Acute Power Shortage In Baghdad Interrupts Bush Administration Press Conference
Acute Power Shortage In Baghdad Interrupts Bush Administration Press Conference
This morning, coverage of U.S. ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad and Gen. George Casey’s Baghdad press conference was briefly interrupted.
The TurkishPress notes that “the hall was plunged into darkness by one of Baghdad’s regular power cuts, despite the fact the venue was in the capital’s heavily-fortified Green Zone, also home to the US embassy.” Here’s a screenshot from CNN:
While the power cut may have been an inconvenience for the media outlets and for Khalilzad — who “kept talking in obscurity for three or four minutes until order was restored” — it’s part of daily life for residents in Baghdad. Electricity levels in the city are at an all-time low. Residents now receive an average of just 2.4 hours per day, compared to 16-24 hours before the U.S. invasion.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
BRING SADDAM BACK!!!!
October 24th, 2006 at 11:19 amA perfect statement as to the state of affairs in Iraq.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:19 amLess electricity v. wood-chippers??? Such a difficult choice for Progs!
October 24th, 2006 at 11:22 amWell, if the objective was to bomb these poor folks back to the Stone Age, then I guess the mission was accomplished.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:23 amThis shows how most of the country still does not have electricity or at least dependable electricity….point taken and proven!
October 24th, 2006 at 11:29 amThat was hilarious.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:30 amI’m sure the Iraqis would love to hear mighty+aphrodite’s uplifting platitudes in person. Get thee over there and give ‘em a pep-talk, mighty_a!
October 24th, 2006 at 11:32 amSoo…if power is available for 2.5 hours a day then just who is CNN Baghdad broadcasting to? There’s a word I am thinking of… starts with a ‘P’ - usually followed by the word ‘village’.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:33 amma, please get off the crack. Thank you.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:34 am#3, WTF are you talking about?
October 24th, 2006 at 11:34 amI think the lights went out in Bush’s brain a long time ago.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:38 amI think MA is saying he/she/it wants to be killed in a wood chipper.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:47 amBut make sure it’s gas powered, electricity can be so unreliable at times.
I don’t know why people keep complaining about the electricity levels in Iraq. Making electrons is hard work. I’m sure Bush will have the electricity running 25-30 hours a day soon.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:48 am#10 - JaneESchneider,
October 24th, 2006 at 11:48 amMental breakdown.
It is no wonder the Iraqis resent the United States’ occupation of their land as it is no wonder that the Iraqis want the U.S. to stop occupying their country as soon as possible. Perhaps if Americans were to actually try to empathize with the Iraqis by imagining what it would be like to have electricity in their homes for less than three hours a day, then perhaps more Americans would begin to finally start advocating that American troops stop occupying Iraq and have those troops returned to this country as quickly as possible.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:52 amMaybe MA just watched the movie Fargo? Hence, the wood-chipper reference? I give up, anyone else?
October 24th, 2006 at 11:52 amLess electricity v. wood-chippers??? Such a difficult choice for Progs!
Comment by mighty+aphrodite
Wow, Mighty Aphid wins the stupidest post of the day award, folks.
I dare anyone to break the encryption on the logic MA uses for this one. Unbreakable.
Best laugh i’ve had all morning, even funnier than the story.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:52 amThe lights went out when an insurgent power drilled through an inncocent civilian and into a breaker box.
But don’t worry, be happy, things are going swimmingly over there.
BOTH HOUSES will be a great start!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
October 24th, 2006 at 11:52 amBring it, please bring it.
HOT AND GRUMPY IN BAGHDAD
.
Bashir, a young man, is getting a drink from the luke cool fridge in his family’s Baghdad apartment. He mutters, “It’s just too blasted hot to go out setting up IEDs today.â€
(the TV and the lights blink and die, the whirr and gurgle of the air conditioner slowly ceases and we hear a door slam, then silence, followed by an explosion in the distance)
October 24th, 2006 at 11:53 amcognitorex blogspot Aug. 06′
#3, WTF are you talking about?
Comment by JaneESchneider — October 24, 2006 @ 11:34 am
I don’t thing that even MA knows what she is trying to say. Incomprehensibility is her trademark.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:54 amCan the IRONY be any greater??
October 24th, 2006 at 11:56 am#3 - MA, now they get both less electricity and the wood chipper you fool. Your statement indicates that before the invasion they at least had a choice, great point.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:57 amShit, this will have a huge impact on the death squads. They’ll have to use hand drill to puncture their victim’s skulls. How inconvenient for them.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:57 amThe only way I could make any sense of MA’s post was:
Should we use electricity or a woodchipper for execution after BushCo is convicted of war crimes?
But, then, MA would have been making some sense so I rejected that as its meaning. It’s so hard to use logic to understand illogic.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:58 am“PERVERSIONS TO THE IMPERIALIST AMERICAN PIGSâ€
.
(a day in the life of a Baghdad family - Bashir, a young man, enters his family’s apartment)
Bashir: Greetings Father, Praise be to Allah.
Father: Praise be to Allah.
Bashir: It’s hot in here. Did we have any electricity today?
Father: One hour, tops. May Allah rain perversions on the Imperialist American Pigs!
Bashir: That sucks. A thousand perversions to the Infidels.
Father: What did you do today?
Bashir: Praise be to Allah, I put out one roadside IED and helped prepare a suicider for a Mosque mission at evening prayers.
Father: Praise be to Allah, but did you stop by the Coalition Forces Outreach Center like your Mother asked you to?
Bashir: Yes, Papa I did.
Father: And did you tell them that death squads have harassing and threatening your Mother, sisters and our neighbors?
Bashir: Yes Papa I did. They said that they already knew and intended to step up patrols. They were very sympathetic and really quite civil.
Father: A thousand perversions to the Imperialist Occupiers.
Bashir: Praise be to Allah, a thousand perversions.
(the lights flicker on: they kneel)
Together: Praise Allah.
(the lights die)
Together : A thousand perversions.
Aug 06′ cognitorex blogspot
October 24th, 2006 at 12:00 pmWalt, RealScientist, you know, I used to be able to talk to MA, when she was much more coherent. Now she’s starting to sound like (shudder) Ann Coulter with her non-sequitors and babbling. I can’t help wondering if she’s okay, she actually used to be almost normal. Okay, I said almost.
October 24th, 2006 at 12:02 pmFargo poped into my head too…
October 24th, 2006 at 12:03 pmPoor MA, it must be really awful to be such a DUPE and a LOSER!
Smarmyness only goes so far.
Wow, Mighty Aphid wins the stupidest post of the day award, folks.
Comment by Wayne — October 24, 2006 @ 11:52 am
It’s still a bit early in the day to present that award Wayne. Jason is working another thread and Daryll, Ben and Roger Roger haven’t shown up yet. I agree that MA is, as always, a front runner for the title - but let’s not discount the potential of the others.
October 24th, 2006 at 12:07 pm[…] During a press conference in Iraq, a power outage interupted some of the coverage. As to be expected, this has been spun as an outrage by the hippies. I guess once you give a guy a TV he forgets that 5 years ago he was living in a mud hut and didn’t even have electricity. […]
October 24th, 2006 at 12:08 pmI wish we could get the power to go out here any time that ass shows up on TV. That would be progress.
October 24th, 2006 at 12:10 pm#28, Quadrajet (and Wayne), with all those trolls in contention, it’s going to be a tight race! ;-)
October 24th, 2006 at 12:15 pmQuadrajet, Rogx2 is up and running on the Khalizad thread - he’s got his Risk board out again…
October 24th, 2006 at 12:15 pmI would love to see what the reaction would be if a random US city was chosen and then occupied by the Mexican army and had only 4 hours of electiciy a day. How long do you think until the first Mexican soldier was shot?
October 24th, 2006 at 12:19 pmI’m glad there is a place where Mighty Aphrodite can debate the voices in her head. Let it out, honey.
October 24th, 2006 at 12:22 pmProggies, I guess you missed the stories about one of Saddam’s favourite execution methods - live prisoners in the ol’ wood chipper. Steve Colbert probably forgot about it, too…
October 24th, 2006 at 12:23 pm#32 - Terry, you do have to give Roger some credit though - playing Risk without frontal lobes must be incredibly challenging. Is he explaining how we can pay for his insane troop level increases in iraq and his proposed invasion of N. Korea with savings from the elimination of social security and medicade yet? (Wayne - as I said earlier, it’s way to early to give MA the award!)
October 24th, 2006 at 12:29 pm#35…Gotta wonder something. At Abu Ghraib where they were hooking up prisoners to electrodes was it the lack of electricity that didn’t make it torture?
October 24th, 2006 at 12:31 pmHmmm, MA, yeah, I guess we missed it. But what does Stephen Colbert have to do with anything?
October 24th, 2006 at 12:33 pmYou’ve got to wonder about the priorities of some people - for action and for memory.
October 24th, 2006 at 12:35 pm36 — Yeah Roger(x2) kinda imploded on that thread ( funny, funny ). He is trying hard for the prize.
The trolls are off ( their rockers ) and running for the title of Lamest Troll Post of the Day!!!!!
Grand prize is a snicker from all of us ( not the candy bar )
=)
October 24th, 2006 at 12:37 pmBut what does Stephen Colbert have to do with anything?
Comment by JaneESchneider
She is trying to put down his news reporting even though its a comedy show. I guess she just hates it that he’s funny and she can’t come up with a witty joke(see #3) to save her life. People like MA always hate and attack others that are better than them instead of respecting their skils.
October 24th, 2006 at 12:38 pmDear Jane - The allusion to Saddam’s preference for wood chippers seems to have slipped past you. I guess Steve couldn’t come up a “funny” about that….
October 24th, 2006 at 12:38 pmMighty must have missed that 650,000 Iraqis are dead because of the US-led invasion. But at least they didn’t die in wood-chippers!
October 24th, 2006 at 12:39 pmThey must not have been at the end of the tunnel. After all, our General in the field just announced a light at the end of the tunnel.
http://rawstory.com/ news/ 2006/ US_could_hand_over_Iraq_security_in_10242006.html
But, wait, he is saying the same thing that was said at this time last year. That’s right, every year they keep pushing back by one year the timeline for Iraqi’s to stand up so we can stand down.
Clear, hold, build.
That is the strategy in the plan for victory. So what benchmarks have we reached. Have we completed “clear” yet? It doesn’t seem that way. Fighting has resumed in the South.
Al-Sadr is the key to an Iraq at peace. Yet we have no direct contacts with him. This is the same failed approach as with North Korea and Iran. Bilateral talks are a first step in negotations, not a last step. Bush needs to get a clue.
October 24th, 2006 at 12:39 pmMA, I doubt many Iraqis have the time to think about the ole wood chipper as they dodge IEDs, car bombs and death squads along with all the other dangers presented by the chaos that bush and his goons have created there. But since I’m not sure whether they actually do or not, how about we send you over there to do a survey? I’ll throw in for your travel…..
October 24th, 2006 at 12:41 pm#35…Gotta wonder something. At Abu Ghraib where they were hooking up prisoners to electrodes was it the lack of electricity that didn’t make it torture?
Comment by jon
So, that is what keeps shorting out power to the rest of the city…..
October 24th, 2006 at 12:42 pmDear Ozillini - How many of those 650,000 dead Iraqi’s were sent to the great Harem in the Sky by Islamic adherents of the “Religion of Peace”?
October 24th, 2006 at 12:45 pm#3
that has been one of several stt, stt, stutterin stupid remarks. wtf. are you talking about. personally i don’t think you know.
October 24th, 2006 at 12:46 pmHey mighty+aphrodite,
I guess you missed the part with the roaming death squads.
Y’know, the part where more people are getting killed per day now than ever were under Hussein.
And the bit with infrastructure problem wrecking the lives of millions.
So now the whole country gets the no electricity and the wood chipper! Bonus!
October 24th, 2006 at 12:46 pmQuadrajet, Rog proposes abolishing social security and medicaid/care to free up an army of retired Korean War veterans to have another crack at the 38th parallel. That’s after he’s secured Kamchatka from Alaska and been able to build up 5 armies a turn for a bit.
October 24th, 2006 at 12:47 pm45 - “MA, I doubt many Iraqis…” - Quadrafoil
Quadra - You have the doubt - I don’t. Have a nice trip….we’ll look forward to your report
October 24th, 2006 at 12:47 pmWhy do excited electrons moving down a wire hate our freedom so much?
October 24th, 2006 at 12:48 pmhey MA so what seems to be your problem? hypocrisy. post then run? would that be ‘cut and run’? and what happened to ’stay the course’? wouldn’t this be considered as flip-flop?
October 24th, 2006 at 12:48 pmTo the aptly named “bs” - scroll through the comments s-l-o-w-l-y….you’ll get up to speed in a couple of hours, dear…..
October 24th, 2006 at 12:49 pmMighty, what? So the guys loading the wood chippers before the invasion were not Muslim?
October 24th, 2006 at 12:52 pm#35, Mighty Aphrodite, You must forgive them….Many, many “progressives” chose to close their eyes to the barbarism of the Saddam regime. They purposely avoided reading or learning anything about Saddam’s savagery, the mass graves he created, his attempted destruction of the Marsh Arabs, his locking up of the children of political opponents, etc. By deliberately avoiding any information that showed Saddam as the monster he was, many “progressives” were trying to assuage their guilt that they did not support the deposing of Saddam. Thus, they did not understood your wood-chipper reference. But those of us who championed the human rights of the Iraqi people did.
October 24th, 2006 at 12:53 pmDear Frank - and those “roaming death squads” are….who????
I have modified my position somewhat. I think we should set political and military benchmarks as Bush noted regularly for the last two years (which many of you failed to grasp or acknowledge). If the Sunnis and Shiites can’t forge a coalition, I really could care less if they kill each other…
October 24th, 2006 at 12:55 pmExley, more Iraqis are dying now than before the invasion.
October 24th, 2006 at 12:55 pmma
i don’t need to ive seen enough of your half ass, illegitimate comments that you pull out of the sky and then run. and then comeback and run again. why not have a debate with folks instead of spewing your whacked-out rhetoric.
October 24th, 2006 at 12:56 pmSo why is our coalition of the willing still there? Do you feel we should just leave and let them kill each other off?
October 24th, 2006 at 12:57 pmBut those of us who championed the human rights of the Iraqi people did.
Comment by Exley
Yeah, we see how you republicans champion rights, right here in the US. Wiretapping and spyingon Americans without a warrant, suspension of Habeus corpus, the right to hold anyone indefinately if the president deems you an enemy combatant or supporter, and the list goes on and on.
How about them death squads sponsored by the current Iraqi government, which in turn is sponsored by Bushco?
Champions of rights, my A$$.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:00 pmma is British which explains her attempts at condescension. Does anyone have an explanation for her stupidity?
October 24th, 2006 at 1:00 pmNow see, I thought the wood chipper was for hiding WMDs.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:00 pmMega Ass,
October 24th, 2006 at 1:01 pmWhy would one use a woodchipper in the desert?
No, really?
Sounds like you swallowed more than you can chew.
At least you’re recognizing 650,00+ deaths…just think
about how many more you could score if that damn
power would be on 24/7.
BTW, the Army is now taking old, spiteful Spinsters.
We all know your a ‘Spinster’ in the first degree, maybe
now you can put your mouth where your money is.
Oh, and before you ship off to Iraq, don’t forget your
woodchipper…whacko.
If the Sunnis and Shiites can’t forge a coalition, I really could care less if they kill each other…
Comment by mighty+aphrodite — October 24, 2006 @ 12:55 pm
Spoken like the true christian she is
October 24th, 2006 at 1:02 pmExley, I honestly don’t remember hearing anything about wood-chippers, etc.
many “progressives†were trying to assuage their guilt that they did not support the deposing of Saddam. Comment by Exley — October 24, 2006 @ 12:53 pm
The deposing of Saddam was NOT the reason that Bush gave the country for his insistence on invading Iraq. No one here supports a vicious, barbarous dictator, but neither would we have felt that the US had the right to invade Iraq simply because Saddam was a ruthless dictator. He’s one of many, why didn’t they invade somewhere else? Oh, yeah, those silly WMDs. You know as well as I do that Bush is not concerned about the human rights of the Iraqi people, and that was not the reason that he gave to Congress for the invasion.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:02 pmI think we should set political and military benchmarks as Bush noted regularly for the last two years
Comment by mighty+aphrodite — October 24, 2006 @ 12:55 pm
Then you are dumber than I thought. If Pres Bush really wanted to set any benchmarks at all, he could have done so a long time ago -he’s the decider. And Republicans control Congerss.
Why, he should have set them before the invasion.
(which many of you failed to grasp or acknowledge).
If you realised the need for benchmarks only after the Pres Bush said so, you are one sheep beyond help.
I really could care less if they kill each other…
Then you’re comment about wood chippers -and some after that- was fake outrage, since you really don’t care what happens to Iraqis, whether elder, women, or children.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:04 pmMA
let’s see how knowledgable you really are. there is one major player in all of this that noone wants to talk about because they don’t know. do to the criminal likes of the rockefellers, duponts, morgans and sharon(ariel)trying hard to keep it a secret. does the rothchilds ring a bell? well hes the big cheese.
since you think you are a lawyer why not defend those that are being harrassed by the irs for not paying income tax. did you know that there is NO law in paying income tax. and is illegal. why not help in bring down the irs? why not help in exposing the federal reserve bank and it’s criminal activity? do something good for the people. sounds fair doesn’t it.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:04 pmDear Frank - and those “roaming death squads†are….who????
Dear MA,
Because it’s relevant when you are trying to make the case that the country is better off post-invasion?
There were death squads and people getting killed before. There are more now, and more people’s lives getting ruined. Tell me why it matters that it’s not (usually) coalition soldiers doing the killing. Then explain to me how the difference is not due to a botched invasion and the creation of a power vacuum.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:05 pmJane, Bush never said it was about WMD’s. Why that’s as silly as the claim that he’s been urging the US to Stay the Course!
October 24th, 2006 at 1:05 pmOx - that would be ‘Coalition of the (King’s) Shilling’
October 24th, 2006 at 1:06 pmThanks Exley - Your kindness to small animals must be legendary, too!
Progressives are willing to overlook savagery and despotic behaviour as long as they are not in ANY way inconvenienced. They saw no evidence of Saddam’s promotion of regional terrorism because such a notion did not fit their model. The dismissal of Palestinian suicide payments by Saddam was “understandable” as many progs despise Israel. Becuase no “bills of lading” from Iraq to Syria were produced….viola (!!)…there must have been no WMD’s….These are the same people who still believe Dan Rather got a raw deal…..go figure…..
October 24th, 2006 at 1:06 pm#58 Oxillini
1. I don’t believe that’s accurate. It is estimated Saddam killed between 300,000 and 750,000 people during his reign. The number of Iraqi civilians killed since the liberation — while tragically high — does not even approach that grim figure (And please, let’s not raise that now-discredited Lancet study published (and debunked) last week).
2. No questions, however, that you are correct that many, many Iraqis continue to do be killed in Iraq at the hands of former Baathist “insurgents” (read, terrorists) who want to restore Baathist rule and Al Qaeda terrorists and sectrarian militias. The question is, what to do about that? Having asked the question, I have no concrete answer. Does keeping U.S. troops there keep a proverbial lid on the violence, which would rage out of control should U.S. troops leave? Or would removing U.S. troops lessen the violence? I do not know the answer (although I find the second proposition to be somewhat dubious). What’s your opinion?
October 24th, 2006 at 1:07 pmMA + Exley = love is truly blind.
Do we have to destroy in the name of building? Is killing the only way to protect? Does it have to be either less electricity without the woodchipper or electricity and the woodchipper? Is the only choice for the Iraqis to suffer at the hands of Hussein’s dictatorship or the occupation of the United States? Just because progressives find fault with OUR leaders doesn’t mean we are blind to the faults of others, just that we should be able to control ours first and easiest. I have NO guilt to assuage about not supporting the attack on Iraq or deposing Hussein, because it was wrong politically, practically, and morally.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:07 pmDear Grgrrrr - Setting benchmarks BEFORE an invasion???? Put away your Milton Bradley military board games, “genius”.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:08 pmand couldn’t forget that your good lawyer skills could help restore habeas corpus, constitution, and military commisions act. override and fight for our privacy. you could be doing something good for the american people with your so-called degree and what are you doing?
October 24th, 2006 at 1:09 pm#35, Mighty Aphrodite, You must forgive them… they did not understood your wood-chipper reference…those of us who championed the human rights of the Iraqi people did.
Comment by Exley — October 24, 2006 @ 12:53 pm
If the Sunnis and Shiites can’t forge a coalition, I really could care less if they kill each other…
Comment by mighty+aphrodite — October 24, 2006 @ 12:55 pm
Exley, apparently MA doesn’t care as much about the Iraqis’ human rights as you do. I’d keep my distance from her, she could be contagious.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:12 pm#66 Jane, I am sure you honestly don’t remember the wood chippers. I am saying, however, that many “progressives” often seem to forget Saddam’s barbarism.
But I must disagree with you, Jane, about the reasons given for deposing Saddam prior to March 2003. Clearly, WMDs was the main reason given (although not the main reason I personally supported liberation). However, evern a cursory examination of the speeches given by Dubya and administration officials prior to March 2003 reveals that one of the stated reasons for toppling Saddam was to remove his barbarous regime and create a stable, democratic society in Iraq that would serve as an example and leader of democratic movements in other countries in the Arab Islamic world and thus remove some of the political, social, and (to a much lesser extent) economic conditions that foster radical Islamic terrorism.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:13 pmWhat Iraqi respect for human rights was Donald Rumsfled endorsing in 1983?
October 24th, 2006 at 1:13 pmHeh,heh. I know all about benchmarks. I used to make them in momma’s kitchen bench all the time. With my pocketknife. Heh, heh. It was fun. Except when she whooped me with the bench. I stopped - after about 15 times - stay the course didn’t work too good with momma neither. So I don’t do benchmarks anymore. Heh, heh.
GWB
October 24th, 2006 at 1:16 pmExley, the 750,000 number you propose for Saddam’s grim slaughter is over his 24 years, correct? And I must have missed the “debunking” of the Lancet study. Looked reasonable to me with respect to its statistical methodology. As for wheether to stay or go, I’m in favor of go. Set a deadline and pull out 100%. The Iraqi government would know the date and would thus be able to prepare for that event. At this point, they have no “end in sight” to prepare for. When do they need to be 100% self-sufficient? 1 month? 1 year? 10 years?
October 24th, 2006 at 1:17 pm(And please, let’s not raise that now-discredited Lancet study published (and debunked) last week).
Post a link to the “debunking” - and from a credible source, 0-6.
It’s not as if you haven’t lied before . . .
October 24th, 2006 at 1:18 pmThe Reverse Domino Theory
October 24th, 2006 at 1:21 pm#81 Oxillini,
Actually, I am inclined to agree with you. While I fully supported liberation and still maintain removing Saddam was the right thing to do (both morally and strategically), the aftermath has not gone as we had hoped. We have done all we can for the Iraqi people. We removed Saddam. We helped set up a democratic government. We have trained many, many Iraqis to serve in their police and military (the actual numbers given vary). Now it is time for them to handle their own affairs. Time to go. Pull out the U.S. troops and send them to Afghanistan.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:23 pm“Just because progressives find fault with OUR leaders doesn’t mean we are blind to the faults of others, just that we should be able to control ours first and easiest. I have NO guilt to assuage about not supporting the attack on Iraq or deposing Hussein, because it was wrong politically, practically, and morally.” - PLC
****** PLC - This progressive site CHEERS every military setback and every abhorrent act in the most leftist political tone. I would find it refreshing to read your volumes of staunch criticism of Saddam…..these might be found where?
“Wrong politically, practically and morally”? - Since Saddam was in violation of the agreed to cease fire in 1991, your statement is COMPLETELY false. His failure to abide by the terms of the cease fire led the warnings and INTERNATIONAL condemnation of his regime. Like many progs, you may have confused “cease fire” with “peace treaty” - - they are wholly different…but you knew that.
Speaking of selective morality - please refresh my memory and tell me the consequences devised by Demos re: the aborted assassaination attempt of Bush the Elder by Saddam. You have the “turning the other cheek” part down pat - now pull up your pants, for goodness sake!
October 24th, 2006 at 1:23 pm1. I don’t believe that’s accurate. It is estimated Saddam killed between 300,000 and 750,000 people during his reign.
And still you won’t acknowledge that many of those were killed due to republicans foolish ideas about “realpolitic.” Who armed Saddam? Who sold weapons to the Iranian terrorists? C’mon Exley, you can say the name . . .
October 24th, 2006 at 1:24 pmNow it is time for them to handle their own affairs. Time to go. Pull out the U.S. troops and send them to Afghanistan.
Comment by Exley —
Flip-flopper.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:25 pmSpeaking of selective morality - please refresh my memory and tell me the consequences devised by Demos re: the aborted assassaination attempt of Bush the Elder by Saddam. You have the “turning the other cheek†part down pat - now pull up your pants, for goodness sake!
Comment by mighty+aphrodite
Thanks for acknowledging the true reason we invaded Iraq. It took a while, but as a hog will find slop, you have finally muzzled into the truth.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:28 pmRight, let’s enforce ALL UN resolutions, the lot of them EVERY SINGLE ONE and bomb the crap out of those who don’t comply…all in favor..?
October 24th, 2006 at 1:30 pmWhy does everyone go off topic whenever trolls shows up? This is exactly what they’re trying to do in order to steer the conversation and take control of the blog. It becomes a troll blog instead of a progressive topic blog.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:30 pmI would find it refreshing to read your volumes of staunch criticism of Saddam…..these might be found where?
Right next to the volume entitled “Arming Dictators and Terrorists for Fun, Profit, and Political Gain.”
October 24th, 2006 at 1:30 pm#87,
Actually, I liken myself more to Robert Kennedy (a personal hero of mine). An initial strong supporter of the Vietnam War who in later years took to the Senate floor and said he had been wrong about the war and called for its end.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:32 pmThe complaints I’ve seen about the Lancet study had to do with the study having a lower number of cluster points then some other studies (or some mathy thing like that). And then I read that a lower number of cluster points would tend to lower the estimated number of deaths. Doesn’t matter to me what the number is. Say it’s 150,000. Isn’t that a great big goddamned pile of bodies? Also, what does the comparison with Hussein tell us. That it is less horrific now than it was? Okay. Even if that point is ceded, does that mean it absolves the coalition of responsibility for planning and performing so that scads of innocent people aren’t killed. Do you think it improper to even ask the question? Is accountability only for people you disagree with?
October 24th, 2006 at 1:33 pmTwisting the facts again are we? Baghdad had power under the Baathist rule but no body else in the country did. Baathist want control again so they blow up power stations like good little terrorists that you want to protect. But for once people all over Iraq are getting power. Not just the elite Baathists. But your just going to talk about Baghdad and not Iraq overall because cherry picking the new articles and statistics is what this website is all about.
You people are a joke.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:33 pmWell, Exley, it doesn’t sound like our viewpoints on this are as far apart as I thought. One point I don’t understand (and I’m not claiming you’ve said it) is this notion that to set a timetable/deadline is somehow Unamerican or traitorous? It seems like a Democrat suggesting such an idea is immediately labelled a “Defeatocrat” (About as childish as Repug in my opinion.)
October 24th, 2006 at 1:33 pmExley, I have argued for the rights of Iraqis for years. As some of the most modern Muslims, I have a hope that they can go back to their respectful existence. Unfortunately, too many Islamic terrorists are bogged down in the 7th century.
Given a little more wattage, they could visit TP regularly and see how tolerant “progressives” respect the opinions of others - - sorry, BAD example.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:34 pmBREAKING NEWS
SPEAKER HASTERT testifying before Ethics Committee…NOW!!
Oh boy…Stay tuned…
October 24th, 2006 at 1:35 pmI kind of like MA’s drive-by postings. Quick and dirty, I’m not into cuddling afterwords. Goodnight.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:36 pmbreaking news
hastert is testifying before the house ethics committee, whatever that means because the ethics committee is a f. joke.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:37 pmExley, I served with Robert Kennedy, I knew Robert Kennedy, Robert Kennedy was a friend of mine, sir you are no Robert Kennedy…
October 24th, 2006 at 1:37 pm#93 TritoneSubstitution
“Say it’s 150,000. Isn’t that a great big goddamned pile of bodies?” Yes (Although that still seems high)
“Also, what does the comparison with Hussein tell us. That it is less horrific now than it was? Okay. Even if that point is ceded, does that mean it absolves the coalition of responsibility for planning and performing so that scads of innocent people aren’t killed.” Absolutely not.
“Do you think it improper to even ask the question?” Absolutely not.
“Is accountability only for people you disagree with?” Again, absolutely not.
The question now is what to do? How to proceed? As James Baker said last week that Iraq is a “helluva mess.” Granted. But what to do about it?
October 24th, 2006 at 1:38 pmMA
would find it refreshing to read your volumes of staunch criticism of Saddam…..these might be found where?
I think I left them in the same place you left the proof that Democrats are against surveillance of suspected terrorists.
His failure to abide by the terms of the cease fire led the warnings and INTERNATIONAL condemnation of his regime.
And condemnation does not automatically, without great planning, mean a military attack for the purpose of deposing a dictator.
You have the “turning the other cheek†part down pat - now pull up your pants, for goodness sake!
No insult to my Christianity, there … right?
October 24th, 2006 at 1:38 pm#100 Heh! Good one, Almost Lloyd.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:39 pmExley and MA:
As Jane Schneider has said, no one supports a vicious dictator. But I have trouble with the fact that more Iraqis have now died since our invasion than apparently under Saddam. Killing to prevent killing is an oxymoron par excellence.
Also, many people have repeatedly pointed out the historical FACT that we supported Saddam in the 80s, sold him weaponry, Rumsfeld shook his hand, etc. This was during the time when he was doing the greatest amount of killing of his opponents in Iraq. I have yet to see any of you conservatives acknowledge this.
If it were truly possible to invade all the countries that have noxious dictators, and to take them and their worst supporters out, without killing their populaces, and without killing our soldiers and depleting our treasure, I would say go for it. But this isn’t what happens. Do you really seriously think that killing people is the way to stop killing, and that torturing people to stop torture, is the way to go?
October 24th, 2006 at 1:39 pmGiven a little more wattage, they could visit TP regularly and see how tolerant “progressives†respect the opinions of others - - sorry, BAD example.
Comment by mighty+aphrodite — October 24, 2006 @ 1:34 pm
Less electricity v. wood-chippers??? Such a difficult choice for Progs!
Comment by mighty+aphrodite — October 24, 2006 @ 11:22 am
This is respectful?
October 24th, 2006 at 1:40 pmRepublicans were for the brutal dictatorship of Saddam Hussein before they were against it.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:43 pmSetting benchmarks BEFORE an invasion???? Put away your Milton Bradley military board games, “geniusâ€.
Comment by mighty+aphrodite — October 24, 2006 @ 1:08 pm
You are truly as dense as they come.
Without benchmarks, there is no way of measuring success. Or failure. There is no way of knowing if you are moving forward or spinning your wheels in the sand.
That you, all of the sudden, have realised the need for timelines and benchmarks validates what I am saying and puts a hole through your logic -or lack thereof.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:46 pm#91- “Right next to the volume entitled “Arming Dictators and Terrorists for Fun, Profit, and Political Gain.†- barfly
*****Dear bargnat - Of course Progs don’t provide the evidence demonstrating their condemnation of Saddam - it’s hard to find the thimble. Your answer? Attempt to shift the debate.
Unfortunately, your limited or selective research is showing. The US propped up the Shah for a couple of reasons - first and foremost, OIL. Second, the strategic regional location of our #1 enem, the now-defunct USSR. After the Ayatollah Khomeini and his merry men overthrew the Shah and held our hostages 444 days, we were delighted to have Iran “occupied” by war with Iraq. Then as now, the Shiites of Iran were warring against Saddam’s Sunnis. Remember the adage, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”?
Instead of fast-forwarding through the points which don’t interest you (or serve your political purpose), you might gradually work up past the black and white fairy tales mom has been reading you….
October 24th, 2006 at 1:48 pmWolfdaughter;
1) But I have trouble with the fact that more Iraqis have now died since our invasion than apparently under Saddam. That is just not true.
2) Also, many people have repeatedly pointed out the historical FACT that we supported Saddam in the 80s, sold him weaponry, Rumsfeld shook his hand, etc. Actually, that is not quite accurate either. We did not sell him very much wepaonry at all. Most of our assistance to Iraq in the Iran-Iraq War was in the form of providing satellite intelligence on the position of Iranina troops. The number of actuall weapons we provided Iraq was quite small. The French and Germans were by far the larger providers of weapons to Saddam in the 1980s.
Yes, Rumsfeld met with Saddam and shook his hand. FDR shook hands with Stalin too…That’s diplomacy. Dealing with unsavory regimes is a necessary evil in international relations.
3) If it were truly possible to invade all the countries that have noxious dictators, and to take them and their worst supporters out, without killing their populaces, and without killing our soldiers and depleting our treasure, I would say go for it.
Generally, I agree with you. Generally, I don’t think it is wise or good policy for the U.S. to go around taking out dictatorships or preventing civil war. especially when there are no U.S. security interests at stake. That is why I opposed any type of U.S. intervention in Rwanda in the 1990s. However, if some things can be done to prevent successfully genocide or remove a dictatorship at a minimal cost of U.S. and civilian lives than I think it is morally incumbent to do. That is why I supported the NATO bombings in the Balkans in the 1990s.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:50 pmWell the Press Conference could have been worse, since it could have been attacked by insugents who are getting better organized and are getting bolder in their attacks > the Bush Regime has lost the war, but they are too stupid to realize it yet!
October 24th, 2006 at 1:52 pm105 - “…This is respectful?”
Comment by Republicans are the fear and smear party
*******Dear Dems are the Party of Compliant Appeasement - Compared to the vulgarity and references to body parts and elimination functions often posted with glee by progs, my post was EXTREMELY respectful.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:52 pmCan you spell - H-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e?
Wolfdaughter:
Also, many people have repeatedly pointed out the historical FACT that we supported Saddam in the 80s, sold him weaponry, Rumsfeld shook his hand, etc. This was during the time when he was doing the greatest amount of killing of his opponents in Iraq. I have yet to see any of you conservatives acknowledge this.
The Iraqi Kurds haven’t forgotten that the gas came from US-supplied Hueys… and the Iranians, well I wonder why they hate Americans…that’s right ‘for their freedoms’.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:53 pmYou sure don’t have to tell me about Iraq in the eighties. I was on Constellation in the IO on our way to Gonzo station in the north Arabian sea when Iraqi pilots “accidentally” slammed 2 exocets into the Stark. Even then, after the “accident” we were overflying Iran with bomb laden A6s. Remember when we were escorting kuwaiti tankers that we flagged as ours and the Iranians placed silkworms at the straits of Hormuz? Iraq and Hussein was our buddy make no mistake. He only became a monster in US eyes after he invaded Kuwait scaring the bejesus out of our good friends the Saudis and threatening world oil markets.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:54 pm“Throughout the period that Rumsfeld was Reagan’s Middle East envoy, Iraq was frantically purchasing hardware from American firms, empowered by the White House to sell. The buying frenzy began immediately after Iraq was removed from the list of alleged sponsors of terrorism in 1982. According to a February 13, 1991 Los Angeles Times article:
“First on Hussein’s shopping list was helicopters — he bought 60 Hughes helicopters and trainers with little notice. However, a second order of 10 twin-engine Bell “Huey” helicopters, like those used to carry combat troops in Vietnam, prompted congressional opposition in August, 1983… Nonetheless, the sale was approved.â€
In 1984, according to The LA Times, the State Department—in the name of “increased American penetration of the extremely competitive civilian aircraft marketâ€â€”pushed through the sale of 45 Bell 214ST helicopters to Iraq. The helicopters, worth some $200 million, were originally designed for military purposes. The New York Times later reported that Saddam “transferred many, if not all [of these helicopters] to his military.â€
In 1988, Saddam’s forces attacked Kurdish civilians with poisonous gas from Iraqi helicopters and planes. U.S. intelligence sources told The LA Times in 1991, they “believe that the American-built helicopters were among those dropping the deadly bombs.â€
In response to the gassing, sweeping sanctions were unanimously passed by the US Senate that would have denied Iraq access to most US technology. The measure was killed by the White House.
October 24th, 2006 at 1:57 pm“
Republicans were for the brutal dictatorship of Saddam Hussein before they were against it.
Comment by Republicans are the fear and smear party — October 24, 2006 @ 1:43 pm
Perfect! It’s funny because it’s true! (Okay, it’s NOT really funny, it’s horrible, but…)
October 24th, 2006 at 1:59 pm#113….Tritone….With using “the Google,” can anyone here answer which American president make this declaration of American policy????:
Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.
October 24th, 2006 at 2:00 pmA metaphor of the Bush administration.
October 24th, 2006 at 2:02 pmThey are losing power and operate in dark shadows, unable to bear the light of day.
Carter. What’s your point? That should still be policy. The words ‘outside force’ are operative here. Frankly, I think that means us now.
October 24th, 2006 at 2:04 pmHmmm….
“If the Sunnis and Shiites can’t forge a coalition, I really could care less if they kill each other…”
And then there was this
“Unfortunately, your limited or selective research is showing. The US propped up the Shah for a couple of reasons - first and foremost, OIL. Second, the strategic regional location of our #1 enem, the now-defunct USSR. After the Ayatollah Khomeini and his merry men overthrew the Shah and held our hostages 444 days, we were delighted to have Iran “occupied†by war with Iraq. Then as now, the Shiites of Iran were warring against Saddam’s Sunnis. Remember the adage, “The enemy of my enemy is my friendâ€? “
What happened to this?
Exley, I have argued for the rights of Iraqis for years. As some of the most modern Muslims,
No principles, no problem….
October 24th, 2006 at 2:04 pmHowever, if some things can be done to prevent successfully genocide or remove a dictatorship at a minimal cost of U.S. and civilian lives than I think it is morally incumbent to do.
Comment by Exley
Where does the current conflict fit in with your reasoning above? What is the current cost of this conflict?
Flighty far Righty, what’s the specifics of the plan for this conflict? Not asking a timeline just a battle plan. How many more Iraqis have to stand up? 300,000 is over twice the amount we have there. 450,000? 600,000?
October 24th, 2006 at 2:05 pmOf course Progs don’t provide the evidence demonstrating their condemnation of Saddam - it’s hard to find the thimble. Your answer? Attempt to shift the debate.
See: would find it refreshing to read your volumes of staunch criticism of Saddam…..these might be found where? and my response: I think I left them in the same place you left the proof that Democrats are against surveillance of suspected terrorists.
MA made this accusation on another thread about 5 hours ago and never did supply any evidence (the discussion happened on the thread about Bush’s lack of evidence, ironically)
Remember the adage, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend�
So, is it the Sunnis who are your friend or their enemy the Shiites?
October 24th, 2006 at 2:05 pm#104 - “As Jane Schneider has said, no one supports a vicious dictator.”
Comment by Wolfdaughter
********WD, Progs “condemnation” of Saddam was luke-warm at best. Allowing him to remain in power after breeching his cease-fire agreement is tantamount to allowing a rabid dog to run your neighbourhood or putting in ear-plugs when you hear a neighbours child being abused.
“Also, many people have repeatedly pointed out the historical FACT that we supported Saddam in the 80s, sold him weaponry, Rumsfeld shook his hand, etc.”
********AND many people have REPEATEDLY told the “progressive” community that arming Saddam against Iran was a foreign policy decision based on the enemy status of Iran. (WHAT part of that confuses you?) BTW, Do you think the photos of Ronald Reagan shaking hands with Gobachev meant they were friends???
“If it were truly possible to invade all the countries that have noxious dictators, and to take them ………”
October 24th, 2006 at 2:13 pm********I agree we can not take out all the dictators we would like - we must consider our national first and FOREMOST - a concept which eludes many Leftists. Unfortunately, the impotence and corruption of the UN demonstrates the necessity of the US to protect our own country and assist others when able. I backed Bill Clinton’s position on Bosnia - and criticized his tepid military responses to terror attacks of US installations.
113 - “He only became a monster in US eyes after he invaded Kuwait scaring the bejesus out of our good friends the Saudis and threatening world oil markets.” - Comment by TritoneSubstitution
*******VERY GOOD!!!! You have just demonstrated to the class a “national vital interest” - OIL. (Smiley face on your paper!!)
October 24th, 2006 at 2:17 pmI don’t understand this concept wherein I need to provide proof that I disapprove of Saddam Hussein. Well here, for the record. Saddam Hussein is a bad man. He was bad when we supported him, he was bad later and I believe he is still bad. Can we leave Iraq now? Honestly, if I thought we could do anything positive at this juncture I would support doing whatever we can to stop the effusion of blood(even if I think those who got us into that mess should pay a price). As a recovering compulsive gambler I recognize the pleas “C’mon just a couple more billion” or “Just a couple more years” or “Just a couple more soldiers lives”. It’s time to cut our losses and learn from the mistake.
October 24th, 2006 at 2:20 pmBut those of us who championed the human rights of the Iraqi people did.
Comment by Exley — October 24, 2006 @ 12:53 pm
Are you fu*king kidding??
You don’t give a rat’s a** about the Iraqi people. If you did you wouldn’t support this illegal, immoral, war.
October 24th, 2006 at 2:21 pmI kind of like MA’s drive-by postings. Quick and dirty, I’m not into cuddling afterwords. Goodnight.
Comment by ForTruth — October 24, 2006 @ 1:36 pm
…and nearly fact-free!
October 24th, 2006 at 2:21 pmPLC - I don’t think Jesus would approve of your lying. You “challenged” me to name Demos opposed to banking and telecommunication surveillance programs– I did. I then made a culinary suggestion so your crow might taste better. Diminishing others to prop up your “argument” isn’t very Christian, is it?
October 24th, 2006 at 2:24 pm#127 You missed the point entirely. I don’t think you’ll find anyone here who thinks we shouldn’t have liberated Kuwait. Well maybe that guy over there. What I’m getting at is that it is disengenuous to claim as argument that he is bad man for justification of hostility when that was never an issue before he began to threaten our interests. What I’m saying is please don’t pee on me and tell me it’s raining.
October 24th, 2006 at 2:24 pm126. So in your estimation we should be fillilng the boats with soldiers and getting them over to N. Korea ASAP because that brutal dictator already has a WMD and that nutcase could give it to anybody.
Where is the demand from the far right to have a draft? We have to either whip up some democracy on a country (whether they want it or not) or we have to whupass on contries that might be thinking about doing something nasty to us. We’ll need a really big army to push this thru but with the Republicans holding both houses of congress and the WH that should be no problem.
And yet there is no big cry for a draft. Why is that? Because when actually faced with the sacrifice it becomes apparent that this country won’t stand for a draft. We won’t follow Pres. Flip-flop thru the woods let alone into a war. By the way, why haven’t they called this an actual war yet.
I really don’t expect you to answer any of these because you’d have to face the failures of this administration. The failures of this administration is what drives many of the people here. The majority here are not the tree hugging far left or the blanket Prog but are people who see the destruction of this country coming from……you guessed it, THIS ADMINISTRATION.
Each of the threads shown is just another example of the missteps, misscalculations, missinformation and missmanagement from THIS ADMINISTRATION.
They have failed us and you are included.
October 24th, 2006 at 2:25 pm#134 - Dear Tritone - I sincerely apologize - I used what you WROTE to reach my conclusion….I’ll try to get to my next mind-reading class so as to understand what you REALLY mean to say. Thanks for the clarification…
’til later…..
October 24th, 2006 at 2:34 pmPLC - I don’t think Jesus would approve of your lying. You “challenged†me to name Demos opposed to banking and telecommunication surveillance programs– I did. I then made a culinary suggestion so your crow might taste better. Diminishing others to prop up your “argument†isn’t very Christian, is it?
Comment by mighty+aphrodite
OK, counselor. Since you insist on lawyering up or you will otherwise ignore the intent:
Mighty Aphrodite, please provide me specific quotes, with full reference information for verification purposes, from at least two national Democratic leaders, currently holding elected national office or having done so in the last six years, which explicitly state his or her opposition to banking and telecommunication surveillance programs that are directly and thoroughly subjected to oversight by U.S. Federal Court or the U.S. Congress, as evidence for your allegation of same.
October 24th, 2006 at 2:37 pm113 - “He only became a monster in US eyes after he invaded Kuwait scaring the bejesus out of our good friends the Saudis and threatening world oil markets.†- Comment by TritoneSubstitution
*******VERY GOOD!!!! You have just demonstrated to the class a “national vital interest†- OIL. (Smiley face on your paper!!)
Comment by mighty+aphrodite — October 24, 2006 @ 2:17 pm
Very good, MA has just demonstrated how much she cares about the Iraqi people. No, it’s all about the OIL, and she is just fine with that.
********WD, Progs “condemnation†of Saddam was luke-warm at best. Allowing him to remain in power after breeching his cease-fire agreement is tantamount to allowing a rabid dog to run your neighbourhood or putting in ear-plugs when you hear a neighbours child being abused.
Comment by mighty+aphrodite — October 24, 2006 @ 2:13 pm
“Breeching (sp) his cease-fire agreement”? Wait, was THAT supposed to be the reason for the invasion? MA, when someone breaches (it’s a lawyer-type word, I’m surprised that you can’t spell it) their agreement, the first thing to do is invade?
October 24th, 2006 at 2:44 pmMs Aprhodite,
October 24th, 2006 at 2:50 pmAlthough unnecessary your apology is accepted. No mind reading is necessary. Next time read all of what I wrote rather than cynically quoting a portion that you like out of its context and you should be fine. I also want to point out that I would never make mention of the fact that you like to “use” what other people wrote rather than discuss the opinions of others. I would also never suggest that your use of language as a cudgel is deliberate. Evidence be damned, I’m certain there are arguments that are so ridiculous that you would never give them voice.
I like to snipe as much as the next guy but let’s have a serious discussion about Iraq. I’ll be respectful of disagreement with my position and you do the same. I can be swayed. Sway me.
October 24th, 2006 at 3:01 pmMA, I currently work in the footcare business, I’m expected to know the difference between, say, “heel” and “heal.” I would hope that, if I ever need one, my lawyer would at least be familiar with the differences between “breech” and “breach”. Sorry, I don’t need no stinking administrative assistant to tell me how to spell something that I SHOULD know.
October 24th, 2006 at 3:05 pmYes but she is typing a lot and many’s the slip twixt cup and lip or whatever the hell that expression is supposed to be. I know I’m going to misspell a buncha words. Many articulate and erudite people caint spell a lick.
October 24th, 2006 at 3:16 pmFlighty far righty has gone from this thread. she couldn’t/wouldn’t admit to the holes in her theories. She could not/ would not admit to defeat, she will not WILL NOT admit she was beat. She’s become the scare and tare (out of here), lie and leave, smear and veer Republican.
October 24th, 2006 at 3:21 pmYou know they say “familiarity breeds contempt”. Shoot, try anonymity. The behavior of trolls is the proof. IRL no one would walk up to a conversation and just let rip and show their asses the way some of these folks do.
October 24th, 2006 at 3:22 pmMA
The link did not work and I never saw your first posting of it. I tried to go to the Washington Post site to find the article you suggested but none of the summaries on that date appeared relevant (and I’m NOT going to pay for a complete archived copy unless I’m very certain it is the one you referenced).
October 24th, 2006 at 3:23 pmWait, Tritone, are you implying that MA is drinking and typing?! ;-)
October 24th, 2006 at 3:23 pmThis is the second time I am posting this WaPo link
Comment by mighty+aphrodite — October 24, 2006 @ 2:56 pm
What is amusing is your inability to paste a working link, even after all the months of posting your asinine rants here at ThinkProgress. Maybe you should ask your “administrative assistant” to do that for you.
As for theWaPo article, PLC asked you to provide names of Democratic leaders who have opposed surveillance programs that have proper oversight.
The only Democrat official named in the article is quoted as saying: “It would be very disturbing to me to find out that this program represents yet another unilateral action and further abuse of executive authority without proper safeguards and oversight,”
The Executive Director of the ACLU is quoted as saying: “How many other secret spying programs has the Bush administration enacted without Congress, the courts or the public knowing?”
They are talking about the need of proper oversight, which is the very same thing PLC was talking about.
With your reading comprehension skills, it is a wonder your clients don’t get the maximum possible sentence every single time.
October 24th, 2006 at 3:26 pmWayne,
Try: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2006/ 06/ 23/ AR2006062300919.html
Paste into the address bar of your browser.
October 24th, 2006 at 3:27 pmIraq’s got so much oil that we can give them more than 3 hrs of electricity in Baghdad? Who’s running the show over there? Enron or one of Cheney’s energy cronies?
October 24th, 2006 at 3:28 pmHe he. You ever hear the Flying Conchords do that song where they talk about kids working in factories making tennis shoes so we can buy cheap tennis shoes. Where are those shoes?
October 24th, 2006 at 3:38 pm161 Gregor Samsa
I just clicked on your post and there the article was. Thank you. Now, I can say:
MA, you are a hit-and-run troll who specializes in lying, distortion, and character assassination. If you are, indeed, an attorney (which I doubt - BTW I’m married to a first-class one), then I hope you do not operate in your professional role as you have on this site. For doing so, you would be disgracing the fundamental honesty and integrity required for justice and protection of the rights of Americans. I will no longer try to have a civil, logical discussion with you but I will feel free and obligated to continue to call you on your nonsense.
October 24th, 2006 at 3:44 pmSo many of you are pathetic simpletons. You’d rather fight your lopsided point than admit the answers to these questions aren’t as simple as a comment form can hold. This goes out to both sides of the aisle. You can call Bush a retard, a monkey or an evil man, and perhaps he is; but these decisions are not for the faint of heart.
Please don’t tote in your plastic cups full of Kool-Aid and pretend that if you were in Kofi Annon’s place you’d do a better job. The world is a big place full of all sorts of people, and while expressing yourself is important, pissing on each other gets no one anything but foul-smelling.
October 24th, 2006 at 3:50 pm#165 PLC - oh, I crossed over the day MA posted under my handle.
October 24th, 2006 at 3:50 pmOnly the truth of Kaneh bosm will ever, ever save the day! I think that may be right around the corner. Food, fuel, shelter, medicine, and TRUE spirituality. All from one wonderful plant!!! KANEH BOSM.
October 24th, 2006 at 3:56 pmWhoah, someone just drove by with his weiner hanging out the window p***ing on everyone. Who the h*** was that?
October 24th, 2006 at 3:58 pmI don’t know Terry, but it sure smells foul! ;-]
October 24th, 2006 at 4:02 pmGiven the difficulties the new Iraqi government is having in maintaining a consistent and plentiful energy supply for all their utlilitarian needs, I bet they make the move to alternative energies before we in the USA are able to do it.
October 24th, 2006 at 4:17 pm#123
Where does the current conflict fit in with your reasoning above? What is the current cost of this conflict?</