The Terrorist of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

moghrabi

House Member
May 25, 2004
4,508
4
38
Canada
My first reaction to George W. Bush’s all-too-obvious politicizing of the memories of September 11, 2001, in his latest lame attempt to justify his illegal and immoral war in Iraq, was anger.

Then anger gave way to sadness.

Sadness over a morality-challenged politician’s use of the deaths of 3,000 plus Americans for his own political gain.

And even more sadness because there are still people out there stupid enough to fall for this kind of crap.

Bush has pulled this stunt before. He keeps 9/11 in his bag of tricks as a last-ditch effort to save his corrupt political hide when things go bad. And, according to polls, things are bad. An increasing majority of Americans no longer buy his lies about Iraq and oppose the war along with growing numbers who finally realize the President of the United States is a liar who cannot be trusted.

Reality, however, will not stop the dwindling numbers of Bushites from defending their failed leader to the end – and it is that maniacal devotion to Bush that may signal the end to America as we know it.

Sometimes it is difficult to decide who to fear the most – the ethically-bankrupt President whose madness drives what was once the greatest country on earth closer and closer to ruin or the blind, brain-dead lemmings who continue to follow him into the abyss.

In more normal times we might be able to dismiss Bush’s followers as just another gaggle of misguided political miscreants who bet on the wrong horse and now try to justify that mistake.

But these are not normal times and the wild-eyed fanatics who continue to buy this charlatan’s snake oil are, in too many ways, as dangerous as Bush himself.

Bush and his klavern of crooks, con-men and thieves have turned this nation into a monster that threatens world peace, an arrogant bomb-throwing bully who poses a far-greater danger than any Islam-spouting lunatic with a turban.

When you get past the hyperbole and sound bite rants of the rabid right, you are left with one sad fact – the United States of America, a nation that once prided itself in never, ever, being the aggressor in a conflict, invaded another nation on false pretenses, a nation that posed no immediate threat to us or our way of life.

It is no longer Osama bin Laden and his fanatical followers who pose the greatest threat to the future of this country. It is George W. Bush and his equally-fanatical, zoned-out legions who buy into his destructive, anti-American actions.

Osama’s still at large and still planning ways to attack this country but he remains at large because Bush ordered the military to all-but-abandon the search for the Al Qaeda leader and divert resources to an ill-conceived, ill-planned and ill-executed illegal invasion of Iraq.

Now the Army admits it is planning for “at least” four more years in Iraq as the death toll of young American men and women races headlong towards 2,000.

So a desperate George W. Bush goes to the well once more, invoking the memories of September 11, 2001 to try and save his political skin.

We can hope, of course, that this blatant political opportunism won’t work. We can hope that Americans will finally see through the sham that is Bush and the fanatics who follow him.

We can hope that Americans recognize that more than one terrorist seeks to destroy America and that the most dangerous terrorist of all lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
 

annabattler

Electoral Member
Jun 3, 2005
264
2
18
RE: The Terrorist of 1600

I think Americans had better start getting very noisy,with their opposition to Bush.
He has three years left to wreak even more havoc...and will continue to do so,unless there is a sustained public outroar.
 

Haggis McBagpipe

Walks on Forum Water
Jun 11, 2004
5,085
7
38
Victoria, B.C.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
We get bombed, and we say it's all our own fault.

Schools refuse to teach history that risks making pupils proud, and use it instead as a means of instilling liberal guilt.

The government and the BBC gush over 'the other,' but recoil at the merest hint of British culture.

The only thing we are licensed to be proud of is London's internationalism — in other words, that there is little British left about it."


When leading British intellectuals, politicians and journalists find justifications for terrorism abroad, and explain suicide bombings in Jerusalem or Baghdad as only the revenge of the oppressed against their oppressors, why should they be shocked when bombs go off in the London subway, too?



Amid the dismal gray slog that has become official British education, these aimless young men encounter a creed to die for — and kill for.

No wonder they fall for it.

Here is a militant belief that gives them a sense of importance, burnishes their ethnic pride and sends them forth to take revenge for every wrong they can imagine.


All that's needed is a few fellow True Believers with whom to talk, murmur, seethe and plan, and a little direction from the kind of agitators who are careful never to risk their own lives . . . and the results can be murder.


There is a lesson here, and not just for the British.
 

missile

House Member
Dec 1, 2004
4,846
17
38
Saint John N.B.
With the happy prospect of at least 4 more years of occupying Iraq,at last you can top the body bag count of Vietnam. This will end the same waytoo, with the Americans hauling ass at warp speed.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
These aimless young men encounter a creed to die for — and kill for.

No wonder they fall for it.

Here is a militant belief that gives them a sense of importance, burnishes their ethnic pride and sends them forth to take revenge for every wrong they can imagine.
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
August 22, 2005

"We consider that it would be counter-productive and dangerous to use force, the serious consequences of which would be barely predictable." warning from the Russian Foreign Ministry to the Bush Administration about prospective plans to attack Iran


There's only one thing that Americans need to remember when the read about the standoff between the Bush administration and Iran. There is no evidence whatsoever that Iran has a nuclear weapons program. But, don't take my word for it. That is the conclusion of Mohammed El Baradei, the chief of the UN's watchdog agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency; the most respected nuclear investigative agency in the world today.
After conducting 2 years of the most rigorous "go anywhere, see anything" investigations, the agency gave Iran a clean bill of health.
No nukes! Not now, not ever!
We should recall that it was the IAEA headed by El Baradei that warned the US that Saddam did not have a nuclear weapons program, and tried to save the Bush administration the embarrassment of attacking an unarmed country. That didn't work. As we know now the intelligence was "fixed" to fit the policy, and the policy was aggression.
With that tragedy in mind, we should not allow ourselves to be duped by the propaganda that passes as news in the US. We must continue to remind ourselves over and over again; there is no evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapons program.
None, Nada, Zippo!
This is not a detail that you should expect to see in the western media. Of the hundreds of articles I've combed through on Iran only 1% to 2% even casually mention this salient fact. The reasons for this are fairly obvious to those who watched the media carefully build the case for war with Iraq based entirely on false information. We don't need to go over that appalling story here. We simply need to recognize that the media to large extent has been successfully "embedded" into the political establishment and operates in the interests of ownership. If the elites who control our "privately" owned media want war, you can bet that there will be a torrent of cleverly-written articles supporting that effort.
That, in fact, is what is happening with Iran today.
Two major stories appeared this week connecting Iran to the IED (roadside bombs) that are killing American servicemen in Iraq. One story was in Time magazine by Michael Ware ( http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,1093747,00.
html ) and seemed reasonably credible except that none of the information could be reliably proved.
Is this simply more disinformation used to pave the way for war?
It certainly merges nicely with Rumsfeld's claims that Iran is involved in the insurgency, but it, in many respects, it completely defies logic.
Why would Iranian Shi'ites support Sunnis in their quest to retake power?
Iran already has "their guy" al Jaffari in the top spot so why rock the boat?
This question is never seriously addressed in either article, which leads us to suspect that there may be ulterior motives.

The Bush Administration has never backed away from its original goal of "regime change" in Iran, so we must assume that the reports of ethnic disturbances in Iran's Ahwaz province are probably instigated by either the CIA or surrogates in the various Iranian dissident groups acting on behalf of the Bush administration. The Iranian government claims to have captured suspects of these regional uprisings and have said that they have solid proof that they are supported by the US.
The most prominent of these groups is the Mujahidin Klaq (MEK) a group that is still on the US State Depts. list of terrorist organizations even though they receive direct funding and support from the US government.
According to Seymour Hersh the MEK and other organizations have been sent back into Iran to foment revolution or carry out covert operations.
Certainly no one is surprised by this given the administration's open hostility towards the current Islamic regime. The fact that the "ethnic strife" is taking place in oil-rich Ahwaz province, however, is interesting. We can be reasonably certain that the US does not plan to occupy all of Iran if there is a war.
Can we be equally certain that the administration strategy isn't simply to annex the primary oil producing region and bomb the main chemical, biological and conventional weapons sites across the country at the same time?
That way, the US would control the oil, eliminate Iran as a regional-military rival to Israel, and avoid the pitfalls of a massive occupation.
Game; Set; Match.

There are potential hazards to Washington's prospective plan. For one thing, Iran has violated none of its agreements under the current NPT (Nuclear Nonproliferation treaty) so, there is no reason for the IAEA to refer the case to the UN Security Council and no cause for punitive action. Iran is allowed to convert uranium under the NPT if it is carefully monitored by the watchdog agency and if it is used strictly for peaceful purposes. The conversion process does not produce weapons-grade enriched uranium, which can be used in nuclear weapons, but a milder form that can be used in nuclear power plants. If there are any violations to this regimen, the IAEA is required to report them immediately to the Security Council.
So, we can see that the US is just ratcheting up the pressure in the media to make it appear as though the EU supports the hard-line policies of the Bush administration and is willing to support their position before the UNSC.
The EU, of course, is simply being bullied by the administration and trying to avoid the impending conflict.

Another possible drawback to the Bush strategy is the sudden and unexpected insertion of Russia into the standoff. Last week Russia cautioned the US against considering the use of force with Iran. The Russian foreign ministry issued a statement saying, "We consider that it would be counter-productive and dangerous to use force, the serious consequences of which would be barely predictable."
Russia's statement was predictably oblique, but the message is clear; Russia will not allow Iran to go the way of Iraq. Not surprisingly, this veiled-threat of Russian retaliation did not appear in any newspaper in the United States. It simply wouldn't due to have the American public know that the administration was risking nuclear holocaust to further its interests in the region.

When I wrote my first article on this topic 2 weeks ago ("Why Iran will lead to World War 3": http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m14453 ) very few readers took the possibility seriously. Since then, the more-insightful political analyst Paul Craig Roberts added his voice to the fray with his article "Get Ready for WW 3". This new statement from the Russian foreign ministry should demonstrate that we may be closer to the brink then anyone had imagined.
The UN and the EU need to convene meetings immediately on the likelihood of an American attack on Iran and issue an unambiguous statement that any military action taken on the part of the United States or Israel without Security Council approval will be taken as a direct assault on the rest of the international community an a tacit declaration of world war. This is no time for equivocating or backpedaling. World leaders need to rise to the occasion and perform their duties. As we know from Iraq, if Washington is planning for war, it won't be easily deterred.


the terrorist group/cult in washington might just start another MAJOR world war......and the possibility of this is REAL. Never underestimate a madman who is a terrorist disguised as US president. And THIS terrorist group (washington style) is the most dangerous one in history of this planet. They already HAVE WMD, they already HAVE the means to cause MORE terror on this planet. .......and continue to use "fear tactics" (aka terror) on their own population. Each time they use the word "security" , "threat" "alert" they are brainwashing (or trying to) a nation into following their own dogma.......and that is how they "control " their own people..........while the people themselves have no real choice but to follow and oblige. Terrorism comes in all forms.........and we are seeing it daily from washington. .......and the media is a happy partner in this phenomena. ( IMHO)....

(they make former dictators, destructive leaders look like penny anti small time criminals in comparison).
 

peapod

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2004
10,745
0
36
pumpkin pie bungalow
Why don't you ask how it got to be the bomb and the vest in the first place jimmy. It did not just appear outta no where. The more lies and real motives that come to light, the more one can see just how it got to this. Your government created this, and it did not happen overnight. Now stand up and start demanding that bush and co are tossed into the streets where they belong.
 

Gertrood

New Member
Jul 19, 2005
25
0
1
Oh how we pine for the good old days when Saddam Hussein was in power. His brutality to his own people filled us with pride. We never mentioned it, just grinned and wished him well.
As for the Taliban well women are pieces of crap anyway.
Why should we worry about them?
Michael Moore for GG, Move over Missus Jean.
 

no1important

Time Out
Jan 9, 2003
4,125
0
36
56
Vancouver
members.shaw.ca
RE: The Terrorist of 1600

Interesting Article

A Pre-Hearing Conference of the Application to review the December 6/04 decision blocking criminal charges against George Bush is scheduled for 10:00 am, Thursday, August 25th, 2005, at B.C. Supreme Court, 800 Smithe Street, Vancouver, B.C.

The Attorney General wants to seal the courtroom at the pre-hearing
conference.LAW says Canadians have the right to be there.

On November 30 2004 Gail Davidson, co-chair of Lawyers against the War
LAW), filed an Information in the Provincial Court of B.C. charging
George W. Bush as President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces with torture.

A Legal Update
Prosecuting Bush in Canada for Torture
 

Vanni Fucci

Senate Member
Dec 26, 2004
5,239
17
38
8th Circle, 7th Bolgia
the-brights.net
Re: RE: The Terrorist of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

Gertrood said:
Oh how we pine for the good old days when Saddam Hussein was in power. His brutality to his own people filled us with pride. We never mentioned it, just grinned and wished him well.
As for the Taliban well women are pieces of crap anyway.
Why should we worry about them?
Michael Moore for GG, Move over Missus Jean.

Kind of a moron aren't ya... :roll:
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
Re: RE: The Terrorist of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

Gertrood said:
Oh how we pine for the good old days when Saddam Hussein was in power. His brutality to his own people filled us with pride. We never mentioned it, just grinned and wished him well.
As for the Taliban well women are pieces of crap anyway.
Why should we worry about them?
Michael Moore for GG, Move over Missus Jean.
:roll: :roll:


like SH rule really bothered people like you , until bush decided he wanted the Iraqi oil and and puppet gov't place so he could get a stronger toe hold in the ME.

like "you" really give a shit about how the Iraqis feel , how they are struggling now, and how they are dealing with the catastrophic changes the bush regime has INSISTED on giving them , while killing thousands of them. All ,people like you do is spew the party line ........regurgitate the same lines as the bush cabal does ........simple three or four word statements repeated over and over until the susceptible ......are brainwashed for good.

an original thought /idea might be a nice change from the bush /war supporters ...... who seem to know no better than to repeat after bush.......like they are programmed.

interesting to see that all of bush's repetative verbal conduct has not be wasted. Some bought into it hook ,line and sinker.-----and with that .....stopped THINKING........and let bush do their thinking for them.

Just watched another segment about how the US actions and attitude , ......uninformed , as they are, continues to stoke the anger at the US.......to the point that the US .....Americans will never be safe...........unless THEY change their ways.

main point is: Don't pretend to care about Iraqi leadership, when you don't give a shit about their lives. and can happily go on killing, maiming and torturing them. And you call yourself a "civilized " nation????? Get real.

The terrorist , you all harbor in the whitehouse ( address in title of this thread)......is worse than SH could ever dream of being. He is more cunning, deceitful, abusive, manipulative, .........all the traits of a cult leader........where the susceptible fall into following. AND the kicker is, he has the WMD in his possession......to use as his maniacal desires will take him. He will find a way to 'justify " the most insane act, and the sheeple will believe his every lying word.......while the anger/threat to the US grows exponentially.
 

JomZ

Electoral Member
Aug 18, 2005
273
0
16
Reentering the Fray at CC.net
You know what will be just hysterical, is the day (say a century from now, if there is one) when they go to write the history books(or computer software) on the history of the World at this time. I don't think they will ever understand, it sad really.

~J
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
Ocean Breeze, if others use your logic to destroy muslim churches, destroy children lining up for a piece of candy, blowing up anything in its path all in the name of fighting the Great Satan BushAmerika then what makes them any better ?

What makes them any better? And who should support either side? You ? By your absence of criticism ? You by your selectivity ?


And if Amerika ceases and desists to do that which you so valiantly protest daily, and if all this outrage stops, can we possibly believe that the terrorism industry will stop?

Will not the terrorism industry look for another cause to keep its self thriving ?

So you say the state terrorism is worse?

In this day and age, you would be hard put to prove that anymore.

Lots of questions for you there.

For the sake of progress in this conversation, I admit into evidence all you have said of Bush Amerika.

Now what of these questions ?