:: Da' Militant One's Lair ::

Da' Militant One has arrived to ''tell it like it is'' and give his unique perspective on today's issues across the political, social, and economic landscapes. His specialty is stickin' it to ''the Man''. Email at Militantone@comcast.net

:: welcome to Da' Militant One's Lair :: bloghome | contact ::

[::..archive..::]

[::..recommended..::]
:: google [>]
:: plastic [>]
:: davenetics [>]

:: Monday, April 14, 2008 ::

Note to Obama. Stop apologizing to white folks who don't like you anyway and will never accept your apologies. From Farakhan to Wright to your comments about rednecks in Pennsylvania, you have placed yourself in a box where you will remain unless you develop the courage to tell folks to "take a hike." Also, never make any comments to one group that you can't say to all. You can also show some courage and go to the people of Pennsylvania and make the same statements there that you made in San Francisco. No one likes an elitist!

:: DM1 4/14/2008 12:18:00 PM [+] ::
...

:: Friday, October 19, 2007 ::

Why is Senator Schumer a member of the Board of Advisors for the organization, The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies? The organization is a front group for Bill Kristol, Clifford May, Frank Gaffney, and the rest of the gang that lied us into Iraq. I am including in this email, an email that I sent to the group, as well as its organization structure and some of its views from the website:

My Email to the FDD:

I have viewed some of the information on your website and I am stunned by several articles that classify the "old left's" scorn for Joe Lieberman and George Bush as polarization politics and hatred. While many democrats may harbor these sentiments the dislike of the two gentlemen stems to a large degree from the frustration of watching Bush take the country down the tubes with little opposition with Lieberman serving as his eager supporter. The short-term (positive?) effects of the “surge” are illusory and comments to the contrary belie a misunderstanding of the dynamics at play. The Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds are ancient people who have long memories and see the current situation in Iraq as an opportunity to gain power, land, and wealth. Their “blood feud” will not be solved by the U.S. , Bush, or the Congress. The surge is working because the Sunnis understand that the only way they will be able match strength with the Shiites and the Kurds is to, at least, for the moment form an alliance with the U.S. military. The Kurds are poised to form a sovereign nation, and the Shiite have no incentive to negotiate in good faith with either the Sunnis or the Kurds since they hold the seat of power. The Shiites are willing to cede northern Iraq to the Kurds because they have no choice. The Kurds are ready to defend any attempts by any party to confiscate the lands, or limit the sovernty that they have enjoyed since the decision by Saddam Hussein to cut his losses and accept the realization that the Kurds could not be conquered without overwhelming military force.

Also, the Kurds have millions of recruits in southern Turkey, which by the way is ready to strike at those Kurds in the south. Any attempt by the Shiites to force the Kurds to acquiesce will most certainly result in significant bloodshed and death. If the Kurds do not comply with the Shiites what will the U.S. do? What is the strategy for diffusing the tension between Turkey and its belligerent citizenry, the Kurds? Turkey has been a valued ally, but is angered by the positive relationship between the Kurds and the U.S. The U.S. is not in a position to make any demands to Turkey that turkey is obligated to accept. Any U.S. military confrontation with Turkey or the Kurds is foolhardy. Most Americans fail to realize that the history of the Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds, and Turks runs thousands of years consisting of overwhelming bloodshed subjugation, domination, self interest, and self preservation. A review of Arab culture would reveal that barter and deal making are hallmarks of their history and neither the Shiites, the Sunnis, the Kurds, nor the Turks will ever accept any arrangement or agreement that leaves them on the short end. Many other variables are in play that some in your organization do not seem to acknowledge. Iraqi Shiites have a big brother in Iran. Iran is covertly supporting the insurgents against the U.S. military for fundamental reasons centering on its ability to protect itself against any military aggression by the U.S., Israel, or any other country.

Iran’s current strategy with respect to Iraq is to ensure that the U.S. military is degraded as much as possible to prohibit its ability to wage war against it, effectively. Also, Iran’s Iraq strategy is predicated on the country’s efforts to develop nuclear weapons with limited opposition by the U.S. Israel’s capacity to militarily respond to Iran’s nuclear objectives is also questionable given these results of its conflict with Hezbollah last year. Any attack by Israel on Iran could be seen as an opportunity by Hezbollah to launch missile attacks on Israel as the group has replenished its stockpile of weapons. What about Hamas? Can Israel fight a two-front war? What about Iran’s response to any provocation by Israel? If Iran responds militarily to Israel how will the U.S. respond? What will be the role of the carrier task forces already in the Persian Gulf? While the weaponry possessed by the carrier groups is more than sufficient to decimate Iran as a country is this strategy operable? How will further conflict in the region affect the “war on Terrorism?” How will further conflict in the region affect the democratic government of Lebanon?

Already, southern Lebanon has been ceded to Hezbollah and its survivability is predicated on the relationship with Hezbollah. Lebanon has no desire to wage any type of military campaign against Hezbollah given that each conflict results if destruction of its infrastructure and the death of its citizens. What was the U.S. response to Israel’s bombing of Lebanon in 2006 given that pacified areas of the country with nominal military value were destroyed: lukewarm rebukes and empty rhetoric. How does the U.S. response to the bombing of a democratic Lebanon by Israel aid the Bush Administration’s strategy of promoting democracy in the region? What incentives did the U.S. give to aspiring Arab democracies? The same can be said for the U.S. response to the travails of the current Iraqi government given its already tenuous position. Iraq President El-Maliki can not achieve any political objectives unless deals are made with the various Shiite groups. The political pressure being applied by the U.S. forces Maliki to establish closer ties with both Iran and Syria to strengthen the legitimacy of theShiite-dominated Iraqi government to its Arab neighbors. The failure of the Bush Administration to anticipate and plan for such a scenario borders on dereliction of duty.

Speaking of Syria, how will it respond to a widening of a regional conflict? Additionally as a staunch supporter of Hezbollah the likelihood of Syria providing military and financial support as well as a huge reserve of manpower is unquestionable. Any deals with the Kurds will not call for any ceding of land or oil fields. The Sunnis are the odd man out because they have nothing to barter, or negotiate. Not only are the Iraqi Sunnis angered, but so too is the Sunni-dominated nation of Saudi Arabia, who by the way has been supporting the Sunni Insurgency, both financially and with ready and willing recruits. Why has the U.S. allowed this treachery to go unpunished? Why is the U.S. planning to sale tens of billions of dollars in military arms and aircraft to Saudi Arabia and other Arab states while also selling even more weaponry and aircraft to Israel? How does arming mutual enemies to-the-teeth advance the Bush Agenda? Why does the U.S. continue to support a Saudi Arabian despotic regime that supports our enemy in Iraq? What about Saudi oil policy which creates a huge transfer of wealth from the U.S. to the Arab state which then uses the money to purchase U.S. military armaments and weaponry and finance groups hostile to U.S. interests.

Foundation for the Defense of Democracies http://www.defenddemocracy.org/

Organizational Structure:

Board of Directors

Steve Forbes, Board Member, CEO Forbes Magazine

Dr. Jeane J. Kirkpatrick, Founding Member, 2001-2006, Fmr. Ambassador to the UN

Jack Kemp, Chairman Emeritus, Fmr. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development

Distinguished Advisors

Judge Louis J. Freeh, Fmr. Director of the FBI

Sen. Joseph Lieberman(D-CT), U.S. Senate

Newt Gingrich, Fmr. Speaker of the House

R. James Woolsey, Fmr. Director of the CIA

Board of Advisors

Gary Bauer, President, American Values

Bill Kristol, Editor, Weekly Standard

Donna Brazile, Campaign Manager, Democratic strategist, Gore 2000

Hon. Richard D. Lamm, Fmr. Governor, Colorado

Rep. Eric Cantor, Chairman (R-VA), Task Force on Terrorism

Rep. Jim Marshall, (D-GA), U.S. House of Representatives

Rep. Eliot Engel, (D-NY), U.S. House of Representatives

Sen. Zell Miller, (D-GA), Former U.S. Senator

Frank Gaffney, President, Center for Security Policy

Richard Perle, Former Chair of the Defense Policy Board and FDD Advisor

Amb. Marc Ginsberg, Fmr. Ambassador, Morocco

Steven Pomerantz, Former Assistant Director, FBI

Charles Jacobs, President, American Anti-Slavery Group

Oliver "Buck" Revell, Former Associate Deputy Director, FBI

Charles Krauthammer, Syndicated Columnist

Sen. Charles E. Schumer, (D-NY), U.S. Senate

Senior Fellows

Khairi Abaza
Middle East and Democracy Expert

Andrew C. McCarthy
Director, FDD's Center for Law and Counterterrorism

Avi Jorisch
Terrorism Expert

Barbara Newman
Investigative Reporter and Author

Samer Libdeh
Middle East and Democracy Expert

Dr. Walid Phares
Director, FDD's Future of Terrorism Project

Mario Loyola
Visiting Fellow: Diplomacy and Defense

Victoria Toensing
Fmr. Chief Counsel to Sen. Intelligence CommitteeBoard of Directors

Adjunct Fellows

Dr. Jonathan Adelman, Professor, University of Denver

Michael I. Krauss, Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law

Richard Z. Chesnoff, Journalist

Agota Kuperman, U.S. Foreign Service (ret.)

Paul Crespo, Former Marine Corps Officer and Military Attaché

Joel Mowbray, Journalist

Tanya Gilly, Member of the Iraqi National Assembly

Dr. J. Peter Pham, Director of the Nelson Institute for International and Public Affairs, James Madison University

Ethan Gutmann, Adjunct Fellow, The Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Dr. Frederic Smoler, Professor, Sarah Lawrence College

Orde Kittrie, Law Professor, Arizona State University

Staff

Tony Badran, Research Fellow, Levant, The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies

Jessica Risch, Research Associate, The Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Amb. Richard W. Carlson, Vice Chairman, The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies

Cara Rosenthal, Senior Manager, Development, The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies

Kyle Dabruzzi, Summer Fellow, The Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Claudia Rosett, Journalist-in-Residence, The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies

Mark Dubowitz, Chief Operating Officer, The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies

Stephanie Schwartz, Communications and Special Projects Coordinator, The Center for Liberty in the Middle East

Sasha Eckstein, Special Assistant, The Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Jonathan L. Snow, Research Fellow, Coalition Against Terrorist Media

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, Vice President of Research, The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies

Jean Thurman, Manager, Operations, The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies

Joshua Goodman, Director of Research, Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Caitlyn Walters, Coordinator, Campus Programs, The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies

Eleana Gordon, Senior Vice-President, The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies

Dan Wilson, Communications Coordinator, The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies

Clifford D. May, President, The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies

Brian Wise, Director of Media Relations, The Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Bill McCarthy, Vice-President, Communications, The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies

Adela A. Zachariades, Coordinator, Future of Terrorism Project, The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies

Media and Publications

The Danger Zone
(10/14/2007)
Sunday's WMAL show featured Richard Landes, a professor of Medieval History at Boston University; and syndicated columnist Arnaud de Borchgrave.

Clifford May Discusses Counterinsurgency Strategy on WAMU 88.5 FM
(10/10/2007)
On Wednesday, October 10, FDD President Clifford May recorded a three-minute audio commentary on WAMU 88.5 FM, describing how the war in Iraq has prompted the U.S. military to reconsider many of the tactics and plans that strategists thought would be the blueprint for all modern day conflicts.

FDD Submits Amicus Brief in Enemy Combatants Case
(10/11/2007)
FDD's Center for Law & Counterterrorism (CLC), together with the Committee on the Present Danger and the Center for Security Policy, has filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief in Boumediene v. Bush, an important case the Supreme Court will consider this term.

Claudia Rosett Testifies on Corruption in Iraq
(10/04/2007)
FDD Journalist-in-Residence Claudia Rosett testified on Thursday, October 4, before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, on the status of corruption in the Iraqi government and whether U.S. government efforts to address this continuing problem have been adequate.

Peter Pham Testifies On Human Rights In Horn of Africa
(10/02/2007)
FDD Adjunct Fellow Dr. Peter Pham testified on Tuesday, October 2, 2007, at a hearing of the Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. He discussed democracy and human rights in Ethiopia.

Gartenstein-Ross Briefs Congressional Staff on US-EU Counterterrorism Cooperation
(09/21/2007)
On Friday, September 21, Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, FDD's vice president of research, briefed congressional staff on the use of terror lists to combat individuals and organizations involved in planning and conducting acts of terror.

Palestinian Authority to Shut Down Hamas' al-Aqsa TV
(09/21/2007)
Reports from the West Bank that the Palestinian Authority has chosen to shut down Hamas' al-Aqsa TV operations were met with praise from a group of Muslims, Christians and Jews who are part of the Coalition Against Terrorist Media (CATM).

Clifford May Discusses Iranian Threat at AEI Event
(09/10/2007)
FDD President Clifford May discussed U.S. strategy toward Iran at a book forum organized by the American Enterprise Institute on Monday, September 10, 2007.

Internet Battle Rages over the Petraeus Report, Future of the US Mission in Iraq
(09/10/2007)
The debate over whether the Iraq mission led by General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker deserves continued support is raging not only in Washington but also in the blogosphere. Now, a grassroots petition supporting General Petraeus and his troops is making its way around the Internet.

Gartenstein-Ross Featured on CNN's "God's Warriors"
(08/22/2007)
Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, FDD's vice president of research, was featured in the second installment of CNN's three-part series on politics and faith, “God's Warriors,” hosted by Christiane Amanpour.

FDD Welcomes Freedom's Watch to the Iraq Discourse, Announces New Resources
(08/23/2007)
As the debate over our nation's future course in Iraq continues, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) today welcomed Freedom's Watch, a new non-partisan organization dedicated to winning the war in Iraq, to the national discourse.

:: DM1 10/19/2007 07:29:00 PM [+] ::
...

Email I Sent to the Editor of The Observer, A British Online News Website and His Response

A U.S. Citizen wants to apologize to his cousins in Britain

Dear Sirs,

I am contacting your organization to apologize on behalf of the United States for our outrageous and unacceptable behavior during the last six years. I have become a regular reader of your website as I find your reporting to be informative, trustworthy, and factual which are in mind my the three pillars of professional journalism. Unfortunately, these pillars no longer exist in my country. I and many other concerned Americans have been trying to fight the good fight, but our adversaries control much of the power structure of the country. Over the past several months, I have developed a higher degree of urgency in confronting my government over its abominable and corrupt behavior which has eroded the country's principles and international integrity. With the aid of your website and other international sites, I have become aware of the disgraceful actions that my government has sanctioned in the name of the “American People,” and I am embarrassed and ashamed of myself and of my fellow Americans as we have failed to uphold our responsibility to our Constitution and most importantly to our fellow citizens of the world. As a proud, but humbled American, I ask that you and the global community to continue to shine the light on truth and keep the faith, as my fellow Americans and I continue the struggle to reclaim our "shining democracy on the hill." Peace.
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
Subject: Thank you for your email: A U.S. Citizen wants to apologize to his cousins in Britain
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 17:09:59 +0000

The editor wishes to acknowledge your email with thanks.

Unless you have indicated to the contrary, it will be considered for
publication and may be edited. Whether or not we have space to publish your
letter, it will be read with interest and copied for noting to the relevant
journalist or section editor.

Please do not reply to this email, as the account from which it is sent
cannot accept incoming email. Instead use letters@observer.co.uk

It was good of you to take the trouble to write.

Yours sincerely

The Letters Editor

The Observer
3-7 Herbal Hill
London EC1R 5EJ

:: DM1 10/19/2007 08:57:00 AM [+] ::
...

Letter To The White House

I am contacting the White House to express my disappointment and frustration by the lack of principle, integrity, and character displayed by the Executive Branch during the past six years. Many of the policies enacted by the Bush Administration have been ill-conceived, short-sighted, and poorly executed. The constant misstatements and in some instances outright lies have damaged our Constitution as well as our country's standing in the world. Mr. Bush and his operatives need to understand that they are only caretakers of the country's government and that they have a responsibility and obligation to the American People to perform their duties in a manner consistent with the United States Constitution and international law. Mr. Bush's constant talk of terror and fear has been very damaging to the psyche of many Americans and we as a people appear to have lost our courage and our mora l standing in the world. My family has produced four generations of military service in each branch of service. My grandfather served in Navy during World War II, my father served in the Air Force and did two tours of duty in Vietnam, I served in the Army during the 1980s, and my nephew serves as a marine, who is weeks away from a tour of duty in Iraq. My family's service to our country is not unique as many other American families have also responded to the "call." The purpose of our service was to protect our fellow citizens and to defend and uphold the principles of our Constitution.

Many of the Bush Administration's policies and actions have eroded the very purpose of my family's service to the country and the patriotism that we have tried to uphold for more than fifty years. My comments have been long in coming as I have been very wary of contacting the White House as I was concerned about being placed on someone's list for being un-American. However, I have the obligation and responsibility to continue my defense of my fellow Americans and the Constitution, so I am prepared for the consequences, if any, of my comments in this email. I remain dismayed by the constant drumbeat of war and the bellicose statements by many who never wore the uniform, but appear to have no shame in asking their fellow Americans to die for very questionable reasons and assertions. I voted for Papa Bush in 1988 and am still an admirer of his as I believe that he embodies the leaders hip, determination, and pragmatism that an effective President must possess. Sadly, it appears that the current President possesses none of the qualities. The events of 9/11 do not define America and should not serve as a facade for impudent decisions and behavior. As a proud American, I refuse to live in fear, or stand idle while my fellow citizens live in constant terror and the country's legacy is disgraced. I urge Mr. Bush and others to reestablish their commitment to the Constitution, the rule of law, and the American People. As for the Iraq War, I hope that Mr. Bush understands that only a true leader can lead warriors into battle and that his stubbornness and arrogance only serve to limit his effectiveness as President and Commander-in-Chief. Peace.

:: DM1 10/19/2007 08:50:00 AM [+] ::
...

Letter To Obama

While I applaud Obama's effort, he is being ill-served by whoever is advising him on Middle East policy. The biggest failure of U.S. Middle East policy is our inability to fully comprehend, or acknowledge the roots of terrorism directed against America and Israel. Obama's position that Iran can not be allowed to develop nuclaer weapons, while popular on the campaogn trail, is fundamentally flawed. While I have much to say, I will leave you with a portion of an email I wrote to the Glenn Beck program to give you an idea of what I am talking about:

By the way, the next time that you profess the danger and fear that you feel from the Iranian President, take a moment to examine the emotions and anger that he and his people must hold with regard to U.S. support of the Shah and his secret police, our support of Saddam during the Iran/Iraq war, and the U.S. government’s tacit acceptance of Saddam’s use of chemical weapons against Iranian forces. The Iranian President stated that as a result of the war over 200,000 Iranians were killed and more than 600,000 were wounded. Where is our government’s accountability? Why shouldn’t the Iranians seek revenge? Why is Iranian support of Iraq insurgents any more unacceptable than the U.S. and Britain’s covert support of Jundallah, a Sunni insurgent group with ties o Al Qaeda that has been launching terrorist attacks inside Iran for several years? The last statement may surprise you, so go do your homework and check out the validity of the allegation. Why should any Arab/Muslim nation trust us? What about impact to Arab nations of the Redline Agreement, or the Balfour Declaration? How about the numerous agreements and promises made to these nations by the U.S., Britain, and other nations that were not honored? What about the violence, terrorism, and lies perpetrated by Jewish extremists against Palestinians in creating the State of Israel? In 1945, during a meeting with Franklin Roosevelt, the Saudi King, Abd al-Aziz, questioned the President as to why the Arab Nations of the Middle East should bear the responsibility of a Jewish State instead of Europe? While folks like you have the luxury of ignorance, for people like me willful ignorance may be hazardous to our health. Lastly, stop the fear mongering, as you folks continue to frighten a large segment of the American Public with predictions of doom. How are your actions American? Where is the courage and conviction that embodies the American Spirit? If black folks had succumbed to fear that you espouse, the Civil Rights Movement would have never achieved success. Peace

Until Obama develops a more expansive view of the Middle East, his candidacy is tenuous at best.

:: DM1 10/19/2007 08:46:00 AM [+] ::
...

If Only Negroes Knew Their Place

I don't know how many of you viewed a video taoe that showed a white Florida cop abusing a black 15-year old teenage girl, but what follows is the text of an email that I sent to Fox News:

Comment on the video of young black girl's beat down by cop

So it's all the fault of the 15 year-old black girl that she caught a beat down from the white cop for "resisting" an arrest stemming from a curfew violation. Could it be that she was fearful of being handcuffed by the white cop at night out of concern for her safety? Did the cop consider calling for backup from a female cop to calm the situation? Is it possible that she shares the same fear of white cops that you have for Muslims? Is her fear any less rational than yours? Since many white folks like you share the belief that she was responsible for the cop's brutality are black parents to assume that their children will be subjected to the same type of brutality if they behave irrationally, possibly out of fear, when dealing with white cops alone and at night? Why is it that these types of incidents appear to involve white cops and black citizens 99% of the t time? If the video showed a black cop abusing a young white female teenager would you still have that same opinion? Why are there no videos of black cops brutalizing white folks? If the young girl was your daughter or the daughter of a friend would that changes your perspective? Was punching the young girl in the face necessary? From the audio of the video, the young lady appears to be pleading to the cop during her beat down. Could her pleas have been related to the cop's use of force in forcing her arm behind her back? From the video images, the young lady's arm appears to be forced in a position that could have resulted in her arm being broken. It's obvious that white folks like you are relieved that a tape of the entire incident exists so that you can feel comfortable holding your racist views. Is it possible that these types of incidents, the response by white folks, and the fear that they profess of terrorist attacks, are what embolden the terrorists?

I pose the question because my view of people like you are that you are incapable of being honest or fair-minded and that you lack a rational moral compass which allows you to dismiss the evil that you do, but whine and moan if someone smacks you back. Is this the type of America that the thousands of black troops in Iraq are protecting? Do you believe that these soldiers would share your view or would they be angered by the images and the justifications mad by white folks like you? You and other white folks that think like you have a skewed concept of others’ humanity. I grew up in D.C. surrounded by more violence than a little kid ought to experience, however, short of trying to take my life, I could never brutalized a young white girl in the manner shown in the video because I would be mindful that her actions might be borne of fear, and not anger. My response to a young white girl acting out in such a manner would compel me to call for a female cop to come to the scene a try and calm the young lady. While I’m sure that many white folks like you do not comprehend such a response, I’ve experienced enough violence in my lifetime growing up in DC that I realize the corrosive long-term psychological effects of violent actions on young people. Given the long adversarial relationship between white cops and the black community, incidents like the one in Florida only reinforce the belief that we as a people have more to fear from racist white cops and people like you than we do from Osama.

:: DM1 10/19/2007 08:34:00 AM [+] ::
...

:: Friday, October 05, 2007 ::

It's All Been Said Before

Tuesday, July 16, 2002

Letter to Bruce Wilson UK Dear Bruce,

The reason why you have been receiving so much negative email is that the truth hurts. Americans are notorious enablers when it comes to their presidents! To american conservatives George W. Bush is not William Jefferson Clinton. It is as simple as that. The american press and the democrats have for the most part rolled over for George W. Bush. You have the courage to say what a lot of americans are thinking, but are unable (afraid?) to express publicly. You are quite correct about the effect of September 11th on Bush's presidency. Examples: terrorist alerts that include every mode of transportation and delivery system known to man, a threat assessment chart that has remained at "Yellow?" despite warnings almost daily of imminent terrorist attacks, John Ashcroft (enough said!), The Patriot Act, Dissenting opinions ridiculed as unpatriotic, an ability to stand before the American People and have no clue as to how to articulate a vision that is a true path to peace, incompetence rewarded as virtue. It goes on! There is a method to the madness: 2004. The conservatives want to remake the judiciary among other goals. This is one of the primary reasons for their backing of George W. Bush. Believe me, in private they will admit that he is not the brightest bulb, but he was electable. They will defend Bush to the very end and the current beginnings of a police state in America is their way of controlling events. Beware of your head my friend! Keep telling the truth because we sure need someone to stand up and shout" "The Emperor has no clothes!" Good Day.

Da' Militant One

:: DM1 10/05/2007 02:32:00 PM [+] ::
...

:: Thursday, October 04, 2007 ::

Da' Militant One has returned once again!

Life is hectic and time is moving so I'll get right to it. The following rant is directed towards weak asses like Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly:

It would be one thing if fake patriots like Hannity and O’Reilly were real men, but it’s more than ridiculous that these fake tough guys now act as if they actually have heart. Neither was man enough to wear the uniform and now after all these years, they’ve both turned into tough guys. Hannity has spent so much time faking his support for the troops, bashing liberals, whining about Hillary, and talking about Bill Clinton’s genitals that he is nothing more than a joke. Tell the fake tough guy that his act has worn thin. Fox is lucky that there is an abundance of ignorant self-righteous white folks living in America because they, like him, would rather have Americans die in Iraq indefinitely than to admit that they have been completely inept and incompetent in comprehending, or understanding the facts as they stand on the ground in Iraq. But, that’s okay because they are white and conservative so they must be right. I know Hannity met with Bush and got his marching orders to talk up a war with Iran while his ass will still be in the States holding phony freedom concerts and bragging about his “patriotism” and “faith.” Let’s talk about his “patriotism” for a moment. I was listening to Hannity’s show a few years ago and a caller called him out for never wearing the uniform. His response? He actually said that he was not called to serve, as if there was a draft back in the day and he didn’t get drafted. The caller pointed out that all the fake patriot had to do was go to the nearest recruiting station and raise his right hand. Instead he wussed out and now he’s Edward R. Murrow! Based on his daily rants about Hillary and Bill, I can only surmise that he secretly is attracted to Hillary and as for Bill, I don’t know too many men that would obsess over another man’s genitals for so many years. Hannity’s “faith?” All of the true Christians that I have known in my lifetime didn’t have to profess their faith over and over as if bragging. They also had a kind spirit and were gentle souls. I never heard any of them tear down people on a daily basis. One more thing, Hannity’s worship of Bush is no different than Monica’s worship of Bill Clinton, she just performed her worship on her knees. Maybe Hannity’s into “salad tossing?”

And then there’s O’Reilly, the fake “John Wayne.” Mr. Tough Guy also failed to put on a uniform and now he’s threatening folks and trying to call folks out. Are folks supposed to be scared? Like most white folks that support the war, he talks a good game from the sidelines. By the way where are all those young republicans that support the war?” Since white conservatives are the true Americans, why haven’t those eligible for military service, enlist? Why hasn’t Fox asked young white conservatives to serve their country. Where are the children of Fox employees? How many are in Iraq? Not many I suspect because they like Hannity and O’Reilly are too busy being fake patriots, phony Christians, and cowards here in the states. See back in the day, me and three of my childhood friends, all young black men from the streets of D.C., joined the military during Reagan’s Presidency which means that while Hannity, O’reilly, Kristol, Hume, Wallace, and the rest of you were hunkering down in your basements playing “Army” my friends and I were the true patriots who gladly put their lives at risk to keep America free and safe. And that’s the disgrace of it all, those with the most mouth and pseudo-courage have spent years pretending to be men and patriots, but they are neither, they are just a bunch of weak-ass white boys grifting off of the liberty that my friends and I spent years protecting in uniform!
Labels: bvbcjs

:: DM1 10/04/2007 04:31:00 PM [+] ::
...

:: Friday, May 11, 2007 ::

I Told You So!

Most of what is happening now in Iraq was predicted years ago. I for one was a skeptic from the start because I've never trusted Bush or Cheney. In July 2002, I posted ten questions to the chickenhawks that pushed this war which have yet to be answered. Keep in mind that the questions were posed approximately seven months before Bush began his war against Saddam. Here's a blog I posted almost five years ago:

Wednesday, October 16, 2002 ::

Ten Questions for the Chickenhawks: If Saddam is such an immediate threat answer the following questions:

1. Why did Bush take a 30-day vacation in August?
2. Why is not the threat assessment at RED, the highest alert?
3. Why now a month before the mid-term elections and not earlier in the year?
4. How many casualities are acceptable?
5. What are the costs?
6. What is the time frame?
7. How long the occupation?
8. What if Iraq attacks Israel and Israel strikes back with nuclear weapons?
9. What happens if Syria helps Iraq?
10. What happens if the democrats take Congress?

:: DM1 10/16/2002 07:35:00 PM [+] :: ...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------So, as you can see most of what is happening in Iraq now is not a surprise to many of us.

:: DM1 5/11/2007 09:00:00 PM [+] ::
...

:: Monday, July 24, 2006 ::

The Other Side to the "Sins of the Father" Post Below (You decide who is telling the truth)

Israel and South Africa Does Israel support the apartheid regime?

You have heard about the relationship between Israel and South Africa, and you may have reached the conclusion that Israel is the main support of the South African regime, its principal weapons supplier, most important trading partner, purveyor of atomic technology, and much more. And that apartheid — the odious suppression of Blacks — might cease if Israel were only to withdraw its support from South Africa.

What are the facts?

Israel is a multi-racial society. Its citizens, most of them "immigrants," or children and grandchildren of immigrants, come from all corners of the globe. More than 55% are what we would call "non-Caucasians." In the last few years, the government has expended much effort and money to in-gather the Black Jews of Ethiopia. The concept of apartheid, of race discrimination, is repugnant to Israelis and to the Jewish religion. Condemnation of apartheid has been publicly expressed by every Israeli Prime Minister, beginning with David Ben Gurion.
Israel is not a significant factor in the arms trade with South Africa. The main suppliers of weaponry to that country are France, Britain, Canada, West Germany, Italy, India, and the United States. But South Africa has its own arms industry. It entered into a $1 billion barter deal with Iran, by which it would supply weapons -- mostly light and heavy artillery and shells -- in exchange for oil, ironically, but not surprisingly, a similar barter contract for $750 million -- was signed with Iraq.Oil is the life-blood of South Africa's economy. All of it is imported, and not a drop comes from Israel, of course. Virtually every barrel of the approximately $2 billion of yearly oil import comes from the Arabs -- most of it from Saudi Arabia.

How about trade in general? The principal trading partners of South Africa in 1986 were in that order: U.S.A., $3.4 billion (exports and imports); Japan, $2.9 billion; Germany, $2.8 billion; U.K., $2.6 billion -- with Israel far in the rear with a total trade of $0.2 billion, less than 1% of South Africa's total trade. And what does not take into account South Africa's vast (unrecorded) trade with the Black African countries, its collusive trading relationships in diamonds and precious metals with the Soviet Union, and its huge barter trade for oil with the Arab countries and Iran.
The Arab countries (with the exception of Egypt) consider themselves to be in a state of war with Israel. They do not trade with Israel at all. Other major countries such as Japan, India, China, Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia do not trade with Israel either or only to a negligible extent. Israel, in order to survive, cannot be too choosy with whom to trade. But, in any case, political approval would not seem to be a requirement for trade. After all, the United States and other Western democracies deal with South Africa, with the Soviet Union, and with other countries of whose politics they disapprove.

Israel has been repeatedly singled out and condemned for alleged nuclear collaboration with South Africa. It is a charge that has no foundation and that Israel has denied categorically and constantly. The U.N. has recently published a document -- "South Africa's Nuclear Weapons Capability." It mentions certain countries in connection with nuclear collaboration with South Africa. Israel is not among them.

The facts are clear: Israel is a very minor player in trade and military relations with South Africa, has no nuclear cooperation, and has at all times condemned and denounced apartheid. In formulating policy towards South Africa, Israel, just as in its dealings with the Soviet Union, must take into account the vulnerable position of that country's large Jewish community. The perception that Israel has a particularly close relationship with South Africa is fostered by the Arabs, is based on distortion, and stems from hostility to Israel. A Congressional Committee and the Black Caucus of Congress has commended Israel for its government's resolution of March 18, 1987, regarding its relations with South Africa. Critics of Israel would also do well to judge its position on racism by its prodigious 20-year record of unprecedented development aid programs in 31 Black African countries.

This ad has been published and paid for by Facts and Logic About the Middle East

FLAME
P.O. Box 590359
San Francisco, CA 94159

Gerardo Joffe, President

:: DM1 7/24/2006 11:04:00 PM [+] ::
...

The Sins of the Fathers

Reposted From The World Traveler

Israel and South Africa

excerpted from the book "Israeli Foreign Policy"
by Jane Hunter South End Press, 1987

History

lsrael's ties with South Africa seem to be especially disturbing to many who follow Israel's international activities. Perhaps it is natural that Israel has been castigated more harshly for its arms sales to South Africa than for its sales to other countries: first, because there has been for a decade an arms embargo against South Africa; and second, because of the unsurpassed criminality of the white regime and the uses to which it puts the Israeli-supplied weapons.

It has also been said that those arms sales are understandable, given the striking similarities between the two countries in their day-to-day abuse and repression of their subject populations, South African blacks and Palestinians under Israeli rule; in their operating philosophies of apartheid and Zionism; and in their similar objective situations: "the only two Western nations to have established themselves in a predominantly nonwhite part of the world," as a South African Broadcasting Corporation editorial put it. That understanding, however, is somewhat superficial, and the focus on similarities of political behavior has somewhat obscured the view of the breadth and depth of the totality of Israeli-South African relations and their implications.

Israel's relations with South Africa are different than its interactions with any of its other arms clients. That Israel gave South Africa its nuclear weapons capability underscores the special nature of Tel Aviv's relations with the white minority government and begins to describe it - a full-fledged, if covert, partnership based on the determination of both countries to continue as unrepentant pariahs and to help each other avoid the consequences of their behavior.

Arms industry - Nuclear Apprentice

There are few areas where the respective needs and advantages of Israel and South Africa dovetailed so perfectly as in the field of nuclear cooperation. "The most powerful reason for Israeli willingness to bear the undesirable consequences of expanded and more open trade with South Africa may be her desire to acquire material necessary to manufacture nuclear weapons," wrote a military analyst in 1980.' To that must be added Israel's great desire to test the nuclear weapons it already had, and the attractions of South Africa's vast territory and proximity to even vaster uninhabited spaces-the Atlantic and Indian Oceans.
Then at the point in its nuclear development where it was fashioning sophisticated bombs (devices which use less nuclear material but have infinitely greater explosive force than the "primitive" bomb dropped by the U.S. on Hiroshima), Israel would find it particularly helpful to observe the performance, explosive force and fallout of a detonated weapon.

Since 1984, Israel had been operating a plutonium extraction plant in a secret underground bunker at Dimona in the Negev Desert. Built by the French in the late 1950s, the Dimona plant also included facilities for manufacturing atomic bomb components. At the time of the 1976 accords, Israel was preparing to build an adjoining plant for the extraction of lithium 6, tritium and deuterium, materials required for sophisticated thermonuclear weapons.
Israel's reasons for devoting what had to have been a significant portion of its scant resources to such an ambitious nuclear weapons program - nuclear experts have recently ranked it as the world's sixth nuclear power, after the U.S., the USSR, Britain, France and China - have been variously offered as the desire to develop a credible deterrent to attack by its neighbors and the desire to substitute that deterrent for at least part of the costly conventional arsenal that Israel, with one of the world's most powerful military forces, maintains, and also (with much less frequency) as an "umbrella" over a partial withdrawal from the occupied territories.

The South Africans began teaching the lessons of Israel's 1967 war at their maneuver school, and Israeli advisers began teaching the Boers the arts of suppressing a captive population and keeping hostile neighbors off balance... The white government's practice of domestic counterinsurgency combines outright military brutality with the extensive use of informers and collaborators. It is impossible to know how many refinements of these age-old techniques have been borrowed from the Israelis' occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan Heights. The Israeli system of village leagues is obviously comparable to the hated town councils imposed on segregated townships by the apartheid government. The collective punishment employed by the Israelis, such as the destruction of a whole family's home when one of its members is arrested as a suspect in an act of resistance, has lately been matched by the recent South African practices of sealing off townships, and assaulting entire funeral processions. What is perhaps more salient is the South African victims' perceptions of Israel's involvement in their oppression and how readily that perception is communicated...

The Frontline States

The South Africans noted that their May, 1983 aerial attack (dubbed Operation Shrapnel) on Mozambique's capital, Maputo, was analogous to Israel's attack on Beirut the previous summer. one analyst, Joseph Hanlon, believes that one of South Africa's objectives in the attack was to see how its version of events would play in the media. It was received very well indeed, according to Hanlon, with the Western press accepting South Africa's claim that its attack was in "retaliation" for an ANC attack and that ANC "bases" were hit.
Instead, the South African Air Force hit a child-care center and private houses with "special fragmentation rockets," leaving 6 dead and 40 wounded. This follows the Israeli practice in Lebanon of speaking about PLO installations while civilians are the actual targets, and attacking with particularly heinous anti-personnel weapons-cluster bombs and phosphorous bombs.

The victims of South Africa's angst are not blind to the similarity of attacks-or motives.
President Samora Machel likened the Israeli Government to the Pretoria regime. He said that because of its inability to contain the fury of the Palestinian people led by the PLO, the Zionist regime is trying to transfer the war to other regions. So reported Mozambican radio shortly after Israeli aircraft bombed PI headquarters in Tunisia in October 1985.

The model provided by Israel, which punishes every internal act of resistance and violent act outside its jurisdiction with a bombing raid on Palestinian targets in Lebanon-almost always refugee camps cynically identified by the Israelis as "terrorist bases" or "headquarters"-has served South Africa well. In January 1986, the white government's radio delivered a commentary on "the malignant presence" of "terrorism" in neighboring states and said "there's only one answer now, and that's the Israeli answer." Israel had managed to survive "by striking at terrorists wherever they exist."

In May 1986, South Africa demonstrated that it had assumed the right to attack its neighbors at a time and on a pretext of its own choosing. The chosen time was during a visit by the Eminent Persons Group of the Commonwealth of Nations, which was attempting to establish negotiations between the apartheid regime and its opposition. The victims-Zambia, Botswana and Zimbabwe, all Commonwealth members-were chosen for their alleged harboring of "terrorists"; the real victims were South African exiles and an employee of the government of Botswana. The South Africans said they had attacked "international terrorism" and compared their raids to the Israeli attack on Tunisia and the U.S. attack on Libya in April 1986.

The attack was similar in style to Israel's 1985 attack on Tunisia. Initially, the Israelis had been threatening Jordan and perhaps because King Hussein of Jordan was at the time on an official visit to the U.S., the Israelis chose to take revenge for the killing of three Israelis (believed to be top Mossad agents) in Larnaca, Cyprus on the PLO in Tunisia.
Two weeks after its three-pronged attack on its Commonwealth neighbors, South Africa attacked the Angolan harbor of Namibia, firing their version of the Israeli Gabriel missile.
Israel has also been connected with the mercenary forces deployed by South Africa against Angola and Mozambique. In the 1970s Israel aided the FNLA (Angolan National Liberation Front) proxy forces organized and trained by the CIA to forestall the formation of a government led by the MPLA (Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola-now the ruling party of Angola). John Stockwell, who ran the CIA operation against Angola, recollected three arms shipments Israel made in cooperation with the CIA: a plane full of 120 mm shells sent via Zaire to the FNLA and Unita; a shipment of 50 SA-7 missiles (all of which were duds); a boat-load sent to neighboring Zaire in a deal that the Israelis had worked out with President Mobutu, even though the Zairian strong man had broken ties with Israel two years earlier.

When Israel reestablished relations with Zaire (in 1982) and began to train Zairian forces in the Shaba border province, Angola had cause for concern. The leader of the FNLA had been Holden Roberto, brother-in-law of Zairian president Mobutu, Israel's new client. In 1986, it would be established that Zaire acted as a funnel for "covert" U.S. military aid for the Unita forces of Jonas Savimbi.

In 1983, the Angolan News Agency reported that Israeli military experts were training Unita forces in Namibia. Since Zaire began receiving military aid and training from Tel Aviv, Angola has been ill at ease. Its worries increased after discovering that: Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon was personally involved in the organization, training and equipping of "commando" units of the army of Zaire, especially organized for missions along the borders of the RPA [Angola].

In 1984, the Financial Times (London) wrote of "joint Israeli-South African support for Unita forces." Other sources also report the transfer of Israeli arms and financial support to Unita.
In 1983, Angola's President Jose Eduardo dos Santos told Berkeley, California Mayor Eugene (Gus) Newport that an Israeli pilot had been shot down during a South African attack. The Angolan President showed Newport pictures of captured Israeli weapons. The following year, Luanda reported the capture of three mercenaries who said they had been trained by Israeli instructors in Zaire.

Israel has also been involved with the Mozambican "contras," the South African-backed MNR (Mozambique National Resistance or "Renamo"), which has brought great economic and social distress to Mozambique. Renamo has a particular reputation for ideological incoherence, being regarded by most other right-wing insurgencies as a gang of cutthroats. For several years there have been stories coming from Southern Africa of captured mercenaries of Renamo who say they were trained in neighboring Malawi-one of the four nations to maintain relations with Israel after the Organization of African Unity (OAU) declared a diplomatic embargo in 1973-by Israelis. And more than one report has told of "substantial Israeli aid" to the MNR, thought to have been funded by the CIA and Saudi Arabia as well as South Africa and former Portuguese nationalists.

:: DM1 7/24/2006 10:49:00 PM [+] ::
...

An email I just sent to Chuck Hagel - Rep Senator, Nebraska

Dear Senator,

I hope this email finds you and your family in good health. I haven't contacted you for a while and I need to express some of my views on the state of our country. I believe now more than ever that your country needs your strong voice and competent leadership. I am always heartened to see you on the talk shows standing up for the republican wing of the Republican party. I am still out there trying to scare up converts to you and your ideals. I dare say that you remind me of the Eisenhower republicans of yesterday: strong abroad, compassionate at home, but always with enlightened leadership.

I don't know what it would cost, but if you could do a solid half hour of prime time to talk about your ideas and your plans for America's future, then I am positive that you would be elected in 2008 to lead our country and the world out of this darkness that now envelops us and into the light of a brighter future. I know that some of what I am wrinting sounds like political slogans and you are correct! I just want to let you know that once again you have a strong supporter and I will be with you to fight the good fight. Your character, integrity, and leadership are what the country needs.

You and your brother are heroes in my book. I know that you would disagree because you a humble man thankful just to be here. I heard you speak about your experience in Vietnam and I said that is the man for this job. Someone who will do the job with a modest demeanor, but a soaring spirit. I am very, very disturbed over the events overseas and the lack of leadership here at home. I also did four years in the Army (1981-1985) and thankfully never had to participate in combat. My purpose for serving my country was to physically protect my country if needed and to help preserve its values and ideals from harm. In no way did I imagine that the threat would also come from within.

We as a people are so much better than the situations that we currently face. The country needs a voice of hope and compasssion to calm the fears that have terrified us for the last five years. To be frank the United States is more than just a country. It is man's greatest experiment in the human condition. While we need to be ever vigilant, the country and its people could go away tomorrow, but our history is already written in the sands of time forever. My ancestors grew up on plantations and now I sit here a bank examiner for 14 years living the American Dream. When we actually do God's work with "peace on earth and goodwill towards men," then we as a people will get to the "promised land."

We owe it to all of those who came before us and all of those who come after us to take the country to a better tomorrow and a brighter future. Sorry for the long email, but I know that you understand. One more thing please call on the President to do all in his power to stop the madness in the Middle East and the tragedy in Iraq. Yours in the cause. Peace.

:: DM1 7/24/2006 10:12:00 PM [+] ::
...

:: Sunday, July 23, 2006 ::

A Terrorist State is Born

The following is an excerpt from "The Modern Middle East and North Africa," a book by Lois A. Aroian and Richard P. Mitchell:

The time frame is early 1948

Page 245 -

"Perhaps the most famous and critical instance of brutality occured at the small village of Dayr Yassin west of and on the road to Jerusalem. The I.Z.L. aided by Palmach and Lehi, massacred some 254 men, women, and children although the village had deliberatelt refused to allow Arab troops to occupy it for fear of such an attack. In The Revolt: The Story of the Irgun, I.Z.L. leader Begin justified the massacre on military grounds and claimed that without it, the Jewish state would have been stillborn. Occuring as it did in early April 1948, the onslaught encouraged the exodus of Arabs. Villagers expected to face another Dayr Yassin if they refused to evacuate their villages when pressured by Jewish Forces. Even in Akka, an overwhelming Arab city allotted to the Arab state, Arabs were frightened into leaving. Based on preplanned movements, Jewish forces began moving into western Galilee, part of the proposed Arab entity. Entire populations had no choice but to leave so that even before the British had evacuated and the Jewish state had been proclaimed, some 300,000 Arabs had fled from their homes..."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Begin that the authors speak of is Menachem Begin, the late Prime Minister of Israel, who at the time was engaging in terrorist activities against Arabs throughout what is now Israel. And there lies the rub. Israel and the U.S. continue to refer to Hammas and Hezbollah as terrorists groups while conveniently not mentioning that the State of Israel was born of terrorist actions that killed hundreds if not thousands of Arabs. Basically, the "chickens are coming home to roost" once again. And let's stop with the "God's people" nonsense, no God that I pray to would ever condone what happened at Dayr Yassin. The crocodile tears that are being shed for all of the murdered Israelies at the hands of Arab terrorists are truly misplaced. The sons and daughters of Israel must accept the fact that their lives will forever be marked by war, terror, and death. You can not have it both ways. It was fine to engage in terrorist activities as long as it was for the establishment of a Jewish State, but now that Israel has laid claim to most of the biblical Holy Lands, it wants the terrorism to stop. Not going to happen. If only the Arab folks who were affected by the terrorism unleashed by the Jewish terrorists prior to the creation of the State of Israel had short memories. These are the cold hard facts and if it makes me anti-semitic to state the facts as they are and their ramifications so be it. The truth hurts, but until Israel admits that it was created as a result of Jewish terrorism and begins to accept the fact that a viable Jewish state in the middle of hundreds of millions of Arabs is not a possibility, the Middle East problem will never be solved.

:: DM1 7/23/2006 10:11:00 AM [+] ::
...

:: Saturday, July 15, 2006 ::

I just sent this email to Sean Hannity:

You talk a lot about liberals and paint them as unpatriotic pansies. If that were true then this country would never have been established. I heard you on the air a while ago trying to explain why you never served in the military. You gave a weasely answer and told the caller who had inquired that you were not called to serve. You and I are the same age and you know as well as I do that all you had to do to enlist was go down to the nearest recruiting station. I did that and so did three of my closest friends. We all grew up in D.C. and did not have a lot of respect for the folks who were running the country. However, we knew that it was something we had to do. That right four young black liberal democrats volunteered, unlike you. When the caller called you on you response you stumbled and uttered some nonsense that I don't remember. You a patriot? Believe me, of us see you as a bully and a coward.

You and folks who think like you are the reason why a flawed ideology has enveloped this country and is sending us over a cliff. You talk very tough, but when it was your turn you passed. Growing up in D.C. could be a war at times. Guns, drugs and violence were always part of the equation, and still my friend and I volunteered. You claim to support the troops. Have you ever felt the impact of a grenade explode? Fortunately, I never had to serve in combat, but I have had the experience of feeling the impact of a grenade explode in basic training, and I was standing behind a concrete wall. The concussion was immediate and shook the area. a war plan should have a strategic focus with clear objectives that are well thoughout and reasonable given the specifics of the situation. The troops are in a meat grinder and no amount of rah! rah! is going to change that. The stories that I am hearing from the folks that have been over there are the opposite of the drivel that you spew daily. How about supporting the troops by requiring their leaders to lead? Leadership is more than just talking tough. It is also about being smart, pragmatic, and forward thinking. Bush posseses none of these qualities. Bush has shown himself to be very incompetent and incapable of effectively performing his duties.

This war was strategic mistake. This is why liberals and others don't support it. Those folks in Iraq have been fighting and dying for thousands of years. What arrogance that we think we know what's best for them. As bad as Saddam was, he was our hedge against Iran. The "hedge" is now gone, and you can see the results. If you remember when he gassed the Iranians, the U.S. government had nothing to say. The different groups that comprise Iraq hate each other and were waiting for a chance to settle old scores. Now the chickens are coming home to roost. One more thing, I worked in the RNC for three years after I got out of the Army from 1985 to 1988. As a computer programmer, I was responsible for processing voter lists and other data that helped spur the republicans to the majority statue they now enjoy. I have been a republican for 20 years. The current republican leadership and you have disgraced the party and its legacy for you have put emotion and ideology ahead of reason and logic.

:: DM1 7/15/2006 01:29:00 PM [+] ::
...

:: Saturday, July 01, 2006 ::

Death in the Chow Line

In my previous post I referred to a death in a chow line from an earlier post. The blog didn't take. Anyway the skinny of the story is that I was watching the Kathy Griffin reality show (shows you how much cable sucks!). Kathy Griffin is a comic that has appeared on numerous shows including Seinfeld. She was invited to entertain the troops in Iraq a few months ago. While visiting a medic unit at a base in Tikrit, she came upon a soldier that had been wounded by mortar fire directed at the base by insurgents. He explained that his fiancee and his friend who were fellows soldiers and standing right next to him were killed. Do you understand? They were killed trying to get some crummy chow while fighting a crummy war. The a-sholes have the nerve to call those who oppose this insanity unpatriotic. Well if being unpatriotic means that I oppose anyone trying to destroy my country and what it stands for well then I am as unpatriotic as it gets! The country's legacy deserves better.

:: DM1 7/01/2006 08:39:00 PM [+] ::
...

Lost for Words

I have stopped blogging regularly because at some point one must ask himself how much? How many times can you state the obvious without becoming boring and uninteresting? Bush is such a failure that flogging him is no longer an option. It's about the future of this Republic and our children, as hokey as that sounds. I haven't been this uncertain since 1968 as a six year old child living in south east D.C. The riots after King was murdered convinced me that things were never going to get better. Combine that with the Vietnam War. I remember a time in probably 1971 or 1972 as an elementary student at Andrew Jackson elementary. Now this is back in the day, but the little red brick schoolhouse is still standing at 35th and R Street N.W. in Georgetown. If you get a chance go see it because across the street is Montrose Park and to this day I still think that it is the best park in Rock Creek Park. Anyway, I'm playing in Montrose Park with my classmates and it was probably a day in May because when it got towards the end of the year our teachers would let us play in the park for the rest of the afternoon after lunch. A young black man who couldn't have been more than 23 or 24 came up to a group of us and started talking. Before you know it we were low crawling, throwing genades, and learning to aim rifles. Although we were using rocks and sticks at the time, the message was clear. Years later, I realized that the brother had probably been in Vietnam and had seen a lot of combat. They sent him back to the States and expected him to act as a normal human being when he had more than likely seen horrific acts of savagery and violence. Now they want to prosecute troops oin Iraq for acting like animals in a jungle. What are they supposed to do? Iraq is much like some of the streets of D.C. Only in D.C. you are not allowed to carry a gun to defend yourself. By the way the gun ban was passed in 1968. You know that we can't have a bunch of niggers with guns. Pretty soon they might try to defend themselves. Many of the soldiers came back to the States hooked on drugs, only knowing how to kill, and no other marketable skills whatsoever. So what did they do? Can you say "seed planters of the current destruction that is infesting black neighborhoods. " Look at the previous post. Folks are dying in CHOW LINE. What the F-ck is going on?

It's just very sad and I for one don't care if a democrat or republican is elected. Only that he or she is decent and honorable. Sh-t we are celebrating the 4th of July on Tuesday. Don't we owe it to those that came before us to be the keepers of the flame? Nixon might have been a crook, but he was not a stupid man, just paranoid. Bush has no intellectual qualities at all that prepare him for what he faces on a daily basis. You wanted an "average American" and you got him. The problem is the average American is ignorant of history both American and World. The average American is arrogant and thinks with his heart not with his head. He is God-fearing bless his heart, but he rarely practices what he preaches. And on and on. How about really rallying around the troops and getting them the f-ck out of Dodge? We owe them this much. Peace.

:: DM1 7/01/2006 08:36:00 PM [+] ::
...

:: Sunday, May 28, 2006 ::

Three months since my last post and the country is still going down the toilet. I don't get it if Bush was a black liberal democrat, the white wing of the Republican Party would have impeached him already. The was not a typo I meant to say the "white wing." How much incompetence will the white wing allow of Bush? Face it you were wrong and your ideology is flawed. It should have been about the country, yet you were more concerned with your own narrow interest. The 30% of you that are hard core Bush loyalists are traitors to the very ideals of the Constitution which you claim to revere. You wave your Bibles as weapons and political tools. Have you for one second considered that because of your "fake" christianity that God does not hear your payers, nor does he know you. The true Christians that I have met throughout my life never once had to proclaim their faith. It was obvious. You are no different than the snake oil salesmen, the grifters, and the poseurs that litter the Christian money making market. Jesus said that it was incumbent that we help the less fortunate. If we can spend $300 billion in three years in Iraq, obviously we can do more at home. But why should you care? Nearer my God to thee, right? Remove the redwoods from your eyes. None is so blind than those who can not see. Stop the disgrace!

:: DM1 5/28/2006 04:38:00 PM [+] ::
...

:: Friday, February 24, 2006 ::

Reposted from AmericaBlog.Com (Contains graphic language!)

Thursday, February 23, 2006I really need to weigh in on this asshole Gordon England by John in DC - 2/23/2006 07:42:00 PM

Joe, in a post below, quotes our illustrious Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England:

If the furor over the port deal should go on, Mr. England said, it would give enemies of the United States aid and comfort: "They want us to become distrustful, they want us to become paranoid and isolationist.Now, my mom reads this blog.

And I don't like gratuitous profanity because it's the easy way to evoke emotion when you don't have the right words. But Gordon England, you're a total asshole. How fucking dare you invoke Osama and September 11 in order to get us to support an administration policy that is in fact CONTRARY to our national security interests? Just because Bush is in bed with the Middle Eastern oil producers we're supposed to roll over and play dead while you guys just give away that store to your petro-buddies? How fucking dare you preach to us about being distrustful and paranoid? You son of a bitches have raised distrust and fear to a high art. You have repeatedly violated the legitimate shock and horror Americans felt after September 11, abused our collective grief and pain and psychosis in order to push your own petty, personal political goals, and now that we catch you red handed, you have the balls to invoke September 11 again?

Gordon England, how fucking dare you, you un-American piece of shit.You want to talk about giving aid and comfort to our enemies? How about your boss single handedly ripping the US Constitution to shreds, spying on American citizens, lying to the American public in order to get us to support his failed wars of convenience that have now so overstrapped our military we're unable to defend ourselves where and when it really matters? How many World Trade Centers do you think Osama would have been more than willing to bomb in order to achieve all that? You people fucking handed Osama the dismantling of our entire democracy, and he didn't even need to fire another shot.

And you lecture us about aiding and comforting the enemy? How fucking dare you even have the nerve to speak to us about what's best for American ports when your God damn administration still hasn't secured container traffic coming into those very same American ports from abroad? What's the latest figure of the percentage of foreign containers shipped into the US that are actually screened (you know, for innocent little things like nukes)? Is it 5% max that gets searched, all the rest just go merrily on their way into our country containing God knows what?And you have the nerve to lecture us about port safety and paranoia?When the president of the United States is so out of touch that he goes on vacation for three days while a hurricane is wiping an entire American city off the map, you better believe I get paranoid.

When the president of the United States is so out of touch that he doesn't even know until the next day that his own vice president nearly killed a man, you better believe I get paranoid.And when the president of the United States runs and hides for the entire day on September 11 while millions of us are forced to turn to Peter Jennings and Rudy Giuliani to be our presidents-by-proxy because George Bush is too much of a chicken shit to show his face for 12 fucking hours while we thought the world was ending, you better believe I get paranoid. Gordon England. Go fuck yourself.

:: DM1 2/24/2006 07:47:00 AM [+] ::
...

:: Monday, February 20, 2006 ::

What follows is a poem from my nephew who is a marine is harm's way. I am very proud of him as he performs his duty. These are very dangerous times and I am glad that he is healthy and well. Hope you like it.

I focus on these homeless
trying to find where home is
in them back alley cracks in the mix for real
Trying to lace their shoes so they can click their heals
Trying to find a place where they can get their mail
And in the mean time trying to get a meal
While I clean up these lines trying to get a deal
And most brothers of course are forced to steal
They resort to the steal, still I can't swallow this pill
Not even in gel form, when it rains it hailstorms
And the crime rate jumps every time a male's born
But we've got nine ways to trump be well warned
Most pawn themselves under some king and sell for him
I even see these young with guns in their backpacks
We rarely see twenty-one like a game of blackjack
And those are the sad facts, just knowing the stats stacked
Against you'll blow your hair out blonde like Mad Max
So many from broken homes grown with these scars
It tends to fall apart when you build a house of cards
That's why they say hope floats 'cause black folks can't swim
I navigate that low boat to pull ya'll right back in
We toss these issues like tissues and try to forget
If there's no visual on the issues then how can they exist
And if these issues don't exist, then what's there to admit
And politicians can't be blamed so their platforms legit
But I've held a few positions in one or two soup kitchens
A couple of group missions to give these youth vision
I'm not the type that'll find it amusing to talk about this confusion
And not offer solution And I speak urgency 'cause the emergency's now
So I develop my plan, put my hand to the plow
'Cause folks are panicking now, let's break these fantasies down
We run these black neighborhoods, so why can't they be ours?
'Cause we lack leadership and most black leaders quit
It hard to back your mayor when even he needs a fix
So problems go on unfixed, society grow more unstitched
It's not about being rich, but it's about being rich
In knowledge, in culture, in stature, in pride
To be honest it first has to happen inside
It seems the issue of us isn't dealt with enough
I only look down on you, if I'm helping you up

:: DM1 2/20/2006 05:25:00 PM [+] ::
...

:: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 ::

The Phony Anger

It's amazing to see the phony indignation on the right about remarks made at Coretta Scott King's funeral. She would have said the same things if she could have spoken. The right is wrong on most accounts. The agenda is narrow, self-focused, and definitely unchristian.

:: DM1 2/08/2006 05:26:00 PM [+] ::
...

:: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 ::

Coretta Scott King

I haven't been blogging as much lately, but I have to take this time and say a word about Coretta Scott King. She was definitely a "Queen" of a woman. To take the torch from a martyred husband. Not only did she succeed, but she succeeded magnificently with class and grace. I feel like an old man even though I am not quite 45. So many giants have passed the scene and we are truly the worse for it. Four presidents are sitting on stage paying tribute to this woman. It speaks volumes about her legacy and even more about her character and integrity. May she and her husband rest in peace.

Da' Militant One

:: DM1 2/07/2006 12:49:00 PM [+] ::
...

:: Friday, January 27, 2006 ::

IT's All Already Been Said!

I haven't been writing my blog lately because everything that is going down with Bush "The Dumber" is coming to a head. It must be very embarassing being a Bush supporter and having to lie to yourself everyday to ease the pain of knowing that YOU are responsible for this idiot and all the his f-ckups. It's very sad what has happened to the country and you all are DIRECTLY responsible. It will only get worse before it gets better and as I said before I hope that you all CHOKE on it!

:: DM1 1/27/2006 07:39:00 PM [+] ::
...

:: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 ::

Here's a repost of Dumbass Disgracing the Country Once Again:

I Thought This Was A Joke When I Heard It

Fresh Dubya

As you can probably see I was injured myself, not here at the hospital but in combat with a cedar. I eventually won.

-- Statement offered in the presence of servicemen and women wounded in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan (rather than by brush on Dubya's ranch), Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, Texas, Jan. 1, 2006

What an absolute ASS! This is the country's Commander-In-Chief? What a complete disgrace! It gets more embarrasing by the day. Enough is enough!

:: DM1 1/03/2006 07:48:00 PM [+] ::
...

:: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 ::

Aiding and Abetting the Terroists

Defense Lawyers in Terror Cases Plan Challenges Over Spy Efforts
By ERIC LICHTBLAU and JAMES RISEN

WASHINGTON, Dec. 27 - Defense lawyers in some of the country's biggest terrorism cases say they plan to bring legal challenges to determine whether the National Security Agency used illegal wiretaps against several dozen Muslim men tied to Al Qaeda.

The lawyers said in interviews that they wanted to learn whether the men were monitored by the agency and, if so, whether the government withheld critical information or misled judges and defense lawyers about how and why the men were singled out.

The expected legal challenges, in cases from Florida, Ohio, Oregon and Virginia, add another dimension to the growing controversy over the agency's domestic surveillance program and could jeopardize some of the Bush administration's most important courtroom victories in terror cases, legal analysts say.

The question of whether the N.S.A. program was used in criminal prosecutions and whether it improperly influenced them raises "fascinating and difficult questions," said Carl W. Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond who has studied terrorism prosecutions.
"It seems to me that it would be relevant to a person's case," Professor Tobias said. "I would expect the government to say that it is highly sensitive material, but we have legal mechanisms to balance the national security needs with the rights of defendants. I think judges are very conscientious about trying to sort out these issues and balance civil liberties and national security."

While some civil rights advocates, legal experts and members of Congress have said President Bush did not have authority to order eavesdropping by the security agency without warrants, the White House and the Justice Department continued on Tuesday to defend the legality and propriety of the program. Trent Duffy, a spokesman for the White House, declined to comment in Crawford, Tex., when asked about a report in The New York Times that the security agency had tapped into some of the country's main telephone arteries to conduct broader data-mining operations in the search for terrorists.
But Mr. Duffy said: "This is a limited program. This is not about monitoring phone calls designed to arrange Little League practice or what to bring to a potluck dinner. These are designed to monitor calls from very bad people to very bad people who have a history of blowing up commuter trains, weddings and churches."

He added: "The president believes that he has the authority - and he does - under the Constitution to do this limited program. The Congress has been briefed. It is fully in line with the Constitution and also protecting American civil liberties." Disclosure of the N.S.A. program has already caused ripples in the legal system, with a judge resigning in protest from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court last week. The surveillance court, established by Congress in 1978 to grant warrants in terrorism and espionage cases, wants a briefing from the Bush administration on why it bypassed the court and ordered eavesdropping without war
rants.

At the same time, defense lawyers in terrorism cases around the country say they are preparing letters and legal briefs to challenge the N.S.A. program on behalf of their clients, many of them American citizens, and to find out more about how it might have been used. They acknowledge legal hurdles, including the fact that many defendants waived some rights to appeal as part of their plea deals. Government officials, in defending the value of the security agency's surveillance program, have said in interviews that it played a critical part in at least two cases that led to the convictions of Qaeda associates, Iyman Faris of Ohio, who admitted taking part in a failed plot to bring down the Brooklyn Bridge, and Mohammed Junaid Babar of Queens, who was implicated in a failed plot to bomb British targets.

David B. Smith, a lawyer for Mr. Faris, said he planned to file a motion in part to determine whether information about the surveillance program should have been turned over. Lawyers said they were also considering a civil case against the president, saying that Mr. Faris was the target of an illegal wiretap ordered by Mr. Bush. A lawyer for Mr. Babar declined to comment.
Government officials with knowledge of the program have not ruled out the possibility that it was used in other criminal cases, and a number of defense lawyers said in interviews that circumstantial evidence had led them to question whether the security agency identified their clients through wiretaps.

The first challenge is likely to come in Florida, where lawyers for two men charged with Jose Padilla, who is jailed as an enemy combatant, plan to file a motion as early as next week to determine if the N.S.A. program was used to gain incriminating information on their clients and their suspected ties to Al Qaeda. Kenneth Swartz, one of the lawyers in the case, said, "I think they absolutely have an obligation to tell us" whether the agency was wiretapping the defendants. In a Virginia case, Edward B. MacMahon Jr., a lawyer for Ali al-Timimi, a Muslim scholar in Alexandria who is serving a life sentence for inciting his young followers to wage war against the United States overseas, said the government's explanation of how it came to suspect Mr. Timimi of terrorism ties never added up in his view.

F.B.I. agents were at Mr. Timimi's door days after the Sept. 11 attacks to question him about possible links to terrorism, Mr. MacMahon said, yet the government did not obtain a warrant through the foreign intelligence court to eavesdrop on his conversations until many months later. Mr. MacMahon said he was so skeptical about the timing of the investigation that he questioned the Justice Department about whether some sort of unknown wiretap operation had been conducted on the scholar or his young followers, who were tied to what prosecutors described as a "Virginia jihad" cell.

"They told me there was no other surveillance," Mr. MacMahon said. "But the fact is that the case against a lot of these guys just came out of nowhere because they were really nobodies, and it makes you wonder whether they were being tapped." John Zwerling, a lawyer for one of Mr. Timimi's followers, Seifullah Chapman, who is serving a 65-year sentence in federal prison in the case, said he and lawyers for two of the other defendants in the case planned to send a letter to the Justice Department to find out if N.S.A. wiretaps were used against their clients. If the Justice Department declines to give an answer, Mr. Zwerling said, they plan to file a motion in court demanding access to the information.

"We want to know, Did this N.S.A. program make its way into our case, and how was it used?" Mr. Zwerling said. "It may be a difficult trail for us in court, but we're going to go down it as far as we can." Defense lawyers in several other high-profile terrorism prosecutions, including the so-called Portland Seven and Lackawanna Six cases, said they were also planning to file legal challenges or were reviewing their options. "Given what information has come out, with the president admitting that they had avoided the courts, then the question becomes, do you try to learn whether something like that happened in this case?" said Patrick Brown, a Buffalo lawyer in the Lackawanna case. "I would have to talk to my client about whether that's a road we want to go down."

Gerry Spence, who is the lead counsel representing Brandon Mayfield, a Portland lawyer who was arrested in error last year in connection with the Madrid bombings and is now suing the government, said of the security agency program: "We are going to look into that. The calmest word I can use to describe how I feel about this is that I am aghast." Because the program was so highly classified, government officials say, prosecutors who handled terrorism cases apparently did not know of the program's existence. Any information they received, the officials say, was probably carefully shielded to protect the true source.

But defense lawyers say they are eager to find out whether prosecutors - intentionally or not - misled the courts about the origins of their investigations and whether the government may have held on to N.S.A. wiretaps that could point to their clients' innocence. Stanley Cohen, a New York lawyer who represented Patrice Lumumba Ford in the Portland Seven case, said many defendants would face significant obstacles in mounting legal challenges to force the government to reveal whether material obtained through the security agency's program was used in their cases.

"You really could have standing problems" for many of the defendants, Mr. Cohen said.
But some Justice Department prosecutors, speaking on condition of anonymity because the program remains classified, said they were concerned that the agency's wiretaps without warrants could create problems for the department in terrorism prosecutions both past and future. "If I'm a defense attorney," one prosecutor said, "the first thing I'm going to say in court is, 'This was an illegal wiretap.' "

:: DM1 12/28/2005 08:22:00 AM [+] ::
...

:: Saturday, December 17, 2005 ::

Another Thought

How much more do some of you need to see before Bush screws everything up even worse? He does not have the intelligence nor the pragmatism to change course . It will get worse before it gets better. The right wing of the repulican party will stop at nothing to retain power and Bush is going to do all he can to make it happen.

:: DM1 12/17/2005 09:14:00 AM [+] ::
...

Maybe the Tide is Turning
In response Bush's attics as M"Master of the Universe" the democrats and four brave republicans voted against cloture on extention of several provisions of the Patriot Act. Read all about it.
Dems block passage of Patriot Act in Senate December 17, 2005
BY DAVID ESPO

WASHINGTON -- In a stinging defeat for President Bush, Senate Democrats blocked passage Friday of a new Patriot Act to combat terrorism at home, depicting the measure as a threat to the constitutional liberties of innocent Americans. Republicans spurned calls for a short-term measure to prevent the year-end expiration of law enforcement powers enacted after Sept. 11.
''The president will not sign such an extension,'' said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), and lawmakers on each side of the issue blamed the other for congressional gridlock.
The Senate voted 52-47 to advance a House-passed bill to a final vote, eight short of the 60 needed to overcome the filibuster backed by nearly all Senate Democrats and a handful of the 45 Republicans.

''We can come together to give the government the tools it needs to fight terrorism and protect the rights and freedoms of innocent citizens,'' said Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.), arguing that provisions permitting government access to confidential personal data lacked safeguards to protect the innocent. ''We need to be more vigilant,'' agreed Sen. John Sununu, a Republican from New Hampshire. Some provisions continue Frist likened the bill's opponents to those who ''have called for a retreat and defeat strategy in Iraq. That's the wrong strategy in Iraq. It is the wrong strategy here at home.'' The practical implications of an expiration of the original law remained somewhat clouded. James Dempsey, executive director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, said law enforcement agencies could continue using Patriot Act provisions against all known terrorist groups such as al-Qaida, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and the Zarqawi group in Iraq. He said even newly discovered members would be subject to Patriot Act investigative tools. The events on the Senate floor underscored the extent of political change since 2001. Then, Feingold cast the only vote against the original Patriot Act, which was designed to give those tracking terrorists some of the authority that had been available only in intelligence investigations.

Much of the controversy involved powers granted to law enforcement agencies to gain access to a wealth of personal data, including library and medical records, in secret, as part of investigations into suspected terrorist activity. The bill also includes a four-year extension of the government's ability to conduct roving wiretaps -- which may involve multiple phones -- and continues the authority to wiretap ''lone wolf'' terrorists who may operate on their own.
Access to various personal records is obtained by order of a secret court established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

AP

:: DM1 12/17/2005 09:08:00 AM [+] ::
...

Are The Terrorists Winning?

After hearing that "C+ Augustus" allowed intelligence agencies to secretly spy on American citizens I thought about Osama and why he hasn't attacked us since 9/11. I started to write a blog, but found this analysis on www.uzzflash.com this morning. It says it all.

The Terrorists Don't Need to Destroy Democracy. Bush is Doing Their Work for The
December 17, 2005

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS

Bush's war on terrorism is an utter failure. In every respect, terrorism is growing, including in Iraq. And Bush is giving them the tools to commit another series of hijackings by letting them carry box cutters and knives on planes again. How transparent a move is that? He is practically inviting them to hijack another airplane so that he can blame the Democrats for letting it happen, when it is Bush and Cheney that are using terrorism, practically letting it happen, in order to consolidate their political power. Now we learn that Bush has illegally allowed spying on Americans -- and that the Pentagon is spying on Anti-War Protestors. It's ironic that the Berlin Wall fell when Bush is trying to create another iron curtain. Only we're on the Soviet side of it now. The terrorists -- including Osama who Bush swore to catch but in his usual inept performance failed to do so -- are justing sitting back and watching Bush do their work for them: destroying democracy.

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS

:: DM1 12/17/2005 08:57:00 AM [+] ::
...

:: Saturday, November 19, 2005 ::

Enough Is Enough

Enough is enough!. What the f*ck is going on? Who are those a**holes masquerading as republicans? Haskert, Delay, Hunter, Frist, Kyl, Cornin, and their spawn are f*cking this country up big time. You idiots that voted in these a*ssholes and that moron Bush have blood on your hands. Over 18,000 casualties and counting. For what? A fool's paradise? You all are an embarassment not only to the country, but to humanity. If you all are true christians then there truly is no God.

:: DM1 11/19/2005 08:16:00 AM [+] ::
...

:: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 ::

A Memo I wrote to that Idiot Pat Roberts in June 2003:

Memo to Pat Roberts:

What a poor excuse for a senator. What are you hiding? Bush told a lie to the American People when he declared in his State of the Union Address that Iraq had received uranium from Niger. If being investigated for lying to the American People is good enough for Bill Clinton, then it's good enough for Bush. Bush didn't lie under oath? That's your defense? Basically what you are saying is that it is perfectly alright to lie to the American People as long as you don't do it under oath. How about this if Bush is such an honest man, put him under oath and have him declare that all of his statements about Iraq and WMD were true. I doubt that he would take the offer. Pat Roberts you should immediately resign as you don't possess loyalty to the people you serve. Your loyalty is with Bush and you more interested in protecting him then the American People. What an utter disgrace!

:: DM1 6/12/2003 07:16:19 PM [+] ::

:: DM1 11/08/2005 06:20:00 AM [+] ::
...

Blog from June 2003:

Thursday, June 05, 2003 ::

Memo to the Sheep:

Let me get this straight Bill Clinton lies about oral sex and is impeached. The Dauphin lies about wars, the economy, and who knows what else and he is exalted. What is wrong with the picture? Clinton lied under oath? Well he was roundly condemned and suffered legal and political consequences. And while Clinton has the morals of a cat he was a tireless worker for the country and its citizens. I didn't vote for Clinton in '92 or '96, but a review of his entire record suggests that the continued criticism by mainly the Right is dubious at best. If those on the Right are truly sincere in their beliefs, they will hold the current occupant of the White House to the same high standards of honesty, integrity, and trust. Accountability was the catch word for Clinton; however, nothing it seems is Bush's fault. Now it really doesn't matter in the scheme of things whether the Right ever holds Bush accountable, but by not living up to the standards previously established, they bear partial responsibility for the fate of the nation and its people. History will be the judge and history as we all know can be a cruel and brutal mistress. How many soldiers' deaths in Iraq are acceptable? They will continue to die and for what? Two empty trailers? I sure hope that more is found not only for the credibility of the war, but the credibility of the nation.
:: DM1 6/05/2003 07:58:21 PM [+] ::

:: DM1 11/08/2005 06:18:00 AM [+] ::
...

A blog I wrote in May 2003:

:: Saturday, May 17, 2003 ::

Memo to "Fox and Friends":

Since you are asking if the Dems are sincere in supporting the Dauphin, why don't you ask if the publicity stunt of flying to the aircraft carrier with real heroes was sincere. In fact why don't you hold the Appointed one to the same high standards as Bill Clinton. When Clinton lied about sex, how many Americans died? When the fraud lied about WMD in Iraq, how many Americans and Iraqis died? Ask about his lack of a domestic policy. Put his entire record up against Clinton. How many jobs were generated while Clinton was president? What about the fraud? If the so-called job stimulus tax cut is so great will generate 1.4 million jobs, what about the other 600,000+ that have been lost under his mismanagment? Monica never gave Clinton what you folks have been giving the fraud. Get up off your knees and do some journalism for a change.

:: DM1 5/17/2003 08:44:35 PM [+] ::

:: DM1 11/08/2005 06:17:00 AM [+] ::
...