August 19, 1964 - Clinton registers for the draft --[Washington Post Sep 13 92] September 1964 - Clinton, age 18, enters Georgetown University --[The Comeback Kid, CF Allen and J Portis, p. 20] November 17, 1964- Clinton is classified 2-S (student deferment). This will shield him from the draft throughout his undergraduate years. ---[Wash Post Sep 13 92] February 16, 1968 - "The Johnson administration unexpectedly abolished graduate deferments." --[Wash Post Sep 13 92] March 20, 1968 - Clinton, age 21, is classified 1-A, eligible for induction, as he nears graduation from Georgetown. --[Wash Post Sep 13 92] Comment: Bill Clinton was the only man of his prime draft age classified1-A by that draft board in 1968 whose pre-induction physical examination was put off for 10.5 months. This delay was more than twice as long as anyone else and more than five times longer than most area men of comparable eligibility.
--[Los Angeles Times Sep 02 92] Summer 1968 - Political and family influence keeps Clinton out of the draft. Robert Corrado -- the only surviving Hot Springs draft board member from that period -- concluded that Clinton's draft statement (the long delays) was the result of "some form of preferential treatment." According to the Times, "Corrado recalled that the chairman of the three-man draft panel ... once held back Clinton's file with the explanation that 'we've got to give him time to go to Oxford,' where the semester began in the fall of 1968. Corrado also complained that he was called by an aide to then Senator J. William Fulbright urging him and his fellow board members to 'give every consideration' to keep Clinton out of the draft so he could attend Oxford. Throughout the remainder of 1968, Corrado said, Clinton's draft file was routinely held back from consideration by the full board. Consequently, although he was classified 1-A on March 20, 1968, he was not called for his physical exam until Feb 3, 1969, while he was at Oxford. Clinton's Uncle Raymond Clinton personally lobbied Senator Fulbright, William S. Armstrong, the chairman of the three-man Hot Springs draft board, and Lt. Comdr. Trice Ellis, Jr., commanding officer of the local Navy reserve unit, to obtain a slot for Clinton in the Naval Reserve. Clinton secured a "standard enlisted man's billet, not an officer's slot which would have required Clinton to serve two years on active duty beginning within 12 months of his acceptance." This Navy Reserve assignment was "created especially for the Bill Clinton at a time in 1968 when no existing reserve slots were open in his hometown unit." According to the LA Times, "after about two weeks waiting for Bill Clinton to arrive for his preliminary interview and physical exam, Ellis said he called (Clinton's uncle) Raymond to inquire - 'What happened to that boy?' According to Ellis, Clinton's uncle replied - 'Don't worry about it. He won't be coming down. "It's all been taken care of.' "
--[LA Times Sep 02 92] Fall 1968 - Because of the local draft board's continuing postponement of his pre-induction physical, Clinton is able to enroll at Oxford Univ. --[Wash Post Sep 13 92] February 2, 1969 - While at Oxford, Clinton finally takes and passes a military physical examination. --[Washington Times Sep 18 92] April 1969 - Clinton receives induction notice from the Hot Springs AR draft board. Clinton however claims that the draft board told him to ignore the notice because it arrived after the deadline for induction. --[Wash Post Sep 13 92] June-July 1969 - Clinton receives a second induction notice with a July 28 induction date and returns home. --[Wash Times Sep 18 92] July 11, 1969 - Clinton's friend at Oxford, Cliff Jackson, writes, "Clinton is feverishly trying to find a way to avoid entering the Army as a drafted private. I have had several of my friends in influential positions trying to pull strings on Bill's behalf." -- [LA Times Sep 26 92]
Clinton benefited from yet another lobbying campaign in order to evade this induction notice. "Democratic presidential candidate Bill Clinton, who has said he did not pull strings to avoid the Vietnam-era draft, was able to get his Army induction notice canceled in the summer of 1969 after a lobbying effort directed at the Republican head of the state draft agency." Arrangements were made for Clinton to meet with Col. Williard A. Hawkins who "was the only person in Arkansas with authority to rescind a draft notice. ... The apparently successful appeal to Hawkins was planned while Clinton was finishing his first year as a Rhodes scholar in England. Clinton's former friend and Oxford classmate, Cliff Jackson -- now an avowed political critic of the candidate -- said it was pursued immediately upon Clinton's return to AR in early July 1969 to beat a July 28 deadline for induction."
-- [LA Times Sep 26 92] Comment: Jackson's statement is contrary to Clinton's repeated assertions that he received no special treatment in avoiding military service. "(I) never received any unusual or favorable treatment." [LA Times Sep 02 92] August 7, 1969 - Clinton is reclassified 1-D after he arranges to enter the ROTC program at the University of Arkansas. --[Wash Post Sep 13 92]
According to Cliff Jackson, Clinton's Oxford classmate, Clinton used the ROTC program to "kill the draft notice, to avoid reporting on the July 28 induction date, which had already been postponed. And he did that by promising to serve his country in the ROTC, number one, to enroll in the law school that fall ... and he never enrolled."
--[Wash Times Sep 17 92] Comment - Clinton's admission into the ROTC program again runs contrary to his repeated statements that he received no special treatment in order to evade military service. Col. Eugene Holmes, commander of the University of Arkansas ROTC program, said Clinton was admitted after pressure from the Hot Springs draft board and the office of Senator J. William Fulbright (D-AR). Again, Clinton was receiving preferential treatment. In addition, records from the Army reveal that Clinton was not legally eligible for the ROTC program at that time. Army regulations required recruits to be enrolled at the university and attending classes full-time before being admitted to an ROTC program.
Fall 1969 - Clinton returns to Oxford for a second year. Clinton was supposed to be at the Arkansas Law School. However, according to Cliff Jackson, "Sen. Fulbright's office and Bill himself continued to exert tremendous pressure on poor Col. Holmes to get him [Clinton] to go back to Oxford." --[Wash Post Sep 13 92] September 14, 1969 - The Arkansas Gazette, published in Little Rock, headlined a draft suspension was reportedly planned by the President. Comment - The article, citing a source, said Selective Service reforms when implemented, would only permit the conscription of 19-year-old men. In addition, the source said "the Army would send to Vietnam only enlistees, professional soldiers, and those draftees who volunteered to go." The source contended that these reforms, combined with troop withdrawals, "would put pressure on the Congress to enact draft legislation already proposed by the President ... and set up a lottery to conscript only 19-year-old men," the Gazette reported. From his letter to Col. Holmes, Bill Clinton said "....Finally, on Sept. 12 I stayed up all night writing a letter to the chairman of my draft board,......I never mailed the letter, but I did carry it on me every day until I got on the plane to return to England.". It is very probable that Bill Clinton was in the United States and well aware of the above proposal on Sep 14, 1969. Bill Clinton was 23 years old. September 19, 1969 - "President Nixon, facing turmoil on college campuses, suspended draft calls for November and December of 1969 and said the October call would be spread out over three months." --[Wash Post Sep 13 92] The President also indicated that if the Congress did not act to establish a lottery system, he would remove by executive order the vulnerability to the draft of all men age 20 to 26. Comment - Again, Clinton was 23 years old. September-October 1969 - "At some point, Clinton decided to make himself eligible for the draft and said in February 1992 his stepfather had acted in his behalf to accomplish this. Newsweek, attributing the information to campaign officials, said this all happened in Oct 1969. Clinton spokesperson Betsey Wright ... said she believed it took place in September. The difference is potentially significant. ... If Clinton did not act to give up his deferment until October, he could have known he faced no liability from the draft until the following summer, that he could take his chances with the lottery and find alternative service if he got a low number."
--[Wash Post Sep 13 92] October 1, 1969 - "Nixon announced that anyone in graduate school could complete the full year." --[Wash Post Sep 13 92] Comment - Clinton is now safe from the draft through June 1970. October 1969 - President Nixon suspends call-up of additional draftees until a draft lottery is held in December. October 15, 1969 - Clinton organized and led anti-war demonstrations in London. -- [Wash Times Sep 18 92] Comment - According to McSorley, Clinton's demonstrations "had the support of British peace organizations" such as the British Peace Council, an arm of the KGB-backed World Peace Council. October 30, 1969 - Clinton is reclassified 1-A, eligible for induction.
--[Wash Times Sep 28 92] Comment - "Clinton said he put himself into the draft by contacting his draft board in September or October and asking to be reclassified 1-A. ... It is not clear, however, whether that occurred at Clinton's urging or whether his failure to enroll at University of Arkansas automatically cancelled his 1-D deferment." Clinton has never produced any evidence to substantiate his claim that he initiated his reclassification.
November 16, 1969 - Clinton organized and led anti-war demonstrations in London. December 1, 1969 - Clinton draws #311 in the first draft lottery. --[Wash Times Sep 18 92] Comment - Clinton was virtually assured that he would not be drafted because of the high lottery number. December 3, 1969 - While still in England, Clinton writes to Lt. Col. Eugene Holmes, , commander of the University of Arkansas ROTC Program and states, "From my work I came to believe that the draft system is illegitimate ... I decided to accept the draft in spite of my beliefs for one reason - to maintain my political viability."
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Clinton's ROTC Letter As Entered in Congressional Record (Page: H5550) 7/30/93 Dear Col. Holmes, I am sorry to be so long in writing. I know I promised to let you hear from me at least once a month, and from now on you will, but I have to have some time to think about this first letter. Almost daily since my return to England I have thought about writing,about what I want to and ought to say. First, I want to thank you, not only for saving me from the draft, but for being so kind to me last summer, when I was as low as I have ever been. One thing that made the bond we struck in good faith somewhat palatable to me was my high regard for you personally. In retrospect, it seems that the admiration might not have been mutual had you known a little more about me, about my political beliefs and activities. At least you might have thought me more fit for the draft than for ROTC. Let me try to explain. As you know, I worked in a very minor position on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. I did it for the experience and the salary but also for the opportunity, however small, of working every day against a war I opposed and despised with a depth of feeling I had reserved solely for racism in America before Vietnam. I did not take the matter lightly but studied it carefully, and there was a time when not many people had more information about Vietnam at hand than I did. I have written and spoken and marched against the war. One of the national organizers of the Vietnam Moratorium is a close friend of mine. After I left Arkansas last summer, I went to Washington to work in the national headquarters of the Moratorium, then to England to organize the Americans here for demonstrations October 15 and November 16. Interlocked with the war is the draft issue, which I did not begin to consider separately until early 1968. For a law seminar at Georgetown I wrote a paper on the legal arguments for and against allowing, within the Selective Service System, the classification of selective conscientious objection, for those opposed to participation in a particular war, not simply to "participation in war in any form." From my work, I came to believe that the draft system itself is illegitimate. No government really rooted in limited, parliamentary democracy should have the power to make its citizens fight and kill and die in a war they may oppose, a war which even possibly may be wrong, a war, which in any case, does not involve immediately the peace and freedom of the nation. The draft was justified in World War II because the life of the people collectively was at stake. Individuals had to fight, if the nation was to survive, for the lives of their country and their way of life. Vietnam is no such case. Nor was Korea an example where, in my opinion, certain military action was justified but the draft was not, for the reasons stated above. Because of my opposition to the draft and the war, I am in great sympathy with those who are not willing to fight, kill, and maybe die for their country (i.e. the particular policy of a particular government) right or wrong. Two of my friends at Oxford are conscientious objectors. I wrote a letter of recommendation for one of them to his Mississippi draft board, a letter I am more proud of than anything else I wrote at Oxford last year. One of my roommates is a draft resister who is possibly under indictment and may never be able to go home again. He is one of the bravest, best men I know. His country needs men like him more than they know. That he is considered a criminal is an obscenity. The decision not to be a resister and the related subsequent decisions were the most difficult of my life. I decided to accept the draft in spite of my beliefs for one reason only, to maintain my political viability within the system. For years I have worked to prepare myself for a political life characterized by both practical political ability and concern for rapid social progress. It is a life I still feel compelled to try to lead. I do not think our system of government is by definition corrupt, however dangerous and inadequate it has been in recent years. (The society may be corrupt, but that is not the same thing, and if that is true we are all finished anyway.) When the draft came, despite political convictions, I was having a hard time facing the prospect of fighting a war I had been fighting against, and that is why I contacted you. ROTC was the one way in which I could possibly, but not positively, avoid both Vietnam and the resistance. Going on with my education, even coming back to England, played no part in my decision to join ROTC. I am back here, and would have been at Arkansas Law School because there is nothing else I can do. I would like to have been able to take a year out perhaps to teach in a small college or work on some community action project and in the process to decide whether to attend law school or graduate school and how to begin putting what I have learned to use. But the particulars of my personal life are not near as important to me as the principles involved. After I signed the ROTC letter of intent I began to wonder whether the compromise I had made with myself was not more objectionable than the draft would have been, because I had no interest in the ROTC program itself and all I seem to have done was to protect myself from physical harm. Also, I had begun to think that I had deceived you, not by lies--there were none--but by failing to tell you all of the things I'm telling you now. I doubt I had the mental coherence to articulate them then. Page 2. At that time, after we had made our agreement and you had sent my 1D deferment to my draft board, the anguish and loss of my self regard and self confidence really set in. I hardly slept for weeks and kept going by eating compulsively and reading until exhaustion brought sleep. Finally, on September 12 I stayed up all night writing a letter to the chairman of my draft board, saying basically what is in the preceding paragraph, thanking him for trying to help in a case where he really couldn't, and stating that I couldn't do the ROTC after all and would he please draft me as soon as possible. I never mailed the letter, but I did carry it with me every day until I got on the plane to return to England. I didn't mail the letter because I didn't see, in the end, how my going in the army and maybe going to Vietnam would achieve anything except a feeling that I had punished myself and gotten what I deserved. So I came back to England to try to make something of the second year of my Rhodes scholarship. And that is where I am now, writing to you because you have been good to me and have a right to know what I think and feel. I am writing too in the hope that my telling this one story will help you understand more clearly how so many fine people have come to find themselves loving their country but loathing the military, to which you and other good men have devoted years, lifetimes and the best service you could give. To many of us, it is no longer clear what is service and what is dis-service, or if it is clear, the conclusion is likely to be illegal. Forgive the length of this letter. There was much to say. There is still a lot to be said, but it can wait. Please say hello to Colonel Jones for me. Merry Christmas. Sincerely, Bill Clinton
December 12, 1969 (approximately): Clinton visits Norway where he meets with various "peace" organizations. December 12 (approx.) - December 31, 1969: ??? Comment: After visiting Norway with Father McSorley, Clinton's movements and activities are unknown until he arrives in Moscow on December 31, 1969. There are a lot of questions as to who Clinton met and where he went during this time period. December 31, 1969 - January 6, 1970: Clinton travels to Moscow. He later said "relations between our two countries were pretty good then." He then described his visit as "a very friendly time, a good atmosphere." Despite Clinton's claim that January 1970 was "a time of détente," relations between the United States and the Soviet Union were anything but warm. The Soviets were supplying the North Vietnamese with advisors and anti-aircraft weapons. September 7, 1992: Col. Eugene Holmes, USA Ret., signs a notarized statement in which he asserts that "there is the imminent danger to our country of a draft dodger becoming Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States." He later writes that "I believe that he (Clinton) purposefully deceived me, using the possibility of joining the ROTC as a ploy to work with the draft board to delay his induction and get a new draft reclassification." Brief Background on Colonel Holmes Colonel Eugene Holmes is a highly decorated officer of the United States Army. He is a survivor of the Bataan Death March and three and a half years as a POW of the Japanese. He served 32 years in the army before retiring with 100% disability. His decorations include the Silver Star, 2 Bronze Stars, 2 Legions of Merit, the Army Commendation Medal and many others.
During the Vietnam War, he personally inducted both his sons into the service--one for 3 years as a regular army enlisted man, and the other as a commissioned officer (after he had completed ROTC training).
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Col. Homes Notarized Statement As Entered in Congressional Record (Page: H5551) 7/30/93 September 7, 1992. Memorandum for Record: Subject: Bill Clinton and the University of Arkansas ROTC Program: There have been many unanswered questions as to the circumstances surrounding Bill Clinton's involvement with the ROTC department at the University of Arkansas. Prior to this time I have not felt the necessity for discussing the details. The reason I have not done so before is that my poor physical health (a consequence of participation in the Bataan Death March and the subsequent three and a half years interment in Japanese POW camps) has precluded me from getting into what I felt was unnecessary involvement. However, present polls show that there is the imminent danger to our country of a draft dodger becoming Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States. While it is true, as Mr. Clinton has stated, that there were many others who avoided serving their country in the Vietnam war, they are not aspiring to be the President of the United States. The tremendous implications of the possibility of his becoming Commander-in-Chief of the United States Armed Forces compels me now to comment on the facts concerning Mr. Clinton's evasion of the draft. This account would not have been imperative had Bill Clinton been completely honest with the American public concerning this matter. But as Mr. Clinton replied on a news conference this evening (September 5, 1992) after being asked another particular about his dodging the draft, "Almost everyone concerned with these incidents are dead. I have no more comments to make". Since I may be the only person living who can give a first hand account of what actually transpired, I am obligated by my love for my country and my sense of duty to divulge what actually happened and make it a matter of record. Bill Clinton came to see me at my home in 1969 to discuss his desire to enroll in the ROTC program at the University of Arkansas. We engaged in an extensive, approximately two (2) hour interview. At no time during this long conversation about his desire to join the program did he inform me of his involvement, participation and actually organizing protests against the United States involvement in South East Asia. He was shrewd enough to realize that had I been aware of his activities, he would not have been accepted into the ROTC program as a potential officer in the United States Army. The next day I began to receive phone calls regarding Bill Clinton's draft status. I was informed by the draft board that it was of interest to Senator Fullbright's office that Bill Clinton, a Rhodes Scholar, should be admitted to the ROTC program. I received several such calls. The general message conveyed by the draft board to me was that Senator Fullbright's office was putting pressure on them and that they needed my help. I then made the necessary arrangements to enroll Mr. Clinton into the ROTC program at the University of Arkansas. I was not "saving" him from serving his country, as he erroneously thanked me for in his letter from England (dated December 3,1969). I was making it possible for a Rhodes Scholar to serve in the military as an officer. In retrospect I see that Mr. Clinton had no intention of following through with his agreement to join the Army ROTC program at the University of Arkansas or to attend the University of Arkansas Law School. I had explained to him the necessity of enrolling at the University of Arkansas as a student in order to be eligible to take the ROTC program at the University. He never enrolled at the University of Arkansas, but instead enrolled at Yale after attending Oxford. I believe that he purposely deceived me, using the possibility of joining the ROTC as a ploy to work with the draft board to delay his induction and get a new draft classification. The December 3rd letter written to me by Mr. Clinton, and subsequently taken from the files by Lt. Col. Clint Jones, my executive officer, was placed into the ROTC files so that a record would be available in case the applicant should again petition to enter the ROTC program. The information in that letter alone would have restricted Bill Clinton from ever qualifying to be an officer in the United States Military. Even more significant was his lack of veracity in purposefully defrauding the military by deceiving me, both in concealing his anti-military activities overseas and his counterfeit intentions for later military service. These actions cause me to question both his patriotism and his integrity. When I consider the caliber, the bravery, and the patriotism of the fine young soldiers whose deaths I have witnessed, and others whose funerals I have attended.... When I reflect on not only the willingness but eagerness that so many of them displayed in their earnest desire to defend and serve their country, it is untenable and incomprehensible to me that a man who was not merely unwilling to serve his country, but actually protested against its military, should ever be in the position of Commander-in-Chief of our armed Forces. I write this declaration not only for the living and future generations, but for those who fought and died for our country. If space and time permitted I would include the names of the ones I knew and fought with, and along with them I would mention my brother Bob, who was killed during World War II and is buried in Cambridge, England (at the age of 23, about the age Bill Clinton was when he was over in England protesting the war). I have agonized over whether or not to submit this statement to the American people. But, I realize that even though I served my country by being in the military for over 32 years, and having gone through the ordeal of months of combat under the worst of conditions followed by years of imprisonment by the Japanese,it is not enough. I'm writing these comments to let everyone know that I love my country more than I do my own personal security and well-being. I will go to my grave loving these United States of America and the liberty for which so many men have fought and died. Because of my poor physical condition this will be my final statement. I will make no further comments to any of the media regarding this issue. Eugene Holmes Colonel, U.S.A., Ret. September 1992
Posted by Johnwayne on :
I do believe it was a crazy time and many young men, both famous and every day Joe's, did things that they either regret or would choose to do differently.
My only reason for posting this is to point out that we can't just excuse democrats or we can't just excuse republicans. Some here have pointed out President Bush's service while "forgetting" Clinton's actions. Other's have ok'd Bush's actions while continuing to cast blame on Clinton.
We need to reach some blanket decision: Does the volitility of this era excuse the actions of many?
As I have said before, both sides have been hypocritical on this issue, what Clinton did was wrong and what Bush did was ok, and vice versa.
Posted by bdgee on :
You need to get real.
BILL CLINTON IS NOT IN THE WHITE HOUSE, HAS NOT BEEN FOR OVER 5 YEARS, AND DID NOT DESERT MILITARY SERVICE.
GEORGE W. BUSH, WHO DID DESERT WHILE ON MILITARY ASSIGNMENT, IS IN THE WHITE HOUSE, HE DID LIE TO BRING US INTO WAR IN iRAQ, AND, TIME AFTER TIME, HE HAS KNOWINGLY AND WILLINGLY VIOLATED THE CONSTITUTION AND KEPT IT A SECRET FROM THE PEOPLE. Posted by glassman on :
yeah but Clinton actually ran on his record didn't he... who friggin cares about clinton now?
As I have said before, both sides have been hypocritical on this issue,
when? JW you are just playing the same tune over and over again.. you are here to support Bush no matter what he does admit it you love him...
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Yes it has been five years but..... Glassman you said this just today "Bush hid during Nam"
Yes I believe I said earlier Glassman that I am a through and through Republican and will continue to be for the forseeable future. I do not deny it. Now last time I said that on here BDgee said I only admit it when backed into a corner. This is untrue, I will admit it in my sleep if need be.
Now Glassman I know you voted for Bush senior, How 'bout you Bdgee.... did you vote for a war hero or a draft dodger?
See this issue should be off the table, but it's not. I see dem's occasionally bringing up the President's service when President Clinton was equally, if not more guilty than Bush. What a bunch of hypocrites. Both sieds are hypocrites and I will try to find where on here I originally said that.
Posted by glassman on :
Both sieds are hypocrites and I will try to find where on here I originally said that.
OK, then we agree.
i am not dem... but i was taught the GOP values by my Grandad (RIP) and this stuff we are seeing is just outrageous....
i want to see US as powerful as possible in the world arena, and quite frankly? i see Bush as a poor chessplayer... checkers? sure but chess?
he has had a lot of good people in the Govt working for him, and he's chased alot of them out...
Clinto had a meritocracy going... he really recruited liberal eggheads from ivyleague schools
i strongly disagreed with a lot of their policies, but those guys were at least using the brain cells...
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Glassman: This is in the NY Times under fire thread. Last sentence is what you are looking for.
Johnwayne Member
Member Rated: posted July 03, 2006 09:40 AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maybe so but you ignore the politics of the situation. A democrat can't swagger around acting like a soldier, because the liberal wing doesn't want someone playing soldier. They want someone who runs around in teenie tiny jogging shorts and playing saxaphone! Are you trying to tell me that you can only act macho if you were in the military? I would like to see what President Clinton did say/do about the Vietnam War because I honestly don't recall his stance. However I seriously doubt that he came out and said he avoided the draft, and that's exactly what he did. I would have remembered if he said what he should have "I dodged the draft, I was wrong, I was a kid and made a mistake. " Sounds like a little spin going on around here. The man who said he smoked pot but didn't inhale, and depends on what the definition of is is did not just flat out offer up that he wrote a letter to a congreesman asking for a deferrment because dodging the draft would hurt his political ambitions. And I remember that letter from somewhere. Know way he was upfront about that mess when he lied about everything else. You can't very well say what Bush did was wrong but what Clinton did was right. Both sides have been hypocritical on this particular issue.
-------------------- Thanks Matto. Thanks Juice.
Posted by glassman on :
OK, sortof remebered it too...
but bringing clinton up 6 years into Bush's reign is just muddy water....
i hated clinton.... but at least he was aware that we live on a planet... Bush has offended everybody, and i mean everybody... did you actually listen to or read Bush's accidentally recorded statements on monday? he says things like it's simple, and i wish i could pick up the phone to fix this...
thats him in nutshell...
Posted by bdgee on :
Clinton never lied to us about him having draft deferments during the Viet Nam war.
Bush lied about service in the Guard, which he wasn't eligible for and was turned down by the Guard until strings were pulled....even after that, he deserted and still lies about it.
So get off the line of crap about it being the same thing. Neither man served in any "real" military capacity during viet nam when they were of appropriate age. But there any similarity in the way they avoided that service stops. Clinton openly and honestly provide us with the details of his deferment, which he alone (and not with preferential treatment) obtained. dubya deserted his position in the Guard, where he hid from any possibility of comnbat service, and now hides the fact by use of his Presidential privilege so he can continue lying about it.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
I'll bet bdgee voted for a war hero, Kerry, over the draft dodger, Bush Jr.
Incidentally, Clinton, Reagan, Nixon, Carter and [INSERT YOUR PRESIDENT HERE] were all intellectual and foreign policy GODS compared to the current Bozo.
quote:Originally posted by Johnwayne: How 'bout you Bdgee.... did you vote for a war hero or a draft dodger?
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Are you serious Bdgee? Never lied to us about draft deferments?
"This account would not have been imperative had Bill Clinton been completely honest with the American public concerning this matter. But as Mr. Clinton replied on a news conference this evening (September 5, 1992) after being asked another particular about his dodging the draft, "Almost everyone concerned with these incidents are dead. I have no more comments to make". Since I may be the only person living who can give a first hand account of what actually transpired, I am obligated by my love for my country and my sense of duty to divulge what actually happened and make it a matter of record. " Col Holmes
President Clinton said he did not pull strings to avoid the Vietnam era draft. He also said he never received any unusual or favorable treatment. See above post for source But others say....
Summer 1968 - Political and family influence keeps Clinton out of the draft. Robert Corrado -- the only surviving Hot Springs draft board member from that period -- concluded that Clinton's draft statement (the long delays) was the result of "some form of preferential treatment." According to the Times,
Corrado also complained that he was called by an aide to then Senator J. William Fulbright urging him and his fellow board members to 'give every consideration' to keep Clinton out of the draft so he could attend Oxford.
Clinton's Uncle Raymond Clinton personally lobbied Senator Fulbright, William S. Armstrong, the chairman of the three-man Hot Springs draft board, and Lt. Comdr. Trice Ellis, Jr., commanding officer of the local Navy reserve unit, to obtain a slot for Clinton in the Naval Reserve.
Clinton secured a "standard enlisted man's billet, not an officer's slot which would have required Clinton to serve two years on active duty beginning within 12 months of his acceptance." This Navy Reserve assignment was "created especially for the Bill Clinton at a time in 1968 when no existing reserve slots were open in his hometown unit." According to the LA Times, "after about two weeks waiting for Bill Clinton to arrive for his preliminary interview and physical exam, Ellis said he called (Clinton's uncle) Raymond to inquire - 'What happened to that boy?' According to Ellis, Clinton's uncle replied - 'Don't worry about it. He won't be coming down. "It's all been taken care of.' "
July 11, 1969 - Clinton's friend at Oxford, Cliff Jackson, writes, "Clinton is feverishly trying to find a way to avoid entering the Army as a drafted private. I have had several of my friends in influential positions trying to pull strings on Bill's behalf." -- [LA Times Sep 26 92]
Clinton benefited from yet another lobbying campaign in order to evade this induction notice. "Democratic presidential candidate Bill Clinton, who has said he did not pull strings to avoid the Vietnam-era draft, was able to get his Army induction notice canceled in the summer of 1969 after a lobbying effort directed at the Republican head of the state draft agency." Arrangements were made for Clinton to meet with Col. Williard A. Hawkins who "was the only person in Arkansas with authority to rescind a draft notice.
According to Cliff Jackson, Clinton's Oxford classmate, Clinton used the ROTC program to "kill the draft notice, to avoid reporting on the July 28 induction date, which had already been postponed. And he did that by promising to serve his country in the ROTC, number one, to enroll in the law school that fall ... and he never enrolled."
Fall 1969 - Clinton returns to Oxford for a second year. Clinton was supposed to be at the Arkansas Law School. However, according to Cliff Jackson, "Sen. Fulbright's office and Bill himself continued to exert tremendous pressure on poor Col. Holmes to get him [Clinton] to go back to Oxford." --[Wash Times Sep 28 92]
Comment - "Clinton said he put himself into the draft by contacting his draft board in September or October and asking to be reclassified 1-A. ... It is not clear, however, whether that occurred at Clinton's urging or whether his failure to enroll at University of Arkansas automatically cancelled his 1-D deferment." Clinton has never produced any evidence to substantiate his claim that he initiated his reclassification.
Bill Clinton came to see me at my home in 1969 to discuss his desire to enroll in the ROTC program at the University of Arkansas. We engaged in an extensive, approximately two (2) hour interview. At no time during this long conversation about his desire to join the program did he inform me of his involvement, participation and actually organizing protests against the United States involvement in South East Asia. He was shrewd enough to realize that had I been aware of his activities, he would not have been accepted into the ROTC program as a potential officer in the United States Army. The next day I began to receive phone calls regarding Bill Clinton's draft status. I was informed by the draft board that it was of interest to Senator Fullbright's office that Bill Clinton, a Rhodes Scholar, should be admitted to the ROTC program. I received several such calls. The general message conveyed by the draft board to me was that Senator Fullbright's office was putting pressure on them and that they needed my help. I then made the necessary arrangements to enroll Mr. Clinton into the ROTC - Col Holmes
Even more significant was his lack of veracity in purposefully defrauding the military by deceiving me, both in concealing his anti-military activities overseas and his counterfeit intentions for later military service. These actions cause me to question both his patriotism and his integrity. When I consider the caliber, the bravery, and the patriotism of the fine young soldiers whose deaths I have witnessed, and others whose funerals I have attended.... When I reflect on not only the willingness but eagerness that so many of them displayed in their earnest desire to defend and serve their country, it is untenable and incomprehensible to me that a man who was not merely unwilling to serve his country, but actually protested against its military, should ever be in the position of Commander-in-Chief of our armed Forces. - Col Holmes
Now how can you say he never lied Bdgee?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
You need to get over the unchangeable fact that Clinton was president for eight years, and, both times, he was actually elected!
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Further, the huge pile of suck that is "president" now is not Clinton's fault...
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Yeah but democrats have tried to draw a distinction between Bush's service and Clintons. Bdgee just did it again. That's what makes it fair game.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Yeah but they don't start threads about it six years after it matters.
Posted by bdgee on :
There is a distinction, JW, you just chose to believe the lies.
Clinton was a student and did apply for and recieve a student deferment. He did not have his daddy or anyone else illegally "obtain" a position in the Texas guard so he could dodge the draft. Clinton's draft status and the documents related to them have never been hidden from the public, as they are and always have been public documents. The BS you post, supposedly about Clinton and his draft status, is exactly that, BS....it ain't facts.
Moreover, upon assuming office, Clinton didn't by Presidential order declare any and all of the records of his daddy's government papers and his from Arkansas to be held in secret.....forever.....dubya did. dubya has dirty laundry to conceal.
Fair game? Of course it is.
Posted by john wayne on :
No Clinton had his "uncle" get him out of the draft. Not a big difference there. Face it guys, unless you took Clinton to task on his actions during the Vietnam era, you are hypocrites for doing so with Bush. Ain't anyway around that. BS statement? Colonal Holmes statement and Clinton's letter to him were both entered into the congressional record. A congress with Democrats in charge. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's a lie Bdgee.
Guys I came out and said both sides are hypocrites on this issue, why can't you say the same?
Posted by john wayne on :
Which of his papers did Bush ordered sealed? I do remember something about that
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by john wayne: Which of his papers did Bush ordered sealed? I do remember something about that
JW, there's a lot more than his military records unavailable....
you really play stocks?
then look up Harken Energy sealed records ... also Teyaxas driving record...
Cheney's secret energy meetings months before 911...
any one could be called an anomoly, but there's so many.
Posted by glassman on :
the highlights?
In June 1990, Junior suddenly unloaded the bulk of his Harken stock -- 212,140 shares -- for a tidy $848,560. A former business associate says that Junior's motivation was his desire to buy an expensive new house in Dallas, for which he wanted to pay cash. The June 1990 transaction was an insider stock sale, and security laws required that it be reported no later than July 10, 1990. But Junior filed no such report, at least not then.
Then, in August, Iraqi troops marched into Kuwait, and Harken shares plummeted 25 percent. Junior would have lost $212,140 if he'd waited to sell his shares until then. Still, he didn't file his SEC disclosure until seven months later, in March 1991 -- well after U.S. troops had finished fighting and the gulf war had moved off the front pages. Harken stock rebounded briefly, but quickly collapsed again. Posted by Johnwayne on :
Where his military records sealed? The other stuff, well the dems said when Clinton was in office, moral values don't matter. Remember don't shove your values down my throat. Also' it's the economy stupid. And any time values were bought up during the campaign, let's stick to the issues. And the ridicule of Dan Quayle for the whole family values debate. It was awful that Clinton never stood up and said "I think values and morals should be a part of this campaign." He just stuck to the idea that that stuff didn't matter. So why all of a sudden does character,values and morals matter to dems? Didn't for the 8 years Clinton was in office. Another issue both sides are hypocrites on.
Posted by bdgee on :
"No Clinton had his "uncle" get him out of the draft."
There is more BS that isn't true. You guys write fiction and pass it back and forth among yourselves with no effort to tell the truth and expect us to believe it. You need to lay off that Party line crap and check out some actual history.
Now how many years did you attack the poor guy about Whitewater and you were proved to be completely full of it?
You pass it back and forth and back and forth without bothering to check the facts 'til you decided the lie is fact. You need to learn to stop the BS and learn to get your information from sources that don't pass it on to you along with the secret handshake of the Party.
Now, get this straight once and for ever: Bill Clinton hasn't been in office for close to 6 years. dubya is in office and it is dubya that is responsible for the mess dubya has gotten the Country (and half of the world) into. There is no way out of the mess dubya brought about in Iraq, a mess that undermines the U. S. throughout the world. Bill Clinton didn't do it, dubya and the republican (they claim) party did.
Glass... you forgot to include his guilty plea up in New England to possession and use of controlled substance.
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Show me the facta of Clinton's Vietnam era activities BDGEE? Because the way I see it You seem to be the arbiter of what is fact and fiction yet you aren't seeming to dig up anything that gives an alternate view point about his service?
Posted by bdgee on :
No, you came on here declaring things are facts and you don't have any proof and haven't bothered to offer any, just BS from the Party line.
And what is ir isn't the truth about Clinton ISN'T my point.
My point is that instead of addmitting the truth (or even considering it) about dubya's lies you resort to attacking poor Clinton. Whatever is true or not about Clinton, has nothing to do with the mess we arte in now.
Posted by john wayne on :
The topic of this thread has nothing to do with the mess we are in either. This is about Clinton's Vietnam service. Are you to mean that we can't talk about the past on this board? Meanwhile I am posting quotes or statements from: The congressional record The Washington Post Author CF Allen The Los Angeles Times The Washington Times
You are saying it's all a bunch of lies, yet you post nothing to support your claims. You have not provided one link, source or quote about Clintons Vietnam activities, yet you insist everything I print is a lie. Why is it a lie? Becuase you say it is that's why. That makes no sense. Why can't you just admit it? The dems, as well as the republicans where hypocrites on this issue.
We as a country lowered the expectations of our leaders, in regards to their actions during the Vietnam era when we elected Clinton. It's hypocritical of democrats to try to raise them again now that a republican is in office.
Posted by john wayne on :
"....This account would not have been imperative had Bill Clinton been completely honest with the American public concerning this matter. But as Mr. Clinton replied on a news conference this evening (September 5, 1992) after being asked another particular about his dodging the draft, "Almost everyone concerned with these incidents are dead. I have no more comments to make".-
Colonel Eugene Holmes Survivor of the Bataan Death March Survivor of three and a half years as a POW of the Japanese. Served 32 years in the army before retiring with 100% disability. Decorations include: the Silver Star 2 Bronze Stars 2 Legions of Merit The Army Commendation Medal and many others.
Posted by Griffon on :
Just pointing out, if you meander through this thread, again the liberal "hate Bush" campaign that lost, still hopes to turn the '04 election around. Look at how Bush the President, is refered to in this thread and tell me Bdgee that Hate is not the only issue the liberals run on and lose every time.
Posted by glassman on :
i will return to my assertion that you guys are disingenuous about your political belief system. Both sieds are hypocrites and I will try to find where on here I originally said that.
it's OK tho, everybody has seen that you twist and turn when confronted....
we don't give a ratzazz about clinton anymore....
Posted by Griffon on :
I don't either Glass. I turn not at all. Just pointing out the truth about how people in this thread talk about Bush. Even in a thread about a once was, the Bush bashing comes out. That is not a twist, that's a fact look at the previous posts.
Posted by bond006 on :
Clinton and Bush have more in comon than most people think don't they watch out what rock you kick over you never know what will come out
Posted by Griffon on :
Amen Bond! Politics are trouble these days, plenty of disappointment and disillusion to go around
Posted by T e x on :
liberal schimberal...
lol...
back to clinton: out-in-the-open-deferment, or not?
to paraphrase purlie: can you guys not stay on-task, off-topic?
Posted by Johnwayne on :
I would disagree with that Glassman. I believe I am upfront with my hypocracy, my blind support of the repubs, am also one of the few on here that says I'm wrong when I was. AKA Novack thread. Tell you what, go back and find, let's say in the last month, other people saying "I'm sorry guys I have to cede this point or anything similar, on this off topic board. Not many will stand up and admit being wrong. Twist and turn when confronted? When confronted with irrefutable truth I believe I'm one of the few that admits when I'm wrong.
Posted by glassman on :
then why are we even talking about clinton? it's ancient hisry
Posted by T e x on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: then why are we even talking about clinton? it's ancient hisry
that's what the thread is about?
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Actually the point I hoped to make with this thread, until Bdgee got me wound up, or maybe somebody spiked my Copnhagen, was that both sides have compromised their values to support their guy. Hence we all have compromised our expectations. In the end guys who would have ever thought that a person with a shady war record could be elected Pesident? We've done it 4 times in row. A president with a drunk driving conviction ? A well known womanizer? How did this happen? How do we rise up and say we demand beter when it's all we have to choose from? What has happened to the great men of this country? I know politicians are a reflection of society, I know a lot of things ave ben brushed under the rug in the past, but aren't there better men out there?
Posted by Griffon on :
That's the point bro' We have a right to expect more from those who lead us: morally and ethically and in leadership skill because they asked for the role. In that respect they asked for the public to scrutinize them.
That said, throughout history, powerful people always seem to have an Achille's Heel. What is the balance?
Posted by Johnwayne on :
The reason I didn't start this topis as "where have all the good men gone" is because I felt we needed to come to a consensus that both sides had been somewhat hypocritical and have compromised their beliefs in electing their party's leaders, so that we could move on too broaden the topic. My intention was too move on to solutions once we reached the consensus. I thought the Vietnam issue was a perfect issue to chrystalize this hypocracy.Only problem was Bdgee wouldn't admit that Clinton was shady during Vietnam. thus stalling the whole thread. I spent the whole night digging up evidence and Bdgee spent the whole night, well being Bdgee.
Posted by bdgee on :
"My intention was too move on to solutions once we reached the consensus."
Solutions to what?
Clinton has nothing to do with the fact that the Nation is in a dire condition from the policies and actions of the current administration and neither fact nor fantasy about Clinton is or could be a solution. It was not Clinton and it was not anything he had any part in that put the U.S. in Iraq as the invader of a sovereign Nation that did not attack nor even have the capacity to attack the U.S.
What consensus is it you are seeking?
The only consenus you are willing to reach is for the world to accept as fact some specious republican generated propagansa about Bill Clinton so as to change the subject from the real facts and the real problems that the republicans won't and can't solve, because they first have to accept responsibility for the mess they have caused. The consensus you are striving for is freedom to claim further falshoods about Clinton are facts (such falshoods as the multi-year multi billion dollar campaign to destroy the man with lies about a 40 - 50K profit on an options deal you claim had to be crooked because no one makes that sort of profit? It's done every day! And your whole Whitewater campaign of lies was proved (at federal expense) to be exactly that, lies) and change the subject and alter the focus of the public on the actual problem.
The world needs us to focus directly on the problem and concentrate on finding the best way to procede from this pont, not to hide our heads in the sand and claim our problems are the specious propaganda you generate about history.
You will not reach a consensus that ignores that the problems are generated via republican policies. (Those of you of actual and honorable republican leanings, please forgive me for calling this bunch of liars and crooks republican....they hijacked the name....another shameful act.)
AGAIN, neither Bill Clinton not anything he did or didn't do has anything to do with or any responsibility for the problems this nation currently faces.
Let's reach a consensus that Bill Clinon is not the President, has not been for years, can not, by law, become President again, has not been in a position to be and is not responsible for the current conditions of the Nation, and the subject of Bill Clinton (or any character he has or doesn't have) does not provid any possible approach to the problem of what the Nation should do from this point on.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Clinton got out of serving and told the truth about it.
Bush got out of serving and has constantly tried to cover it up.
Case closed.
Posted by Griffon on :
Both lied, both failed to serve. Case closed.
Posted by bdgee on :
No, Bush lied....it's his trademark. He continues to lie about his draft dodging. Sadly, that is only one of his lies and and a relatively minor one. Many of the other lies he has told have led the entire world into very very dangerous times and circumstances. We, this Nation and the world's people may never recover from them.
Clinton never denied his draft status or lack of service record.
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Gordon- Provide the link that says Clinton was honest about his actions during the war. Oh and please make it at least as credible as the Congressional record, while the democrats controlled congress.
"....This account would not have been imperative had Bill Clinton been completely honest with the American public concerning this matter. But as Mr. Clinton replied on a news conference this evening (September 5, 1992) after being asked another particular about his dodging the draft, "Almost everyone concerned with these incidents are dead. I have no more comments to make".- Col Holmes
How was Clinton being open when he said that?
Clinton benefited from yet another lobbying campaign in order to evade this induction notice. "Democratic presidential candidate Bill Clinton, who has said he did not pull strings to avoid the Vietnam-era draft, was able to get his Army induction notice canceled in the summer of 1969 after a lobbying effort directed at the Republican head of the state draft agency." Arrangements were made for Clinton to meet with Col. Williard A. Hawkins who "was the only person in Arkansas with authority to rescind a draft notice.
Find me where Bill Clinton said "I did benefit from my political connections to avoid service in Vietnam" Than he is being truthful and honest about his service.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Fair enough. But again, I have to ask, who cares?
quote:Originally posted by Griffon: Both lied, both failed to serve. Case closed.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by Griffon: Both lied, both failed to serve. Case closed.
there is one thing Clinton got the Bush hasn't got yet, and that's an impeachment....
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Gordon - Now I will move on. How did we get to the point that both parties have now nominated a person with a questionable war service record? How is it that both parties accepted that the last 4 elections? Throw in allegations of womanizing, OWI convictions etc. Where have all of our real leaders gone? I know that things have been brushed under the rug in the past, but did we always have this poor of a choice as we seem to have now? Maybe it's just the result of the Vietnam era. The WWII generation seemed to produce alot better leaders than the Baby Boomer generation has.
Posted by bond006 on :
And the time of the geek trash continues. Two men not to long ago in public life would have been totally ashamed to show there faces now they are and were president. Bush on one hand is so bold to have a draft dodger for a V.P. and also Rove as his closest advisor.No shame at all. completely disgusting. But I sure liked Clinton better and so did the world. Makes no difference America is on a new path for leadership. And service to your country is going to be very rare indeed
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Man if we could just all stand up and say we demand better leaders! But nobody seems to fit that description. Military service is not a necessity, but honesty, integrity is. There has got to be somebody better from this generation than what we've had so far. Or is it just that society has slipped so far we don't produce good leaders anymore?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
On May 1, 2003, President Bush stood underneath a “Mission Accomplished” banner and announced that “Major combat operations have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.”
Here’s a look at the situation then compared to the situation now, by the numbers:
................................May 1, 2003...............Today U.S. Troops Wounded...............542..............18,777 U.S. Troops Killed.....................139...............2,556 Size of U.S. Forces.............150,000............132,000 Iraq Security Forces.......7,000-9000............250,500 Number of Insurgents.............5,000..............20,000 Insurgent Attacks Per Day.............8...................75 Cost to U.S. Taxpayer.......$79 billion........$320 billion
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
And Clinton was impeached for lying about sex.
ROTFLMFAO Posted by glassman on :
it only counts if you lie under oath...
Posted by bdgee on :
JW,
Please sir, explain to me how saying,
"Almost everyone concerned with these incidents are dead. I have no more comments to make".
amounts to a coverup? He didn't hide or ask that anyone or any agency keep secret any thing ever said or filed.
The entire record of his deferment is all there today, just as it was then and characterizing that statement as a coverup and dishonest is a bit more than far fetched, indeed, it is more than disingenuous.
As to your,
"Find me where Bill Clinton said "I did benefit from my political connections to avoid service in Vietnam" Than he is being truthful and honest about his service.". Why would any person make a false claim like that to apease the hate mill of the republicans. He didn't say that because he didn't have the influence to get favorable treatement and didn't have reason to confess to a lie.
Why on earth would he make such a statement.
My god, man, in that day, the first act of any draft board was to classify every young man to be 1A upon his 18th birthday or as soon thereafter as their lottery number was up. Maybe half the youth of that day had their draft status reviewed after direct contact or meetings with "...the only person in (their State) with authority to rescind a draft notice. It was the only way to get a student deferment and was the expected and accepted practice. Student deferments had to be applied for through channels and only came about through the "recending" of a previous draft status. You could not get a student deferment from a 4F classification, for example, only from an "existing" status that placed you in jeopardy of being drafted.
You are asking for the condemning of a man for following the rules!
On the other hand, dubya has repeatedly lied about his draft dodging as well as the circumstances of his beein allowed to enter the Guard and his desertion from his assigned duties for the Guard and has secreted records away so he can claim the records are different from what they are.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
That's why Bush refuses to be sworn in during any questioning.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: it only counts if you lie under oath...
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Does anybody think the reason the last two Presidents have been of low moral character is because that is the way society is? Or is it more that society is forced to accept the short comings of it's leaders?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
When the majority vote doesn't count, citizens can't be held responsible for those elected.
I would further argue that Bush could probably use a good BJ. It might temper his obsession with world domination if he was gettin' a little lovin' action on the side.
LOL
Posted by bdgee on :
I don't agree that the "last two Presidents have been of low moral character". Unless you wish to characterize Eisenhower, Bush, Rosevelt, Hoover, Coolidge, Reagan, Harding, Kennedy, and so on and so on and so on to be of "low moral character" because of their activities with women they were not married to (a very backward appeal to religion, actually), there is no reason to so label Clinton. (In truth, the lure of women seems to be associated with particularly outstanding leaership and diplomatic abilitiies.)
On the other hand, dubya is of only the basest of moral character in most ways. He is a druggie and a drunk and stock fraud and a tax cheat and - - -.
Perhaps worst of all in a President, dubya is a habitual liar of the constant variety.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
...a war-monger and a chickenhawk and...
Posted by Johnwayne on :
So where do we go from here? Depsite the flaws of the last two presidents, how do we move forward and find better leaders?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Sadly we have to survive the next two years of Hell first.
Posted by Johnwayne on :
I am looking to single out these two because of their age and am using them as an example because what I am trying to figure out here is our society only producing these leaders or are we accepting them. In other words are we missing better candidates or is this the best we get?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
When our votes don't count, and our dissent is crushed or ridiculed, then yes, this is the best we get.
Posted by Griffon on :
Wow, all you guys know is lies and hatred. Just because you lost the election for lack of any substantive stands on issues other than "hate Bush." I switched to Independant after Clinton endorsed genocide in Rwanda by his inaction.
The fact that he purjured himself makes no difference to me in specific, but look at the consequence: as Clinton was in the process of purjury, he was distracted from running the country at full effectiveness. 5,000,000 were dying around the world as victims of brutal dictators and Clinton was busy covering up his lies about the draft and keeping a lid on Monica Lewinski. The only place Clinton did anything in response to genocide was when it affected white folks in the Balkans. Pure ethno-phobia.
Let's be honest too. In any major corporation Bill Clinton would have been fired for such conduct. What he did constitutes abuse of power and creation of an un-safe work environment. There are state and federal statutes that in effect say: "hands off the help." Anytime you use your title to get coerse, invite, or engage in sex with someone who is clearly in a subordinate professional job title, it constitutes sexual harassment.
Thus it is against the law to protect employees and interns from predatory bosses. Consentuality cannot be used as a defense because there is no proof a person was not coersed or intimidated by the authority of the boss. So it is not a move from religion as you have so arrogantly asserted, it is a protection policy instituted by legal eagles to protect corporations from sexual harassment suits.
But after all, Clinton lied and 800,000 Rwandans died. Now we cry because the sitting president told the truth and 3000 Americans have died with honor. Interesting that Dems value the 3000 American human beings more highly than they did 800,000 Rwandans. Is that racism all that surprising though given that we let as many Somalis die because they weren't worth the valor and dignity of 12 US troops during Clinton's reign. Once again my point is valid: Democratic policy is racist in supporting genocide.
By the way Gordon, I was wondering if you are actually George Bush. Both with the same initials. But then, GB doesn't talk with intolorance about his political opponents the way you do, so I guess not.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
When our votes don't count, and our dissent is crushed or ridiculed, then yes, this is the best we get.
Posted by Griffon on :
GB your vote counted, it was just in the minority. In the first case, the electoral college made sure small state votes counted. In the second case Bush just clobbered Kerry because hate doesn't win. Wow that has some theological implications too.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
In my case, I have proof that my vote didn't count. That's why I will never vote again until the system is fixed.
Posted by Griffon on :
From GB:
"Sadly we have to survive the next two years of Hell first."
Actually GB Hell comes later. War is often called Hell, but this war will go on beyond that. The enemy combatants will persist because like brutal people all around the world they see that as their only means to power. It's interesting they haven't struck France yet but pretty much everywhere else has felt the chill of terrorism.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
You mean the enemy combatants that have increased a thousandfold since Bush's invasion of Iraq and the resulting hatred of the USA?
Posted by glassman on :
maybe France has better intel...
you say they haven't "struck" but France had serious riots...
Posted by Griffon on :
Your dissent is not ridiculed. What do you call this site, the NY and LA T(abloid)imes? We are all free to express our dissent.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
“Cindy Sheehan is a clown. There is no real antiwar movement. No serious politician, with anything to do with anything, would show his face at an antiwar rally.”-Karl Rove Posted by Griffon on :
France's serious riots were caused by unjust social and employment conditions. In a sense they were "struck" but for very different reasons. There they imported primarily African labor with the promise of pay and equal opportunity. Then they found all they could afford were the slums. It would never have happened if the system really wanted to afford them opportunity. Which is why the plan I set out in another thread would work.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Sound like ridicule to me, how about you?
“Cindy Sheehan is a clown. There is no real antiwar movement. No serious politician, with anything to do with anything, would show his face at an antiwar rally.”-Karl Rove Posted by glassman on :
"the system"...
"the system" is: nobody wants to be the garbage collector... but we still keep making garbage... grow up..
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
You're right, glass. Don't you just love how these guys scatter like roaches when the kitchen light (I.E. the truth) is turned on?
Posted by Griffon on :
"Karl Rove" From GB, this quote came from KR not from GB. And what do you think your venting spleen and name calling all over this site is about? You are free to ridicule anyone you want, and you do. You are free to dissent about anything and you do. That people will criticize that dissent is a given. As I post I fully expect people to disagree and insult me.
If I put myself out there, in the public square, I expect to get eggs thrown at me. My lack of a gall bladder means eggs tend to hate me, but I love 'em anyway. Scrambled that is. I also expect I will make mistakes, and when I do, like the other day, I apologize. That's called discourse. We don't have to agree, but we should appreciate each other's humanity, even when we mightily disagree. So I rise to defend those who are so mistreated as our president president.
Posted by glassman on :
the other thing griffon is overlooking is that with/because of, that large group of immigrants? France has many intel collecting tools in place... France was on the opposition side of the iraq war because they KNEW for a fact there was no uranium deal... they control the uranium tradein northern africa...
Posted by Griffon on :
"You're right, glass. Don't you just love how these guys scatter like roaches when the kitchen light (I.E. the truth) is turned on?"
What truth? I note many people scatter when the truth of the Gospel is proclaimed: Love God and love your neighbor. If that were listened to no one would be ridiculing anyone. Course then there would be no war either.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
You said dissent is not ridiculed. I posted proof from the highest levels of Government that it is.
You said my vote counted. I have proof that it didn't.
Bush is as "mistreated" as he deserves to be. We are being asked to destroy our country in order to save it.
Sorry if the truth hurts, Griffon.
God's peace be with you
Posted by Griffon on :
"the other thing griffon is overlooking is that with/because of, that large group of immigrants? France has many intel collecting tools in place... France was on the opposition side of the iraq war because they KNEW for a fact there was no uranium deal... they control the uranium tradein northern africa..."
Not overlooking that at all, Glass. And they were opposed to invading Iraq for exactly the reason one of the earlier cited articles said: they were owed billions by Saddy and didn't want to give them up. Add to that the Oil-for-Food Francs and the promise of an oil field and we know why they didn't like the prospect of invasion. It cost them money. In the end they traded lives for profit. Many of the weapons the Russians took out to Syria primarily (also documented earlier) now find use against Israel. France deals in life and death, just ask Sudan, Chad, and other former colonies. There's that colonialism precursor
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Bush won by just 2.7 percentage points. That's the smallest margin of victory for a re-elected president since 1828.
Hardly the "clobbering" you describe.
Hate doesn't win? Tell that to the "Swiftboat Veterans For Truth." Tell that to Karl Rove. Both will, I imagine, scoff at your naivete.
I have come to the conclusion that you are being disingenuous for the sake of the argument. A "Devils Advocate," if you will.
You said dissent is not ridiculed. I posted proof from the highest levels of Government that it is.
You said my vote counted. I have proof that it didn't.
Bush is as "mistreated" as he deserves to be. We are being asked to destroy our country in order to save it.
quote:Originally posted by Griffon: GB Bush just clobbered Kerry because hate doesn't win. Wow that has some theological implications too.
Posted by Griffon on :
My friend, you need to re-read what I said: I said you are free to dissent and using my own case, I know when I dissent, I will face eggs thrown at me. That means I expect people who disagree with me will throw stones.
"I have come to the conclusion that you are being disingenuous for the sake of the argument. A "Devils Advocate," if you will."
In a sense you are correct. I am challenging the assumption that the present way of doing things works. My ultimate concern is an end to genocide and ethnic cleansing. I am apolitical though a conscientious voter and I will tease people and taunt people because we need to be able to laugh at ourselves if we are ever to have peace. Gotta go for now, but you'll see, I do like to have provocative discussions. It's a break from very serious life issues with the people I serve.
Posted by Johnwayne on :
You still have to get someone electable to get people out to vote for your guy. All the conspiracy theories, all the hate Bush movies on the shelves at Blockbuster, Celebrities threatning to leave the country, That one channel that devoted election day to showing Michael Moore's movie over and over, all the conspiracy books about Republicans, Rathergate, still doesn't make your guy electable. That's why hate alone cannot win a presidency. 2004 was proof of that. The Democrats waged the most unprecedented hate campaign in modern times and Bush still won.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Are you serious?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Griffon, To paraphrase a famous cliche, If you can't dazzle them with the facts, baffle them with bulls**t.
Posted by rimasco on :
quote:Originally posted by Johnwayne: You still have to get someone electable to get people out to vote for your guy. All the conspiracy theories, all the hate Bush movies on the shelves at Blockbuster, Celebrities threatning to leave the country, That one channel that devoted election day to showing Michael Moore's movie over and over, all the conspiracy books about Republicans, Rathergate, still doesn't make your guy electable. That's why hate alone cannot win a presidency. 2004 was proof of that. The Democrats waged the most unprecedented hate campaign in modern times and Bush still won.
JW do yourself a favor and go rent "Farenhype 9/11" I dont know how the Repub. spin docs didnt get more light on this documentary
The reason that the Repub spin docs didn't get more light on it is that it's an uninteresting film consisting of interviews with politicians, pundits, political consultants, and right-wing journalists, plus a couple of pissed off people who unknowingly ended up in Moore's film.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
“As people do better, they start voting like Republicans - unless they have too much education and vote Democratic, which proves there can be too much of a good thing”-Karl Rove Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by Griffon: "the other thing griffon is overlooking is that with/because of, that large group of immigrants? France has many intel collecting tools in place... France was on the opposition side of the iraq war because they KNEW for a fact there was no uranium deal... they control the uranium tradein northern africa..."
Not overlooking that at all, Glass. And they were opposed to invading Iraq for exactly the reason one of the earlier cited articles said: they were owed billions by Saddy and didn't want to give them up. Add to that the Oil-for-Food Francs and the promise of an oil field and we know why they didn't like the prospect of invasion. It cost them money. In the end they traded lives for profit. Many of the weapons the Russians took out to Syria primarily (also documented earlier) now find use against Israel. France deals in life and death, just ask Sudan, Chad, and other former colonies. There's that colonialism precursor
see? you are a GOP activist lying whenever confronted with the truth... you think oil-for-food amounted to a good reason to ignore a threat to world security?
thats STUPID.. its more rovism...
Posted by rimasco on :
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Bennett: The reason that the Repub spin docs didn't get more light on it is that it's an uninteresting film consisting of interviews with politicians, pundits, political consultants, and right-wing journalists, plus a couple of pissed off people who unknowingly ended up in Moore's film.
LOL and what did Farenheit 9/11 consist of? This other doc. debunked Moores entire film.
Comon Gordo we know the real reason it got no play.
uhhhhh who is it that controls the media and hollywood......ohhhhhh thats right the DEMOCRATS!
P.S. Please dont come back at me with Fox news
Posted by glassman on :
The Democrats waged the most unprecedented hate campaign in modern times and Bush still won.
highlarious...
swiftboats? yeah.....
Posted by rimasco on :
Lets moveon.org?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
And he claims he's politically neutral.
Posted by glassman on :
rim? moore ain't a democrat dude... he's soemthing else... i dunno what nader calls himself but he's a nader guy...
moore=democrat? another rovism.. you guys don't even see that guy behind the curtain but he's there....
Posted by rimasco on :
If that was directed at me Gordo I still have a little bit of the right resonating within...I will bash both parties alike
Sombody please praise Al Franken so I could show my right side
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
I saw both Fahrenheit 911 and Fahrenhype 911.
Moore's film was just as as politically slanted as its money-grabbing cousin, Fahrenhype 911.
From a pure entertainment standpoint, however, Moore's movie gets my vote. Two thumbs up!
LOL
quote:Originally posted by rimasco:
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Bennett: The reason that the Repub spin docs didn't get more light on it is that it's an uninteresting film consisting of interviews with politicians, pundits, political consultants, and right-wing journalists, plus a couple of pissed off people who unknowingly ended up in Moore's film.
LOL and what did Farenheit 9/11 consist of? This other doc. debunked Moores entire film.
Comon Gordo we know the real reason it got no play.
uhhhhh who is it that controls the media and hollywood......ohhhhhh thats right the DEMOCRATS!
P.S. Please dont come back at me with Fox news
Posted by rimasco on :
Im aware that Moore and Franken alike are considered Libs. I consider them FAR LEFT
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Then you are not, by definition, apolitical. Another lie on the rimasco pile.
quote:Originally posted by rimasco: If that was directed at me Gordo I still have a little bit of the right resonating within...I will bash both parties alike
Posted by glassman on :
Many of the weapons the Russians took out to Syria primarily (also documented earlier) now find use against Israel.
documneted my azz...you provided a bunch of third tier web sites for documentration.. and? if we are seeing them being used right now? they are not much more than firecrackers... terroist firecracker YES, but worthless for fighting a war...
Posted by rimasco on :
"Moore's film was just as as politically slanted as its money-grabbing cousin, Fahrenhype 911."
Yeah but we certainly know who grabed alot more.
The Irony is Michael Moore is rumored to be the single biggest profiteer from the Iraqi war.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Which country would you rather live in: a country where the FAR LEFT got everything it wanted (free medical care, gay marriage, legal abortion and a real foreign policy, etc.), or one where the FAR RIGHT got everything it wanted (no privacy rights, no reproductive rights, no life-partner rights, reduced human rights, endless war, an official screw-the-poor policy, etc.)?
[ July 20, 2006, 15:47: Message edited by: Gordon Bennett ]
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
As it should have. It's an entertaining film. The first rule of propaganda is that it has to be interesting enough to watch.
Moore's film is infinitely watchable, while FahrenHYPE 911 was just a talking head laden bore.
quote:Originally posted by rimasco: "Moore's film was just as as politically slanted as its money-grabbing cousin, Fahrenhype 911."
Yeah but we certainly know who grabed alot more.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Which country would you rather live in: a country where the FAR LEFT got everything it wants (free medical care, gay marriage, legal abortion, a real foreign policy, etc.), or one where the FAR RIGHT got everything it wants (no privacy rights, no reproductive rights, no life-partner rights, reduced human rights, endless war, an official screw-the-poor policy, etc.)?
NOTE: If you're in the top 2% income bracket, I already know your answer.
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Real foreign policy? The dems haven't had a real foreign policy since Truman. What was Clinton's foreign policy? He was President in the easiest foreign policy period since the mid '30's, with no war, no cold war and no terrorist attacks on American soil. I could have been Secretary of State during his two terms.
Posted by glassman on :
more rovism...
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
I thought you'd jump on the "screw-the-poor-policy" first. LOL
Okay, so that would be a negative for you, nothing's perfect. But overall, which country would you choose and why?
quote:Originally posted by Johnwayne: Real foreign policy? The dems haven't had a real foreign policy since Truman. What was Clinton's foreign policy? He was President in the easiest foreign policy period since the mid '30's, with no war, no cold war and no terrorist attacks on American soil. I could have been Secretary of State during his two terms.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by Johnwayne: Real foreign policy? The dems haven't had a real foreign policy since Truman. What was Clinton's foreign policy? He was President in the easiest foreign policy period since the mid '30's, with no war, no cold war and no terrorist attacks on American soil. I could have been Secretary of State during his two terms.
JW? i'm beginning to wonder about you.. no attacks on American soil? WTC parking garage ring a bell?
and who was it that created osambinalivetoolong? he was set up in afghanistna by who again?...LOL
and who caught him? yeah...
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
The WTC parking garage brings up another interesting point.
Prior to 9/11, Bush received a memo entitled 'Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States' which describes New York buildings and activities "consistent with preparations for hijacking."
Especially given that the WTC had already been attacked once, would any other president in history have tossed it in the wastebasket the way Bush did?
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Point taken guys, forgot about WTC. Why did we set Bin Laden up in Afghanistan Glassman? have anything to do with the cold war? At the time who was our big enemy? You mean the republicans couldn't see 20 years into the future and know that Bin Laden was going to attack the US. Shame on them. War sometimes makes for strange bedfellows, sad but true. Just like after WW2 many Nazi scientists came over here and worked on our space program.
Also if I can add a few here to the liberal utopia Gordon referred to: An ammendment banning religion 75% tax rates A formal apology to all terrorists and financial renumeration for the damage we caused them when they attacked us on 9/11 Military reduction Outlawing all smoking Outlawing all SUV's Outlawing all guns Outlawing Fox news A federal law against dodge ball and musical chairs in the schools
All told, I will stick with the republicans.
Posted by Johnwayne on :
"Prior to 9/11, Bush received a memo entitled 'Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States' which describes New York buildings and activities "consistent with preparations for hijacking."
Please provide link
Posted by glassman on :
JW, dubya's been in office now for 6 years... bringing up clinton is a political diversion. this is availble at the whitehouse dot gov...
i do not paste links directly there because you should look thru the website yourself.. they post a lot of stuff there that is actually true....
Fact Sheet The August 6, 2001 PDB
The August 6, 2001 Pdb Item Entitled "bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US" was prepared in response to questions asked by the President about the possibility of attacks by al-Qaida inside the United States. The PDB article did not warn of the 9-11 attacks. Although the PDB referred to the possibility of hijackings, it did not discuss the possible use of planes as weapons. The PDB was based largely on background information about past terrorist attacks conducted by al-Qaida and general threats from the late 1990s. The only recent information concerning possible current activities in the PDB related to two incidents. There is no information that either incident was related to the 9-11 attacks.
the Italians EXPECTED airplanes/jets under remote control to be used in attacks at the G8 summit meeting in June just before 911... there's lots of good info available if you really want to know ....
Posted by glassman on :
Q: The PDB item stated that "al-Qa'ida members have resided in or traveled to the US for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks." Was this new information and what was being done about it?
The presence of individuals associated or affiliated with al-Qaida in the United States was not new information. This information had been well-known to the intelligence and law enforcement communities for a number of years. The FBI was actively investigating individuals associated or affiliated with al-Qaida in the United States -- a fact noted in the PDB article. As also noted in the PDB article, the FBI was conducting approximately 70 full-field Bin-Laden-related investigations.
more from whitehouse dotgov
Posted by rimasco on :
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Bennett: Which country would you rather live in: a country where the FAR LEFT got everything it wanted (free medical care, gay marriage, legal abortion and a real foreign policy, etc.), or one where the FAR RIGHT got everything it wanted (no privacy rights, no reproductive rights, no life-partner rights, reduced human rights, endless war, an official screw-the-poor policy, etc.)?
Sorry had to step away....Good points. BUT you left out a slew of Lib. demands
Posted by glassman on :
and:
Q: Why is the term "patterns of suspicious activity" used in the PDB and what does it refer to?
The CIA author of the PDB item judged, after consulting an FBI colleague, that there were suspicious patterns of activity that were worrisome, even though nothing pointed to a specific operation in a specific location. o In that vein, the author was concerned that one of the East African bombing defendants had told FBI officers earlier in 2001 that Bin Laden would retaliate if the defendants in the trial were convicted -- four were convicted in New York on May 29 -- with a major attack, something the FBI interpreted to mean possibly in the United States. o In addition, the CIA author understood that there had been possible recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York. Except for the information relating to the possible surveillance of federal buildings in New York, which was later determined by the FBI to be consistent with tourist-related activity, the PDB item contained no information from FBI investigations that indicated activities related to the preparation or planning for hijackings or other attacks within the United States. None of the information relating to the "patterns of suspicious activity" was later deemed to be related to the 9-11 attacks. From June through September, the FAA and FBI issued a number of warnings about the possibility of terrorist attacks. FAA warnings included specific warnings about the possibility of a hijacking to free imprisoned al-Qaida members inside the United States and the possibility of attacks in response to law enforcement actions against al-Qaida members.
and that bstrd massoui was already in custody....
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Beat you to the punch Gordon.
APRIL 10--Under pressure from the September 11 commission, the White House today declassified and released an intelligence digest given to President George W. Bush weeks before the 2001 terrorist attacks. The confidential President's Daily Brief (PDB) for August 6, 2001 contained a two-page section entitled "Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US," and refers to possible hijacking attempts by Osama bin Laden disciples and the existence of about 70 FBI investigations into alleged al-Qaeda cells operating within the United States. The August 6 PDB, an excerpt from which you'll find below, was presented to Bush while he vacationed at his ranch in Crawford, Texas. The digest is prepared by the Central Intelligence Agency, an official from which briefs the president on the report's contents. While Bush critics have described the August 6 PDB as a warning of an impending al-Qaeda attack, Condoleezza Rice, Bush's national security adviser, testified Thursday that the document contained "historical information based on old reporting. There was no new threat information." (2 pages)
You left out the First part of the paragraph and the paragraph immediately after.
The paragraph starts out ....
We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting such as that from a service in 1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a US aircraft to gain release of Blind Shaykh Umar and other US held extremists Never the less, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activities activity in this country consistent with preperations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.
The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full field investigations throughout the US that it considers Bin Ladin related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our embassy in UAE in may saying that a groupd of Bin Laden supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives.
What would you have him do? Open a 71st FBI investigation?
Also is there a link to the full report? this was only two pages of it.
Posted by bdgee on :
Uh huh, sueeeeerrrre...
And what is the reason you want to talk about Clinton? Because you don't want to admit that this is dubya's screw-up and no one else by him is responsible.
It's because of the training from the Party line:
When you get trapped by your own double speak and distortions, change the subject.....and being hateful and crude will cover up that you are changing the topic in order to run from the truth.
The only consensus you are interested in is a consensus that we aboid the fact that we are in Iraq as a result of Bush lies and deceptions.
Posted by glassman on :
and? we are empowering Shia Muslims that are affiliated with Iran who is our mortal enemy Iran...
who got so greedy they failed to see the forest from the trees on this one? Cheney and the neo-cons... who didn't know the difference between a Sunni (Paki's, Saudis ) and a Shia? Bush, the foreign policy genius according to you? LOL
Posted by bdgee on :
I've heard both Rummy and dubya claim that "no one could have expected th events after the fall of Bagdad and how things turned out in Iraq".
Horse crap!
Over and over I heard the Administration warned that the results would be exactly as they have become. It was in response to such warnings that they declared it would ge a "cake walk" and "the Iraqis will welcome us with roses". Bush refused to listen!
Posted by glassman on :
Bush Senior KNEW during the Gulf War....
he even put it in print... In his memoirs, A World Transformed, written more than five years ago, George Bush, Sr. wrote the following to explain why he didn't go after Saddam Hussein at the end of the Gulf War:
"Trying to eliminate Saddam .. would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible ... We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq ...there was no viable "exit strategy" we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land."
If only his son could read.
Posted by Johnwayne on :
So the FBI knows about suspicious acctivty, the CIA knows about suspicious acivity, the FAA knows about suspicous activity and Bush gets a report thrown on his desk with a bunch of information from 1998. Now he knows that all three of these organizations are aware of this activity does he not? So what is he supposed to do? Make them doubly aware, Work the grave yard shift at airports?
I can agree that the guy at the top takes responsibility, that's the job. But he is no more responsible than,... you know who was on watch during the WTC bombing in 1993.
PS guys, It says right in the title of the topic "Clintons Vietnam service". Who cares what my motivation is? Party line, run from the truth, blah blah blah. If you feel the topic is irrelevant, don't click on the thread.
Posted by bdgee on :
Almost everybody knew it, Glass.... Even these guys that are in Washington now knew an invasion of Iraq was a trap. But they had other reasons to want a war.
So they fabricated a tale of Saddam with direct ties to Al Qaeda, stock piles of WMDs, and plans for their use in imminent attacks on the U.S. mainland to overcome the concerns of it being a trap.
There is no honorable way out and no such thing as a victory. Every honest person admitted that beforehand. It was a blunder to cover schemes more important to the Party that is the Country.
We have played into the fondest hopes of Ben laden.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
My honest opinion is that the administration let 9/11 happen. First, call me crazy. Then tell me why.
Posted by Griffon on :
"Almost everybody knew it, Glass.... Even these guys that are in Washington now knew an invasion of Iraq was a trap. But they had other reasons to want a war.
So they fabricated a tale of Saddam with direct ties to Al Qaeda, stock piles of WMDs, and plans for their use in imminent attacks on the U.S. mainland to overcome the concerns of it being a trap."
Good thing my previous presented evidence proves this statement wrong.
Posted by bdgee on :
Hahahahaha
You haven't made a statement that even approximates a proof of anything except proof that you are an unimaginative mixed up Party line quoter.
BUSH LIED!!!!
Posted by Griffon on :
Bdgee, you lose this round again! here's part of the proof and why it hasn't been widely reported. This was the reason you went and hid a few dys til the thread died down. As an apolitical person, I have no party line. Regarding the "hollow claims" check out HRW's website for the documentation of meat grinder and plastic shredder usage in Saddam era Iraq. That's simple ancient history.
Just as the comments about the two Russian Generals:
ah yes, now that one was where you started to avoid me. No party line here, I blast 'em both with these articles. Feel free to read them and comment further.
Posted by Griffon on :
And as far as the story about the Russian generals who secreted WMDs out of Iraq to Syria and Russia scant days before the war began, that demonstrates not only that WMDs existed in Iraq, as we found recently again, but it also demonstrates Bush is consistent in his understanding of National Security.
In the Washington Post (liberal bastion) story, we see Bush fired a person for talking about this story because it was an on-going investigation of our security agencies. It paints the picture of a Chief Executive who put the security of the nation above his personal political interests. Quite a different picture than your "party line." George Bush could have cleared his name with this story, but in turn he would have jeopardized national security agents, so he ordered it squelched, in order to protect them. PO24 ran the story as well; I suggest you get an international perspective.
Posted by glassman on :
griifon? do you really read?
see? there's two kinds of actual readers IMO..
type A... they read alot... they read the first parargraph clearly and the rest gets garbled...
type B... they read alot, they read and comprehend every word...
you would have found this:Mr. Shaw went public to counter a political "October surprise" campaign designed to "crucify the president" over the missing explosives, he wrote to Mr. Rumsfeld. "The Kerry media-driven October surprise attack on us and the president stopped within hours," Mr. Shaw wrote. "If I had not had the openly hostile environment in [Pentagon public affairs], I would have moved the story differently. Getting the truth out instantly was more important than process."
"He has been directed on several occasions to produce evidence of his wide-ranging and fantastic charges and provide it to the DoD inspector general," Mr. DiRita said in an interview. "To my knowledge, he has not done so." Mr. DiRita declined to comment on specific accusations made by Mr. Shaw.
the guy was fired for lying...
and?
i clearly remeber all the bozo's who showed up here at allstocks claiming the same thing back during the campaign... they have all left cuz they are embarassed to have believed this crock o'chit...
there is ONE possibility that i entertained for a long time
sadam may have had some samllpox from Russia...
it never turned up... if Bush could have shown ANY WMD? he wouldn't have had to even campaign.
why do you think abugraib happened?
your high and mighty do-gooder attitude suffers on that one doesn't it?
Posted by Griffon on :
Not at all glassman, since other sources said the same thing. I simply present articles that discuss the issue. Contrary to what your view of religion and my Independent politics allow, I allow both sides of a story to be expressed. I am quite secure knowing that I do not have a lock on the truth
I think Abu Graib happened because our troops are human beings. See, Glass, your hatred of religion mystifies me. What exactly gives you the impression I am high and mighty? Come see me preach sometime, you'll know I am a bleeding heart who is simply a limited part of creation. That shades my worldview in the following way.
In my faith, I can look at Abu Graib and see that horrible incident for what it is: a terrible manifestation of human nature. The Biblical understanding of humanity is true: we are sinners at heart. Left to ourselves we are greedy, violent, self-centered. People who are left in difficult situations eventually exhibit those tendencies.
So I see Abu Graib for what it is, a failure of humanity to live up to its self-imposed ideals. Not on the scale of Saddy who killed 1,400,000 Iraqis, Iranians, Kuwaitis, Kurds, Marsh Arabs and coalition forces.
That is not to justify the reprehensible act, nothing can excuse those soldiers' behavior. It is another example of why this was a burden for the whole Western imperialist franchise: France, Britain, Germany, Russia and the US, all of whom at various stages and levels of involvement, have drawn an imaginary map (as was done in Yugoslavia, Africa and India), played tribes off against each other, put Saddy in power, armed him to the teeth and encouraged him to attack Iran. None of us did anything when he gased Kurds. None of us did anything as he butchered 5000-6000 of his own people a year.
See you all think I support Bush because of the WMDs and such, I don't. I support ending a dictator's regime, as I would be for ending the regime in Sudan. At some point, the developed world has to take responsibility, to say, "We've done wrong," and work to fix it even if it costs our own lives, even if it's expensive. Not for nukes, WMDs, terrorist connections, (though they were all there) but for human lives. To post warning to brutal dictators and say, "If you kill your people, we will hunt you down, drag you out of whatever hole you crawl into and lock you up.
Now that's a noble, idealistic endeavor that we can't in our own strength accomplish. So atrocities happen. One thing I can say, our troops are prosecuted for atrocities, inadequately to be sure for nothing can remove the stain, where Saddy's troops were given medals and promotions.
See a limited political agenda will lift up only one side or the other. As GB noticed yesterday, my point is not to clobber those who disagree with me, but to engage in the free exchange of ideas. He called me devil's advocate; not quite accurate but then I often defy labels.
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Glassman- "He has been directed on several occasions to produce evidence of his wide-ranging and fantastic charges and provide it to the DoD inspector general," Mr. DiRita said in an interview. "To my knowledge, he has not done so."
Was that Shaw they said that about or BDGEE? Lol
Posted by glassman on :
Come see me preach sometime,
no thanx.... Left to ourselves we are greedy, violent, self-centered. People who are left in difficult situations eventually exhibit those tendencies.
duh...
I support ending a dictator's regime,
Iran is a democracy.... a one party democracy, but a democracy... is that a dictatorship?
"If you kill your people, we will hunt you down, drag you out of whatever hole you crawl into and lock you up.
the evidence for 1.4 million people is not there... you didn't provide evidence for that just hearsay and justice in the mideast is not the same as justice here.... i'm not saying sadam was a good guy.. i'm saying that the people in Iraq want a dictatorship as do the people of Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia ...
i know this is a hard concept for you to swallow, but its true..
we in the US are the oddballs in the world cuz we have never had a King, except when we were colonies, and not a country...
Posted by glassman on :
"If you kill your people, we will hunt you down, drag you out of whatever hole you crawl into and lock you up."
lessee howmuch more fun we can have with this religio-fascist statement....
....after we lock you up? we're gonna kill you...
and
....who cares how many people WE kill to get you?.....
and
...while we are at it? we'll make sure our good buddies make about a quarter trillion doallrs in revenues, all the while villifying people that oppose US by accusing them of being greedy ... LOL..
man, i hope you know how to ask forgiveness...
cuz you are the worst type of peacenik...
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Well where does he say or even imply he is going to kill people Glassman? You mean religous people can't believe in jail? Religous people can't believe in the rule of law?
Posted by glassman on :
you think Sadam is going to LIVE? heehawheehaw
you guys crack me up man... i'm sorry JW...
i can't help it..
what ever happened to Thou Shalt Not Kill?
pretty inconvenient at times like this huh????
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Glassman- Oh so do you mean Christians can only believe in locking up people who don't face the death penalty? In other words just the light weights and if you commit a crime that could lead to death penalty sentence you get to go free. So you feel Christians should have been against apprehending all of the SS Generals? How about Bundy? Gacy? Those guys get to go free?
Posted by glassman on :
see? there you go again.. thats history... i'm talking about TODAY...
we are getting ready to go bomb Iran back into the stone age right now, and you are talking to me about the SS?
WTF?
there is no peace... it's a myth.. get used to it..
Iran can't stand the Pakis having a nuke when they don't... it's that simple..
and we can't allow them to have one.. the organised religions are just a way to define enemies
Posted by Griffon on :
Glass commented to my statement "lock you up."
What part of that statement eludes you? I am opposed to war and killing, I am opposed to capitol punishment. As opposed as I am to war, I am opposed to sitting back and allowing a guy we empowered to kill his own people in massive numbers. I know you would rather we just let those Iraqis keep dying, little babies going without incubators, and all. I understand you think that was the better way to go. I absolutely disagree! You cannot keep sending that message out to the dictators of the world that it is okay to torture, maim and kill your own people.
"If you kill your people, we will hunt you down, drag you out of whatever hole you crawl into and lock you up. lessee howmuch more fun we can have with this religio-fascist statement...."
Now, supporter of genocidal dictators, tell me if you are one of the potential victims of that regime, what part of my statement is fascist. Listen again to the phrases, break down the sentence if the meaning is escaping you.
I am pointing out that we need to send a message palin and simple: if dictators with violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, they will not be allowed to be in power. If they want to use peasants for target practice they will be removed from power. What is fascist about that?
"Iran is a democracy.... a one party democracy, but a democracy... is that a dictatorship?"
No but given I was speaking of Iraq, I assume we can agree it WAS a dictatorship.
"the evidence for 1.4 million people is not there"
see my posts about Iraqi and Iranian history, 1.4 million may be too few. But here you are an apologist for Saddam. The truth comes out at last. Sounds like those Nazi apologists that sy the Holocaust never happened. Why is is there are always good, sincere people who just won't recognize genocide happens?
"cuz you are the worst type of peacenik..."
Yes, I am sure given your denial of ethnic cleansing that you think a person opposed to killing is the worst.
"what ever happened to Thou Shalt Not Kill? pretty inconvenient at times like this huh????"
It's a judgment we all face friend. Not inconvenient at all. But I would rather face God with the conviction in my heart that I spent my life ending the oppression of the victims of violence, feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, housing the homeless. Stick to your support of the status quo, stick to supporting dictators, keep ignoring the pictures of genocide, keep making excuses for doing nothing. Feel good about the situation the world was in with Saddy in power. Ignore the cries around you. It's all good friend.
Posted by glassman on :
What part of that statement eludes you? I am opposed to war and killing, I am opposed to capitol punishment. As opposed as I am to war, I am opposed to sitting back and allowing a guy we empowered to kill his own people in massive numbers. I know you would rather we just let those Iraqis keep dying, little babies going without incubators, and all. I understand you think that was the better way to go. I absolutely disagree! You cannot keep sending that message out to the dictators of the world that it is okay to torture, maim and kill your own people.
wow... lay it on thick...
you have the Terible Swift Sword in your hand....
Posted by glassman on :
i am not defending anybody, just questioning YOUR ethics..
cuz they don't add up..
you shoulda had that covered in those physics classes...
wanna KNOW God? study physics... wanna play politics? study religion...
Posted by Johnwayne on :
I would like to know Glassman what you feel the Christian viewpoint should be about Saddam's capture?
Posted by bdgee on :
Glass...,
You are trying to reason with the anti-reasonable.
Remember, "Ignoraance is bliss" and "Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free".
These guys are not about freedom, quite the opposite, in fact. Particularly they are not for freedom that might fall on your side of the street. So determined to disallow and disavow that freedom, for fear it doesn't place them and their causes paramount, they dodge out of the way of truth, for it might make you free.
They cling desparately to Bliss and the logical implication thereof.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by Johnwayne: I would like to know Glassman what you feel the Christian viewpoint should be about Saddam's capture?
i think the United Methodist Church (Bush's Own) said it well... Board of Church and Society calls for withdrawal from Iraq
LINK: Click to open full size version of image Jim Winkler Jim Winkler Oct. 19, 2005
By Mark Schoeff Jr.*
WASHINGTON (UMNS) ? On a day when officials at the State Department were monitoring the results of a constitutional referendum in Iraq, a couple of miles away in a local hotel the United Methodist Board of Church and Society passed a resolution calling on the United States to withdraw its troops from the country.
?As people of faith, we raise our voice in protest against the tragedy of the unjust war in Iraq,? the resolution stated. ?We urge the United States government to develop and implement a plan for the withdrawal of its troops. The U.S. invasion has set in motion a sequence of events which may plunge Iraq into civil war.? Criticizing a war ?waged on false premises,? the resolution went on to state, ?Thousands of lives have been lost and hundreds of billions of dollars wasted in a war the United States initiated and should never have fought. ...We grieve for all those whose lives have been lost or destroyed in this needless and avoidable tragedy. Military families have suffered undue hardship from prolonged troop rotations in Iraq and loss of loved ones. It is time to bring them home.? http://www.umc.org/site/c.gjJTJbMUIuE/b.1118121/k.8ABD/Board_of_Church_and_Socie ty_calls_for_withdrawal_from_Iraq.htm
UNFORTUNATELY?
i have a different view on what the correct thing to do now is....
pulling out will give Iran too much influence
Bush PERSONALLY has tried to set the stage for WW3 if this is all going according to HIS plans.. otherwise? he's an idiot...
you choose...
Posted by Griffon on :
see? there you go again.. thats history... i'm talking about TODAY...
we are getting ready to go bomb Iran back into the stone age right now, and you are talking to me about the SS?
WTF?
there is no peace...In the world there is no peace, to be sure, the only peace is in Christ who is the full revelation of God. On the basis of God's prevenient grace most other religions have some truth too, Islam witnesses to God's transcendence, Buddhism and Taoism to God's immanence, Judaism gives the command to love God and neighbor. In those we find peace.
"Iran can't stand the Pakis having a nuke when they don't... it's that simple.." yes that "simple" notion is wrong, but you go on believing that. It'll help you sleep at night. Iran isn't looking at Pakistan, their sites are pointing West. Anyone who has been to Pakistan knows it will go a radically different direction when Musharaff is gone. They are already in Iran's cmp except for the top.
"and we can't allow them to have one.. the organised religions are just a way to define enemies"
This whole post just demonstrates that you have the typical American disease: "we can't learn from history." It's the same old, short sighted, business-as-usual approach, that refusal to learn from history, that means you cannot accurately understand what is going on now in the Middle East.
In Palestine and Israel, they say the Arab Christian community is the only viable hope for peace. Your unwillingness to learn the lessons of the past is precisely why we are involved in Iraq right now and as you so quaintly put it, "getting ready to bomb Iran..." Your unwillingness to learn the lessons of the past, to be drawn into dialog with people of other cultures, is the reason terrorism exists.
In short your cultural insensitivity, lack of historical awareness, part of the whole of the American pathology about history, means we are not equipped to find any alternative but war. So come down off your pious, self-righteous atheo-centric, high-horse, learn from history and equip yourself to move beyond the nihilist party line so you can be part of the solution.
There is still time to derail the madness of political chicanery but not if intelligent people like you continue to bury your head in the sand every time history is mentioned.
Posted by rimasco on :
Lets face it "most" of these rougue radical countrys want a nuke so they can sit at the bargaining table with the rest of the "nuke club". And lets face it that countrys that do posess nukes are treated differently when it comes to world trade.
Posted by bdgee on :
Yep, that's one reason Saddam wanted the world to believe he had 'em. The bigger reason was he wanted Iran to think so so they wouldn't attack.
Posted by glassman on :
In short your cultural insensitivity, lack of historical awareness, part of the whole of the American pathology about history, means we are not equipped to find any alternative but war. So come down off your pious, self-righteous atheo-centric, high-horse, learn from history and equip yourself to move beyond the nihilist party line so you can be part of the solution.
you couldn't more wrong... the war was engaged by people that think like that...
you are promoting "take over the world" politics... i am not...
you are trying to justify the lies that led US into Iraq.
i am not...
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Glassman- very interesting, I don't see how it answers my question but please take a look at what I found from the same source:
"We deplore war and urge the peaceful settlement of all disputes among nations. From the beginning, the Christian conscience has struggled with the harsh realities of violence and war, for these evils clearly frustrate God's loving purposes for humankind. We yearn for the day when there will be no more war and people will live together in peace and justice. Some of us believe that war, and other acts of violence, are never acceptable to Christians. We also acknowledge that many Christians believe that, when peaceful alternatives have failed, the force of arms may regretfully be preferable to unchecked aggression, tyranny and genocide. We honor the witness of pacifists who will not allow us to become complacent about war and violence. We also respect those who support the use of force, but only in extreme situations and only when the need is clear beyond reasonable doubt, and through appropriate international organizations. We urge the establishment of the rule of law in international affairs as a means of elimination of war, violence, and coercion in these affairs.
Clearly the church struggles with this issue. Now there is no right or wrong answer to this question Glassman but what do you think of religous soldiers fighting in any war? (Is that better Bdgee?)
Posted by glassman on :
In Palestine and Israel, they say the Arab Christian community is the only viable hope for peace.
there you go.....
missionaries to inflame the Muslims..just what we need.... you are at war to spread your version of religion...
Posted by bdgee on :
Yes, Glass.., but they don't recognize it for what it is.....and won't!
Posted by glassman on :
they have to bdgee..
they are the AMERICAN TALIBAN
Posted by Griffon on :
"missionaries to inflame the Muslims..just what we need.... you are at war to spread your version of religion..."
What missionaries are you talking about? Do you know nothing about Arab Christians? Have you never heard of Mar Elias Educational Institute where Israeli Muslim, Druze, Christian and on exchange some Jews come to study together? Do you not know about the one Peace Center in Israel?
There I can go as a Christian to teach Muslim and Druze students about our common God who is Jewish, Muslim, Christian and Druze and who created us to worship within our own cultural and religious understanding. We are teaching that followers of Abraham, Jesus and Mohammed can worship however they practice their faith and sit down together, break the bread of life and share the cup of fellowship. We speak Hebrew, Arabic and English and they love when I tell them French, Italian, Spanish, Polish or Greek words.
You guys don't even have a clue what organized religion is. One of my best friends from Jenin is Amar. He is Palestinian and Muslim and the gardner for the whole campus. We know the areas where we disagree theologically and we just don't go there. We don't proselytise, because there is no need. The God of us all, Allah be praised, YHWH giver of peace, brings us together in diversity and unity. I believe it is in Jesus, or Isa, peace be upon him. But when we go to worship in Muslim fashion on Friday, or when we hear the cll to prayer, or stand in the synagog on Saturday or the beautiful church on Sunday we all know it is the One God.
Organized religion taught us peace and brought us together. Even when I am far removed locationally, my heart is at home there. So keep rooted in your fear, stay blinded by hate, we will meet you with love.
Posted by glassman on :
What missionaries are you talking about?
don't act stooopid....
Posted by Griffon on :
"In Palestine and Israel, they say the Arab Christian community is the only viable hope for peace."
You're right Glass, I should have clarified for you: Palestinian Muslim and Israeli Jewish leaders say Arab Christians, you know those indigenous folk I keep lifting up as a solution, are the hope for peace. Thanks for pushing me to explain further.
As to the American Taliban since I know you are religio-phobic and atheo-centric I can appreciate you really are speaking in ignorance.
Posted by glassman on :
As to the American Taliban since I know you are religio-phobic and atheo-centric I can appreciate you really are speaking in ignorance.
yep, that's the same thing every cult says to the new recruits....
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Glassman- Methodism is a cult?
Posted by glassman on :
and i am religio-phobic and atheo-centric?
LOL.... you guys crack me up big time...
Posted by glassman on :
what would you say if i told you that you can't break God's Laws.. period... not possible... God rules...
Posted by Griffon on :
"We also acknowledge that many Christians believe that, when peaceful alternatives have failed, the force of arms may regretfully be preferable to unchecked aggression, tyranny and genocide. We honor the witness of pacifists who will not allow us to become complacent about war and violence. We also respect those who support the use of force, but only in extreme situations and only when the need is clear beyond reasonable doubt, and through appropriate international organizations. We urge the establishment of the rule of law in international affairs as a means of elimination of war, violence, and coercion in these affairs."
Glass, As United Methodism is my denomination, you know we are not committed to global domination but the right of self-determination. And as we openly confess above, we struggle with how to deal with genocide. I am not a pacifist only because inaction in the face of evil is complicity with evil.
Now as a denomination, we are not a cult, though again, I know you speak out of ignorance as to what the difference is because you hate religion. Admit it Glass, you are afraid of organized religion, you hate organized religion, because its tenets would restrain your human nature. It's okay, unlike the atheist religion, Christians do not make forcible converts.
But there was a day when he churches were caught up in that sin. We can weep and confess what we did and even call for reparations.
Posted by Griffon on :
"what would you say if it old you that you can't break God's Laws.. period... not possible?"
I would know the truth was not in you. I would say you were likely of the atheist religion and respect your right to hold that mistaken belief as a human being of free will.
Posted by glassman on :
It's okay, unlike the atheist religion, Christians do not make forcible converts.
there is no such thing as a forcible convert....
somehow you guys got yourselves convinced going to church is worship...
no, you go to church and preach...
you can't be a Methodist...
Methodists are supposed to live by Christs' teachings, you have been preaching different stuff right here...
Posted by Johnwayne on :
In what way is he not living by Christ's teachings?
Posted by glassman on :
turn the other cheek ring a bell?
Posted by Johnwayne on :
In a debate he has to turn the other cheek?
Posted by glassman on :
no, you guys are saying Bush was right to invade another country to "do good"... i propose the "novel idea" that Jesus might be just a little upset about that...
Posted by Griffon on :
"Methodists are supposed to live by Christs' teachings, you have been preaching different stuff right here..."
Jesus answered them, “Beware that no one leads you astray. For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Messiah!’ and they will lead many astray. And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars; see that you are not alarmed; for this must take place, but the end is not yet. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be faminesb and earthquakes in various places: all this is but the beginning of the birth pangs"
Jesus warned about war in Matthew 24. He said we would be caught in the middle many times.
"turn the other cheek ring a bell?" Yes!
Does God's response to, "Am I my brothers' keeper" ring a bell? “What have you done? Listen; your brother’s blood is crying out to me from the ground! And now you are cursed from the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand."
We are our brother's keeper. We are to act justly and love mercy. Tell me Glass, is letting women and children die under a brutal leader acting justly? Is it merciful?
This war is deeply flawed, as all wars are, but we created the monster. To use the Cain and Abel imagery, we gave Abel (Saddam) the club to kill his brothers and sisters. So we are responsible for removing that club or preventing Abel from killing again.
And I believe that we as the United States will have to give an acount before God for all that has transpired with Saddy and in this war. And it won't be pretty! I do not believe God means for us to war, ever. But that broken human nature you point to, that doom sying about there being no peace that you claim as truth, means we will sometimes find war pushed upon us. Like it should have been in Rwanda as 800,000 people died. As it should be in Sudan where they say as many as 1.2 million have died.
If you want to argue the bible with me, I think we could have some fun, but I do not think you are prepared for that.
Posted by bdgee on :
Glass, is this a reincarnation of arogorn?
Ain't no way these guys respect anyones right to anything, particularly free will.
Posted by glassman on :
We are our brother's keeper. We are to act justly and love mercy. Tell me Glass, is letting women and children die under a brutal leader acting justly? Is it merciful?
no it snot..
but? operation shock and awe was not a Biblical answer to the dilemna and you are saying it was..
operation shock and awe was a response applied because WE THE PEOPLE were told sadam was going to arm Alqueda with nukes which was a lie..
nothing good can from the lies.. so why don't you stop trying to justify it? and admit Bush led US astray and stop trying to make excuses... the road to hell is paved with excuses.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: Glass, is this a reincarnation of arogorn?
Ain't no way these guys respect anyones right to anything, particularly free will.
no, i think not. i think the seminary has identified US here as a good place to train their students in kritikal thinking...for free no less...
Posted by bdgee on :
Hahahahaha
Maybe that is the case.....
Well, I can reccommend to the seminary that this pair isn't ready for prime time, particularly in the intellectual department...
Send 'em back for remedial training, guys, these ain't graduatable yet....
Posted by glassman on :
And I believe that we as the United States will have to give an acount before God
this is just creepy...
each person will go on their own...
you act like Bush and Cheney will represent US?
wierd man, really wierd...
Posted by bdgee on :
"And I believe that we as the United States will have to give an acount before God"
Yeah?
Well, I don't.
Where are you getting these ideas about what I will require?
Posted by Griffon on :
operation shock and awe was not a Biblical answer to the dilemna and you are saying it was..
I am not saying it was biblical, Glass. You really need to calm down and read objectively: war is evil. It is rejection of relationship. That is sin. There is nothing good about war except its ending. Look at my posts. Where have I ever said this war was good, or that shock and awe was appropriate? See you judged long before you ever gave me chance to talk about the war. You assumed because I talked about the sins of the Left that I towed a party line. But you were so messed up about the hate and name-calling of the President. I stand against any character asssination precisely because I know we are all fallen. That utter depravity thing that we all share.
nothing good can from the lies.. so why don't you stop trying to justify it?
Don't have to justify ending genocide. I know, you associate better with Saddy, you feel better when he's around, but his murdering was no good for the neighborhood. I know, you would have us stay home, let millions of people of color die, because you think our troops are worth more than them. Clinton lets 5,000,000 people die, that's okay, they weren't your type. To me that is wrong-headed. But you go ahead and believe what you want.
and admit Bush led US astray and stop trying to make excuses... the road to hell is paved with excuses.
No my friend, the quote is, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." I think if you read what I said following the Cain and Abel statement, you know I already said that. But what does it matter, you don't believe in anything about hell anyway. Why is it religio-phobic people know more about hell and focus more on hell than anyone else?
Glass, is this a reincarnation of arogorn? Ain't no way these guys respect anyones right to anything, particularly free will.
Actually that's the Left you're talking about here. Free will unless you want to express your faith, free will unless you have an opinion other than ours. See that's all Left thinking there. Ask Hillary.
Posted by bdgee on :
As I recall arogorn too claimed to be Methodist.
Seems we have another failure to understand Methodism.
Posted by glassman on :
Look at my posts. Where have I ever said this war was good,
LOL.... no point in going any further... you don't even know what you are saying anymore...
Posted by bdgee on :
I don't keep such records at hand, but didn't I see about a month back a PR out of the United Methodist refusing to condone the invasion of Iraq?
Posted by glassman on :
yeah i posted it for them already today... i'm gettting a good workout on the key board anyway...
Posted by Griffon on :
no point in going any further... you don't even know what you are saying anymore...
Blind in your arrogance aren't you Glass. I never, ever said the war was good. Everything I posted above was a quote about war. I said the war was necessary because we are broken human beings, I did not say it was good.
You did see that from the Council of Bishops. Now how do you all claim to have credentials on Methodism?
"Well, I can reccommend to the seminary that this pair isn't ready for prime time, particularly in the intellectual department...
Send 'em back for remedial training, guys, these ain't graduatable yet...."
See, athei-centric hate comes out in denigration simply because you don't agree with me. You are incredibly intolerant.
"this is just creepy...
each person will go on their own...
you act like Bush and Cheney will represent US?
wierd man, really wierd..."
What I meant is every one of us will be held to account for the sins of this nation of which war is one. Of course you don't believe anyway so why do you care?
Posted by glassman on :
What I meant is every one of us will be held to account for the sins of this nation of which war is one. Of course you don't believe anyway so why do you care?
just because i thrash you for posting contradictory statemnets doesn't mean you have any clue what my religious beliefs are....
are you sure you are Methodist? you type more like a Baptist...
Posted by Griffon on :
First there was no contradictory statement. You are mistaken because of this limited means of communication. That's because the lovely PM I got said people were sick of my long-winded posts. So I am trying to abridge my responses, which means making black and white statements instead of the nuanced position I hold to.
Posted by Griffon on :
Are you claiming to be Methodist? I can see what your point is Glass, but we are on opposite sides of one issue. You don't seem to understand, I was never in favor of going to war over WMDs. I was never in favor of Shock and Awe. I was in favor of buying Saddy off into exile and removing him from his killing machine. The only thing that motivates me in the situation of Iraq and Sudan is the on-going genocide or the historic genocide.
"just because i thrash you for posting contradictory statemnets doesn't mean you have any clue what my religious beliefs are...."
when you sharply criticize me for my religious view, it does leave me with a rather definitive opinion of your general view on religion. This is a great demonstration of what I teach about peace-building. Too bad you all won't give me a hearing because of my political Independence and religious views.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Let me hear ya say 'A-men.'
A-MEN!
quote:Originally posted by glassman: no, you guys are saying Bush was right to invade another country to "do good"... i propose the "novel idea" that Jesus might be just a little upset about that...
Posted by glassman on :
so stick to the peace building griffon..
cuz Bush had no intention of buying sadam off.. he told the weapons inspectors to GET OUT NOW...
before they could finish their job...
gimme a break man.. you are a blatant Bush supporter...
Posted by bdgee on :
I had a full and estensive eduation in methodism via two great uncles that were Methodist Bishops before you were able to read, lad....
There is "the lie" placed on another of your silly assumptions meant to grant you authority. You are no authority on anything, that's just selfish arrogance you carry around.
Posted by Griffon on :
bdgee, then how could you be so rude if they taught you so well? And I am sure I was reading before you think.
Posted by glassman on :
Weapons Inspectors Leave Iraq Along With All Other U.N. Personnel, By Orders Of Kofi Annan
BAGHDAD, Iraq, March 18, 2003 A portrait of Saddam Hussein stands vigil over the road, as U.N. weapons inspectors head out of Iraq on orders of U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan. (AP)
Quote
U.N. weapons inspectors arrived in Baghdad for the first time in four years on Nov. 27, 2002. During four months of inspections, arms experts traveled the length of the country hunting for banned weapons of mass destruction.
(AP) U.N. weapons inspectors climbed aboard a plane and pulled out of Iraq on Tuesday after President Bush issued a final ultimatum for Saddam Hussein to step down or face war.
A plane carrying the inspectors took off from Saddam International Airport at 10:25 a.m. It landed an hour and a half later in Laranca, Cyprus where the inspectors have a base.
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Monday ordered all U.N. inspectors and support staff, humanitarian workers and U.N. observers along the Iraq-Kuwait border to evacuate Iraq after U.S. threats to launch war.
U.N. spokesman Hiro Ueki said 56 inspectors as well as support staff were on board Tuesday. Reporters at the airport saw about 80 people boarding buses for the plane, and officials earlier estimated the total number of U.N. evacuees at about 150.
still want to defend Bush? you think he really gave peace a chance? you are blinded by something...
After failing to secure U.N. authorization to use force to disarm Iraq, President Bush gave Saddam 48 hours to step down or face war in a speech Monday night.
Iraq rejected the Bush ultimatum, saying that a U.S. attack to force Saddam from power would be "a grave mistake. Saddam warned that American forces will find an Iraqi fighter ready to die for his country "behind every rock, tree and wall."
But Saddam made a last-minute bid to avert war, admitting that Iraq had once possessed weapons of mass destruction to defend itself from Iran and Israel - but insisting that it no longer has them. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/17/iraq/main544280.shtml
"It's unfortunate we have to leave now," Ueki said at the airport. "I think all the inspectors and support staff have done our best." Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
There was no effort made on the part of the US Government to avoid war.
Posted by glassman on :
funny how griff and JW disappear when you dig stuff like this up...
only to reappear with some new "provacative" thread....
like we have only short term mammary or something?
This is a great demonstration of what I teach about peace-building. Too bad you all won't give me a hearing because of my political Independence and religious views.
LOL
translated: "whyz everbuddy allus pickin' on me?"
Posted by Dustoff 1 on :
LOL here....Oh' O,,,, man alive, are G&JW in for a surprise.....
We little folks do remember what you did to Art...Poor Art, is he back to the sheep farm now?
Art was a major leaque debater...Don't think G&JW can even come close to his level....
Guess Glass is just playing with um now... But I sure want to read what happens when he really lets go! LMAO
G&W hope you two don't wind up on the sheep farm with Art babbling in somekind of incoherant dialect with Art...
The sheep farm is better known as "The Happy Acres Funny Farm"
The Battle ship "New Jersy" just might be recommisioned....Go Navy. Posted by Johnwayne on :
Oh I think we might just come out ok Dust-Off. Don't know who Art is but the fun here is just beginning.
Posted by glassman on :
heh, i just set him up for Purl... she's the one that sent him packin'....
Posted by Griffon on :
Let's play boys! I think you all take this too seriously, but I don't see the need for this rhetoric to escalate personally. As always I am a peace-builder. But if we must get attacked then Glass better offer more than he has, we will never convince each other and I have said as much. Glass will make a compelling argument, but mine is equally valid as an understanding of the facts we have.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
A short term mammary? Is that the same as a one night stand? Jus' kiddin' glass.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: like we have only short term mammary or something?
Posted by Griffon on :
translated: "whyz everbuddy allus pickin' on me?" No Glass, let me explain what I said:
This is a great demonstration of what I teach about peace-building. Too bad you all won't give me a hearing because of my political Independence and religious views.
That is a simple statement of fact.
Posted by Griffon on :
I feel no persecution, I feel no being picked upon. See, this is a diversion for all of us. It's not real. If the www crashed today we would find another diversion. This is a place to unwind and have some fun. That's why I am puzzled when Glass says he's going to undo me completely. Forget the wording exactly but it's on page 6 of the thread I started. We can't harm each other on this site. Why would we want to?
Posted by bdgee on :
pardon me, griffon, but is that entry in your profile correct, you are from Morning Sun, Iowa?
And you are a minister ath the local united methodist church?
Posted by Relentless. on :
quote:Originally posted by Griffon: I feel no persecution, I feel no being picked upon. See, this is a diversion for all of us. It's not real. If the www crashed today we would find another diversion. This is a place to unwind and have some fun. That's why I am puzzled when Glass says he's going to undo me completely. Forget the wording exactly but it's on page 6 of the thread I started. We can't harm each other on this site. Why would we want to?
This is very real.. to believe otherwise is proof that you are being dishonest. And I assure you there are some here that could cause you great harm if they desired.
Posted by Griffon on :
yes bdgee
Posted by bdgee on :
I thought that congregation had a female minister????
Posted by Griffon on :
"This is very real.. to believe otherwise is proof that you are being dishonest. And I assure you there are some here that could cause you great harm if they desired."
Relentless, the other parts of this site, where real consequences can be created by transactions, are very real. To me this is a forum where we debate topics, have fun, get silly at times, and unwind
Posted by Griffon on :
Sue Ellen is the lead pastor, I am the associate pastor. We have three churches.
Posted by bdgee on :
I see. And that town is 54% Latino, according to you?
Posted by Griffon on :
Columbus Junction is 12 miles away, yes.
Posted by bdgee on :
What has where Columbus Junction is got to do with the percentage of Mexicans in Morning Sun, Iowa?
You said that Morning Sun was 54% latino, right?
Posted by Griffon on :
If I said that it was a mistype, I work with residents of Columbus Junction and so one of my towns is Columbus Junction where I am a volunteer with JFON. I actually serve Southeast Louisa County United Methodist Parish with members from: Wapello, Morning Sun, Oakville, Mediapolis, Columbus Junction and Grandview. And I find it interesting that you are digging into my job. Why would that be?
Posted by Dustoff 1 on :
Where's ART!
Did he breakout!
Posted by Griffon on :
Who is ART?
Posted by Griffon on :
"What has where Columbus Junction is got to do with the percentage of Mexicans in Morning Sun, Iowa?"
Bdgee, I know I never called these persons Mexicans. Since you have checked that out you know the Latino population is far more diverse than that and we have people from several Latin nations both in our congregation at Wapello and in Columbus Junction. JFON is justice for our neighbors an organization that helps immigrants in this country,
Posted by bdgee on :
I recalled having seen a page on the net saying that that the "Pastor" of the Morning Sun United Methodist Church presided at a funeral. It also said that pastor was a woman.
So, a post claiming the town (or any other in Iowa) is 54% Mexicaan (along with the United Methodist minister being female) contrary to what you have been saying, sounded fishy.
Here ya go.....census data on Morning Sun, Iowa:
Races in Morning Sun:
* White Non-Hispanic (95.1%) * Hispanic (3.8%) * Other race (1.4%) Ancestries: German (30.2%), Irish (11.0%), English (10.1%), United States (7.1%),
Scotch-Irish (2.6%), Welsh (2.6%).
I guess they are all illegals and the census guy couldn't find all those wetbacks, huh?
Posted by glassman on :
i think hes' beginning o realise that we can see quite abit with our 'puters. if we know how to look..... of course? this isn't real research it's just fun-n-games.... real research is going to Iran and preaching peace to the Ayatoluhs....
Posted by Griffon on :
Your word: "wetbacks" racism huh, from a Democrat?
Posted by bdgee on :
Once again your assumptions are way off base.
You don't know beans about me and what I am and I don't appreciate your condecending attitude.
Just because I'm just a poor ignurt ol' country boy and you got all them high degrees don't give you leave to be a jerk.
Posted by Griffon on :
"i think hes' beginning o realise that we can see quite abit with our 'puters. if we know how to look..... of course? this isn't real research it's just fun-n-games...."
It's just junk research Glass. You did this for fun and games and it isn't credible. But you know what, it is potential stalking for all intents and purposes. Go ahead and check out Columbus Junction's demographics. You'll see I'm right.
"real research is going to Iran and preaching peace to the Ayatoluhs...."
Yes you prefer to deal in death right? You're a gutsy Democrat I'll give you that.
Posted by bdgee on :
You reported on where you said you were, Morning Sun.
Posted by Griffon on :
Yep I did. And investigating me was an interesting choice to make, since I have always been honest with you. Must be a little paranoia after talking about the CTs huh? But your racist reference to Latinos is revealing about you and why you got so upset at my threads.
Posted by bdgee on :
If you expect us pitifully uneducated po boys to believe what yaw'll says, yaw'll best report what you says ko-rec-lee and pree-sise-lee or not says it a tall, cause as you keep pointin out, we ain't so bright as you is and ain't not got no way of a chanc to unnerstan nohow.
Posted by bond006 on :
After many hours of thought and a lot of shoot from the hip posts buy me and thinking of some of the verygood friends that I and my family have across the border we do visit each other I am publicly with drawing my posts about illegals. I agree with my pasture these folks are economic refugee's and that is the only humane way for me to look at this. I don't care about the politics any more. People cannot not be exspected to starve and 99% of them are good people looking for a chance to live.
I know that a lot of you will disagree I don't care because your post's will fall on deaf ears I have made my mind up and next week I am going to start to help in any way I can. I hope all of you will in your own way in your own communities will start to do something to since we have a lot to do and it seems like the fight is just begun. I have seen this for a lot of years and I can tell you there is a lot of folks who's life is so bad that they risk death to get away from there circumstances where they live which for most of them is death also.
Posted by Griffon on :
Where did I say that? Ever. Go back and look at what I have said. Never said you were poor, dumb, or boys. You sought a scammer, checked my bona fides. I am who I say I am. And you never answered my question bdgee. Should teachers be allowed to indoctrinate their students with a political party preference. Should they incite their students in favor of or in opposition to a candidate or party? I explained pastors who did so would be guilty of malpractice. How bout teachers?
Posted by Griffon on :
"I don't care about the politics any more. People cannot not be exspected to starve and 99% of them are good people looking for a chance to live."
AMEN to that Bond!
Posted by T e x on :
lottsa Hispanics in Iowa...
Posted by Griffon on :
We have alot of meat packing plants that many Latinos work hard in. That's why I am in Columbus Junction at least once a week. But that means we also have some great food! Our Wapello church also has an ESL program! Many originally came to Iowa as migrant workers when I was still in diapers because of Muscatine's melons and Heinz ketchup they had alot of work. Now there are four fortune 500 companies in the area so opportunities are somewhat better for them.
Posted by glassman on :
It's just junk research Glass. You did this for fun and games and it isn't credible. But you know what, it is potential stalking for all intents and purposes.
i didn't do it... somebody else did...
i could care less about your ministry...
you came here thinking you would "play" and you are finding out we are not a bunch of goofy wussies...
you should really be more careful what you say...
you haven't even met Mother Nature yet, i don't think, and you know what they say? It's not nice to mess with Mother Nature....
stalking? LOL.... more of the persecution issues popping up i see...
Posted by Griffon on :
So Glass tell me, what comments did you have to my answer to your query about peace-building?
Posted by Griffon on :
"stalking? LOL.... more of the persecution issues popping up i see..."
Careful, might be a Conspiracy Theory in that.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by Griffon: So Glass tell me, what comments did you have to my answer to your query about peace-building?
you'll have to re-post them
Posted by Griffon on :
"so griff you are the "peace expert" make some peace here...show US how it's done when faced with a seriously antagonistic opponent...."
My response in two posts:
I don't even believe in the view of Revelations that you suggested. As an Apocalypse, Revelation is not written about this present event in time so no amount of "forcing" it to occur can make it happen; it is written about the Roman Empire.
Because it is apocalyptic it has lessons to draw from, most of which are not complementary of the present war and the US role in it. As a post-millenialist, I believe we need to work not for God to destroy the world and re-make it but instead to make the world more like the Kingdom of God represented in Isaiah Swords into plowshares, lions and lambs, children and adders nests, and in Revelation 21:
"See, the home of God is among mortals. He will dwell with them as their God;c they will be his peoples and God himself will be with them; he will wipe every tear from their eyes. Death will be no more; mourning and crying and pain will be no more, for the first things have passed away.”"
That is the society we are working to bring. You just assumed because I am a Christian that your view of eschatology was the one I had. You're lumping me into all that Rapture stuff, which is not Biblical, and a good way to defeat that is to read Barbara Rossing's book, "The Rapture Explained." I believe in the already/not yet tension in the Kingdom reality meaning a partially realized eschatology. In other words, I am: environmentalist, Human Rights centered, believing in the redemption of all creation as an ongoing work.
How does that look? Supporting environmental groups, supporting programs to combat AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa, building wells in Third World countries, Supporting Africa and Mar Elias Universities (Mar Elias is a branch of U of Indianapolis for 9 more years before it may be fully, independently accreditted), building homes in Afghanistan through Habitat for Humanity, building homes in the South and in Appalachia, visiting the sick, home-bound and in prison, and lobbying against genocide and war.
You know this on-going struggle, which I have only maintained in this thread when you were present to respond, is like a scene from an old movie. In Excalibur, King Arthur is riding up to a bridge where Lancelot will let no one pass. I prefer the Monty Python edition of the story but this has the line we both can learn from:
Lancelot to Arthur as they are fighting, (please note I have changed a few words because in our present context they would be considered inflammatory and justly so)"Your anger has unbalanced you, You sir would fight to the death against a person who is not your enemy."
We are metaphorically at that cross-roads, on that bridge. Do we choose to stay in this vicious cycle and let self-righteous indignation win? Or do we choose to take another path, perhaps even the higher ground if you will, around our conflicted opinions of President Carter's actions? Can we see past the perceived slights that are in reality reactions rooted in our deeply held desire for a better world?
Let me allow you to begin defining that new world. And please note I didn't say "new World Order" another image that is not biblical.
I am, or rather already did. Define the sides and parameters of the debate (read my controvercial topics), help the opposing parties to express themselves fully, outline the areas of sharpest difference, allow the sides to express themselves through narrative. Draw new balance of understanding. I took the first step of the second to last phase. Read my above post offering us an alternative through a narrative. Do the same to express yourself. The next step from there will be to arrive at a new balance in the site.
I do appreciate greatly the quotations around that phrase. We both know there are no "peace experts" only peace-builders, peace-keepers, peace-practicioners and peace-destroyers.
Posted by glassman on :
it's fantasy....
and so was 20,ooo leagues under the sea...
we now have subs that can do that....
maybe in 100 more years..
what you are proposing has little resemblemce to our current government...
but? you have done your best to insult US for being critical of that govt....
Posted by Griffon on :
No, I have criticised you for using hate language in reference to a human being.
Posted by glassman on :
Bush...he's earned it... so have you...
Posted by Griffon on :
Now, since UNESCO used this approach to peace in Sierra Leone with success, transfered the approach to Liberia and presented it in the Fall or Winter of last year, I would say it is far from fantasy.
Here's a summary of the work in Sierra Leone. Another one for you to consult is:
Journal For Peace-building and Development, vol 2, number 2 2005
Posted by Griffon on :
"Bush...he's earned it... so have you..."
So you believe hate speech is okay and justifiable. Well, tell me the hate speech that I deserve.
Check out:
Leadership-Conflict: Confronting Controversy with character and grace
Posted by Griffon on :
Here's one for that reference to Latinos made by your friend:
Anti-Racism: Confronting the Sin by Elaine Jenkins
Posted by glassman on :
Now, since UNESCO used this approach to peace in Sierra Leone with success, transfered the approach to Liberia and presented it in the Fall or Winter of last year,I would say it is far from fantasy.
really? what exactly have they used? you aren't making sense... am i supposed to read your peace journal?
according the CIA? The government is slowly reestablishing its authority after the 1991 to 2002 civil war that resulted in tens of thousands of deaths and the displacement of more than 2 million people (about one-third of the population). The last UN peacekeepers withdrew in December 2005, leaving full responsibility for security with domestic forces, but a new civilian UN office remains to support the government. Mounting tensions related to planned 2007 elections, deteriorating political and economic conditions in Guinea, and the tenuous security situation in neighboring Liberia may present challenges to continuing progress in Sierra Leone's stability. https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/sl.html Posted by glassman on :
griffon you are just nutty..
you have earned very insult i gave you.. i don't care whether you call it hate language or not...
you admit you want to be an agent provocateur, you were...
i told you to shove it... i'll say it again. too.. LOL....
Posted by Griffon on :
You are supposed to read the journal I just refered you to as I read you 4 Horsemen" material.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by Griffon: You are supposed to read the journal I just refered you to as I read you 4 Horsemen" material.
huh?
Posted by Griffon on :
And it's a process, a quick fix. That's the mistake we always make and it always draws us into conflict
Posted by Griffon on :
If you would like I can suggest the particular article, but please don't misunderstand, it's not MY journal. It's the Center for Global Peace.
The article name is "Building Blocks for Peace-building Impact Evaluation." Larissa Fast and Reina Neufeldt
Posted by glassman on :
you really are rambling here dude...
maybe you should lay off the peyote...
Posted by Griffon on :
sorry, there should be a "not" between "process" and "a"
Posted by Sunnyside on :
Grif, I'm so tired of reading your crap. I'm sending you a very, very graphic link to a video.
Sit down and start dialog with these folks.
Posted by Griffon on :
No time sunny, but will later.
"I'm so tired of reading your crap"
why? It's not my ideas, it's good liberal friends working for peace.
Posted by glassman on :
griffon... if you truly want to make a difference? you first have to become part of the problem... change only comes from within.... good luck with that...
Posted by Sunnyside on :
And for everyone else, I advise you not to view it.
Posted by Griffon on :
Let's talk about another article:
Evaluating the Link between Conflict and Education by Lynn Davies
And check out the IPCRI website. Israel-Palestine Center for Research and Information:
"if you truly want to make a difference? you first have to become part of the problem... change only comes from within...."
In my limited experience I learned from a 23 year missionary who only left Iran with the Shah's fall. You have to do is be willing to enter in with a heart for service. A servant's heart opens doors. Willingness to be acted upon softens hearts. Consider Mohondas Mahatma Ghandi or Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King. They were willing to absorb the violence of their surroundings, take it unto themselves, and through that they altered the course of history in their respective countries.
It's not hard to immerse ourselves in situations, but we must first be willing to submit to another culture's norms
Posted by Griffon on :
Oh sunny, if it's too good for the others, I must decline. I appreciate the offer, never said we didn't have to stop terrorism, but the ethnic group is not comprised of terrorists. Terrorists have emerged within the ethnic group.
In Ibillin, Lower Galilee, Israel, you can make the 3 mile walk to the bank in Shef'amir (or Shefaram depending on the culture pronouncing it) withdraw 1600 sheckles which at the time was $400 in plain view of several Arab men, walk back to Ibillin in the dark, get invited into homes along the way for coffee/espresso flavored with cardamom and sit with people in perfect safely. The notion that there is a bomb on every street corner and a gun in every house is part of the mytho-poetic historio-graphy we have been exposed to.
Now that is not to say there aren't dangerous people, when I was sitting with Israeli student friends at Tel Aviv, a bomb went off in a cafe down the street. I think it was February 27 or 28, 2005, but you can check that one out. But in both Jewish and Arab sections of Israel, we were safe. And actually, except for the fighting now, the West Bank and Gaza were safe for us. It was sad in Ramallah that we saw little children eating fried rat out of vats of oil.
Immersion is possible Glass, just not in the tourist-y areas. The whole trip including souveniers for everyone, cost me $1500 for three weeks. Arab and Israeli hospitality is genuine.
Posted by glassman on :
he left with the fall of the Shah?? smart dude....
Consider Mohondas Mahatma Ghandi or Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King. i hope things go better for you....
let's talk about teaching religion in public schools here in America....
Posted by Griffon on :
I am opposed to teaching religion in public schools, how bout you?
we agree again
[ July 23, 2006, 21:37: Message edited by: glassman ]
Posted by glassman on :
Oh sunny, if it's too good for the others, I must decline. I appreciate the offer, never said we didn't have to stop terrorism, but the ethnic group is not comprised of terrorists. Terrorists have emerged within the ethnic group.
shove it...
we know that.... you are being condescending again...
Posted by Griffon on :
Now in universities I think it's good to offer comparative studies in religion to foster understanding of the diverse religions, but not to require.
Posted by Griffon on :
"shove it...
we know that.... you are being condescending again..."
yes and she was being patronizing let's call it a draw
Posted by bdgee on :
Egocentric nut......
Posted by glassman on :
actually? she's telling you that you may not be prepared to deal with the real world... i'd say it's friendly advice...
you've already insulted us all here by saying our research methods suck...
Posted by Griffon on :
My problem with religious education in public schools, especially before about 14-15 but after as well, is in the case of young teens heir cognitive processes are in such flux. Besides I honestly think the family has that responsibility and it is not the school's responsibility. It was necessary when the Bible was the only book available around these parts but that ended before my dad's time. He started in a one room schoolhouse in the boonies but then got "city-fied" as grandpa put it in the late 50s when they went to Fredericksburg.
Posted by Griffon on :
"you've already insulted us all here by saying our research methods suck..."
Insulted? We're even on that one too Glass. Neither agrees with the others research methods. But hey it's a free country. At least for the moment.
"Egocentric nut......"
walnut or pecan?
Posted by Griffon on :
Bdgee, when you going to tell me if teachers should be able to indoctrinate students for or against politicians or parties?
Posted by bdgee on :
Not just our research methods and not just him.
His brother (so claimed) issued an announcment that Griffon is so terribly much smarter than we ever might hope to be and had so much more education than it was possible for us dodos to ever even consider that we should simply fall to the grounfd and beg to kiss his feet.
And so it turns out that neither he nor his prother (so claimed) managed to tell us how full of himself he is.
But he showed us how much better educated he is and posted a resume so we could marvel at seminary degrees and feel jealous and be humbled and embarrassed.
We are also assured he has this 180 IQ we can admire.
Hate to let it out, but I know for a fact that IQ scores over about 140 - 140 are statistically impossible to measure, that IQ test do not correspond to intellect, but to conformity, and that there are persons that post here that also (if I am to accept that 180) have comparable scores on IQ test.
Posted by bdgee on :
No one can tell you anything....
Posted by glassman on :
he reminds me of a teenager....
Posted by bdgee on :
Most teenagers have respect for others.
Posted by T e x on :
quote:Originally posted by Griffon: Bdgee, when you going to tell me if teachers should be able to indoctrinate students for or against politicians or parties?
not to put words in Bdgee's mouth, but my take is he is four-square against indoctrinating anybody...anytime. The point is to learn to think... to that end, yes, the mind is *only* a tool
to be used as necessary, not to be "ruled" by...
Posted by bdgee on :
Thanks, Tex......cause ya know I don't feel compelled to play that silly game he does...
Posted by glassman on :
kinda sad...
Topic: Why does the Democratic party support genocide! By griffon
my old party just let those poor people die... we coulda kilt them badguys bfore they killed anyboy...
we have a time machine so we can view the future and judge who is bad and who is good... i don't care if they are the enmey of my enemy they need killin' by griffon
Posted by Griffon on :
"Hate to let it out, but I know for a fact that IQ scores over about 140 - 140 are statistically impossible to measure, that IQ test do not correspond to intellect, but to conformity, and that there are persons that post here that also (if I am to accept that 180) have comparable scores on IQ test."
I am sure other are.
Yeah that degree looks good on the wall, but it means nothing except the credibility to serve humanity.
"not to put words in Bdgee's mouth, but my take is he is four-square against indoctrinating anybody...anytime. The point is to learn to think... to that end, yes, the mind is *only* a tool"
then bdgee and I agree
Posted by bdgee on :
That is the normal way they do things, by issuing loadaded questions and acting hurt and surprised that they don't get an answer.
Then they declare that the only answer their question allows is right because they didn't get an answer. It's about a jr high schoolers logical error, but we have been assured they can't make errors......to highly educated, ya know....
Posted by glassman on :
Whether the Democrats mean it or not, the policy they advance promotes genocide, ethnic cleansing, ethno-centrism, ethno-phobia, sexism, ageism and religio-phobia. Now I am not suggesting such thoughts guide EVERY Democrat, but that is the product of the policies they advocate will get.
At some point the colonial and cold war powers have to assume responsibility for the evil, brutal leaders they equipped for power. But that's enough for now. Let's have a good, fun chat about this absolutely serious issue
geez.... this is grad level stuff?? they sure have lowered standards since i was in..
Posted by bdgee on :
Agree, My A$$, you've been posting over and over your assurance thatyou already knew what I thought (on all topics, too) and it sure wasn't that.
Posted by bdgee on :
It is in seminary schools.
Dont forget, seminary schools have an agenda that amounts to indoctrination.
Ain't the facts that are important and if they lead to a conclusion in contrast to what the agenda requires, change the facts!
Posted by Griffon on :
my old party just let those poor people die... "we coulda kilt them badguys bfore they killed anyboy..."
Glass, again, didn't say that did I? Never advocating killing. It's the commandment thing. You putting words in my mouth to upset me. Read UNESCO's plan, then let's talk about my plan for removing bad leaders. Read the Belgian General's report from Rwanda pleading for 5000 more men he believed would have prevented bloodshed, then we can talk about how to end the reign of brutal leaders.
Posted by glassman on :
Let's have a good, fun chat about this absolutely serious issue
Posted by bdgee on :
snicker
Posted by Griffon on :
"It is in seminary schools. Dont forget, seminary schools have an agenda that amounts to indoctrination. Ain't the facts that are important and if they lead to a conclusion in contrast to what the agenda requires, change the facts!"
Then you have never been to seminary bdgee.
"geez.... this is grad level stuff?? they sure have lowered standards since i was in.."
Glass, it is funny to hear you talk that way. So elitist. We learned about Civil Rights from our teachers and how to apply the lessons of history. We learned that policies have consequences and some of those consequences are affected on human beings here and abroad. When we do not pass an aid package for instance, children in other countries die from lack of food and/or medicine. When a president says we will pull our forces out of one country and we're not going to act to prevent people dying in this other, the effect of that decision is genocide, at least in the case of Rwanda. The decisions of our leaders of the past affect us and our relations with others in the present.
You know these
Posted by glassman on :
Posted by Griffon on :
Aw, that's a cute picture to bait me, but we both know, I've said my piece. You just keep proving it, first with bdgees racial slur earlier and now with a pic. Read the articles I suggested then we can talk.
Better yet, if you need a breather, let's go back to the school issue. What should be taught in our schools?
Posted by Griffon on :
Yes I know you still haven't gotten your mind around Saddam committing evil. 1.4 million dead and you haven't accepted Saddam had to go.
Posted by bdgee on :
"We learned that policies have consequences and some of those consequences are affected on human beings here and abroad."
So tell me, is that not attempting to influence students with a political preference?
I'll just sit back quietly and watch the weaseling, if that's ok.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by Griffon: Yes I know you still haven't gotten your mind around Saddam committing evil. 1.4 million dead and you haven't accepted Saddam had to go.
LOL....
keep telling me you know what i know that you know i know....
Posted by Griffon on :
Nope, that's studying history: the poorly conceived peace at Versailles, had economic consequences that influenced German politics and eventually led to Hitler's power. Nothing political there. It was my application to that early history lesson that helped me see the actions of our government have consequences. So you tell me, is that being indoctrinated into a political preference, or was that an extrapolation from free thinking?
Posted by Griffon on :
good tongue twister Glass
Posted by bdgee on :
Didn't have to wait long quietly, did I?
snicker
Posted by Griffon on :
It never came did it? So tell me why the racial epithet about Latinos earlier?
Posted by glassman on :
i guesss this is what's bugging me...
you wear the collar and call yourself a man of peace and you want ME to go kill whoever you deem as bad....
why do you think you know all those people sadam actually killed didn't need killin'
it wasn't 1.4 mill Iraqi's...
and the Iranians? some of them are still "in need"
clinton dundid a real bad thing in Waco...why ain't he in jail? he oughta be for that IMO....
and? the mean Banker President that took all the cocaine money in Panamamama? he needed removin' too, right? never mind that he lived in a sovereign nation...nope no sovereignity anymore nohowz... we got us a free-for all.. just walk into america and have whatever you want....
so just point out the bad guy mister preacher man... heck i'm good with a rifle.....
Posted by bdgee on :
Yep, it came. Call it spent.
He, Leroy, do that thar be anuthur o' them laoded questions? Sho looks to me that itiz.
May he's be too shoat sighted ta know what one o them ez? What with all thet thar expensev high f'lootin education and he can't see't....my, my, my.
Posted by bdgee on :
I like a side by side 12 guage, myself.
And I'm real good with it too.
I can get by with a rifle, but I might miss the sides of a hole with a pistol if I was standing at the bottom.
Posted by Griffon on :
Hey Glass you're the one advocating killing.
"why do think you know all those people sadam actually killed didn't need killin'"
yeah that's what Hitler said Glass. I know those folks didn't need killing because no one needs killing. Read UNESCO's report in the journal I recommended, then we can talk peace-building. Just as you asked me to "do my homework" last night Glass.
Those folks you mentioned don't need killed, they need long-term incarceration, but killing is wrong.
"Yep, it came. Call it spent.
He, Leroy, do that thar be anuthur o' them laoded questions? Sho looks to me that itiz.
May he's be too shoat sighted ta know what one o them ez? What with all thet thar expensev high f'lootin education and he can't see't....my, my, my."
And you were an educator. That's sad grammar bdgee. Must be how you missed my point.
Posted by Griffon on :
Guys, I couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with wide splatter, double-barrel, sawed-off shotgun at 10 feet and I wouldn't pick up a gun to kill anyone if it were to save myself. But I would and have defended others. Killing people is wrong, killing pheasant, that's tasty.
Posted by glassman on :
as you asked me to "do my homework" last night Glass
but you didn't do it... those folks you mentioned don't need killed, they need long-term incarceration, but killing is wrong.
gitmo for e'm then LOL... forever...
and if i get killed trying to "capture" them under you orders then who's guilty?
jails may be worse than killin' bubba
Posted by T e x on :
"Hey Glass you're the one advocating killing."
ooops...
Griffon, I distinctly remember your advocating "pulling 'em out of their holes."
Do you think we use turkey calls then trap them in a HavaHart contraption?
Posted by Relentless. on :
Griffon, there are some.. in fact many who need to be killed in this world. Hoping for an easy way out never gets one anywhere. There is true evil in this world.. and a warm hug and all the understanding you can muster will not fix it.
Posted by Griffon on :
But I like to fish. Sometimes I even catch em
Posted by bdgee on :
I didn't miss your point. I spotted it way back when you showed up declaring we need to adore you.
Now if you want, I can teach you things about grammer you never imagined. (On second thought, maybe not.....can't get blood out of a turnip.)
Posted by glassman on :
i was a Gunner in the USN... i was ready to follow orders what's your orders preacherman?
Posted by 66inxs on :
time to praise the Lord, and pass the ammunition.
Posted by Griffon on :
"Griffon, I distinctly remember your advocating "pulling 'em out of their holes."
Yes I did and in the next phrase I said for trial or some such thing. When I was a wee lad, I agreed with capital punishment, but as I've aged, I have changed.
That might be a good way to head with this thread: what do you all think of capital punishment?
Posted by 66inxs on :
Skypilot, you'll never, never, never reach the sky. the animals.
Posted by Griffon on :
"Now if you want, I can teach you things about grammer you never imagined."
I'm sure you can bdgee. Was that your subject? I can speak well, write conversationally, but my grammar is down-right comical at times.
"I spotted it way back when you showed up declaring we need to adore you."
Nope, never said that. Don't believe that. I don't mind being used up and thrown away. You're born, you grow, you work, you live, you die and all we are is dust in the wind. Hey that sounds like a song.
Posted by bdgee on :
Better be careful, Griffon, you go to talking against capital puinishment, they'll be asking for you to return you membership card in the George W. for Saint club.
Then they'll stop sending you the weekly talking points directives and you'll be left to finding your own argumnents and witty wordings.
Posted by T e x on :
"Yes I did and in the next phrase I said for trial or some such thing. When I was a wee lad, I agreed with capital punishment, but as I've aged, I have changed."
ok, for trial...
lol, this is *exactly* why folks perceive you as dodgin'. Glass's point was you are willing to have him (us, whatever) do the killing for ya...
Well, I'm gonna go "get 'em" for trial...chances are? will be killin' along the way... eggs? omletes? etc...
killin' some folks is as necessary--if as distasteful--as putting down rabid dogs. No joy in it...just a nasty job to be done.
Posted by Griffon on :
"Better be careful, Griffon, you go to talking against capital puinishment, they'll be asking for you to return you membership card in the George W. for Saint club.
Cute bdgee. But no one who applies for sinthood is ever worthy. And my witty wordings seem to interest you to no end so why get someone else's material.
Posted by bdgee on :
Ok, ok, so those aren't your precise words.
And ok, it was your brother that specified that we were obliged to kiss your feet and tell you how much we need your brilliant mind to tell us poor dummies how to think.
But you sure did accept it whole heartedly as a fact and and start preaching how worthy you are.
Now, how many years did it take you to get that hi high degree that is clearly out of reach of us dodos?
Posted by bdgee on :
No, sorry, you failed that test. i did not say anything you have said is original or witty. I said that AFTER your supply is removed.....
Posted by Griffon on :
"ok, for trial..."
Tex I like the way you put it here:
"Well, I'm gonna go "get 'em" for trial...chances are? will be killin' along the way... eggs? omletes? etc... killin' some folks is as necessary--if as distasteful--as putting down rabid dogs. No joy in it...just a nasty job to be done."
My only point of contention is that it is too quick. Let me tell you for instance what I THINK (not know) should be done when we catch terrorists:
They should go to trial immediately and if found guilty they should be put in a prison where they are told every hour, you are sitting here and everyone knows you failed in your mission; the organization you fought for is losing and you are anonymous enjoying a peaceful, non-violent incarceration while your cause goes without your help. You will sit and rot, no martyrdom, no however many young women. Just an anonymous prisoner that will live long while his organization dies off heroically. Every day as long as they live.
I do not believe in killing as I said, and I do not leave anyone to do the killing.
Posted by 66inxs on :
geez griffon, if the terrorists captured you, do you think that they would spend the time that it takes to have an intellectual battle of wits with you? no, they would simply behead you.
Posted by bdgee on :
"Let me tell you for instance what I THINK (not know) should be done when we catch terrorists:
They should go to trial immediately and if found guilty they should be put in a prison...."
Yeah, so why is it, then, that when we said exactly that, you and your brother (so claimed) declared it to be "Bush bashing"?
Posted by T e x on :
"be done when we catch terrorists"
lolololissimo...
have you ever even been in a serious fist fight?
weee... when we "catch" terrorists....
Grif? seriously suggest you back-off and re-approach...
Posted by Griffon on :
"Now, how many years did it take you to get that hi high degree that is clearly out of reach of us dodos?"
Never said any of this either. Contrary to your opinion, I respect anyone who posts on here. To share your personal beliefs is a brave thing.
"But you sure did accept it whole heartedly as a fact and and start preaching how worthy you are."
Didn't do this either bdgee. I engaged in conversation as you all have done. I explained my credentials because I have worked hard to amass 200+ undergrad and 110 graduate credits. That you presume I think I'm superior based upon my studies is incorrect. A person is not made by intelligence. A person is not made by party. A person is not made by religion. But we are all products of these and more influences. Would you not agree?
Posted by Griffon on :
"have you ever even been in a serious fist fight?"
I have the knife scar to prove that yes. I also have the bent cross from being hit with a gun.
Posted by bdgee on :
Yeah ya did.
And I could chase down the post and prove it, but I'm simply too lazy.
Posted by T e x on :
"too quick"
ya...you stumbled onto that one... it *does* happen too quick...
suddenly, you're bud's head is gone, or your own leg... etc...
That's what I was pointing out earlier: you don't just simply go out with duck decoys, a favorite dog, a nice thermos and a coupla sandwiches...
and with that...I can't post here, anymore, tonight...
good luck, all
Posted by Griffon on :
"Yeah, so why is it, then, that when we said exactly that, you and your brother (so claimed) declared it to be "Bush bashing"?"
Because you put in the context of his intellect. You said it in the context of Bush being a heinous person. Imagine if you were spoken about in such a manner and one of your relatives saw the ridicule you received.
You assumed I was opposed to trial for terrorists, why do you think I said I oppose GITMO? For that matter, why do you think I wanted to buy Saddam off into exile? We would not even necessarily be in Iraq now, if we had tried that avenue. All violence gets is more violence, a quick victory and uneasy peace because of bitter feelings that erupt as soon as possible.
Posted by Griffon on :
Sorry Tex if I gave offense
Posted by Griffon on :
"Yeah ya did. And I could chase down the post and prove it, but I'm simply too lazy."
Nope, never happened. Bdgee I simply do not say that type of stuff. That may be what you inferred from my words but that's not what I ever said or meant.
Posted by john wayne on :
So called brother Bdgee? Why on earth would we feel the need to lie about that? I'm sure if you saw us you'd figure it out. Both bald as cue balls!
Posted by 66inxs on :
Griffon said: All violence gets is more violence, a quick victory and uneasy peace because of bitter feelings that erupt as soon as possible.
with that said, do you think you could use your influence with the Almighty to help some of us poor slobs pick out a runner or a gapper tomorrow am? you can find out the definitions to these terms in the general investment topics if necessary. thanks in advance.
Posted by Griffon on :
I will do so though I am utterly ignorant about investment terms. My brother can fill me in. Hey a very dear friend lives in Missouri, you have a great state
Posted by Griffon on :
"geez griffon, if the terrorists captured you, do you think that they would spend the time that it takes to have an intellectual battle of wits with you? no, they would simply behead you."
Sorry I missed this earlier, I agree, but as we fight them, and as some are killed, let's be sure not to confuse Arabs with terrorists. It is one of the realities of war we all know about: collateral damage is the colloquial expression, but human beings are the bitter reality.
Posted by 66inxs on :
thanks Griffon. Missouri is not much but it grows on you after a while. it sure beats some of the big cities i have lived in. good luck to you in your studies. people in iowa have always been nice to me. iowa is a nice place too but it gets too cold there imho. see you around the board. allstocks is a great site, but we all have our moments !
Posted by Griffon on :
yes we do. You have a good week and I hope the temps moderate for you all.
Posted by john wayne on :
Glassman-
kinda sad...
Topic: Why does the Democratic party support genocide! By griffon
my old party just let those poor people die... we coulda kilt them badguys bfore they killed anyboy...
we have a time machine so we can view the future and judge who is bad and who is good... i don't care if they are the enmey of my enemy they need killin' by griffon
I don't understand what you are saying/implying? Are you saying my brother said this stuff or that's what he meant? Specifically the time machine and the killin' lines are stumping me. I see that you put by griffon" at the bottom of this..... are you saying he said that?
Can you explain to me what you meant by this?
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Bdgee For once I have to agree with you. I got a little carried away about my brother and in my excitement, layed it on a little too thick. I am proud of my brother, as well as my father, who I still consider to be my hero. Hell m proud of my whole family. I'm kind of like the little league dad that is as full of crap as everybody else thinking his son will play in the majors and telling everybody that'll listen. So please forgive me for laying it on a little thick. I can't help but feel I bear most of the responsibility for some of the disagreements that have ensued. Agreeing with Bdgee.... God that hurt LOL.
Posted by bdgee on :
quote:Originally posted by Griffon: "Yeah ya did. And I could chase down the post and prove it, but I'm simply too lazy."
Nope, never happened. Bdgee I simply do not say that type of stuff. That may be what you inferred from my words but that's not what I ever said or meant.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
