> I totally agree!
>
> Je suis d´accord (that´s the correct spelling?)

C'est parfait.

Italians Oppose Marriage, Adoption for Gays

Abortion debate flares in Australia

Air Force Studying Massive 30,000 Pound Bomb

HARVARD STUDY: POVERTY DOES NOT BREED TERRORISM

America the Beautiful revised


Bush's War Song

---

Account frozen...

Err, the Vietnam war was as long under Nixon as it was under "liberals." If anything, it was the hawkish Repukes screeching in the Dems ears "WE HAVE TO STAY THE COURSE" ---- sound familiar?

PS -- and isn't the war in Iraq just ideological reasons? I mean WMDs and "war on terror" -- isn't that just ideology over facts & truth?

Here's an interesting layout of the old free/slave territories/states and how they voted in '04:

http://bigpicture.typepad.com/writing/2004/11/voting_free_ves.html


Marry a Canadian to get out of Dumb AmeriKKKa:

http://www.marryanamerican.ca/

> Here's an interesting layout of the old free/slave territories/states and how
> they voted in '04:
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/writing/2004/11/voting_free_ves.html

It speaks by itself itself...

> Marry a Canadian to get out of Dumb AmeriKKKa:
http://www.marryanamerican.ca/

I am already married, but otherwise I would have said yes to Jessica
anytime ! Oups ! I have just made me an enemy, sorry Misfit.

GBW has set up quite an operation down at Gitmo
I've been there a few times
It's hot and there's alot of mosquitos.

Seems a federal judge has put the kabash on the military tribunals that would serve out justice to the detainees.

From todays NY Times Online

Listen to this at NPR:

Top 10 Signs You Might Not Get a Fair Trial at Gitmo

Believe it or not, for awhile I was of the mindset "who cares about Gitmo, those Taliban/AlQaeda guys deserve it." My liberalism means not making apologies and excuses for any sort of gay-bashing, misogynist religious screed, whether it's Southern Baptists or Islamic fundamentalists. However, it does seem that there is some weird sh*t going on at Gitmo.

---

Finally we're coming around to Geneva (yay!) But I don't think that the President "overstepped his bounds" by setting up either Guantánamo or the trials. It comes down to the definition of "enemy", I guess...

Why are the Taliban/Al-Qaeda being tried in military court if Sheik Omar Abel Rahman and his associates were tried in civilian courts for the WTC/93 bombing?

> Believe it or not, for awhile I was of the mindset "who cares about Gitmo,
> those Taliban/AlQaeda guys deserve it." My liberalism means not making
> apologies and excuses for any sort of gay-bashing, misogynist religious
> screed, whether it's Southern Baptists or Islamic fundamentalists. However,
> it does seem that there is some weird sh*t going on at Gitmo.
>

For sure there are some weird sh*t going on at Gitmo. I am wondering on
what criminal criteria or basis they have been put there. I mean are they
all linked to AQ or 9/11 ? There must be half of them that doesn't belong
there. I have the feeling they just took the first Taliban (or look alike)
men they have faced and took them to Gitmo. Who knows he might be a friend
or have informations about Bin Laden ? We will see after days of torture
and maltreatment if he talks...This son of a bitch !

The truth will come out one day, as always.

the truth will come out, but there is a very low probability anymore that Americans will believe it or care. I'd rather err on the side of caution & restraint as the Europeans do than jump in with guns blazing, or just be apathetic as the US.

---

Since 9-11 there's been a sea change for sure. It looks like the initial hysteria that followed the attack is cooling off. So much of the conduct of the aftermath has been shifting regarding who's the real enemy of the US that it's hard to tell the white hats from the black hats. Immediately following the attack, Sikhs working at convienience stores were being shot at through the windows by patriots in pickups. Recently, an Afgani dentist from New Jersey was released from Gitmo after almost 3 years- he had been seized in NY and rushed off to the camp never charged with any wrongdoing and never having a sit-down with a legal official. Maybe they have some genuine bad-asses locked up down there and maybe they dont. People used to be scared of the IRS but the fear factor they engender es nada compared to the swift sword carried by Homeland Securitys' lockdown division.
I think it's way over the line to run Camp Zero as a holding ground for suspected criminals whose legal status (none of the above) entitles them incarceration for indeterminate time for indeterminate crimes for indeterminate reasons.

Hear most recent NPR coverage of judges ruling

> Err, the Vietnam war was as long under Nixon as it was under "liberals." If
> anything, it was the hawkish Repukes screeching in the Dems ears "WE HAVE TO
> STAY THE COURSE" ---- sound familiar?
>
> PS -- and isn't the war in Iraq just ideological reasons? I mean WMDs and
> "war on terror" -- isn't that just ideology over facts & truth?
>

Err, the Vietnam war was as long under Nixon as it was under "liberals", because it was handled so badly (Oh! We don't want to offend any poor downtrodden Viet Cong Terrorists and sad Uncle Ho!), that it took years to end it. And what kind of simpleminded response is that? JFK and LBJ got us involved and expanded our involvement, respectively (lying to Congress about the Gulf of Tonkien incident to justify the war, by the way), while Nixon and Ford ended it, and this means they were equivalent? Boy, you are way off base on that. But, it seems you often are.

Your definition of ideology must be from some other planet: communism and capitalism are ideologies, WWII is not an ideology (let me explain why I said "WWII" rather than the "war on terror": because your warped brain, which allows you to say anything to make some unsupportable point, has a better chance of understanding a distant historical example than a current one that raises your anger beyond reason).

---

OK, all of you conspiracy theorists who think the Saudis and other oil producing companies are such friends of the Bush family, didn't you say that they were going to lower oil prices to get Bush re-elected? Now, well after the election, we are seeing some of the lowest prices in months (which, despite the backward logic some of you are capable of, means lower profits for oil producers). While in the run-up to the election we saw some of the highest oil prices.

---

Our grand grand childrenS will be laughing (well not relly) at us
so much when they will be no longer fighting for oil but for fresh
water...I have already start a familly reserve. I put 1 gallon every
day in my backyard tank, my grand grand childrens will be as rich
as cresus...

> Okay, a theory - not that I am stating that I espouse it.
>
> Higher oil prices means less consuption and thereby less profits, in the
> long-term, for oil producers.
>
> Lowered oil prices means increased comsumption and thereby increased,
> sustainable, long-term profits for oil producers.
>
> Extremely lowered oil prices means a short-term bonanza for consumers,
> severely decreased profits for oil producers, an oil shortage resulting in
> escalating increases in prices.
>

You may be right, but I think you are just talking about "supply and demand".

---

In '76 I worked a winter at a Phillips 76 gas pump- the price was $.76 per gallon.
We'd say it'll NEVER top a buck a gallon- imPOSSible.
Future generations will be paying $76.00 and saying it'll NEVER get to a C-note.
We're certainly smart enough already to develop an alternate.
Is anybody listening? It's getting where I cant afford to drive...cc

> In '76 I worked a winter at a Phillips 76 gas pump- the price was $.76 per
> gallon.
> We'd say it'll NEVER top a buck a gallon- imPOSSible.
> Future generations will be paying $76.00 and saying it'll NEVER get to a
> C-note.
> We're certainly smart enough already to develop an alternate.
> Is anybody listening? It's getting where I cant afford to drive...cc
>

I vote for fuel cells.

---

> OK, all of you conspiracy theorists who think the Saudis and other oil
> producing companies are such friends of the Bush family, didn't you say that
> they were going to lower oil prices to get Bush re-elected? Now, well after
> the election, we are seeing some of the lowest prices in months (which,
> despite the backward logic some of you are capable of, means lower
> profits for oil producers). While in the run-up to the election we saw some
> of the highest oil prices.

Okay, just another theory.

The oil price was high because of the unsure Irak situation and future
during the election. Now that Bush got a second term and started to
regain control of the situation by killing all the insurgents, Funny
how it happen just after election, the oil business are getting more
confident over the amount of oil that will come from Irak in a near future.
Bush kill the new "democracy" regime opponents, arrange election so the
new president of Irak is a good friend of him, oil is flowing like never
before, and everybody is happy.

Supply and demand