the facts. Who is lying now.

Here is the news from CNN today regarding the lie and the start of the
war. CNN leans left so add that to your evaluation of the news if you
prefer. If you read this and then call it a lie, shame on you.

See CNN today for the complete report.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A new biography of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has
once again raised the issue of whether members of Congress read a key
intelligence report before the 2002 vote to authorize war in Iraq.

Clinton did not read the 90-page, classified National Intelligence
Estimate on Iraq, according to "Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of
Hillary Rodham Clinton."

For members of Congress to read the report, they had to go to a secure
location on Capitol Hill. The Washington Post reported in 2004 that no
more than six senators and a handful of House members were logged as
reading the document.

The Clinton biography, written by New York Times reporters Jeff Gerth
and Don Van Natta Jr., summarizes the intelligence estimate, which
combined reports of U.S. intelligence agencies about Iraq.

Clinton, a New York Democrat, was briefed on the intelligence report
multiple times, a spokesperson told CNN.

Clinton is one of six presidential candidates who were in the Senate in
October 2002 who voted for the resolution to authorize the invasion of
Iraq.

Candidate and then-Sen. John Edwards "read and was briefed on the
intelligence" while sitting on the Senate Intelligence Committee, a
spokesman said. Edwards has called his vote for the 2002 resolution a
mistake. Another Democratic candidate, Sen. Joseph Biden, said he read
the report.

A spokesman for presidential candidate Sen. Christopher Dodd said the
Connecticut Democrat did not read the document, either.

Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain of Arizona also voted
in favor of the resolution without reading the report.

A spokesman for McCain told CNN his boss was briefed on the document
"numerous times, and read the executive summary."

Other candidates were not available for comment Monday.
Misleading report

The National Intelligence Estimate concluded that the United States had
"compelling evidence" that Iraq was restarting its efforts to develop a
nuclear bomb and had concealed stockpiles of chemical and biological
weapons from U.N. inspectors after the cease-fire that ended the 1991
Persian Gulf War.

That was wrong, but that wasn't established until after a U.S. -led army
toppled Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's government in April 2003.

The intelligence report did contain passages that raised questions about
the weapons conclusions, said John McLaughlin, then deputy director of
the CIA.

"I think if someone read the entire report, they would walk away
thinking the intelligence community generally thinks he has weapons of
mass destruction, but there are quite a bit of differences," he said.

Here is the link in case you get there after today.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/28/clinton.iraq/index.html

braaaaiiiiinnnnwashed

Good morning, everyone. I hope you all had a fine and reflective
Memorial day.

Philosopher offers a CNN report on the intelligence regarding Iraq prior
to the US invasion and occupation of Iraq.

The NIE the report refers to was one of the most controversial ever, and
represented the US government at its worst. The NIE is supposed to be a
consensus document from the sixteen or so agencies that are charged with
intelligence activities. It is the CIA's job to coordinate the
preparation of the NIE.

In preparing this particular NIE, the CIA found itself overridden by a
new office created within the Defense Department by SecDef Rumsfeld and
his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz. Wolfowitz's man, Doug Feith was in charge of
this office. Wolfowitz and Feith are leading neocons, and both were
involved in the attempt years earlier to get the US to invade Iraq to
'protect' Israel.

Feith appointed two other key neocons, David Wurmser and Michael Ledeen,
to run a small office that would put out 'information' on Iraq. The
problem was that every one of the items that this office promoted was
incorrect: Niger yellocake, a Saddam-September 11 connection, aluminum
tubes for centrifuges, mobile biochemical weapons labs, al-Qaida-Saddam
Hussein meetings in Prague, etc -- each palpably false and known to be
so at the time by many Middle East analysts, including those in the CIA.

Feith's information was known to be misinformation at the time, but such
was the power of the neocons that they got away with it, with the help
of a number of gullible US journalists, like Judith Miller of the
NYTimes, and Jim Hoagland of the Washington Post.

But when the CIA prepared the first drafts of the NIE, Wolfowitz and
Feith, assisted by Scooter Libby in Vice President Cheney's office,
began to browbeat the CIA analysts into supporting the neocon
misinformation put out by Feith's office. To its shame, the CIA, charged
with building consensus, failed to fully back its own analysts, and the
neocon misinformation crept into the NIE.

The CNN report is flat out wrong in saying that the truth about the
neocon lies was only discovered after the US invasion of Iraq. What was
discovered after the invasion was the final proof that Iraq had no
biochemical weapons program after 1991, that there was no Iraq-Sept 11
connection, that there was no al-Qaida-Iraq connection, that Iraq had no
nuclear weapons program, etc. But this was all known, before the US
invasion.

The story gets worse: for example, David Wurmser's wife is a Mossad
agent (a member of Israeli intelligence) and she and David had a two-way
exchange of classified US information and Israeli planted
misinformation. Several other neocons are Americans who also hold
Israeli citizenship, and who clearly put Israel's interests ahead of
ours. And we now know that it was Israel that planted the false Niger
yellowcake story with the US Embassy in Rome, using an Italian
'pass-through'.

Well, this is long enough!
Lots of good reading coming up, folks. Stay tuned.

Oceans

thanks Oceans...

that was like fresh air..

thanks Oceans

Many thanks....

I've been catching up on this and several other Memorial day threads --
how many were there??? -- and hope that the angers that the
juxtaposition of 'honoring soldiers' with 'opposing the war' fanned will
now recede.

Really, in my opinion the flames of the last couple of days advanced
neither intention....


Oceans

you may notice (ironic tho it is), that as the 'holiday' fades and
attention is diverted, this energy will subside as well....some let go,
move on, some simmer, a few still rave...but...collectively it shifts...

we shift it with our tenacity

I think you missed the point that nobody read the report. When you go to
war based on a report, but don't bother to read the report, then claim
the report was false and that you were duped into the war I think you
are not doing your homework.

Neocons are not the problem here, rigor, discipline and prudence are the
problems.

This applies equally to the conservatives and the liberals.

As for the report being false, the report, if you read the text of my
post, makes the point that there was controversy in the detail. 7 to 10
pages of the report in fact were pointing out contrary opinions.

You can not ignore the details and then blame others when you make
mistakes.

Philosopher , agreed. I was responding to the intelligenec portions of
the report. The items abotu Congree people not reading the NIE is well
known and does not need elaboration.

Panic seized America after Sept 11, and in this panic the country's
leadership failed it badly, including leaders not themselves looking
into matters. Too much reliance on the assertions of senior
administration officials, some of whome were themselves panicked, some
of whom were, to put it bluntly, lazy, and some whose intentions were
precisely to deceive both the people and the Congress.

Keep in mind that McLaughlin, a generally well-regarded fellow, concedes
that the NIE in question would have confused readers into half-believing
the neocon deception. So even if the Congreesional leaders had read the
whole thing (and 60 pages doesn't seem like much -- I read at least
twice than every day) they would not necessarily emerged as better
informed or more capable of making informed decisions. First and
foremost, they were the first victims of the neocon deceptions.

The CNN report does not mention it, but another way that Congress gets
its info is through Congressional hearings, and during the course of
several such hearings, public and closed-doors, the neocons (some in the
Bush adminsitration and some in academia) repeated their lies.

A third way Congress gets its information is through their staff. It is
really here that the most critical step of informing Congress goes on.
While it does depend on the attention span of the individual Congress
person (and some of them have the attention span of a sparrow), it even
more depends on the integrity and intelligence of their staff. It is to
influence these staffers that Washington is saddled with a multi-billion
lobbying industry -- and no accident that AIPAC -- the pro-Israeli lobby
organization -- is the second most powerful lobby in town.

I hope this fleshes out my comments on the CNN report adequately.

Oceans