President Bush Issues 48 Hr. Ultimatum....Please Pray For Our Soldiers

[rockstar]

You know who I blame for all of this?

Bud Selig.

I'm telling you, if GWB had only become the baseball commissioner instead of President! It was a job he wanted, was qualified for, and would have been GREAT at!!



Support F.O.B.B.

[Anne FS]

Thanks, bgoosewood. And that was just off the top of my head in a caffeine-fueled flurry of typing.

[Erin]

LOL, rockstar.

OK, here is my war-related thought of the day. I'm not sure why it is that both the media and the administration are getting so worked up over the fact that this war will probably take months, not weeks or days. The media is treating it like a huge revelation that the Iraqis are actually fighting back, and that we didn't blow through Baghdad already. And the administration is all pissy at them for continuing to ask about it.

Uh, is this the first time that war has not gone exactly as planned? I don't really see what the big deal is.

[Adelita]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Erin:
LOL, rockstar.

OK, here is my war-related thought of the day. I'm not sure why it is that both the media and the administration are getting so worked up over the fact that this war will probably take months, not weeks or days. The media is treating it like a huge revelation that the Iraqis are actually fighting back, and that we didn't blow through Baghdad already. And the administration is all pissy at them for continuing to ask about it.

Uh, is this the first time that war has not gone exactly as planned? I don't really see what the big deal is. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly!! what did they expect, the Iraqis to just roll over and surrender in a few days?

And our Administration is yelling about how the Iraqis treat and kill POWs. It's a violation of the laws of war. Hello?? laws of war? like they are even concerned about following any laws of war!! This is IRAQ we're talking about here....

&gt;^.,.^&lt;
~~Linda

"In the practice of tolerance, one's enemy is the best teacher."- Dalai Lama

[lilblackhorse]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Erin:
LOL, rockstar.

OK, here is my war-related thought of the day. I'm not sure why it is that both the media and the administration are getting so worked up over the fact that this war will probably take months, not weeks or days. The media is treating it like a huge revelation that the Iraqis are actually fighting back, and that we didn't blow through Baghdad already. And the administration is all pissy at them for continuing to ask about it.

Uh, is this the first time that war has not gone exactly as planned? I don't really see what the big deal is. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Saw on the Today show this morning they were discussing with some general who is the nbc strategist fellow....they were discussing why the Iraqies aren't ecstatic to see us. DUH....granted the guy (SH) is a scum, shooting his own people who are trying to get relief or leave Bosra, but hellooooo......when did Dubya think this thing was going to be fixed in a few days???

Npr said yesterday that we are woefully short of troops, and wonder of wonders, those Iraqies are actually fighting us more than we had thought! So now , instead of having the man power to do the job right from the get go, we have to have these poor troops hunkering down outside baghdad to await more help.

npr also stated that GW changed the wording of his speech which took out something to the effect of "This war is going exactly to schedule"...and said something else more like "Things are progressing as we had hoped". Funny how stuff like wars just don't always go on a timeline, eh?

On the baseball thing, I had no idea that's was georgie had wanted.....damn, it would have been a good gig for him. A bunch of overpaid, not terribly bright good old boys playing games. I'd feel a lot better having him there orchestrating a game than a war.......

Elippses Users Clique........
Co-Founder Occularly Challenged Equine Support Group

[mbp]

dcm -

People are going to dislike politicians. Goshalmighty years later, you still get folks like Rush to absolutely froth at the mouth over Clinton in a very personal way. Goes with being a politician.

Without taking a personal issue on whether anyone is smart or dumb, it seems very very clear that the administration doesn't want to look at a complex issue as that - instead they want to reduce it to a platitude and jingoism. This is always going to make those who disagree angry, bc no matter how angry they are that that someone reasonably considers their points and still disagrees, when their arguments are not even heard and discussed, they get even more p*ssed.

Thank you SimpsonMat for the estate tax link. I work in this area every day and it makes me ill that you have cabbies making 8/hour who will tell you they are worried about the estate tax. And the "family business" (not just family farms - which, btw, get some significant tax breaks under the gift and estate tax sections and under property tax assessments in most places) failure issues typically have little to do with estate tax. Studies in other countries with no estate tax show the same second generation family business failure rates - there is a lot more to business succession success than a low or nonexistant tax rate. Sure the estate tax needs work - but spare the tears - only an extremely small percent of the population ever has to worry about the estate tax. Lending policies and shifting govt programs have much more affect on family farm failure rates.

Personally, I am amazed at how willing so many people (for example, Anne here) have been to support Bush even when they do not like his policies. (He does have about a 70% or so approval rating - I mean, how much hate do you think that reflects?)I do see LOTS of vehement dislike of policies, and some jabs at his intellect, but I have not seen anything that comes close to the robustly enjoyed hatred aimed at Clinton.

Keep in mind that we did not "just" have a situation where the current President did not get the popular vote. We also had a situation where a State Supreme Court wanted to have further recounts done to determine how its own state electoral college votes would be handled - a STATE LAW matter - and you had the US Supreme Court, which included Bush's father's appointees and cronies, who prevented that State Supreme Court from handling this uniquely state law matter. 5-4 This, in a setting, where the state at issue was governed by Bush's brother. My gosh, RUSSIA sent observers to the last Fla elections bc this whole thing looked so bad. Is it hard to see that folks might be a little miffed? Think about it - how high do we hold our heads when RUSSIA is sending observers to try to keep OUR elections on the up and up.

But where do you get the "hatred" for him? If people think the Patriot Act II is a travesty, that the failure to be involved in the Kyoto accord is tragic, that the war is misguided, and that people and States governments are spiralling into poverty while the Federal govt worries about just how many dollars (from deficit spending - you know, like writing bad checks except they will not have to be the ones to cover it) it can transfer to the wealthiest sectors; if people think the government has deliberately failed to explore the complexities of the situation in the middle east and has entered into a course that was predetermined to suit a personal need; surely those are things people can have a strong opinion about without being accused of just "hating" the president and being mean?

GWB did lie several times about the drunk driving. I don't know what you mean when you say he never lied about it. When someone tells you that this is not correct, it does not mean they hate the man, but gosh. We brough the country to a halt to get the real story on Monica - at least let's acknowledge that the drunk driving incidents were lied about. This kind of "covering up" for him is part of what makes people angry.

I don't hate the man. I distrust him immensely, not because I necessarily attribute horribly bad motives, but bc he seems to be acting like an absolutist, like someone who does not see why he should even have to bother to consider any view but his own. His policies sadden and frighten me.

I guess my question is why, when you are faced with these very real policy issues, you seem to find it easier to think that people are actually just going around hating someone who is conservative? What makes all these things personal to you?

BTW - I remember when being conservative used to include things like wanting a balanced budget - wanting to control govt spending, wanting to get the federal govt and federal courts out of state matters and state law.


*****An aside - even the link provided by SimpsonMat isn't totally accurate - it says the current exemption is 675,00 net /perperson 1.35mill/couple - it is actually 1mill/per person and 2mill/couple, scheduled to go to 1.5mill/person 3mill/couple in 2004(this is net after liabilities and costs and does not for Fed purposes typically include life ins proceeds) and be phased out in 2010 - only to come back in 2011 as currently scheduled. So, if you have a large estate, the tax laws don't change, and lots of family members offer you strange tasting food on 12-31-2010, be worried!)

[This message was edited by mbp on Mar. 28, 2003 at 03:48 PM.]

[Adelita]

I have stayed away from this thread because I am very against our administration and their war. Yes, I agree that Saddam has to go.

I think, personally, we are being fed untruths about what is really happening over there. I think our government is out to destroy. I also think it's quite a coincidence that the moment the US is accused of a bombing which kills civilians, the admin says "IRAQ PLANTED IT." Uh...yeah. Iraq doesn't even have any planes flying in this war, the bombing the other day was full of witnesses who saw/heard a plane that dropped those bombs. Hmmmm.

http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm is another site, not for the weak of stomach.

Below is one of many articles I have found that sums up how I feel to a T:


Wednesday’s atrocity in a Baghdad working class neighborhood has cast a grisly light on the real character of the US-British invasion. The final death toll from two US missiles that tore apart the Abu Taleb Street market in the suburb of Al Shaab is expected to approach 30.

Notwithstanding the predictable claims by the Pentagon, uncritically regurgitated by the Western media, that the bombing was either an Iraqi military attack on its own people or a US “mistake,” the civilian carnage is the direct and inevitable result of the war that the Bush administration has embarked upon.

As has been discussed in ruling circles in Washington and London for months, the subjugation of Iraq and the conquest of Baghdad—a sprawling city of 5 million people the size of Los Angeles or Toronto—will require the flattening of poor suburbs, the occupation of residential areas and the terrorizing of the population.

Two cruise missiles struck the heavily populated and impoverished Al Shaab area at midday, a time when Abu Taleb Street was at its busiest. Iraqi officials said 14 people were killed, but other reports said at least 20 people perished immediately, with 30 others injured, some badly.

It was the worst single reported instance of civilian deaths since the aerial assault by B-52 bombers, F-17 jet fighters and cruise missiles began a week earlier. The area that was hit was one of Baghdad’s poorest—consisting of overcrowded apartments, rundown shops and cheap restaurants.

Associated Press Television News video showed a large crater in the street, a smoldering building, demolished cars, and bodies wrapped in plastic sheeting in the back of a pickup truck. Flames could be seen rising above the burning shops. Men with buckets doused the wreckage of blackened automobiles, while women grabbed the hands of children and ran from the scene.

The streets were flooded after water pipes ruptured. Streetlights toppled over, trees were uprooted and some cars were overturned. At least half of the 17 damaged cars were completely gutted by fire, with only charred metal skeletons left. Other cars had their wheels blown off by the force of the explosion, while flying shrapnel damaged nearby apartments.

Hundreds of people milled around on the street in front of the gutted market. Some of them shook their fists in anger. “This is barbarian!” shouted Adnan Saleh Barseem. “It’s proof that their aggression is collapsing.”

Among the victims were 21 young people in a minibus. As dead and horribly burned survivors were brought into Al Kindi hospital, Tomma Hussein, a casualty ward doctor, said: “This enemy wants to kill all of us.”

These comments reveal not only the deepening outrage of ordinary Iraqi people, but an understanding that the bombing is part of a new and deliberate pattern following the collapse of Pentagon predictions that the Iraqi regime would quickly surrender or disintegrate.


Carnage and hostility

A number of Western correspondents recorded the carnage, and the hostility, in Al Shaab. Robert Fisk, writing in the British Independent, described the scene as “an outrage, an obscenity.” He wrote: “The severed hand on the metal door, the swamp of blood and mud across the road, the human brains inside a garage, the incinerated, skeletal remains of an Iraqi mother and her three small children in their still-smouldering car...

“Abu Hassan and Malek Hammoud were preparing lunch at the Nasser Restaurant on the north side of Abu Taleb St. The missile or bomb that killed them landed next to the westbound road, its blast tearing away the front of the cafe and cutting the two men—the first 48, the second only 18—to pieces. A fellow worker led me through the rubble. ‘This is all that is left of them now,’ he said, holding an oven pan dripping with blood.

“At least 15 cars burst into flames, burning many of their occupants to death. Several men tore desperately at the doors of another flame-shrouded car in the centre of the street which had been tipped upside down by the same missile. They were forced to watch helplessly as the woman and her three children inside were cremated alive in front of them. The second missile or bomb hit neatly on the eastbound road, sending shards of metal into three men standing outside a concrete apartment block.”

Reporting for the Canadian National Post, Patrick Graham (the son of Canada’s Foreign Minister Bill Graham), described local people finding hands and other body parts of victims strewn across the area and waving them in the air in furious protests. Graham called the results of the bombing “gruesome” and quoted a local resident’s response:

“‘People inside the cars were melted,’ says Thamer Al Mutalib, his hands still covered in soot from pulling bodies from the wreckage... ‘It was to scare people and force them to give up,’ said Thamer... ‘This is terrorism. We’re not military people—we’re just shop owners’.”

British Guardian correspondent Suzanne Goldenberg reported that an oil tanker had parked in the area moments before the bombing. “Five cars were cabonized, and flames licked the first-floor windows of buildings.” A local man, Hisham Madloul, told her: “There were three families in the building upstairs and many children. We have committed no sin. We are not guilty. Why are they doing this? We are innocent people? What does Bush want?”


Pentagon lies

In his dispatch, Fisk noted that he had checked the neighborhood for military targets but found none. “Iraqis said there was a military encampment just over a kilometre from the street, though I couldn’t find it. Others talked about a firefighters’ headquarters, but that can hardly be described as a military target.”

Nonetheless, the US Central Command said in a statement that US aircraft used “precision-guided weapons” to target Iraqi missiles and launchers “placed within a civilian residential area” and that “most of the missiles were positioned less than 300 feet from homes.”

The Pentagon sought to blame Saddam Hussein’s government for the carnage, one way or another. “A full assessment of the operation is ongoing,” the statement said. “In some cases, such damage is unavoidable when the (Iraqi) regime places military weapons near civilian areas.”

Despite stating that the US had launched more than 600 Tomahawk missiles and 4,300 precision-guided weapons in six days, Major-General Stanley McChrystal told a Pentagon briefing that the Al Shaab bombs could have been Iraqi weapons.

Without offering details, Pentagon spokeswoman Torie Clarke said Iraq placed missile launchers only 100 meters from residents’ homes and this was “a sign of the brutality of this regime and how little they care about civilians.” Clarke insisted that US war strategists had gone to great lengths to craft precision strikes on military targets in order to keep casualties low. “Any casualty that occurs, any death that occurs, is a direct result of Saddam Hussein’s policies,” she said.

Almost without exception, the American and other Western media uncritically echoed this line, referring to the massacre as a “blunder” and condemning the Iraqi regime for allegedly embedding its military in civilian areas, supposedly using citizens as “human shields.”

This black propaganda is seeking to prepare the American and British public, and world opinion, for a terrible new phase in the war. Having last week destroyed most military and government buildings in Baghdad—all of which had been vacated long before—the Bush and Blair administrations are turning to civilian targets.

Two days before the Al Shaab tragedy, a cruise missile struck Baghdad’s Al A’azamiah district just as the call for the Muslim noon prayers blared from mosque minarets. The strike killed five people and injured 27, flattening one home and damaging two others.

On Tuesday night, hundreds of missiles rained down on residential areas, hitting television stations and a corner of the Al Rashid Hotel complex. Iraqi Satellite TV, which broadcasts 24 hours a day outside Iraq, went off the air for about eight hours. Iraq’s domestic state-run television service, which was not on the air at the time, resumed broadcasting Wednesday morning as scheduled.

It seems that the Bush administration has determined that it must silence the Iraqi media in order to stifle coverage of the intensifying bombing of Baghdad and other cities. International law makes it a war crime to target such facilities, because they are staffed by civilian media workers and technicians. But Jim Wilkinson, a spokesman for US Central Command, declared: “These targets are key regime command-and-control assets.”

The wider target is the Iraqi population, which has stunned the White House by fiercely resisting the US-British invasion force. The Al Shaab atrocity is an indication of what is already happening in Basra, Nasiriya, Karbala and other towns and villages where there are no reporters to witness the civilian death toll.

It is impossible to estimate the extent of the civilian casualties so far. For their own reasons, the Iraqi authorities appear to be understating the figure. On March 23, three days before the market bombing, the Iraqi government said 58 civilians had been killed and 469 injured throughout Iraq.

The Al Shaab massacre is a warning of what is to come once the ground assault on Baghdad begins. As the Pentagon planners have always anticipated, the Iraqi armed forces, augmented by local militias, have dug into positions throughout the metropolis. Boosted by the deep hatred for the occupying forces, the defense of the capital will be a largely guerrilla war, in which the army is mixed in with the population.

As the US political and military establishment found in Vietnam, a determined population defending its home territory and sovereignty can be defeated only by pulverizing entire residential areas and terrorizing the occupants into submission. President George W. Bush’s promise to wage a “relentless” war means attacking the very people he claims to be liberating, further intensifying the popular resistance.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/ma...mass-m28.shtml

&gt;^.,.^&lt;
~~Linda

"In the practice of tolerance, one's enemy is the best teacher."- Dalai Lama

[Anne FS]

Uh, Adelita, 'uncritically regurgitated' Pentagon claims by Western media? Good grief, I read reams of criticism of Pentagon claims every hour. You quoted some yourself. You can't have it both ways.

War is ugly and civilians and soldiers die. No one has ever claimed otherwise. You sound like the Fox News "reporter" this morning who was incensed that it took a helicopter 3 tries to knock down an Iraqi observation tower. "Don't they know we're covering this live?" she said when it was taking longer than expected. And when it took three tries she said very sniffily "I don't know about whoever is shooting. I wouldn't have him shooting anything in Baghdad; it took him 3 times."

Yep, gee whiz, it's not a video arcade out there, folks. Look at pictures of the bombing of Dresden, or of London. NEVER in history has an attacking army made so much effort to try to NOT hit civilians. Read history. Actually, a lot of the reporters are beginning to see that our rules of engagement are costing more American and Brit lives because we are trying so hard to keep the civs out of it.

[Anne FS]

Adelita, midge, or anyone, do you think these things are truth or lies?

1. Iraqis fired on civilians who tried to leave Basra via bridge.
2. Iraqis turned their mortar fire back into the city and fired upon citizens until the British took them out.
3. Iraq has stashed military equipment and personnel and/or communication devices in schools, hospitals and mosques.
4. As reported by the British, Iraqi paramilitary fighters herded women & children out in front of them and fired over them into British troops.
5. Iraqi men & boys are threatened on pain of death to either themselves or family members to fight against the Americans & Brits.
6. Do you think Iraqi POWs are being beaten and/or starved or are they being decently treated?
7. Do you think American POWs are being beaten and/or starved or are they being decently treated?

Do you think all of these things are lies?
Do you think any or some of them are happening?
Do you think both sides are equally lying about everything? IOW, are you saying the the US Govt. is outright lying to us and the reporters in the field are too stupid to figure it out?

[Moesha]

Look it is too complex to ever know what the "truth" is on every detail..yes the death of one person is a very big deal something irreversible as are the actions in any war campaign. Unfortunately on all sides I doubt even those within the inner circles know every move or truth.


The sad thing is we can only go on our widespread feeling and ideals...we can never know 100% what is really going on...every report claims to be unbiased, truthful, but if you stop and look each also has a source or backer with and agenda...and look at how they all claim truth but contradict each other!

I think the best thing to do is just for people to keep sharing what news they hear....and most importantly hoping and praying for the troops and the innocent and wishing for a better world after this is over, where old freinds now at each others throats can come back together in the international arena. Regardless of what side or stance you have it takes an strong and brave effort for everyone to try to educate each other and keep up to date on what they hear is going on. To accept whether you agree differences...and the best strategies involve bridging views and people together not alienating them.

If people are really interested in knowing then you have to read and hear even what you don't want to or beleive in.

[dcm]

&lt;dcm lies in a bloody mass on the floor&gt;

Someone come and clean me up, please!

Mostly I was just curious, and I will admit to a bit of trolling. &lt;don't kill me erin&gt; Quite a bit of interesting information that I have been provided with. Thanks. I already know I will not vote for him in the next election, unless the democrat candidate is worse. He does seem to have lost focus of what is truely important. I blame 9/11 for that. I think he has been deeply disturbed by it and has no idea how to get past it. Very sad.

Thanks Anne FS, I will be sure to check some of the links provided later tonight. Just so you know, I am a Native Texan, born and bred (Native Houstonian) who can trace my maternal line to the original settlers with Steven F Austin. When I asked my family (who are all still in Texas) what they thought of Bush as he emerged a contender, they were fairly positive about him dispite his lack of speaking ability. As my younger sister told me when I asked her what most Texans think of him, "Walks-on-water", not that she really believed it. And she the most liberal member of my family.

And finally, do try to remember, I am an ignorant, unenlighted lemming!

********
Proud to be an American!

Proud supporter of our Armed Forces all over the world!

[dogchushu]

I was kind of wondering why there was so much hatred of Bush myself. I understand that a lot of people may dislike him and his policies. There's a lot I don't like. And yes, I understand that Clinton got has his share of invectives hurled in his direction.

However, the kind of hatred I'm speaking of is evidenced by (as an example) emails I've gotten comparing Bush to Hitler (I think someone even posted a comparison on one of these threads). I mean, I can understand that some people believe his is a bad president, not smart enough, not savvy enough, pushing bad policy, etc.

But, c'mon folks, to compare him to Hitler??? And be serious about it? I think that's a bit over the top and bordering on hysteria. {Awww c'mon, even you Dubya-haters have to admit that most accounts of Hitler describe him as a diabolical, yet brilliant, spell-binding orator. As for Dubya, I don't think so!}

Erin, I have noticed endless discussion in the media about whether the war is going well or poorly and whether this will be everything from a repeat of the Gulf War to Vietnam. Even the market seems to bobble and hiccup with every report from Iraq. I don't know that many people who thought this war would be over any quicker than the Gulf War (how long was that one? 6 - 8 weeks?). We're not pushing Iraq out of another country, we're attacking them directly. It's going to take some time and it's going to kill some people.

I tend to think many, myself included, were hoping that the initial "decapitation" strikes would work and this thing would be over before it really began. Not that it was terribly realistic, but I've hoped for less based on even poorer odds.

[dcm]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Anne FS:
4. As reported by the British, Iraqi paramilitary fighters herded women & children out in front of them and fired over them into British troops.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Had to get this one. I don't know which one it was, but my coworker told me last night one of the news channels (CNN, FOX, MSNBC) showed a photo of an Iraqi woman dressed in camo, standing in front of an Iraqi soldier who was firing a gun over her shoulder. It was a closeup, like you were standing only 10' away. How awful. I will have trouble sleeping tonight over that. I know in my heart that the Iraqi soldier will have to answer to his God for that.

********
Proud to be an American!

Proud supporter of our Armed Forces all over the world!

[Coreene]

Well. Not to get into a Clinton / Bush discussion, but I will say that, had I been Monica, I'd have picked Bill too.

[dcm]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Coreene:
Well. Not to get into a Clinton / Bush discussion, but I will say that, had I been Monica, I'd have picked Bill too.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did you hear the reports that Palistinians (I think it was them) were chanting for Monica to go and distract Bush, too?

********
Proud to be an American!

Proud supporter of our Armed Forces all over the world!

[Heidi]

Oh, Coreene, get your mind out of the gutter

Tony Blair, all the way, baby!

If possible, I'd strongly encourage the interested to watch CBC News. I think what distinguishes news programs and channels between our two nations is that Canadian broadcasters tend to offer more of a global perspective; and the CBC, for one, has an admirable commitment to documentaries.

Among the highlights from last night's broadcast fare:

"Return to Kandahar", a documentary which looked at the aftermath of the military strikes. Afghanistan continues to have the highest illiteracy and infant mortality rates in the world. They've yet to receive all those vast sums that were pledged to them by the U.S.

CBC's "Fifth Estate" news program featured two stories on the Iraqi conflict. One profiled Peter Galbraith who was the State expert on the Kurds. As early as 1983 (!!!), the Kurds were being gassed by Hussein. Hussein was, though, at that time a bud of the U.S. Galbraith was responsible for drafting a resolution (in one hour) which passed the House of Reps. that very day. It was vetoed by Reagan's White House. Those helicopters that delivered the mustard and cyanide gasses, BTW, were purchased from the U.S.

A second examined the role of Tony Blair in the current crisis and offered the theory that he felt he could be a bridge between the U.S. and a UN sanctioned peace accord with Iraq. Among its conclusions, as others have mentioned, the position the US administration has assumed is based on a ten-year-old document drafted by Wolfowitz. The U.S. went through the motions with the UN because they needed the time to draft and perfect their military plan.


Shall see what's on fare this evening.

[poltroon]

A Conservative is supposed to be someone who doesn't like to take risks, who believes that change, if it happens at all, should be slow and measured.

I don't believe this describes the current Administration.

If there's a pile of explosive in a park across the street, there are three ways to deal with it. One, build a fence and tell everyone to keep out forever. Two, call the bomb squad. Three, throw in a match.

I have to agree about Wall Street. I've long considered it completely irrational (yay, we're going to war ... what do you mean it won't be over next week?), though to be fair it's the business press that makes up the "reason" for a particular market change. It's the classic human foible: correlation does not mean causation.

Did you know our great coaltion partner Morrocco offered to send 2,000 minesweeping monkeys as its contribution to the war effort?

[mbp]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>{Awww c'mon, even you Dubya-haters have to admit that most accounts of Hitler describe him as a diabolical, yet brilliant, spell-binding orator. As for Dubya, I don't think so!}
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


LOL

I don't know who compared him to Hitler. I do know that there are segments of the world in general right now that are very upset. Since our society reflects so many segments of race, religion, ethnicity, etc., then some of that world opinion will be reflected here. Maybe not in large amounts, but some of it.

If someone is part of a group that feels that "their" compatriots in life are actually being targeted and killed, or are being treated very unfairly, then that may be where the disputes over policies become anger and hatred. THe region shows us that nothing spurs hatred like deaths and religious disputes.

So, for example, a US citizen who feels that the Palestinians should get more support from our country, and feels that we are doing nothing to prevent Israel from murdering Palestinian civilians and razing their homes (I am not saying this is what Israel is doing, although they have certainly gone further under Sharon than I personally think is well advised) then that citizen, particularly if they have family or first hand knowledge of someone they think died unjustly, might go from just disagreement to hatred for what they perceive as an unsympathetic administration.

If, say, you are a devout Catholic and the Pope has said this is an unjust war, and you have a son or daughter in the military who has been called up, you might be more likely to hate the administration that puts them in harm's way over what your religion says is an unjust war.

I can't imagine there were too many Hitler analogies before the war. Maybe some, but once you start a war, particularly one that is controversial and people are dieing, then there will probably be some hate reactions. There are so daggone many people, that even something less than war and death can trigger this.

I think a lot of people feel the administration has been very arrogant in their dealings. And a lot of people have a lot of fear for the outcome and how things are heading. Those two things, particularly the fear, are probably at the root of anything that actually amounts to hatred.

It is hard to reason when you are afraid.

[poltroon]

&gt;&gt; Axis of Evil Wannabees
&gt;&gt; by John Cleese

Bitter after being snubbed for membership in the "Axis of Evil," Libya, China and Syria today announced that they had formed the "Axis of Just as Evil," which they said would be more evil than that stupid Iran-Iraq-North Korea axis President Bush warned of in his State of the Union address.

Axis of Evil members, however, immediately dismissed the new Axis as having, for starters, a really dumb name. "Right. They are just as evil .... in their dreams!" declared North Korean leader Kim Jong-il. "Everybody knows we're the best evils . . . best at being evil . .. we're the best."

Diplomats from Syria denied they were jealous over being excluded, &gt; although they conceded they did ask if they could join the Axis of Evil. "They told us it was full," said Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. "An axis can't have more than three countries," explained Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. &gt; "This is not my rule, it's tradition. In World War II you had Germany, Italy, and Japan in the evil Axis. So, you can only have three, and a secret handshake. Ours is wickedly cool."

International reaction to Bush's Axis of Evil declaration was swift, as within minutes, France surrendered. Elsewhere, peer-conscious nations rushed to gain triumvirate status in what has become a game of &gt; geopolitical chairs. Cuba, Sudan and Serbia announced that they had formed the "Axis of Somewhat Evil," forcing Somalia to join with Uganda and Myanmar in the "Axis of Occasionally Evil," while Bulgaria, Indonesia and Russia established the "Axis of Not So Much Evil Really as Just Generally Disagreeable."

With the criteria suddenly expanded and all the desirable clubs filling &gt; up, Sierra Leone, El Salvador, and Rwanda applied to be called the "Axis of Countries That Aren't the Worst But Certainly Won't Be Asked to Host the Olympics.".

Canada, Mexico and Australia formed the "Axis of Nations That Are Actually Quite Nice But Secretly Have Some Nasty Thoughts About America," while Scotland, New Zealand and Spain established the "Axis of Countries That Want Sheep to Wear Lipstick."

"That's not a threat, really, just something we like to do," said Scottish Executive First Minister Jack McConnell.

While wondering if the other nations of the world weren't perhaps making fun of him, a cautious Bush granted approval for most axis, although he rejected the establishment of the "Axis of Countries Whose Names End in 'Guay," accusing one of its members of filing a false application. Officials from Paraguay, Uruguay, and Chadguay denied the charges.

Israel, meanwhile, insisted it didn't want to join any Axis, but privately world leaders said that's only because no one asked them.

[EventerAJ]

ROTFLMAO Poltroon!!!!

~AJ~
I've been there...that's why I'm here.