Let it ring: Cell Phone Ringtones…

texas hold um

wedding rings

hair transplant and hair loss help

jennifer lopez

ABC/ TIME MAG NEW POLL

7 in 10 Iraqis say their own lives are going well, and nearly two-thirds expect things to improve in the year ahead.

You lost little liberal cowards are on the wrong side of history!

We all know the whole admin is full of it. Yet, we seem to continue to expect some kinds of “good” from a very evil source. Comment by #93 is so right on!

Wait a minute… didn’t this administration tell us we must go to Iraq because of the “terrorist-threat” that Iraq posed to the U.S.? (e.g. Since 911, … rhetoric.) Now we are just to stop defining sucess because of the increasing frequency of these attacks over the past year?

So now, even the biggest tertirary reason for being in Iraq, as well as this allegedstrength of this Admin (or republicans in general) we are just to disregared and still believe that they can fight an effective war on terror?

What’s the Orwellian principle here? Yes, that’s right :
double-think.

Of course that was just a fairy tale. But here, let me see if I can scare Rummy.

Lets talk bin laden.

Actually I strongly suspect ain’t bin laden in a while is in the disputed region, between India and Pakistan, known as Kashmir.

If you recall back in early 2002, bin laden was suspected of having frostbite on his hands. It was believed he got this by climbing up above the snow line.

When you look at the globe it’s clear that this would be a prime location for him to hold up. Thick dense jungle makes for poor quality satellite photos, constant fighting in the region makes it difficult to enter (US military is not permitted in without escort and jumping through a lot of hoops) and dangerous to send small forces.

Al Qaeda is purported to flourish in this region, and loyal supporters of bin laden comprise a large percentage of the Pakistani population.

Now consider this doomsday scenario.

Suppose bin laden and his army, move out from the Kashmir region and into Pakistan. There they rally loyal followers of bin laden, (purported to be over half the population)and overthrow the Pakistani army (or simply convince them to join them), and Musharraf and seize the Pakistani nuclear arsenal.

Then we would have a ball game.

As I am sure you are aware, these missiles don’t just threaten India, they threaten Israel.

In fact, this was a common concern back in early 2003, and was discussed openly.

“The CIA is clearly concerned about the very real possibility that an Islamic general could take over one day -and acquire control of the arsenal”. – The Independent – April 10, 2003

But somehow that concern has been overshadowed, by this administrations insistence on protecting us from a country that had no nuclear arsenal, presented no real threat to anyone, and was “contained” by international law and weapons inspections, not to mention the “no-fly” zones.

I guess President Bush should have just “stayed the course”.

But now we ignore real threats, countries that really threaten the US, with Nukes and massive armies, and we don’t even bother looking for bin laden, because Bush is not concerned with capturing bin laden.

He’s too busy talking tough, and looking tough, and acting tough, to actually “be” tough.

An interesting note. Guess where Pakistan got their nuclear arsenal?

That’s right, North Korea.

Terrorist are free to operate because we gave them freedom.

Our needlessly killed aren’t even enough to register.

Isn’t it all really the leberal medias fault!

If Democrats screwed up like he is, can you imagine how he would judge them?

Suppose if we had “Rummy” set up house in the Bagdhad Hilton until the war was over. I mean it. Send Rummy, Condie and Karl on over, and say to them, “don’t come back until the wars over”.

I mean if it’s going soooo well, then why not?

How much does anyone want to bet that the war would be over in a week?

I bet those three would suddenly be full of new ideas on how to do it. I can hear it now.

“Hey Condie, pass me that Murtha thing again, will ya?”.

And trolling here also?

Suspicious over reports of actual progress in Iraq, the Los Angeles Times launched an investigation and was shocked to discover that the Pentagon had been paying the Iraqi media to publish articles that “while factually correct, presented a positive view of the conditions in Iraq”. As they descended further down the rabbit hole, the Times learned that many of the planted reports were penned by U.S. troops stationed in Iraq, most of whom don’t even have journalism degrees and therefore cannot accurately describe the pointless futility of an illegal and immoral war for oil. According to the Times, the stories would often “praise the efforts of U.S. and Iraqi troops, denounce terrorism and promote the country’s reconstruction efforts”, a total contradiction what the Los Angeles Times has been printing for over two years.

I guess this will put to rest the radical right’s constant attacks on the integrity of the mainstream press. Say what you will about the New York Times, but you certainly couldn’t pay the Old Gray Lady to write anything positive about the troops.

http://blamebush.typepad.com/

Dean made his comments in an interview on WOAI Radio in San Antonio.

“I’ve seen this before in my life. This is the same situation we had in Vietnam.

Yep, it’s a lot like Vietnam except that the useful idiots/Enemy Within were not the leaders of the Democratic Party. Now they are. One hopefully two differences though. In Vietnam we didn’t win, the Filthy Left won that one. We will this time. And two; we didn’t hang the traitors like Fonda and Kerry. Hopefully this time we will.