As far as I am concerned, you have just lost all vestige of credibility with that last reply.

So what?

His 'belief', if you had read the previous posts, was stated that he ascribed to me a mindset or opinion or belief that I do not hold.

Whether you call it a belief or an opinion or an accusation it was not correct, ......his assumption was wrong....

. You are the only one lacking in reality..

As far as I am concerned, you have just lost all vestige of credibility with that last reply.

Like I said, you will just have to continue to have problems with that....

Just because I link to something does not mean I intend to pick through it and give my own views on every little part of whatever may be included in a link....

Read the link if you choose, form your own opinions about the content....

You can even accuse me of something I haven't stated, .... if it's incorrect, I will comment if I see it.

I rest my case on this one.

Seems your 'case' is premised on the lies we both know are present..... the only difference seems to be that I will deign to comment on the lies and you don't like hearing about it.

I don't need to infer a damn thing Paul. Unlike you I beleive that the people who frequent this board are capable of reading and comprehending what is posted here.

It is amazing that a man who specializes avoiding details of a story that do not fit his opinion should ask for the whole story.

Not so much that I asked for the 'whole story', as much as I recall many of those events and know that there was much not accounted for in your short encapsulations. I wanted to see where you were getting such abbreviated accounts.

I was in the military during both of these incidents.. Nothing was done..

I'm not argueing when I ask you if you think we should forget about the illegality of the war.

Not sure what you think we agree on. I'm of a firm belief we are in Iraq because of the kind of policies developed by the Project for a New American Century... Our strategic goals as presented to the public, match the policies put forth by that group and the aim goes far beyond just GW avenging some imagined shortcoming that GW thought HW had.

Ohhhhh I suppose that Clinton, Carter, Johnson, and Kennedy never lied, or is you only think Republician lie..

We know now that much of the blame for some events during the Carter years were not attributed to any action Carter may or may not have done, but instead, as suspected by some, were clearly actions of Carter that were thwarted by other agencies.

To answer your somewhat impertinent suggestion that I only pick on Republicans, I will repeat that I have no allegiance to any one party and comment on lies and injustices I percieve no matter who is behind it.

Since Bush and the Republicans are in the majority at the moment, most of the policy decisions and machinations coming from our government are a comment on their acts.
t may be a way to attempt to discredit what I comment on by alluding to some bias which I do not share, .....but that doesn't make it true.

How is that different?

Do we have much choice? Considering the number of people who have asked you to stop and yet you continue I think we will be stuck with your dribble forever...

Possible.....

I don't have a problem with your personal views Paul. I have a problem when you post something, and don't comment in opposition to it and then claim the comments are not your opinion.

Like I said, you will just have to continue to have problems with that....

Just because I link to something does not mean I intend to pick through it and give my own views on every little part of whatever may be included in a link....

....

....

....

....

I don't need to infer a damn thing Paul. Unlike you I beleive that the people who frequent this board are capable of reading and comprehending what is posted here.

Well, that's dismissive of reality.... there are any number of misunderstandings and misreadings on this board or any board all the time.... it goes with the character of trying to interpret written words with no other clues such as expressions or tone etc....

....

....

....

I beleive you posted an article from one of your "sources" complaining that more and more families of the fallen are "justifying" why their loved ones died.

In your opinion, ....if I link to an article I 'own' all the opinions of the author?

Weird logic there, cw.

I don't have a problem with your personal views Paul. I have a problem when you post something, and don't comment in opposition to it and then claim the comments are not your opinion.

I rest my case on this one.

I don't need to infer a damn thing Paul. Unlike you I beleive that the people who frequent this board are capable of reading and comprehending what is posted here.

I am reasonably sure, but does it matter since it was still multiple administration and two different political parties.

It is amazing that a man who specializes avoiding details of a story that do not fit his opinion should ask for the whole story.

I was in the military during both of these incidents.. Nothing was done..

Did I say it didn't justify the lies.. No... Even when people agree that the war is wrong you have to argue..

Ohhhhh I suppose that Clinton, Carter, Johnson, and Kennedy never lied, or is you only think Republician lie..

How is that different?

Do we have much choice? Considering the number of people who have asked you to stop and yet you continue I think we will be stuck with your dribble forever...

Nice back pedal there Paul. Keep your stories straight and your opinions in line. All someone has to do is read all of your post see that you shift sides faster then a speeding bullet.

I will be happy to discuss anything that is NEW and not the same rehashed argument. You have yet to post anything that anyone can or would consider NEW news, unless of course they have been off-world for the last two years.

You'll have a tough go of things, if that's your belief..... believe what you want, cw. But I have stated otherwise and I won't stop linking to ideas just because you're worried that all I link to might be my personal view....

You won't without comment on all the "lies" and "misconceptions" you perceive was in the State of the Union.

That there were lies in some past State of the Union addresses is not something that is disputed.... why wouldn't someone comment on the lies.

You can infer whatever you want..... that doesn't make it true.... (and there was no backpedalling.... you asked, I told you. Feel free to ask again sometime about something, and I will tell you what I think..... (whether you choose to accept it, ....isn't my problem)

Not real sure if this short encapsulation is a true recounting of all the history in Afghanistan or Iraq, cw..... are you sure of your timeline and when and who was in office when the Taliban emerged? ... or who may have supported Bin Laden when he was 'recruited' to assist us in making the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan difficult?

Now lets go back a wee bit further. The attack on the USS Stark by an Iraqi exocet was probably ordered by Hussian to provoke the US.

Got a source for this 'probability'? I'm not argueing against the possibility but these events do not happen in a vacuum..... what was the provocation from the other side? To understand these events, the whole story should be presented.

That was done during the Reagan administration and NOTHING was done.

So now GW Bush is finishing his Daddy's war. That is most likely the REAL reason we are in Iraq.

Is that what you think? That GW is just redoing something that his pop couldn't get right?

And if so, .... can that justify the lies and the possible illegality of the process leading to that conclusion?

So Paul who is at fault?? Seems to be that Carter should have done something back in the early 80's. Ohhhh wait he had his hands full trying to get the hostages released from the IRAN government.

Not what you infer at all, cw. I had read what you posted... it was not a quote... it was as I said.... you read what I said and you replied by exageration and sensationalizing what I said to mean something far different from what I actually posted..... (not the first time, either)

here is my statement.......

""It's obvious that the 'scarcity' of coverage is due to the control that the government is excerting on some of the major media owners.""

here is yours.....

""My, My our governemnet is now violating our First Admemndment with every single news agency in the world.. Imagine that.. Ohhh wait if they were then how come all this dribble you been spewing is OLD news...

Stay tuned..... the question of the legallity and justifications of our actions in Iraq will linger for years and years..... much more will not be known until the veil of secrecy is lifted, and many more Freedom of Information requests are granted, ......there won't be any way for you or I to make it stop, just because 'we' don't wish to discuss it anymore.....

Nice back pedal there Paul. Keep your stories straight and your opinions in line. All someone has to do is read all of your post see that you shift sides faster then a speeding bullet.

I will be happy to discuss anything that is NEW and not the same rehashed argument. You have yet to post anything that anyone can or would consider NEW news, unless of course they have been off-world for the last two years.

It did address the question because we are talking about Iraq and why we are there. If you think for one moment that Hussian does not influence the events that are transpiring in Iraq you really are blinded by your "HATE" of George Bush.

Not weird logic at all. You are posting links to these articles and NOT making comment in opposition to them. Once can conclude that you argee with them. Try again!!

You won't without comment on all the "lies" and "misconceptions" you perceive was in the State of the Union.

Yet another fine example of how you can back pedal when your argument is false. You posted the link and did not comment in opposition to contents of the link. One can therefore infur your are in agreement with the contents of said article.

Is that logic too tough for you Paul.

Ahhh yes lets see.. Clinton let the Taliban and Bin Laden run ramped in Afganistan, but to you that is all GW Bush's fault. Now pay attention close here Paul cause you are going to see me somewhat in agreement with you.. George Bush SENIOR and the government in power during the FIRST Gulf war had a chance to stop Hussian, but fell far short. Clinton did NOTHING.

Now lets go back a wee bit further. The attack on the USS Stark by an Iraqi exocet was probably ordered by Hussian to provoke the US.

That was done during the Reagan administration and NOTHING was done.

During the Carter Administration TWO Iraqi jets locked and loaded on TWO US F-14's. The Iraqi jets were taken out but that was all that was done.

So now GW Bush is finishing his Daddy's war. That is most likely the REAL reason we are in Iraq.

So Paul who is at fault?? Seems to be that Carter should have done something back in the early 80's. Ohhhh wait he had his hands full trying to get the hostages released from the IRAN government.

Pay attention real close... The intelligence community gave the political community what they were looking for. Yes the intelligence community cherry picked the information, which was once again Cherry Picked by the Political Community. The point is this news is TWO YEARS OLD.. It is not new.. It has been argued before.. Rehashed a hundred times and then brought to our attention one more time by you. Do you honestly beleive that there is ANYONE in the US that does nto beleive that the reasons we were told we are in IRAQ were not false? MOVE ON to other more up to date topics...

Again a good back pedal Paul.. Scroll down I quoted you word for word..

Unlike you Paul the Major Networks know when a story has been beat to death..

Everyone of your posts are concentric around one theme - The Bush Administration...

Yes, .....well, .....if one is to discuss current American policies, .....one is going to have to refer to the Bush administration...... so?

Maybe, it's just a case of you wishing not to discuss such.....

Saddam Hussian is a good start...

Doesn't address the question, cw.... the question was referring to who is their oppressor now and who you suggest they align themselves with to 'fight' it?

I beleive you posted an article from one of your "sources" complaining that more and more families of the fallen are "justifying" why their loved ones died.

In your opinion, ....if I link to an article I 'own' all the opinions of the author?

Weird logic there, cw.

The author's comments are used as a preface to the rest of his article... it doesn't mean I necessarily subscribe to everything or anything he says. (or is that concept too difficult for you to grasp?)

I could link to the State of the Union address..... and according to your logic, I would then be demonstrating that I believed and supported every speechwriter's opinion in that document.....

That's pretty funny, you wanting to ascribe other's opinions entirely to me just because I happen to link to them.

(as to the author's question or belief..... we know some of the families of the fallen do have concerns about whether their loved one's sacrifice will be judged to be 'justified'.... by stating that, their questions don't ask if their loved one's actions were dishonorable, but it does speak to the question of whether or not the motives of men who may have promoted an unjust war will be judged as 'justified' or not..... that's something we all might consider. But considering that question, does not do dishonor to those who follow orders and considering that question does not mean I suggest dishonor for those who follow orders.)

If you want all the history..

I know the history, ...like I said.... the policy was developed and commited to by one administration and 'handed' to the next to deal with as they could....

Kind of like 'creating' a monster that comes back to haunt successive administrations, often people lose sight of when and who 'created' the monster and it's creation is often miscredited to those successive administrations...

IMisreported may have been a wrong word to use here considering your fondness of the Press. In this case misreported meant from the so-called collectors of the data reported to the decision makers..

Yep as a matter of fact you did say that. You seem to be forgetting your own posts again Paul.

Read it again, cw.... I did not say that. I said some of the major media were unwilling, inferring that pressure from the administration or support for the administration may be the reason some were not covering the news....

Your assessment was that I said all of the media all over the world were prevented from carrying the news..... (which wouldn't make any sense anyway, because I was linking to those organisations which were not unwilling to air the story, CNN covered the story, but some major networks have yet to report on it at all...)

Yep as a matter of fact you did say that. You seem to be forgetting your own posts again Paul.

Everyone of your posts are concentric around one theme - The Bush Administration...

Saddam Hussian is a good start...

I beleive you posted an article from one of your "sources" complaining that more and more families of the fallen are "justifying" why their loved ones died.

If you want all the history..

IMisreported may have been a wrong word to use here considering your fondness of the Press. In this case misreported meant from the so-called collectors of the data reported to the decision makers..

Yep as a matter of fact you did say that. You seem to be forgetting your own posts again Paul.

The real irony is your inability to realize that your irony may be lost on people whose native language is not English...

Celtic Wolf, even my native language is not English, my sense for numbers is very good!


Paul Zimmerman: Credit: 11, RAC: 0, Posts: 1151

Celtic Wolf: Credit: 56,919, RAC: 290, Posts: 1209

Fuzzy Hollynoodles (myself!):Credit: 4,135, RAC: 68, Posts: 796



Timestamp: 19 May 2005 17:46:02 UTC

"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me

[
Nothing new there..... or original, for that matter..... lot's of people have been expressing those thoughts for quite some time. What's funny is how many people never seem to remember that when they try to make arguments which are unrelated.

Ohhhhh wait according to you GW is the only one that runs our government.

On the contrary, I've posted much information which negates your assertion.... You won't find your accusation is true... (but you have not much care for representing the truth, ... your purpose is to attempt to malign any way you can..)

POLITICIAN = LIAR. Something you should know personally I beleive.

Ah, yes.... a new word.. (I know what you meant to spell, and your point was to compare me to a liar...... another of your attempts to discredit... funny how often what you complain about is what you practice....)

WOW you admited that we can't convince you.

Convince me of what? That we are in Iraq to bring them freedom? That we are in Iraq to root out the perpetrators of 9/11? That we are taking our time to get Iraq 'right'?

What's the surprise? None of that is why we went into Iraq.

Freedom comes from with-in by those capable of fighting their oppressers. When oppressors are the very military who is supposed to defend your freedom then it might just take outside help. Our own Revolution would not have been won if not for the help of the French and one well know Prussian.


So, pick the oppressors in this invasion and occupation..... who should help Iraq gain their freedom from those who are oppressing them now?

Nothing cheap about it.

Again, practicing that which you preach others shouldn't do....

I willnot dishonor those that died for doing a job that may or may not be justified in the eyes of everyone.

Are you suggesting that I've said the people who are taking orders are to be dishonored?

Sounds like you're making another of your false accusations... true to form again, cw.

I have to wonder if your current level of protests were at the same level during Vietnam, or is just Republician Wars you protest?

It is a reasonable assumption that if some actions were misreported then other would be there as well.

Not talking about misreporting.... I was referring to cooked up falsehoods which were fed to the media and when it was revealed as such, the administration denied it. As they still are. There is still no accountablility. And still no admission of the lies..... (not that I expect this bunch to start being accountable for their deceptions now, they've been schooled in it for so long now, I don't think they know how to tell the truth.

I never said we don't need to be notified I said we don't need to be reminded day after day, hour after hour like you have been doing month after month. Even when we ask you to give it a rest you continue..

My, My our governemnet is now violating our First Admemndment with every single news agency in the world.. Imagine that.. Ohhh wait if they were then how come all this dribble you been spewing is OLD news...

Oh, right..... the old Seti/Boinc division argument again.....

You're just going to have to live with that, cw. I've already addressed it..... You can whine as long as you want about what you think on that matter..... it doesn't phase me.... but maybe you can get some points with your playmates by repeating it again.

WOW I do beleive we have finally seen an ORIGINAL thought here.

Ohhhhh wait according to you GW is the only one that runs our government.

POLICITIAN = LIAR. Something you should know personally I beleive.

WOW you admited that we can't convince you.

Freedom comes from with-in by those capable of fighting their oppressers. When oppressors are the very military who is supposed to defend your freedom then it might just take outside help. Our own Revolution would not have been won if not for the help of the French and one well know Prussian.

Nothing cheap about it.

I willnot dishonor those that died for doing a job that may or may not be justified in the eyes of everyone.

I have to wonder if your current level of protests were at the same level during Vietnam, or is just Republician Wars you protest?

It is a reasonable assumption that if some actions were misreported then other would be there as well.

It was the British Government that first reported well over a year ago the the information supplied to them by the CIA was full of wholes.

I never said we don't need to be notified I said we don't need to be reminded day after day, hour after hour like you have been doing month after month. Even when we ask you to give it a rest you continue..

My, My our governemnet is now violating our First Admemndment with every single news agency in the world.. Imagine that.. Ohhh wait if they were then how come all this dribble you been spewing is OLD news...

Just to point you the the right direction Paul.. The quote is their to remind you that you should stop taking up space on a board that you are not giving too..

Odd, the memo that caused the whole revival of the question was only revealed May 1, 2005.....Your own words "REVIVAL OF THE QUESTION" The Question is still OLD NEWS[/pre]

No, you don't 'get the point'...... The point is that Bush very likely acted outside of the rule of law and he lied to boot.

Whether I 'like' war or not doesn't matter..... and we all have to endure whatever Bush may attempt in the duration of his 'term'.

Yes that would be the point we have got for the last several MONTHS


[quote]
Saudi terrorists are oddly not mentioned much these days..... I'm not sure your comparison to interrogation atrocities or as you put it, interrogation with prejudice, is much related to stopping another 9/11.... Seems to me that the likely result of our misguided foreign policies and just plain illegal and unethical conduct is to generate more 'blowback' which will result in not making us any safer but making the world a more dangerous place for us and for many others...
[/quote]

[pre]WOW I do beleive we have finally seen an ORIGINAL thought here

You forget.... Bush never wanted elections in Iraq.... Sistani forced his hand. Do you not remember our CIA puppet Allawi? Have you been uninformed about election tampering and the later divvying up of political seats? Does the new oil minister's name ring a bell?

As to what our government is doing in Iraq now, your inference about what they are taking the time to do this time is, in my opinion, hopeful pie in the sky dreaming.... nice to think that may be the case, but I wouldn't hold my breath. I see no evidence of this administration doing anything near what they may claim to be doing.... too many lies have already been uncovered. (you say you know all about them)

Lincoln Didn't want to free the slaves, but his hand was forced.  That would be our government at work.. Ohhhhh wait according to you GW is the only one that runs our government.

I didn't say I knew ALL the lies. I said I already knew everything you post over and over and over again.  POLICITIAN = LIAR. Something you should know personally I beleive.

Freedom does not come easy or cheap to places that have been under the thumb of dictators like Sadam. It it not won cheap from people like Bin Laden. His beliefs are as rock solid as yours. Like you he will not listen to saner minds.

You bet, cw.... nice touch, comparing me to Osama....

If you see what I said a total compasion to Bin Laden that is your choice. I simply said he will not listen to saner minds. Some we all know is one of your traits.

Freedom comes from within, freedom is not forced on people at the point of a gun or at the bomb bay doors of a plane. Freedom in the Middle East is likely to result in a fudamentalist theocracy and you can't convince me that is the aim of our policies there.
[/quote

WOW you admited that we can't convince you. We know that already too, but it's good to see another ORIGINAL thought. There is hope for you yet.

Freedom comes from with-in by those capable of fighting their oppressers. When oppressors are the very military who is supposed to defend your freedom then it might just take outside help. Our own Revolution would not have been won if not for the help of the French and one well know Prussian.

I have to wonder if you beleive that people should die under the rule of people like Bin Laden, the Taliban or Sadam? What on earth would you have to bitch about? Do the lost lives of so many mean nothing to you? Do you feel the lives of those that have already died defending the lives of all of those that would have died have been for nothing?

Ah, another attempt at a cheap shot.... Our country used to fight against tyranny, now we export and support tyranny.

Nothing cheap about it.

Do the lost lives of our own blunders mean nothing to you? Does the empty rhetoric which results in continued genocide mean nothing to you?

( I expect it does mean something to you, ... I'm just pointing out how disingenuous it is of you to ask such loaded questions as you do. Making the inferences you do is nothing but more cheap shots...

All loss of life saddens my heart, but I also know that I willnot dishonor those that died for doing a job that may or may not be justified in the eyes of everyone.  

I have to wonder if your current level of protests were at the same level during Vietnam, or is just Republician Wars you protest?

[quote>We have heard from some folks all along that some actions were reported and denied. What's new is another source, the British government, which does not refute the information, while our own administration still claims it's all a lie. What's new is that our administration can't discredit and dismiss the British government.

It is a reasonable assumption that if some actions were misreported then other would be there as well.

It was the British Government that first reported well over a year ago the the information supplied to them by the CIA was full of wholes. 

While some may not wish to be reminded of the spurious means to an unjust war, if we are to be a country which recognizes the 'rule of law' we have to confront and deal with unlawful acts..... we can't wish them away just because we are unhappy we are responsible for them. Accountability must be ascertained.

I never said we don't need to be notified I said we don't need to be reminded day after day, hour after hour like you have been doing month after month.  Even when we ask you to give it a rest you continue..

It's obvious that the 'scarcity' of coverage is due to the control that the government is excerting on some of the major media owners.

 My, My our governemnet is now violating our First Admemndment with every single news agency in the world..  Imagine that..  Ohhh wait if they were then how come all this dribble you been spewing is OLD news...

What values you wish to forfeit are your own decisions ...... I'll stick to the values I've been led to believe we are supposed to standing for. I see the American values we lost.....

Just to point you the the right direction Paul.. The quote is their to remind you that you should stop taking up space on a board that you are not giving too..

Just one of the few, of the recent articles written about the newly discovered British secret memo is this well thought out treatise from Juan Cole.

Fair points out the timeline and scarcity of coverage of the story.

Not a dayum thing in either acticle that I had not heard months ago..

We get your point Paul.. You don't like war, even though freedom should defended. You don't like Bush even though you have to endure him for 3 and half more years.

I wonder if the spirits of the 3,500 people whose lives were snuffed out because of terrorists give a rats ass if a few dozen people are being interrogated with prejudice. I certainly don't if it will stop another slaughter like 9/11 (no matter where in the world it occurs).

Every time America has stepped in to oust a foreign power we have managed to put in someone far worse. This time our government is taking the time to ensure that the "far worse" scenario does not happen, and you bitch.

Freedom does not come easy or cheap to places that have been under the thumb of dictators like Sadam. It it not won cheap from people like Bin Laden. His beliefs are as rock solid as yours. Like you he will not listen to saner minds.

I have to wonder if you beleive that people should die under the rule of people like Bin Laden, the Taliban or Sadam? What on earth would you have to bitch about? Do the lost lives of so many mean nothing to you? Do you feel the lives of those that have already died defending the lives of all of those that would have died have been for nothing?

We have known for months that the sources used to justify the actions in Iraq were not true. Why is this new news to you and your so-called sources?

One final thought: Maybe the scarcity of coverage was because the REAL journalist realise that nobody likes to be reminded of the true cost of Freedom everyday and every hour.

"The First Rule of Alchemy: For everything taken a thing of equal value should be given".. It applies to real life to0, to bad you don't or won't see that.