Eight Thousand Bombers

[jd77]

Evidence justifying the invasion of Iraq will be mostly ignored. Opponents of the war already have their minds made up.

As if I didn't already know :yeah: what do you think of the fact that there is evidence Saddam sponsored terrorist training camps for Islamic radicals?



Original Article (http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/550kmbzd.asp)


Saddam's Terror Training Camps
What the documents captured from the former Iraqi regime reveal--and why they should all be made public.
by Stephen F. Hayes
01/16/2006

THE FORMER IRAQI REGIME OF Saddam Hussein trained thousands of radical Islamic terrorists from the region at camps in Iraq over the four years immediately preceding the U.S. invasion, according to documents and photographs recovered by the U.S. military in postwar Iraq. The existence and character of these documents has been confirmed to THE WEEKLY STANDARD by eleven U.S. government officials.
The secret training took place primarily at three camps--in Samarra, Ramadi, and Salman Pak--and was directed by elite Iraqi military units. Interviews by U.S. government interrogators with Iraqi regime officials and military leaders corroborate the documentary evidence. Many of the fighters were drawn from terrorist groups in northern Africa with close ties to al Qaeda, chief among them Algeria's GSPC and the Sudanese Islamic Army. Some 2,000 terrorists were trained at these Iraqi camps each year from 1999 to 2002, putting the total number at or above 8,000. Intelligence officials believe that some of these terrorists returned to Iraq and are responsible for attacks against Americans and Iraqis. According to three officials with knowledge of the intelligence on Iraqi training camps, White House and National Security Council officials were briefed on these findings in May 2005; senior Defense Department officials subsequently received the same briefing.

[Sponsored Links]

[LadyGodiva]

JD, are you still trying to justify this war? I think you ought to pack it up my friend and go :fish2: It's a lot more fun :rofl:

[Shaughnn]

JD,
You *do* know that the editors of the "Weekly Standard" were called in to tutor George Bush on foriegn affairs leading up to his first Presidential campaign, don't you? You *do* know that the invasion and conversion of Iraq was a fundemental plank of the foriegn policy which they outlined for him, don't you? You *do* know that Rupert Murdoch owns the "Weekly Standard", along with other bullhorns for the Neo-conservative agenda, don't you? You also know, don't you, that the "terror training camps" which are "exposed" in this report were long ago debunked along with much of the other misinformation which was selectively incorporated into the justification for war? Citing the "Weekly Standard" as your source is a little bit like asking a cow if you should have chicken or beef for dinner tonight. It's a self-serving subject and far from impartial.
Do you know of any other independant and reputable source for this "startling revelation? :)
Shaughnn

[LadyGodiva]

Hey, JD did you forget that the US used to be buddies with Saddam? It's kind of like kindergarten isn't it? First we're friends and then we have a squabble and it's a bunch of 'he hit me first', NO, 'he did!' :rofl:

But then again, the friendship was between Saddam and Reagan :D

[jvcstone]

Yep, It sure was. Oh and what was Reagan's VP's Name??? ,Bush???
And the name of Reagan's special envoy to Iraq and Saddam-- the guy who encouraged Saddam to keep on using chemical weapons at the same time the US was "officially" condemning their use--Non other than Don Rumsfeld. (transcript of memos of these talks can be found in the freedom of information archives -- along with a whole bunch of other goodies that will set you back a step or two)
Always have found it interesting how our foreign policy has supported dictators, tyrants and other unsavory critters while they are useful to our nefarious ends, and turning on them when they are no longer useful, or even worse- start to think for themselves. Quite a long list of names over the last half century or so. And this is the one area that partisan politics does not get involved since our foreign policy has been been driven by neither republican nor democratic interests.
Oh yea, Second to what Shaugnn said about the source
JVC

[LadyGodiva]

JVC you're the man :D :bow: :clap2:

[John Corley]

:moon:

[Dan1]

JD

There is no arguing that subject with any one here.

Minds are already made up, and I for one am nowhere near articulate enough to try.
Please dont speak for anyone elses "minds". I personally pride myself on being open minded. When I see or learn new facts or evidence I will change my opinion or mind its what smart people do, theres nothing wrong with learning new things even when they contradict the old . Diehards would call me a flipflopper they would rather deny the truth, too scared to admit ever being wrong.

[Tool Guy - Kg]

It is too bad we can't argue this. :(

[John Corley]

Sorry I even said anything

Delete my post please.

Never mind I did it for you.

I just get sick of anytime some says something remotely close to what might be construed as coming from someone who may be :devil2: conservative :devil2:

They get shot down and talked down on like they are misinformed drooling idiots.

You guys can't deny that

[Shaughnn]

John C,
I disagree. My mind isn't "made up". I have strong opinions and I'm willing to debate them but I am *always* looking for an arguement which will sway my opinions and cause me to see things in a different light. I am hardly in the "liberal" corner but I am very strongly opposed to many of the actions taken by this administration. I'm neither conservative or liberal. I'm an open-minded American who takes my responsibility to remain informed and vigilant very seriously, that's all. :)
Simply shrugging off those who disagree with you, instead of engaging them, may give you comfort but it rarely serves more purpose than that.
Shaughnn
PS: John, you are perfectly welcome to edit your post if you like, but I hope that you will choose to remain engaged instead. While we may not agree, I welcome your views and opinions.

[Shaughnn]

John,
Replace "conservative" in your post with "liberal" and you might see how we've allowed *real* debate to become neutered here in the United States. The tact of discrediting the messenger instead of the message is a well-honed weapon of Karl Rove's machine. If you are feeling frustrated by such labels, reject them and incite *real* conversation instead of the rhetorical mimicry which certain outlets have been engineered to create.
When I can see myself in the position of the person I am in disagreement with, then I will know that a real conversation is taking place. But if I only hear "talking points" and "media blitz" then I know that I'm faced with someone else's puppet and not someone who applies their own critical filters to what's been presented to them. How often have you become discouraged when talking to a salesperson and thought to yourself, "I need to find someone in charge"? BECOME the "store manager" and not just a "floor-monkey" and you might just make the sale of your life. :)
Shaughnn
PS: That final metaphor was not intended to imply that you are a monkey, John. I like monkeys. I like referring to all sorts of professions in the "monkey-tense". It's an attempt at light humor in an otherwise serious discussion. :D

[cx]

I just get sick of anytime some says something remotely close to what might be construed as coming from someone who may be conservative

They get shot down and talked down on like they are misinformed drooling idiots.

You guys can't deny thatI can deny that, John. :)

[John Bridge]

My man Jefferson said it best, and I paraphrase. We are all liberals and we are all conservatives. It takes a little of each. I wish we could get off that angle of conversation, because it solves nothing.

George Bush is a chump despite his liberal or conservative leanings. :)

Politicians are chumps, period. It goes with the job description. :D

The war in Iraq is stupid whether you are a lib or a conservative or a Republican or a Democrat or a Libertarian or a Bhudist. :D It's stupid, and it's costing lives all around. But it's nothing new. The same thing has been going on at least throughout recorded history, and I'll bet a lot of it went on before then.

[Shaughnn]

John B,
Do you plan to attend the big "welcome home" rally for Tom Depay? I hear they're going to have police cars there and he might even get to meet some of those judges he's famously said are a hinderance to American progress. :D At least, California's "Duke" Cunningham wore a wire for the FBI before he resigned in disgrace. I can't wait to see who that little fishing trip managed to hook, also.
What are the parameters of "treason" again? It's still a hanging offence in this country, isn't it? :tup2:
Shaughnn

[LadyGodiva]

Chumps? :rofl:

I like that description :D

[John Corley]

Lady G

What happened to your previous Avatar?

It was brilliant :tup2:

[John Bridge]

I have never liked Tom De Lay. He has always been too big for his britches -- beyond the law in his own mind. He is a petty thief that needs to be weeded out. I'm glad someone finally called him to task.

This whole "conservative" idea is crazy, folks. I've always been a conservative, meaning I'm not willing to change things without good reason. That's a true conservative. The meaning lately has been changed to equate with someone's idea of patriotism. I'm here to tell you there are patriots in both camps, heroes all over the place. Americans ought to be just Americans. We ought to be able to get along long enough to see the truth and falsities of the various issues we are faced with. Good Americans calling other good Americans names is not the answer, my friends. :)

[renataleo]

evebody want to be american,you guys live in the best country in the world,we all want somebody take care us,or fight for us,like your govern do that for you,luck you believe

[Splinter]

This whole "conservative" idea is crazy, folks... etc.

I agree JB... I said something similar about the "liberal" label that was thrown around in the beginning of Shaughnn's "impeachable" thread. I just dont get it...

[renataleo]

http://www.link4u.com/weareone.htm

[renataleo]

http://www.link4u.com/kissedmyson.htm

[jd77]

Just had a peek at this thread for the first time since this morning.

Well, I can't really say I'm shocked at the response. Disappointed is more like it :crap:

The truth is I had a sentence in my original intro just like John Corley's but I knew it would cause a stir. Also had one predicting Shaughnn would attack the source of the info. but took it out for the same reason.

What bugs me is that not one of you even bothered to discuss the information presented.
Instead we got:

The war is stupid
Citing the "Weekly Standard" as your source is a little bit like asking a cow if you should have chicken or beef for dinner tonight
Bush is a chump
The tact of discrediting the messenger instead of the message is a well-honed weapon of Karl Rove's machine
When I see or learn new facts or evidence I will change my opinion or mind its what smart people do, theres nothing wrong with learning new things even when they contradict the old
If you are feeling frustrated by such labels, reject them and incite *real* conversation instead of the rhetorical mimicry which certain outlets have been engineered to create.

With those comments I see now that it was the waste of time I expected it to be.

You really showed your true colors.

[kwangtzu]

What concerns me most about the article is that it is from the future!!! :sick:

Saddam's Terror Training Camps
What the documents captured from the former Iraqi regime reveal--and why they should all be made public.
by Stephen F. Hayes
01/16/2006

I think this is an alien plot to destroy our liberal belief in the sanctity of linear time. But I KNOW time is linear...must believe...must fight evil forces...don't listen to their lies...I'll hold them off, the rest of you run.

[Shaughnn]

JD,
What were you hoping for? Seriously??? Should any of us have fallen to the ground and shouted out loud, "My God! Now that the "Weekly Standard" has revealed these great truths, I am completely swayed and overcome by regret for my wrong-ness!"? I actually have a pretty solid respect for William Kristol, the editor of the "Weekly Standard", and I have made a point of catching interviews with him when I can. It was through listening to interviews with William Kristol that I learned of his influence over George Bush's foriegn policy. Mr. Kristol's very open about his involvement there. He's talked about it with Jon Stewart on the "Daily Show". He's talked about it while a guest on "The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer". He's talked about it at either the National Press Club or the Commonwealth Club (I'm not certain which broadcast I was listening to).
So, when you expected me to poo-poo your source was it because you think that I'm a fanatic "lefty" who can't see past labels or because you knew that the source was suspect and you were baiting me?
Many people don't like this President or his policies, JD. His approval rating is further down the toilet than box office sales for "Gigli", and he's quickly approaching "Heaven's Gate (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080855/) " status. It stands to reason that some might not agree with your support of his policies, if only at first. If you wanted to change our minds with that posting, you can easily take up my suggestion to provide some other source to support the "Weekly Standard"'s report. They cite "eleven U.S. government officials" as their source, and not a single one of them is willing to be named??? We are spending a ba-zillion of OUR tax dollars in Iraq every day and we have tens of thousands of United States citizen-soldiers putting their lives at risk daily and this huge revealation which will vindicate all of that immense cost is only worthy of an anonymous tip??? :wtf: Come on, JD! Look at yesterday's meager employment numbers and how the White House struck up the band and sent the town-criers scampering to share the good news that things don't "suck" as much as much as they were estimated to "suck". If there were any legs to this story, vindicating the war when the White House is under siege for it's disasterous policies which placed us there, they'd be making as much news about it as they could.
Instead, we get a whisper campaign fed to the fervent faithful to bolster them in the face of growing disillusionment.
I'm sorry to have disappointed you, JD. Tell me how I can make it up to you, please? :)
Shaughnn

[jd77]

John,
Replace "conservative" in your post with "liberal" and you might see how we've allowed *real* debate to become neutered here in the United States. The tact of discrediting the messenger instead of the message is a well-honed weapon of Karl Rove's machine. If you are feeling frustrated by such labels, reject them and incite *real* conversation instead of the rhetorical mimicry which certain outlets have been engineered to create.
When I can see myself in the position of the person I am in disagreement with, then I will know that a real conversation is taking place. But if I only hear "talking points" and "media blitz" then I know that I'm faced with someone else's puppet and not someone who applies their own critical filters to what's been presented to them. How often have you become discouraged when talking to a salesperson and thought to yourself, "I need to find someone in charge"? BECOME the "store manager" and not just a "floor-monkey" and you might just make the sale of your life. :)
Shaughnn
PS: That final metaphor was not intended to imply that you are a monkey, John. I like monkeys. I like referring to all sorts of professions in the "monkey-tense". It's an attempt at light humor in an otherwise serious discussion. :D

Shaughnn,

This is an insulting post. I won't speak for John Corley but I don't need to be talked to like I'm in kindergarten. I have many sources of information and certainly see the big picture. John had it exactly right.

Why not try to address the actual issue?

[Shaughnn]

JD,
What was "insulting" about it? I thought I did a pretty good job of explaining that I meant to use "monkey" in the best possible way and in no way meant to imply that John (or anyone else) was less-than-evolved. I take it that you felt that I was condescending in explaining why false-titles like "conservative" and "liberal" distract us from any real sort of debate? I really didn't intend to be. It was my hope to be clear about the point I was trying to make. I guess you went to a more advanced Kindergarten than I did 'cause I don't recall words like "Neutered", "incite" or "rhetorical mimicry" in any spelling bees. :)
See you on the swings,
Shaughnn

[Tool Guy - Kg]

...but allowing the level of respect for each other to errode is not. Everyone is certainly free to believe whatever they like, and this forum has allowed just that. But if someone feels insulted, let's not pick at it, let's respect each other and move onward. :)

[jjwq8]

Ignoring the epithets isn't this simply further proof that you are suffering from too much information and too little truth?
I loathe and despise what has happened to Iraq, but you broke it ergo you bought it. Quit bitching!
Valid reasons or not, it is still broken.
Just hurry up and fix it or get out and leave it to those who can, and no I don't have any idea who that may be other than an undying certainty that it isn't anyone with an office located anywhere between the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts.

[Shaughnn]

Kurt, I agree and I'll leave both John and JD alone. I just wanted to make sure that I'd explained again that I wasn't attacking them, I was attacking the information which was used to support their arguements.
Shaughnn

[jd77]

JD,

So, when you expected me to poo-poo your source was it because you think that I'm a fanatic "lefty" who can't see past labels or because you knew that the source was suspect and you were baiting me?



No Shaughnn (hey - I just spelled your name right without looking :shades: ) I was just throwing the subject out for general discussion.


I'm sorry to have disappointed you, JD. Tell me how I can make it up to you, please? :)
Shaughnn

Come to think of it - you lived up to my expectations so you did not disappoint:D

But if you still want to make it up to me you can:

Read the Wall Street Journal opinion page for 2 weeks
Listen to Rush Limbaugh for a month
Last but not least - read the next 52 issues of the Weekly Standard

:tup2: Hey - you asked. In fact - you begged :bow:



Really though Shaughnn, Thank you for at least taking the time to lay it out there. I really respect that.

[Shaughnn]

JD,
I've already got the Wall Street Journal bookmarked so the first isn't too difficult. And I've got the "Weekly Standard" bookmarked also. But I'll put them both on my toolbar for the next while and see if I can accomodate your reasonable requests. But Rush Limbaugh!!! That would be like asking me to sit in a dark closet counting out a jar of pinto beans. I think I'd go nuts! Honestly, I equate listening to that man rant on about politics and society to Howard Stern's "marital advice". They are both entertainers abusing the guise of legitimacy that only commercial exposure can create for them. Honestly, what are Rush Limbaugh's credentials other than his ratings? Is he a scholarly fellow? Does he have real-life experience in the fields which he claims authority over? Or, does he simply beat his drum so loudly that great numbers of folks can't help but look in his direction? :) I used to listen to Limbaugh occasionally as kind of a curiousity and for the "car wreck' quality of his leaps of logic and broadstroke condemnations. But it's not funny for me any longer. Can I eat glass instead? Pretty please? :)
Shaughnn

[jd77]

JD,
Can I eat glass instead? Pretty please? :)
Shaughnn

Really Shaughnn - you should pay more attention - you were already off the hook :fish2:

Begging is beneath you :sheep:

[Shaughnn]

Hey JD,
Thanks for letting me off the hook but I didn't consider it too much of an imposition in the first place. :) Fact is, I saw it as a very reasonable invitation, except for the Rush Limbaugh part which was just mean spirited. :) In return, can I ask you to look at your own sources and compare the "message" which they are distributing to the "on point" delivery which the White House floods the air-waves with any time they are trying to make a point? Look critically at how every news story critical of the White House and it's policies is quickly countered by some other sensational news story which serves to distract attention away from Washington D.C.. Now, look at who cooperates with these coordinated efforts. Fox New's Hannity and O'Reilly both failed to mention Jack Abramoff all week long. Do you think that is by accident? Do you think that Abramoff's signed confessions of guilt and his indication that as many as SIXTY United States Congressmen and their aids were compromised by his activities isn't newsworthy enough for Fox?!? How about how Sean Hannity shut down a guest on his show who pointed out that the Sago mine tragedy was entirely predictable and the Bush administration's pointed neglect of enforcing regulations was a major contributor to those 12 deaths? :wtf: I guess those dancing kittens and little league scores just trump any of that "sad news", right? :tup1:
Hold your sources accountable and I'll give them a shot also. Together we just might find enough common ground to make sense of all the rest of this mess?
Shaughnn

[John Corley]

Shaughnn

Do you mind elaborating how the mine accident was the current administrations fault.

I'm not f ing with you, I just haven't heard anything that would lead me to that conclusion.

[Dog paws]

The banter and diatribe on these forums are amusing. What I'd really like to hear is a solution out of this mess from our left of center friends.
I was once on the bandwagon figuring Sadam's finger prints just had to be on 9-11 while at the same time listening to that vaint voice telling me that all it's really about is oil and vengeance. I admit I was duped. I can't however, buy the "cut and run" plan as an answer to the mess we created.
So what's the retort to a statement like, "Right now your reputation and name is in the toilet. Make the most of the opportunity this presents. Take the damn gloves off. Get in their amongst the bad guys and take the bastards out."

And for the record. This conservative considers a day without Rush like a day without Osama.

[Shaughnn]

Glad to John,
The guest on the Hannity-Combs show was the past director of the Mining Safety Board and he tried to discuss the nearly 200 regulatory violations which the Sago mine and it's operators were cited for. He tried to explain that the federal government under the Bush administration has withdrawn nearly all of the regulatory enforcement which took generations to install and that willfull neglect is ultimately what put those miners in harm's way. The guest tried also to explain that prior to the dismantling of the regulatory agencies by ther Bush administration, the Sago mine would have been closed and those violations addresssed prior to those miners being sent back in there. The guest wasn't attacking the White House, he was explaining "how something like this happens". Sean Hannity instead shouted him down and dismissed his informed analysis as partisan attacks and that's how the show ended.
I guess the journalistic logic is that if you disagree with President Bush and his policies, you MUST be a partisan hack? At least that's how FauxNews rigged the ballgame.
Shaughnn
PS: Michael, whose quote is that? For the record I don't think that the "lefty" view is "cut-and-run". I think it's been portrayed that was but even John Kerry said such a tact would be dissasterous if you read the transcripts of what he said and not what people "say he said". The current acceleration of the pull-out discussion has more to do with growing frustration and the pending mid-term elections. If you substitute the term "cut-and-run" for "sh!t or get off the pot" I think you'll see that outside of the semantics, the sentiment isn't nearly as pathetic.

[jd77]

Hold your sources accountable and I'll give them a shot also. Together we just might find enough common ground to make sense of all the rest of this mess?
Shaughnn

Hey Shaughnn,

You're making a pretty big assumption here - my sources. How do you know my sources? I have a good BS filter and it works to the left and right. It is more about what is not said than what is said. I'd like to agree with you about the common ground but, the reality is, it probably will not happen. I think it is far too difficult to pull off a conspiracy to have as many going on as you allege. That's OK because we need diversity of opinion :D

I am not of the belief that my views are the only views and don't believe everyone would agree with me if only they "understood".

Thanks for tryin' :talk:

[Shaughnn]

Hi JD,
Well, I did ask you what other sources you would offer to support the initial posting and you declined to offer any, so I did indeed make some assumptions based on my very limited information at hand. If you spend as much time listening to Air America as you do with Mr. Limbaugh, then I guess you do keep your options open. I listen to neither as I think my own BS filters might become too quickly clogged. :D
So, in the interest of broadening my opinions what three information outlets do you expose yourself to most often?
Shaughnn

[John Bridge]

I remember the NY Times best seller entitled RUSH LIMBAUGH IS A BIG FAT IDIOT. Stayed at the top of the list for a lot of weeks. Got a chuckle out of that. Rush couldn't sue, because it was true. :D

[John Corley]

Glad to hear that Air America is not being taken seriously I mean Jerry Springer, Randi Rhoades, and Al Franken come on.

Someone mentioned a lack of solutions to our problems, occasionally I listen to America Left on XM and I have never heard one solution ever.

Not to many solutions on America Right either for that matter.

[Scooter]

"We have to fight them there or we'll fight them here."

"We have to make the country a beacon of democracy."

"We had to destroy the village to save it."

No, these are no quotes from the current Iraq war, although they could be. They were quotes from when I was 19 years old and serving in the U.S. Army overseas in Viet Nam.

Those quotes were believed then, and surprisingly, they are believed now.

And they were false then, as they are false now.

This war is a mess. Iraq will end up in a massive civil war and complete chaos. I really don't understand the hawks that still support this stupid invasion. Sorry, I just don't get it. I fail to see the upside. I do see the downside.

[Rob Z]

Shaughnn,

I don't know how much of the problems in that mine were because of lax Federal oversight or because of the WVa State authority. I worked with a teacher years ago who was from WVa, and he had worked in the mines for years before coming to the school system. The stories he used to tell were quite interesting, but the ones I remember the most were about the miners themselves threatening the inspectors and other "folks in charge" with nothing short of a severe beating if they asserted too much control over how they (the miners) did their work. Anything that cut into their production rates was unacceptable. An inspector that rubbed them the wrong way had a very difficult time doing his job.

He told me it was a whole other world down in those mines and most people wouldn't believe the shit that goes on down there.


Here's a start for info about the WVa agency with jurisdiction:

http://www.wvminesafety.org/

[jd77]

Hi JD,
So, in the interest of broadening my opinions what three information outlets do you expose yourself to most often?
Shaughnn

Information outlets? The Drudge Report

Basically a gathering of links to stories from many different sources. Updated every two minutes. One story can lead you on an adventure all over the world if you know how to keep an open mind.

Hard news: NYT, WAPO, WSJ, KCStar
Opinion: NYT, WSJ Opinion Journal, National Review Online

Mostly Shaughnn it is the story that drives my consumption.

Inquiring minds want to know: How will this broaden your opinions?


Now it's your turn :)

[Shaughnn]

Hi JD and thanks,
I've had internet problems all week and was unable to connect for much of it. Sorry for replying so late.
It would appear that we both approach things in a similar fashion. I've got the San Francisco Chronicle's webpage (http://www.sfgate.com) set as my homepage and begin every day by looking at the headlines. While the San Francisco Chronicle might be seen as a "liberal" paper, their website has been recognized as one of the best designed amoung newspapers and it gives me a good overview of worldy stuff as well as local news. From there, depending on how much time I've got before heading out to work, I browse across the web like tarzan using links and resources like Google to find more detailed information. I've had a folder of other news outlet links which I check also to get differing perspectives but I'll have to rebuild that as all my settings disappeared this week also, along with about 16,000 e-mails from the past 2 years. Damn con'fussers. :tongue:
In the truck, I generally stick with the local PBS radio station (http://www.kqed.org/radio/) as their signal is strong and I don't have to suffer through any annoying "morning zoo". From that I get Michael Krasny's "Forum", the "Commonwealth Club" and other discussion-based programming which avoids bombast and sensationalism. I also get a good overview of national and world news along with local developements with the "California Report". My wife got me an iPod Nano over this past holiday and so I've been actively seeking podcasts to add to my routine as well. If you've got a podcast or two that you think is worth my while to check out, I'd love to learn about it.
Based on what I've heard over the course of the day, I then entertain myself in the evenings by swinging through the internet jungle again using an intentional variety of methods to avoid getting stuck in any single mind-set. As I don't have much time to read at work and I dislike consuming the tons of paper-products print-based periodicals requires, I admit that my exposure is limited to what I can find on the internet and what radio waves bring me. But I like to think that I've got the benefit of a nimble BS-filter also and I can easily search out opposing viewpoints if I find any source is not giving me an even-handed perspective.
That being said, about the only television I watch is "The Daily Show" with TIVO'd "Colbert Report" episodes if I'm bored, "My Name is Earl" and "Project Runway" with my wife. Damn, I love "My Name is Earl"! :)
Yours in truthiness,
Shaughnn

[Scooter]

My Name is Earl is just plain funny. For those of you who haven't watched it yet, its about a druggy loser who went to jail, won the lottery, and when he gets out trys to fix up every thing he did wrong in his life. He's got a list, and its good karma to fix things.

But then, he's still a PWT loser, so in trying to fix things up, he makes it worse, but it all comes out in the end.

He lives in a trailer court type motel with an illegal allien girlfriend and his ex-wife is a hooker. Lots of memorable characters.

So are we going to invade Iran, or just bomb the shit out them? I mean they got nukes and we don't need no stink'in weapons inspectors to figure that out. I don't see why we are waiting on this. Heck, we only suspected WMD with Hussein, and didn't have time for diplomacy, so why not just invade now?

How do you guys feel about having a whacko Hezobolah former terrorist as head of Iran in charge of nukes, while we are farting around in Iraq dodging IED's? I don't think we could spare a platoon for Iran given our over-reaction in Iraq.

[John Corley]

Scooter I agree with you.

But the question is, does the rest of America?

[Scooter]

The post was a tad tounge in cheek. Yes, I agree we probably need to take that terrorist out--but the problem lies that Bush over-reacted in Iraq. Thus, he cried Wolf and he has expended, indeed heavily borrowed, on any political capital he had. The Iranians could publically display their bomb, and as a result of this stupid war in Iraq, the people will not want invade.

I doubt we will do anything except maybe toss over a few cruise missels.

We unjustly and without provocation fight a war in Iraq and let the real terrorist off. Talk about screwed up priorities.

[jvcstone]

And please don't anyone forget North Korea -- you know the guys who claim nuclear weapons, claim they will use them, are completely paranoid about us attacking them, and have 750,000 troops ready to go at the boarder.

Come to think of it, we could stay in a perpetual war time basis for a long time to come trying to stomp out all the bad guys around the globe. :bonk: :bonk: That would probably be good for parts of the economy anyway.

JVC

[John Bridge]

Nukes or no nukes, Iran and N. Korea only become a direct threat to the U.S. if they have inter-continental ballistic vehicles. If it looks like they are developing those, we should hit them now. Otherwise, our actions should be on a tactical level and only as a response to direct provocation.

[Shaughnn]

Scooter,
Where the hell are you getting your information from, Buddy? Earl Hickey was hit by a car and put into the hospital immediately after he won the lottery, where he learned all about "karma" from watching the "Carson Daly Show". The undocumented housekeeper Catalina is kinda-sorta dating Earl's younger brother Randy. Earl's ex-wife isn't a "hooker", she's just a trampy bee'otch with a hot little heiny and some significant paternity issues. Hell, you didn't even mention "Crab Man" or Earl's first success story Kenny. I don't know what sort of slanted journalism you subscribe to but maybe you need to upgrade yer cable and get yer facts straight? :goodluck:
Shaughnn
PS: For the humor-challenged, that was an attempt at self-mockery through ironic hyperbole, so bite me. ;)
PPS: So, how's about them 8,000 bombers?

[Davestone]

I love that show..and The Office, too...but i really love Jamie Pressley..she's the perfect trailer trash! :tup2: :D

[jjwq8]

While levelling your sights on putative nuclear powers, why not include actual nuke powers that refuse to sign or even acknowledge the NPT. Can everyone spell ISRAEL? Oh and both India and Pakistan possess missile programmes in constant development.

Oh and for the record. What actula proof is there that either Iran or PDK currently pose terrorist threats to the US other than rhetoric?

[Scooter]

Had Israel's leaders actually expressed a desire to destroy one of our allies, I would strongly recommend leveling the frigging country. But they haven't and we won't.

I do fear that Pakistan will go fundamentalist, and that thought is very scary.