"willfully ignorant"

[sweetnpetite]

That pretty much somes up how I feel about it.

GWB, imo, just provides a cherry on the cake of ignorance and arrogance. A bit like Reagan, but ineffective, he believes slogans, and good/evil prophecy, and sabre rattling can obscure the details of situations that are basically quagmires or out of control. And that ones needing a 'fix', bare military might will solve the problem in a hurry (Hit at the fly with a hammer.).

 

[sweetnpetite]

It was a horrible event, but the silver linging was that it could have been a true rallying point for unity. Instead, it was used as an excuse to carry out a war they were itching for. I hated, and now hate worse, George W. Bush.

There was so much potential for good to come out of the tragedy of 9/11 and it was pissed away on politics.

Amen to that.

(That's all I can muster right now, lol)

 

[sweetnpetite]

It's not too hard. Most American's barely know the difference between Afganistan and Iraq- and the administration doesn't do a darn thing to keep the differences clear in our mind. Half the country probably thinks we should just blow up the whole middle east and be done with it. (they all hate us after all- and that is a capital crime)

I agree Colly. A show of force was definitely needed. In Afghanistan. Not in Iraq. The war in Iraq is not a war on terror. It's W. finishing his daddy's business. Bush messed up in going after Iraq when he did. The job should have been finished in Afghanistan before anything else was taken on. There was no relation to Al Qaeda through Iraq until after the fall of Hussein's regime. Now Iraq is a totally lawless territory and more of a safe haven for terrorists.

My biggest problem isn't that Hussein was dethroned. Absolutely, he was a bastard and deserved it. My problem is that Bush lied to the Senate and the Congress to get their support for the invasion of Iraq. He lied to the other countries to get them to support the invasion. He did everything he could to try to connect Iraq and 9/11 in people's minds so that he could have his war. The first point of business when Bush took office was to find a way to go to war with Iraq. It was brought up to his cabinet on the first day. 9/11 was a godsend to him. The greatest thing that ever happened to him.

Bush thrives on innocent blood and fear. That fear is the only hope he has of getting re-elected. He finds ways to work a 9/11 reference into any speech he can, no matter how out of place it might be. I have yet to see one redeemable quality in the man.

To me, right and wrong aren't really subjective terms. To Bush they are apparently irrelevent terms. It's only about what he wants. About how he and his friends will benefit from this war. Halliburton among them. The financial windfall of the companies who win the rights to rebuild Iraq are his true concern.

As far as Bush doing things helping the war on terror, he has done nothing that no other president wouldn't have done. All he has really done is put the plan that Clinton had Richard Clarke working on into action. The only difference is that Bush ignored all the information until the attacks happened. The Clinton plan, which was shot down by the Republicans as too expensive and unnecessary, is pretty much the identical lpan that went into effect after 9/11. It's kind of weird how Clarke was good enough to plan the response to the terrorist attacks, but now that he has come out against the administration he is not a credible person. He served this country his whole life and now he is supposedly trying to subvert it. Slandering good people is the Bush gangs modus operandi. They did the same thing to John McCain during the Republican primary a couple years ago.

 

[sweetnpetite]

This is exactly what I was thinking when talk of 'war on terror' first started. I thought- this isn't going to be like any other war that we know. And yet- they turned it into one anyway. I guess they don't know how to do it any other way.

Do we know when to fight or not? Debatable, highly.

Iraq shows we don't know when to use many or few.

Our upper and lower ranks don't have the same desire.

Were we prepared? No.

My opinion of Western generals is low, and they can't shit without checking with Washington first.

This does not look good.

In my opinion, the War on Terrorism is an intellgence war. It is very low intensity. It doesn't really require a lot of people. High tech is only of minimal usefulness. It is likely to be going on for a very long time with nothing resembling a clear victory. Much of it will have to be done in secrecy. And it will be severely 'irrational'.

This makes it very unsuited for the current Western style of warfare. We are still trying to fight The Cold War becoming hot. Hell we're still trying to refight WWII. This means big, high tech armies. We like quick ends and clear cut victories. We like to have great media generated by our wars, lots of pretty pictures and sound bites. And we like wars to generate reams and reams of statistics and numbers proving what a great job we did and how 'rational' our wars are.

This is one of the main reasons for the invasion of Iraq. It fit into our paradigm of warfare.

However Iraq distracted us from the War on Terror. And conciously or unconciously, our leaders know we can't fight the War on Terror well with our current warmaking philosophy, and they are unwilling to make the changes required to fight it properly.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Thank you Colly for stating this so clearly and consisely. Most people, I think are happy to believe that a war on terrorism or a war on drugs are wars that can- and must- be won. Maybe it's the urgency of the 'must' that makes them need to believe the 'can.'

In many early forms of government there was a caluse that allowed a leader to take dictatorial power in time of war or extreme crisis. I seem to remember with the Romans a dictators term of office was a year, as strange as that sounds.

In many of these sociceties declaring an perpetual state of emergency was the time honored dodge used by unscupulous men to hold onto power. A war on terrorism cannot be won, it isn't meant to be won, anymore than a war on drugs can be won.

The war on drugs is strange because we are basiclly fighting against our own economic system's precepts. I.E. supply and demand and free market forces. As long as there is a demand, someone will step up to supply. The tougher you make it for them to get the supply to the customer, the more the consumer pays for the product.

The war on terrorism is equally unwinable. You can't stomp out terrorism, you can only hope to stomp out state sponsored terrorism. As Doc. Mab pointed out, even that is impossible when some states define a group as terrorist while others define them as freedom fighters.

The war on terror does however provide a war that will go on and on and on. And as long as the terrorists succeed occasionally it provides a powerful vehicle for the Republicans to run campaigns on. A perpetual state of emergency, if you will, whereby our individual freedoms are being insidiously eroded.

-Colly

 

[cloudy]

You know, all this laying-of-blame, and rehashing of the 9-11 tragedy really serves no purpose. What we need now is discussion on how we can prevent something similar from happening again. I'm not being insensitive - I lost a family member at the World Trade Center that day.

Someone sent me this through email the other day, and although it's very tongue-in-cheek, it also makes some very good points.......

This may very well be the best thought out item we have read since 9/11/01.

Leave it to Robin Williams to come up with the perfect plan ...
what we need now is for our UN Ambassador to stand up and repeat this message.

I see a lot of people yelling for peace but I have not heard of a plan for peace. So, here's one plan.

1. The US will apologize to the world for our "interference" in their affairs, past & present. You know, Hitler, Mussolini, Tojo, Noriega, Milosovich and the rest of those good ol' boys: We will never "interfere" again.

2. We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with Germany, South Korea and the Philippines. They don't want us there. We would station troops at our borders. No one sneaking through holes in the fence.


3. All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and leave. We'll give them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder will be gathered up and deported immediately, regardless of who or where they are.

4. All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 days unless given a special permit. No one from a terrorist nation would be allowed in. If you don't like it there, change it yourself and don't hide here. Asylum would never be available to anyone. We don't need any more cab drivers or 7-11 cashiers.

5. No "students" over age 21. The older ones are the bombers.If they don't attend classes, they get a "D" (for "deport") and it's back home baby.

6. The US will make a strong effort to become self-sufficient energy wise. This will include developing non-polluting sources of energy but will require a temporary drilling of oil in the Alaskan
wilderness. The caribou will have to cope for a while.

7. Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries $10 a barrel for
their oil. If they don't like it, we go some place else. They can go somewhere else to sell their production. (About a week of the wells filling up the storage sites would be enough.)

8. If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will not "interfere." They can pray to Allah or whomever for seeds, rain, cement or whatever they need. Besides, most of what we give them is stolen or given to the Army. The people who need it most get very little, if anything.

9. Ship the UN Headquarters to an isolated island some place. We don't need the spies and fair weather friends here. Besides, the building would make a good homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens.

10. All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way no one can call us "Ugly Americans" any longer. The language we speak is ENGLISH.....learn it...or LEAVE...

I don't post this to offend, insult, or otherwise piss anyone off, but as an American, sometimes I feel like screaming ENOUGH! I'm all for diversity, and consider myself almost a case for diversity myself, because of my multi-cultural background, but although I'm sure the situation looks different to those not residing in this country, to me it seems we are always helping others, and not solving the huge problems we have here at home.

Just my two cents (and Robin Williams')

Cloudy

 

[sweetnpetite]

I don't think that Robin Williams (or at least not the famous Robin Williams) wrote this.

I hate those emails, full of ignorance, propaganda, disguised as patriotism. Maybe Toby Keith wrote it, who knows. Don't think country music and WWE fans. America is right, drunk or sober

You know, all this laying-of-blame, and rehashing of the 9-11 tragedy really serves no purpose. What we need now is discussion on how we can prevent something similar from happening again. I'm not being insensitive - I lost a family member at the World Trade Center that day.

Someone sent me this through email the other day, and although it's very tongue-in-cheek, it also makes some very good points.......

This may very well be the best thought out item we have read since 9/11/01.

Leave it to Robin Williams to come up with the perfect plan ...
what we need now is for our UN Ambassador to stand up and repeat this message.

I see a lot of people yelling for peace but I have not heard of a plan for peace. So, here's one plan.

1. The US will apologize to the world for our "interference" in their affairs, past & present. You know, Hitler, Mussolini, Tojo, Noriega, Milosovich and the rest of those good ol' boys: We will never "interfere" again.

2. We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with Germany, South Korea and the Philippines. They don't want us there. We would station troops at our borders. No one sneaking through holes in the fence.


3. All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and leave. We'll give them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder will be gathered up and deported immediately, regardless of who or where they are.

4. All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 days unless given a special permit. No one from a terrorist nation would be allowed in. If you don't like it there, change it yourself and don't hide here. Asylum would never be available to anyone. We don't need any more cab drivers or 7-11 cashiers.

5. No "students" over age 21. The older ones are the bombers.If they don't attend classes, they get a "D" (for "deport") and it's back home baby.

6. The US will make a strong effort to become self-sufficient energy wise. This will include developing non-polluting sources of energy but will require a temporary drilling of oil in the Alaskan
wilderness. The caribou will have to cope for a while.

7. Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries $10 a barrel for
their oil. If they don't like it, we go some place else. They can go somewhere else to sell their production. (About a week of the wells filling up the storage sites would be enough.)

8. If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will not "interfere." They can pray to Allah or whomever for seeds, rain, cement or whatever they need. Besides, most of what we give them is stolen or given to the Army. The people who need it most get very little, if anything.

9. Ship the UN Headquarters to an isolated island some place. We don't need the spies and fair weather friends here. Besides, the building would make a good homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens.

10. All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way no one can call us "Ugly Americans" any longer. The language we speak is ENGLISH.....learn it...or LEAVE...

I don't post this to offend, insult, or otherwise piss anyone off, but as an American, sometimes I feel like screaming ENOUGH! I'm all for diversity, and consider myself almost a case for diversity myself, because of my multi-cultural background, but although I'm sure the situation looks different to those not residing in this country, to me it seems we are always helping others, and not solving the huge problems we have here at home.

Just my two cents (and Robin Williams')

Cloudy

 

[cloudy]

I can't vouch for it actually coming from "the" Robin Williams or not, since I haven't heard/seen a tape of him saying it, however, unbelievable as it may seem, he does lean towards the right more than most would credit......he is also very conservative in his politics, strange as it may sound.

I don't believe we're right no matter the circumstances......as a member of a NA tribe, I would tend to see things as being wrong more than right in our history, however the case may be, my point was that we should look to ourselves and OUR problems in society, and the future security of our OWN people, before we worry about everyone else's problems. Rehashing 9-11 and who's to blame is only useful if the finger-pointing is forgotten about and we learn from what ever the mistakes were that allowed that tragedy to happen. Blaming solves nothing, and distracts attention from the issue of the future. The past can't be changed, sadly.

Cloudy

 

[amicus]

Robin Williams bit...

For Cloudy....nice post...just enough light heartedness to temper the proximity to truth... interested regardless of who wrote it...thanks.. regards... amicus...

 

[cloudy]

For amicus -

Thank you.....I'm sure I managed to offend/piss off just about everyone, but you're right.....whoever said it gets very close to the truth....so close its almost painful, but sometimes that's what we need - to have someone make us look at the real situation by almost "overplaying" it, dontcha think?

Cloudy

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I haven't been able to stomach any "conservative" comments about a man's war wounds since Ann Coulter's disgusting comments about Max Cleland. The fact is, Cleland and Kerry and even Bill Clinton, who was anti-war and said so, each followed his conscience. The Bush administration consists of two hawks, both of whom verbally supported the war in Vietnam and both of whom managed to keep their precious asses out of the line of fire.

Kerry's wounds are "scratches?" Would he be worthy of conservatives' respect if he had lost limbs, like Max Cleland? No, Cleland is also worthless. Anybody who points out the fact that the emperor has no clothes embarrasses Republicans and other Bush voters. The response is to attack their credibility and courage.

Molly Ivans was right: "The clothes have no emperor."

-Colly

[/B][/QUOTE]


I don't where Kerry was wounded or how. I think in the grand scheme of things it is probably inconsequential. If you are a Democrat the fact that he served is what is important. If you are a Republican the fact that he came home and bad mouthed his fellow soldiers is what's important. If you are non-partisan both facts have some weight.

I know there are some verterans who post here. I would be very interested in how you gentlemen feel about him.

-Colly

 

[Pure]

Cloudy,

The "Robin Williams" a well know bogus piece: here's the write- up at

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl-williams-plan.htm

[quote from the site]
Comments: One would expect a piece written by Robin Williams to be smart and funny, which this lackluster rehash of the sort of lowest-common-denominator foreigner-bashing one would expect to hear on right-wing talk radio is not. Apart from the final quotation (an actual quip, sans original context, from his comedy act), Williams — a so-called "San Francisco liberal" whose political views have angered conservatives and earned him billing on at least one Internet-posted "celebrity blacklist" — clearly did not write the thing. Who did write it remains a mystery, if not a particularly interesting one. Early versions circulated in March 2003 before the Robin Williams tagline was added went entirely uncredited. [end quote]
-----

I find the part of your 'williams' posting
8. If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will not "interfere." They can pray to Allah or whomever for seeds, rain, cement or whatever they need. Besides, most of what we give them is stolen or given to the Army. The people who need it most get very little, if anything.

Particularly offensive. But I'm not upset. This is typical "The US is the do gooder who's always punished and maligned. " In fact, many nations give more, (compared to GDP) to aid famines, etc., that does the US. Many nations take more immigrants and refugees (compared to population, and in some cases, absolutely) than does the US.

This misunderstood 'do gooder' view of the US is in your own posting

Cloudy: my point was that we should look to ourselves and OUR problems in society, and the future security of our OWN people, before we worry about everyone else's problems.

Why the f*** do you think we're in Iraq? To save Iraqi kids? The US is looking to its oil needs, so the Saudis are allies, and Iraq is said to be-- in neocon messages-- like S. Korea.

Please tell me where in the #$%$# you see excessive US altruistic concern over other people's problems? Do you see excessive (and unappreciated) US contributions to the world fight against AIDS?

The major 'saves' of the US, were west europe, philippines, and
s korea. All drafted as allies against the Soviets, so don't expect lots of hosannas. The current 'saving' of Iraq and Afghanistan, 'winning hearts and minds' is still at bit early to tell. esp. given the numbers of dead children and civilians since the US 'liberation' began.

In essence, the 'Williams' message says 'Get rid of, or ignore, everyone who's not a white Christian real American with a real God, and let them see what their pagan 'gods' do for them.' (Well, Allah certainly greased the wheels for 9-11. And Jesus did not prop up the towers or even send angels to let the jumpers down easy. Maybe Allah's not such an impotent fiction after all! [sarcasm warning]. )


PS. NO, it's not a case of 'truth' hurting. The only 'truth' I see is in point 6 --- which Bush [like a number of predecessors] is doing nothing about-- US energy self sufficiency.

 

[cloudy]

Knew I would piss someone off with that post, but it's okay, I don't take it personally.

Just for your info, I am NOT white, am NOT christian, and do not necessarily believe that we should close our doors to outsiders, etc., etc.

However, I do believe that we should stop spending money to feed other countries until everyone here is fed, and other like "altruistic" operations. I don't object to helping anyone, I do, however, object to having people that we are trying to help turn around and curse Americans. There is no absolute right, and no absolute wrong as far as this issue goes. There are always those that will hate Americans simply for being Americans, (and for simply not believing as they do - too many wars have been fought in "God's" name) and seemingly, there will always be people everywhere who object to someone having a different opinion.

Cloudy

(thank you, sincerely, for clearing up where the quote came from - I honestly didn't know)

 

[sweetnpetite]

...my point was that we should look to ourselves and OUR problems in society, and the future security of our OWN people, before we worry about everyone else's problems. Rehashing 9-11 and who's to blame is only useful if the finger-pointing is forgotten about and we learn from what ever the mistakes were that allowed that tragedy to happen. Blaming solves nothing, and distracts attention from the issue of the future. The past can't be changed, sadly.

Cloudy

I understand you're frustration. However, there will always be disagreements, and becoming isolationists is not the way to solve the problem. IN fact, it would end up creating just as many, if not more. The US can't just pretend that they are the only ones in the world who matter. Well, actually that is the typical stereotype of us from the rest of the world. Just because foreign policy is something that most of us don't understand doesnt' mean it's not important.

The past is the foundation of the future. In one sence, every day is a chance to start over, but in reality the past forms a pattern and makes you who you are today. If you've always been irrisponsible, and then one day you decide to turn over a new leaf, people are going to see you as you *always have been* until you consistantly over time prove yourself otherwise. The future and the past are interconnected. Sometimes we get distracted with blame, but that also doesnt' mean that the past is irrelevant- it never is, even for those who are ignorant of it. Time is a continuem, not three seperate blocks of past present as future. You can't put something in a river and expect it not to show up later downstream, and that is how time works too.

 

[cloudy]

sweetnpetite (sp?) you make a very good point....thank you.

I just wish the powers-that-be would expend the same energy on making the future a little more secure that they seem to be spending playing "duck, duck, goose" with trying to be the duck who doesn't get blamed. The ultimate reality is IT HAPPENED. Now, let's figure out how we can keep history from repeating itself, because ultimately, it doesn't matter who's to blame.

Cloudy

(and yes, it is frustrating to see the game of musical chairs that seems to go on continuously in Washington.....thank you for recognizing that )

 

[Pure]

Cloudy,

I know it's all in good fun, and yes, it would be nice to feed and educate American kids. But in truth no American kid lacks food, 'cuz it got trucked off overseas. or medicine.

any evidence of this?

I don't object to helping anyone, I do, however, object to having people that we are trying to help turn around and curse Americans.

can you give a couple examples?

(let's leave aside the 'help' we're giving Iraq, for the time being. we'll discuss its curse-provoking potential another time. here's a clue though: there is now 1/3 less good drinking water in Bagdad than before 'liberation.')

 

[cloudy]

First, before you read the rest.....I just wanted to reiterate that I firmly believe in diversity as desirable, and the freedom to practice whatever religion you choose. Unfortunately, we seem to be one of the few places left where religion is actually a choice, and even here, the line is becoming blurred, so please, please don't take my opinions as racially or religiously biased.......it really has nothing to do with it.

A couple of examples? hmmm......

A group of Afghani's several years ago, burning American soldiers in effigy just after we had stepped in and stopped them from killing each other. It's okay to not like Americans, I mean, hey, no one is liked all the time, by everyone, but my personal opinion is, if you don't want the help, then don't ask for it and don't accept it.

The recent, as in yesterday, I believe, killings of several Americans in Iraq, followed by dragging their bodies through the streets, and then hanging them from a bridge - these were non-combatants. It could be argued that they understood the situation, and were there of their own free will, but c'mon, lets treat each other like human beings, at least. I'm absolutely sure that not all the Iraqi's want us there, and can't completely blame them. On the other hand, other than security concerns, I'd just as soon leave them to their own brand of lunacy. And I don't call it that out of racial predjudice, just that it seems, from where I sit in my comfortable home, to be lunacy to put up with a ruler like Saddam, but if they want him, more power to them......as long as he keeps his fingers to himself. Live and let live has always been my philosophy, but if they can't keep their ambition under control, then all bets are off. I apply this to our own country as well.

No doubt the drinking water's in bad shape....we have our own history of not taking very good care of resources. Our own country is in pretty shitty shape if you ask me.....I grew up in Los Angeles, the king of polluted cities. It doesn't excuse anything, but it does make it not very surprising.

Don't get me wrong, I do NOT, in any way shape or form, believe that we are omnipotent people, and know what's good for everyone, I'm just voicing my frustration at forever being the "global police", and forever getting kicked for it, when we have such large problems here at home. True, someone has to keep certain issues under watch and certain factions from destroying the entire world in their quest for world domination (shades of Pinky and the Brain?), and we've been in that position for so long now that it's just accepted, however when we do what is asked, the popular opinion is that other countries just flat out don't want us there.

There is really no solution, and no clear-cut way to solve everything, but just a little more time spent on issues here might get us on the right track. No, I've never even supposed that a child here went hungry simply because we shipped food elsewhere, but the fact is, there ARE children here that are hungry, and homeless......and we could also bring out the issue of the education system, which is one of the worst in the world if you don't include third-world countries. Unemployment, education, homelessness, the welfare system, the impossiblity of affording medical care for most of us, etc., etc., etc. The list goes on and on. I would just like to see a focus on these things, just once, and put our "foreign policy" and altruistic nature on a back burner. I truly believe in the basic goodness of humanity (fool that I am), but we need to take care of our own first. Charity starts at home.

Cloudy

 

[Guest]

Richard Clarke is a currently a co-professor of a college course, his fellow co-professor of this course happens to John Kerry's foreign policy advisor. To me this seems slightly suspicious. As does the fact that the original release date of Clarke's book was 27 April 2004, and was only changed two weeks before it was actually published. He was a holdover from the Clinton Administration as were many people were in the months leading up to 11 September 2001, due to the delay in getting a transition team into place. Repeated recounting in Florida causing this delay. Clarke received a demotion from the post he held under Clinton, to head of the Cyber-terror section. After which he rarely attended NSC meetings. He also gave contradictory statements to the 9/11 commission, and to Congress regarding events that led up to 11 Sept 01. He also admitted that 9/11 could not have been prevented even had his ideas been implemented. As far as him working on Clinton’s plan to deal with terror. Clinton had no plan for terror, and this Clarke stated as well.

Paul O'Neil was fired by the Bush administration. And took with him Classified documents which he published and allowed CBS to air, and is currently under investigation for these actions. yet he still says that he plans to vote for Bush in the upcoming election, because he's the best man for the job.

Connecting Iraq and Al Qaeda is not hard. In March 1997 or 98 U.S. intelligence reports as well as reports from other countries show that Bin Laden met with Hussein and his weapons and intelligence directors in Tikrit. Just outside of Baghdad is a training base with a interesting item. The fuselage of a Boeing 727, anyone remember what type of plane was hijacked on 11 Sept. Does anyone else remember Hussein stating, "If I could hit the United States I would."
Saddam did have WMDs and the whole world knew it. It's strange that for 12 years he claimed that he destroyed them, but wouldn't show anyone where or how he did it. Event thought it would end the sanctions against his country. And how about the weapons he used on his own people in the mid-nineties. How about the tens of thousands of chemical suits and masks we found inside wear houses. We've found missile and artillery shells that were designed specifically to carry these types of weapons. Anyone want to guess where they were made France and Germany. He had twelve years to hide these things or give them away. To me that seems a helluva lot more likely then him destroying them and just no wanting to tell where, when or how he did it.
As far a Iraq trying to obtain yellow cake from Africa, even the liberal hero Clinton acknowledged that he did this, and more then once. In 1998 Clinton ordered U.S. forces to strike “Iraq’s nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons facilities.” Funny how when a Democrat says it it’s taken as gospel, but when a Republican says it he’s trying to profit and help his oil buddies. If the war with Iraq was about oil Iwould be paying 75 cents a gallon, instead of almost 2 dollars.
I'll be back with more but I've got to go to work in the morning .

 

[shereads]

deleted pointless post

 

[Somme]

deleted pointless post

I know what you mean.

 

[Pure]

Come, come, I say we welcome Ann Coulter when she drops by, regardless of her screenname.! We're all creative writers, aren't we?

 

[Pure]

Seaknight said,

Richard Clarke is a currently a co-professor of a college course, his fellow co-professor of this course happens to John Kerry's foreign policy advisor. To me this seems slightly suspicious.

Right on.

Even more suspicious--and a little known fact-- is that Richard Clarke, just two months ago, purchased a life size _male_ doll and dressed it up like George Bush. An ex aide of his, in sworn testimony to a grand jury, has stated that Clarke fucks his GWB doll in a specially enlarged earhole, every morning, before he gets out his stashed prayer mat and prays to Allah.

 

[sweetnpetite]

he probably thinks Bush is a 'good man' too

 

[sweetnpetite]

A real Robin William's Quote:

"Ever notice that George Bush doesn't speak when Dick Cheney is drinking water? Do you realize we're only a heart attack away from Bush being president?"

http://urbanlegends.about.com/gi/dy...sonline.com/onwisconsin/music/mar02/25596.asp


Maybe I'm just dense- but I don't get it- what does 'deleated pointless post' mean?

 

[sweetnpetite]

Another link regarding the Robin Williams Plan:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/williams.asp

My boyfriend says he saw Robin Williams read that speach on Jay Leno. But I'm not buying it. For one thing, I can't imagine Robin Williams sticking to one topic for that long.