Discussion:
Bush: Countdown to his Arrest
(too old to reply)
unknown
2006-01-28 01:02:01 UTC
Permalink
Majority Believe White House Should Release Abramoff Records

By Richard Morin

Washington Post Staff Writer

Friday, January 27, 2006; 10:27 AM

A strong bipartisan majority of the public believes President Bush should
disclose all contacts between disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff and White
House staffers despite administration claims that media requests for details
about those contacts amount to a "fishing expedition," according to a new
Washington Post-ABC News poll.

The survey found that three in four--76 percent--of all Americans said Bush
should disclose contacts between aides and Abramoff while 18 percent
disagreed. Two in three Republicans joined with eight in 10 Democrats and
political independents in favoring disclosure, according to the poll.

At a Thursday news conference, the president declined to discuss those
meetings but said federal investigators are "welcome" to look into them if
they suspect wrongdoing. Last week, Bush press secretary Scott McClellan,
pressured by reporters to explain Abramoff's contacts with the Bush
administration, said, "We're not going to engage in a fishing expedition."

Earlier this month, Abramoff pleaded guilty to felony conspiracy and fraud
charges. A plea agreement said Abramoff bribed public officials, including a
member of Congress.

Questions about White House contact with Abramoff came as special prosecutor
Patrick Fitzgerald continues an unrelated investigation to determine who
leaked the name of an undercover CIA operative to reporters. That
investigation already has produced charges against I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby
, former top aide to Vice President Cheney. Libby is accused of lying to FBI
agents and a federal grand jury.

The twin scandals have done little to help the battered public image of the
Bush White House and Congress. The new poll found that 56 percent of the
public disapproved of the way that Bush is handling ethics in government, up
7 percentage points in the past five weeks. An equally large majority say
the type of wrongdoing admitted by Abramoff is "widespread" in Washington.

Abramoff has agreed to cooperate with federal investigators whose targets
reportedly include several members of Congress as well as ranking officials
within the executive branch.

In Congress, both parties have scrambled to put together lobbying reform
packages as the November midterm elections loom on the horizon.

But Americans are divided over whether Congress is serious about passing
reform legislation. About half--51 percent--of those surveyed said they
doubted Congress would pass tough new lobbying restrictions in the coming
year while 46 percent said it was likely.

A total of 1,002 randomly selected adults were interviewed nationally Jan.
23-26 for this telephone survey. The margin of sampling error for the
overall results is plus or minus 3 percentage points.
--
Relpo Miraculous

9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of
ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large
corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The
ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure
military production (in developed states), but also as an additional
means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often
pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of
interests, especially in the repression of have-not citizens."
Beeber
2006-01-28 02:29:29 UTC
Permalink
Relpo's mother is quoted as questioning the brown substance Relpo brought
home for breakfast, "What is this crap and why does it look like pudding?"

"It is crap, moma. I eat it every day." I'm a faggot and I deserve extra
rights above and beyond those dictated in the Constitution. Because I eat
crap I'm a special person."
Organfreak
2006-01-28 02:40:31 UTC
Permalink
On or about Fri, 27 Jan 2006 20:29:29 -0600, someone purporting to be
Post by Beeber
Relpo's mother is quoted as questioning the brown substance Relpo brought
home for breakfast, "What is this crap and why does it look like pudding?"
"It is crap, moma. I eat it every day." I'm a faggot and I deserve extra
rights above and beyond those dictated in the Constitution. Because I eat
crap I'm a special person."
You make me sick to my stomach. I'm going to do as I said I would: I'm
taking this post of yours and some others, and sending them to parties
you do business with. Fair enough?
Beeber
2006-01-28 02:44:54 UTC
Permalink
And I will do the same with you.
unknown
2006-01-28 06:22:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beeber
And I will do the same with you.
Liberals are all unemployed. We need another stragedy.
--
In His Name...and His Name is Bush,
Barry Whitmen
http://barrysballbustinbushblog.blogspot.com/
Glennbo
2006-01-28 14:29:21 UTC
Permalink
In news:***@text.giganews.com the killer robot Barry
Whitmen <> grabbed the controls of the spaceship cakewalk.coffeehouse and
pressed these buttons...
Post by unknown
Liberals are all unemployed.
There is an exiting opening waiting for you in proctology!
--
Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to Reply by email
________ ____
/ ____/ /__ ____ ____ / __ )____
/ / __/ / _ \/ __ \/ __ \/ __ / __ \
/ /_/ / / __/ / / / / / / /_/ / /_/ /
\____/_/\___/_/ /_/_/ /_/_____/\____/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Glennbo http://www.soundclick.com/glennbo
Non-Linear Sound http://www.soundclick.com/jambits
Hear My Music http://www.soundclick.com/ThePseudonyms
Glennbo
2006-01-28 05:59:10 UTC
Permalink
In news:***@4ax.com the killer robot
Organfreak <***@plinkety.plunk> grabbed the controls of the spaceship
cakewalk.coffeehouse and pressed these buttons...
Post by Organfreak
You make me sick to my stomach.
You made crap leak past my filter.
--
Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to Reply by email
________ ____
/ ____/ /__ ____ ____ / __ )____
/ / __/ / _ \/ __ \/ __ \/ __ / __ \
/ /_/ / / __/ / / / / / / /_/ / /_/ /
\____/_/\___/_/ /_/_/ /_/_____/\____/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Glennbo http://www.soundclick.com/glennbo
Non-Linear Sound http://www.soundclick.com/jambits
Hear My Music http://www.soundclick.com/ThePseudonyms
unknown
2006-01-28 06:21:09 UTC
Permalink
We must prevent liberals from overthrowing our leader.
--
In His Name...and His Name is Bush,
Barry Whitmen
http://barrysballbustinbushblog.blogspot.com/
K-Bob
2006-01-29 22:50:56 UTC
Permalink
Countdown to his Blog Spam
The Cisneros case isn't closed

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-
review/opinion/columnists/datelinedc/print_417927.html

Excerpt:

...

During their time in the White House and Department of Justice, the
veritable "Gang of Three" -- Bill and Hillary Clinton and Janet Reno --
organized and were a part of a successful cabal that enabled a member of
the Clinton Cabinet, Henry Cisneros, to evade justice.

Cisneros was able to parley 18 felony counts into a single "guilty" plea to
a misdemeanor on a charge of lying to the FBI. For this, he was convicted
and paid a $10,000 fine. The lies were about his income, his IRS tax
filings and his adulterous relationship over a number of years with Linda
Miller, who received huge and regular payments from him. On Bill Clinton's
last day in office, Cisneros received a presidential pardon.

...
unknown
2006-01-29 23:17:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by K-Bob
Countdown to his Blog Spam
The Cisneros case isn't closed
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-
review/opinion/columnists/datelinedc/print_417927.html
...
During their time in the White House and Department of Justice, the
veritable "Gang of Three" -- Bill and Hillary Clinton and Janet Reno --
organized and were a part of a successful cabal that enabled a member of
the Clinton Cabinet, Henry Cisneros, to evade justice.
Cisneros was able to parley 18 felony counts into a single "guilty" plea to
a misdemeanor on a charge of lying to the FBI. For this, he was convicted
and paid a $10,000 fine. The lies were about his income, his IRS tax
filings and his adulterous relationship over a number of years with Linda
Miller, who received huge and regular payments from him. On Bill Clinton's
last day in office, Cisneros received a presidential pardon.
The same fate will befall your criminal heros in the Bush Administration, so
you should be pretty happy.

I know nothing about Cisneros so I can't comment, but I've heard it was just
another religious right witch hunt. I don't doubt it for an instant.
--
Relpo Miraculous

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the
prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins,
the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the
regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always
obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity
were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually
coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on
xenophobia."

From: Fascism Anyone? by Lawrence W. Britt
Free Inquiry magazine, Spring 2003
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4113.htm
K-Bob
2006-01-29 22:51:02 UTC
Permalink
Countdown to his Blog Spam
http://www.redstate.com/story/2006/1/28/225229/236

Biden Silent on Reid Stepping Down
By: Nick Danger · Section: News

“That's a big problem.”
— Howard Dean

Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) failed today to address rumors that Nevada
Senator Harry Reid will step down next month as Senate Minority Leader. Reid
has been stung by revelations that his political action committee (PAC)
accepted more than $60,000 in contributions from Indian tribes linked to
convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Appearing on CNN's Late Edition, Biden
avoided discussing either the Reid situation or any upcoming changes in
Senate Democratic leadership.

More below...
Print This Story
Jan 29th, 2006: 16:05:42

Reid is no stranger to scandal, having been the subject of a 1979 Justice
Department probe into allegations that Reid — then Nevada Gaming Commission
chairman — had received bribes through mob lawyer Oscar Goodman and Tropicana
attorney Jay H. Brown. The probe officially cleared Reid, but he subsequently
received numerous contributions from gambling industry figures, including
Brown.

Some Democrats are worried that Reid's continued presence in the Senate
leadership undermines Democratic hopes of scoring significant gains this
November.

Earlier this month, Reid described Oscar Goodman — now Mayor of Las Vegas —
as "a real vote-getter" who would be "a very, very strong candidate" if he
entered the race for the Senate seat held by Republican John Ensign. "I'm
happy to give him any advice or counsel that he needs or wants," Reid told
the Las Vegas Sun. "I've known him for many, many years and will have to wait
and see what he decides to do." Before becoming mayor in 1999, Goodman was a
defense attorney whose mob clients included Anthony "Tony the Ant" Spilotro.

"Reid is going around the country talking about a 'Republican scandal' —
about Republicans accepting one- and two-thousand dollar contributions from
Jack Abramoff, when his own PAC took in $60,000," said one Republican
strategist. "If this is what the Democrats call a 'Culture of Corruption,' it
ought to be an interesting discussion."

Some Democrats are also upset that Reid capitulated on President Bush's
nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. "Everyone knows there
are not enough votes to support a filibuster," Reid told reporters, even as
Senator John Kerry (D-MA) and others worked to drum up support for such an
effort. Reid later stated he would support a filibuster, but only as a sort
of protest vote. "I think it is an opportunity for people to express their
opinion as to what a bad choice (Alito) was," Reid said.

Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean, appearing on Fox News
Sunday, made no announcements concerning Reid's status, but did comment on
the growing controversy.

Moderator Chris Wallace asked Dean, "if we find that there were some
Democrats who wrote letters on behalf of some of the Indian tribes that
Abramoff represented, then what do you say, sir?"
Without mentioning Reid by name, Dean replied, "That's a big problem. And
those Democrats are in trouble. And they should be in trouble."
unknown
2006-01-29 23:26:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by K-Bob
Reid is no stranger to scandal, having been the subject of a 1979 Justice
Department probe
Reid is no stranger to scandal, having been the subject of a 1979 Justice
Department probe
Can;t you come up with something more current?

ROFLMAO!

Reid isn't going anywhere. Your article is Bush-catapulted media controlled
fascist propaganda spin.

LOL!

What else you got? ...you morally bankrupt Bush supporting co-conspirators are
all in a panic and it's simply breathtaking to watch you all flap your limbs
and you circle down the drain.
--
Relpo Miraculous

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.
Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression
associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and
academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and
the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically
unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or
expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed.
To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national
interest or they had no right to exist."

From: Fascism Anyone? by Lawrence W. Britt
Free Inquiry magazine, Spring 2003
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4113.htm
K-Bob
2006-01-29 23:44:44 UTC
Permalink
®£(þø MŠrª¢ü¶øµ§ © <> could not resist divulging personally embarrassing
Post by unknown
What else you got? ...you morally bankrupt Bush supporting
co-conspirators are all in a panic and it's simply breathtaking to watch
you all flap your limbs and you circle down the drain.
Fuck, I didn't read the article. Who cares? I don't read the bullshit you
post either. Why not engage in dialogue?

--

K-Bob
unknown
2006-01-29 23:59:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by K-Bob
Fuck, I didn't read the article. Who cares? I don't read the bullshit you
post either. Why not engage in dialogue?
So it's all bullshit? OK. I can go along with that.

Is that what you mean?
--
Relpo Miraculous

6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media
were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to
stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power
to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing
and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and
implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically
compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in
keeping the general public unaware of the regimes excesses."

From: Fascism Anyone? by Lawrence W. Britt
Free Inquiry magazine, Spring 2003
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4113.htm
K-Bob
2006-01-30 00:49:59 UTC
Permalink
®£(þø MŠrª¢ü¶øµ§ © <> could not resist divulging personally embarrassing
Post by unknown
So it's all bullshit? OK. I can go along with that.
Is that what you mean?
While that can be true in some sense, no it is not what I mean.

--

K-Bob
Organfreak
2006-01-30 00:02:44 UTC
Permalink
On or about Sun, 29 Jan 2006 17:44:44 -0600, someone purporting to be
®£(þø M¦rª¢ü¶øµ§ © <> could not resist divulging personally embarrassing
Post by unknown
What else you got? ...you morally bankrupt Bush supporting
co-conspirators are all in a panic and it's simply breathtaking to watch
you all flap your limbs and you circle down the drain.
Fuck, I didn't read the article. Who cares? I don't read the bullshit you
post either. Why not engage in dialogue?
I read the stuff he posts. Much of it is compelling, to me. I assume
that if Richie posts it, he endorses what it says. Don't shoot the
messenger; there are always more.
unknown
2006-01-30 00:19:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Organfreak
On or about Sun, 29 Jan 2006 17:44:44 -0600, someone purporting to be
Post by K-Bob
®£(þø MŠrª¢ü¶øµ§ © <> could not resist divulging personally embarrassing
Post by unknown
What else you got? ...you morally bankrupt Bush supporting
co-conspirators are all in a panic and it's simply breathtaking to watch
you all flap your limbs and you circle down the drain.
Fuck, I didn't read the article. Who cares? I don't read the bullshit you
post either. Why not engage in dialogue?
I read the stuff he posts. Much of it is compelling, to me. I assume
that if Richie posts it, he endorses what it says. Don't shoot the
messenger; there are always more.
Bingo. Bob thinks I'm just trying to piss him off, but I only post articles
here after:

Going to lengths to find them

Taking the time to read them

Assessing whether my friends here will get something out of them

Sharing the hope or frustration I got from reading the article in the hopes
that that sharing them with people of like mind will make my day a little
happier.

I have no interest in even hearing from conservatives here about the articles
unless they have something to say about their CONTENT.

Has hell frozen over yet?
(oops...even hell is suffering from gooballs warming!)
--
Relpo Miraculous

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves
viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing
the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda,
the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by
marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was
egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation."

From: Fascism Anyone? by Lawrence W. Britt
Free Inquiry magazine, Spring 2003
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4113.htm
K-Bob
2006-01-30 01:10:19 UTC
Permalink
®£(þø MŠrª¢ü¶øµ§ © <> could not resist divulging personally embarrassing
Post by unknown
Bingo. Bob thinks I'm just trying to piss him off, but I only post
Going to lengths to find them
Taking the time to read them
Assessing whether my friends here will get something out of them
Sharing the hope or frustration I got from reading the article in the
hopes that that sharing them with people of like mind will make my day a
little happier.
You'd sound more genuine if the theme of your articles were a little less
monomorphic.
Post by unknown
I have no interest in even hearing from conservatives here about the
articles unless they have something to say about their CONTENT.
Slapping articles in here accompanied by a snide remark doesn't seem to
rise to that standard. Are you disavowing the practice?

I don't post all the articles I actually *do* read in here. People rarely
respond to articles from Reason magazine, The Economist, etc. They don't
have that "trolling" feeling, I guess.

--

K-Bob
Organfreak
2006-01-30 02:37:56 UTC
Permalink
On or about Sun, 29 Jan 2006 16:19:43 -0800, someone purporting to be
Post by unknown
Post by Organfreak
On or about Sun, 29 Jan 2006 17:44:44 -0600, someone purporting to be
®£(þø M¦rª¢ü¶øµ§ © <> could not resist divulging personally embarrassing
Post by unknown
What else you got? ...you morally bankrupt Bush supporting
co-conspirators are all in a panic and it's simply breathtaking to watch
you all flap your limbs and you circle down the drain.
Fuck, I didn't read the article. Who cares? I don't read the bullshit you
post either. Why not engage in dialogue?
I read the stuff he posts. Much of it is compelling, to me. I assume
that if Richie posts it, he endorses what it says. Don't shoot the
messenger; there are always more.
Bingo. Bob thinks I'm just trying to piss him off, but I only post articles
Going to lengths to find them
Taking the time to read them
Assessing whether my friends here will get something out of them
Sharing the hope or frustration I got from reading the article in the hopes
that that sharing them with people of like mind will make my day a little
happier.
I have no interest in even hearing from conservatives here about the articles
unless they have something to say about their CONTENT.
Well said, Mr. Po. Funny how all this was obvious to me from the
git-go and the git-gone. I think what you are seeing ARE objections to
the content.
K-Bob
2006-01-30 03:36:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Organfreak
I think what you are seeing ARE objections to
the content.
Seeing where? I never objected to the content. If I did, you'd probably see
at least one sentence making that claim somewhere. I don't work by
inference, I write what I mean.

I spent energy trying to engage in a dialogue, which has been essentially
refused. You prefer I should use the accusation-style blather Richie usually
gets from certain people? In fact, at this point, I've about decided Richie,
Roger, and "dick" are all the same person.

It's not possible for me to argue with you about your assumptions of what I'm
writing. Why not assume I write what I mean?

--

K-Bob
K-Bob
2006-01-30 00:53:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Organfreak
I read the stuff he posts. Much of it is compelling, to me. I assume
that if Richie posts it, he endorses what it says. Don't shoot the
messenger; there are always more.
If we weren't an internet community (barf), needing a flood of articles might
be useful. Most of us tend to put up an occasional article for general
discussion or for laffs. Partisan floods of blog entries are pretty boring.
I don't give a shit which party posts 'em.

--

K-BOb
Organfreak
2006-01-30 02:39:12 UTC
Permalink
On or about Sun, 29 Jan 2006 18:53:14 -0600, someone purporting to be
Post by K-Bob
Post by Organfreak
I read the stuff he posts. Much of it is compelling, to me. I assume
that if Richie posts it, he endorses what it says. Don't shoot the
messenger; there are always more.
If we weren't an internet community (barf), needing a flood of articles might
be useful. Most of us tend to put up an occasional article for general
discussion or for laffs. Partisan floods of blog entries are pretty boring.
I don't give a shit which party posts 'em.
To each his own. I have a delete key and I know how to use it without
bashing.
K-Bob
2006-01-30 03:38:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Organfreak
To each his own. I have a delete key and I know how to use it without
bashing.
Yeah, ...I know.

Well, you could stop bashing me, then!

Of course, then that would be no fun.

--

K-Bob
Organfreak
2006-01-30 03:55:35 UTC
Permalink
On or about Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:38:09 -0600, someone purporting to be
Post by K-Bob
Post by Organfreak
To each his own. I have a delete key and I know how to use it without
bashing.
Yeah, ...I know.
Well, you could stop bashing me, then!
Of course, then that would be no fun.
You are worth arguing with, maybe. You write much that shouldn't go
unanswered.

Relpo has his own style of posting what is presumably his opinion. One
style among many (or at least several) who are here. Why don't you
just look at it as a matter of style? At least one person here finds
the contributions to be valuable.

I bet if you fairly argued some of the points in his posts, even if
they are written by somebody else, there might be some meaningful
discussion. This way though, you dismiss all of the material out of
hand and there can be no real discussion.

Here, take this test, a hypothetical, just pretend now:
If AndyW posted about four to six quoted articles, blogs, or whatever,
per day, with just his short comments at the top, would you be
objecting so forcefully? Eh?

-OF
K-Bob
2006-01-30 19:45:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Organfreak
You are worth arguing with, maybe. You write much that shouldn't go
unanswered.
Thanks. I agree.
Post by Organfreak
Relpo has his own style of posting what is presumably his opinion. One
style among many (or at least several) who are here. Why don't you
just look at it as a matter of style? At least one person here finds
the contributions to be valuable.
I will. I was just hoping to bring some level of discourse to the situation,
and was blown off. One thing we can all count on: on the internets, posts
about a person's style almost always result in flame wars. I wasn't going to
go after his style so much as to simply try to get an honest discussion with
the dood.
Post by Organfreak
I bet if you fairly argued some of the points in his posts, even if
they are written by somebody else, there might be some meaningful
discussion. This way though, you dismiss all of the material out of
hand and there can be no real discussion.
I don't have time to address even a small percentage of his flood of blog
posts. I'd far rather spend time discussing issues directly, and use those
discussions to introduce my philosophical positions. It serves little
purpose to throw other people's words in here to support one's position.

An article here, an essay there, backed with some analysis by the person who
supposedly read the thing makes far more impact.
Post by Organfreak
If AndyW posted about four to six quoted articles, blogs, or whatever,
per day, with just his short comments at the top, would you be
objecting so forcefully? Eh?
Yes, definitely. If Glennbo, ModBod, BlackHawk or some <ahem> "enemy of the
left" put floods of blog posts and snide remarks in them, I'd be likely to
object. And I don't think you can say I've objected "forcefully" to Relpo's
posts. I have asked him politely to write something himself and discuss it.
I didn't say he should stop what he's doing, nor did I call him names, nor
did I claim he was being a problem, nor did I claim he was incapable of
discussion, etc. My less-than-subtle point was simply that anyone can throw
shit into the group and act like it's of value just because it was found on
the internet, but it doesn't really make for meaningful discussion.

It has the effect of bringing a bullhorn into a small room of people talking
about stuff.

However, Andy *always* adds his own thoughts, not slogans, and not political
cheerleading (such as "You're goin' down! Woohoo!" That sort of crap). He
then takes a lot of time with each person that responds. You and Glennbo and
Michael (for instance--there are many more in here) are the same way.

Me, I hardly ever write anything. Just few trifles here and there...

--

K-Bob
K-Bob
2006-01-29 22:54:42 UTC
Permalink
Countdown to his blog spam
Sunday, Jan. 29, 2006 1:33 p.m. EST

Iraqi General: Syria Gave Al Qaida Saddam's WMDs


A former senior military advisor to Saddam Hussein is warning that the
chemical weapons used by top Al Qaida terrorist Abu Musab al Zarqawi in a
foiled 2004 plot to attack Amman, Jordan were the same weapons Saddam
Hussein transported to Syria before the U.S. invasion.

Gen. Georges Sada offered the stunning revelation Saturday while explaining
why he didn't decide to go public about Saddam's hidden WMD stockpile until
recently.

"As a general, you see, we should keep our secrets," Gen. Sada told WABC
Radio's Monica Crowley. But when news broke of the foiled WMD attack on
Amman, he changed his mind.

"I understood that the terrorists were going to make an explosion in Amman
in Jordan . . . . and they were targeting the prime minister of Jordan, the
intelligence [headquarters] of Jordan, and maybe the American embassy in
Jordan - and they were going to use the same chemical weapons which we had
in Iraq," he told WABC.

Last week, Gen. Sada generated headlines when he told the New York Sun that
Saddam had shipped his biological and chemical weapons stockpiles to Syria
in the weeks before the U.S. attacked in March 2003.

But until yesterday, the former top Iraqi official had said nothing about
al Qaida gaining access to those same weapons.

"It was a major, major operation. It would have decapitated the
government," said Jordan's King Abdullah at the time, in an interview about
the Zarqawi plot with the San Francisco Chronicle.

Had it succeeded, the WMD strike would have been the most deadly terrorist
attack in world history, with Jordanian officials estimating that Zarqawi's
al Qaida team could have killed up to 20,000 people.

While King Abdullah said that trucks containing chemical weapons had come
from Syria, he did not identify Iraq as the ultimate source of Zarqawi's
WMDs.

Gen. Sada, however, said he had no doubt that Zarqawi intended to use the
same chemical weapons Saddam had sent to Syria.

Telling Crowley that he was "shocked" when news of the Zarqawi plot broke,
Saddam's former top advisor recalled thinking: "My God, I know many things.
How can I keep them [secret any longer]."

Gen. Sada also detailed on Saturday the Iraqi dictator's plan to launch his
own WMD attack during the first Gulf War, explaining, "He wanted to attack
Israel with chemical weapons."

The top Iraqi military man recalled a meeting of senior defense ministers
where Saddam ordered: "I want you to do two things that are very important
- to attack Israel and to attack Saudi Arabia with chemical weapons."

Gen. Sada said the planned WMD strike was to be carried out by 98 aircraft,
including Soviet-built Sukhoi 24s, MiGs and French-built Mirage jets.

"One wave would fly through Syria and the other wave through Jordan and
then penetrate to Israel," he said.

Gen. Sada recalled that he was the only one to raise objections, warning
Saddam that such an attack would surely provoke a nuclear response from Tel
Aviv.

"I told all this directly [to Saddam] and everybody was listening. If a
needle was dropped on the carpet you would hear it," he told Crowley.

After presenting a nearly two-hour-long argument against the WMD attack,
Gen. Sada said Saddam was finally persuaded to pull the plug on the deadly
operation.
unknown
2006-01-29 23:28:18 UTC
Permalink
Countdown to his blog spam
Just keep repeating this spin over and over and over and over...

You are worthless. No intellectual honesty. No morals. No end to your lies
and your quagmires.
--
Relpo Miraculous

5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and
the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably
viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly
anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually
codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox
religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses."

From: Fascism Anyone? by Lawrence W. Britt
Free Inquiry magazine, Spring 2003
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4113.htm
K-Bob
2006-01-29 23:46:32 UTC
Permalink
®£(þø MŠrª¢ü¶øµ§ © <> could not resist divulging personally embarrassing
Post by unknown
You are worthless. No intellectual honesty. No morals. No end to your
lies and your quagmires.
Nice response. Dialog threatening to you or something?

--

K-Bob
unknown
2006-01-30 00:00:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by K-Bob
®£(þø MŠrª¢ü¶øµ§ © <> could not resist divulging personally embarrassing
Post by unknown
You are worthless. No intellectual honesty. No morals. No end to your
lies and your quagmires.
Nice response. Dialog threatening to you or something?
Nope. You wanted my opinions. You're now getting them. You don't seem to
like that wither. You don't read articles, and you dismiss comments as well.
why are you bothering at all?
--
Relpo Miraculous

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. Ruling elites always
identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure
that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was
allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The
military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used
whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations,
and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite."

From: Fascism Anyone? by Lawrence W. Britt
Free Inquiry magazine, Spring 2003
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4113.htm
K-Bob
2006-01-30 01:14:57 UTC
Permalink
®£(þø MŠrª¢ü¶øµ§ © <> could not resist divulging personally embarrassing
Post by unknown
Nope. You wanted my opinions. You're now getting them. You don't seem
to like that wither. You don't read articles, and you dismiss comments
as well. why are you bothering at all?
No problem. I thought I'd try and bring out some actual dialogue here, but I
see you are more comfortable with Roger-esque methods of accusation. I begin
to see why he's targeted you, and my sense of outrage at his targeting begins
to diminish.

Now that *really* bothers me.

--

K-Bob
Organfreak
2006-01-30 02:40:37 UTC
Permalink
On or about Sun, 29 Jan 2006 19:14:57 -0600, someone purporting to be
®£(þø M¦rª¢ü¶øµ§ © <> could not resist divulging personally embarrassing
Post by unknown
Nope. You wanted my opinions. You're now getting them. You don't seem
to like that wither. You don't read articles, and you dismiss comments
as well. why are you bothering at all?
No problem. I thought I'd try and bring out some actual dialogue here, but I
see you are more comfortable with Roger-esque methods of accusation. I begin
to see why he's targeted you, and my sense of outrage at his targeting begins
to diminish.
Now that *really* bothers me.
This fucked-up reasoning. Roger makes personal attacks of an extreme
sort, without letup, on Relpo here. There isn't any comparison at all.
Organfreak
2006-01-30 02:43:54 UTC
Permalink
On or about Sun, 29 Jan 2006 18:40:37 -0800, someone purporting to be
Post by Organfreak
This fucked-up reasoning. Roger makes personal attacks of an extreme
sort, without letup, on Relpo here. There isn't any comparison at all.
This fucked up syntax.
K-Bob
2006-01-30 03:49:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Organfreak
Post by K-Bob
Now that *really* bothers me.
This fucked-up reasoning. Roger makes personal attacks of an extreme
sort, without letup, on Relpo here. There isn't any comparison at all.
Oh no?

"Bush is running a fascist dictatorship. You're in on it. You are not to
be trusted anymore, if you ever were at all"

"you morally bankrupt Bush supporting co-conspirators are
all in a panic..."

"You are worthless. No intellectual honesty. No morals. No end to your
lies and your quagmires."


So far, the only diff I see is that Roger doesn't flood the groop with blog
entries, ...well, and that whole anti-Homersectional thing.

--

K-Bob
Organfreak
2006-01-30 04:03:07 UTC
Permalink
On or about Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:49:18 -0600, someone purporting to be
Post by K-Bob
Post by Organfreak
Post by K-Bob
Now that *really* bothers me.
This fucked-up reasoning. Roger makes personal attacks of an extreme
sort, without letup, on Relpo here. There isn't any comparison at all.
Oh no?
"Bush is running a fascist dictatorship. You're in on it. You are not to
be trusted anymore, if you ever were at all"
"you morally bankrupt Bush supporting co-conspirators are
all in a panic..."
"You are worthless. No intellectual honesty. No morals. No end to your
lies and your quagmires."
So far, the only diff I see is that Roger doesn't flood the groop with blog
entries, ...well, and that whole anti-Homersectional thing.
Hmmm. I guess I find the bashing to be on a much higher level, much
less relentless and certainly less obscene, on a subject that's
actually worthy of discussion. <g> It's also a lot funnier. Besides, I
agree with him. Go ahead, call me a name, horndog.
K-Bob
2006-01-30 20:05:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Organfreak
Post by K-Bob
So far, the only diff I see is that Roger doesn't flood the groop with
blog entries, ...well, and that whole anti-Homersectional thing.
Hmmm. I guess I find the bashing to be on a much higher level, much
less relentless and certainly less obscene, on a subject that's
actually worthy of discussion. <g> It's also a lot funnier. Besides, I
agree with him. Go ahead, call me a name, horndog.
All that's fine. Just not of much use to me. I like to have thoughtful
discussions (when actual issues are being discussed, that is), not
playground-level taunts and displays of attitude.

Now when we're just havin' fun, attitude is cool, and I like to be as
immature as anyone. A careful person can combine havin' fun with
discussion real issues, without being plain, old rude. Most of us manage
that with no problem.

Hmm. I can't think of a good name right now.

--

K-Bob
K-Bob
2006-01-29 23:13:39 UTC
Permalink
Countdown to his Blog spam
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2014815,00.html

Page 1......


The Sunday Times January 29, 2006

'Stop Hillary' bandwagon gathers pace
Sarah Baxter, Washington
THE frontrunner for the Democrat nomination for president in 2008, Hillary
Clinton, is heading into a hail of opposition from within her own party
after a poll showed last week that most Americans would “definitely” not
vote for her.

Aides in Bill Clinton’s White House are warning she could be a risky
choice. To their left, an anti-war “stop Hillary” bandwagon is gathering
momentum, threatening her ability to unite the Democrats.

Mike McCurry, Bill Clinton’s White House press secretary, fears the 2008
campaign could be brutal for the former first lady, now a senator for New
York. He remembers how she became a “lightning rod” for the right during
her husband’s years in office.

“She has proven that she works hard at being senator and does that job
well, but bringing the country together and moving it in a different
direction is an entirely different matter,” McCurry said. “It is very hard
to reinvent yourself in politics.”

A CNN/Gallup/USA Today poll last week found that 51% of Americans
“definitely” would not vote for her and only 16% said they definitely
would. Among men, 60% said they would not vote for her.

Leon Panetta, Bill Clinton’s former chief of staff, said there was
“nervousness” among Democrats about backing such a controversial figure at
a time when many Americans believe President George W Bush had polarised
the country.

Like McCurry, he wondered whether Clinton was “the kind of lightning rod
that would stimulate all of the opposition” and resurrect the “hate side of
the political agenda”.

“Ultimately the issue is: do we turn to something new? We’ve been through
the Clintons, we’ve been through the Gores, we’ve been through the Kerrys,
all of whom are known quantities in politics,” Panetta said.

Bush described Clinton as “formidable” in an interview ahead of his annual
State of the Union address this Tuesday. Republicans are determined not to
underestimate her voter appeal in 2008, particularly as they are short of
well-known candidates.

“This is an unusual year because this is the first time there hasn’t been a
kind of natural successor in the party,” Bush said.

The Democrats have a new rising star in Mark Warner, who recently stepped
down as governor of the conservative state of Virginia. His proven appeal
to moderate voters is attracting Democrats of all shades who are anxious to
win, but he remains little known on the national scene.

The doubts about Clinton’s electoral viability have surfaced as she romps
towards re-election as New York senator this year.

She has already seen off one Republican challenger — whose campaign was
reduced to tatters — and last week dispatched another, Ed Cox, the son-in-
law of former president Richard Nixon. He turned down his party’s
increasingly desperate pleas to stand.

Clinton’s modest success with voters in small-town upstate New York is
taken by some as proof that she can win over conservatives, although
according to last week’s poll, 90% of Republicans will “definitely” not
vote for her.

New Republic magazine, the left-of-centre weekly, argues in its current
issue that the voters of rural New York bear little comparison to diehard
Republican voters in the South and Midwest. “She is going to have to bring
something else to the national stage,” it warned.
unknown
2006-01-29 23:36:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by K-Bob
'Stop Hillary' bandwagon gathers pace
What has Hillary done to warrant your fears about her?
--
Relpo Miraculous

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes,
the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless
by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves
to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray
themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the
ruling elites behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the
religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the
illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and
opponents of the godless. A perception was manufactured that
opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion."

From: Fascism Anyone? by Lawrence W. Britt
Free Inquiry magazine, Spring 2003
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4113.htm
K-Bob
2006-01-30 01:15:17 UTC
Permalink
®£(þø MŠrª¢ü¶øµ§ © <> could not resist divulging personally embarrassing
Post by unknown
Post by K-Bob
'Stop Hillary' bandwagon gathers pace
What has Hillary done to warrant your fears about her?
Beats me. I didn't read it.

--

K-Bob
sam booka X2
2006-02-16 11:16:41 UTC
Permalink
®£(þø MŠrª¢ü¶øµ§ © <> wrote in message news:MPG.1e46f168b2833e398b523
Post by unknown
Post by K-Bob
'Stop Hillary' bandwagon gathers pace
What has Hillary done to warrant your fears about her?
She already had her 8 years.
--
__________________________________________________________
: :
.--. .--. ,-.,-.,-.: `-. .--.
`._-.'' .; ; : ,. ,. :' .; :' .; :
`.__.'`.__,_;:_;:_;:_;`.__.'`.__.'
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...