VoyForums: The Philadelphia Talk Radio Politics and Opinion Forum

[ VoyUser Login optional ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4 ]

It's like giving your 2 cents but without the 2 minute rule!
Personal attacks against other posters or talk radio professionals will be deleted.
Report abuse to ptrabuse@surveyguy.com
This forum is maintained by Philadelphia Talk Radio Listeners.
Also visit the Philly Talk Radio Forum and PhillyTalk.com

Permit me to vent -- Surf, 11:56:02 02/10/03 Mon (pool-68-162-78-194.phil.east.verizon.net/68.162.78.194)

I'm in the middle of upgrading my vast office-plex here at Rancho Surf but I had to take the time to get back online and vent.

Dom Giordano had a GREAT quote regarding the terrorist fanatics when he called them, "Cowards in search of Eternal Erections." Now THAT sums it up.

This is how I see Saddam Hussein and why we can't contain or threaten him ...

Saddam is like the trash neighbor who is always in your face about something. Imagine Saddam living next door and threatening to kill your dog. Of course you are shocked but you point out to him that if he harms your dog you will then kill his dog. That should stop him right? Nope, Saddam then turns around and shoots his own dog. He then turns back to you and again threatens to shoot your dog.

Any country or people that thinks Saddam can be reasoned with should read the above twice. Saddam already has slaughtered his own people without losing sleep.

But there's more, it gets worse.

The fanatics, be they religious extremists, North Korea, etc., have one thing in common. They want us destroyed. Not just dead but our entire way of life, our country, our kids, everything, ... gone. They will NEVER stop, they won't ever give up trying. The only thing that can stop them is death ... theirs or ours. You make the call. Us or them. If you think the WTC was the end you're a fool.

Yesterday it was Bin Laden, this week it's Iraq, a month from now it will be Iran or North Korea. They are all the same peas in a pod (along with such "friends" as Saudi Arabia). They all want us gone, dead, destroyed. This American is sick and tired of explaining to my kids why they hate us. I'm tired of fearing for the future of my children and what kind of world they will grow up in. Why not use the full force of our military to wipe out any and all people who put us in the crosshairs? They WILL attack us, that's an absolute.

But it gets worse, there is more.

Why in the world is the Hollywood elite infested with Anti-Semites? They know for a fact the extremists want all the Jews dead. They see for themselves how women and babies have become targets, blown to shreds for no other reason than to cause fear. They have read the history and watched Schindler's List. What they can't grasp is that several hundred million nuts would like nothing better than to fire up the ovens again and wipe out Israel AND any other remaining Jews no matter where they live. Jews are targets, Jews get killed and the so called celebrities oppose wiping out the very people who have dedicated their lives to killing Jews? I don't get it. Isn't half of Hollywood run by Jews?

Maybe they think it won't happen to them.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Surf, that is some serious venting! I have more. To read, click here. -- William, 14:25:53 02/12/03 Wed
- Great post, Surf. I am back from my travels. Just cleared away the snow. What's all this duct tape talk? That stuff won't even work on ducts! Still, it makes more sense than throwing 7 pebbles at a big rock in Saudi Arabia -- sort of like a rock concert without any music. (NT) -- SurveyGuy (The sun came out the day I left FL), 10:01:41 02/13/03 Thu
  - SuveryGuy and Surf, here is another idea. Instead of we United States citizens cowaring in our homes behind sheets of plastic and ductape, clinging to our flashlights and our three days supplie of canned goods and water, why are we all not going out and buying guns, rifles, uzzies, Mack-10s, and assault rifles, etc., and launching neighborhood militia groups, working in coordination with the military and the state and local police, in order for be prepared to launch an offensive against al Qaeda, Hizbolla, Hamas, Iraqi secret police, and any others here on our own soil? (NT) -- William, 17:47:02 02/13/03 Thu
    - while I have no firearms at home - I always thought shotguns would be better for home defense
      I mean if someone is invading my home, a shotgun would make short work of them.
      add to which I believe shotguns have less red tape involved in their purchase...
      barring that, a short barreled lever-action rifle that takes .357 rounds... (NT) -- H_Bergeron, 01:18:33 02/24/03 Mon
  - The Police will be overwhelmed and will not respond as quickly as a well trained neighborhood, county, and state civilian militia. I already served ain Active duty service in the US military. I am willing to be an at home father and husband while being part of a local anti-terrorism rapid response assault force. Training and preparedness would include marksmanship, hand to hand combat, knife and stick fighting, communications, and group assault tactics, along with other skills. What do you think? -- William, 17:48:33 02/13/03 Thu
    - I think we should stock up on bullets to protect our homes from the looters who would emerge should anything happen. I cannot see wasting good duct tape. What does a Lugar cost these days? (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 19:02:40 02/14/03 Fri
Does the website misrepresent Islam or doe s Islam misrepresent Islam? Note that Islam is Malis (malice?) spelled backwards. -- SurveyGuy (just stirring things up), 06:58:52 12/28/02 Sat (maxtnt06-171.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.241.171)
Islamic Group Wants Web Link Shut Down
POSTED: 11:49 a.m. EST December 27, 2002

WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. -- An Islamic civil-rights organization has asked the Guilford County Republican Party to remove a link to a Web site that it says misrepresents the Islamic faith.

Click for full article

(The article mentions the site IslamExposed.Com. Is it a "hate site" or just all too accurate shedding light on more than they would want you to know. You decide.)

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- closing ISLAMEXPOSED.com site -- abracadabra, 16:41:19 02/22/03 Sat
Snow vent -- Spock (just my 2 cents), 16:35:21 02/19/03 Wed (user-vc8fm1s.biz.mindspring.com/216.135.216.60)
Sorry to show up only to vent, but....

WHAT IS PHILADELPHIA'S PROBLEM WITH SNOW REMOVAL?!!!

I have never lived anywhere that was so bass-ackwards in (lack-of) snow removal. OK, so they say they're spending tons of money to remove tons of snow. Just where, exactly, is this money being spent? On hot chocolate and donuts and/or pizza for the road crews? On analysis reports that say, yup, there's a lot of snow out there?

Sure, I've seen Streets Dept. vehicles out and about....doing nothing more than driving around and acknowledging, yup, there's a lot of snow that needs to be removed. In fact, as I trudged down a one-way street (because the sidewalks were impassable) on foot yesterday, a Streets Jeep came up behind me, driving the wrong way, and the guy actually rolled down his window and advised me to be careful. And when I advised him he was driving down the wrong way on a one-way street, he said, "We're just checking out the streets." This is such a great use of my taxpayer dollars, I can't even tell you. Really -- it's not printable.

I've seen lots of city plow trucks merely driving -- not plowing -- down streets that desperately need plowing. And I've seen the same kind of trucks needlessly re-"plowing" streets that are very clear already.

I work in Manayunk -- it ain't pretty there, folks. Can't find parking anywhere but places you have to pay to park in, and there are only about three streets that are actually safely navigable by car. The rest is a cross-country ski expedition.

Who's in charge of this operation? Some company that manufactures shovels and toboggans? How about, at the very least, every plow truck out there actually drop your plows and start PLOWING, huh?

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
An interesting dispassionate Middle East analysis that someone sent to me via e-mail. Just sharing. Interesting reading for some background. -- SurveyGuy, 19:17:11 02/14/03 Fri (maxtnt04-228.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.96.228)
The Region After Iraq
By Dr. George Friedman
Summary Desert Storm was about restoring the status quo ante. The 2003 war with Iraq will be about redefining the status quo in the region. Geopolitically, it will leave countries like Syria and Saudi Arabia completely surrounded by U.S. military forces and Iran partially surrounded.

It is therefore no surprise that the regional powers, regardless of their hostility to Saddam Hussein, oppose the war: They do not want to live in a post-war world in which their own power is diluted. Nor is it a surprise, after last week's events in Europe indicating that war is coming, that the regional powers -- and particularly Saudi Arabia -- are now redefining their private and public positions to the war. If the United States cannot be stopped from redefining the region, an accommodation will have to be reached.

Analysis Last week, the focus was on Europe -- where heavy U.S. pressure, coupled with the internal dynamics, generated a deep division. From the U.S. point of view, regardless of what France and Germany ultimately say about the war, these two countries no longer can claim to speak for Europe. Ultimately, for the Americans, that is sufficient.

This week, U.S. attention must shift to a much more difficult target -- the Islamic world. More precisely, it must shift to the countries bordering Iraq and others in the region as well. In many ways, this is a far more important issue than Europe. The Europeans, via multinational organizations, can provide diplomatic sanction for the invasion of Iraq. The countries around Iraq constitute an essential part of the theater of operations, potentially influencing the course of the war and even more certainly, the course of history after the war. What they have to say and, more important, what they will do, is of direct significance to the war.

As it stands at this moment, the U.S. position in the region, at the most obvious level, is tenuous at best. Six nations border Iraq: Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Turkey and Iran. Of the six, only one -- Kuwait -- is unambiguously allied with the United States. The rest continue to behave ambiguously. All have flirted with the United States and provided varying degrees of overt and covert cooperation, but they have not made peace with the idea of invasion and U.S. occupation.

Of the remaining five, Turkey is by far the most cooperative. It will permit U.S. forces to continue to fly combat missions against Iraq from bases in Turkey as well as allow them to pass through Turkey and maintain some bases there. However, there is a split between the relatively new Islamist government of Turkey, which continues to be uneasy about the war, and the secular Turkish military, which is committed to extensive cooperation. And apart from Kuwait, Turkey is the best case. Each of the other countries is even more conflicted and negative toward an invasion.

Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and Iran are very different countries and have different reasons for arriving at their positions. They each have had very different experiences with Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

Iran fought a brutal war with Iraq during the 1980s -- a war initiated by the Iraqis and ruinous to Iran. Hussein is despised by Iranians, who continue to support anti-Hussein exiles. Tehran certainly is tempted by the idea of a defeated Iraq. It also is tempted by the idea of a dismembered Iraq that never again could threaten Iran, and where Iran could gain dominance over its Shiite regions. Tehran certainly has flirted with Washington and particularly with London on various levels of cooperation, and clearly has provided some covert intelligence cooperation to the United States and Britain. In the end, though -- however attractive the collapse of Iraq might be -- internal politics and strategic calculations have caused Iranian leaders to refuse to sanction the war or to fully participate. Iran might be prepared to pick up some of the spoils, but only after the war is fought.

Syria stands in a similar relation to Iraq. The Assad family despises the Husseins, ideologically, politically and personally. Syria sided openly with the United States in 1991. Hussein's demise would cause no grief in Damascus. Yet, in spite of a flirtation with Britain in particular -- including a visit with both Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Charles for Syrian President Assad -- Syria has not opted in for the war.

Nor have the Jordanians -- at least not publicly. There are constant reports of U.S. (and Israeli) special operations troops operating out of Jordan. U.S. Marines have trained during the past month in Jordan, but the government remains officially opposed to the war -- and what support it will give, it will give only covertly.

Finally, there is Saudi Arabia, which has been one of the pillars of U.S. power in the region since the 1950s and which has, in turn, depended on Washington for survival against both Arab radicals and Iraq itself. The Saudis have been playing the most complex game of all, cooperating on some levels openly, cooperating on other levels covertly, while opposing the war publicly.

For all of the diversity in the region, there is a common geopolitical theme. If the U.S. invasion is successful, Washington intends to occupy Iraq militarily, and it officially expects to remain there for at least 18 months -- or to be more honest, indefinitely. The United States will build air bases and deploy substantial ground forces -- and, rather than permit the disintegration of Iraq, will create a puppet government underwritten by U.S. power.

On the day the war ends, and if the United States is victorious, then the entire geopolitics of the region will be redefined.

Every country bordering Iraq will find not the weakest formations of the Iraqi army along their frontiers, but U.S. and British troops. The United States will be able to reach into any country in the region with covert forces based in Iraq, and Washington could threaten overt interventions as well. It would need no permission from regional hosts for the use of facilities, so long as either Turkey or Kuwait will permit transshipment into Iraq. In short, a U.S. victory will change the entire balance of power in the region, from a situation in which the United States must negotiate its way to war, to a situation where the United States is free to act as it will.

Consider the condition of Syria. It might not have good relations with Hussein's Iraq, but a U.S.-occupied Iraq would be Syria's worst nightmare. It would be surrounded on all sides by real or potential enemies -- Israel, Turkey, Jordan and the United States - and, in the Mediterranean, by the U.S. Sixth Fleet. Syria -- which traditionally has played a subtle, complex balancing game between various powers -- would find itself in a vise, no longer able to guarantee its national security except through accommodating the United States.

A similar situation is shaping up for Saudi Arabia. The United States is operating extensively in Yemen; it also has air force facilities in Qatar and naval facilities in Bahrain. U.S. B-1 bombers and some personnel are going to be based in Oman. The United States has established itself along the littoral of the Arabian peninsula. With U.S. forces deployed along the Saudi- Iraqi border, and with U.S. domination of the Red Sea and Persian Gulf, the Saudis will be in essence surrounded.

The same basic problem exists for Iran, although on a less threatening scale. Iran is larger, more populated and more difficult to intimidate. Nevertheless, with at least some U.S. forces in Afghanistan -- and the option for introducing more always open -- and U.S. forces in Iraq and the Persian Gulf, the Iranians too find themselves surrounded, albeit far less overwhelmingly than would be the case for Syria or Saudi Arabia.

The only probable winners would be Turkey, which would lay claim to the oil fields around Mosul and Kirkuk; Jordan, whose security would be enhanced by U.S. forces to the east; and Kuwait, which is betting heavily on a quick U.S. victory and a prolonged presence in the region.

If we consider the post-Iraq war world, it is no surprise that the regional response ranges from publicly opposed and privately not displeased to absolute opposition. Certainly, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Iran have nothing to gain from a war that will be shaped entirely by the United States. Each understands that the pressure from the United States to cooperate in the war against al Qaeda will be overwhelming, potentially irresistible and politically destabilizing. This is not the world in which they want to live.

Add to this the obvious fact of oil, and the dilemma becomes clear. The United States is not invading Iraq for oil: If oil was on Washington's mind, it would invade Venezuela, whose crisis has posed a more serious oil problem for the United States than Iraq could. Nevertheless, Washington expects to pay for the reconstruction of Iraq from oil revenues, and there will be no reason to limit Iraqi production. This cannot make either Riyadh or Tehran happy, since it will drive prices down and increase competition for market share.

Saudi Arabia, Iran and Syria have every reason to oppose a war in Iraq. The consequences of such a war will undermine their national interests. They were depending on Europe's ability to block the war, but that strategy has failed. The Saudis and Syrians then launched into an attempt to find a political solution that would prevent a U.S. occupation of Iraq. That centered around either Hussein's voluntary resignation and exile, or a coup in Baghdad that would produce a new government -- one that would cooperate fully with weapons inspectors, and remove the U.S. justification for occupation.

This attempt, in collaboration with other regional powers and countries like Germany and Russia, is still under way. The problem is that Hussein has little motivation to resign, and his security forces remain effective. Hussein apparently still is not convinced that the United States will invade, or that he will be defeated. His seems to assume that, if his troops can inflict some casualties on U.S. forces, then the United States will accept a cease-fire without toppling him. He will not abdicate, nor will his followers overthrow him, until those two assumptions are falsified. What that means is that the United States still would occupy Iraq militarily, even if there was a coup or resignation as the campaign unfolded.

If you can't beat them, join them. The European split -- and the real possibility that France and Germany ultimately will endorse war in some way -- mean that war cannot be prevented. Hussein will not abdicate or be overthrown until the war is well under way. Therefore, it is highly likely that the war will take place, the United States will occupy Iraq and that the map of the Middle East will change profoundly.

Continued opposition to the war, particularly from Riyadh's standpoint, makes little sense. The issue until now has been to cope with the internal political challenges that have arisen in the kingdom since Sept. 11, 2001. After the Iraq war, this issue will be supplemented by the question of how the United States regards the kingdom. It is not prudent for a nation surrounded by a much more powerful nation to allow itself to be regarded as an enemy. Therefore, we are witnessing a shift in the Saudi position that might evolve to reluctant, public support for the war by the time an attack is launched.

Iranian leaders do not feel themselves to be quite in such desperate straits -- since they are not. However, the presence of U.S. power on Iran's borders will create an urgent need to settle the internal disputes that divide the country. The need to do so, however, does not guarantee a successful outcome. The division between those who feel that an opening to the United States is essential and those who feel that protecting Iran against the United States is paramount might become exacerbated and destabilize the country. However, there is no immediate, overt threat to Iran, although the possibilities for covert operations increase dramatically.

Jordan will do well, but Syria's future is cloudier. Washington has concerns about Syria's long-term commitment to U.S. interests, and Damascus might find itself squeezed unbearably. Turkey will fatten on oil and manage the Kurds as it has done in the past. But nothing will be the same after this war. Unlike Desert Storm, which was about restoring the status quo ante, this war is about establishing an entirely new reality.

The United States is, of course, well-aware that its increased presence in the region will result in greater hostility and increased paramilitary activity against U.S. forces there. However, the U.S. view is that this rising cost is acceptable so long as Washington is able to redefine the behavior of countries neighboring Iraq. In the long run, the Bush administration believes, geopolitical power will improve U.S. security interests in spite of growing threats. To be more precise, the United States sees Islamic hostility at a certain level as a given, and does not regard an increase in that hostility as materially affecting its interests.

The conquest of Iraq will not be a minor event in history: It will represent the introduction of a new imperial power to the Middle East and a redefinition of regional geopolitics based on that power. The United States will move from being an outside power influencing events through coalitions, to a regional power that is able to operate effectively on its own. Most significant, countries like Saudi Arabia and Syria will be living in a new and quite unpleasant world.

Therefore, it is not difficult to understand why the regional powers are behaving as they are. The disintegration of the European bloc has, however, left them in an untenable position. The United States will occupy Iraq, and each regional power is now facing that reality. Unable to block the process, they are reluctantly and unhappily finding ways to accustom themselves to it.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- You got some serious connections SG. It looks like the all the Islamofascists hate each other and the only time they agree on is hating Jews and the US.. Do you have any more info on the Syria Iraq rift? (NT) -- Chez, 12:38:42 02/15/03 Sat
  - No connections. I hate when people send me stuff with no citation. However, this was the first short overview of the whole region that I had seen anyone attempt, so I posted it. If any disagree or agree with the author's assessment of any component, please feel free to comment or amplify. The world is indeed a strange place. My position is that it is high time to get off of oil dependency and develop other power sources. (NT) -- SurveyGuy (wishing for a car with a cold fusion engine - I can dream), 13:11:24 02/15/03 Sat
- SurveyGuy, Chez, et al, here is the source of the article: It is written by George Friedman, as the article states. George Friedman is associated with "Stratfor" which is a private intelligence agency. They have a web site and an information subscription service which offers various subscription level, such as; basic, premium, etc. You can visit their website at: STRATFOR.COM (NT) -- William, 16:58:47 02/15/03 Sat
  - That makes sense. I got it from an attorney I know in Washington, D.C. who has many corporate friends among his acquaintances. This was probably a premium report. I can see how such knowledge could be helpful in corporate planning. Now if we could just find a way to make it snow like this in the middle east. (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 11:25:16 02/17/03 Mon
"Forces of Reaction" - perhaps he has a point..... -- H_Bergeron, 03:09:35 02/14/03 Fri (pcp02148573pcs.neave01.pa.comcast.net/68.81.252.202)
CHEW ON THIS

Saddam's crimes, al Qaeda massacres, Kurdish freedom, oil worth fighting for...
and a few other things Seattle's potlucking peaceniks might want to think about this weekend.

by Christopher Hitchens

Dear brothers and sisters, boys and girls, comrades and friends,

The editor of this rag told me of your upcoming "Potlucks for Peace" event
and invited my comments, and at first I couldn't think of a thing to say.
For one thing, why should I address a Seattle audience
(or even suppose that I have a Seattle audience, for that matter)?
I daresay that I can claim a tenuous connection, because I have always had a good crowd
when reading at the splendid bookstores of the city,
and because it was in Seattle that I stayed when grounded on September 11, 2001,
a date that now makes some people yawn.

I had been speaking to the students of Whitman College in Walla Walla
about the crimes of Henry Kissinger and had told them that 11 September--
which was then tomorrow--was a symbolic date.

On that day in 1973, the civilian government in Chile
had been drowned in blood by an atrocious military coup.
On the same day in 2001, a group of Chilean survivors proposed
to file a lawsuit against Kissinger in a federal court in Washington, D.C.
I showed a film illustrating this, made some additional remarks,
and closed by saying that the date would be long remembered
in the annals of the struggle for human rights.

I got some pretty decent applause--
and this from the alma mater of Henry "Scoop" Jackson, whose family was present.

On the following morning I got a very early call from my wife, who was three hours ahead of me.
She told me to turn on the TV, and she commented mordantly that the anti-Kissinger campaign
might have to be on hold for a while.
(Oddly enough, and as recent events have shown, she was mistaken about that.)
Everyone knows what I saw when I turned on the TV.

Now hear this.
Ever since that morning, the United States has been at war with the forces of reaction.
May I please entreat you to reread the preceding sentence?
Or perhaps you will let me restate it for emphasis.
The government and people of these United States are now at war with the forces of reaction.

read the rest of the article here

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:

Human Shield Tour 2003 -- H_Bergeron, 23:53:30 02/10/03 Mon (pcp02148573pcs.neave01.pa.comcast.net/68.81.252.202)

Human Shield Tour

Are you a mindless vapid entertainer who wants to give peace a chance?
Do you hate the United States and think it is the cause of all the problems in the world?
Do you think that Hillary Clinton is the smartest woman in the world?
Do you think Rosie O'Donnell isn't a man? Do you hate nuclear power?
Do you think that George Bush was selected, not elected?
Do you think that Bill Clinton was the best president this country has ever had?
Do you think that this thing with Iraq is all about oil?
Do you think that Jimmy Carter should be sent to Iraq to negotiate?

If you answered yes to any of those questions,
then do we have a deal for you!
Leaving on February 15 is the Human Shield Tour of Iraq. Included in the tour:

Deluxe accomodations at the Saddam Hussein Best Eastern Hotel for 21 glorious nights.
(Trip may be extended due to airspace filled with US military aircraft)

A complimentary copy of the Guardian
delivered to your room every morning.

Daily tours of baby food factories, fake military emplacements,
and fake chemical and biological factories.

Possible nightly fireworks displays around February 28.

A personal audience with Saddam Hussein
(or one of his many doubles).

A chance to mingle with celebrities like Susan Sarandon, Dave Matthews,
Sean Penn, Woody Harrelson, Mike Farrell,and other well known entertainers.
Who knows? There may be some surprise guests, like Barbra Streisand or Michael Moore.

So, what are you waiting for?

The trip is free!!!!

link

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:

These celebrities have more than enough money to pay their way, one way, to Iraq to play the role of human shields. I think it would improve the content and moral of the United States and possibly imrove the quality and content of movies as well if these people do go and get themselves disintregrated while serving the bad guys. (NT) -- William, 21:34:08 02/13/03 Thu

pa turnpike and the puppet master -- mike, 10:07:22 02/12/03 Wed (haz-354.ddisp.net/65.213.87.114)
after finding out that mitch rubin was named chairman of the turnpike commission i had to wonder why a person who discriminates against disabled people and who retaliates against injured workers would be named chairman.i guess the only credentials you need is how to kiss vince fumos butt.mitch rubin is just another puppet for vince fumo to control.i hope the public gets to read the truth about rubin.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
Tracing the trail of the anti-US demonstrations sponsors -- William, 09:28:27 01/24/03 Fri (cache-mtc-ah04.proxy.aol.com/64.12.96.169)

Who Pays For These Demonstrations?
By Stephen Schwartz
FrontPageMagazine.com - January 24, 2003

Both before and after the latest round of so-called peace demonstrations, many respected liberals, leftists, and pacifists have expressed their concern over the events? control by a tiny Stalinist cult, the "Workers World Party" or WWP. WWP created International A.N.S.W.E.R., the umbrella group for the protests, and WWP leaders, posing as peace activists, have gained extraordinary media access in recent weeks. In addition, the group manipulates former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark as a pliable puppet, in an effort to gain respectability.

The despicable record of WWP in promoting Stalinist and fascist dictators is old news. WWP, the patron of International A.N.S.W.E.R., is on record supporting:

* The pitiless massacre of Chinese protestors by the armed forces in Tiananmen in 1989. WWP states, "troops were issued arms? after some students took some soldiers hostage. On June 4, [1989], the demonstration changed from a peaceful protest to violent attacks on the soldiers? events were a battle ? not a massacre." Everybody in the world knows this is a disgusting lie.

* The dictatorship of Saddam Hussein, among whose defenders WWP are doubtless the most fawning. Their newspaper, also titled Workers World, wrote gleefully, in 2001, "more and more countries had begun individually breaking the ban on flights and other sanctions against Iraq." Right: countries with an equally bad or worse record, like Yugoslavia, which supply Iraq with illegal chemical, biological, and other weapons.

*The evil regime of crazed North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Il. WWP hack Deidre Griswold, who has been shoveling this manure for some 35 years, recently wrote, from the Communist hell itself, "People here in the socialist north of Korea are well aware of U.S. President George W. Bush's remarks branding their country as part of an ?Axis of Evil.? It has in no way dampened their ardor for their independent socialist system? Koreans today are celebrating? the continuity of leadership represented by unity around Kim Jong Il, who is pledged to follow the course of national independence and socialist construction charted by Kim Il Sung? the North Korean socialist system, which has kept it from falling under the sway of the transnational banks and corporations that dictate to most of the world." No mention here of the numerous individuals and families that have risked their lives and those of their relatives to escape the reality of North Korean socialism, or of North Korean international weapons sales, kidnapping of foreign nationals, terrorist attacks, or other details.

*In one of its most disgusting, and continuous, displays of admiration for genocidal fascists, WWP, the leaders of International A.N.S.W.E.R. are prominent defenders of indicted Serbian war criminal Slobodan Milosevic. When the trial of Milosevic began last year at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague, Netherlands. The International Action Center (IAC), predecessor of International A.N.S.W.E.R, "sent a delegation to take part in activities showing solidarity with the defendant and opposing the ?trial? as a NATO frame up." They declared, "Washington and its NATO allies hopes (sic) to pin the guilt for the 10 years of civil war in the Balkans on the Yugoslav leader." Who in the world, aside from fevered extremists, believes this swill? WWP has also published expensive volumes defending Milosevic.

Never mind that these Stalinist rodents see no inconsistency in acclaiming Saddam, who claims the title "sword of Islam," and Milosevic, whose terror took the lives of hundreds of thousands of Balkan Muslims. The peace parasites of WWP are thrilled to kiss the shoes of bloodthirsty tyrants like Saddam, Kim, and Milosevic, and then have the nerve to repeat moronic chants, in the streets of our cities, charging President Bush with genocide!

Numerous liberals, leftists, and pacifists have correctly questioned the morality of joining such vermin in their parades. Nevertheless, the main question has yet to be posed: Who pays for the Workers World Party, its weekly tabloid, its website, books, speaking tours, and other extensive activities? Whose money keeps their "Korea Peace Commission," and "Independent Commission of Inquiry to Investigate US/NATO War Crimes Against the People of Yugoslavia" going?

WWP is a minuscule Stalinist group. It does not command thousands of members or control major labor unions. Yet for many years groups of its leading members have constantly flown back and forth to Pyongyang and Baghdad, with side visits to Cuba and other isolated Stalinist territories, staying in hotels and traveling around in "solidarity." Who subsidizes "peace" activities that, regardless of the apparent sincerity of many marchers, aim to defend monsters like Saddam and Kim? Who foots the bill for WWP and its acolytes to assist Milosevic in the dock?

Any normal citizen should wonder whether this "peace" movement is not, in fact, directly funded and controlled by Saddam and Kim. Unfortunately, most Americans have forgotten that, before 1941, Hitler, Mussolini, and the Japanese militarists bankrolled similar "peace movements" in the U.S., and that the Soviet Communist Party paid for such propaganda for years and years.

We know who stands behind International A.N.S.W.E.R.: the mindless totalitarians of the WWP. Who stands behind them? Americans have a right to know, and if these phony peaceniks really desire respectability, they should be willing to publicly account for their financing, especially for air travel and hotel hospitality enjoyed while they serve as camouflage tourists in states committed to terrorism.

There can be no place in the United States for "peace" activism bought and paid for by the evildoers.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- I have a pretty complete list of those 'sponsors', if you're interested. It's pretty telling. (NT) -- JL, 17:49:18 02/08/03 Sat
  - JL, I'd love to see your list. Thank you. (NT) -- William, 01:50:56 02/09/03 Sun
    - Hi William ... -- JL, 15:04:39 02/09/03 Sun
Test Tude Society" to be syndicated ... KANTOR Radio talk Show -- Mark Spiewak, pascal Communications, 14:05:37 02/08/03 Sat (LIBRARY11.client.mscd.edu/147.153.52.40)
Hi,
My name is Mark Speiwak and I'm a writer, critic and multimedia artist/musician.
I'm enclosing my article here called "Test Tude Society" to be syndicated soon on many Radio Talk shows and et cetera...
Thought you might be interested in publishing it on your websites, content providers.
Though your audience might really like it.

Very Truly Yours,

Mark Spiewak.
http://www.up.to/kantor

"Test Tube Society"
by
Mark Spiewak.

Thus spoke Zarathusta:

God is dead...
Nietsche

There is a crowd of infertile women out there, screaming for more intimacy with their partners. Let's make a game more visible.
Lots of relationships between women and men end up �cause of infertility.
Some take an approach of adoption. Some split. Therefore someone is in a tremendous pain, sometimes both separated partners.
Most likely, the biggest pain lies on woman which
leads to personal crisis.

I didn't have a sex for last nine months and this fact upsets me. I look to a cause of it and see that it's because of my socio-political outlook. I strive for independence which is pretty normal. However I blame the security system for its corrupted existence.
So I'm being controlled by cops and undercover. Women
actually are scared to resist them and tell them to go take themselves.
But some are not...
For example, few days ago I did a poetry slam at local
coffee shop. It went pretty good, except for a lady's
encounter with undercover cops after I left.
After my poetry performance on stage, I happen to make a friend with an older than me lady. Her name is Liz. She's maybe seven or ten years older than me. That's not a point.
The point here is that Liz is mature. Most of women I met don't know what to talk about or don't want to for some reason, or can�t behave.
My new friend, Liz, and me developed a perfect communication and became new friends.
We exchanged contact numbers and I gave her a copy of my poem I recited that night on stage. She liked that. But cops or censorship didn't.
When I was gone, as I was told, the undercover cops walked over to Liz and told her to give them my poem to them.
"Do you want to talk to my attorney?" Liz asked.
Bah!!!
That's my favor woman ever, hero!
I never heard of anything like that before. That's the first woman, actually, since twenty years that showed a fist to my competition. I wrote "competition" because a lot of cops and undercovers work in entertainment industry. Most producers don't mind working with cops, just for reason of financial support to produce a movie or cabaret show.
So I'm looking ahead to meet Liz again.
But there are women out there, bunch of them, I mean a bunch of trash women, that never even raised a finger on undercover cop. They are scarred to loose a lot of business connections.
Therefore I find myself in a leap and don't have a sex or mutual relationship. I don't want a dog. I want woman, normal woman. For this kind of situation creates sort of crisis for me.
Than I'm a little upset here and yell my statements on all sorts of people, including City Mayor, President Bush or any innocent animal on the streets. But I don't kill. They also kill.
Same situation is with infertile women. I mean I can get to a point that I understand a pain woman feels from rejection based on infertility.
Are most lesbians infertile women?
Actually, a lot of lesbians are infertile women. And lots of lesbians and gays and straight people live the fact that their kids will be born with some kind of defects. Most ikely those are frequent mental defects than physical.
Science is remarkable.
nd business or business of science is even more remarkable.
Thanks to science and advanced bio-technology we, infertile humans, can still bring new humans to this planet. If woman is infertile or have a chance of miscarriage, advanced medicine comes in hand for a family to be completed. Nine months later, a new human is born. But!
But it's of sure speculation that there will be abnormalities in a new human development. Sooner or later someone down the road in a genetic lineage will come out with serious defects that, that's a must awareness, will effect not only genetics of human population but also socio-psychology of us.
Therefore I say in one of my poems:

"I don't want babies from test tube,...".

Then how far can we go from here? Is there any cure for infertility? Is there any cure for socio-psychological risis? Maybe we can give a credit to ancient medicine. But for sure, we must give a moral and ethical impact and outlook on future society, thus civilization.

I, I, I don't want babies from test tube,

I don't want pills from space stations,

Chickens and cows

Shall we have blood type not from,

We are sick and tired of TV

And genetic food...

They import organs from dead bodies

From Africa and Siberia

No wonder AIDS is eating our Society, Thus

Civilization

Mark Spiewak

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Nietsche is dead ... God (NT) -- JL (Sheesh! What's going on around here?), 15:48:34 02/08/03 Sat
- Read it, absorb it you want to take the time, this gets nuked soon, its going around lots of boards. (NT) -- Surf, 13:49:40 02/09/03 Sun
Here is an example of what some people think about the United States and the war which has not actually happened, Bush, Democrats and Republicans, etc. -- William, 07:09:34 01/23/03 Thu (cache-rl02.proxy.aol.com/152.163.189.98)
I found this on an internet forum I visited which was related to a meditation group I was once involved in.

Although it is supposed to deal with the teacher and topics related to that meditation and group, some people make comments related to politics. I have found that these comments are always one sided.

I get a bit peeved at the immaturity and lack of vision and lack of logic that I see.

I am interested in your opinions.

Here is an example:

from 01/21/03

Hi Livia,

I'm surprised at my own reaction to this part of your post:

"Same thing's happening in America which started out as a fantastic idea and with the best of intentions. Now they're the most powerful nation in the history of the world but paranoid as hell and losing the plot fast"

I'm wondering if this past weekends deomonstrations were shown on TV in your part of the world? They were multi-city and the largest since the Viet Nam war.

Right now living in the U.S., for me, is like living under a dictatorship. When one party rules the White House and Congress, and that party's main agenda is to make money from oil and large defence and pharmaceuticals, then things turn upside down. Now we have a president who was elected by less than honest means and allowed to take office by the Supreme Court.

The Democratic party does not play down and dirty like the Republican party, IMO. What you are not hearing is the ground swell of people. both Republican and Democratic that have had enough of this war mongering and the economy going to hell in a hand basket. Everyday it seems there's thousands more lain off from jobs never thought possible. It doesn't get the headlines because the White House spin doctors keep Iraq there.

There was a special on last week about the working poor in this country. Honestly, it was impossible to sit with a dry eye. Honest, hardworking people can't even feed their families anymore. They have been reduced to standing for hours on end, with families in tow, in free food handout lines. Teenagers were interviewed and asked how they were able to keep concentration on studies when they only had one meal a day.

My mother passed away last year and we just settled the small estate she had. It was a vineyard left to her and her siblings. It's value was one fifth of what it was ten years ago. The farmers are pulling out beautiful orchards and vineyards because there is no profit. Most fruit is now imported from out of the country! Mind boggling.

So the point I'm making is, the average American has not lost the plot nor the reason for living in this democracy. Quite the contrary. It's when the fundamentals that this country was based on get violated we end up with a fanatical President and Cabinet, who refuse to listen to the people they represent.

When bodies start coming home in bags, there's going to be sparks like we haven't seen since Berkeley in the 60's.

I guess that's what it always comes down to. The real agenda of the Bush administration is being kept from us just as Rawat's. It takes decent people to have the common decency to say "No, this is not right and I won't support it."

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- LMAO!!!!! Are they linked to the DU? Whatever we provide them, they want more, more, MORE. How nice of them to wish us distress in the upcoming, NECESSARY war. Typical Demoncrat BS. Ellen RATner has said so much and was 'caught' on it by Rita Cosby. (NT) -- JL (try having any sort of discourse anywhere else), 18:26:28 02/08/03 Sat
Woe to be black and not support black victimhood, to encourage personal responsiblity, to oppose reparations, and to have what are called Conservative values. -- William, 00:20:03 08/15/02 Thu (spider-wi081.proxy.aol.com/205.188.197.56)

Doctor Thomas Sowell; Doctor Walter Williams; Larry Elder - talk show host - Attorney, and commentary writer; Ward Connerly, California State Representative; Niger Inis, J C Watts, State of Oklahoma Representative in Congress, Armstrong Williams, Condaleeza Rice, and other blacks have been raked over the coals for their not so popular opinions and somewhat conservative actions and points of view.

Another black person who has been the subject of character assassination and personal attacks is Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson.

Recently there was a debate held at the annual convention of the National Association of Black Journalists in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in which Rev. Peterson was invited to represent the side opposing reparations to blacks for slavery.

Reverend Peterson became the object of racial epithets, personal attacks, and ridicule.

I read about the incident at this debate regarding the case for or against reparations and how Rev Peterson was abused by the black journalists and other black leaders at the debate for taking a stand against reparations and other not-so-popular opinions.

Here I found Rev. Peterson's own account and points regarding this debate, his treatment, and the reaction of those in attendance from his experience and his perspective.

Threatening the power of the black elite August 14, 2002

By Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson

This past week, I debated Professor Michael E. Dyson on "The Case For/Against Reparations for African Americans" at the annual convention of the National Association of Black Journalists in Milwaukee. Condace Pressley, president of the NABJ, had invited me to participate in this forum to argue against reparations.

The debate was poorly organized and unfairly administered from the start. Professor Dyson arrived 30 to 40 minutes late, yet was given both the opening and closing statements. And he received overwhelming applause from an audience of nearly 300 (liberal) black journalists, even though the main thrust behind his words were personal attacks against me. He and others called me "ignorant" and I was labeled the "white man's boy."

As he wrote in the Chicago Sun-Times of the debate later, "If you've ever wondered what a self-hating black man who despises black culture and worships at the altar of whiteness looks like, take a gander at the Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson."

In my opening remarks, I stated that black Americans don't need reparations, that instead what they need are intact, two-parent homes with good fathers leading them. I stressed that blacks are suffering nowadays primarily due to the lack of moral character and not due to racism. I also stressed that education is important, but it will not repair the moral and physical damage that has taken place over the last 40 years at the behest of the fraudulent civil-rights leaders.

My words were met by the crowd of black journalists with boos, jeers and laughter. This was curious to me, because I always thought that the responsibility of a journalist is to be objective and look at both sides of an issue. But these "journalists" instead attempted to degrade me because my point of view did not align with their motives.

During the question-and-answer portion of the debate, Vernon Jarrett, a founder and former president of the NABJ approached the microphone. He scornfully asked me, "Are you for real? Do you believe what you're saying? You're just a pawn of the white man. You have this little white boy [indicating my assistant] running around passing out your newsletters."

I answered the man's insulting comments this way, "I'm saddened by your statements, because you're an old fool, you have no wisdom. Normally older people gain wisdom." I then had my assistant, Doug, who actually is a light-skinned black man, stand up so the audience would see him.

Mr. Jarrett answered, "Don't get me started ? I'll talk about your mama!" This from a man billed as one of the nation's foremost media commentators on race. Amazing.

Michael Dyson is popular amongst most blacks because he uses his pedestal as an "educated" man to justify blacks' rage and hatred, and never demands that blacks take responsibility for themselves and their own failures and character flaws. The agenda of many of the black "journalists" in attendance at this debate is clearly more important than the truth and, because they are without the truth, the best they can counter my words with are personal attacks, boos and degrading laughter rather than facts and real solutions.

I pose a threat to Professor Dyson and these black journalists because I don't hate whites and I call on others to do the same. Dyson knows that if blacks overcome their anger, then they'll no longer listen to him and he'll lose his influence. It's no wonder, then, that Dyson attacked me as he did ? he and these black journalists tried to squash any threat whatsoever to their power base, and there is nothing more sacred to elite blacks than their own personal wealth and power.

Unfortunately for them, I'm still here. And as long as I am, I will continue to fight for the well being of all people ? a battle that will forever threaten the power of those like Michael Dyson and the National Association of Black Journalists.

The Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson is founder and president of BOND, the Brotherhood Organization of A New Destiny. He is currently on a national "Stop Reparations Now!" speaking tour. The Rev. Peterson is the author of the widely acclaimed book, "From Rage To Responsibility," and is a nationally syndicated radio host. To contact Rev. Peterson, e-mail him at bond@bondinfo.org or call 1-800-411-BOND (2663).

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- FYI -- Joel, 17:41:43 01/23/03 Thu
- I heard Peterson being interviewed by someone - I forget who (maybe JEff Katz or Dom G.) and he is a very soft-spoken man with no vitriol for those who attack him. If more blacks would listen to men like him and follow through, they would all be better off. (NT) -- SG, 07:44:43 01/25/03 Sat
- Reverend Peterson is a great man. And a REAL reverend. (NT) -- JL, 18:13:31 02/08/03 Sat
Does anybody remember this incident? -- Vincent, 11:21:13 02/05/03 Wed (NoHost/205.147.242.4)

Did they ever find out the "who" and the "why" that politically connected blatantly homosexual dentist from Society Hill was murdered in his car outside the city of Philadelphia? I believe the killer(s) torched his car after they shot him.

It was all over the local news and they kept playing tapes of this guy singing Judy Garland songs at parties attended by the rich and famous of Philadelphia. Just curious. If the police resolved this case I didn't hear about it.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- I remember it. Nothing publicized about catching anyone that I recall. Does that mean that we only have to worry if we are weird homosexual dentists who annoy people by singing Judy Garland songs? Talk about a stereotype! That guy was a characature of himself! Are you still in Florida, Vince? (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 19:09:19 02/05/03 Wed
- Vincent, I remember that incident also but I do not know what became of that case either. If you are in Florida, in which part are you located? (NT) -- William, 04:34:41 02/08/03 Sat
- Vince, here is a bit more on that Dr. Stephen Grosse murder case but it does not resolve the case -- William, 04:46:28 02/08/03 Sat
  - Thanks for the input guys. It is just curious that as big a stink that was made over this nothing has been resolved. I'm not the Vincent from Florida. (NT) -- Vincent, 09:47:22 02/08/03 Sat
Why we know Iraq is lying - article by Condoleezza Rice -- William, 09:15:32 01/24/03 Fri (cache-mtc-ah04.proxy.aol.com/64.12.96.169)

Why We Know Iraq Is Lying

By CONDOLEEZZA RICE - NY Times

WASHINGTON

Eleven weeks after the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed a resolution demanding ? yet again ? that Iraq disclose and disarm all its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs, it is appropriate to ask, "Has Saddam Hussein finally decided to voluntarily disarm?" Unfortunately, the answer is a clear and resounding no.

There is no mystery to voluntary disarmament. Countries that decide to disarm lead inspectors to weapons and production sites, answer questions before they are asked, state publicly and often the intention to disarm and urge their citizens to cooperate. The world knows from examples set by South Africa, Ukraine and Kazakhstan what it looks like when a government decides that it will cooperatively give up its weapons of mass destruction. The critical common elements of these efforts include a high-level political commitment to disarm, national initiatives to dismantle weapons programs, and full cooperation and transparency.

In 1989 South Africa made the strategic decision to dismantle its covert nuclear weapons program. It destroyed its arsenal of seven weapons and later submitted to rigorous verification by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Inspectors were given complete access to all nuclear facilities (operating and defunct) and the people who worked there. They were also presented with thousands of documents detailing, for example, the daily operation of uranium enrichment facilities as well as the construction and dismantling of specific weapons.

Ukraine and Kazakhstan demonstrated a similar pattern of cooperation when they decided to rid themselves of the nuclear weapons, intercontinental ballistic missiles and heavy bombers inherited from the Soviet Union. With significant assistance from the United States ? warmly accepted by both countries ? disarmament was orderly, open and fast. Nuclear warheads were returned to Russia. Missile silos and heavy bombers were destroyed or dismantled ? once in a ceremony attended by the American and Russian defense chiefs. In one instance, Kazakhstan revealed the existence of a ton of highly enriched uranium and asked the United States to remove it, lest it fall into the wrong hands.

Iraq's behavior could not offer a starker contrast. Instead of a commitment to disarm, Iraq has a high-level political commitment to maintain and conceal its weapons, led by Saddam Hussein and his son Qusay, who controls the Special Security Organization, which runs Iraq's concealment activities. Instead of implementing national initiatives to disarm, Iraq maintains institutions whose sole purpose is to thwart the work of the inspectors. And instead of full cooperation and transparency, Iraq has filed a false declaration to the United Nations that amounts to a 12,200-page lie.

For example, the declaration fails to account for or explain Iraq's efforts to get uranium from abroad, its manufacture of specific fuel for ballistic missiles it claims not to have, and the gaps previously identified by the United Nations in Iraq's accounting for more than two tons of the raw materials needed to produce thousands of gallons of anthrax and other biological weapons.

Iraq's declaration even resorted to unabashed plagiarism, with lengthy passages of United Nations reports copied word-for-word (or edited to remove any criticism of Iraq) and presented as original text. Far from informing, the declaration is intended to cloud and confuse the true picture of Iraq's arsenal. It is a reflection of the regime's well-earned reputation for dishonesty and constitutes a material breach of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441, which set up the current inspections program.

Unlike other nations that have voluntarily disarmed ? and in defiance of Resolution 1441 ? Iraq is not allowing inspectors "immediate, unimpeded, unrestricted access" to facilities and people involved in its weapons program. As a recent inspection at the home of an Iraqi nuclear scientist demonstrated, and other sources confirm, material and documents are still being moved around in farcical shell games. The regime has blocked free and unrestricted use of aerial reconnaissance.

The list of people involved with weapons of mass destruction programs, which the United Nations required Iraq to provide, ends with those who worked in 1991 ? even though the United Nations had previously established that the programs continued after that date. Interviews with scientists and weapons officials identified by inspectors have taken place only in the watchful presence of the regime's agents. Given the duplicitous record of the regime, its recent promises to do better can only be seen as an attempt to stall for time.

Last week's finding by inspectors of 12 chemical warheads not included in Iraq's declaration was particularly troubling. In the past, Iraq has filled this type of warhead with sarin ? a deadly nerve agent used by Japanese terrorists in 1995 to kill 12 Tokyo subway passengers and sicken thousands of others. Richard Butler, the former chief United Nations arms inspector, estimates that if a larger type of warhead that Iraq has made and used in the past were filled with VX (an even deadlier nerve agent) and launched at a major city, it could kill up to one million people. Iraq has also failed to provide United Nations inspectors with documentation of its claim to have destroyed its VX stockpiles.

Many questions remain about Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and arsenal ? and it is Iraq's obligation to provide answers. It is failing in spectacular fashion. By both its actions and its inactions, Iraq is proving not that it is a nation bent on disarmament, but that it is a nation with something to hide. Iraq is still treating inspections as a game. It should know that time is running out.

Condoleezza Rice is the national security adviser.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
Interesting to read the divergent views in this article ... what is your take? Has anyone been forthcoming about the "real" reasons? Hmmm? -- SurveyGuy, 11:35:13 01/22/03 Wed (maxtnt03-178.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.230.178)
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0121/p01s03-usgn.html
White teachers flee black schools
Some see exodus in South as a new form of segregation.
By Patrik Jonsson | Special to The Christian Science Monitor

Certain neighborhoods in the South are weathering a new version of an old phenomenon: white flight.

Across the region, white, often middle-class, teachers are leaving schools dominated by African-Americans almost as fast as they arrive. Many are moving to school districts with smaller populations of blacks, new studies show.

Critics see the exodus as a new form of segregation, encouraged by court rulings that no longer enforce racial diversity. But teachers say that cultural and economic barriers, not racial ones, are fueling the trend in a region where more than 40 percent of the public school population is black.

At the very least, the growing shortage of white educators is creating a dilemma for black schools from Picayune County, Miss., to Decatur, Ga. Right now, there aren't enough black teachers to go around, either. "All the stars are aligned for white teachers to leave," says Gary Orfield, an education professor at Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass. "It's a combination of poverty and racial segregation, added to cultural differences, that all makes it tough for suburban teachers to figure out the black and Latino cultures."

In Georgia, the trend is as pronounced as anywhere: A new study from Georgia State University (GSU) in Atlanta says that 32 percent of white elementary school teachers left their posts at predominantly black schools in 2001 - up from 18 percent in 1995. Moreover, they left well-to-do black districts at about the same rate as poorer ones.

Recent studies in Texas, California, and North Carolina reach the same conclusion. The effect, critics say, is that black students aren't getting an equal shot at good schooling. The reason: As white teachers leave, many blacks are fleeing the profession, too, leaving a dearth of qualified teachers of any kind. "As a result, we have lots of classes being taught by substitute teachers, who don't usually have degrees and aren't licensed to teach anything," says Tom Clark, a former superintendent of the Picayune County, Miss., schools.

Other factors are contributing to the exodus. A recent school building boom in Georgia created more job options for teachers - many of whom wanted to work closer to their own neighborhoods. What's more, many qualified teachers tend to leave lower-performing schools at faster rates.

But the authors of a new Harvard study on the "resegregation" of the South believe the flight is rooted in something more ominous. They see it an inevitable result of a backsliding society where white and black students increasingly go to different schools. They trace that divide, in part, to recent federal court decisions outlawing civil rights-era protections, such as busing and affirmative action in college admissions. What's more, fewer and fewer Southern schools are under court order to end discrimination.

As diversity diminishes, the problems become exacerbated. Mr. Orfield notes that white teachers who grew up in integrated schools have less trouble adjusting to crowded hallways where most of the kids are black. Even practical complaints can mask deeper motivations. "It's race, not test scores, not income, that's the motivating factor, says David Sjoquist, a professor involved with the GSU study. "If there's a concern about safety simply because there are black people in the neighborhood, sociologists would say that's a form of racism."

Still, not everyone agrees that faulty motives are behind many of the white teachers' decisions to leave. In many cases, it's more a matter of general frustration and unhappiness. "I don't think that the majority of these teachers [who leave] are racist," says Mike Worthington, the white principal of predominantly black Avondale High School in suburban Atlanta.

Cultural differences certainly play a part. Mr. Worthington notes that many of the white teachers who come to his school from white high schools and predominantly white colleges have trouble adjusting to the different speech patterns and classroom characteristics at Avondale. Among other things, he would like to see new teachers learn the Creole that many blacks here speak.

"I see my kids as bilingual," says Worthington, who received his cross-cultural training as a high school football coach. "There's a language that they use within their own culture that may not be used in the majority culture at large. My teachers should know that, so they can understand what's going on and allow it to be acceptable."

Today, there are signs that colleges are trying to address the exodus as a product of teaching methods rather than latent racism. "[White flight] is a major subject of debate in the literature right now," says Christine Sleeter, an education professor at California State University at Monterey Bay.

North Carolina Central University in Durham now offers a course in "dealing with classroom diversity." At one teachers' college in Milwaukee, some interns are required to "immerse" themselves in the neighborhood where they'll be working before taking over a lectern. "White teachers need all the help they can get," says Kian Brown, a black teacher at Durham's Y.E. Smith Elementary School.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
Oh, those peaceful, law-abiding mosques ... -- SurveyGuy (reported in the Times (UK) Online, 20:24:52 01/21/03 Tue (maxtnt03-198.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.230.198)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-549985,00.html

January 21, 2003
Arms found in mosque terror raid
By Stewart Tendler, Ian Cobain, Steve Bird and Daniel McGrory

A SMALL arsenal of weapons, including a stun gun and a CS gas canister, was seized during a police raid on the controversial Finsbury Park Mosque in North London, Scotland Yard said last night.

Detectives also recovered hundreds of documents including forged passports, believed to be French, faked French identity cards and counterfeit credit cards.

A number of arrests were made when up to 150 police, some armed, surrounded the building at 2am before using a battering ram to burst through the doors.

Five Algerian men and a Somali, aged between 23 and 48, and an Albanian, 22, were detained. Among them were three Algerians who the police and the Security Service, MI5, did not know had entered the country. Police have now asked immigration officials to check on the status of all seven in this country.

One of the three was said to be a "hugely significant figure" in the ricin poison plot uncovered two weeks ago. His arrest is said to be one of the most important made since police began tracking down members of the ricin network.

Police also removed computer equipment. M15 is reported to have asked the GCHQ listening station at Cheltenham to intercept thousands of coded e-mails sent and received by the mosque.

The raid, codenamed Operation Mermant, was mounted after police analysed material seized during a series of arrests following the discovery of the makeshift laboratory in North London. Senior officers now suspect that they have uncovered a major supply base for Islamic terrorists.

The mosque has been a focal point for Islamic fundamentalism for more than six years under the influence of Abu Hamza al-Masri, the one-armed, one-eyed Egyptian-born cleric.

Scotland Yard insists that it did not intrude on the main areas of the mosque that are used for worship, but officers did break down locked doors to a number of offices, including a basement office used by Abu Hamza and his deputy Abu Obeida, an Algerian asylum-seeker who has been in the UK since 1999.

As police continued to search the offices and the mosque�s third-floor accommodation area, Deputy Assistant Commissioner Andy Trotter described the raid as intelligence-led and said that it aimed to make arrests as well as seizing papers. Mr Trotter said that it was part of a "coherent campaign to keep this country safe."

"There will be more arrests to come in the future as a result of the intelligence we are gathering," he said.

The weapons found included an electric Taser stun gun, of the kind used by law enforcement agencies in the United States and currently illegal in the UK. A blank-firing pistol was also recovered.

After the weapons were found, Abu Hamza said: "This is not used for the mosque at all. This is not a terrorist weapon. This has nothing to do with the mosque."

There was a mixed reaction to the operation among prominent British Muslims and clerics, with some supporting the police but many voicing grave concern. Tension was growing among Algerians in North London last night amid claims that the police raid had offended local Muslims.

Around 100 Muslims, mostly Algerian, went to the heavily policed cordon around the building throughout the day to see the damaged door and smashed windows.

Karim Nagib, a driving instructor who came to Britain ten years ago, said: "Algerian police would not go into churches in Algeria in that way. Being an Algerian now means people think you might be a terrorist. Britain is the best country to be in and I am proud to be British, but I feel sad about what happened at the mosque."

Local residents said that the raid began shortly before
2am when a helicopter hovered low over the mosque�s minaret and used a high-powered beam to flood the building in light.

Police had the entire area sealed off within seconds, and armed officers guarded the perimeter while dog-handlers patrolled a railway line along the east side of the mosque.

Moments later there was a loud crash as a hydraulic battering ram was used to break open the heavy wooden entrance doors.

Laurence Baxter, 32, a policy analyst with the Consumers� Association, said: "I have been concerned about the mosque, but I find it reassuring that the police are being active. My main concern last night was getting back to sleep."

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Did they have permits for that stuff?
  I expect the backlash will be that Muslims are being unfairly singled out and discriminated against. It has been the mantra of choice since 9/11.
  I think I hear Mae West talkin' "Oh, is that a rocket in your pocket, or are ya' just glad ta' see me?" (I wonder if their weapons and poison gas, etc., are part of their religious rituals) (NT) -- William, 08:06:13 01/22/03 Wed
  - How do we know those mosque spires are not really ICBMs? Has Hans Blix checked them out? (NT) -- SurveyGuy (with tongue in cheek), 11:08:07 01/22/03 Wed
Great story on North Korea's atrocities and why they are part of the "Axis of Evil" -- KRM, 11:44:32 01/20/03 Mon (noc-nat.ma.tmpw.net/63.112.170.1)
http://www.msnbc.com/news/859191.asp

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
Some over-enthusiastic police or what? They say the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. I say it is paved with poor behavior. -- SurveyGuy, 19:01:37 01/09/03 Thu (maxtnt01-sdf-337.fast.net/209.92.61.83)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24635-2003Jan7.html
Bar Raids Irritate Owners, Drinkers
Fairfax Police Defend Sobriety Testing
By Carol Morello Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, January 8, 2003; Page B01

As the designated driver in her dinner party, Pat Habib was careful to consume no more than one alcoholic drink and follow it up with two sodas.

So she was shocked when a police officer singled her out of the crowd at Jimmy's Old Town Tavern in Herndon and asked her to step outside to prove her sobriety. After she ran through the alphabet without pause, the Fairfax County police officer let her go and explained police had received a complaint about an unruly blond woman matching her description. Then she watched as police tested other women looking nothing like her.

"I could see it if they wanted to prevent you from getting into a car, but they didn't even ask me if I was driving," Habib said.

Habib was among restaurant and bar patrons swept up last month in a joint operation of the Fairfax County police and the Virginia Department of Alcohol Beverage Control. During the holiday period, undercover agents went to 20 bars in Reston and Herndon looking for examples of bartenders "overserving" customers. Police ultimately raided three bars and arrested nine patrons who failed sobriety tests. They were charged with public drunkenness and spent the night in jail.

Police consider the operation a success and said they would consider doing it again. Lt. Tor Bennett, assistant commander of the Reston District station, described it as a "low-key" operation designed to stop drunks before they got behind the wheel.

"We're not talking about someone who was enjoying a cocktail or two and enjoying a nice evening out," Bennett said, noting that the nine men arrested had blood-alcohol levels ranging from 0.14 to 0.22. "They drew attention to themselves by their actions."

But civil libertarians, restaurateurs and many of their customers who were either questioned or arrested have decried the police tactic. They said many people who were drinking responsibly and causing no commotion now have the Class 4 misdemeanor of public intoxication on their record, and many more potential customers were scared away for good out of fear that a drink or two could get them arrested.

"It does smack of a pending police state if law enforcement is going into establishments to monitor behavior," said Lynne Breaux, executive director of the Metropolitan Washington Restaurant Association. "At the same time, we strongly oppose any combination of drinking and driving."

Under Virginia law, a restaurant or bar is a public place, and public intoxication is a low-level misdemeanor punishable by a night in jail and up to a $250 fine.

Kent Willis of the Virginia branch of the American Civil Liberties Union said the law does not specify what level of blood alcohol constitutes public drunkenness. The level for drunken driving is 0.08.

Police said the holiday raids, first reported in the Reston Times, were born of a community policing goal of discouraging crime before it occurs. Bennett said police had been called repeatedly to the three bars in response to fights and disorderly conduct. Undercover agents found no problems in 17 other bars they visited before Christmas, he said. And four of the men arrested were on their way to their cars when police stopped them, he said.

"We're not talking about overzealousness here," Bennett said, adding that uniformed police officers who made the arrests were accompanied by members of the police bicycle patrol clad in nylon pants and polo shirts.

But bartenders and patrons saw it differently.

At Ned DeVine's restaurant in Reston, owner Graham Davies said seven or eight police officers "came bursting into the place."

"If they decided you had too much to drink, you were targeted," Davies said, acknowledging that he believed the three customers who were arrested at his tavern probably had too much to drink.

"The police are within their rights. I can't disagree with what they want to do, which is save lives. But I disagree with the way they did it."

At Champps in Reston, general manager Kevin O'Hare described police as "antagonistic." He said they "pulled" people from their chairs who were making no commotion. "They're always welcome to come in anytime," he said of police. "It's not an issue when they talk to our guests. But when they actually pull people out of their seats, it is an issue. When it's borderline harassment, it's an issue."

One man who was arrested during one of the police raids acknowledged having several drinks during the course of the afternoon, but said he was not driving or acting unruly as he sat at a table with several work colleagues. He had just finished singing "Jingle Bell Rock" on the karaoke machine when an officer asked him to step outside. He failed a breath test and was taken in a van to jail.

"I've lived my life with tremendous respect for the rule of law," said the man, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he is contesting the charges.

Now his respect is tarnished.

"You could be anybody, anywhere, and they can take you out and throw you in jail," he said. ". . . I didn't do anything other than to be in the wrong place at the wrong time."

Katherine K. Hanley (D), chairman of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, said the operation was a tool to reduce drunken driving and would be evaluated before it is repeated.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- why do I get the feeling these people watched Minority Report ? (NT) -- H_Bergeron ( pre-crime prevention at its finest), 02:13:55 01/15/03 Wed
  - Note that they made being drunk in public a crime. You don;t have to be disorderly or doing something dangerous like driving. Just sitting quietly, although drunk, in a public place is sufficient cause for arrest because of what one might do later. Yup, a pre-crime crime. However, if the bar owner is drunk and lives upstairs, is he in public or home? A lawyer friend of mine who lives nearby is not bothered by this at all. (NT) -- SurveyGuy (people do not seem to understand how liberties are stripped away under the guise of protecting someone), 18:53:55 01/17/03 Fri
    - eminds me of a Bruce Cockburn lyric:
      "sudenly it's repression, moratorium on rights/
      what did they think the politics of panic would invite?/
      person in the street shrugs "security comes first"/
      the trouble with normal is it always gets worse."
      from "The Trouble with Normal" (NT) -- H_Bergeron, 05:16:58 01/19/03 Sun
      - Thank you for that wonderful lyric! (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 17:50:50 01/19/03 Sun
When is enough, enough?
A woman and celebrity takes a stand and walks out on bad behavior -- William, 00:14:18 01/19/03 Sun (cache-dq01.proxy.aol.com/205.188.209.133)

Actress Patricia Heaton is honorary Chairperson for Feminists for Life, a national femininst pro-life group. She is one of the few Hollywood celebrities who actually takes a stand against abortion and lived to tell the tale, having won two Emmy awards for her acting role in the television program "Everybody Loves Raymond" playing the wife of Raymond.

Here she goes against the grain again, walking out of the Music Awards held at the Shrine Auditorium, as a result of lewd and off color behavior and jokes perpetrated by fellow attendees, performers, and presenters, even at the expense and in the presence of young people during a prime time broadcast.

Patricia is openly pro-life and walked out of an event that was rife with celebrities and "power elite" in the entertainment industry due to bad behavior of fellow participants. Does this woman have a little bit of guts, or what?

She has character and backbone. She reminds me of my wife.

William

Hollywood star stands up for decency

Patricia Heaton walks out of music awards because of lewd tone
Posted: January 17, 2003 10:00 p.m. Eastern from World Net Daily

For "Everybody Loves Raymond" star Patricia Heaton, the last straw came when a performer at the 30th annual American Music Awards made graphic references to three-way sex. That, and, perhaps, Sharon Osbourne's joke about what she called Mariah Carey's "fake" endowments.

Though the actress was at the awards show to introduce a pre-recorded retrospective of executive producer Dick Clark's annual music show, enough was enough. She walked out of the Shrine Auditorium in Los Angeles, disgusted by what she called "an onslaught of lewd jokes and off-color remarks."

A two-time Emmy winner for her portrayal of Debra Barone on "Everybody Loves Raymond," the sitcom star had grown increasingly upset with the raw and raunchy comments made by presenters, performers and the hosts for last Monday's show ? the infamous Osbournes.

"I'm no prude, but this was such a vulgar and disgusting show," Heaton told the Cleveland Plain-Dealer.

Heaton marches to the beat of her own drummer in an industry not known for such politically incorrect thinking. She even boasts Rush Limbaugh among her personal friends.

"I arrived a little late and was seated in the audience," Heaton said. "I was going to present what's called a video package ? a look at 30 years of the American Music Awards. Well, what was passing for humor basically ranged from stupid to vulgar, and I just thought, 'I'm not going to be part of this.' So I walked out and said, 'Get me my car. I'm leaving.'"

Even the show-business industry publications and reporters covering the event noted the Osbournes and other performers kept the ABC network censors working overtime. Print advertisements for the live awards event showed a roaring Ozzy Osbourne saying, "I'll be bleeped!"

"The entire evening became about bleeping," said Heaton. "It was as if they were trying to become more like the MTV awards. But it's one thing if this kind of stuff is on MTV at 10 at night. It's quite another if it's on ABC at 8 o'clock. I don't know what Dick Clark was thinking."

She continued: "I really didn't know what I was getting into. I mean, there was Ryan Seacrest pulling open his co-presenter's shirt, then noticing there was a 12-year-old girl in the front row. And he says, 'Don't worry, honey, you'll have a pair of these soon.' And everybody went crazy. It felt like I was in the Roman Colosseum. As far as I'm concerned, it was an affront to anyone with a shred of dignity, self-respect and intelligence."

Will Heaton take heat in Hollywood for her decision? She's not expecting it.

"And if there is," she said, "who cares? When I was waiting for my car, one of the security people came up to me and said, 'I just want you to know how much I admire what you're doing.' So I wasn't the only one who felt this way. The camera coordinator for the awards was our camera coordinator from 'Raymond.' And when I walked on the set the next day, he started applauding."

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Yes, I read that. Let's see if she gets any othre roles after that series is over. Apparently crudeness is considered "kewl." Went to see George Carlin a few months back. Crudeness is now his whole act. I don't mind a bit thrown in for the adolescent minds who think they're adults, but a whole show of that just isn't funny. I wasn't offended as much as bored. Hollywood used to think drugs were avante garde. Now this disease of the intellect is poisoning their thinking. What a bunch of pinheads. (NT) -- SurveyGuy (Bravo! to Ms. Heaton), 17:48:32 01/19/03 Sun
Submitted for your consideration... John le Carre' -- H_Bergeron, 02:21:06 01/17/03 Fri (pcp02148573pcs.neave01.pa.comcast.net/68.81.252.202)
from The London Times
The United States of America has gone mad
John le Carre'
America has entered one of its periods of historical madness, but this is the worst I can remember: worse than McCarthyism, worse than the Bay of Pigs and in the long term potentially more disastrous than the Vietnam War.
The reaction to 9/11 is beyond anything Osama bin Laden could have hoped for in his nastiest dreams. As in McCarthy times, the freedoms that have made America the envy of the world are being systematically eroded. The combination of compliant US media and vested corporate interests is once more ensuring that a debate that should be ringing out in every town square is confined to the loftier columns of the East Coast press.
The imminent war was planned years before bin Laden struck, but it was he who made it possible. Without bin Laden, the Bush junta would still be trying to explain such tricky matters as how it came to be elected in the first place; Enron; its shameless favouring of the already-too-rich; its reckless disregard for the world?s poor, the ecology and a raft of unilaterally abrogated international treaties. They might also have to be telling us why they support Israel in its continuing disregard for UN resolutions.
But bin Laden conveniently swept all that under the carpet. The Bushies are riding high. Now 88 per cent of Americans want the war, we are told. The US defence budget has been raised by another $60 billion to around $360 billion. A splendid new generation of nuclear weapons is in the pipeline, so we can all breathe easy. Quite what war 88 per cent of Americans think they are supporting is a lot less clear. A war for how long, please? At what cost in American lives? At what cost to the American taxpayer?s pocket? At what cost ? because most of those 88 per cent are thoroughly decent and humane people ? in Iraqi lives?

How Bush and his junta succeeded in deflecting America?s anger from bin Laden to Saddam Hussein is one of the great public relations conjuring tricks of history. But they swung it. A recent poll tells us that one in two Americans now believe Saddam was responsible for the attack on the World Trade Centre. But the American public is not merely being misled. It is being browbeaten and kept in a state of ignorance and fear. The carefully orchestrated neurosis should carry Bush and his fellow conspirators nicely into the next election.

Those who are not with Mr Bush are against him. Worse, they are with the enemy. Which is odd, because I?m dead against Bush, but I would love to see Saddam?s downfall ? just not on Bush?s terms and not by his methods. And not under the banner of such outrageous hypocrisy.
read the rest of the piece

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Due to space constraints I posted an initial reply to this post in a main message directly above (NT) -- William, 05:04:12 01/18/03 Sat
Answer to le Carre's article/opinion piece posted below by H Bergeron -- William, 04:56:22 01/18/03 Sat (cache-dq01.proxy.aol.com/205.188.209.133)
H Bergeron, I think the author, John le Carre, hates George Bush and has fallen for the rhetoric from Islamic web sites as well as the left and fifth column here and abroad, such as that in Europe and Arabia, that Iraq is about oil and Bush is Hitler.

I believe that le Carre is among the masses who also hate Israel and think that the Jews are the bad guys and that when Israelis are killed by Arab homicidal suicide bombers that Israelis lost their lives but the killers are freedom fighters and martyrs doing a good thing (He sounds like he does not like Israel either).

I think he tries to draw a link to oil between Condaleeza Rice, Dick Cheney, and George Bush and imply that this is all about oil. The author, le Carre, does mention the human rights abuses, which Bush did mention as well but are often ignored in this context and which are not emphasized as much as they could be, but he passes that off with the same arrogant, needling method of so many others, by naming other places where there are human rights abuses. He forgets that the US went in to other countries, such as Bosnia, Kosovo, etc., to stop human rights abuses. They did not necessarily have anything to offer the US, no oil, nothing of the kind. It was done under a Liberal/Democrat President, Clinton, and it was mainly emphasized that it was for human rights for someone else. In the case of the current plans, it is for the United States interests, such as security, as well as to remove a megalomaniac dictator from power. Although I do not think that this is about oil, one must remember that our culture, and others, do depend on oil. It is almost as important as water. Would people become offended if the US went to war because of water? Only if a conservative or Republican president was in office at the time. The Liberals/Democrats seem to be unable to accept military action which is intended to protect the US and its interests. If it is for charity it is okay though.

I remember back in the late 1990s how Clinton ordered the weeks long bombings in Kosova and Bosnia. Those bombings killed many Christians. There was no outcry over that. The Muslims were saved, even though it is true that those Muslims had been involved in the planning and carrying out of attacks and murders of non Muslims. Nevertheless the Muslims were helped and now people forget and claim that the US murders Muslims. Which ones? Only those in Iraq who invaded Kuwait, anther country whose appreciation seems to be no where in sight.

It also sounds like the author would prefer the likes of Al Gore or Hillary Clinton running the show instead of Bush. In other words, he believes in it but not with Bush as the president.

It also appears that this author ignores the fact that the US does not intend to kill innocent civilians but intends to minimize such casualties. The fact that we were attacked and we have a right to take action to defend ourselves including unseating Saddam Hussein and securing Iraq and the Middle East where a great number of the enemy, those who attacked us and declared war on us, are actually residing and being supported and trained is totally ignored.

There is al Qaeda related activity in Iraq. I do not understand how the people of the US do not realize that. I wonder if they have been ignoring this information or if the US press just does not talk about it much. Nevertheless, le Carre sounds like British Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain, who was giddy with excitement at a letter he brought back from Hitler and whose policies failed to avert the outbreak of World War II in Europe in 1939. Chamberlain went the route of appeasement and later, after Churchill was prime minister and the German army was finally defeated, Chamberlain admitted that he made a mistake.

I have more specific information to reduce le Carre's statements to the babbling I think they are but it would take me some time to type it out and double check it, so I am leaving this summary with the possibility of adding more to this forum about this later.

I am aware of some of the stupid ideas perpetrated here since 9/11 which do circumvent some of the constitutional rights but I am also aware that many steps have already been taken to circumvent these rights without the influence of 9/11. We citizens must do something about this regardless of 9/11 and current policies.

Regarding the authors talk about switching attention from al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden to Iraq and Saddam Hussein, that is nonsense. Throughout the world many thousands of arrests and hundreds of convictions have already taken place, including upper leadership in al Qaeda. Even here in the US many have been arrested and many al Qaeda cells have already been disrupted.

As of today, allowing for incidents around the world, like the bombing in Bali, the attack on the Israeli Airliner in Kenya, and the Israeli/Jewish hotel in Kenya, as well as activity in India, Pakistan, and elsewhere, there various Islamofascist militants are busy killing people, there has been no major catastrophic attack as that which took place on 9/11/01. It appears that the leftists, fifth column, and left leaning liberal democrats, although even many Democrats do see the importance of getting serious, even if it means employing military force to stop these killers, here in the Us and around the world, are upset that there have been no major attacks and deaths.

The US has not stopped its hunt for al Qaeda and the author's suggestion is pure, well, it is pure nonsense! Sour grapes again. The US and the Bush administration are still pursuing these killers and still going on to other things.

We shall see about the other claims that people make about US imperialism and colonialism. To date this has mainly been done by others. The Arab/Muslims have been busy conquering nations for more than 800 years and still do so today. That is how Islam spread throughout Arabia, South Asia, and North Africa, and how Islam is about the only religions which can be practiced and where others are practiced they are being tortured, murdered, imprisoned, made to pay the poll tax and treated like second class citizens, their places of worship vandalized or destroyed, etc., etc. And the call the US imperialists. We defeated Germany and Japan and instead of making them the 49th and 50th states (Alaska became the 49th state on January 3, 1959. Hawaii was annexed before becoming a state. Hawaii became the 50th state August 21, 1959) the US helped rebuild these two countries.

Russia and France are already customers of Iraq, which might explain why they did not wish to see the US invade Iraq. Nevertheless I have a wait and see attitude about the accusations about this being about oil, etc. But if it is, I also reserve judgment to see what is done with it, for, as I said above, oil is important to people's lives and if people needed water would they have a problem with that? Gore and others from the Democrat side also have interest in oil. If Gore were president would the Democrat and Leftists have a problem with him going to Iraq and claim that he was interested in oil? He and his family have oil ties as well.

I'll answer that. If Hillary or Bill Clinton, or Al Gore were president and going into Iraq I don't think people would be as upset. I think it is because most people do approve of something being done but are upset because it is Republican Bush who is doing it. Of course the Leftists, and extreme rightits, would scream no matter what a person does. (exaggeration for emphasis)

I've got to go.

That is all for now.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
Is al-Qaeda winning? -- William, 23:40:17 01/08/03 Wed (cache-dq01.proxy.aol.com/205.188.209.133)

This is from the Observer published in the Sydney Herald,

Why al-Qaeda is winning

January 4 2003

The war against terrorism won't be won until the West grasps the fact that we are fighting a lethal idea rather than a tangible enemy, writes Peter Beaumont.

When the dust has settled and the blood and tears have dried, we will be able to say one thing with certainty about the terrorist attack in Kenya. Anyone who tells you the war against terrorism is being won is lying.

It is the great heresy of free societies, so speak it softly, but the accumulating evidence of the past four years is that terrorism can - and does - work. And it is working on a global scale.

It is a simple fact that is more terrifying than any of the attacks themselves - September 11 included. That a tiny group of extremists, for the most part using the most basic of technologies, could effect such a startling paradigm shift that has transformed the world we live in. But to what end? The answer is more surprising than our political classes appear yet to have grasped.

Strip away the millenarian agenda and its language of apocalyptic struggle - the Great Satans, the enemies of God, references to the Crusaders. Strip away, just for a moment, its extreme religious aspects and what you are left with is a non-negotiable political agenda.

That aim is to remove - or neutralise - American and Western influence from large areas of the globe, including states that are not exclusively Islamist.

It is a tension that was in part foreseen by Benjamin Barber in 1992 in his essay Jihad versus McWorld, which predicted that the greatest threat to democracy would be the clash between the spread of a homogenising American culture - paradoxically indifferent to what was happening in the world it touched on - and a new kind of anti-political tribal politics which, he predicted, would see 'the breakdown of civility in the name of identity, of comity in the name of community'.

Barber thought that breakdown in civility would likely come from the kind of gang warfare then beginning to grip the Balkans. Instead, the real challenge to McWorld has been the unforeseen emergence of an extremist version of radical Islam at war with the West and all it stands for. For the time being, at least, it seems it is the terrorists who are winning.

It is a pessimistic outlook, but an easy case to make. Let's start with the most obvious economic impact. The fear engendered by a spate of attacks by Jihad International - al-Qaeda and groups that share its agenda - is crippling the long-haul tourist industry, threatening the West's airline industry and has almost shut down tourism outside the US. That cost is likely to amount to billions in the long run, its impact being felt as keenly in countries such as Indonesia and Kenya which are heavily dependent on tourist dollars.

What is less quantifiable is what John Stevenson, senior fellow in counter-terrorism at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, describes as al-Qaeda's aim of 'neutralising' America and the West's influence in large areas of the world. Already the US and other countries have reduced embassies in vulnerable areas of the world, closing missions at times of threat. But it is not just diplomats who carry our message into the world. Business, too, is supposed to fly the flag for our values. And as businesses become more wary of operating in threatened areas, they will withdraw to safer areas of operation.

In our withdrawal from exactly those places where the kind of Islamist extremism we fear most is at its most threatening, we give up the intellectual and psychological space to those who most threaten our values. Because the real war with al-Qaeda, as James Thomson, the president of the Rand Corporation think-tank, pointed out in the organisation's summer review, is not simply one of missiles, snatch squads and bullets. It is quintessentially one of ideas.

And it is in the war of ideas that we are most notably failing in the war on terrorism. As Thomson's overview points out, even a year after September 11, America and its allies have little idea of the roots of the discontent that has made Jihad International so attractive to so many young Islamist men, or the etiology of the hatred of America.

Not only is the message not getting across, but there seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of where the real sophistication of Jihad International comes from. It is not in its ingenious and despicable skill in butchering innocent civilians, or even in its apparently formidable organisational skills, which in reality may be far less formidable than assumed, but in syndicating and marketing its brand of terror.

This is not the old terrorism of the Irish Republican Army or the Basque terrorist group, the ETA, with structures, doctrines and pseudo-military organisation. What George Bush and Tony Blair and their allies do not understand is that it is the idea of al-Qaeda, not its reality, that is the key, an idea that has taken root in countries from Afghanistan to South-East Asia and Africa.

At the centre of that idea is an oppositional discourse that seeks to drive the West - particularly America - out of what Osama bin Laden has claimed as the wider Islamic nation. That misunderstanding is represented at its worst by Bush who - it is said - keeps a list of 12 names of the top al-Qaeda terrorists and ticks them off as they are captured or killed.

But al-Qaeda is less a hierarchical organisation led by a sinister mastermind, than a dynamic dialogue between like-minded radicals conducted via mosques, radical publications and the internet. A specific order is almost redundant as individual groups know exactly what must be done and when, adapting themselves to new security constraints and to new targets.

What appears to have been 'understood' before the attack on Mombasa was that it was the right time to polarise the war on terrorism. Just when Bush and his allies had constructed a grudging consent from the Arab world for its tough line on Iraq, Jihad International brought in Israel.

In his threat to hunt down the perpetrators of the Mombasa attacks, Israel's Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, has threatened to upset the delicate consensus between America and its allies on the issue of the war on terrorism, and on the UN Security Council over Iraq. So by bringing Israel explosively into the mix a week before the deadline for Iraq's weapons declaration, Jihad International has shown a political and operational astuteness that is terrifying.

What is more terrifying is the notion among the West's political classes that it is an organisation, not an idea, they are fighting. With each new arrest, each new targeted killing, we congratulate ourselves that we are winning - until the next atrocity. All the while, we fail to tackle the ideas that replace each arrested or dead terrorist with a new recruit.

As the tens of millions dead in the last century demonstrated, ideas - no matter that they are venal ones like Nazism or Stalinism - can be as hard to kill as they are lethally and stupidly persistent. But in a war of ideas, to do nothing is the worst of all options.

The Observer

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- I've said it before (I think).... Islamism is the new Communism
  which I guess will inevitably lead to someone wondering if Islamist love their children too.... (NT) -- H_Bergeron, 02:18:25 01/15/03 Wed
- could you imagine what Joe McCarthy could have done if he had a 9/11 incident to work with? (NT) -- H_Bergeron, 02:24:58 01/17/03 Fri
Anyone attempting to post scams will be banned -- SurveyGuy, 15:26:17 01/15/03 Wed (maxtnt01-sdf-450.fast.net/209.92.61.196)
The reason the old post under this one jumped to the top is because calling themselves "Willfred" someone posted one of those stupid email letters caliming that they would share a multi-million dollar windfall if only you give them access to your bank account (in effect).

This time I only deleted the post and banned the posted. If it happens again, I will report it to the FBI along with IP number and time of posting and text of message as well as return email. Of course the FBI will probably do nothing because these are usually off-shore. I know that no -one here would fall for that nonsense, but sometimes we need to warn some of our more foolish friends.

I am amazed when I read that people still fall for the old "pigeon drop" scam. Lots of internet similar scams. Watch out.

For real internet deals, visit http://clarkhoward.com/

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
INS: Incontrovertible Nincompoop Status? Did they do the right thing .... or the easy, yet incompetent thing. -- SurveyGuy, 19:26:19 01/09/03 Thu (maxtnt01-sdf-337.fast.net/209.92.61.83)
Canadian programmers in San Jose jailed for 5 days for no reason
You may be interested in the story of Faramarz Farahani and other high-tech workers in California who, trying to do the right thing on the advice of their lawyers, went to clear up immigration paperwork. Farahani is a Canadian who was born in Iran, as was another man.

In his case, he had overstayed his visa by 2 days. When he went to the INS, they were too busy, and rather than having him come back when they didn't have so many people on staff, they jailed him, sending him on a Con Air junket, eventually to a San Diego jail, where, in the holiday spirit, he had to sleep in a crowded cell on a concrete floor while INS agents woke them every 15 minutes to ask questions.

Only because he had help from his silicon valley employer and because he had good English did he make it out after only 5 days of fun.

Welcome to America!

http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/PEstory/TGAM/20021226/ULOCKN/Headlines/headdex/headdexInternational_temp/13/13/19/

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=farahani&btnG=Search+News

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- SurveyGuy, Thanks for keeping us apprised of these situations. They either do nothing to help and everything to hurt or they do stupid things like not do their job, make people who are sincere and legal, wait until it is too late then arrest them an incarcerate them for noncompliance. Not a very efficient or helpful group, the INS, are they? They don't waste any time incarcerating people fleeing from China but if a person is from Mexico, the Middle East, or Cuba, the treatment seems to be different. (NT) -- William, 20:55:05 01/11/03 Sat
  - I don't know what it is, but their system sure seems screwed up. Here people present themselves under their company attorney's advice and the IRS jails them because they don't have the time. Somehow, I do not think terrorists are going to show up at INS with papers. The INS may even make some new terrorists with their behavior and treatment. (NT) -- SurveyGuy (seeing patterns of incompetence everywhere. Sort of the opposite of paranoia. I am sure that people are to confused to be after me.), 17:17:27 01/12/03 Sun
Penn Jillette - Airport patriot.... don't you just love stries like these? -- H_Bergeron, 01:55:18 01/05/03 Sun (ppp-216-158-59-67.cust.oldcity.dca.net/216.158.59.67)
this is the summary from Boing Boing
read the whole story here
Penn Jillette, nerd squillionairre and fearless bad-boy magician,
had a bad experience with Las Vegas airport security, where a security guard
grabbed his crotch during a frisking without asking permission.

Penn, who knows his rights, told the guard that unless he asks first,
grabbing a person's groin is assault.
The guard told him, basically, that he doesn't have any rights
once he's in the security checkpoint, and shut up.
So Penn asked him to call the cops so that he could press assault charges.
What follows is a tragicomedy for the twenty-first century,
in which various airport personnel insist that poor Penn will be late for his flight
if he doesn't back off of this pressing charges business,
and a Las Vegas cop (who's an enormous Penn and Teller fan) tells them, Penn's right,
you committed assualt, and Penn stoically insists that he won't mind missing his flight,
since he can always catch a later one.
The punchline is a call from a PR person at the airport who offers to ensure
that he gets VIP treatment from now on whenever he flies out of Vegas.

I explained the problem. "Do you allow your crotch to be grabbed without being asked?"
I didn't exaggerate, I said that there was nothing sexual,
I wasn't hurt, and it wasn't my genitals. I just said it was wrong.
She said "Well, your feedback is really important because most people are afraid of us..."

She said, "Well, you know a LOT about this."
I said, "Well, it's not really the right word, but freedom is kind of a hobby with me,
and I have disposable income that I'll spend to find out how to get people more of it."
She said, "Well, the airport is very important to all of our incomes and we don't want bad press.
It'll hurt everyone, but you have to do what you think is right.
But, if you give me your itinerary every time you fly, I'll be at the airport with you
and we can make sure it's very pleasant for you."

I have no idea what this means, does it mean that they have a special area where all the friskers are topless showgirls,
"We have nothing to hide, do you?" I have no idea.
She pushes me for the next time I'm flying. I tell her I'm flying to Chicago around 2 on Sunday,
if she wants to get that security guy there to sneer at me.
She says, she'll be there, and it'll be very easy for me. I have no idea what this means...

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Very interesting, but we already know the quality of screeners and the stupidity of their policies that will eventually result in a partial botcott of airlines by the public. It is already happening with peoiple flying much less more due to indignation than fear. In the end, not only won't he sue, but he didn;t even getthe VIP treatment he was promised. Here's the FOLLOWUP. (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 13:34:49 01/05/03 Sun
- My wife and I were sent to a separate and confined area at the time of our initial airline baggage check in and sent to a separate room ... (click to read more) -- William, 04:19:05 01/07/03 Tue
  - As long as there is insufficient training and non-profiling, I will avoid air travel as will others. While I will be flying in February, I will be doing more driving to destinations when possible. The airlines wonder why they are in trouble? This crude unnecessary harrassment of the public is the reason. Security without professionalism is just horrible. A few lawsuits when these goons step out of line is what it will take. I will report on my experience when I return from my Feb. trip. My last trip was not as eventful as yours. (NT) -- SurveyGuy (you and your wife don't look suspicious to me), 22:55:32 01/07/03 Tue
Purul Comic Club and the Slick Ducks - 2003 Mummer's Parade -- Alexis Hall, 12:59:31 01/03/03 Fri (fw.tyson.com/199.66.1.5)
The 2003 Mummer's Parade in Philadelphia will be a controversial one. For anyone who hasn't already heard, the Slick Ducks, a brigade marching with Purul Comic Club, will be marching this year under the theme "The Devil Made Me Do It". They are dressing as preists, altar boys, cops, and nuns (complete with go-go polls). Channel 17 has already stated that they will go to a commercial during the time in which the Ducks reach the A-Stand, and there have been quite a few newspaper articles written on the subject.
I have heard that there will be protestors present at the rescheduled parade this Saturday, and I know for a fact that the owners of both Purul Comics as well as the Slick Ducks have recieved phone calls from people on behalf of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia asking them to please "tone down" the Duck's presentation.
I would like to use this forum to express my disgust at the way in which people are reacting to the Ducks and Purul Comic Club.
I have been marching with Purul Comic Club since I was a fetus. The Mummer's Parade has long been a tradition in my family, and I can honestly say that New Year's Day is my favorite day of the year. Through the years, I have tried to learn as much as I can about the origins of the parade, and it is my understanding that the parade was initially started as an act of rebellion - a day of debauchery, family, and satire. This year's parade is no exception, and I firmly believe that the Ducks are doing nothing but holding fast to the original intentions of the parade!
This just goes to show how people have lost sight of the parade's intent and purpose, as well as the Comics' integrity. The Comic Clubs have been somewhat forgotten in the years of late, which is a disgrace, especially considering the fact that they are the foundation on which the parade as we know it today was laid.
Every year, I sacrifice my social life between Christmas and New Year's and do nothing but paint, glue, build, and run errands to do my part in helping to make Purul Comic Club a success. My father and mother put countless hours into making sure Purul Comic Club marches up the parade route with smiling faces, a family bond, and even tasteful irreverance.
Despite all of the controversy and intentional commercial breaks, Purul Comic Club, as well as the Slick Ducks, should be given the respect that they deserve. For if nothing else, they are holding true to tradition, and coincidentally shedding a satirical light on something everyone should be aware of - crimes against children.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- The "ducks" just admitted it was a "joke." Was the prupose to get some pubicity? Don't know. Still, if it had been true, would others agree with you that it was legitimate parody? Or would the lines of decency have been crossed? (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 14:40:12 01/04/03 Sat
  - No Sense of Humor -- Alexis Hall, 16:52:44 01/05/03 Sun
    - I have no disagreement with anything you've posted. I just wanted to point out the current status. I appreciate the posts. I thought that I would ask what others thought. I think it was a fine joke to see whether the forces of polical correctness would jump to defend the Ducks or the Church or what. Some may have a different reaction. (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 18:24:54 01/05/03 Sun
      - Gotcha -- Alexis, 11:35:58 01/06/03 Mon
- I thought it might be a joke and I was waiting to see what else was said about it. I also thought about how "safe" a target Catholic priests, nunes, and just plain Catholics, are. I don't think anyone will make a comedy about black racists and race hustlers, democrat anti-Semites and democrat racists (Robert Byrd, William and Hillary Clinton, Jesse Jackson, George Wallace, Harry Belafonte, Al Sharpton, Spike Lee, and on and on), homosexuals (gays and lesbians) or Mulsims. I guarantee that these are off limits and would be met with outrage and condemnation. (NT) -- William, 04:07:58 01/07/03 Tue
British women 1 in 3 have abortions? Sounds fishy to me. -- William, 04:06:08 01/02/03 Thu (cache-mtc-ah04.proxy.aol.com/64.12.96.169)
SurveyGuy,

Would you like to chew up these statistics and come back with an assessment at how they can possibly come up with such a number? 1 in 3 woman will have an abortion?

Not just 1 in 3 of those who are pregnant but 1 in 3 of all woman. Sounds fishy to me. Also, it does not make it right either.

In Canada it is estimated that 1 in 4 woman will have an abortion.

I know that the statistics of miscarriages of pregnant women start at about 1 in 3 and go up to about 1 in 5. These are among women who have become pregnant and lose their baby before birth. One caveat, however, is that many of these miscarriages take place in the early days of the pregnancy and many mothers do not know they are even pregnant.

With the 1 in 3 statistic, I figure they are inflated numbers but I also figure that many women who have one abortion are likely to have a second and a third thus raising the average. If three out of ten people steal 100 times and there are 400 thefts the average is: 40 thefts per each of those ten people. Now, if there are 100 people, let's say they are all women, then that makes the average of 4 thefts per each person, when in reality only 10 of the 100 are actually engaging in the thefts and of those ten, three are actually doing 1/4 (100) of all thefts (400) and only 1/10 of all the women are actually doing any of the thefts at all, then this statistic, although an average, is also, in my opinion, a lie, for in reality only 10, or 1/10 of these women, who are theives are doing the stealing, 400 thefts in all, out of 100 women.

I am going to bed and I'll post this without double checking.

Thanks, SurveyGuy!

William

One in three the Guardian

October 12, 2002

Abortion often the subject of secretiveness and widely thought of as relatively rare, is actually a commonplace experience for women in Britain. The day-to-day reality seems at odds with the present state of the law on abortion. Here six women tell their stories.

Interviews by Rachel Shabi
Saturday October 12, 2002
The Guardian

It is a commonly quoted statistic - that one in four women will have an abortion during their lifetime. In fact, according to the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, that is an underestimate. At least a third of British women will have an abortion by the age of 45 (excluding Northern Ireland, where abortion is still illegal). In 2001, there were 186,000 legal abortions carried out in England and Wales (17 per 1,000 women aged 15-44). That figure remains fairly constant from year to year, although there was a peak in 1996, coinciding with a health scare over the pill.

Under the terms of the Abortion Act of 1967, termination is legal up to the 24th week of pregnancy, subject to approval from two doctors. To 'qualify' for an abortion, a woman must prove that having a baby would cause her or her family greater physical or mental damage than not having one. Effectively, this places the power to decide in the hands of the medical profession, and does not provide women with the legal right to choose. The UK differs from other European nations and the US in this respect. 'The current law tells you that there are very few politicians who will pay anything more than lip service to the idea of women's rights,' says Dr Ellie Lee (pictured top, left), editor of Abortion: Whose Right?

While in practice many doctors interpret the law liberally, they are nonetheless able to block access to services on the basis of moral opposition. A survey conducted by Marie Stopes International (MSI) in 1999 found that 18% of GPs were opposed to abortion, yet they do not have to declare this objection to patients. According to Alice Richardson, chairwoman of the National Abortion Campaign, women report numerous incidents of 'notes lost, decisions delayed and confidentiality broken' by doctors. Many women prefer to refer to a specialist abortion provider, such as the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) or MSI - both of which are charities. If seeking an NHS abortion, however, a woman initially has to go through her surgery or family planning clinic.

She may then face a second hurdle: NHS provision for abortions is patchy, resulting in what Richardson describes as 'abortion by postcode'. The amount of funding made available for abortion varies widely from borough to borough: in 2001, for example, 96% of abortions in North Cumbria were NHS-funded; in Dorset, the figure was 61%; in Kingston and Richmond, in Surrey, meanwhile, only 50%. Health authorities set different time ceilings on abortions - in some areas, they are refused to women who are more than 11 weeks pregnant. Waiting lists - even for an initial appointment - are commonplace. Much of the burden of abortion provision is undertaken by charities such as MSI and BPAS. In 2001, 33% of NHS abortions were contracted to such organisations, while 24% of all abortions were private - at a cost, on average, of �400.

Public opinion polls show high rates of appro-val for abortion, but there is still a minority that disagrees. The Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child campaigns on this issue and seeks a tightening of the current law. Its education officer, Katherine Hampton (top), says, 'It is too easy for people to get abortions and I don't think they are given enough information - at the time they are considering abortion and earlier, at school.'

Pro-choice campaigners, meanwhile, advocate greater honesty in this area: 'Accidental pregnancy is so predictable, and so much a part of having a sexual relationship,' says Lee. 'We are dishonest in saying we can be 100% in control. It is simply not true.' A spokesperson for MSI describes the current abortion law as 'paternalistic, way out of date, and long due for reform'.

Mary Williamson, 66, Colchester

It was in the 1980s, I was 44 or 45. The cap failed and I found, to my absolute horror, that I was pregnant. I'd come off the pill because of a health scare and thought that there was less and less chance that I would become pregnant. It was pretty awful - the whole idea of having another child was totally unplanned and unlooked for. I had one child who was then 19 and didn't want any more. I'm married and we discussed it. I told my mother and there was no disapproval at all - if I'd have had to go privately, she would have helped me. My daughter was in America at the time - I can't remember when I told her, but it certainly wasn't a secret. I had a national health abortion, which was very quick - but it was traumatic because of the decision to make, and also because I'm old enough to remember when it would have been a fate worse then death to need an abortion.

I was pleasantly surprised at the availability. I think I was six weeks pregnant when I realised, and a couple of weeks later I'd had the abortion. My GP wasn't too hot, but he did put me on to a consultant, who was brilliant - no judgmental remarks or anything. I must have been quite worried at the time, but looking back it was a relatively straightforward procedure, which was almost totally due to having a very caring consultant. I overheard him saying to a nurse, "This is what the 1967 Abortion Act was all about."

The doctor who referred me to the consultant was fairly old and I had to bring it up - he probably wanted me to say the word "abortion" rather than him. In hospital, they kept asking whether I wanted to go ahead, but I guess they had to in case I changed my mind. I had it on a Wednesday and went back to work the next Monday. A year later, I had a sterilisation, just to make sure it didn't happen again.

I've absolutely no regrets, I'll always remember the enormous feeling of relief when I woke up in hospital. I've never been mentally ill, or any of the things they say you are going to be - I'm not walking around damaged beyond repair. I'm very upfront and open about it, and I feel it should be talked about. It is a private and shameful thing in many people's eyes - not, I hasten to add, in mine. People are a little bit shocked and surprised when I talk about it; they take it for granted that I'm against abortion, partly because of my age and partly because I appear very "respectable" - we live in a small village and I was a lecturer in further education. The perception is that people like me aren't supposed to have abortions.

Sally Helliwell, 35, London

I was 23 and about to go to university. Though I was in a relationship and living with the bloke, I definitely didn't want to have children. I was on the pill, so it was a bit of a shock. But I didn't really consider any other option - there was no question, either for me or for my partner at the time. I never had any dilemmas about it - it was just a practical thing to do. I think it makes a big difference if you are in a situation where you might want children, but you aren't quite sure. That might have an impact on your decision.

I approached the whole thing in a very matter-of-fact way. We made an appointment at the doctor's and had to go through the rigmarole of getting two doctors' consent, although fortunately it was fairly straightforward and I didn't get any hassle. It was very early on when I found out - seven weeks - and I had to wait to have the abortion, they said it was too small to do it any earlier.

There are two images I remember of going to hospital. Seeing this girl I knew in the waiting room and lying on the operating table waiting for the general anaesthetic to take effect. I can't really remember any of the details - but why would you? I don't remember getting my teeth taken out, either. Even giving birth, which I did 18 months ago, is fading from my memory pretty quickly.

I did have an instance when I was 19 and thought that I was pregnant, and went to see a doctor who made it very clear, even before I had the tests, that she was anti-abortion. I was scared stiff that I was pregnant and was insinuating that I wasn't going to have the baby. She made it clear that it wasn't an option as far as she was concerned.

So when I was pregnant at 23, I thought that was going to happen again, but it didn't. My impression from that is that it very much depends on the doctor - you can be lucky or unlucky. When it comes to practicalities, most people think abortion is OK, but that can change when you talk about it in the abstract as a moral issue; then there's this whole thing that women are supposed to be traumatised by it. And the whole process of doctors ticking boxes to say that you'll be more traumatised by having a child than if you don't, to say that your mental health is at risk if you go through with the pregnancy - that puts across the idea that somehow you are doing something you shouldn't be doing. Or something that will affect you in the future, when really there is no reason why it should.

I was very confident about what I wanted to do. It was a long time ago and I haven't really thought about it since. I didn't even think about it when I had my child. It is very different finding out you've made a mistake and working out how you're going to deal with it, then wanting a child, getting pregnant and looking forward to having one.

Sue Hulbert, 40, Leeds

It was May 12 2000 when I had the abortion, a date that is fixed in my mind. The next day that sticks is November 19, because that's when my child was due. Whatever anybody says, there will always be a life missing from my life. I hope and pray that one day I will see him and that he will forgive me.

I was involved in a relationship that had problems, but the baby was planned. Every relationship goes through rocky patches - I just didn't know how rocky. As soon as I got pregnant, my partner refused to talk about the baby. Things between us got worse, strained, we started to argue a lot and he became quite aggressive. In the end, we had an enormous argument and I remember screaming at him, "I don't want you or your baby." On the day we should have gone to the hospital for the first pregnancy consultation, we actually went and spoke about abortion.

The hospital made it very easy for me. Although the first consultant did say he wouldn't do it, he put me in touch with someone who would. Within a fortnight, I was booked in. My pre-abortion meeting gave me no indication that the abortion was going to cause me any damage, either mentally or physically. On the morning I went in, I was distraught. Even up to that point, I had an idea that I would never go through with it. But I went in, was examined, given a pessary, and two hours later I had the abortion.

I woke up in tears - I knew that I'd done the wrong thing. I had a haemorrhage - which was frightening and painful - and another one four weeks later. But, mentally, the problems became more debilitating. The overarching thought in my mind was that I had killed my child. I felt so guilty, I lost all confidence, all my self-esteem, and I wasn't able to do my job. In the end, last December I took an overdose, because I'd decided my life wasn't worth anything. I didn't feel worthy of being a mother to my two kids [from an earlier relationship]: I thought if they ever found out about the baby, they would hate me, and because I was so depressed and crying all the time, I wasn't being a proper mother to them. I spent a long time after that in a hospital psychiatric unit. In the meantime I've had counselling from the British Victims of Abortion [a helpline for those experiencing physical and emotional difficulties after an abortion].

The thing that makes me angry is that I was never told what the side-effects might be, by anybody. I was so weak and I was put under pressure by my partner, who had lowered my self-confidence, anyway. I felt as though I couldn't cope with anything. You are in a very vulnerable state, it's a time when you need guidance and structure - and it simply wasn't there.

Without a doubt, I would have been better off having that baby. However many problems I could have had being pregnant, I didn't know I would have far more not having that child. I've had nightmares - I've seen foetuses in hospital kidney bowls, crowds of people shouting at me that I'm a murderer, pur�ed foetuses being splattered on windows. I have difficulty with other people's two-year-olds - it makes social interaction very hard. I lost work, money - you can't describe the cost of it, or the frustration when people don't understand what you are trying to tell them.

Anonymous, 32, London

I was 27 and had been going out with someone for three months. I found out I was pregnant after we broke up. It was a split condom. I never told my ex, I had no desire to - he's the sort of person who, instead of making me feel better, would have needed me to reassure him. I felt awful finding out I was pregnant. I didn't want to be, it was really horrible. I went to my GP and was really scared: you hear so many horror stories about doctors refusing abortions, and I knew that, if he did refuse, I wouldn't be able to afford one privately. But he was actually really good and referred me to a hospital within a week. Then I had to wait four weeks to have my operation, which was just awful. Not for one moment did I think I was doing the wrong thing, but waiting put me in a state of temporary paralysis. I just wanted it to be over - I couldn't move on, get on with anything. It was a horrible time, going through this so soon after the break-up of a relationship. I couldn't sleep, I couldn't eat - it wasn't good.

I felt stupid being in that position. I'm an intelligent person and I felt like I should have known better. You still think, "God, I'm so stupid, how could I have got into this position?" Even though I wouldn't think that of anyone else, I thought it about me.

A friend came to the hospital with me and the actual termination was fine. You turn up in the morning and are home by lunchtime, watching videos in the afternoon. When I woke up from the operation, I instantly knew I wasn't pregnant any more - I felt a bit weird, but mostly I just felt relief. I've never felt at all guilty about it, and now I just don't think about it. The only thing I regret is that I was ever in that position in the first place.

I would never tell my mum, it would upset her and she doesn't need to know. I don't regret what I did, but it is still not really acceptable to talk about. You wouldn't think that one in three women has an abortion. There is a lot of stigma attached, and the anti-abortionists like to claim the moral high ground. Plus we're not very good at talking about sex generally - and abortion is one of those things that is supposed to happen to other people.

Anonymous 24-year-old

It was three years ago. I was at university. At the time, I was very stressed because I was having problems with my family and it was interfering with my studies. My doctor put me on antidepressants and told me they would stop me getting pregnant as well. A month after that, I got pregnant. As soon as I found out, I knew I wanted a termination. At no point did I feel I wanted a child - it just wasn't right for me at the time. I was in what turned out to be a long-term relationship, but at that point we hadn't known each other long.

I was referred to a private clinic on the NHS and had the termination. I was lucky; I know that's not the case for everybody - in my area there is not very good NHS provision. But part of that was that my doctor realised she'd made a very big mistake, so from then on it went very smoothly.

I didn't tell my family, but my mother is quite nosy and she went through my bag and found a letter. My family went completely mad. It was only then, facing other people's extreme opinions, that I was affected badly. It wasn't the abortion itself, but the reactions of my family that made it difficult - being told by them that I had killed, that I was a murderer. It really upset me. I was studying, away from home, a poor student, and my family messed it up for a few months, made it difficult to concentrate because of endless phone calls and arguments. They said it was because they're strict Muslims, but I know now that views within the religion vary quite a lot, especially on early abortions. It may have been a cultural issue as well for my family - it just wasn't considered acceptable to have an abortion.

But I was quite confident about it at the time, and I still am. I felt that I had a right to do what I did. Purely on an emotional level, it was clear to me from the beginning that this wasn't for me, that I didn't want to be controlled by children I didn't want, that this wasn't a future I wanted at that stage. I thought I had done the adult thing, and it seemed that what my family wanted was for me to be like a child, allow my life to be shaped by circumstances rather than me having agency in my life. It doesn't bother me what they think. What bothers me is that they got in my way and made things much harder for me. I respect anyone who wouldn't choose abortion for themselves. What I don't respect is someone ruining another person's life by telling them that they can't have one.

Anne Quesney, 36, London

About four years ago, I had a total accident, a failure of contraception when a condom split, and suddenly found myself pregnant. I decided to have an abortion because I don't want to have children, full stop. It's something my partner and I decided long ago, so for me it was the only solution. I never thought that decision was right or wrong. It's just a choice women make, and that was it. There were no kind of moral considerations, it was just a practical solution.

I went to the doctor and told him that I thought I was pregnant and wanted an abortion. He was very supportive, so everything happened straightforwardly and very quickly - I was so adamant about my decision that it made things easier. I was sent to a Marie Stopes clinic, but it was paid for on the NHS. I think I was extremely lucky - I was living in a borough that is known to have one of the worst track records in terms of NHS abortions.

I only had a local anaesthetic - by choice, I didn't feel the need to be totally put out - so I remember the termination clearly. It is a very quick process, a very simple operation, so I don't think there is a need for people to have a general anaesthetic. I think they do it because most women don't want to be conscious. It was over in minutes. You feel slight discomfort - it's not exactly a picnic - but in a sense it's not that much worse than a visit to the dentist. I had a few cramps afterwards, but I assume that was normal. My partner picked me up, and two hours later I was home.

The feeling was relief, straight away. I didn't want to have a child - it was the only solution. There are a lot of women who don't want children; for those who do, it seems a really strange concept, but for those who don't it is totally acceptable. My life carried on. There was no traumatic experience or psychological hang-ups or whatever.

Before I had an abortion, I wasn't aware of the legal situation in this country. It did shock me [that two doctors had to agree to the termination], as I didn't feel I was able to exercise my right over my own body. I can't say I was treated badly in any way, but it's a time when quite a lot of woman can feel vulnerable. I've never come across anyone who told me it was the wrong thing to do - and, in any case, I know it was the right thing, so it doesn't really matter

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Propaganda for those with no consicience. For those with conscience who fall for it, the long term ramifications for their loves are dismal, but not as dismal as the life that was taken. The Guardian is, of course, a liberal publication. It makes one woder why such an article is printed. Perhaps business for abortion clinics is down as people contemplate more. (NT) -- SurveyGuy [The question is, will such people ever make a good decision?), 12:10:37 01/02/03 Thu
  - SurveyGuy, I've been reading articles from the Guardian, among others left wing and liberal sounding points of view press outlets and I have discovered that there definitely is a slant. (Duh!?) The United States is painted as a big bully; the worst terrorist organization in history; George W. Bush is a Nazi, and on and on. Don't get me wrong, this is not necessary the title of the articles, but the overall tone of the fight column here in the US as well as anti-US sentiment in Europe, Arabia, and elsewhere is expressed this way. (NT) -- William, 21:08:42 01/02/03 Thu
  - The Guardian does present the news in such a way that the US cannot do anything right. At least, that is my opinion. (NT) -- William, 21:23:47 01/02/03 Thu
You may find this inspirational. Compare with behavior and hate speech of some other countries and people. This was send to me via email without citation but I researched it. You can find out more about the writings of Naomi Ragen at http://www.NaomiRagen.com. -- SurveyGuy, 12:23:00 01/01/03 Wed (maxtnt03-258.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.231.4)
http://www.NaomiRagen.com/Columns/PeopleILiveAmongst.htm
ISRAELI HEROISM

The People I Live Amongst
By Naomi Ragen

I live in a place where all around me, every minute of the day, in every part of this land, there is a hidden saint and hero.

I want to start with the latest story, the story of Noam in Otniel. Otniel is a yeshiva in which boys add two years to their regular army service so that they can continue their religious studies. My son went there. And his friends. And the son of one of my neighbors, a remarkable young man, the kind that regularly visits a family because they lost one of their sons in the army. And now he visits them, and comforts them, every week. People he didn't know.

Last weekend in Otniel, the boys went home for Shabbat, and the yeshiva was open to visitors. Friday night. The white tablecloths. A hundred boys wearing knitted skullcaps just returned from Sabbath prayers. They formed a circle and danced, waiting for the first course of the Sabbath meal to be served. In the kitchen. Gabriel,17, Tvika, 18, Yehuda 20, and Noam 23, were getting the first course on to the serving plates. Outside, two terrorists, members of the Islamic Jihad organization, cut the useless wire fence around the yeshiva, and entered the kitchen wearing IDF army uniforms and toting M 16's, 12 rounds of ammunition, and ten hand grenades. They started shooting immediately. Under fire, Noam Apfter ran towards the door separating the kitchen from the dining room where a hundred unsuspecting young boys were welcoming the Sabbath. Wounded, with his last strength, he locked both locks and threw the key away. He locked himself in with the terrorists, and locked them out from harming his fellow students.

Noam Apfter paid for this act of heroism with his life. He, and the other three boys were murdered by the terrorists.

Now, I don't know if I can explain this to you, those of you who have never been in a terrorist attack. Faced with such harm, every single fibre of your being screams to open the door and escape. To think of others in such a situation is remarkable. To deliberately lock yourself in with terrorists to save others, is beyond my capacity to understand. It takes a large soul, and more courage than is given to any human being.

These are the people I live amongst:

Shlomo Harel: who pushed a suicide bomber to the ground when he tried to explode himself in a Jerusalem coffee shop, pinning his arms to the floor.

Mikhail Sarkisov, 31, a new immigrant from Turkmenistan, living in a trailor with no bathroom or refrigerator, who as a guard on Tel Aviv's beachfront Cafe Tayelet, armed with a fake pistol, threw himself bodily on a suicide bomber to prevent him from detonating, saving dozens of lives.

Rami Mahmoud Mahameed, 17, a young Arab Israeli, who asked a suicide bomber waiting at a bus stop for his cell phone, and calmly called the police, who prevented the bomber from boarding a bus, but not from exploding. Rami was badly injured.

Eli Federman, who, guarding a Tel Aviv disco, faced the speeding car of a suicide bomber heading straight for him, and the club, and coolly fired, blowing up the car before it could enter.

Bus driver Baruch Neuman, who got off the bus to check a passenger who had fallen trying to board the bus from the back, only to find he was wired. He and another passenger held the bomber's hands down until the rest of the bus passengers could flee to safety.

Others who paid for their heroism with their lives include Yossef Twitto, head of the response team in Itamar, who ran to save a family whose home had been entered by terrorists, terrorists who killed three sisters and brothers, wounded another two, before killing Yossef Twitto. And Mordechai Tomer, 19, who stopped a car from going into downtown Jerusalem and was blown up. And Tamir Matan, who helped stop a suicide bomber in a gas station from entering a busy cafeteria. He and two young soldiers who helped him, were blown up.

This is the face of Israel. These are the people I live amongst. I live among them humbly, knowing that in any place, or time, in a random ten minute period, there are heroes cruising around, ready to give their precious lives for mine.

This is our human landscape, what the land of Israel, its values, its education, its mothers and fathers, have produced. This land, and its people.

God bless them and keep them.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
First, they take Manhattan..... respectfully submitted for your consideration -- H_Bergeron, 00:27:27 12/31/02 Tue (ppp-216-158-60-66.cust.oldcity.dca.net/216.158.60.66)
from Fightin' with Grabes

Proving that there is no end to the stupidity and incomprehensibility of the Left's response
to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, here is a bon mot for you:

UPPER WEST SIDE STARBUCKS TAKEN OVER BY SETTLERS IN LOCAL LAND GRAB

I like the reasoning based on latte disenfranchisement:

"Fifteen activists today occupied an uptown branch of Starbucks during the lunchtime rush, claiming the coffee shop as settled land. Hanging flags and banners announcing the takeover, and arranging houseplants and bedding around the room, settlers from Queer Resistance for Palestine hustled customers out of the comfy chairs, informing them 'This is our coffee shop now.'

As several Starbucks patrons were confused about the hindrance in getting their lattes, settlers explained: although Starbucks supplies endless lattes to New Yorkers, it actively deprives Palestinians of lattes - as well as work, jobs, education, the right to leave their homes, and numerous other freedoms curtailed under the illegal Israeli occupation."

This "direct action" was staged by a group called "Queer Resistance for Palestine".
Asking these people to appreciate the difference between Israel's and the Palestinian Authority's treatment of gays would be far too much.
Perhaps instead if one of the displaced patrons had sent a bomb-laden donkey over to the couches the activists would have a clearer moral view of the conflict.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- ". . . All mimsy were the borogoves, And the mome raths outgrabe." (NT) -- SurveyGuy (quoting Jabberwocky), 10:07:03 01/01/03 Wed
United Way in CA loses major donor after stiffing scouts. -- SurveyGuy (Giving to UW is like creating a charity political power. I give to individual charities only.), 22:19:13 12/27/02 Fri (maxtnt02-182.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.227.182)
Boy Scouts Vs. United Way In California

CAMARILLO, Calif., Dec. 26, 2002
(CBS) A Boy Scout is always supposed to be prepared, but the Ventura County, California, scouts were blindsided when, after 57 years, the local United Way stopped funding them, reports CBS News Correspondent Sandra Hughes.

"We were getting allocations from United Way of about $50,000 a year," said Dave Graska of the Ventura County Boy Scouts.

The United Way decision was made after the Boy Scouts of America announced it would exclude gays from the organization.

The charity then passed an inclusiveness policy stating it would only fund: "...agencies that provide services ... without discriminating on the basis of ... sexual orientation."

"The reality is there are a lot of people in Ventura county who happen to agree with our policy," said Dave M. Smith, president of the United Way of Ventura County.

Not major donors Denny and Allyson Weinberg, who gave $100,000 to the United Way last year.

"This was very confusing because this inclusiveness policy came out of nowhere," said Denny Weinberg. "It wasn't promoted, there was no press release, there was no letter to donors about this."

The Weinbergs were so upset they stopped giving to the United Way and launched their own fundraising effort called "Friends of Ventura County Scouts."

Their ads urge supporters to donate: "The Boy Scouts of America are making a positive difference in our community yet United Way of Ventura County is ending their support for the Scouts."

So far the group has raised almost $80,000, much more than the United Way ever planned to give.

"People love scouting, it's an American tradition, it's like baseball for heaven's sakes," said Allyson Weinberg.

After the June 2000 Supreme Court decision which affirmed the Boy Scouts' right to ban gays, about 50 local United Way chapters pulled their financial support - but that's only about five percent of chapters nationwide.

"We don't base our policy on what the United Way chapter in Lexington, Kentucky, or Fargo, North Dakota happens to think the policy should be," said Ventura County's David Smith.

But the United Way did try to compromise, offering $50,000 to an educational program affiliated with the scouts.

For now, the Ventura County scouts don't want the money.

"We respect the right of the United Way to establish its values, just as we have the right to establish ours," said scout leader Dave Graska.

A sentiment shared by many in a town now divided between two of its most cherished institutions.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Good for them! While I do contribute to the UW, I use the option to specify which group gets it. It doesn't make any sense to do it any other way... (NT) -- H_Bergeron, 22:18:13 12/30/02 Mon
  - If you were to specify a group they decide not to fund, then they ignore your wishes. Try specifying the USO and see what happens! The UW executives have been holding elaborate dinners for years and the CEO has been lavishly compensated. While some of this has been "fixed," they are still to arrogant to suit me and use to much for operating expenses. Good of you to contribute in any event. I am probably just too picky. (NT) -- SurveyGuy (too cynical or too accurate?), 15:15:35 12/31/02 Tue
Affirmative Action or Negative Retribution? Do you agree or disagree with what the writers have to say. -- SurveyGuy, 20:23:11 12/26/02 Thu (maxtnt03-310.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.231.56)
Jewish World Review Dec. 12, 2002/ 7 Teves, 5763
Jackie Mason & Raoul Felder

Jews are suffering political Alzheimer's

Why would most Jewish people prefer being attacked by a mob of contaminated turtles than be caught voting for a Republican? What does this dread and fear of Republicans come from?

Since the presidency of FDR, which is now about 60 years ago, the Jews still have the fixed image in their minds of the Democrats as the symbol of salvation and the Republicans to them are thieves, frauds, exploiters, lowlifes, and opportunists.

The truth is that the Jews are half-right if they are judging the Republicans of 60 years ago. But, they act as if they left the country at that time and since then have been suffering from Alzheimer's.

You don't have to buy a calendar to know that 60 years ago was not yesterday. The Jews are either oblivious to reality or feel such a panic attack just from hearing the word Republican, that they quiver as if they were hit by lightening or got caught with an 11 year old girl who just announced that she is pregnant.

Both parties have changed since 60 years ago the only difference is that the Republican changed for the better and the Democrats changed for the worse.

If the Democrat had any respect for the truth they would drop the name "Democrat" and present the title to the Republicans, because the Republicans stand for exactly the same policies that the Democrats abandoned many years ago.

Sixty years ago Roosevelt fought for the right of equal jobs for all minorities, but now the Democrats have invented something called affirmative action, which should really be called negative retribution. It created something unheard of in a democracy. Affirmative Action is not a fight for equality it is a reward for irresponsibility. It claims to stand for equal opportunity. That is a fraud! It really stands for opportunity without equality, because it demands the right to deprive opportunity for anyone who cannot qualify as a minority.

Ironically the greatest defenders of Affirmative Action are the Jews who feel so guilty for just making a living, that they will do anything for someone labeled "minority," although they would never do it even for their own children. If their own child was 20 years old and refused to go to college, refused to get a job, and refused to get up in the morning he would find himself not only thrown out of the house, he would even more likely be thrown out of a window. But if he is a member of a minority, a Jew suddenly becomes his psychiatrist, benefactor, and fundraiser because without even knowing him a Jew feels that it is his own fault if somehow his back can't even get off the bed.

Giving, caring, sharing, and sacrifice are nurtured in the Jewish home to the point of harassment. That is why a Jew is like a man in a boxing ring fighting with his conscience about whether he has done enough to help. Which translated means every minority except the Jews.

Since he is guilt-ridden for coming out of poverty he has to help other minority people as quickly as possible and no matter how much he does he is always pleading forgiveness for not having done enough. That is why no Jew can think that Affirmative Action should also include the Jew. He feels that if he made it so can another Jew.

And if the existence of anti-Semitism didn't stop him it shouldn't stop you.

But if he is Black, Hispanic, red, green or a mixture of orange and pink a Jew is convinced that unless he can become a lawyer without passing the test he will be forced to remain a janitor in the building for the rest of his life.

The Jews are so guilt-ridden that they can't even remember their own victimization under the constant plague of anti-Semitism. They think of themselves as co-conspirators with the white Protestants who persecuted the minorities of this country, but they keep forgetting that they were never a member of that club. They are still never invited to join and even now most gentile clubs still have a hidden sign under the chief officers tablecloth that says "No Jews Allowed".

And what is still true of most country clubs was until recently true of what Jewish people faced when they were looking for a job. How could a thinking man manage to forget that until recently it was as hard for a Jew to get a job in a major corporation as it was for him to become the Pope? Almost every ad in the New York Times read "White Christian Only" 'til as late as 1960. Obviously they can't remember it because it might eliminate too many guilt trips and a Jew can't live without it.

As far as the Jews are concerned, the Democrats can't do any wrong and the Republicans can't do anything right. When it was discovered that the secretary of state to the elder President Bush somehow used that well-known epithet "F- the Jews", the popularity of the Bush Administration couldn't withstand the shock and they were condemned by the Jews as hopeless anti-Semites who would have been hung if this were a society of decent people.

But when Hillary Clinton was caught making blatantly vulgar anti-Semitic remarks, Jews reacted with contempt not for her but for the people who had the nerve to publicly mention it.

When the headlines quoted her as calling someone an "F---ing Jew bastard", after he offered to take the lie detector test and passed it with such high honors that if he was in college it would have made him the Valedictorian, it still didn't stop her. She then claimed that he was not only a liar but also a thief, a lowlife, and a degenerate, unaware that she was stealing all the names that her husband had been called for 8 years.

Even if she went from house to house calling every Jew the same names she had called this innocent man it couldn't diminish her popularity among Jews for a second. She already had bought immunity from prosecution from any Jew the day that the word Democrat was attached to her name.

The proof is that even after she hugged Yassar Arafat's wife, kissed her and praised her and even after she demanded a Palestinian state before even asking to protect Jewish lives from suicide bombers, she still wound up with by far the majority of the Jewish vote in her Senatorial campaign.

If she were a Republican the whole American army wouldn't have been armed with enough equipment to protect her. It has been proven a hundred times that a Republican can't get more than 30% of the Jewish vote even if he saved every Jew from drowning.

The Prime Minister of Israel Yitzhak Rabin once confided to us during a private meeting that the two presidents that did the most to save the state of Israel were Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon. But if this information was blasted into every Jewish home in America 30% will still be the fence that no Republican could ever climb over, because it is a hopeless case if you happen to be a Republican.

Nobody in America including the Jews themselves has worked harder than Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell to support the state of Israel. They have dedicated almost every sermon, every speech and every prayer fighting for the Israeli side in every argument about the state of Israel.

But the Jews suffer from such blank prejudice towards Republicans that they can't except what they are hearing. They believe Hillary Clinton while desperately campaigning for the Jewish vote is suddenly telling the truth, because somehow a Democrat can't lie.

But these two religious ministers who are bringing a message which comes from what they interpret as the word of G-d and the words of their scriptures are suspected of having some mysterious hidden agenda and therefore shall not be trusted.

In plain English when they hear the word Republican, especially when connected with the words "far right" to the Jews they become more dangerous than leprosy and they feel they better get out of town before they catch it.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
Merry Christmas to All -- SurveyGuy (a P.C. - free Christmas to all), 11:29:14 12/25/02 Wed (maxtnt02-119.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.227.119)

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
Visit Top 100 Message Boards list. Add your board! -- Kman, 17:59:32 12/24/02 Tue (1Cust95.tnt3.weekiwachee-springs.fl.da.uu.net/67.209.233.95)

Visit Top 100 Message Boards list. Add your site!

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Yeah, right. there is one board on the list and then spam pop-ups. If anyone has the urge to be really annoyed, just click the link. Normally, I just delete stuff like this, but it is so egregious, I thought you might want to give your 2 cents about what you think of spam like this. By the way, static ads to sites related to themes we may discuss here are welcome in moderation. At least create a nice banner for yourself. (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 11:08:58 12/25/02 Wed
Which remark offended you the most? When Lott said he supported "affirmative action" he had to got. The man really has no core beliefs. A.A. is really reverse discrimination and a racial quota system in disguise. It's not "successful" unless they get enough numbers! It actually creates less good opportunities, not more. It is not the same as the old Equal Opportunity programs. Anyone want to discuss how A.A. works and the unintended consequences? Naaahhh , me neither. -- SurveyGuy, 18:59:04 12/21/02 Sat (maxtnt04-324.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.97.70)

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
Of course I want to vomit! This news is distressing and annoying! We have heard other, similar stories since 9/11 as well. Nothing like closing the door after the horse has already left the barn. -- William, 04:23:54 12/20/02 Fri (spider-mtc-ti072.proxy.aol.com/64.12.101.182)

Called Off the Trail?
FBI Agents Probing Terror Links Say They Were Told, ?Let Sleeping Dogs Lie?

By Brian Ross and Vic Walter
[ABCNEWS.com]
Dec. 19, 2002

? Two veteran FBI investigators say they were ordered to stop investigations into a suspected terror cell linked to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network and the Sept. 11 attacks.

In a dramatic interview with ABCNEWS, FBI special agents and partners Robert Wright and John Vincent say they were called off criminal investigations of suspected terrorists tied to the deadly bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa. U.S. officials say al Qaeda was responsible for the embassy attacks and the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States.

"September the 11th is a direct result of the incompetence of the FBI's International Terrorism Unit. No doubt about that. Absolutely no doubt about that," Wright said. "You can't know the things I know and not go public."

In the mid-1990s, with growing terrorism in the Middle East, the two Chicago-based agents were assigned to track a connection to Chicago, a suspected terrorist cell that would later lead them to a link with Osama bin Laden. Wright says that when he pressed for authorization to open a criminal investigation into the money trail, his supervisor stopped him.

"Do you know what his response was? 'I think it's just better to let sleeping dogs lie,'" said Wright. "Those dogs weren't sleeping. They were training. They were getting ready."

The FBI says its handling of the matter was appropriate at the time.

"Truthfully, if 9/11 had not occurred, we wouldn't be here [giving the interview]," said Vincent, a 27-year veteran at the bureau until he retired a few days after being interviewed by ABCNEWS. "Because of 9/11, we're here because we see the danger."

"You Will Not Open Criminal Investigations"

The suspected terrorist cell in Chicago was the basis of the investigation, yet Wright, who remains with the FBI, says he soon discovered that all the FBI intelligence division wanted him to do was to follow suspected terrorists and file reports ? but make no arrests.

"The supervisor who was there from headquarters was right straight across from me and started yelling at me: 'You will not open criminal investigations. I forbid any of you. You will not open criminal investigations against any of these intelligence subjects,'" Wright said.

Even though they were on a terrorism task force and said they had proof of criminal activity, Wright said he was told not to pursue the matter.

In 1998 al Qaeda terrorists bombed two American embassies in Africa. The agents say some of the money for the attacks led back to the people they had been tracking in Chicago and to a powerful Saudi Arabian businessman, Yassin al-Kadi. Al-Kadi is one of 12 Saudi businessmen suspected of funneling millions of dollars to al Qaeda and who had extensive business and financial ties in Chicago.

Yet, even after the bombings, Wright said FBI headquarters wanted no arrests.

"Two months after the embassies are hit in Africa, they wanted to shut down the criminal investigation," said Wright. "They wanted to kill it."

The move outraged Chicago federal prosecutor Mark Flessner, who was assigned to the case despite efforts Wright and Vincent say were made by superiors to block the probe. Flessner said Wright and Vincent were helping him build a strong criminal case against al-Kadi and others.

"There were powers bigger than I was in the Justice Department and within the FBI that simply were not going to let it [the building of a criminal case] happen. And it didn't happen, " Flessner said.

He said he still couldn't figure out why Washington stopped the case ? whether it was Saudi influence or bureaucratic ineptitude.

"I think there were very serious mistakes made," said Flessner. "And I think, it perhaps cost, it cost people their lives ultimately."

Muslim Agent Refused to Record Fellow Muslim, Agent Says

Perhaps most astounding of the many mistakes, according to Flessner and an affidavit filed by Wright, is how an FBI agent named Gamal Abdel-Hafiz seriously damaged the investigation. Wright says Abdel-Hafiz, who is Muslim, refused to secretly record one of al-Kadi's suspected associates, who was also Muslim. Wright says Abdel-Hafiz told him, Vincent and other agents that "a Muslim doesn't record another Muslim."

"He wouldn't have any problems interviewing or recording somebody who wasn't a Muslim, but he could never record another Muslim," said Vincent.

Wright said he "was floored" by Abdel-Hafiz's refusal and immediately called the FBI headquarters. Their reaction surprised him even more: "The supervisor from headquarters says, 'Well, you have to understand where he's coming from, Bob.' I said no, no, no, no, no. I understand where I'm coming from," said Wright. "We both took the same damn oath to defend this country against all enemies foreign and domestic, and he just said no? No way in hell."

Far from being reprimanded, Abdel-Hafiz was promoted to one of the FBI's most important anti-terrorism posts, the American Embassy in Saudi Arabia, to handle investigations for the FBI in that Muslim country.

The FBI said it was unaware of the allegations against the Muslim agent when he was sent to Saudi Arabia or of two similar incidents described to ABCNEWS by agents in New York and Tampa, Fla. They said Abdel-Hafiz contributed significantly to many successful terror investigations.

In a statement to ABCNEWS, the FBI also defended the agent, saying he had a right to refuse because the undercover recording was supposed to take place in a mosque.

But former prosecutor Flessner said that was a lie and the mosque was never part of the plan.

"What he [Abdel-Hafiz] said was, it was against his religion to record another Muslim. I was dumbfounded by that response," said Flessner. "And I had perfectly appropriate conversations with the supervisors of his home office and nothing came of it."

Closing In on Bin Laden Money Trail

On Sept. 11, 2001, the two agents watched the terror attacks in horror, worried that men they could have stopped years earlier may have been involved.

The White House confirmed their fears. One month after the attacks, the U.S. government officially identified al-Kadi ? the same man the FBI had ordered Wright and Vincent to leave alone years earlier ? as one of bin Laden's important financiers.

Al-Kadi told ABCNEWS he can prove his total innocence, repeatedly denying, from his office in Riyadh, any connection to bin Laden or al Qaeda.

"Not even one cent went to Osama bin Laden," he said.

But on Dec. 6, U.S. Customs agents, as part of their own investigation, conducted a midnight search of a Boston-area company believed to be secretly owned and controlled by al-Kadi.

The company provides computer software to the FBI and other key federal agencies, which means al-Kadi and his employees could have had access to some of the government's most sensitive secrets.

Al-Kadi is on the U.S. government's "dirty dozen" list of leading terror financiers being investigated by the CIA. The federal government says it is pursuing possible criminal charges.

"I was relieved that Customs was picking it up ? where we failed big time," said Wright. "There's so much more. God, there's so much more. A lot more."

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- (NT) -- , 16:50:54 12/20/02 Fri
- I think most of us are aware of this an are as appalled as the FBI agent. PC-ness will be the death of us. That is why I get rid of the jerks who start calling this kind of reporting "hate speech." Don't worry, that will happen again. If they don;t understand the danger yet, they never will. They still dram of Utopia. Thomas More is dead folks. You have to take care of yourselves! (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 10:22:34 12/21/02 Sat
Dissent Is Patriotic -- a useful website regarding the Bill of Rights -- SurveyGuy, 19:30:56 12/19/02 Thu (maxtnt06-373.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.242.119)
Jeff Katz just mentioned http://www.bordc.org which has the purpose of defending the Bill of Rights. It has important links to show exactly where the Patriot Act violates these critical amendments. Worth a visit.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- The Constitution is essentially a legal contract. Contracts can be modified to reflect current needs and changes in the lives of the parties it represents. That's what the Patriot Act is, a change that is needed that requires a modification of the original contract. (NT) -- Ron, 08:37:52 12/20/02 Fri
  - You confuse modifying a contract with circumventing it. There is a prescribed way to amend the Constitution. Democrats used the courts to circumvent. Republicans are using legislation. At least know what rights and liberties you will lose. If you agree, then vote for ratification of an amendment, if you even get the chance. With this Act, you have essentially lost that right as well. Acts cannot modify the Constitution. You need to call a Constitutional convention, put an amendment in place and have the Congress and the States ratify it. (NT) -- SurveyGuy (If you don't know your rights, you have none. If the majority don;t know their rights, then you don't have them either.), 10:51:32 12/20/02 Fri
Tent Lott 4 sale -- Boz Willey, 00:27:32 12/20/02 Fri (duppp172.plns1.pa.net/67.96.252.172)
I bought my Ten Lot 4 sale T-Shirt @ ICEHIM.com to show my true colors.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
Do you think this is Truth or Spin or a mix of the two? Here is another point of view from Islam. -- William, 23:42:38 12/17/02 Tue (cache-dq01.proxy.aol.com/205.188.209.133)

From The Globe and Mail

The language of Islam has been hijacked

By SHEEMA KHAN

Tuesday, December 17, 2002 ? Print Edition, Page A23

The Miss World pageant has mercifully ended its annual debacle.

The organizers were duly chastised for planning a swimsuit spectacle during the month of Ramadan in a country with a sizable Muslim majority; weaknesses of the Nigerian government were exposed for failing to anticipate and contain deep-seated religious tensions between Muslims and Christians; ThisDay columnist Isioma Daniel and her editors were criticized for making light of Muslim protests with insensitive comments about the Prophet Mohammed; and the mob violence initiated by a segment of Nigerian Muslims was rightly condemned.

But then, just as the situation calmed, the deputy governor of Zamfara state issued a fatwa (religious edict) calling for the death of Ms. Daniel. At this point, what had been a responsible media treatment froze, as if hypnotized by "that" word, leaving a North American public largely ill-informed about the criticism of that fatwa by Muslims, and about its eventual revocation.

Never mind that religious authorities in Egypt and Saudi Arabia immediately condemned the fatwa as having no sound basis in Islamic jurisprudence, and that Nigeria's supreme Islamic body ordered Muslims to ignore the edict, noting that the state had no religious authority in the first place. For many in the West, a fatwa remains synonymous with murderous zealotry.

In this case, as in others before it, media focus gave undue credibility to unqualified authorities, while legitimate voices, trained in the rigours of Islamic law, were ignored.

Chronic abuse of Islamic terminology can only contribute to the widening gulf between the "West" and the Muslim world. Whereas Muslims attach a rich, historical legacy to words such as fatwa or jihad,current discourse insists on their interpretation on Western terms.

Consider Ken Wiwa's thoughtful essay on the Nigerian strife in these pages. Unfortunately titled "Jihad versus Miss World" -- a play on Benjamin Barber's 1992 essay Jihad vs. McWorld -- the use of "jihad" was meant to capture the anger of Nigeria's Muslims.

As Mr. Barber himself acknowledged, jihad "is a rich word whose generic meaning is 'struggle' -- usually the struggle of the soul to avert evil" and that "strictly applied to religious war, it is used only in reference to battles where the faith is under assault." Ironically, Mr. Barber insisted on using his own interpretation, however inaccurate, arguing, "My use here is rhetorical, but does follow both journalistic practice and history." This approach was echoed in his 2001 essay Ballots vs. Bullets, in which jihad is understood not as part of Islam but as "disintegrative tribalism and reactionary fundamentalism."

In 1999, then chief justice Antonio Lamer of the Supreme Court of Canada issued a public rebuke of those demanding more severe sentences and tougher laws for violent crimes, referring to these concerns as a "jihad" against justice, apparently oblivious to his own antonymic use of the term.

But misuse of Islamic terminology is not confined to the West. Osama bin Laden has sanctified mass murder by his use of such terms as fatwa and jihad and by deviously manipulating the rich legacy of these concepts.

Such misappropriation of Islamic terms requires Muslims to step forward and reclaim the authenticity of their own language. The nihilism of Osama bin Laden is not jihad but hirabah,the most loathsome of crimes, in that it involves killing with terrorism and intimidation.

That is how six of the most respected Muslim scholars described the attacks of Sept. 11 in a fatwa: "These terrorists' acts, considered by Islamic law [constitute] the crime of hirabah." And it's how a prominent Islamic jurist described the Bali bombing: "Total barbarism . . . or hirabah; a crime in Islam for which severe punishment is specified."

Ironically, most Islamic scholars say the principal reason for legislating a jihad is in cases of hirabah -- that jihad is meant to be a defence against the senseless harm and targeting of innocents.

This is the language that people in the West should hear more about.

The Koran refers to the power of language: A good word is analogous to a tree, with firm roots in the ground, spreading its branches to the heavens, providing fruit and shelter to many. A harmful word is akin to a sickly plant, with shallow roots, yielding bitter fruit.

We can continue to use superficial, injurious terminology to the detriment of many. Or we can insist on using accurate language, firmly rooted in universal concepts that nourish the desire for fair and frank debate.

Sheema Khan is chair of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Canada.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- If you can believe it, how come there is, nor will there ever be, a fatwah against those who murder innocents? I guess it is all in your defintition of "innocent" I guess an infidel cannot be an innocent, eh? Whoops -- did I break the code? That may explain why so many Muslins on the street cheer the murdering of innocents. Then again, they may just be out for a stroll and are told that a celebrity will be passing by, so they cheer (and shoot rifles in the air). Ah, cultural diversity at its finest. (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 17:03:39 12/18/02 Wed
- Seems to me there's considerable Koranic illiteracy among Muslims, no matter how devout, just like there is considerable biblical illiteracy among Christians, no matter how devout. How many people think you can find these statements in the Bible?: "cleanliness is next to godliness," "God helps those who help themselves," etc. You won't find them in the Bible, and there are many other similar sentiments similarly attributed. And so the overall religion is corrupted and diluted. I propose that Islam suffers the same, and as with Christianity, the freaks ruin it for everyone. (NT) -- Spock, 11:34:16 12/19/02 Thu
  - The freaks ruin it for everyone WOW, good one.
    And you mean the "cleanliness" thing ain't in the bible? ... Don't tell my sons that, we have to get them into the shower now at gunpoint. (NT) -- Gary, 16:57:24 12/19/02 Thu
Courage and bien pensants -- H_Bergeron, 03:12:03 12/16/02 Mon (ppp-216-158-5-253.cust.oldcity.dca.net/216.158.5.253)
another great editorial from Eric Raymond:
Sneering at Courage:

One of the overdue lessons of 9/11 is that we can't afford to sneer
at physical courage any more. The willingness of New York firemen,
Special Forces troops in Afghanistan, and the passengers of Flight 93
to put their lives on the line has given us most of the bright spots
we've had in the war against terror. We are learning, once again,
that all that stands between us and the night of barbarism is the
willingness of men to both risk their lives and take the awful
responsibility of using lethal force in our defense.

(And, usually, it is men who do the risking. I mean no disrespect
to our sisters; the kind of courage I am talking about is not an
exclusive male monopoly. But it has been predominently the job of
men in every human culture since Olduvai Gorge, and still is today.
I'll return to this point later in the essay.)

The rediscovery of courage visibly upsets a large class of bien
pensants in our culture. Many of the elite molders of opinion in
the U.S and Europe do not like or trust physical courage in men. They
have spent decades training us to consider it regressive, consigning
it to fantasy, sneering at it — trying to persuade us all that
it's at best an adolescent or brute virtue, perhaps even a vice.

If this seems too strong an indictment, consider carefully all the
connotations of the phrase "testosterone poisoning". Ask yourself
when you first heard it, and where, and from whom. Then ask yourself
if you have slid into the habit of writing off as bluster any man's
declaration that he is willing to risk his life, willing to fight for
what he believes in. When some ordinary man says he is willing to
take on the likes of the 9/11 hijackers or the D.C. sniper — or
even ordinary criminals — them, do you praise his determination
or consign him, too, to the category of blowhard or barbarian?

Like all virtues, courage thrives on social support. If we mock
our would-be warriors, writing them off as brutes or rednecks or
simpletons, we'll find courage in short supply when we need it. If we
make the more subtle error of sponsoring courage only in uniformed men
— cops, soldiers, firemen — we'll find that we have
trouble growing the quantity or quality we need in a crisis. Worse:
our brave men could come to see themselves apart from us, distrusted
and despised by the very people for whom they risk their lives, and
entitled to take their due when it is not freely given. More than one
culture that made that mistake has fallen to its own guardians.

Before 9/11, we were in serious danger of forgetting that courage
is a functional virtue in ordinary men. But Todd Beamer reminded us of
that — and now, awkwardly, we are rediscovering some of the
forms that humans have always used to nurture and reward male courage.
Remember that rash of news stories from New York about Upper-East-Side
socialites cruising firemen's bars? Biology tells; medals and
tickertape parades and bounties have their place, but the hero's most
natural and strongest reward is willing women.

Manifestations like this absolutely appall and disgust the sort of
people who think that the destruction of the World Trade Center was a
judgment on American sins; — the multiculturalists, the
postmodernists, the transnational progressives, radical feminists, the
academic political-correctness brigades, the Bush-is-a-moron elitists,
and the plain old-fashioned loony left. By and large these people
never liked or trusted physical courage, and it's worth taking a hard
look at why that is.
read the rest of the story

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Great? Hardly. I didn't read anything there that wasn't already said elsewhere (and more succinctly) by real professional writers published in legitimate publications, not blogs that can be found anywhere on the net. Geez, a guy writes open source code for an overrated OS and suddenly he's an authority on world affairs! (NT) -- Tim Paterson, 23:28:42 12/17/02 Tue
  - The poster put it here for comment or to open a discussion. It is meant to be taken in that spirit as are most of the posts here, including news articles, editorials and such. I view this as an amateur editorial. While it may re-state various views, the game here is to either agree of debunk anything written. It is useful to see what individuals who are not professional writers think of things. I thank Bergeron for widening the readings to such things. You too can publish your opinion on the web. Hey, you just did! ;) (NT) -- SurveyGuy (Even amateurs can publish on the web.), 20:03:42 12/18/02 Wed
So this is what government schools run by liberals have come to ... and Yonkers used to be such a nice little town. -- SurveyGuy, 20:00:51 12/10/02 Tue (maxtnt04-374.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.97.120)
http://newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2002/12/10/171310
Tuesday, Dec. 10, 2002
Educrats Tear Down Christmas

Every December there are stories galore of how anti-religious zealots censor the Christian and Jewish holy days. Here's a new low: The government schools in Yonkers, N.Y., have ripped children's artwork right off the walls.

Interim Superintendent Angelo Petrone ordered underlings last week to remove all decorations that go beyond a vague "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings," the Associated Press reported today.

PTA member Marla Hurban said teachers scrapped lesson plans involving Christmas and Hanukkah decorations and took down bulletin boards loaded with children's artwork.

When word of the order began to spread, "anybody who heard it thought it was a joke at first," said Amanda Pendleton, who has a daughter in fifth grade. "Then they had to literally tear everything off the walls."

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- To the parents that permit this to go on in their own school district I say
  THANK YOU
  The more your children are screwed up the less prepared they will be to compete against my kids in the future. (NT) -- Gary, 15:54:16 12/11/02 Wed
  - It's no wonder home-schooling is becoming so popular and why so-called liberals are scared to death of it. The people who keep voting for this will understand the consequences when they can;t find competent medical or other services in the future because spociety has been too dumbed down and emotionally disturbed. (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 16:11:49 12/11/02 Wed
    - Yeah, that's what has me scared ... when I get old who will work in the hospitals and nursing homes? I don't think I will live long enough to need some elderly care but you never know, I might just cheat death long enough to be given horrible care by a generation of nitwits. (NT) -- Gary, 17:06:34 12/11/02 Wed
      - Gary, on the bright side if Christmas is abolished and made illegal and the illegality of it is enforced, maybe we won't have to buy hundreds of dollars worth of Christmas gifts and worry that we forgot someone. But then again we might be forced to observe Ramadan for that seems to be the "good will" trend after 9/11. (NT) -- William, 07:12:43 12/15/02 Sun
  - HA! Love it! (NT) -- Spock, 13:59:07 12/17/02 Tue
- We happened upon a light show set up on a farm up in Newtown last night -- I never saw so much wattage in one place! It was beautiful, and certainly covered all the bases -- from giant LED vegetables to light-wrapped trees, to all kinds of seasonal and nonseasonal figures. A highlight was a big Statue of Liberty with "God Bless America" next to it. The funniest part was a BIG nativity scene, a BIG menorah, and a wimpy star & crescent between them... (NT) -- Spock, 12:51:00 12/16/02 Mon
Vast left-wing conspiracy? Uh-huh. As much as I think Lott has made many errors, his biggest was previously being conciliatory to the Democrats. -- SurveyGuy (politics of destruction is alive and well), 12:46:04 12/15/02 Sun (maxtnt03-268.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.231.14)
http://newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2002/12/13/163843
Friday, Dec. 13, 2002
Ex-Klansman, Not Lott, Is in Line for Presidency

Foes of Senate Republican leader Trent Lott are circulating a lie that he is "four heartbeats away from the presidency." But it's Sen. Robert Byrd, the famous Democrat ex-Klansman and former party leader, who is fourth in succession.

The phony claim is falsely being attributed to the (all-Democrat) Congressional Black Caucus, according to UPI.

"The Senate majority leader is not in the line of presidential succession under any circumstances," UPI noted today.

Vice President Dick Cheney, of course, is first in line. "Then comes, by constitutional prescription, U.S. House Speaker Denny Hastert, R-Ill., followed until the Republicans officially become the majority party by Senate President Pro Tempore Robert Byrd, D-W.Va."

Do Lott's Democrat enemies worry that a former Klansman who continues to use racist language has been "four heartbeats away from the presidency"? Of course not. Nor do they care about white Democrats donning blackface and using racial slurs. And of course it's OK for Jesse "Hymietown" Jackson, Louis "Gutter Religion" Farrakhan and Al "Tawana Brawley" Sharpton to pull their holier-than-thou acts on TV.

Nor will the Lott-obsessed mainstream media point out these hypocrisies. So much for Al Gore's vast right-wing media conspiracy.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Holy double standards, Batman! What gets me is how whenever (note: not "if") a Democrat gets caught with his pants down, literally or figuratively, an aw-shucks-it-wasn't-my-fault will usually do just fine for an apology in the ears of fellow Dems & liberals. But if fault is found with a Republican, no apology is good enough, no matter how sincere or drawn-out. (NT) -- Spock, 12:44:43 12/16/02 Mon
Is this what Palestinian Arabs think of the United States, or is this what they are told to think? -- William, 07:05:07 12/15/02 Sun (cache-dq01.proxy.aol.com/205.188.209.133)

February 18, 2002

Palestinians: America is the "Country of Brutality"
From Palestinian Media Watch

As part of an ongoing campaign to present the United States war effort as a global conflict between the West and Islam, the Palestinians voice strong anti-American sentiment, while calling for Muslims to unite.

The following excerpt from the sermon broadcast live on the Voice of Palestine this Friday is an example:

"...Let us hope that Allah will unite the Muslims and defeat their enemies. Will Muslims realize that the country of brutality, America, is threatening them with punishment and torture if they do not go its way and follow its orders, according to its new world order which it imposed on Muslims to change their language of religious education this order of infidels, the new criminal (order)...It is an order that wants to break the power of Muslims all over the world?

"...We are not asking for the impossible, and we know that Muslims do not have the strength required to confront the arrogance of America and the great countries of the world, but the unity of the Muslims perhaps will prevent this loss and this disgrace which has harmed the (Islamic) nation. "O Nation of Islam, Islam grants you the strength born of faith, and you are the finest nation of the human race. You are the possessors of the good faith... and the most significant resources, primarily: oil..."

(Palestinian Authority Radio, Feb. 15, 2002)

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- I guess they've run out of suicide murderers for the moment. Time to develop a few more. In the meantime the rest of the inductrious world moves ahead. Palestineans remind me of liberals, waiting to be led and told what to think and believe and feel by their government while their government steals from them. Very sad. I predict that ne day they will go too far and when there is no restraint, millions of them will die -- a self-fulfilling prophecy? Maybe that is the only temporary solution -- wall them off from Israel. (NT) -- SurveyGuy (no solution in sight - don't expect any), 11:19:47 12/15/02 Sun
News about Palestinian petition and Israel -- William, 06:35:39 12/15/02 Sun (cache-dq01.proxy.aol.com/205.188.209.133)
Palestinian petition urges Oslo Accords abolishmen

Internet Jerusalem Post
KHALED ABU TOAMEH Dec. 15, 2002

Some 70 prominent Palestinian figures have signed a petition calling on the Palestinian Authority to abolish the Oslo Accords, and warning that the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq would place all the Arab countries under the control of Israel and the US.

This is the first time that such a large group of widely respected and influential Palestinians have issued a public demand to abolish the Oslo Accords and return to the "option of resistance" against Israel.

Signatories to the petition include members of the Palestinian Legislative Council and Palestinian National Council, as well as university teachers, academics, lawyers, former mayors, physicians, political activists, workers student union members, and businessmen.

One of the petition's organizers told The Jerusalem Post that a second petition would be published later this week with yet more names. "Many people, including top Fatah and PA officials, told us that they fully support our initiative," he explained.

"There's nothing wrong with admitting that Oslo was a historic mistake," he added.

The four PLC members who signed the petition are Muawiyah al-Masri of Nablus, Abdel Jawad Saleh of al-Bireh, Ahmed Irsheid of Jenin, and Ali Abu al-Rish of Hebron. Among the academics are Hisham Sharabi, who lives in the US, Talal Okal, a writer and journalist from Gaza City, and Abdel Sattar Kassem, a professor of political science from Nablus, who has announced his intention to run against Yasser Arafat in the next general election.

Former mayors Bassam Shaka of Nablus, Wahid Hamdallah of Anabta, and Khaled Awad of Kabatiya added their voices to the call to rescind the Oslo Accords.

"We call on the Arab states and their leaderships, first and foremost the Palestinian Authority, to reject the Oslo Accords," reads the petition, a copy of which was sent to PA Chairman Yasser Arafat on Saturday. "We also call for the rejection of separate and bilateral agreements that are imposed against the will of liberation and [against] Arab solidarity."

The petition implores the PA to repair the damage that has resulted from the Oslo Accords and to "unite the national will to resist."

Warning against factional and tribal schisms in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and the Arab world, the Palestinian figures added: "The collapse of Iraq would result in the entire Arab world becoming contingent upon the imperialists and Zionists."

The petition also calls on the PA and Arab governments to abide by their peoples' national interests and not to be dragged into initiatives and agreements aimed at dismantling the Arab nation.

"The goal of these initiatives, agreements, and positions is to dismantle the Arab nation and pave the way for [Israeli and American] dominance of the region," the petition states.

It predicts that the PA would be asked to make far-reaching concessions or cease to exist soon after the US and its allies achieve their goals in Iraq. The petition says that even if the Palestinian leadership were to accept the recent US road map peace plan, "this will not change the strategic goals of this racist and aggressive alliance."

The petition lashes out at the US for preparing to wage a war against Iraq, and warns that Arab and Islamic countries would be the next target after Iraq. "Taking control over Iraq would facilitate the liquidation of those neighboring regimes which have maintained their independence and liberty, such as Syria, Lebanon, and Iran," it claims.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
Lest we forget . . . -- SurveyGuy, 17:30:15 12/14/02 Sat (maxtnt05-16.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.99.16)
http://newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2002/12/13/170754
Why Clinton is MIA on the Lott Race Flap

Just about every high-profile Democrat has by now offered his opinion on Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott's troubles - every Democrat, that is, except for America's "first black president," Bill Clinton.

Clinton has never been shy about criticizing Republicans before, so his silence on the issue has begun to attract attention.

The ex-president's 1993 Medal of Freedom award to arch segregationist Sen. William Fulbright has been invoked by talk radio hosts all week to suggest that it's not just Mr. Lott who may have a segregationist or two in his closet.

But even Clinton's harshest critics are probably unaware of just how vulnerable he is on the racial sensitivity issue, the admiration of the black community notwithstanding.

In 1999, for instance, Clinton was accused of repeatedly using racial slurs while governor of Arkansas in private references to Little Rock black activist Robert "Say" McIntosh.

Larry Patterson, who worked in law enforcement for more than three decades and was Clinton's bodyguard between 1986 and 1992, told NewsMax that the then-governor would often refer to McIntosh as a "n----r" after the black leader had confronted him at public events.

Patterson's account brought almost immediate corroboration from longtime Clinton paramour, Dallas attorney Dolly Kyle Browning, who told Fox News Channel a week later that she repeatedly heard Clinton describe McIntosh as a "n----r."

"He didn't just use the 'N' word," Browning revealed to FNC's "Hannity & Colmes." "He took the Lord's name in vain, condemned the man to hell, and, if you get my drift, said 'G - D - N', not just the 'N' word."

Browning added, "And sometimes in conversation, instead of saying, 'Say McIntosh, that G - D - N,' he would just start out a conversation by saying, 'That G - D - N. ...' And I knew exactly who he was talking about."

While neither Patterson nor Browning have audiotape to back up their explosive charges, Clinton's brother Roger was once captured on a police surveillance videotape repeatedly using the ugly racial epithet. Experts say that kind of behavior usually runs in families.

And it doesn't end there.

In the 1980s, civil rights leaders were outraged when then-New York City Mayor Ed Koch donned an Afro wig at an annual theatrical event poking fun of city leaders. Maybe that's why, a decade later, White House press secretary Mike McCurry warned reporters not to print a photo of Clinton clowning around in an Afro wig at a tony Martha's Vineyard soiree in August 1997.

Three weeks later, the Washington Post's Al Kamen broke the embargo, running the photo along with a report noting that the entertainment at Clinton's party consisted of an all-white Afro-wig-wearing band that called themselves "The Boogies."

In fact, the list of similar Clinton racial "mistakes" is as long as your arm, dwarfing the so-called "pattern" of incidents in Trent Lott's background.

Few know, for instance, that Clinton's uncle, Raymond "Buddy" Clinton, who employed Bill's stepdad, Roger, in his Hot Springs Buick dealership, was the dominant influence in young Clinton's life, a role that continued right through Uncle Ray's successful efforts in helping the future president beat the Vietnam War draft.

But according to historian Roger Morris, Uncle Ray had a dark side. While researching his Clinton biography, "Partners in Power," Morris says he found "convincing evidence of the prominent car dealer's links to organized crime and to the then-still formidable Ku Klux Klan."

In 1964 Clinton mailed his grandmother a postcard with a picture of a smiling black youth standing next to a giant watermelon. Such a postcard was considered completely innocuous in the Arkansas of his youth.

God help Sen. Lott if reporters discover he sent a similar greeting to any of his relatives.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
The difference between Conservatism (charity begins at home) and Liberalism (charity begins in Washington) -- SurveyGuy, 15:16:57 12/07/02 Sat (maxtnt05-479.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.100.225)

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- SurveyGuy, can you get one or get someone to draw the following? A person is donating to charity and working for charity. In the next frame shows a person standing with their hand out, while the person who just worked for charity and gave money for charity is shown walking down the street, and a bug, burley bully with a gun pointed at the passerby's head and bully's hand in the passerby's pocket taking the money from the passerby, putting the bulk of it into their own pocket and giving the remainder of it to the person with their hand out (NT) -- William, 03:01:31 12/12/02 Thu
- In the next frame will be shown the robbed person who at the beginning was working for and giving to charity voluntarily, destitute while the person who got the handout from the bully/thief is fawning over the bully "Oh! You are so generous! Thank you so much for your kindness, kind sir!" (NT) -- William, 03:03:05 12/12/02 Thu
  - I imagine that you want to label the bully as "Big Govt." and the worker (muggee) as "Avg. Citizen" and the reipient as "Handout Harriet" or what? Wish I had the time to get back to drawing. I think it has been described juts fine in words and picture. What we really need is a little song, perhaps sung to the tune of bonanza or sumthin. (NT) -- SG, 16:03:43 12/12/02 Thu
    - Yes. Joe or Sally citizen gives their time and money voluntarily to lend a helping hand to their fellow citizen down on their luck. They get mugged by big, burly bully US government with the tatoos on the arm, the beer gut, the three day old whiskers, and crooked teeth with spaces for missing teeth. Bully Goverment steals Joe and Sally Everyone's money, takes most of it and puts it in his own pocket and gives a few pennies to Freddie freeloader and freedie falls all over Brutus the bully for being so charitable and so kind and generous. (NT) -- William, 20:38:11 12/13/02 Fri
And now for something completely different . . . -- SurveyGuy, 19:42:24 12/12/02 Thu (maxtnt03-135.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.230.135)
World Sousveillance Day: http://wearcam.org/wsd.htm ("sousveillance" is inverse surveillance: accountability from below)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

An international coalition that includes artists, scientists, engineers, scholars, and others is declaring December 24, to be "World Sousveillance Day".

THE SHOT SEEN AROUND THE WORLD:

At noon on Tuesday, December 24, 2002, ordinary people all over the world will call into question the growing and dehumanizing effects of increased video surveillance, automated face recognition, and Covernment (Corporate+Government) tracking in public places, as well as private places.

Often Covernment officials that use video surveillance try to prohibit others from taking pictures or video within their establishments or regimes, but on this day, many people will photograph these officials, their establishments, and their security systems.

As high noon sweeps past various time zones, the shot heard around the world will be that of clicking cameras.

Rather than protesting by carrying signs, or by marching, citizens will protest by going on shooting sprees. Armed with their own photographic or videographic cameras and recording devices, ordinary citizens will dish out some accountability.

HOW CAN I PARTICIPATE?

All you need to do is bring a camera --- any camera (even a fake or broken camera, or one with an empty film magazine) --- to a place where video surveillance is used.

HOW WILL I KNOW WHO I SHOULD SHOOT?

Taking pictures of the surveillance cameras will cause models to appear very quickly for you to photograph. When you point your camera at their cameras, the officials watching their television monitors will very quickly dispatch the models for you to shoot. This is a universal phenomenon that happens in nearly any large organization where video surveillance is used. Models often carry two--way radios and wear navy blue uniforms with special badges.

Why December 24th?

This is a day when security forces are very busy watching for shoplifters, and it is also a time when folks are reflecting on the year's activity and it's something to do rather than merely buy something. For more info, see http://wearcam.org/wsd.htm

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
A Bit of Perspective.... -- H_Bergeron, 03:31:15 12/08/02 Sun (ppp-216-158-59-11.cust.oldcity.dca.net/216.158.59.11)
from www.kuro5hin.org

What will you really die from

By turmeric
Fri Dec 6th, 2002 at 05:55:49 AM EST
The news media have been fear mongering like a Baptist preacher at a revival for about 1 year, 2 months now. I would like to point out how screwed up and irrational their view of terror is.
First stop, the CDC.
The top 10 causes of death in the United States in 1999.
(note) the population of the US is roughly 300 million.
- All causes 2,337,256
- Diseases of heart . .724,859
- Malignant neoplasms . . . 541,532
- Cerebrovascular diseases . .. 158,448
- Chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases . . . 112,584
- Accidents and adverse effects . . . 97,835
- Pneumonia and influenza . . . 91,871
- Diabetes mellitus . . . 64,751
- Suicide . . 30,575
- Kidney disease . 26,182
- Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis . 25,192
- All other causes . . . 463,427
So there you have it. Do you see terrorism on there? Do you even see homicide? Do you see crime? If you included 9/11 it wouldn't even be a blip. The only crime I see on this list are the tobacco companies, the fast food companies, the city planning folks, the evil bosses who overwork people, etc. And as for suicide, why do people commit suicide? Becuase the US is largely run by clueless hysterical people who are obsessed with Time Magazine's stories about Osama Bin Ladin instead of why their child has cut marks all over his arms.
Were they included in the rankings, both causes would be placed among the 10 leading causes of death -- lung cancer would rank third and Motor vehicle accidents would rank eighth.

So why aren't motor vehicle deaths on the front page of Newsweek? Why don't you write a gigantic article about 'How to Prevent Motor Fatalities' or how about we pass a "Homeland Motor Security Act"? Because it would mean public transportation or smaller cities, which would hurt the profits of the oil auto and rubber companies. Which usually have links to the media companies through interlocking boards of directors, conglomerate ownership, etc.
I would like to point out an omission on my part. On and around pages 12, 14, and 15, of the aforementioned document, it says that homicide is actually a significant cause of death for many age groups, especially young folks and babies. I guess young folks and babies don't run the blasted newspapers though. (and no, school shootings do not explain several thousand homicides of kids. )
But really, even with homicide/assault ranking quite high among everyone below 44, it is still often behind or tied with things like liver disease, cancer, heart disease, accidents (auto) and suicide.
In other words, you're more likely to off yourself than get offed, and more likely to get cancer than to get ka-kakked. Stuffing yourself with big macs and cigarettes and driving drunk from parties is more likely to kill you than the horrific headlines you are doing these things to escape from.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Of course the economic cost of terrorism goes beyond mere death. The psychological costs to families goes beyond that where a disease process is the culprit. Moreover the effects on civil society and its functioning go far beyond a simple mortality tally. I have always used auto accidents to compare with mortality and morbidity of war for perspective. This, however, is only the beginning of the story. (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 16:39:59 12/08/02 Sun
- Where is HIV/AIDS on that list? Why is HIV/AIDS such a promoted cause, even garnering many times more dollars per person affected in research and even treatment than heart disease and cancer? (Is that a rhetorical question?) (NT) -- William, 03:32:19 12/09/02 Mon
  - I am sure that you realize that it is not a major cause of death, numberwise. Actually many AIDS related deaths are from cancers, so those deaths are confounded with the numbers above. The simple stats are just too simplistic to make a strong point other than the obvious -- that death is all arounds -- live with it! (How's that for a mixed metaphor?) Is the writer of the piece trying to say that terrorism is not so bad by making such comparisons? (NT) -- SurveyGuy (Cost benefit analyses always have at least two perspectives.), 09:10:04 12/09/02 Mon
    - Hello, SurveyGuy! Yes, I am aware that the numbers of HIV/AIDS deaths are small compared to many other illnesses and causes of death. What gets me is how celebrities and others will proudly tout their involvement in this or that HIV/AIDS fundraiser or public awareness program. I ask myself "Why?". I answer "Probably because it is a popular and politically correct cause to become involved in." (NT) -- William, 23:33:25 12/10/02 Tue
      - It is "popular" because so many in the arts are affected. Hence they use (abuse?) their influence. As a result, the political protection may have caused even more cases and deaths. There are not enough trained researchers for all the diseases and conditions we face. The dumbing down of schools means there will be even fewer in the future, hence less cures or preventions. As new viruses emerge, we will not be equipped to deal with them. The future looks pretty bleak and the politicos don't even realize it. (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 09:24:20 12/11/02 Wed
    - It is still a disease which is almost 100% directly caused by personal actions, i.e. homosexuality, intravenous drug use, and sex with prostitutes, and after cheating in a homosexual act, an IV drug use or involvement with a prostitute, passing it on to an unsuspecting spouse. There are much more worthy causes to champion, like alternatives to abortion, treatment and comfort for MS and MS suffers, child and spousal abuse, Dementia and its sub headings, e.g, alzheimer's, high black on black crime and violence with poor education results, etc (NT) -- William, 23:35:12 12/10/02 Tue
Just another example of how liberal "thought police" try to quash honest dissent. If you want to defend the NYTimes editorial action, go ahead, but it may reveal a bit too much about yourself, eh? -- SurveyGuy, 09:24:03 12/05/02 Thu (maxtnt02-350.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.228.96)
http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2002/12/4/171228
Wednesday, Dec. 4, 2002

New York Times Censors Itself

The New York Times' monomaniacal assault on a Georgia golf club has reached an absurd new low: This bastion of leftist intolerance is now crushing dissent from within.

The Old Gray Lady's editors have killed columns by Pulitzer Prize winner Dave Anderson and sportswriter Harvey Araton - not for any factual errors, but for daring to challenge the corporate thought police about Augusta National.

"That's right, my column didn't run," Anderson told the New York Daily News. "It was decided by the editors that we should not argue with the editorial page."

Heresy!

The Daily News reported today: "Araton is believed to have written women face bigger issues than whether they can become members of a ritzy golf club.

"The Times editors' decisions reinforce a growing sense in journalistic circles that the paper under [executive editor Howell] Raines looks for conformity in its news and opinion columns."

As Fox News Channel pointed out today, there are golf clubs that choose not to admit men. Question: When will the New York Times go on a rampage against them?

And exactly which clubs do Howell Raines and other Times fatcats belong to?

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Is it any wonder at all that Liberal papers see their subscriptions go down? (NT) -- Gary, 14:46:43 12/05/02 Thu
  - Do you have statistics to back that up, remember that on this board, you have to be prepared to back up everything you say with facts, not conjecture, because that's how Survey Guy wants it. See the rules above. No exceptions. This is a serious board for serious discussion for serious people. (NT) -- Reynaldo DeLavrova, 15:10:36 12/05/02 Thu
    - You, sir, are not addressing the topic. That's one. The local stInquirer is well-known to be down over 30% and they are trying to make a comeback. The NYTimes is becoming the same kind of rag by abusing the talent they have. Caution -- you picked the wrong person to whine about. (NT) -- SG (This is your first alert. We have 3 moderators. That was one of them. I am surprised you're not gone already.), 15:19:38 12/05/02 Thu
- Can you say, "Citizen Kane"? (NT) -- Spock, 13:00:51 12/06/02 Fri
  - It is a shame. Previously the NYT merely had a liberal bias, but you could still find op-ed pieces. Its deterioration raising the politics of the editors above any kind of journalistic integrity may mark the downslide unless they either wake up or do a better cover up. (NT) -- SG (who hasn't bought the Inquirer because of its overt bias in over a dozen years ... and won't), 21:05:55 12/06/02 Fri
Suggestions for liberals.... -- H_Bergeron ( not a bad idea for some conservatives, either), 02:15:06 12/01/02 Sun (ppp-216-158-59-242.cust.oldcity.dca.net/216.158.59.242)
From Eric S. Raymond -
big open source kahuna and quite the Libertarian.....

What a responsible American Left would look like:

The congressional Democrats have made Nancy Pelosi their leader.
Whether or not this is conscious strategy, it means they're going to
run to the left. And very likely get slaughtered in 2004.

It's truly odd how self-destructive the American Left has become.
They're like that famous line about the Palestinians, never missing an
opportunity to miss an opportunity. And there are so many
opportunities! So many good things Republican conservatives can
never do because they're captive to their voter base.

Herewith, then, my humble offering of a program for the American
Left. This is not sarcasm and I'm not trying to score points here,
these are issues where the Left could take a stand and gain back some
of the moral capital it has squandered so recklessly since the
days of the civil rights movement.

read the rest of this article

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Interesting BLOG -- the problem these days with liberals is that their "leaders" have so muddied the waters, that many think they know whatthey should be for, but have no idea why. When pressed, they usually agree, for example, that maybe we have to do something about Iraq. The bellicose stance my only be a ploy, but then how does one explain Hans Blix? Blix has never, ever discovered a single weapon. You'd hope he'd try harder. (NT) -- SurveyGuy (Waitin' and seein' but not expectin' much), 14:08:45 12/01/02 Sun
- "DO NOT post diatribes that refer to no specific reported actions or speech by an groups or individuals but merely empty stereotypes with no examples." (see how your words come back to haunt you, SG?) (NT) -- the Watcher, 16:56:48 12/02/02 Mon
  - Watcher, or is it "Stalker" or "Peeping Tom"? I read the message board parameters or rules above. I don't know who wrote them. How would you know who wrote and posted them? H Bergeron's and SG's posts are fine. What you do is merely act like an adolescent who knows nothing but would love to be the center of attention. If you grow up and take part in discussions perhaps you might enhance this message forum. As it is now, you are merely a dog barking and snapping at the car's tires as the car speeds past. You are all noise and no substance. (NT) -- William, 22:26:59 12/02/02 Mon
    - It is not worth responsing to these empty posts. They should just be un-approved. I will let this stand for a while as an example of what is unwelcome. They, of course, take the rule out or context. Those who REPEAT that nonsense with no postive contributions will be ignored and removed. I will no longer even reply. Just delete and ban. (NT) -- SG (too busy to bother with such vapidity), 15:17:09 12/03/02 Tue
      - I think that some forums call that "feeding the trolls" as in "please don't feed the trolls" for they get satisfaction in pestering forum participants while posting empty posts with no purpose but to harass. (NT) -- William, 16:19:11 12/04/02 Wed
        
        I like the metaphor. My personal policy is now "tossing the trolls" as soon as possible. (NT) -- SG, 09:30:28 12/05/02 Thu
  - That's two. (NT) -- SG, 22:29:23 12/02/02 Mon
belive in allah -- hamrez, 09:01:40 11/29/02 Fri (cacheflow238.cen.brad.ac.uk/143.53.238.40)
go to www.jews-for-allah.org and be muslim

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Yup, it's true -- you can find just about anything on thei nternet. (NT) -- SG, 12:04:49 11/29/02 Fri
- and don't forget to visit their sister sites:
  www.dissidents-for-stalin.org
  www.african-americans-for-KKK.org
  and, of course....
  www.feminists-for-Larry_Flynt.org (NT) -- H_Bergeron (pumping irony), 02:26:28 12/01/02 Sun
  - >I love it! Thanks for the laugh. (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 07:39:33 12/01/02 Sun
  - Just visited www.paranoidschizophrenicsforunity.org....the homepage is black and just says in white letters, "This site has been moved to an undisclosed location. What's your business here?" I clicked on "Forwarding Information" and it said, "Who's asking?" (NT) -- Spock (sorry, swept away by the stream of consciousness), 15:00:09 12/04/02 Wed
    - That's very funny. Thanks. (NT) -- SG, 09:04:37 12/05/02 Thu
Other Voy Forums for those who don't like the way this is run -- SG, 09:05:28 12/04/02 Wed (inetgw4.ccp.cc.pa.us/63.121.99.32)
For those who prefer a more free-wheeling style, here are a few other active boards with a similar focus.
http://www.voy.com/75426/
http://www.voy.com/60560/
http://www.voy.com/64631/
http://www.voy.com/9623/
http://www.voy.com/1448/
http://www.voy.com/31499/

There are 100s more. Not your style? Start your own and run it however you want. The internet is about options. It is not about doing whatever you want whereever you want.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
Finally - a common moniker for the common sense-less -- H_Bergeron, 00:31:53 12/02/02 Mon (ppp-207-245-71-139.cust.oldcity.dca.net/207.245.71.139)

another bit of dashing brilliance from Eric Raymond -
hope you all enjoy it....

Why We Fight — An Anti-Idiotarian Manifesto

WHEREAS, the year since the terrible events of 9/11 has exposed
the vacuity and moral confusion of all too many of the thinkers,
politicians, and activists operating within conventional political
categories;

WHEREAS, the Left has failed us by succumbing to reflexive
anti-Americanism; by apologizing for terrorist acts; by propounding
squalid theories of moral equivalence; and by blaming the victims of
evil for the act of evil;

WHEREAS, the Right has failed us by pushing `anti-terrorist'
measures which bid fair to be both ineffective and prejudicial to the
central liberties of a free society; and in some cases by rhetorically
descending to almost the same level of bigotry as our enemies;

WHEREAS, even many of the Libertarians from whom we expected more
intelligence have retreated into a petulant isolationism, refusing to
recognize that, at this time, using the state to carry the war back to
the aggressors is our only practical instrument
of self-defense;

WE THEREFORE ASSERT the following convictions as the premises of
the anti-idiotarian position:

read the rest of the manifesto

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- "DO NOT post diatribes that refer to no specific reported actions or speech by an groups or individuals but merely empty stereotypes with no examples." (NT) -- the Watcher, 16:53:05 12/02/02 Mon
  - There are plenty of examples in H Bergeron's posted message. His post does fall within the guidelines from which you extracted your response. (NT) -- William, 22:12:12 12/02/02 Mon
  - You have violated the rules - watcher. Bergeron has posted someone else's editorial for comment. That's one. (NT) -- SG, 22:26:30 12/02/02 Mon
  - Who watches the Watcher....? (NT) -- Spock, 14:52:34 12/04/02 Wed
More on gun control and poor reasoning. Ammunition for a debate? -- SurveyGuy (pun intended), 19:13:51 12/01/02 Sun (maxtnt06-165.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.241.165)
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell1.asp
Thomas Sowell
Gun Control myths: Part II
http://www.NewsAndOpinion.com | Talking facts to gun control zealots is only likely to make them angry. But the rest of us need to know what the facts are. More than that, we need to know that much of what the gun controllers claim as facts will not stand up under scrutiny.

The grand dogma of the gun controllers is that places with severe restrictions on the ownership of firearms have lower rates of murder and other gun crimes. How do they prove this? Simple. They make comparisons of places where this is true and ignore all comparisons of places where the opposite is true.

Gun control zealots compare the United States and England to show that murder rates are lower where restrictions on ownership of firearms are more severe. But you could just as easily compare Switzerland and Germany, the Swiss having lower murder rates than the Germans, even though gun ownership is three times higher in Switzerland. Other countries with high rates of gun ownership and low murder rates include Israel, New Zealand and Finland.

Within the United States, rural areas have higher rates of gun ownership and lower rates of murder, whites have higher rates of gun ownership than blacks and much lower murder rates. For the country as a whole, handgun ownership doubled in the late 20th century, while the murder rate went down. But such facts are not mentioned by gun control zealots or by the liberal media.

Another dogma among gun control supporters is that having a gun in the home for self-defense is futile and is only likely to increase the chances of your getting hurt or killed. Your best bet is to offer no resistance to an intruder, according to this dogma.

Actual research tells just the opposite story. People who have not resisted have gotten hurt twice as often as people who resisted with a firearm. Those who resisted without a firearm of course got hurt the most often.

Such facts are simply ignored by gun control zealots. They prefer to cite a study published some years ago in the New England Journal of Medicine and demolished by a number of scholars since then. According to this discredited study, people with guns in their homes were more likely to be murdered.

How did they arrive at this conclusion? By taking people who were murdered in their homes, finding out how many had guns in the house, and then comparing them with people who were not murdered in their homes.

Using similar reasoning, you might be able to show that people who hire bodyguards are more likely to get killed than people who don't. Obviously, people who hire bodyguards already feel at risk, but does that mean that the bodyguards are the reason for the risk?

Similarly illogical reasoning has been used by counting how many intruders were killed by homeowners with guns and comparing that with the number of family members killed with those guns. But this is a nonsense comparison because most people who keep guns in their homes do not do so in hopes of killing intruders.

Most uses of guns in self-defense -- whether in the home or elsewhere -- do not involve actually pulling the trigger. When the intended victim turns out to have a gun in his hand, the attacker usually has enough brains to back off. But the lives saved this way do not get counted.

People killed at home by family members are highly atypical. The great majority of these victims have had to call the police to their homes before, because of domestic violence, and just over half have had the cops out several times. These are not just ordinary people who happened to lose their temper when a gun was at hand.

Neither are most "children" who are killed by guns just toddlers who happened to find a loaded weapon lying around. More of those "children" are members of teenage criminal gangs who kill each other deliberately.

Some small children do in fact get accidentally killed by guns in the home -- but fewer than drown in bathtubs. Is anyone for banning bathtubs? Moreover, the number of fatal gun accidents fell, over the years, while the number of guns was increasing by tens of millions. None of this supports the assumption that more guns mean more fatal accidents. Most of the gun controllers' arguments are a house of cards.

No wonder they don't want any hard facts coming near them.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
The sharp tongue and piercing sword of Truth
Larry Elder puts a spankin' on Dr. Phil's lies! -- William, 02:12:28 11/29/02 Fri (cache-dq01.proxy.aol.com/205.188.209.133)

Larry Elder November 29, 2002

Kids, guns, and Dr. Phil

Move over Mr. Anti-Second Amendment Michael Moore, and make way for Dr. Phil. Dr. Phil recently aired a program in which he staged an experiment to demonstrate the danger of guns in the home. Amid a group of playing little girls and boys, a teacher placed two fake guns inside a dollhouse. The teacher warned the kids not to play with the guns, and then left the room. The mindful girls left the guns alone even after the teacher left the room.

The experimenters took the girls out of the room. The boys promptly began playing with the guns. Dr. Phil came in, warned the boys again, and after eliciting a promise not to play with the guns, which he put on a table, he left the room. Again, the boys promptly began playing with the guns. Moral to the story? Guns in the home and children -- especially boys -- simply don't mix. Never mind that responsible parents rarely leave guns, let alone loaded ones, inside a girl's dollhouse or on a table near the children.

Dr. Phil said, "America kills more kids with guns than any other industrialized nation," later adding, "There are five children a day killed with guns through either accidents or suicides. Five children a day in America are killed with guns." The five children per day figure adds up to over 1,800 per year.

Hold tape.

Dr. Phil never defined what he meant by "children." Independence Institute researcher Dave Kopel notes that many of the reported gun deaths involving "children" include those aged 14 through 19, many of them gangbangers. If, by children, Dr. Phil meant 10 and under, approximately 50 children -- or less than one child per state per year under 10 -- die from handgun violence.

Dr. Phil specifically said gun "accidents and suicides." Yet the Center for Disease Control, which tracks all causes of death, reports only 86 accidental deaths in kids aged 14-years-and-under in the year 2000, and 110 suicides, for a total of 198. Not exactly 1,800. (Even if Dr. Phil intended to include homicide and undetermined intent, the total of kids aged 14-and-under killed by firearms in 2000, according to the CDC, was 435.)

By contrast, the CDC reported 943 accidental drownings of kids aged 14-and-under, 593 deaths from accidental exposures to smoke and fire, and 2,591 killed in motor vehicle accidents. Surely one child dying through handgun violence -- or any kind of violence -- is one child too many, but we should not lose perspective.

Dr. Phil went further. In front of the largely female -- and often instinctively anti-gun group -- audience, Dr. Phil added this headline, "More children die from gunfire than cancer, pneumonia, flu, asthma and HIV/AIDS combined. Do you know what your child would do if he found a gun and you weren't there?"

Hold tape.

According to the CDC, the annual deaths from cancer in 2000, for children aged 14-years-and-under, was 1,939. Add in the number of 14-and-under who die every year from pneumonia and flu, at 479, plus 169 kids killed by asthma, plus 70 from HIV, and we have a grand total of 2,657, a number higher than Dr. Phil's figure of 1,800 children allegedly killed each year through handgun accidents and suicide.

As usual with programs stacked against guns, Dr. Phil failed to even address the number of children saved by handguns per year. In other words, how many kids remain with us because Mommy or Daddy -- or in some cases a child -- used a gun to defend the household. According to the Department of Justice, Americans use guns for defensive purposes 1.5 million times a year. And, according to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention -- a division of the Justice Department -- the government found that children taught appropriate use of guns by their parents turn out to be far less likely to use those guns for criminal purposes than those without such instruction.

Recently, in South Bend, Ind., a thug broke into a home occupied by an 80-year-old grandmother and her 10-year-old grandchild. The intruder held a jagged box cutter to the grandmother's neck, at which time the 10-year-old bolted upstairs where he retrieved his father's gun, the responsible use of which his dad taught him. The 10-year-old returned, pointed the gun at the intruder, and shot and killed him. "The young man reasonably believed his grandmother and himself to be in danger of dying," the South Bend police said. "It was clear to us this was a justifiable homicide. He did what he had to do."

Some suggestions: Don't go to your gun store for psychological counseling; and don't go to a mental health therapist for advice on guns.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Funny that Dr. Phil did not put guns in a locked gun rack where the kids would probably have paid no attention to them. This just shows that you need to store weapons responsibly. (NT) -- SG, 10:12:04 11/29/02 Fri
- Ethics from the Barrel of a Gun (NT) -- H_Bergeron (great article), 02:32:42 12/01/02 Sun
- Kids, Guns, and Dr. Phil -- John DiPrimio, 12:12:31 12/01/02 Sun
belive in allah -- ham, 09:02:56 11/29/02 Fri (cacheflow238.cen.brad.ac.uk/143.53.238.40)
go to www.jews-for-allah.org and learn about islam

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
Book title and summary -- William, 00:54:16 11/28/02 Thu (cache-rl02.proxy.aol.com/152.163.189.98)

Today I came upon this book summary while perusing books available on the market.

Based on the information in the summary, I do not get it.

I think there is more of a chasm between the left and left leaning liberals and the lovers of personal freedom and supporters of personal responsibility, often referred to as "conservatives" and/or "Libertarians", or "Constitutionalists",depending on who uses the terms and what they mean.

I have not noticed an extremeism among whites or a "Nationalism" among whites. I have seen more of an appreciation of the United States and a disdain for those who attack her from many different types of people, including blacks, whites, Asians, Orientals, and Hispanics.

I wonder what you think.

The New White Nationalism in America

Carol M. Swain

Over the past ten years, a new white nationalist movement has gained strength in America, bringing with it the potential to disrupt already fragile race relations.

Eschewing violence, this movement seeks to expand its influence mainly through argument and persuasion directed at its target audience of white Americans aggrieved over racial double standards, race-based affirmative action policies, high black-on-white crime rates, and liberal immigration policies.

Due to its emphasis on group self-determination, multiculturalism has provided white nationalists with justification for advocating a parallel form of white solidarity. In addition, as Swain illustrates, technological advances such as the Internet have made it easier than ever before for white nationalists to reach a more mainstream audience.

Swain?s study is intended as a wake-up call to all Americans who cherish the Civil Rights Era vision of an integrated America, a common humanity, and equality before God and the law.

Contents:

1. Introduction; Part I. Is There Cause for Alarm?:

2. The new white nationalism;

3. Racial holy war! - the beliefs and goals of the more radical racist right;

4. Demographic change and immigration issues;

5. Crime and fear of violence; Part II. Affirmative Action: Is This the Perfect Grievance?:

6. Affirmative action: past and present;

7. Framing effects, opinion surveys, and the evidence from focus groups;

8. A grievance made to order?;

9. The path from discrimination to reverse discrimination in higher education; Part III. What Can Happen to Young People in a Racially Charged Environment?:

10. The growing competitiveness for college and university admissions;

11. Multiculturalism and racial double standards;

12. White nationalist recruitment in America; Part IV. Remedies:

13. A search for consensus in college and university admissions;

14. Can religion promote greater racial and social harmony among America?s diverse people?;

15. Concluding observations and policy recommendations.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Probably just another America hating liberal doing her part to foment further division now that some blacks have begun to see how they've been mislead. Since I haven't read it, I could be wrong. However, it sounds suspiciously like what I hear on TV. Be prepared for more such balderdash from the left. (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 15:53:53 11/28/02 Thu
William sent me this and I thought it was worth posting. It really captures the Democratic Senatorial and Congrssional "leaders" as many of us see them -- falsely criticizing others for what they do themsleves. -- SurveyGuy (reminds me somewhat of some of Jules Pfeiffer's work), 08:58:24 11/27/02 Wed (maxtnt05-390.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.100.136)

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
News Regarding ESCR, (Embryonic Stem Cell Research) - Let us see how this pans our, and how the news media deals with this, if they even deal with it at all. -- William, 03:17:04 11/25/02 Mon (cache-rl02.proxy.aol.com/152.163.189.98)
Founding Stem Cell Researcher Admits Embryonic Stem Cells Will Not Be Used For Therapies

Astonishing Admission Indicates Foolishness of Previous Hype

WASHINGTON, November 22, 2002 (LifeSiteNews.com) - All the public promises and Congressional testimony vowing amazing cures to come from the use of embryonic stem cells have proven hollow with an astounding admission by one of the world's foremost embryonic stem cell scientists. John Gearhart, who gained international recognition in 1998 when he successfully extracted human pluripotent stem cells from aborted fetal tissue, said at a recent conference: "I am not sure these cells are going to be used in therapies."

Gearhart, director of research for Johns Hopkins University's Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, insisted however that embryonic stem cell research should still be allowed in order to learn how to work with adult stem cells from the patient's own body. Speaking November 14 at the "Human Embryonic Stem Cells: Differentiation and Transplantation" conference convened by the National Human Genome Research Institute, Gearhart said, "I am not sure these (embryonic stem) cells are going to be used in therapies, but we are going to use the information we get out of this research to get the patient's own cells and work with them to get them to do what we want. This is really where I see the future now."

Dr. John Shea, Medical consultant to Campaign Life Coalition Canada told LifeSite that the statement by Gearhart is likely "a covert admission that the promises made of the wonders to come from embryonic stem cells were false and foolish." Dr. Shea explained: "they are probably beginning to face the fact that they will not be able to overcome the rejection problem with embryonic stem cells and that the cloning method they proposed to avoid rejection has been discounted since the vast abnormalities exhibited with cloning." Gearhart's next attempt to justify the controversial embryonic research is to piggy-back on the real promise of ethical adult stem cell research, says Dr. Shea. "The game is up, and I think they are preparing the public to soften the blow to their ego," concluded Dr. Shea.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Very Interesting.; but not surprising. Liberals and the media usualy try to emotionalize partial truth and try to demonize those who would dare disagree with them, regardless of the harm their position may cause. In the end, it will be interesting to see what useful therapies, if any, result from this research. I am not sure how accurate this is either. The topic is fairly complex and changing rapidly. However, this seems to be something that was known but ignored (covered up?) (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 12:10:26 11/25/02 Mon
This Just In ... [humor] -- SurveyGuy, 13:16:14 11/24/02 Sun (maxtnt05-126.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.99.126)
This Just In: Gambols Along �
Norman Liebmann Monday November 22, 2002

THIS JUST IN: A survey revealed the elderly said they would abandon any notion of medically-assisted suicide if the government would start a program of medically assisted sex.

THIS JUST IN: The Clinton Library will have on display an actual pair of shorts Bill wore when he was a boy in pornography camp.

THIS JUST IN: Rewrite men at the New York Times have been instructed by the editor to henceforth give the news a second coat of taint.

THIS JUST IN: Hollywood celebrities realize the easiest place to find groupies to shack up with are in trendy coffee shops. The Hollywood celebrities refer to these fans as �starbuckers.�

THIS JUST IN: Americans can now expect to get screwed even more often when they go to court. An Ivy League University is opening up a new graduate institution called The Get Over It School of Law.

THIS JUST IN: Rome is finally cracking down on sexual activity among its clergymen. A priest will no longer be allowed to take confession with the penitent sitting on his lap - unless they are �in a relationship.�

THIS JUST IN: CNN is getting rid of Bill Press and is replacing him with James Carville. In liberal media this is a process called rotating the pr***s.

THIS JUST IN: The National Chutzpah Award went to a Berkeley college student who defected during the Viet Nam War, and returned from Canada to apply for a disability pension for combat fatigue.

THIS JUST IN: The Clinton property in Chappaqua has officially been designated a National Treason Park.

THIS JUST IN: Vermont legalized its first domestic partnership of an elf and a pixie. They spent their honeymoon in a holding pattern over the airport, but were grounded by air controllers due to smarmy weather.

THIS JUST IN: In the interest of something other than security, Bill Clinton has volunteered to conduct body searches in nudist colonies.

THIS JUST IN: Meteorologists estimate it will take another five years before the jet stream is able to clear the gamy funk that is still hanging over Woodstock.

THIS JUST IN: The sure way to find those weapons of mass destruction In Iraq is to put some automobile �repo men� on the job.

THIS JUST IN: The honors just keep coming. Along with being designated as �The First Black President�, a black university will award Bill Clinton a degree as a Doctor of Doin� Bitches and Ho�s.

THIS JUST IN: It is generally estimated that if they re-polled the first O.J. jury, they would vote unanimously to remain black.

THIS JUST IN: It has just been revealed at his first inauguration, Bill Clinton was sworn in on the King James Version of TV Guide.

THIS JUST IN: Dr. Kevorkian is said to have been considering mixing his suicide cocktail with Viagra, so at the last moment the patients wouldn�t know if they were coming or going.

THIS JUST IN: A Special Ops team that Bill Clinton sent to Somalia is planning to salute their old boss with a twenty-one gun misfire.

THIS JUST IN: The Taliban make their camp high up in the mountains since they discovered at elevations above nine thousand feet they are no longer able to smell the Palestinians on the Gaza Strip.

THIS JUST IN: Vermont is opening up its new Medical Center for Diseases of the Lap.

THIS JUST IN: A survey voted Rosie O�Donnell the Girl Parents Would Least Want Their Daughter to do Same Sex Stuff With.

THIS JUST IN: The Curator just acquired another piece of memorabilia for the Clinton Library - the actual ten foot pole Vince Foster refused to touch Hillary with.

THIS JUST IN: There will be a new politically correct version of Charles Dickens �A Christmas Carol.� After the visit by the three spirits, Ebenezer Scrooge shows he has reformed and becomes a good person by turning black.

THIS JUST IN: It�s reported, not as much business is going on across Bill Clinton�s desk these days as is going on under it.

THIS JUST IN: People in Vermont are using Fruit Loops as calling cards.

THIS JUST IN: A prominent economist has said taking handguns out of circulation would eliminate the principle tool for conducting �commerce� in the inner city.

THIS JUST IN: Hillary Clinton has not yet learned to control her temper. It�s just that they have bolted down all the lamps in the Senate Office Building.

THIS JUST IN: Al Gore will initiate a new environmental campaign to save the icebergs. (We wonder how the Captain of the Titanic would have felt about that.)

THIS JUST IN: The Department of Sanitation agreed to have its garbage truck stop at Bill Clinton's Harlem office three times a day to collect his thoughts.

THIS JUST IN: CSPAN is drawing a pervert audience. They are putting in a Heavy Breathers Line.

THIS JUST IN: A cosmetic firm is considering putting out a perfume in honor of Janet Reno to be called Bar Mop No. 5

THIS JUST IN: Scientists are close to a cure for cancer. What�s holding it up is the tablets are inside those prescription bottles that nobody can twist the safety caps off.

THIS JUST IN: Timorous Trent Lott is considering having his belly re-yellowed.

THIS JUST IN: A county in Texas found a way to cut down on the number of illegal aliens in their county. It is now against the law to drive under the influence of rice and beans.

THIS JUST IN: More evidence of Hillary Clinton's anti-Semitism. She is working on legislation that will add chicken fat to the DEA�s list of controlled substances.

THIS JUST IN: A cosmetic firm is putting out a new shade of lipstick inspired by Hillary Clinton. It�s called Kremlin Pink.

and ...

THIS JUST IN: A contest has been held to come up with a suitable epitaph for Bubba. The winning entry is: �Here Lies Bill Clinton � This Time He�s Really Not Inhaling.�

Norman Liebmann is a former Television writer (Johnny Carson, Dean Martin; wrote and produced Chico and the Man, and created the characters for The Munsters (who are all named after his relatives) and a brilliant and insightful columnist/humorist. Please visit his website Firehat, a treasure trove of Clinton and Media bashing.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
Are things heating up over downing of Flight 800? -- William, 05:19:51 11/19/02 Tue (cache-mtc-ah04.proxy.aol.com/64.12.96.169)
No longer an accident
November 19, 2002
World Net Daily
The jury is in on TWA Flight 800, and the verdict is clear: There is absolutely no evidence of either a mechanical failure, or of a bomb planted in the fuselage. Indeed, all available evidence suggests the explosive event that destroyed the ill-fated airliner in 1996 was caused by a terrorist group called the Islamic Change Movement.
This is the "group" that had taken responsibility for the Riyadh bombing in 1995 that killed five Americans and two Indian nationals, and the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia on June 25, 1996, that killed 19 American servicemen.
Early on July 17, 1996, the very day TWA Flight 800 was destroyed, this same group issued a communique that, according to Yossef Bodansky, "laid the foundation for the downing of TWA 800." As director of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, Bodansky knows the subject as well as any man alive.
The communique was chilling: "The mujahideen will deliver the ultimate response to the threats of the foolish American president. Everyone will be amazed at the size of that response," it read in part. "Their time is at the morning-dawn. Is not the morning-dawn near?" Dawn in Afghanistan corresponded almost exactly to dusk in New York, the moment of TWA Flight 800's demise.
So powerful and public was the warning that, by the night of July 18, the State Department had already swung into denial mode. "While it's up to those leading the investigation to make a judgment on what this means," said spokesman Glyn Davies unconvincingly, "we think that this is a common type of political tract circulated commonly in the Middle East, and that the only connection is a vague chronological one ? that this thing surfaced at this dreadful time."
The State department failed to note that on this same day, July 18, the Islamic Change Movement released another communique through well-established Islamist terrorist channels in Beirut. It read in part, "We carried out our promise with the plane attack of yesterday."
Bodansky was not impressed by the State Department denials. He raised the chillingly prophetic alarm that follows ? not after Sept. 11, but two years before:
The case of TWA 800 served as a turning point because of Washington's determination ? and to a great extent ability ? to suppress terrorist explanations and "float" mechanical failure theories. To avoid such suppression after future strikes, terrorism-sponsoring states would raise the ante so that the West cannot ignore them.
Less well understood is just which "terrorism-sponsoring state" was backing the Islamic Change Movement. In her fascinating book, "The War Against America," Laurie Mylroie makes the case that the one nation with the means and the motivation was Iraq. "The most likely interpretation," she notes, "is that the Islamic Change Movement was a name given by Iraqi intelligence to threaten or claim credit for bombings."
To be sure, Mylroie does not link the Islamic Change Movement to TWA Flight 800. In fact, she does not mention the doomed flight at all. She focuses primarily on the first World Trade Center bombing. A meticulous researcher, Mylroie developed much of her material as a consultant for Newsweek. She has sifted through the various documents unearthed in the various criminal trials, and followed the paper trail right back to Iraq. Her reasoning and her documentation are difficult to refute.
Curious as to why she avoided the subject of TWA Flight 800, I called Ms. Mylroie. As I told her, I did not expect her to commit to a theory on the crash based on my five-minute phone explanation, but I would appreciate her insight on a few key points. One was on the question of whether it was indeed the Islamic Change Movement that had sent a specific threat the morning of the flight. "No," she answered cagily, "They actually sent it the night before."
A second point of interest was the date of the plane's destruction. Mylroie mentions frequently, as have others, that terrorists in the Islamic world have a fixation with dates. She argues, for instance, that the first World Trade Center bombing took place on the second anniversary of the final day of the Gulf War, a correlation she sees as significant. (She does not explore the Oklahoma City bombing, despite the fact that its modus operandi is eerily similar to the bombing of the World Trade Center and that it took place on the second anniversary of the final day of another siege ? the one on Waco).
The most significant day on the Iraqi revolutionary calendar marks the coup that brought Hussein's Ba'th party to power in the ill-starred year of 1969. Mylroie makes several references to this date ? July 17 ? but, curiously, she makes no reference to the most violent terrorist event that tracks with that date, namely the destruction of TWA Flight 800. Again, Mylroie was aware of the connection, but chose not to pursue it.
A third point of interest is the man responsible for the first World Trade Center bombing, Ramzi Yousef. Mylroie makes a compelling case that Yousef was an Iraqi agent. Indeed, the Arabs with whom he conspired in the New York area knew him as "Rashid, the Iraqi."
On July 17, 1996, Yousef was standing trial in New York for his role in a plot known as "Bojinka," the Serbian word for explosive. Yousef had been planning to blow up 11 American airliners over the Pacific more or less simultaneously. The scary thing is that he was capable of doing it.
One element of Bojinka planning mirrored Yousef's most successful crime: the truck bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993. If one could stuff a thousand pounds of explosives into a van, reasoned Yousef (on the laptop seized from the Manila apartment he shared with Abdul Hakim Murad, a Pakistani pilot), why not stuff a comparable amount in a small plane and strike real terror into the belly of the beast? The one speculative target cited was the CIA building. But more important was the methodology. The following excerpt from a classified Republic of the Philippines intelligence report shows that al-Qaida had plans to use small planes as flying bombs as early as 1994.
The document [from Yousef's computer] specifically cited the charter service of a commercial-type aircraft loaded with powerful bombs to be dive-crashed by Saeed Akman. This is apparently intended to demonstrate to the whole world that a Muslim martyr is ready and determined to die for the glorification of Islam.
Sept. 11 mastermind, Mohammed Atta, also made plans to use small, private planes to launch an attack of some kind within America. During the spring of 2000, in a stunning bit of chutzpah, Atta visited a U.S. Department of Agriculture office in Homestead, Fla., and attempted to apply for a government financed loan. USDA manager Johnelle Bryant described his unlikely (and happily unsuccessful) request for ABC News:
He ? actually wanted to purchase a six-passenger, twin-engine airplane, that he could pull the back seats out, and build a special-made chemical tank to put ? into ? the aircraft to hold the chemicals for crop-dusting, and yet remove that when he ? needed to, and replace the seats for ? [a] charter-type plane.
Although Atta had no known connection to the destruction of TWA Flight 800, and his avowed interest was in "crop-dusting," his plans to reconfigure the plane seem to have come right out of the Yousef playbook. I cite these references to small planes because there was undeniably one in the mix on July 17, 1996 ? one described by the most credible eyewitness as a "six-seater."
A fourth point of interest is the behavior of President Bill Clinton. Although she served as an adviser to Clinton during his 1992 campaign, Mylroie finds his reaction to Iraqi-backed terrorism "inexplicable." In fact, throughout the book, Mylroie quietly condemns the seeming "policy disarray" that leads time and again to inaction. The administration, she notes, suffered from the inability to tell the truth about Iraq even to itself.
In an insightful National Review article, Byron York argues that in the desperately political year of 1996, Clinton adviser Dick Morris polled continuously, even on tragic events like Khobar Towers and TWA Flight 800, to see how the president should respond. The conclusion was that "talking tough" would suffice. The implication is that tough talk would allow Clinton to hold his lead over the Republican's aging warrior, Bob Dole, without engendering further risk. Says York, "Clinton was preoccupied with his own political fortunes to an extent that precluded his giving serious and sustained attention to fighting terrorism."
For the Clinton White House, there was no political upside to terrorism unless it could be blamed on the American right wing. And if there were no political upside, why pursue it at all ? why not just wish it away? Such was America's foreign policy for eight years, and never more intensely so than in the anxious run-up to Clinton's 1996 re-election bid.
If Mylroie ignores TWA Flight 800 altogether, York addresses it parenthetically: "It was later ruled to be an accident," he notes. One cannot blame either for avoiding the topic. When they were writing, there was no substantial body of evidence refuting the government's specious but complex argument for mechanical failure. That is about to change. And when it does, the brief for an attack on Iraq could only grow stronger.
Jack Cashill is an Emmy-award winning independent writer and producer with a Ph.D. in American Studies from Purdue.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- I never thought it was an accident. The government spent an awful lot of time building their story while at the same time openingly going out of their way to ignore evidence that didn't fit their own story. We will probably never know the entire truth or even a facsimile. heck, the feds still claim it was a weather balloon at Roswell! Whatever that was, it was no balloon. (NT) -- SurveyGuy (Whenever the government is involved, the truth is the first casualty), 18:34:12 11/19/02 Tue
  - SurveyGuy, the downing of flight 800 took place exactly on the same day as my wife's and my marriage or wedding. We were in Maui getting married while that plane went down. I don't think it was an accident either. I favored the possibility of a problematic fuel line at first but I do not think the reports of eye witnesses really supports that. Notice that there was not quaranteen on that model aircraft after the aircraft went down? (NT) -- William, 19:51:25 11/23/02 Sat
  - If the model aircraft has a defect the aircraft should be taken out of service and corrections made. The same with some with cracks on the fuselage, wings, and elsewhere. No, the FBI is still blowing smoke about the Okalahoma bombing evidence. I heard Senator Arlen Spector call Michael Smirconish a few days ago and update Michael on that "investigation". It did not make me feel confident in the FBI and I am not certain how much Arlen Specter can be trusted either. (NT) -- William, 21:41:02 11/23/02 Sat
    - When I first heard Spector would give it to the FBI, I thought "Right -- give to the same people who covered up in the first place. The result will be the same." After hearing the FBI guy interviewed being unable to adress a single question directly, sadly the same denial sans details will occur. Spector did the politically expeditious thing, but at least aired it. I give him credit for that for what it's worth. When he opens the Warren Report early, then I will have more trust. At least he hasn't changed parties mid-term like jumpin' Jim. (NT) -- SurveyGuy (If OK and 800 are covered up, we will never know the truth re Vince Foster - a single death.), 12:44:22 11/24/02 Sun
christians and "Harry Potter" -- SnowCone, 00:59:47 11/16/02 Sat (dialup-63.214.8.37.Dial1.Seattle1.Level3.net/63.214.8.37)
It is crazy that some christians can believe that "Harry Potter" is bad for their kids. Yes, "Harry Potter" has witch craft, but it will not turn kids into full blown witches and wizards. Yes, little kids sometimes don't know better, but you can compare this to cartoons, little kids don't usually shoot cannas at people. Yes, their are "Harry Potter" products that have "kits", but that shouldn't affect kids in the way that they'll go run away to some dark forest and practise wicken.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- People can believe whatever they want - crazy or not -- so long as they do not abridge other's rights or harm them. What the heck is "cannas?" Also, what is your point? Is there some *action* that has occurred regarding this? Also, why do you focus on "some christians?" I am sure some Muslims, Jews, Buddhists and Hari-Krishnas think it is harmful too. Is there something more specific that has occurred that you are reacting to? (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 12:59:12 11/16/02 Sat
- I appreciate your distinction of "some" Christians; as Survey Guy alluded, any religion has its kooks. My husband and I are conservative Christians, and we LOVE Harry Potter. It's great storytelling, at the least, IMHO. Haven't caught this new flick yet, but hope to soon -- hearing mixed reviews over quality (from fans). (NT) -- Spock, 11:17:46 11/19/02 Tue
Just so a few more people begin to understand the nature of the evil to come. So when will the Democrats and Republicans get together and control our borders? Republicans are doing no different than the Dimocrats. -- SurveyGuy, 22:06:45 11/17/02 Sun (maxtnt04-456.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.97.202)
http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28819
HOMELAND INSECURITY
New al-Qaida training tape shows another side of terror
Captured video reveals plans for home break-ins, killing police, drive-bys, golf course assassinations
Posted: September 4, 2002 1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Joseph Farah � 2002 WorldNetDaily.com

An al-Qaida training videotape, captured in Afghanistan, shows Osama bin Laden's terrorists are not only planning attacks with weapons of mass destruction but are preparing to kill Americans with drive-by shootings and home break-ins, through ambushes of law-enforcement officers and targeted assassinations on golf courses, WorldNetDaily has learned.

The videotape was produced, U.S. analysts believe, for al-Qaida's internal use and did not appear to be an external propaganda device.

U.S. intelligence considers the tape much more significant in what it reveals about al-Qaida's modus operandi than the highly publicized video purchased and broadcast last month by CNN. U.S. forces found a cache of 64 al-Qaida tapes while combing caves and hideouts in Afghanistan. Analysts were surprised by some of what they saw in the latest video and believe they employ terrorist tactics and techniques meant for export to America and other nations.

"None of these training scenarios depicts the type of fighting that al-Qaida engages in within Afghanistan," noted John Holschen of Insights Training Center, who produced a report on the tape for military and law enforcement officials.

The training video shows al-Qaida operatives practicing the following kinds of assaults:

using pickup trucks with shooters concealed in the bed of the trucks; using motorcycles as a shooting platform for drive-bys and assassinations; execution of prisoners; ambushes of law-enforcement officers; residential assassinations; assassination on a golf course using a rocket-propelled grenade and rifle fire; drive-up kidnapping of target walking on a street; use of tunnels, storm drains and sewers for infiltration during urban raids; rappelling from rooftops of buildings to make entry on upper floors; use of motorcycles for grenade attacks; and raids on buildings with large numbers of occupants � perhaps schools or office buildings.

Analysts point out that all scenarios involving prisoners and hostages ended in execution. None included plans for negotiated settlements for escape by terrorists.

"They plan to kill the prisoners and die in place," wrote Holschen.

The "perfect day" as seen by al-Qaida would combine attacks designed to produce a maximum number of casualties with attacks that would give them the opportunity to get "face time" on the news channels to deliver their rhetoric, explained Holschen.

"The major take-home lesson here is that although the enemy is known to be seeking the ability and opportunity to use weapons of mass destruction and of an unconventional nature, such as hijacked airliners, they are also spending a lot of time training to carry out attacks the old-fashioned way � attacks executed by small groups of dedicated personnel equipped with little more than small arms," explained Holschen.

Hostages, prisoners and anyone else identified as a target or problem by al-Qaida terrorist operatives will be killed, say those who viewed the tape. There is no point in complying with orders, they say. Those who do not resist ultimately will be rewarded with ritual execution in front of television cameras, according to the tactics and techniques captured on this video.

In one scenario on the video, terrorists pretend to be stranded on a six-lane highway, their vehicle disabled. When a police officer stops to assist, the driver blows his horn. Another occupant of the vehicle opens fire on the police officer with a rifle. In other scenarios, shooters were concealed in the trunk of the car. When the terrorists were picked up by accomplices in a getaway car, the original vehicle was blown up, apparently to destroy evidence.

In another scenario, an innocuous-looking terrorist knocks on the door of a residence, standing in view of the resident and answering questions through a closed door. When the resident opens the door, the terrorist immediately draws his weapon and fires, emptying his weapon into the victim.

In the golf course assassination, the target was on the green, near the hole. A rocket-propelled grenade is fired at a vehicle adjacent to the green, perhaps a security detail. Then the target of the assassination is killed with rifle fire.

When asked if these techniques are intended for use in the U.S., one military intelligence operative said without hesitation, "Yes."

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
pneumonia -- Teresa, 13:46:37 11/17/02 Sun (h24-65-140-149.ed.shawcable.net/24.65.140.149)
Is type "A" pneumonia contagiuos? How do you catch it?

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
Nothing new here. New Democrat leader lying about who they really are and what they really stand for. The spin never ends. -- SurveyGuy, 08:13:22 11/17/02 Sun (maxtnt06-202.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.241.202)
http://newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2002/11/15/171404
Friday, Nov. 15, 2002
Pelosi Not A "Conservative Catholic" Catholic League President Says

Nancy Pelosi's claim to be a "conservative Catholic" was challenged today by an astonished Catholic League president William Donahue.

Noting that Pelosi made the claim on yesterday's CNN show, "Inside Politics," when the new House Minority Leader said, "Yes, I'm a liberal Democrat, but I'm a conservative Catholic," Donahue ticked off Pelosi's numerous stands in conflict with her Church:

Pelosi, has voted against school vouchers and the Faith- Based Initiative.

She has been an ardent abortion supporter. " When it comes to abortion, no one in the U.S. Congress has a more extreme record than she does," Donahue reports. "Whether the issue is parental consent or partial-birth abortion, she can always be counted on to deliver a pro-abortion vote."

In spite of these anti-Catholic positions, Donahue said "she calls herself a 'conservative Catholic.' It would be instructive to know what she considers a liberal Catholic to be."

And Donahue wasn't finished: "It's actually worse than this," he said. "The October 12 edition of the PBS program, 'To the Contrary,' showed Pelosi playing host to anti- Catholics. Frances Kissling and other staff members of the notoriously anti-Catholic organization Catholics for a Free Choice, were featured walking out of Pelosi's office after a lobbying session.

"Pelosi's contacts with these anti-Catholics is nothing new: in 1995 she was critical of the U.S. bishops for blasting Kissling's outfit as anti-Catholic," he recalled. "At that time, the bishops objected to the inclusion of Kissling's group at the U.N. Conference on Women that was to be held in Beijing.

"In reference to Kissling, William Cardinal Keeler, then head of the bishops' conference, said 'To use the name Catholic to promote the taking of innocent life is offensive.' Pelosi defended Kissling saying 'Many women are concerned about freedom of speech and association at the conference. Accreditation should not be a politicized process.' It is not surprising, then, that Pelosi refuses to condemn the DNC, [Democratic National Committee] for its support for Kissling's group today.

"In short," Donahue concluded, "Pelosi's spin game is insulting. No conservative Catholic we know okays the killing of kids 80 percent born."

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
While i don;t expect to ever see this in my lifetime, what really annoys me is how our brain-washed citizenry will not even want to debate the concept. Lots of good discussion in the article and especially read Ron Paul's comments. -- SurveyGuy, 21:26:11 11/13/02 Wed (maxtnt03-264.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.231.10)

THE POWER TO DESTROY

National sales tax gains momentum

Experts, lawmakers claim it would promote growth, be simpler

Click Here to read the whole article

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- The only problem I see with this is that we, as a people, have become too used to voting ourselves largesse from the public purse.
  It will bring us to the point where we have to figure out how we can pay for all the things we're used to having...
  let's not even bring up the spectre of the increasingly ill-named Social Security.... (NT) -- H_Bergeron ( hey waiter - I didn't order this check! ), 22:26:12 11/14/02 Thu
  - About 10 years ago, some Harvard economists figured that a 14% rate would be revenue neutral with respect to the federal income tax. So they could still fight over the same money. (NT) -- SurveyGuy, 22:29:37 11/14/02 Thu
Here's an interesting tidbit. Nothing may come of it, but wouldn't it be sweet to see a few seats migrate across the aisle? -- SurveyGuy, 17:31:04 11/12/02 Tue (maxtnt03-274.phlpa.fast.net/209.92.231.20)
Tuesday, Nov. 12, 2002
Pelosi Already Has House Democrats Ready to Join GOP

Republicans are now hoping more than ever that the minority party chooses leftist San Francisco Democrat Nancy Pelosi as its House leader. "Several Democrats have already put out feelers, trying to find out how they would be received if they came across the aisle - Pelosi being too liberal for their tastes," United Press International reported today.

The GOP would receive them very well indeed. Stay tuned for developments on this little bombshell.

Meanwhile, expect plantation mistress Pelosi to toss a few crumbs to moderate Rep. Harold Ford Jr., D-Tenn.

If, as expected, Ford loses the race for minority leader, "look for Pelosi to appoint him to some kind of position analogous to that which former GOP Reps. Bob Walker and Bill Paxon held while Newt Gingrich was speaker of the House," UPI said.

And when will bigots Harry Belafonte and Rep. John Conyers, who deem Secretary of State Colin Powell a "house slave," refer to Ford as a "House slave"? Note to Harold Ford Jr.: Why not think about joining those Democrats who bolt to the GOP?

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Go, Nancy, Go! Dreams can come true ...it can happen to you...if you're... (NT) -- JL :), 22:21:18 11/12/02 Tue
- SG - where did this come from? I want to pass it on to a friend and let them know source too. Thanks! (We were nervous about this gal getting a leg up, so to speak, but maybe it's not so bad after all?) (NT) -- Spock, 14:11:04 11/13/02 Wed
  - Here's the link. I didn't bother because it was so short and pretty much wishful thinking anyway. (NT) -- SG, 21:08:46 11/13/02 Wed
They say that it is not save to have a moose wandering around populated areas ... this opinion piece is very revealing. -- SurveyGuy, 21:24:27 11/08/02 Fri (maxtnt01-sdf-485.fast.net/209.92.61.231)

Chief Moose cost lives

Read this story of how this incompetent may have cost lives. Very revealing. Very scary.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- When I heard about Sheriff Moose I checked up on his background via his biography at the Montgomery County, MD, web page. He sounded like he has a very good background including his Ph. D. After the capture of the alleged snipers I find out that Muhammad was stopped a total of ten times during the shooting spree and not once did he become a suspect. It is outrageous. During Moose's time as leader of the investigation he and others kept suppressing the terrorist, Islam, foreigner, and people of color angle. (NT) -- William, 00:41:24 11/09/02 Sat
- They put their blinders on, ignored and suppressed witness statements, seeking only lonely white, trailer trash, gun nut, tattooed white boys driving a white van with ladder racks on the roof. They were wrong. (NT) -- William, 00:53:22 11/09/02 Sat
- Muhammad was stopped 10 times due to the car's tags coming up among witnesses and each time he was let go. Our law enforcement personnel and government officials have let us down numerous times even after the terrorist attack of 9/11. They have contributed to the murder of US citizens and ignored evidence such as the Oklahoma City terrorist connection and this sniper incident as well. (NT) -- William, 00:56:55 11/09/02 Sat
- After the two snipers were arrested did we see many publications mention that Muhammed was a Muslim? Many news outlets emphasized the fact that he was a Gulf War Army veteran and downplay his association with Islam and his sympathy with al Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks. Now that is tweaking the news! (NT) -- William, 01:04:14 11/09/02 Sat
- If our law enforcement agencies and news outlets continue to drop the ball in an effort to avoid offending all but whites and white males and if they don't start flying straight, we might see more collapses in protection, investigation, and suppression of law abiding citizens, and slanted, kid glove reporting of the facts. This can only be more encouraging and emboldening for terrorists. (NT) -- William, 01:05:17 11/09/02 Sat
- It must have practically KILLED Moose to finally arrest the criminals here. Maybe he and his wife were trying to tap into the vein where Clinton was the first black president....All I want to know is why "Justice" has started peeking over her blindfold.... (NT) -- Spock, 13:26:35 11/11/02 Mon
- You bogus strategists second guessing a trained police officer when it seems as if your only talent is to complain. When you are placed in a position of grave responsibility then you can pass judgment. Deciding each morning between creme filled or glazed doesn't count as important decision making. You know nothing of Chief Moose other than what you've heard in the media. You know nothing of policework. What an insult to police officers everywhere. They caught the damn snipers, didn't they? Isn't that enough? It's sickening. (NT) -- Rolf, 19:12:46 11/11/02 Mon
The wisdom of terrorists -- William, 16:40:38 11/09/02 Sat (cache-mtc-ah04.proxy.aol.com/64.12.96.169)

Bored and with not much to do to occupy their time a bunch of terrorists were aimlessly lurking around, and, by all rights, should have been arrested for loitering. Nevertheless one of the terrorists had a novel idea.

What did one terrorist say to the other terrorists?

"Hey! What do you say we all go into town and ... get bombed?"

What did his brave and willing friends say in response?

"Okay. You go first. Well join you later."

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- What did the suicide bomber's associates say about him? "He is DA BOMB!" (NT) -- Spock (not that I ever really *got* that expression to begin with, but if the shoe fits...), 12:56:38 11/11/02 Mon
  - "If the shoe fits ... light it up... while it is still on your foot? (NT) -- William, 15:10:47 11/11/02 Mon
    - ....and I thought athlete's foot burned.... (NT) -- Spock, 15:28:49 11/11/02 Mon
      - Gives a whole new meaning to the term "hot foot" With any luck if there is a next "shoe bomber" he/she will incinerate himself/herself leaving everyone else safe and unharmed to laugh hysterically at their stupidity. (NT) -- William, 15:24:01 11/12/02 Tue
        
        Do you suppose they'd burn up the dance floor? (NT) -- Spock, 11:56:58 11/13/02 Wed
On the liter side of life ... -- William, 13:34:52 11/07/02 Thu (cache-rl02.proxy.aol.com/152.163.189.98)

For a bit of fun

But don't tell your mom

why not visit Time to Bomb Saddam?

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Replies:
- Remember how, curiously, Iraqis are one demographic who are never represented on Star Trek.... (NT) -- Spock, 14:33:00 11/07/02 Thu
  - Spock, why no Iraqis? Did they include any Jedi Knights, ETs, "Alien". I wondered what would happen if the Jedi Knights, including Yoda, Obi Wan Kenobi, Luke Skywalker, and Darth Vader, teamed up with the Rebellion AND the Empirical forces AND The United Federation of Planets, including the Vulcans, Klingons, Romulans, and others, and fought the entire Borg forces. Throw in Superman, Hercules, Sampson, and Bruce Lee on the side of the United Federation of Planets, et al. (NT) -- William, 12:40:24 11/08/02 Fri
  - You might as well include James Bond, Walker Texas Ranger and his pal Trevett against the Borg as well if you choose.
    News update: Do remember Persis Kembata from the original "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" who was the bald women who was sucked up by Veeger? She was one time Miss World India before making that movie. She died already, peacefully. I am a bit miffed and almost shocked at that. I read it on the Indian news info. I don't know what was the cause of death. I believe she was ill. Everyone must die but it is still sad news for she was still young. (NT) -- William, 12:44:21 11/08/02 Fri
    - Well...I was referring back to a joke I posted a month or more ago, about Pres. Bush at a state dinner with Tariq Azziz, who asked him why there were never Iraqis on Star Trek, when every other human (& alien) race was, and Bush's answer was that ST takes place in the future! I don't recall Persis Kembata, but then I only saw STMP once. I'll have to scan thru the video sometime. Very sad indeed. (NT) -- Spock (live long and prosper...), 13:47:24 11/08/02 Fri
      - Spock, to see Star Trek the Motion Picture navigator Lt Alia, Persis Khambatta click here Click the subject title here to read her obituary. She died at the age of 49 on August 18, 1998. -- William, 17:17:54 11/08/02 Fri
      - Spock, who will win the battle with the combined forces listed above against the Borg? (NT) -- William, 17:39:18 11/08/02 Fri
        
        That's a tough call, considering half of them are already dead (a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away) and the other half haven't even been born yet (ST is still a few centuries away)....Let's throw in a TARDIS and see what happens. (NT) -- Spock, 11:32:34 11/12/02 Tue
        
        My money is on the combined forces. Superman by himself would likely destroy the Borg. Throw in Yoda, and you have an imposing force. Add Luke as Jedi Master along with Darth Vader and the Borg would be quite non-plused. Add the rest of the Jedi, Bruce Lee, James Bond, the Klingons, Vulcans, and others, and the Borg would be crispy fried. Mister Spock as single handeldy solved centuries worth of problems within an hour show numerous times. Throw in the TARDIS or the DALECS on either side and it would probably still come out the same. Can Dr Who play? (NT) -- William, 15:45:45 11/12/02 Tue
With friends like this, who needs enemies? E-mail Saddam Hussein with your best treason.... -- Spock, 11:47:44 11/12/02 Tue (user-vc8fm1s.biz.mindspring.com/216.135.216.60)

Hey, it's a living right? Free enterprise and all that?

Check this out, from wired.com: click here

Scary.

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]
It happened one day in France
World History - Part 3,415 -- William (Hysterian; Professor of Romantic Sciences - University of Hana, Maui, HI), 15:46:34 11/09/02 Sat (cache-mtc-ah04.proxy.aol.com/64.12.96.169)

Quasimodo hires a bell-ringer and warns him to get out of the way after swinging the bell clapper. If not, the clapper would strike him hard and injure him.

Sure enough, the novice bell-ringer forgets the important tip and the clapper strikes him hard in his face and knocks him on to the street below.

A crowd gathers around and Quasimodo rushes down to the street to see if his assistant is OK.

Someone in the crowd asks Quasimodo, "You know this chap?"

"No," Quasimodo replies, "but his face rings a bell."

[ Post a Reply to this Message ][Edit]

Report abuse to ptrabuse@surveyguy.com
Also visit the Philly Talk Radio Forum Brought to you by the Philly Talk

Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 2.94, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums^(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2008 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.

Human Shield Tour

The United States of America has gone mad

Sneering at Courage:

What will you really die from

By turmeric Fri Dec 6th, 2002 at 05:55:49 AM EST

What a responsible American Left would look like:

Why We Fight — An Anti-Idiotarian Manifesto

By turmeric
Fri Dec 6th, 2002 at 05:55:49 AM EST