Iraq Is On Track

[Craig Read]

Yes yes good arguments. So you learned the above in let's say Grade 7 ?

And the following are also true:

-Hussein never invaded his neighbours

-Never used WMD on his own people

-Never attempted to create hegemony over ME oil supplies

-Created a democratic enlightened culture

-Had free press and free elections

-Never killed his own citizens

-Never threatened Israel with total destruction

-Never funded terror

-Had no plans for Nuclear weapons

-Loved baby seals

Some of these posts are truly pathetic.

[Crusader]

Claims that Saddam also used biolopgical weapons on his own people is also questionable since the instance occured during the 1984 war between Iraq and Iran. The town in question was also by the border of Iran.

[Black Dog]

-Hussein never invaded his neighbours

-Never used WMD on his own people

-Never attempted to create hegemony over ME oil supplies

-Created a democratic enlightened culture

-Had free press and free elections

-Never killed his own citizens

-Never threatened Israel with total destruction

-Never funded terror

-Had no plans for Nuclear weapons

-Loved baby seals

Thank goodness. Now that Hussein is gone we can rest, knowing there's no one anywhere else in the entire world who fits the above critirea. And I'm sure if they were, teh U.S would be really, really quick to step up, right? Right?

[Hugo]

Thank goodness. Now that Hussein is gone we can rest, knowing there's no one anywhere else in the entire world who fits the above critirea.

So, you admit that Saddam was a butcher of innocents, a terror to his own people and his neighbours, warmonger, megalomaniac psychotic, sponsor of terrorists... but it was a bad idea to remove him from power?

Please, in future, smoke the wacky baccy after you post here, not before.

[KrustyKidd]

In the Battle of Algiers ........

CK,

I would like to refute a few of these claims however know that you did not write it as it obviously was an editorial of some kind. and am afraid that you will just respond with unrelated info overload from more publications rather than join in on a potentially active discussion.

As a parry I will counter this quote and hope to show the biased nature of the article in question;

.

Then, as now, prisoners were taken and tortured,

And now, unlike before, the perpetrators are taken off active duty, charged, stand trial and find themselves in Lavenworth rather than still on active duty.

[Morgan]

The following url is a link to an eye-opening blog created by an Iraqi who is actually living in Iraq. It would appear that Iraqis are much happier with coalition "occupation" than left winger journalists are.

For example, this is his response today to Western news media mis-reporting Iraqis' desire to help coalition troops and omissions re: Iraqis' hatred for Baathists, Saddam, and foreign fighter-terrorists who sabotage progress in Iraq. This blog directly challenges the veracity of "news" that CBC/CNN, et al report. It appears, at least from this Iraqi's viewpoint, that Iraq is as much on track as is humanly possible.

http://healingiraq.blogspot.com/archives/2...802883205716753

-You see a handful of teenagers dancing in front of the camera celebrating dead Americans, and you judge an entire people, you start whining about pulling the troops out of Iraq and giving the Iraqis what they deserve. Are you people really so close-minded? It is the fault of your news agencies that show you what they want, its certainly not ours.

-According to a poll by an Iraqi agency, only 3% of Iraqis want Saddam back and less than 40% want the Americans to leave immediately. Did you even hear about these results?

-If you think that Iraqis aren't doing enough, then you're being mislead by your media. Thousands of people are applying to be members of IP, FPS, and the civil defense force. They are begging for the security to be in their hands. We know how to handle those scum. The Americans are more interested in being nice and all about human rights and free speech and stuff. We have our own Law and court systems which we can use but the CPA won't allow us to. They are being too lenient and forgiving on our expence. If you think that is what is required to build a successful democracy then you're too deluded. You don't know the first thing about the Iraqi society.

-Iraqis are providing intelligence to the CPA hourly. Just ask the soldiers here. Iraqis are cooperating in every way they can. They're losing their lives for it goddammit. If you aren't seeing it on tv, it isn't my fucking problem.

-Imagine yourself living in a neighbourhood with a large number of ex-Baathists/Wahhabis/extremists like I do. Would you go out and denounce the Jihadis/Ba'athists openly for everyone to see, and then get back from work one day to find your brother kidnapped or a threat letter hanging on your door? A friend of mine was standing in front of his house with his kids when a car drove by and emptied a magazine of bullets into them. You know why? Because he was working with the CPA in reconstructing Baghdad Airport. What do you think he did? He stubbornly refused to quit his job and bravely returned to work after spending a week in hospital. Would you do the same? Of course not. We expected most of the IP would simply leave their jobs after last weeks bombing, well they didn't. In fact there were thousands of parents volunteering to carry arms and protect the schools which their kids attend to allow the IP to do their real job.

-Another thing I'm sure you haven't seen in your news. There are paintings on the walls all over Baghdad warning Arab foreigners from a bloody revenge if they keep messing with our affairs. Iraqis are openly calling the GC to quit the Arab League.

***His blog puts CBC/CNN anti-American agenda driven mis-reporting of events in Iraq in proper perspective.

[SirRiff]

one blog is just as useless as one attack.

it would be reasonable to say that a small # want the US there, a small # are attacking the US, but most just want them to leave and are happy to be rid of saddam.

incidently, ABC news said that prewar violent deaths in bahgdad were 16 month. now its 660. i cant imagine why they are pissed.

SirRiff

[KrustyKidd]

Ya, the masses are too dumb to figure out that this is a permanent situation. The US will be there forever and like Arabs do, the ruling council will have time to become Liberal and spend their time (for the next thousand years or so) making laws on smoking in bars, anti gun legislation, HRDC grants, cultural trips abroad for foreign terrorists, fat expense accounts for ethics commisionaires and such, No real progress will be made, just guys shooting at guys. Hey, and the husbands and mothers of the kids who now have a school to go to will spend their off time bombing the new facilities that have been built so their children can learn how to grovel in rubble.

Nope, nothing will come of this. They liked being grabbed off the street by Saddam's guys better, all the neighbors watching in fear as some guy's wife gets dragged away for a little "action." That's the Liberal way I suppose?

[Craig Read]

According the liberal anti reality left, the Iraqi's are pining away for Hussein's regime, and sorely missed being raped, beaten, abused, threatened, extorted and killed. According to the liberal world view, the Arab peoples are just too stupid, too lazy, too dumb or depending on the depravity of the liberal in question, too cultured, too refined and too nuanced to accept crass orthodox Western liberalism.

Liberal views on world affairs have always been wrong so one should take the CNN [Clinton News Network] view that all is disaster with a grain of salt at best.

And what is Canada doing there ? Nothing much - $250 million in aid, no troops, no media support, and lots of CBC yearnings for an American failure.

Ditto the EU who contributed 0 dollars. [but of course the French are VERY concerned about the Iraqi people!].

Iraq presents clearly the positions of those in the world who are adults, accept responsibility, want to create a better world and understand the magnitude of the terrorist challenge. The adults also believe that the Arab people if given a chance will create stable, pro Western and pro Living governments and societies.

Arrayed against the adults are the Liberal children. Childish, puckish, with 12 year old mentalities that if only we love harder, the world will be a better place and that we must 'let the people decide' in Iraq and elsewhere what type of country they want to build. This fatuous view traces its origins back to Korea, Vietnam, Africa, Central America, Soviet Russia, China, Eastern Europe and now the Middle East. The fact that you don't rid the world of fascist violence without war is rather lost on the simple minded left who apparenlty have difficulty reading the lessons of history, being of course anti-historical ie. 'post modern'.

But hey these clowns think Al Gore is smart and that Harvard College is the epi-centre of intellectual activity.

[Crusader]

Quite on the contrary this is not the liberal view. Nobody on our side liked Al Gore, he was just the best we had at the time. You see, he's an idiot but unfortunately the lesser of two evils at the time. When people are faced with a hoorible travesty ( Like 9/11) they naturally rally behind there leader. The support Bush is due to 9/11 not any feelings of him doing a "great super job!!!!" Iraq was the biggest mistake of our time.

Iraq is in the heart of the middle east. The western views will not be welcome there, nor will they accept democracy. The "democracy" we have in place at this time is no more than a shame. A handful of officals the US choose to represent the Iraqi people. Why has there been no election? Because the US knows that the Iraqi people would "elect" another dictator. 70% of all Iraqi people would rather have Saddam still in power rather than the US. Wow, we are worse than Saddam!!!!!

I also think your living in the past about the whole "liberal Media" biased thing. The media is clearly conservitist biased. Donahue was cancelled and during the entire "iraq cat and mouse game" between the US and Iraq, you were 80% more likely to watch pro war topics. Fox is also clearly biased, giving us the ever watched and loved, "Sites and sounds of iraq" when they show us videos of bombs expoding and people running to the music of twangy "American" country music.

War is a last resort and shouldn't be portrayed in a positive way. The American people need to fear war instead of using it every time it's convienent for them to snatch some oil. Speaking of which, Haliburton and Bectel need to go and give Iraq there natural resources back.

[Crusader]

Speaking of the Conservitist biased media, this recent artical at commondreams about how the Bush adminisrtation itself is not releasing the "whole" story to the media. Thank you Boston Globe.

______________________________________________

Published on Wednesday, November 5, 2003 by the Boston Globe

How the White House Deletes the Truth

by Derrick Z. Jackson

PRESIDENT BUSH blames the media for filtering out good news on Iraq. He says he does not even read newspapers. "The best way to get the news is from objective sources," Bush said in a Fox News interview. "And the most objective sources I have are people on my staff who tell me what's happening in the world."

This is the same president who erases history itself.

Bush's desire for us to become ostriches over the deaths and wounding of American soldiers in Iraq -- 379 dead and 2,155 hurt at last count -- is but one more pathological act in sticking all of America into the sand. Bush severely limited access to the presidential papers of his father. Vice President Dick Cheney erected an iron curtain around his energy task force. Hundreds of Muslim immigrants were detained without due process and with no evidence they were involved in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The administration wiped out parts of an Environmental Protection Agency report that specifically tied human activities to global warming.

Bush has his eraser out again. The Justice Department recently released a commissioned report on diversity among its attorneys. Half of its 186 pages were blacked out.

The Bush administration made sure to filter in the good news in the report. The federal government, regardless of which party is in power, has long been more inviting to people of color at the entry level than the private sector. The Justice Department is no different. Its attorney work force is 15 percent of color and 38 percent women, compared to 12 percent and 30 percent, respectively, in the national legal labor pool.

The blacked-out pages betray a Justice Department that does not want America to know what happens after people are hired. The full report is available on a Web site called the Memory Hole, which electronically lifted the blacked-out sections. Among the conclusions of the full report were:

"When controlling for component, grade, and salary, we found that the average minority is currently residing approximately one-third step lower than the average white and the average woman is currently residing approximately one-half step lower than the average man. These effects are statistically significant."

"Race and gender combine for a particularly strong negative effect of identity for minority women."

"Section chiefs are an extremely critical element of the department's diversity climate. They have significant authority in recruitment, hiring, promotion, performance appraisal, case assignment, and career development. The section chief work force is not diverse, and turnover is low. This pattern, combined with the generally low attention that these managers pay to staff career development, leads minorities to perceive a lack of advancement opportunities."

The sections on "stereotyping," "racial and gender tension," "harassment behavior," and "mentoring," were completely blacked out. Asked if employees felt free to "express differences that may be due to different cultural backgrounds," 83 percent of white men and 73 percent of white women said yes. Only 56 percent of men of color and 42 percent of women of color said yes.

Deleted was this statement: "More than 40 percent of racial minorities participating in the study believe that stereotyping of minorities having limited abilities is a problem. Further analysis shows that an actual majority (51 percent) of nonwhite women hold this belief. Although we do not know the extent to which this belief is based on actual differential treatment of people, it clearly represents a barrier to the goal of creating an environment where all members feel equally valued and able to contribute."

An further analysis provides an even more deeper divide. While only 13 percent of white attorneys at the Justice Department say people of color are stereotyped, 60 percent of African-American lawyers say attorneys of color "are often stereotyped here."

Deleted was a paragraph that showed that about 20 percent of lawyers of color say they have personally experienced racial harassment at the department. Deleted was the fact that only 53 percent of attorneys of color felt that the promotion process was fair with respect to color compared with 87 percent of white attorneys. Deleted was the fact that 60 percent of women felt that the promotion process was fair with regards to gender, compared with 81 percent of men.

Deleted was the fact that only 45 percent of attorneys of color, compared with 74 percent of white lawyers, "feel that assignments I receive, and management decisions about my career development, have been made without regard to my race/gender/ ethnic origin."

With all these deletions, it was no surprise that all nine pages of "Recommendations" were blacked out. Hear no problem, see no problem, solve no problem. Bush blames the media when he is bringing back memories of Nixon erasing tapes. The administration deleted the data on global warming. It blacked out diversity reports. It disappears immigrants. With a war built on falsehoods failing with fatal consequences, Bush now wants to disappear the media. It is all part of Bush erasing you.

© Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company.

###

[cknykid]

American and British claims of the hell that Saddam could unleash against the Homeland "on any given day" (as Bush himself put it)--500 tons of chemical weapons, some already mounted in missile warheads, primed and ready for use; "mobile labs" cooking up deadly poisons on the run; eyewitness reports from Iraqi defectors providing irrefutable evidence of banned weapons production; and most ominous of all, an "active" and expanding nuclear arms program that could soon produce "a mushroom cloud" in America's cities--are all completely debunked by Kay's investigation. Kay found that the combination of UN inspections and other international oversight efforts had worked a wonder of disarmament: Iraq's production of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons--which had accelerated greatly in the late 1980s with the eager aid of Saddam ally George Bush I--ended in 1991 and was never re-started, Kay said. What's more, those oh-so-informative defectors--many of whom were paid millions by the Bush Regime--certainly fabricated much evidence that they supplied, and some perhaps were under the direct control of Saddam's secret service, Kay declared. The "aluminum enrichment tubes" that were the Bushists' "smoking gun" for Saddam's "aggressive" nuclear program were likewise abandoned to their fate by American forces, and why not? Even before the war, experts said the tubes couldn't be used in nuclear weapons, a fact belatedly confirmed by Kay's investigators. Some of these "sinister" tubes have been scavenged to make sewage pipes so: There were no weapons of mass destruction. There were no active WMD programs. There were no mobile weapons labs. There was no nuclear program or any efforts to obtain the technology to start one--even after UN inspectors were withdrawn in 1998. "On any given day," Saddam Hussein could not have threatened the United States or neighboring countries, nor passed any WMD material to any terrorist group anywhere in the world. These are not the ravings of anti-war dissidents, but the sober conclusions of David Kay's official $300 million investigation. The entire case for war, put forth so meticulously by the Bushists in national forums and at the UN, was based on lies, bribes, distortions--and threadbare intelligence cooked to order for the conspirators in the White House, who set up a system that deliberately ignored or rejected any finding that clashed with their unalterable plans for aggression and conquest. The Bushists are now in full flight from the reality of Kay's report: hiding it, twisting it, pretending it doesn't mean what it clearly says--but their own evidence cries out against them. They planned and executed a war of aggression in the full

[cknykid]

knowledge there case was a lie

[Black Dog]

Iraqi resistance gaining support: CIA.

WASHINGTON - A new, top-secret CIA report from Iraq warns that growing numbers of Iraqis are concluding that the U.S.-led coalition can be defeated and are supporting the resistance.

The report paints a bleak picture of the political and security situation in Iraq and cautions that the U.S.-led drive to rebuild the country as a democracy could collapse unless corrective actions are taken immediately.

Winning hearts and minds Part 1.

BAGHDAD, Nov. 11 — American soldiers handcuffed and firmly wrapped masking tape around an Iraqi man's mouth as they arrested him on Tuesday for speaking out against occupation troops.

Asked why the man had been arrested and put into the back of a Humvee vehicle on Tahrir Square, the commanding officer told Reuters at the scene: ''This man has been detained for making anti-coalition statements.''

He refused to say what the man said.

A U.S. military spokesman said he had no immediate information on the incident.

Winning hearts and minds Part 2.

Wed November 12, 2003: BAGHDAD (Reuters) - If Washington doubts there is Iraqi public support for guerrillas killing its troops, it should consider the teenagers who happily watched American blood spill on Wednesday.

After a roadside bomb ripped through a military vehicle and wounded two soldiers, Iraqi boys rushed out of their homes to survey the damage.

"This is good. If they ask me, I will join the resistance. The Americans have to die," said Ali Qais, 15. "They are just here to steal our oil."

The U.S. administration has long dismissed the guerrillas as isolated "terrorists" who are Saddam Hussein loyalists or foreign Islamic militants.

But the scene in the Sarafiya district of Baghdad suggests they are winning the sympathy of Iraqis, whose joy at Saddam's fall has been overshadowed by anti-American rage.

Teenage boys were irritated to hear that two American soldiers were just wounded, not killed.

"I saw them pushing their hands onto one of the Americans' chest. They must have died. One soldier's friend was crying," said Abdullah Oman, 18.

His fury has been fueled by what he says is an American desire to humiliate all Iraqis.

[Morgan]

Black Dog,

1. All 3 of your links relate to a "secret" CIA report that was "leaked" to the Philadelphia Inquirer and whose contents were summarized by a journalist on staff at the newspaper on Nov.12.

The article quotes "unnamed administration officials" as sources for confirming that the "classified " document's bleak view of the situation in Iraq has been "privately" endorsed by Iraq's U.S. governor, Paul Bremer.

No offense, but words like secret, leaked, unnamed sources, classified, privately ...make it hard to evaluate the credibility of the article because one cannot compare how much is true, how much is spin, how much information has been omitted/taken out of context.

Furthermore, the leaker of classified information purportedly supporting a negative image of the situation in Iraq might be a biased source of information, perhaps even a Bush hater in the CIA or military ranks.

2. As for the Iraqi teens celebrating the GI deaths in the helicopter crash, I recall an Iraqi blogger actually living in Baghdad[Healing Iraq] addressing that incident saying that this small group of teens did not represent the majority and that with Baathists and Al Feyadeen still hiding within local neighborhoods, it was dangerous for the average Iraqi to go public with a counter demonstration to challenge the one staged by the Iraqi teens at the crash site.

3. With regards to GI's putting tape on a suspect's mouth who made anti-coalition statements and Reuters reporters being miffed at the US commander for only giving them a brief statement...what does that prove?

Perhaps the man was shouting inflammatory hate speech against coalition troops? In that case, I for one don't believe he should be allowed "free speech," and that tape over his mouth was a non-physical method to contain the continued outpouring of vile words.

That Reuters was not embraced and treated as an "equal" in a free and open information exchange with the US commander is laughable in itself. Reuters should get a clue and adopt a less self-important vision of its place in Iraq.

4. Here's what the head honcho in the military, General Abizaid just announced an hour ago. From his perspective, it's the same, same old usual suspects and not ordinary Iraqi citizen throwing their hats in with the insurgents. He feels that these are just more Saddam supporters who are coming out of the woodwork anong with help from foreign Al Queda fighters coming into Iraq.

US General says only 5000 insurgents in Iraq, AP News, Nov.13

The forces opposing the U.S.-led military coalition in Iraq total no more than 5,000 insurgent fighters, the top American general in the region said Thursday. Abizaid said the largest and most dangerous portion of the opposition forces consists of loyalists of ousted president Saddam Hussein. Foreign fighters also pose a threat and are entering Iraq through porous borders, Abizaid said.

5. For the life of me I can't figure out why the Left takes such obvious glee in any story or rumour, no matter whether it is false or true, that coalition troops might be overwhelmed by Sadam supporters and Al Queda fighters.

And what does the Left think will happen to ordinary Iraqis if the coalition troops fail? Happy days again like before when Uncle Saddam was in charge ...did all the trains run on time then? What about the rape rooms, mass graves, children's prisons, Saddam's humongous personal bank accounts abroad while his own people lived terror-ridden humble life styles?

I think the Left needs to look more closely at the "side" they cheer for as well as who stands to lose the most if the Left's dreams come true and coalition troops withdraw.

[Black Dog]

From his perspective, it's the same, same old usual suspects and not ordinary Iraqi citizen throwing their hats in with the insurgents. He feels that these are just more Saddam supporters who are coming out of the woodwork anong with help from foreign Al Queda fighters coming into Iraq.

Again, we've seen no evidence of this being the case, beyond the constant pronouncments of this "fact" by U.S. officials.Your assesment of the alleged CIA report applies here as well, no? (Interestingly enough, there's an article from the Guardian on the same report that estimates the insurgency at 50,000 strong)

For the life of me I can't figure out why the Left takes such obvious glee in any story or rumour, no matter whether it is false or true, that coalition troops might be overwhelmed by Sadam supporters and Al Queda fighters

Again, show me some substansial evidence to indicate that the resistance is all Al Q and Ba'athists and I'll consider this point. Till then, this is a straw man.

And what does the Left think will happen to ordinary Iraqis if the coalition troops fail? Happy days again like before when Uncle Saddam was in charge ...did all the trains run on time then? What about the rape rooms, mass graves, children's prisons, Saddam's humongous personal bank accounts abroad while his own people lived terror-ridden humble life styles?

False premise. One can oppose the illegal invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq by a foriegn military force without endorsing the previous regime.

[Morgan]

1. differences between reliability/credibility of info. from General Abizaid who's in charge of 35,000 GI's fighting in Iraq, who visits Iraq in person, who speaks Arabic because he is an Arab-American himself...versus a Philadelphia based journalist's version of a leaked secret CIA report, confirmed by unnamed US officials...ummm, where do I begin?

General Abizaid is going on record with his comments about the approximate numbers and identity of the "insurgents" in Iraq. General Abazaid has a reputation to worry about...he's accountable to Congress and he has much more to lose for making misleading/untruthful press announcements.

However, unnamed US officials cannot be held accountable, and the Philadelphia Inquirer reporter's position is, in fact, enhanced with his boss if he presents a controversial theory that sells more newspapers. Ditto for the Guardian, which like the BBC, has been notoriously anti-American. The "talking heads" at the Guardian and the BBC were the same guys who forecast 100,000 or more Iraqi deaths if the coalition troops invaded, blah, blah...

I believe various sources have been quoted in the past ranging from military sources to Iraqis living in the middle of conflict about the Baathists, Al Feyadeen, and foreign fighters being the "insurgents", but you refuse to believe what's said.

Based on the content of our previous posts, I have the distinct impression that your mind was made up from the get-go and you hope for US "occupation" failure in Iraq. I have no desire to waste my time doing any more research for a negative mindset.

3.

False premise. One can oppose the illegal invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq by a foriegn military force without endorsing the previous regime.

Your comments make no sense to me. If there were no so-called "illegal invasion" by the coalition military force, Saddam would still be in power. That amounts to tacit support of the previous regime.

[SirRiff]

All 3 of your links relate to a "secret" CIA report that was "leaked" to the Philadelphia Inquirer and whose contents were summarized by a journalist on staff at the newspaper on Nov.12.

The article quotes "unnamed administration officials" as sources for confirming that the "classified " document's bleak view of the situation in Iraq has been "privately" endorsed by Iraq's U.S. governor, Paul Bremer.

No offense, but words like secret, leaked, unnamed sources, classified, privately ...make it hard to evaluate the credibility of the article because one cannot compare how much is true, how much is spin, how much information has been omitted/taken out of contex

you cant be serious,

obviously i am also suspect of anythign that isnt right in front of my nose, but when the washingtonpost or some reputable news organization quotes a CIA source, its usually true. just like the leaked CIA operative, or all the classified pre iraq reports that have come out, people leak to news organizations specifically because they feel this is information that needs to come.

you notice government never comes out and absolutely denies this stuff, because if they did the memo would appear front page the next day.

its been reported for months that many inside the CIA disagree with the use of intelligence, and several have spoken out through newspapers.

SirRiff

[Morgan]

its been reported for months that many inside the CIA disagree with the use of intelligence, and several have spoken out through newspapers.

I can't recall any articles about insiders in the CIA speaking out to newspapers. I do recall poor intelligence gathering by the CIA not only with respect to Iraq but also it was the CIA that dropped the ball re: 9/11. George Tenet, head of the CIA who was a Clinton appointee, should have been fired long time ago. He's intent on running the CIA into the ground.

Fyi, the Washington Post is no different than the NYT. Both are left wing positioned newspapers. Donald E. Graham, CEO of the Post and son of Katherine Graham, is a life long Democrat and member of the Bilderberg Planning Group, of New World Order fame. His uncle is Democrat Senator Bob Graham of Florida.

As for the recent leak ,you speak of, regarding the CIA "operative"...are you talking about the case involving Left wing ex-Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV and his wife, Valerie Plame, who had a desk job in the CIA which people knew about irrespective of the alleged "leak?" The whole story was a tempest in a teapot that was much to do about nothing. Wilson is a Democrat party lackey who made a fool of himself in the process.

I think Mark Steyn says it best:

If sending Joseph C. Wilson IV to Niger for a week is the best the world’s only hyperpower can do, that’s a serious problem. If the Company knew it was a joke all along, that’s a worse problem. It means Mr Bush is in the same position with the CIA as General Musharraf is with Pakistan’s ISI: when he makes a routine request, he has to figure out whether they’re going to use it to try and set him up. This is no way to win a terror war.

Bigger than Watergate, By Mark Steyn, October 11, 2003

The CIA leak that never was, By Robert Novak, Oct.01, 2003

[Black Dog]

General Abizaid is going on record with his comments about the approximate numbers and identity of the "insurgents" in Iraq. General Abazaid has a reputation to worry about...he's accountable to Congress and he has much more to lose for making misleading/untruthful press announcements.

The naivete in the above statement is astounding. Do you honestly believe, in light of events from the crazed General Boyton's pronouncements and subsequent lack of action on the part of the administration to Rumsfeld's out right denial of statements he made on the record, that there is any accountability here? if so, I've got a pretty sweet bridge I can let you have for a good price...

The "talking heads" at the Guardian and the BBC were the same guys who forecast 100,000 or more Iraqi deaths if the coalition troops invaded, blah, blah...

Well, casualty numbers are unknown. Chances are, they were right (iraqbodycount.com has reported almost 10,000 civilain deaths. Those are just the one's that get reported. We have no idea how many Iraqis died in cobat and how many deaths have gone unreported. 100,000 dead seems entirely realistic at this point.)

Your comments make no sense to me. If there were no so-called "illegal invasion" by the coalition military force, Saddam would still be in power. That amounts to tacit support of the previous regime.

Wow. That's a really screwed up way of thinking. Nowhere did I indicate support for Saddam or the status quo. Just because I didn't endorse an invasion that (in the words of Bush 1) "would have incurred incalculable human and political costs does not mean I'm any great fan of Saddam. Not a difficult concpet to grasp.

[righturnonred]

in light of events from the crazed General Boyton's pronouncements

Boykin came under criticism when reports surfaced of his comments during several speeches at evangelical Christian churches. Boykin said the enemy in the war on terrorism was Satan, that God had put Bush in the White House and called one Muslim Somali warlord an idol-worshipper.

-The enemy in the war on terrorism is Satan.

-From his perspective, God put Bush in the White House. What the hell is wrong with that?

-Adid is an evil man and an idol-worshipper. These people have hijacked Islam. They worship a false, twisted version of religious orthodoxy. Boykin's comments were not directed at conventional followers of Islam.

If you consider these statements crazed, then you haven't been listening to the secular, atheist, anti-America, anti-religion, treasonous fanatics on the left. Holy sh*t, I can't believe this. The radical left has completely tried to destroy this man, and for what? Refusing to conform to the Orwellian political correctness of the left?

Your comparison to General Abizaid is ridiculas.

Well, casualty numbers are unknown

New Flash: People Die In War. I have about as much faith in casualty assessments from iraqbodycount.com as I do from MoveOn.org or some other radical organization of America hating traitors. These people don't give a crap about civilians in Iraq, they only care about waging their culture war in the United States in an effort to undermine family, religion, marraige, and every other sacred institution in this country. Sooner or later, conservatives in this country are going to stand up to the communist trash trying to rip this nation apart, and you can be guaranteed that heads are gonna roll.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear righturnonred,

your last post is amusing, and somewhat misguided.

...United States in an effort to undermine family, religion, marraige, and every other sacred institution in this country.

The culture of America IS what is destroying these values, it is not being done from the outside. Mammon is America's new GOD and all can see how the above values have crumbled before his power.

[righturnonred]

The culture of America IS what is destroying these values, it is not being done from the outside. Mammon is America's new GOD and all can see how the above values have crumbled before his power.

The is the most bazzar post i've seen, ever. What the hell are you talking about? Who the crap is Mammon, and where do you get the lame idea that "American culture is destroying our values"? You make know sense and frankly you sound like an idiot. Values and norms are the building blocks of culture, a culture being altered by the left in some perverted attempt at social engineering. Graduate from high school and then we'll have a discussion.

[Black Dog]

-The enemy in the war on terrorism is Satan.

-Funny, I don't remember seeing anybody with horns, pitchfork and a tail hanging about New York on 9-11.

Satan, contrary to the Louvin Brother's opinion, ain't real.

-Adid is an evil man and an idol-worshipper. These people have hijacked Islam. They worship a false, twisted version of religious orthodoxy. Boykin's comments were not directed at conventional followers of Islam.

So you're saying this is a holy war...perhaps a jihad?

If you consider these statements crazed, then you haven't been listening to the secular, atheist, anti-America, anti-religion, treasonous fanatics on the left. Holy sh*t, I can't believe this. The radical left has completely tried to destroy this man, and for what? Refusing to conform to the Orwellian political correctness of the left?

Funny how secular, atheist and anti-religion are used as perjoratives here. Persoanally, I take them as a compliment.

It's funny how many of the ultra-rightwing Christians that are on "our" side (Boyton, for example) bear a striking resemblence to the radical Islamists" that are the 'bad guys." The rhetoric is astoundingly similar; only the names have been changed.

New Flash: People Die In War. I have about as much faith in casualty assessments from iraqbodycount.com as I do from MoveOn.org or some other radical organization of America hating traitors.

Yes, people die in war, yet your denial of the civilian casualty figures indicates you are unwilling to face that fact yourself.

Pay attention. Iraqbodycount gathers it's data from media reports of civilian casualties and is very meticulous in confirming their information and cross-checking it. They are doing this body count because the U.S. won't.

These people don't give a crap about civilians in Iraq, they only care about waging their culture war in the United States in an effort to undermine family, religion, marraige, and every other sacred institution in this country. Sooner or later, conservatives in this country are going to stand up to the communist trash trying to rip this nation apart, and you can be guaranteed that heads are gonna roll.

Looks like someone missed their meds.

[righturnonred]

-Funny, I don't remember seeing anybody with horns, pitchfork and a tail hanging about New York on 9-11. Satan, contrary to the Louvin Brother's opinion, ain't real.

On the contrary, true evil is a very real force in this world. Satan, obviously a mythological figure, is a representation of true evil. The fact that liberals can't seam to grasp the nature of absolute evil is exactly the problem here. You cannot equivocate radical islamic fundamentalism and you cannot negotiate with it either. The sooner you realize this, the better off we are.

What are you suggesting with you're comments here, that the perpetrators of 9-11 were not clearly consumed by evil?

-Adid is an evil man and an idol-worshipper. These people have hijacked Islam. They worship a false, twisted version of religious orthodoxy. Boykin's comments were not directed at conventional followers of Islam.

So you're saying this is a holy war...perhaps a jihad?

It's a war against Jihad. Don't try to twist my words.

Funny how secular, atheist and anti-religion are used as perjoratives here.  Persoanally, I take them as a compliment.

I don't find it funny. I find it depressing. These values, or rather lack there of, is the force directly responsible for this destruction of this country's moral fiber.

The only thing that communists like you have in common with islamic radicals is hatred for America. It is an ironic fact however that if these forces of evil, with which you align yourself, were to succeed, it would be secular, atheists like you who would be the first to die.

It's funny how many of the ultra-rightwing Christians that are on "our" side (Boyton, for example) bear a striking resemblence to the radical Islamists

There seem to be a lot of serious problem that you regard as funny. First off, Boykin is not an ultra right-wing Christian. By that definition, anyone who professes a belief in Jesus and possess a strong desire to protect the traditions of his religion is an "ultra-rightwing conservative" Talk about a perjorative. According to your view, any who reads bible is a right wing nut. You need to gain some perspective. Your comment shows how out of touch you are and your inability to grasp the true nature of islamic fundamentalism.

Yes, people die in war, yet your denial of the civilian casualty figures indicates you are unwilling to face that fact yourself.

Pay attention. Iraqbodycount gathers it's data from media reports of civilian casualties and is very meticulous in confirming their information and cross-checking it.

While I deny the accuracy of iraqbodycount.com's casualty figures, I do not deny that civilian casualties have occured and continue to occur to a lesser extent. Some civilian casualties are unavoidble in any armed conflict, but this fact does not destroy the justification for war in general.

They are doing this body count because the U.S. won't.

The DoD won't do it because they can't. Despite claims made by iraqbodycount.com, it is impossible to varify the authenticity of civilian casualty reports. How in the hell would iraqbodycount.com have the ability and resources to go into Iraq and validate every report of a civilian casuality. They have absolutely no ability to establish reality from propaganda.

Looks like someone missed their meds.

I always take my Zoloft on time.