Jamie Schmidt turned to me, holding the yellow crayon in her hand, “Here, shove it up your butt.” Never in my life had such a proposition been presented me, not even had such an idea ever occurred to me. Stick the crayon into my butt? It was not until the end of the day while I waited in line with the other bus riders that the seriousness of it all sunk in.
Indignant, I dropped my backpack, marking my place in the single-file line.
“Ms. Criswell”, I said, my head craned back to meet her shoe leather P.E. teacher face, “Jamie told me to stick a crayon into my b-u-t-t.”
“Excuse me?”
“Jamie told me to stick a crayon into my b-u-t-t.”
“She did? Jamie’s not even here, Johnny”
Indeed, she had left with the other Kool kid bike riders/ walkers.
“She told me in music class.”
“That was four hours ago.”
The girl I love told me to stick a thick, from-the-eight-pack crayon in my butt and all I get is a lecture on timely tattling?
Ms. Criswell promised to talk to her about it, but I never really believed she would or did. I suspected Ms. Criswell party to the deep conspiracy against my well-being ever since she made my permanent square dance partner Michelle Kraft, who furiously picked her nose when she thought nobody was looking.
As I resumed my place in line for the long bus ride home, I resolved to not get bothered by all of this. I could turn the other cheek. After all, I was an anointed man of God, and had been for nearly a month.
26.5.04
Texas: Sail: "Call David at 325 388 4521 or email davidluc@earthlink.net to reserve your sailing adventure."
Texas: Sail: "Call David at 325 388 4521 or email davidluc@earthlink.net to reserve your sailing adventure."
The New York Times > International > Middle East >The New York Times begins the long process of explaining their atrocious march-to-war coverage. There were so many discrepcancies between the official Iraq line and numerous solid sources, a casual reader of foreign newspapers could have told you that the NYT should exchange their black ink for some brown, as 99 percernt of their front page coverage was but d.c.p.r.b.s.
"But we have found a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been. In some cases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionable now, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged. Looking back, we wish we had been more aggressive in re-examining the claims as new evidence emerged- or failed to emerge"
Note to Times: Yes, you must corraborate government sources. I know it makes your job a little more difficult, and your operation a little more expensive, but, hey, that's the price of writing history.
"But we have found a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been. In some cases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionable now, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged. Looking back, we wish we had been more aggressive in re-examining the claims as new evidence emerged- or failed to emerge"
Note to Times: Yes, you must corraborate government sources. I know it makes your job a little more difficult, and your operation a little more expensive, but, hey, that's the price of writing history.
25.5.04
Alvin, Texas
The Lewis Residence
Thursday, February 3, 1983
Having just gone to bed around 9:30 p.m., the Sharon and I were beginning to read when John came running into our room saying he had seen a vision of Jesus. We, his two older sisters included, were all stirred about this. We spent some time asking questions about the vision. After a period of time we all returned to our beds. A short time later we began to hear him crying again. We waited in the hallway for him to come out of his room, and when he did he said he had seen another vision of Jesus. This time Jesus was not a normal size, but rather so large only his face could fill the room.
I recalled the scriptures of I Samuel 3, where the lord was calling Samuel and each time he heard the voice of the Lord he would run to Eli and ask what was needed. Finally Eli realized it must the Lord calling to Samuel. Eli told Samuel that if he heard the voice again to ask the Lord what he wanted of him.
After the excitement died down and the girls quit their chatter, we once again returned to our beds. Things looked like they might return to normal.
Then John starts wailing and beating his bed. It’s a good thing we live I the country atmosphere without neighbors being very close because I know they would think we were beating our children.
John stops crying and comes running out of his room, throwing his arms around my waist. Jesus had appeared again. When John asked what he wanted of him, the Lord said he wanted him in the ministry and he also wanted him to heal people.
We put him bed with us this time, I went to sleep and John was still awake as was his mother. His mother asked him why he was staring at his hands. In a calm voice he replied, “Mom, the Lord told me he was putting healing in my hands.” He held up his hands, showing his mother the one red palm and the other having red splotches. He said his palms tingled but the splotches tingled more.
Once again John stayed home from school because it was late when all of this was over.
The Lewis Residence
Thursday, February 3, 1983
Having just gone to bed around 9:30 p.m., the Sharon and I were beginning to read when John came running into our room saying he had seen a vision of Jesus. We, his two older sisters included, were all stirred about this. We spent some time asking questions about the vision. After a period of time we all returned to our beds. A short time later we began to hear him crying again. We waited in the hallway for him to come out of his room, and when he did he said he had seen another vision of Jesus. This time Jesus was not a normal size, but rather so large only his face could fill the room.
I recalled the scriptures of I Samuel 3, where the lord was calling Samuel and each time he heard the voice of the Lord he would run to Eli and ask what was needed. Finally Eli realized it must the Lord calling to Samuel. Eli told Samuel that if he heard the voice again to ask the Lord what he wanted of him.
After the excitement died down and the girls quit their chatter, we once again returned to our beds. Things looked like they might return to normal.
Then John starts wailing and beating his bed. It’s a good thing we live I the country atmosphere without neighbors being very close because I know they would think we were beating our children.
John stops crying and comes running out of his room, throwing his arms around my waist. Jesus had appeared again. When John asked what he wanted of him, the Lord said he wanted him in the ministry and he also wanted him to heal people.
We put him bed with us this time, I went to sleep and John was still awake as was his mother. His mother asked him why he was staring at his hands. In a calm voice he replied, “Mom, the Lord told me he was putting healing in my hands.” He held up his hands, showing his mother the one red palm and the other having red splotches. He said his palms tingled but the splotches tingled more.
Once again John stayed home from school because it was late when all of this was over.
17.5.04
Often on these pages I have praised Patrick Buchanan for his critique of Neocons and of Globalization. So, I am compelled to castigate the WASP on his latest piece. Rather than celebrating the birth of the codification of "seperate is not equal", Buchanan seizes the anniversary of Brown V. The Board of Education as occassion to grieve the death of traditional America by a "liberal, secularist" Supreme Court.
He maintains that B. v. E. established the precedent of an activist judicial branch usurping the laws set down by elected representatives Buchanan says the Supreme Court rulings following desegration- abolition of organized prayer, Bible readings, the Ten Commandments, Easter pageants, and so on- are evidence of the Court's on going mission to de-Christianize public schools.
It seems pretty damn sad that a man as wise as Buchanan can come from a place so spiritually inept that he thinks a classroom whose door is locked to negros, yet filled with cleanly pressed white boys and white girls reciting morning prayers beneath a shiny cross is in anyway Christian. I pitythese old white men who cling to their symbols of Christianity when they have long lost its substance.
Note to Patrick Buchanan: A burning cross is not a symbol of Christianity.
He maintains that B. v. E. established the precedent of an activist judicial branch usurping the laws set down by elected representatives Buchanan says the Supreme Court rulings following desegration- abolition of organized prayer, Bible readings, the Ten Commandments, Easter pageants, and so on- are evidence of the Court's on going mission to de-Christianize public schools.
It seems pretty damn sad that a man as wise as Buchanan can come from a place so spiritually inept that he thinks a classroom whose door is locked to negros, yet filled with cleanly pressed white boys and white girls reciting morning prayers beneath a shiny cross is in anyway Christian. I pitythese old white men who cling to their symbols of Christianity when they have long lost its substance.
Note to Patrick Buchanan: A burning cross is not a symbol of Christianity.
12.5.04
Balkinization
This will be my last politcal post. When I started this blog, I needed an outlet in our march to war. There is nothing I can say that is not being articulated by better writers with more informed blogs. Some are linked to the right. Even the nightly news has finally moved beyond their euphoria of grief and seem to be covering the chasm between reality and the White House p.r.b.s. Of course, Koppel and Co. are 15 months and 15,000 dead Iraqiis too late.
So, in short, I will not stay the course.
This will be my last politcal post. When I started this blog, I needed an outlet in our march to war. There is nothing I can say that is not being articulated by better writers with more informed blogs. Some are linked to the right. Even the nightly news has finally moved beyond their euphoria of grief and seem to be covering the chasm between reality and the White House p.r.b.s. Of course, Koppel and Co. are 15 months and 15,000 dead Iraqiis too late.
So, in short, I will not stay the course.
7.5.04
5.5.04
29.4.04
6.4.04
by Karen Hagen Liste, 1994
: "the price of liberation is very high, as it requires the dissolution of all beliefs, images and constructs about ourselves, and their conscious resolution in the absolute silence which precedes creation. "
: "the price of liberation is very high, as it requires the dissolution of all beliefs, images and constructs about ourselves, and their conscious resolution in the absolute silence which precedes creation. "
1.4.04
Medical evacuations in Iraq war hit 18,000 - (United Press International): "Mosley said that after returning from Iraq last summer, he has had to drive 195 miles each way at his own expense to see a specialist. He said the Army put him out of service without compensating him for a neck injury or vertigo apparently triggered from mortar explosions. He can no longer work his civilian job."
This is too wierd.These are two excerpts given by Washington Times Editor Rev. Moon.
"A new era has arrived today. The number of people around the world who have received my teaching and are standing resolutely for the sake of building the Kingdom of Peace is growing by leaps and bounds. Heaven and earth are shaking with the cries of bright young people who are determined to build true families even if they must offer their lives in order to protect their purity. Already, we find hundreds of millions of blessed families around the world. These families are shoring up a world in which ethics and morality are rapidly deteriorating.
"The five great saints and many other leaders in the spirit world, including even Communist leaders such as Marx and Lenin, who committed all manner of barbarity and murders on earth, and dictators such as Hitler and Stalin, have found strength in my teachings, mended their ways and been reborn as new persons. Emperors, kings and presidents who enjoyed opulence and power on earth, and even journalists who had worldwide fame, have now placed themselves at the forefront of the column of the true love revolution. Together they have sent to earth a resolution expressing their determination in the light of my teaching of the true family ideal. They have declared to all Heaven and Earth that Reverend Sun Myung Moon is none other than humanity's Savior, Messiah, Returning Lord and True Parent. This resolution has been announced on every corner of the globe."
"A new era has arrived today. The number of people around the world who have received my teaching and are standing resolutely for the sake of building the Kingdom of Peace is growing by leaps and bounds. Heaven and earth are shaking with the cries of bright young people who are determined to build true families even if they must offer their lives in order to protect their purity. Already, we find hundreds of millions of blessed families around the world. These families are shoring up a world in which ethics and morality are rapidly deteriorating.
"The five great saints and many other leaders in the spirit world, including even Communist leaders such as Marx and Lenin, who committed all manner of barbarity and murders on earth, and dictators such as Hitler and Stalin, have found strength in my teachings, mended their ways and been reborn as new persons. Emperors, kings and presidents who enjoyed opulence and power on earth, and even journalists who had worldwide fame, have now placed themselves at the forefront of the column of the true love revolution. Together they have sent to earth a resolution expressing their determination in the light of my teaching of the true family ideal. They have declared to all Heaven and Earth that Reverend Sun Myung Moon is none other than humanity's Savior, Messiah, Returning Lord and True Parent. This resolution has been announced on every corner of the globe."
29.3.04
Buchannan: WorldNetDaily: Israel's isolation ... and ours: "'Israel has a right to defend itself,' said President Bush. And against whom was Israel defending itself at dawn on Monday?
A half-blind and deaf paraplegic being wheeled out of a mosque after prayers, Sheik Ahmed Yassin was struck by missiles that blew him to pieces. In carrying out the assassination of the founder and spiritual leader of Hamas, Ariel Sharon used a U.S. Apache helicopter gunship. Thus, in Islamic eyes, we are passive accomplices in the killing.
Instantly, protests erupted in Mosul and Basra. Ayatollah al-Sistani, the Shiite leader on whom we depend for a peaceful transfer of power in Iraq, was enraged: '[T]his morning, the occupying Zionist entity committed an ugly crime against the Palestinian people by killing one of their heroes, scholar-martyr Ahmed Yassin.'
Sharon's defenders say the sheik had sanctioned terror attacks on innocent Israelis. But why did Israel not then seize him, expose his complicity in murder, and put him in prison, as Israel had before? Why convert this crippled old sheik into a martyr-saint? Why enhance the prestige of Hamas?
Has the killing made Israel more secure? If so, why were Israeli buses deserted all week? Has it made us more secure? Why then were the travel advisories issued to Americans in the Middle East? Why are U.S. embassies shutting down? How does inflaming the Islamic world against us advance the president's goal of persuading the world that Islam is not America's enemy?
President Bush must begin to realize that his blind solidarity with Sharon, who has shown himself contemptuous of America's interests in the larger region, is among the greatest crosses we have to bear in the war on terror.
A year after the fall of Baghdad, Bush's men are boasting of his triumphs � the overthrow o"
A half-blind and deaf paraplegic being wheeled out of a mosque after prayers, Sheik Ahmed Yassin was struck by missiles that blew him to pieces. In carrying out the assassination of the founder and spiritual leader of Hamas, Ariel Sharon used a U.S. Apache helicopter gunship. Thus, in Islamic eyes, we are passive accomplices in the killing.
Instantly, protests erupted in Mosul and Basra. Ayatollah al-Sistani, the Shiite leader on whom we depend for a peaceful transfer of power in Iraq, was enraged: '[T]his morning, the occupying Zionist entity committed an ugly crime against the Palestinian people by killing one of their heroes, scholar-martyr Ahmed Yassin.'
Sharon's defenders say the sheik had sanctioned terror attacks on innocent Israelis. But why did Israel not then seize him, expose his complicity in murder, and put him in prison, as Israel had before? Why convert this crippled old sheik into a martyr-saint? Why enhance the prestige of Hamas?
Has the killing made Israel more secure? If so, why were Israeli buses deserted all week? Has it made us more secure? Why then were the travel advisories issued to Americans in the Middle East? Why are U.S. embassies shutting down? How does inflaming the Islamic world against us advance the president's goal of persuading the world that Islam is not America's enemy?
President Bush must begin to realize that his blind solidarity with Sharon, who has shown himself contemptuous of America's interests in the larger region, is among the greatest crosses we have to bear in the war on terror.
A year after the fall of Baghdad, Bush's men are boasting of his triumphs � the overthrow o"
Buchannan: WorldNetDaily: Israel's isolation ... and ours: "'Israel has a right to defend itself,' said President Bush. And against whom was Israel defending itself at dawn on Monday?
A half-blind and deaf paraplegic being wheeled out of a mosque after prayers, Sheik Ahmed Yassin was struck by missiles that blew him to pieces. In carrying out the assassination of the founder and spiritual leader of Hamas, Ariel Sharon used a U.S. Apache helicopter gunship. Thus, in Islamic eyes, we are passive accomplices in the killing.
Instantly, protests erupted in Mosul and Basra. Ayatollah al-Sistani, the Shiite leader on whom we depend for a peaceful transfer of power in Iraq, was enraged: '[T]his morning, the occupying Zionist entity committed an ugly crime against the Palestinian people by killing one of their heroes, scholar-martyr Ahmed Yassin.'
Sharon's defenders say the sheik had sanctioned terror attacks on innocent Israelis. But why did Israel not then seize him, expose his complicity in murder, and put him in prison, as Israel had before? Why convert this crippled old sheik into a martyr-saint? Why enhance the prestige of Hamas?
Has the killing made Israel more secure? If so, why were Israeli buses deserted all week? Has it made us more secure? Why then were the travel advisories issued to Americans in the Middle East? Why are U.S. embassies shutting down? How does inflaming the Islamic world against us advance the president's goal of persuading the world that Islam is not America's enemy?
President Bush must begin to realize that his blind solidarity with Sharon, who has shown himself contemptuous of America's interests in the larger region, is among the greatest crosses we have to bear in the war on terror.
A year after the fall of Baghdad, Bush's men are boasting of his triumphs � the overthrow o"
A half-blind and deaf paraplegic being wheeled out of a mosque after prayers, Sheik Ahmed Yassin was struck by missiles that blew him to pieces. In carrying out the assassination of the founder and spiritual leader of Hamas, Ariel Sharon used a U.S. Apache helicopter gunship. Thus, in Islamic eyes, we are passive accomplices in the killing.
Instantly, protests erupted in Mosul and Basra. Ayatollah al-Sistani, the Shiite leader on whom we depend for a peaceful transfer of power in Iraq, was enraged: '[T]his morning, the occupying Zionist entity committed an ugly crime against the Palestinian people by killing one of their heroes, scholar-martyr Ahmed Yassin.'
Sharon's defenders say the sheik had sanctioned terror attacks on innocent Israelis. But why did Israel not then seize him, expose his complicity in murder, and put him in prison, as Israel had before? Why convert this crippled old sheik into a martyr-saint? Why enhance the prestige of Hamas?
Has the killing made Israel more secure? If so, why were Israeli buses deserted all week? Has it made us more secure? Why then were the travel advisories issued to Americans in the Middle East? Why are U.S. embassies shutting down? How does inflaming the Islamic world against us advance the president's goal of persuading the world that Islam is not America's enemy?
President Bush must begin to realize that his blind solidarity with Sharon, who has shown himself contemptuous of America's interests in the larger region, is among the greatest crosses we have to bear in the war on terror.
A year after the fall of Baghdad, Bush's men are boasting of his triumphs � the overthrow o"
Buchannan: WorldNetDaily: Israel's isolation ... and ours: "'Israel has a right to defend itself,' said President Bush. And against whom was Israel defending itself at dawn on Monday?
A half-blind and deaf paraplegic being wheeled out of a mosque after prayers, Sheik Ahmed Yassin was struck by missiles that blew him to pieces. In carrying out the assassination of the founder and spiritual leader of Hamas, Ariel Sharon used a U.S. Apache helicopter gunship. Thus, in Islamic eyes, we are passive accomplices in the killing.
Instantly, protests erupted in Mosul and Basra. Ayatollah al-Sistani, the Shiite leader on whom we depend for a peaceful transfer of power in Iraq, was enraged: '[T]his morning, the occupying Zionist entity committed an ugly crime against the Palestinian people by killing one of their heroes, scholar-martyr Ahmed Yassin.'
Sharon's defenders say the sheik had sanctioned terror attacks on innocent Israelis. But why did Israel not then seize him, expose his complicity in murder, and put him in prison, as Israel had before? Why convert this crippled old sheik into a martyr-saint? Why enhance the prestige of Hamas?
Has the killing made Israel more secure? If so, why were Israeli buses deserted all week? Has it made us more secure? Why then were the travel advisories issued to Americans in the Middle East? Why are U.S. embassies shutting down? How does inflaming the Islamic world against us advance the president's goal of persuading the world that Islam is not America's enemy?
President Bush must begin to realize that his blind solidarity with Sharon, who has shown himself contemptuous of America's interests in the larger region, is among the greatest crosses we have to bear in the war on terror.
A year after the fall of Baghdad, Bush's men are boasting of his triumphs � the overthrow o"
A half-blind and deaf paraplegic being wheeled out of a mosque after prayers, Sheik Ahmed Yassin was struck by missiles that blew him to pieces. In carrying out the assassination of the founder and spiritual leader of Hamas, Ariel Sharon used a U.S. Apache helicopter gunship. Thus, in Islamic eyes, we are passive accomplices in the killing.
Instantly, protests erupted in Mosul and Basra. Ayatollah al-Sistani, the Shiite leader on whom we depend for a peaceful transfer of power in Iraq, was enraged: '[T]his morning, the occupying Zionist entity committed an ugly crime against the Palestinian people by killing one of their heroes, scholar-martyr Ahmed Yassin.'
Sharon's defenders say the sheik had sanctioned terror attacks on innocent Israelis. But why did Israel not then seize him, expose his complicity in murder, and put him in prison, as Israel had before? Why convert this crippled old sheik into a martyr-saint? Why enhance the prestige of Hamas?
Has the killing made Israel more secure? If so, why were Israeli buses deserted all week? Has it made us more secure? Why then were the travel advisories issued to Americans in the Middle East? Why are U.S. embassies shutting down? How does inflaming the Islamic world against us advance the president's goal of persuading the world that Islam is not America's enemy?
President Bush must begin to realize that his blind solidarity with Sharon, who has shown himself contemptuous of America's interests in the larger region, is among the greatest crosses we have to bear in the war on terror.
A year after the fall of Baghdad, Bush's men are boasting of his triumphs � the overthrow o"
22.3.04
A quick look at Rice’s NYT op-ed:
“The seriousness of the threat was well understood by the president…”
Not true: Bush said, "I knew he was a menace and I knew he was a problem," Bush said of Osama bin Laden in a Dec. 20 interview with The Washington Post. "I was prepared to look at a plan that would be a thoughtful plan that would bring him to justice, and would have given the order to do that. I have no hesitancy about going after him. But I didn't feel that sense of urgency."
“We committed more funding to counterterrorism [before 9-11]…”
Not true: Internal FBI budget records clearly slashed the funding for counterterrorism. As late as 10-12-01 Ashcroft refused to allot money for the 75% of the FBI’s budgetary requests. When Ashcroft inherited the Justice Departments, the agency, per Reno’s order, held counterterrorism as the highest priority. In all of Ashcroft’s directives pre-911, counterterrorism wasn’t to be considered one the “top seven priorities.”
“We pushed hard to arm the Predator unmanned aerial vehicle so we could target terrorists with greater precision.”
Not true: At the end of Clinton’s term, Bin Laden had been located three times in Afghanistan, plans were held until the presidency could be passed to Bush. Bush ordered the cruise ship that waited with cruise missiles to “stand down.” Instead, an armed Drone would take him out. This effort to take him out was thwarted by interagency quibbling over mission leadership. Bin Laden played in the gun sights, while the administration tried to decide who gets to pull trigger. The White House denies these accounts, claiming the technology to outfit a Drone wasn’t fully operable. However, armed Drones were deployed on 9-12-01 to patrol the U.S. borders.
“The seriousness of the threat was well understood by the president…”
Not true: Bush said, "I knew he was a menace and I knew he was a problem," Bush said of Osama bin Laden in a Dec. 20 interview with The Washington Post. "I was prepared to look at a plan that would be a thoughtful plan that would bring him to justice, and would have given the order to do that. I have no hesitancy about going after him. But I didn't feel that sense of urgency."
“We committed more funding to counterterrorism [before 9-11]…”
Not true: Internal FBI budget records clearly slashed the funding for counterterrorism. As late as 10-12-01 Ashcroft refused to allot money for the 75% of the FBI’s budgetary requests. When Ashcroft inherited the Justice Departments, the agency, per Reno’s order, held counterterrorism as the highest priority. In all of Ashcroft’s directives pre-911, counterterrorism wasn’t to be considered one the “top seven priorities.”
“We pushed hard to arm the Predator unmanned aerial vehicle so we could target terrorists with greater precision.”
Not true: At the end of Clinton’s term, Bin Laden had been located three times in Afghanistan, plans were held until the presidency could be passed to Bush. Bush ordered the cruise ship that waited with cruise missiles to “stand down.” Instead, an armed Drone would take him out. This effort to take him out was thwarted by interagency quibbling over mission leadership. Bin Laden played in the gun sights, while the administration tried to decide who gets to pull trigger. The White House denies these accounts, claiming the technology to outfit a Drone wasn’t fully operable. However, armed Drones were deployed on 9-12-01 to patrol the U.S. borders.
WSJ.com - Government Accounts of 9/11 Reveal Gaps, Inconsistencies
How is it that Bush had the FAA on its highest state of alert inresponse to fears of a terrorist hijacking, yet didn't think a jet crashing into the WTC had any connection, and so continued reading books to children?
Nor Rice, or Cheney, or Rumsfield? The official story is that wasn't until the second plane that they knew we under attack
How is it that Bush had the FAA on its highest state of alert inresponse to fears of a terrorist hijacking, yet didn't think a jet crashing into the WTC had any connection, and so continued reading books to children?
Nor Rice, or Cheney, or Rumsfield? The official story is that wasn't until the second plane that they knew we under attack
9/11: Internal Government Documents - - Center for American Progress
Perhaps the Donkey Machine isn't as worthless as it has appeared throughout Bush's presidency. Six weeks ago, ols unvetted facts regarding wide descrepcancies in Bush's military record and the strings he pulled to keep his soft skin out of Vietnam finally reached TOP 40 news charts. Now, it seems the widely documented failures of pre-911 Bush are finally getting some print.
No matter how low the hum of Clinton's counterterrorism efforts, the facts leave no question these efforts were further deemphasized by the Bush administration.
Inspite of the fact that every relevant federal agency was on its highest state of alert "in decades" in the weeks leading up to 9-11, Bush never convened agency heads inspight of CIA Director's Tenet's urging. In fact, Bush took a vacation, and then extended it while those in the know were bracing for a massive attack on American soil.
While, Janet Reno held counterterrorism as the Justice Department's top concern, Ashcroft cut funding and lowered counterterrorism to a non priority.
The ships of the coast of Pakistan waiting to bomb Bin Laden through the sites of Drone surveillance were orderd to stand down. Plans to have him killed by an armed Drone languished for months while the CIA and Pentagon wrangled over who gets to pull the trigger.
Republicans wish to castigate Clinton for laxadazical handling of terrorism. Okay. However, it can not be denied that Bush did signifigantly less.
Perhaps the Donkey Machine isn't as worthless as it has appeared throughout Bush's presidency. Six weeks ago, ols unvetted facts regarding wide descrepcancies in Bush's military record and the strings he pulled to keep his soft skin out of Vietnam finally reached TOP 40 news charts. Now, it seems the widely documented failures of pre-911 Bush are finally getting some print.
No matter how low the hum of Clinton's counterterrorism efforts, the facts leave no question these efforts were further deemphasized by the Bush administration.
Inspite of the fact that every relevant federal agency was on its highest state of alert "in decades" in the weeks leading up to 9-11, Bush never convened agency heads inspight of CIA Director's Tenet's urging. In fact, Bush took a vacation, and then extended it while those in the know were bracing for a massive attack on American soil.
While, Janet Reno held counterterrorism as the Justice Department's top concern, Ashcroft cut funding and lowered counterterrorism to a non priority.
The ships of the coast of Pakistan waiting to bomb Bin Laden through the sites of Drone surveillance were orderd to stand down. Plans to have him killed by an armed Drone languished for months while the CIA and Pentagon wrangled over who gets to pull the trigger.
Republicans wish to castigate Clinton for laxadazical handling of terrorism. Okay. However, it can not be denied that Bush did signifigantly less.
9/11: Internal Government Documents - - Center for American Progress
Perhaps the Donkey Machine isn't as worthless as it has appeared throughout Bush's presidency. Six weeks ago, ols unvetted facts regarding wide descrepcancies in Bush's military record and the strings he pulled to keep his soft skin out of Vietnam finally reached TOP 40 news charts. Now, it seems the widely documented failures of pre-911 Bush are finally getting some print.
No matter how low the hum of Clinton's counterterrorism efforts, the facts leave no question these efforts were further deemphasized by the Bush administration.
Inspite of the fact that every relevant federal agency was on its highest state of alert "in decades" in the weeks leading up to 9-11, Bush never convened agency heads inspight of CIA Director's Tenet's urging. In fact, Bush took a vacation, and then extended it while those in the know were bracing for a massive attack on American soil.
While, Janet Reno held counterterrorism as the Justice Department's top concern, Ashcroft cut funding and lowered counterterrorism to a non priority.
The ships of the coast of Pakistan waiting to bomb Bin Laden through the sites of Drone surveillance were orderd to stand down. Plans to have him killed by an armed Drone languished for months while the CIA and Pentagon wrangled over who gets to pull the trigger.
If Republicans wish to castigate Clinton for laxadazical handling of terrorism. Okay. However, it can not be denied that Bush did signifigantly less.
Perhaps the Donkey Machine isn't as worthless as it has appeared throughout Bush's presidency. Six weeks ago, ols unvetted facts regarding wide descrepcancies in Bush's military record and the strings he pulled to keep his soft skin out of Vietnam finally reached TOP 40 news charts. Now, it seems the widely documented failures of pre-911 Bush are finally getting some print.
No matter how low the hum of Clinton's counterterrorism efforts, the facts leave no question these efforts were further deemphasized by the Bush administration.
Inspite of the fact that every relevant federal agency was on its highest state of alert "in decades" in the weeks leading up to 9-11, Bush never convened agency heads inspight of CIA Director's Tenet's urging. In fact, Bush took a vacation, and then extended it while those in the know were bracing for a massive attack on American soil.
While, Janet Reno held counterterrorism as the Justice Department's top concern, Ashcroft cut funding and lowered counterterrorism to a non priority.
The ships of the coast of Pakistan waiting to bomb Bin Laden through the sites of Drone surveillance were orderd to stand down. Plans to have him killed by an armed Drone languished for months while the CIA and Pentagon wrangled over who gets to pull the trigger.
If Republicans wish to castigate Clinton for laxadazical handling of terrorism. Okay. However, it can not be denied that Bush did signifigantly less.
18.3.04
Buchanan On Terrorists and Freedom Fighters: "Saddam's Iraq did not threaten us, did not attack us, did not want war with us, did not have weapons of mass destruction. Yet, we attacked, invaded and occupied Iraq. And when Iraqis attack our troops, we call it terror and we call them terrorists"
17.3.04
An Open Letter to Mel Gibson:
Are you too steeped in your own old school Catholic theology to recognize you own prejudices?
Whenever the first accusations of anti-Semitism arose, you had in me a sympathetic supporter. That harsh charge is leveled far too easily these days in the name of tolerance.
Having been raised in a fundamentalist Zionist church I am very familiar such accusations. Many accuse the church of anti-Semitism simply for acting on Christ’s command to go unto all the world and spread the good news. Many feel a faith that Jews receive salvation through conversion akin to Jew bashing. For these reasons my hunch was to consider the charges against you unwarranted. We can’t sacrifice authentic religious expression on apolitically correct altar.
But something happened on the way to the theatre, Mr. Gibson.
Given Christianity’s bloody history of persecuting Jews, including its complicit approval of the treatment of Jews in the first half of last century, I do understand why some might harbor concern for a dramatization of the verses forming the underpinnings Christinity’s historic anti-Semitism. Therefore, at least an ounce of empathy for the reasonable worries of the Jewish community were in order.
Instead, what you delivered were flippant denials of anti-Semitism intended to deflect questions not resolve issues.
Meanwhile, your Dad used the smoldering controversy as a platform to spew backwoods diatribes, flatly denying, for instance, the holocaust ever existed: Where did are those Jews go if they didn’t end up in a gas chamber? They’re all in New York, you fool. [paraphrase]
When you finally sat down for a formal interview with Reader’s Digest you were given a softball question, an opportunity to address the accusations swirling around your movie: “Do you believe in the holocaust?” Your response is beyond belief.
You tepidly distanced yourself from your father’s stance: “A lot of people died in World War II, some of them were Jews in concentration camps.”
Easy Mel, keep your hood on. I’m only kidding, but my ears did prick up. I found it curious that you defended yourself with a position with which even your father couldn’t argue with rather than taking the opportunity to alleviate some valid concerns of the community.
One concession you did make was to remove the words: “Your people are cursed for all time.” However, you didn’t cut it out of the movie really, just erased the subtitles, leaving the words to be heard in Aramaic. You recognized the inflammatory nature of those words, yet allowed them to be fester in the tender box that is the region that understands Aramaic.
When you were asked about the deleted subtitle you flimsily replied: “All Jews aren’t cursed for all time.” [your emphasis]
I went to the theatre to see a movie acclaimed for eloquently documenting humanity’s tendency to fall prey to our worst tendencies, a movie that asks the question: Can we be saved?
Having some time waiting for the “Fog of War” to begin, I popped in to have a gander at your movie. I entered a scene familiar to all such movies: Pilate, the reluctant executioner, bless his heart, listening to the mass of Jews call for Jesus’ death.
What are the odds, I thought to myself, of catching the most controversial scene. Twice as good as the chances should have been. For in your non-Biblical version, Pilate initially spares Jesus’ life; instead Jesus suffers fifteen movie minutes of being beaten to a nearly skinless pulp. Jesus is then paraded before another angry, hungry crowd. Once again the horde of blood thirsty Jews chant for his crucifixion.
I hadn’t read the Bible since that redhead in Florida, and even I recognized you were using artistic license to stake a very strange editorial position.
I had your back when you didn’t want to trade Biblical accuracy for politically correct accommodations. From the same heart, I detest that accuracy being traded for unwarranted amplification of those one or two versus that our religion has historically used to fuel flames of hate.
Disturbed, I left the theatre, sitting down in an empty matinee, waiting for the lights to dim in the “Fog of War”.
One more than thing, Mr. Gibson. Before writing this letter I went back and read Matthew to make sure I hadn’t forgotten a second scene of Jews clamoring for the death of Christ, and I noticed something else.
About your little comment about a curse not being on all Jews for all time…
I don’t know what your daddy taught you in Sunday school, but the Bible doesn’t condemn any Jews for any time. The Bible reads that Pilate said “His blood be on us, and on our children”.
See? Those aren’t God’s words, they’re the executioner’s. However let’s pretend for a moment the divine inspiration of the Holy Spirit possessed Pilate, making his word the Word:
He said “we.” He said “we.”
He words hold true for both the gentile and the Jew.
We are all cursed. We are all sinners.
We are all awash in his blood.
That blood is not a curse of justice but a promise of grace.
Are you too steeped in your own old school Catholic theology to recognize you own prejudices?
Whenever the first accusations of anti-Semitism arose, you had in me a sympathetic supporter. That harsh charge is leveled far too easily these days in the name of tolerance.
Having been raised in a fundamentalist Zionist church I am very familiar such accusations. Many accuse the church of anti-Semitism simply for acting on Christ’s command to go unto all the world and spread the good news. Many feel a faith that Jews receive salvation through conversion akin to Jew bashing. For these reasons my hunch was to consider the charges against you unwarranted. We can’t sacrifice authentic religious expression on apolitically correct altar.
But something happened on the way to the theatre, Mr. Gibson.
Given Christianity’s bloody history of persecuting Jews, including its complicit approval of the treatment of Jews in the first half of last century, I do understand why some might harbor concern for a dramatization of the verses forming the underpinnings Christinity’s historic anti-Semitism. Therefore, at least an ounce of empathy for the reasonable worries of the Jewish community were in order.
Instead, what you delivered were flippant denials of anti-Semitism intended to deflect questions not resolve issues.
Meanwhile, your Dad used the smoldering controversy as a platform to spew backwoods diatribes, flatly denying, for instance, the holocaust ever existed: Where did are those Jews go if they didn’t end up in a gas chamber? They’re all in New York, you fool. [paraphrase]
When you finally sat down for a formal interview with Reader’s Digest you were given a softball question, an opportunity to address the accusations swirling around your movie: “Do you believe in the holocaust?” Your response is beyond belief.
You tepidly distanced yourself from your father’s stance: “A lot of people died in World War II, some of them were Jews in concentration camps.”
Easy Mel, keep your hood on. I’m only kidding, but my ears did prick up. I found it curious that you defended yourself with a position with which even your father couldn’t argue with rather than taking the opportunity to alleviate some valid concerns of the community.
One concession you did make was to remove the words: “Your people are cursed for all time.” However, you didn’t cut it out of the movie really, just erased the subtitles, leaving the words to be heard in Aramaic. You recognized the inflammatory nature of those words, yet allowed them to be fester in the tender box that is the region that understands Aramaic.
When you were asked about the deleted subtitle you flimsily replied: “All Jews aren’t cursed for all time.” [your emphasis]
I went to the theatre to see a movie acclaimed for eloquently documenting humanity’s tendency to fall prey to our worst tendencies, a movie that asks the question: Can we be saved?
Having some time waiting for the “Fog of War” to begin, I popped in to have a gander at your movie. I entered a scene familiar to all such movies: Pilate, the reluctant executioner, bless his heart, listening to the mass of Jews call for Jesus’ death.
What are the odds, I thought to myself, of catching the most controversial scene. Twice as good as the chances should have been. For in your non-Biblical version, Pilate initially spares Jesus’ life; instead Jesus suffers fifteen movie minutes of being beaten to a nearly skinless pulp. Jesus is then paraded before another angry, hungry crowd. Once again the horde of blood thirsty Jews chant for his crucifixion.
I hadn’t read the Bible since that redhead in Florida, and even I recognized you were using artistic license to stake a very strange editorial position.
I had your back when you didn’t want to trade Biblical accuracy for politically correct accommodations. From the same heart, I detest that accuracy being traded for unwarranted amplification of those one or two versus that our religion has historically used to fuel flames of hate.
Disturbed, I left the theatre, sitting down in an empty matinee, waiting for the lights to dim in the “Fog of War”.
One more than thing, Mr. Gibson. Before writing this letter I went back and read Matthew to make sure I hadn’t forgotten a second scene of Jews clamoring for the death of Christ, and I noticed something else.
About your little comment about a curse not being on all Jews for all time…
I don’t know what your daddy taught you in Sunday school, but the Bible doesn’t condemn any Jews for any time. The Bible reads that Pilate said “His blood be on us, and on our children”.
See? Those aren’t God’s words, they’re the executioner’s. However let’s pretend for a moment the divine inspiration of the Holy Spirit possessed Pilate, making his word the Word:
He said “we.” He said “we.”
He words hold true for both the gentile and the Jew.
We are all cursed. We are all sinners.
We are all awash in his blood.
That blood is not a curse of justice but a promise of grace.
16.3.04
Jews For Jesus Executive Director Susan Perlman Fixes Everything "She added that blaming Jews, or anyone else, for killing Jesus is a non-issue because 'He didn't stay dead.' Perlman asked, 'How can you be blamed for killing someone who is alive?' "
8.3.04
Calpundit: "In one revealing case, Bush & Co. intervened at the precise moment that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention was set to consider once again lowering acceptable blood-lead levels in response to new scientific evidence. The Administration rejected nominee Bruce Lanphear and dumped panel member Michael Weitzman, both of whom previously advocated lowering the legal limit. Instead, Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson appointed William Banner--who had testified on behalf of lead companies in poison-related litigation--and Joyce Tsuji, who had worked for a consulting firm whose clients include a lead smelter. (She later withdrew.) Banner and another appointee, Sergio Piomelli, were first contacted about serving on the committee not by a member of the Administration but by lead-industry representatives who appeared to be recruiting favorable committee members with the blessing of HHS officials."
3.3.04
The tip of America
The democratically elected Aristide was pushing away from his IMF/WTO pimp daddy, and loses office by force. That's the American way.
Just ask Chavez, the sole South American leader who hasn't completely bent over for a Globalotomy and is under constant threat of an American-supported coup.
If your too busy to follow the money trail, just reference the tacit approval Bush gave to the Chavez coup after its supposed success. (Supposed because Chavez had stashed an army beneath the palace he was holed up in, defeating in the end those who surrounded him, defeated those who had taken control of democratic Venezuela, shredded its constitution and disbanded its parliament.) I know this is an unfocused entry, but I get so tired of God's Blessed America propping up dictators and undermining democracies because it benefits the factory owners.
[Star].
The democratically elected Aristide was pushing away from his IMF/WTO pimp daddy, and loses office by force. That's the American way.
Just ask Chavez, the sole South American leader who hasn't completely bent over for a Globalotomy and is under constant threat of an American-supported coup.
If your too busy to follow the money trail, just reference the tacit approval Bush gave to the Chavez coup after its supposed success. (Supposed because Chavez had stashed an army beneath the palace he was holed up in, defeating in the end those who surrounded him, defeated those who had taken control of democratic Venezuela, shredded its constitution and disbanded its parliament.) I know this is an unfocused entry, but I get so tired of God's Blessed America propping up dictators and undermining democracies because it benefits the factory owners.
[Star].
The other half of the island
"The result was the fastest growth rate in Latin America last year, 8.3 percent, fueled by a huge influx of foreign investment, which benefited only the small minority of Dominicans in the upper crust of society. According to one press account: “The rich have grown richer, while corruption remains endemic and prostitution, drug trafficking and illegal boat journeys to the United States are on the rise.” Especially unpopular was the outgoing government's decision to privatize the state-run sugar and electrical power industries. The Dominican Republic has been plagued by power blackouts, with many families enduring outages of 12 hours a day, while electricity bills have soared."
"The result was the fastest growth rate in Latin America last year, 8.3 percent, fueled by a huge influx of foreign investment, which benefited only the small minority of Dominicans in the upper crust of society. According to one press account: “The rich have grown richer, while corruption remains endemic and prostitution, drug trafficking and illegal boat journeys to the United States are on the rise.” Especially unpopular was the outgoing government's decision to privatize the state-run sugar and electrical power industries. The Dominican Republic has been plagued by power blackouts, with many families enduring outages of 12 hours a day, while electricity bills have soared."
Want to understand Haiti?
I do. I don't yet. But here is the start. The Haitian situation so resembles many third-world, post globalization economic situations, I figured the IMF was involved somehow. Lo and behold.
""The IMF forced Haiti to open its market to imported, highly subsidized U.S. rice at the same time it prohibited Haiti from subsidizing its own farmers," declares the Web site of Global Exchange, one of the Third World advocacy groups organizing the Washington protests. 'Haitian farmers have been forced off their land to seek work in sweatshops, and people are poorer than ever.'- April 2000
Par for the course.
I do. I don't yet. But here is the start. The Haitian situation so resembles many third-world, post globalization economic situations, I figured the IMF was involved somehow. Lo and behold.
""The IMF forced Haiti to open its market to imported, highly subsidized U.S. rice at the same time it prohibited Haiti from subsidizing its own farmers," declares the Web site of Global Exchange, one of the Third World advocacy groups organizing the Washington protests. 'Haitian farmers have been forced off their land to seek work in sweatshops, and people are poorer than ever.'- April 2000
Par for the course.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)