Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
right.....looks like he's already moved on to less taxing stuff.
>>>what I posted was exactly relevant to your statements.<<<
No it wasn't unless you're ready to say I'm dismissing islamic extremists as a threat. Both you and ied replied as if I did when instead I acknowledged the threat but questioned whether or not the two of you are a bit paranoid about it.
Pick any country on earth including america and show me one where the number of citizens murdered by islamic terrorists exceeds the number of citizens murdered by fellow citizens. Or show me a non-islamic country that's been successfully invaded, occupied and transformed by islamic extremists.........like what will happen to america if we pull out of Iraq according to some of the super patriots here.
>>>Difference is that if you had bothered to research the Koran, you'd see that violent jihad is expressly spelled out<<<
So anyone coming to different conclusions than you haven't done their homework? I tell you what I think. I think you're looking for reasons to slaughter every muslim on earth when you research the koran and those you accuse of lousy research are looking for the truth.
Many people have been quoting the Quran out of context in an effort to show that Islam promotes violence. A recent op-ed piece by Cal Thomas is a high profile example.
This is pure nonsense. Thomas and others doing this are taking selected passages and reading them completely out of context to support whatever argument they wish to make. I can do the same thing with the Bible.
Here are some choice passages from the KJV Bible which when read in isolation makes the Bible appear to be a primer for evil:
1) In Leviticus 25:44-46, the Lord tells the Israelites it's OK to own slaves, provided they are strangers or heathens.
2) In Samuel 15:2-3, the Lord orders Saul to kill all the Amalekite men, women and infants.
3) In Exodus 15:3, the Bible tells us the Lord is a man of war.
4) In Numbers 31, the Lord tells Moses to kill all the Midianites, sparing only the virgins.
5) In Deuteronomy 13:6-16, the Lord instructs Israel to kill anyone who worships a different god or who worships the Lord differently.
6) In Mark 7:9, Jesus is critical of the Jews for not killing their disobedient children as prescribed by Old Testament law.
7) In Luke 19:22-27, Jesus orders killed anyone who refuses to be ruled by him.
Context is important, of course, and many of these seeming cruelties disappear when read as such. However, this would not stop a Christian terrorist from interpreting the Bible in a manner necessary to concoct a religious justification for unspeakable horrors, as Pope Urban II did, for example, when he preached the First Crusade in 1095 or as many American preachers did when they used Leviticus to defend slavery.
Political and religious extremists have abused Islamic, Jewish, or Christian scriptures continuously throughout history. Cal Thomas, a man who claims to be Christian, would do well to learn something of his own faith s scriptures and history before accusing Islam s Quran of promoting violence.
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/1086.htm
"Almost all the common Mohammadan and European writers think that a religious war of aggression is one of the tenets of Islam, and prescribed by the Koran for the purpose of proselytizing or exacting tribute. But I do not find any such doctrine enjoined in the Koran, or taught, or preached by Mohammad. His mission was not to wage wars, or to make converts at the point of the sword, or to exact tribute or exterminate those who did not believe his religion. His sole mission was to enlighten the Arabs to the true worship of the one God, to recommend virtue and denounce vice, which he truly fulfilled."
http://balneus.wordpress.com/2007/07/07/a-call-to-jihad-not-radical-islamism-from-1885-and-1842/
The original question remains: If the koran explicitly calls for death of all non-believers, why are only tiny, extreme factions of the muslim population obeying? And why do they concentrate on americans and american allies when the world is full of non-muslims? Please explain this before you fly off on another useless rant.
It's no use fuag. You may share 60% or more of their vision on Israel and the war on terror but the moment they realize you don't share their exact vision you may as well hang it up since you are now representing the enemy.
Lots of rambling about nothing. Same question again: What was I wrong about in the first post? The one you replied to with - more rambling - about bad muslims acting like good muslims in order to invoke sympathy and financial aid. Did I ever say such muslims don't exist?
Interesting you and eddy would post almost the exact same response, both of which were irrelevant to what I said in the first place. Have I denied the threat of islamic terrorists or the way they go about financing their activities? Obviously I haven't but that's what you both pretended I did.
This whole thing started with rollingrock saying all muslims on earth are out to convert all non-muslims to their faith and will kill you if you resist. If that were really the case, why are muslims still allowed to enter the country or serve as US congressmen?
See what I'm saying about fanatics? Even the mere suggestion that maybe all muslims aren't crazed religious wackos out to kill us all brings out wrath and fury in the thread's Israel faithfuls.
>>>WRONG YET AGAIN<<<
Wrong about what? As if I'm denying the existence of muslim terrorists and disguised terrorism funding. What's the point you were trying to make?
>>>So, discussing an issue makes him a fanatic<<<
You're so f#&ing disingenuous (or stupid) it really feels like a waste to respond. No......."discussing an issue" doesn't make anyone a fanatic but making 99% of your posts about innocent Israelis defending themselves against unprovoked attacks by palestinian monsters makes you a fanatic in my opinion.
>>>Idiot<<<
Ever stop and think about who share your views anymore before calling others idiots? I'm talking about the 28% who for the most part reside in a swath of rural farmland stretching from Texas to north Carolina, better known for the rate of high school dropouts than for intellectual sophistication.
>>>if you beleive the kark you write<<<
First off I didn't write it. Secondly, I didn't say I necessarily believed all of it but said I found it while looking for proof that all or most muslims will try to kill me if I don't convert to their religion. I still haven't found proof of that so any leads would be appreciated.
Never fails.........post ANYTHING that puts into question the entire global muslim population's goal of beheading with dull knives anyone who dares resist conversion to their faith and Israel fanatics like yourself (and ieddy) blow gaskets and choke on your hummus.
No doubt in my mind there are thousands of Islamic fanatics that make jihad into whatever they want it to be but if it's a concerted Islamic global effort on a large scale as you seem to believe, where's all the bloodshed?
If you ever made a post here that wasn't Israel and/or Palestine related I don't recall it. Which in my mind makes you a religious fanatic, borne out by the hysterics in your response by the way. Maybe you're not ready to strap a bomb around your waist but you're clearly preoccupied with religious strife and I wish you could tell me when that kind of mindset ever lead to anything constructive.
You sound unstable.
>>>Islam teaches that Muslims must wage war to impose Islamic law on non-Muslim states.<<<
What's your reference to that? Rush Limbaugh? I can't find anything that confirms what you're saying but I found this:
Q: What is jihad?
A: Jihad does not mean "holy war." Literally, jihad in Arabic means to strive, struggle and exert effort. It is a central and broad Islamic concept that includes struggle against evil inclinations within oneself, struggle to improve the quality of life in society, struggle in the battlefield for self-defense or fighting against tyranny or oppression.
Q: What does Islam say about Christianity?
A: Islam teaches that Christians and Muslims are both "people of the book." By that it means that the two religions share the same basic beliefs articulated through the Bible and the Koran. The main difference between Christians and Muslims is that Muslims do not believe that Jesus was the son of God. Muslims believe that Jesus was a prophet who was granted special powers by God to show people the power of God.
Q: How does Islam view terrorism?
A: Islam does not support terrorism under any circumstances. Terrorism goes against every principle in Islam. If a Muslim engages in terrorism, he is not following Islam. He may be wrongly using the name of Islam for political or financial gain.
Q: Does Islam tolerate other beliefs?
A: Yes. It is one function of Islamic law to protect the privileged status of minorities. Islamic law also permits non-Muslims to set up their own courts, which implement family laws drawn up by the minorities themselves.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/islam.htm
>>>What do you think we should do, just let them kill us if we don't covert?<<<
First off, the premise of your question is bogus and secondly, I've already asked you this but I ask again: How will you pacify the small portion of muslims that does believe in violence by waging war against entire muslim nations? This is what you're promoting so I assume you can explain why it's such a great strategy.
>>>what happens in Iraq will affect national security!<<<
You should rephrase that slightly. "What HAS happened in Iraq will affect national security" is a much better description.
The global w.o.t. is understood as being a war against Al Qaeda and/or extreme Islamic fanatics which represent less than 10% of Iraq's insurgency BUT have active cells in more than 100 countries around the world. So even if someone comes up with a clever way of declaring "victory" in Iraq, how do you figure that will have a positive impact on american security?
A tiny fraction of the enemy may have been eliminated, but at what cost? An Islamic country was invaded, occupied and destroyed along with hundreds of thousands of innocent muslim civilians so try a wild guess on how that makes the rest of the world's muslim population feel. Once you've figured that out, apply it to the notion that about 1% of the world's 1 billion muslims are fanatic material and then report back with how you feel about our odds and how they have been affected by victory in Iraq.
BTW....... 1% of 1 billion is 10,000,000 and all this was started by 19 of them. Good idea to keep trying the extermination method?
If you and other Bush republicans were capable of the most basic form of objective analysis you'd know that much of the constitutional pollution the courts had to clean up behind Bush had nothing to do with terrorists rights but american citizen's rights under the bill of rights.
You obviously don't understand it but what Bush and followers like you advocate is the destruction of the constitution that's the basis of our freedom in order to protect our freedom. That sounds reasonable to you?
>>>We are a Republic,NOT a Democracy.<<<
banana...if you don't mind. plain republic was abandoned 7 years ago.
"Judge says Bush administration's Katrina policy unconstitutional
http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061130/REPOSITORY/611300386/1043/NEWS01
"A federal judge struck down President Bush's authority to designate groups as terrorists, saying his post-Sept. 11 executive order was unconstitutional and vague."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,232605,00.html
Federal Judge: Bush Abortion Ban Unconstitutional
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0601-09.htm
A federal judge issued a stern rebuke of a key White House antiterror law, striking down as unconstitutional two pillars of the USA Patriot Act."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/26/ap/national/main3302830.shtml?source=search_story
"A federal judge on Thursday ruled that the U.S. government's domestic eavesdropping program is unconstitutional and ordered it ended immediately."
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/17/domesticspying.lawsuit/index.html
"The Supreme Court yesterday struck down the military commissions President Bush established to try suspected members of al-Qaeda, emphatically rejecting a signature Bush anti-terrorism measure and the broad assertion of executive power upon which the president had based it.
Brushing aside administration pleas not to second-guess the commander in chief during wartime, a five-justice majority ruled that the commissions, which were outlined by Bush in a military order on Nov. 13, 2001, were neither authorized by federal law nor required by military necessity, and ran afoul of the Geneva Conventions."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/29/AR2006062900928.html
>>>We have 160,000 troops there and we need those assholes over there????????<<<
""The military is very sensitive to its relationship that they've built with the Iraqis being altered or even severely degraded by actions such as this event," the official said.
"This is a nightmare," said a senior U.S. military official. "We had guys who saw the aftermath, and it was very bad. This is going to hurt us badly. It may be worse than Abu Ghraib, and it comes at a time when we're trying to have an impact for the long term."
In interviews involving a dozen U.S. military and government officials, many expressed anger and concern over the shootings in Nisoor Square, in Baghdad's Mansour neighborhood. Some worried it could undermine the military's efforts to stabilize Iraq this year with an offensive involving thousands of reinforcements.
"This is a big mess that I don't think anyone has their hands around yet," said another U.S. military official. "It's not necessarily a bad thing these guys are being held accountable. Iraqis hate them, the troops don't particularly care for them, and they tend to have a know-it-all attitude, which means they rarely listen to anyone -- even the folks that patrol the ground on a daily basis."
http://greatnorthernplains.blogspot.com/
Judge: Part of Patriot act unconstitutional
Judge Strikes Down Parts Of Patriot Act
PORTLAND, Oregon, Sept. 26, 2007
(AP) A federal judge ruled Wednesday that two provisions of the USA Patriot Act are unconstitutional because they allow search warrants to be issued without a showing of probable cause.
U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken ruled that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, as amended by the Patriot Act, "now permits the executive branch of government to conduct surveillance and searches of American citizens without satisfying the probable cause requirements of the Fourth Amendment."
Portland attorney Brandon Mayfield sought the ruling in a lawsuit against the federal government after he was mistakenly linked by the FBI to the Madrid train bombings in 2004.
The federal government apologized and settled part of the lawsuit for $2 million after admitting a fingerprint was misread. But as part of the settlement, Mayfield retained the right to challenge parts of the USA Patriot Act.
Mayfield claimed that secret searches of his house and office under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, violated the Fourth Amendment's guarantee that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause ..."
Aiken agreed with Mayfield, repeatedly criticizing the government.
"For over 200 years, this Nation has adhered to the rule of law — with unparalleled success. A shift to a Nation based on extra-constitutional authority is prohibited, as well as ill-advised," she wrote.
She said that by asking her to dismiss Mayfield's lawsuit, the U.S. Attorney General's office was "asking this court to, in essence, amend the Bill of Rights, by giving it an interpretation what would deprive it of any real meaning. This court declines to do so."
Elden Rosenthal, an attorney for Mayfield, issued a statement on his behalf praising the judge, saying she "has upheld both the tradition of judicial independence, and our nation's most cherished principle of the right to be secure in one's own home."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/26/terror/main3302826.shtml
>>>The Decider is a buffoon. Unfortunately he doesn't keep it to himself, he insists on making a fool of himself on the world stage.<<<
Or maybe 28% know something the rest don't? I'm watching this now trying to figure out what it is.
Hi Steph......just taking a little detour here, saying hello to the neighbors. They're friendly so far. Not a lot of answers but.....I can feel the bonding.
>>>You libs have a double standard<<<
First off I'm not a "lib" but a diehard independent unless something changes drastically. Secondly.......how is it a double standard to say that anyone who crashes an election - liberal and conservative - is a criminal? What do you want me to say......that liberals who trash election posters should be hung from the highest tree but conservatives doing the same thing should get a pass because they only had the country's best interest in mind?
By the way, I've given you 3 chances to answer this now and you keep ducking.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=23152245
Since you won't or can't answer I guess I have to answer for you. So here goes: "Razorback supports the troops and their mission but he can't explain what constitutes victory."
If you can't define victory, how do you define the mission to begin with and how can you brag about supporting the troops if you send them off on a mission you don't understand?
Of course. Why wouldn't they be criminals? Same offenses.
>>link please<<
"The "preppy riot": the manual recount in Miami-Dade County was shut down shortly after screaming protestors arrived at Miami's recount center. It turned out that these protesters were Republican Party members flown in from other states, some at Republican Party expense."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2000_Florida_results
"If all of this wasn’t enough, we learned Friday that the Democratic Party Headquarters in Tucson was vandalized and the phone lines to the call center were cut overnight. This crippled our volunteer call center and jeopardized our ability to talk to voters in Southern Arizona at a critical time in the election."
http://www.azdem.org/blog/385/what-do-the-kkk-suspicious-vandalism-and-operation-wetback-have-to-do-...
"John Kerry campaign signs were burned and pro-Bush messages scrawled on windows and a door at the Kerry headquarters, the chairman of the Louisiana Democratic Party said Thursday.
It was the second act of vandalism aimed at the Democratic presidential nominee's campaign office in Lafayette."
http://www.nhdp.org/corruption_details.asp?id=1061
Lots more but you get the idea....
First one:
>>>If the liberal "progressive" movement is indeed tolerant, why does this happen?
http://www.whenangrydemocratsattack.com
- Election Signs spray painted
- Car Windows smashed
- Tires slashed
- Vandalism
- Siege on a GOP office
- Intimidation
- Arson<<<<<<<<<<<<
Idiotic question that ignores the fact that both sides have immature idiots among their ranks. Why are some conservatives doing the same exact things although they claim to stand for law & order, liberty and freedom?
>>>I wish the delusioned liberals would let the military fight and win<<<
You said this on the politics board:
>>>I support our military and their goals to defeat suicide bombers.<<<
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=23124758
And I asked you this which you refused to answer.
So how will you know that the military have defeated the world's suicide bombers? What will be the telltale sign that US troops have captured or killed the last suicide bomber?
You don't know?
>>>care to answer any of these questions?<<<
What questions?
Razor......you're a chickenshit coward. Like to play tough guy but put those who takes you to task on ignore or ban them outright. Which makes sense since you also put the part about serving in the war on ignore and participate only in the part you feel comfortable with - cheerleading.
>>>I support our military and their goals to defeat suicide bombers.<<<
So how will you know that the military have defeated the world's suicide bombers? What will be the telltale sign that US troops have captured or killed the last suicide bomber?
>>>Why won't you get your ass to Arabia, where your friends are?<<<
Who's friends?
>>>But you don't throw your political opponent a nice fat bone to chew on the day of the hearings.<<<
Point is that both sides keep supplying each other with fat bones to chew on but republicans are the only ones chewing. Look at this newspaper ad. It's been front and center of politics for almost two weeks now only because the dems have allowed it. Why didn't Reid or Pelosi step up and say....."enough already. The ad was over the top but it's time to move on to more important matters." Instead they cowered as usual and got dragged into more political theatrics on the senate floor where an entire afternoon was wasted voting on who merely disliked the ad and who disliked so much they felt it had to be "condemned". As far as I'm concerned, the entire democratic senate should have laughed out loud when the dumbass republicans embarrassed themselves by announcing this vote. There were cameras on the floor and the point would have been made.
>>>The MoveOn ad was outrageous.<<<
Was it more outrageous than the right's swiftboat ads trashing war veteran Kerry, or Bush trashing war veteran McCain, or draft dodger Saxby Chambliss (R) calling war veteran Max Cleland an unpatriotic coward for leaving two legs and an arm in Vietnam?
This was an openly far left political ad questioning the role of an active general's place in political policy making. So what was more outrageous? The ad itself or the republican congress, wasting taxpayer's money on the senate floor spending hours grandstanding, debating and actually voting on who's more patriotic........AGAIN. This time they framed it around how best to describe how outrageous the MoveOn ad was and how best to condemn it for maximum effect on the evening news. Nothing else concerning the welfare of the country was more important that day?
While at it......democrats in congress have an 11% approval rating now which is outrageous too. What are those 11% approving of?
"A paltry 11 percent rated Congress positively, beating the previous low of 14 percent in July."
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1844140220070919?feedType=RSS&feedName=politics...
>>>John Howard's Liberal party, who will, head feeling still says just must, lose the next election at east is equal to your Republican's penchant for lying.<<<
Yeah...well at least you've got lying nerds instead of lying sex criminals and lying war criminals.
In Australia, The Rise Of A Political Nerd
Earnest And Bookish, Labor Party Chief Kevin Rudd Is Poised To Lead Australia
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/21/world/main3285216.shtml
Seems like only a few years ago when republicans would have us believe that no male member of their party and certainly not of their congress wasn't a hetrosexual, family oriented, church going american role model while the democratic counterparts had already been tagged by satan for their choice of lifestyle and lack of values.
So now what? Neither side can lay claim to the franchise on morals & values anymore which means the dems lost nothing since they never played that card but the right lost the foundation of their political platform.
BTW......here's another one in today's news. Not a politician as far as I know but a Christian activist which according to the GOP only has one realistic choice in terms of party affiliation.
The director of a Christian youth center was arrested Thursday on charges he had sex with a girl beginning when she was 13.
http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20070922/NEWS/709220355
>>>I wonder if he'll repeat some of these comments.<<<
I think we know the drill now. His comments were reported "out of context". If those three words were off limits for politicians along with "I can't recall" we wouldn't need term limits.
"Quite simply the cockiest guy I ever met in my life"
"Carol, former President Fox's book won't be out for a few more days, but it is already causing murmurs in social and political circles from Washington, D.C., to Mexico City, because it apparently brings out Fox's true feelings about U.S. president George Bush, who many thought was one of his closest friends.
It was his first trip outside of the United States as president. In February of 2001, George W. Bush visited Mexican president Vicente Fox on his ranch in the state of (INAUDIBLE).
They stopped to admire horses at the ranch, but Vicente Fox wasn't convinced that President Bush was a true horse lover. In "Revolution of Hope," the former Mexican president's memoirs, Fox calls Bush a "windshield cowboy," one who prefers to drive than ride. "A horse lover can always tell when others don't share our passion," Fox writes.
Fox also critiques Bush's language skills, saying his Spanish is that of grade school level. And he says Bush is "Quite simply the cockiest guy I ever met in my life."
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0709/21/sitroom.01.html
>>>ARE THEY WORSE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA? I DOUBT IT.<<<
You got a political party in Australia that pops up in encyclopedias under "family values" while at the same time making weekly headlines for perverse sexual behavior? We got one here.
Family values in U.S. politics
Republican party
Since 1980, the Republican party has used the issue of family values to attract socially conservative voters. While family values remains a rather vague concept, social conservatives usually understand the term to include some combination of the following principles (also referenced in the 2004 Republican Party platform):[10]
Opposition to homosexual marriage[11]
Support for traditional education and parental involvement in that education[12]
Support for policies that encourage "adoption over abortion"[13]
Support for behavior identified as traditional or moral such as respect, discipline, attentiveness, religious commitment[14]
Support for healthy choices such as a nutritious diet, medical screenings, and physical activity[15]
Support for abstinence, education regarding risks associated with early sexual activity such as teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases[16]
Support for policies that protect children from obscenity and exploitation[17]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_values
Assistant U.S. attorney charged in child sex sting
Chalk another one up for the moral majority. The creep's a registered republican according to Florida records. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/9/17/161247/155
Assistant U.S. attorney charged in child sex sting
He flew from Florida for a 5-year-old girl, court records show
September 17, 2007
By CHRISTY ARBOSCELLO
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER
UPDATED AT 4:12 P.M.
An assistant U.S. attorney from northern Florida appeared today in federal court in Detroit on charges he flew to metro Detroit to have sex with someone he thought was a 5-year-old girl.
John David Roy Atchison, 53, of Gulf Breeze, Fla., was charged with enticement of a minor using the Internet and knowingly traveling interstate to engage in illicit sex.
With eyes cast downward and fiddling with papers, Atchison asked for a court attorney before he obtains one on his own.
His arrest Sunday was part of an undercover sex crime sting on behalf of the Macomb Area Computer Enforcement Team, also known as M.A.C.E.
According to court records, Atchison, who described himself as “very much a family man,” initiated an online chat Aug. 29 with an undercover officer posing as a mother interested in letting men have sex with her children.
During continuous conversations, he expressed a desire to engage in oral, vaginal and anal sex with her fictitious daughter, records show.
At one point, he wrote: “I’m always gentle and loving; not to worry; no damage ever; no rough stuff ever ever.”
He assured the undercover officer that the girl would not need medical attention, saying, “I can be absolutely sure; just gotta go slow and very easy is how; I’ve done it plenty.”
Prosecutors say the transcripts could lead to further investigations.
Days before catching the flight for his Macomb County destination, records show, he told the woman to tell the girl she “found her a sweet boyfriend who will bring her presents.”
Atchison is due back Tuesday in U.S. District Court for a detention hearing. If convicted of the charges, he could face a maximum of 60 years in prison.
His employer did not return multiple calls seeking comment.
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070917/NEWS04/70917039&imw=Y
I suggest they save taxpayers some money and just send this family man back to the Florida panhandle and let him loose on his own recognizance. The local redneck population will take care of any justice issues involved.
>>>Amazing what you can learn if you read and comprehend<<<
I agree so when will you demonstrate? Haven't seen it yet.
Now pay attention please:
"The events of November 19, 2005, were "exhaustively reviewed" by investigators,"
Ok, so the events were exhaustively reviewed but they also admit that much of what probably should have been reviewed couldn't be reviewed because of a botched investigation from the start.
"The government's case lacked evidence, Ware said last month when he advised against going to trial, AP reported.
Three other officers in addition to Stone are accused of failing to properly investigate and report the killings."
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/08/09/haditha.charges.dropped/index.html
>>>the actual path the case is taking- Marines being exonerated-<<<
Where they exonerated or were charges dropped because the incident wasn't investigated and reported properly?
"Three other officers in addition to Stone are accused of failing to properly investigate and report the killings."
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/08/09/haditha.charges.dropped/index.html
Some might say their charges were dropped due to a cover-up of the investigation. Hardly exoneration if that's the case.
>>>On his way back to Iraq this week, Gen Petraeus made a stop-off in London to talk them into not leaving southern Iraq. No success.<<<
That's ok. Republicans voted yesterday in favor of keeping everything just the way they are anyway. They understand you don't mess with a winning hand.
"In blocking this bipartisan bill, Republicans have once again demonstrated that they are more committed to protecting the president than protecting our troops," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/19/politics/main3278896.shtml
>>>Things are looking up for residents of Baghdad, Bush told us<<<
"Baghdad remained the most violent part of Iraq when measured in attacks by province, with about 58 attacks there a day between early May and late July."
Security Took 'Turn for Worse' In Southern Iraq, Report Says
By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, September 18, 2007; A14
Security is deteriorating in southern Iraq as rival Shiite militias vying for power have stepped up their attacks after moving out of Baghdad to avoid U.S.-led military operations, according to the latest quarterly Pentagon report on Iraq released yesterday.
"The security environment in southern Iraq took a notable turn for the worse in August" with the assassination of two governors, said the report, which covers June through August. "There may be retaliation and an increase in intra-Shi'a violence throughout the South," it said, whereas previously the violence was centered in the main southern city of Basra.
Iran has intensified its training and funding of the Shiite militia, and Iranian-influenced militias are believed to be responsible for killing the two governors, as well as for a nearly 40 percent increase in attacks using lethal weapons known as explosively formed projectiles, compared with the mid-February to mid-May period, the report said.
The growing violence in the south is one factor making it unlikely that Iraq's leaders -- hampered by a "zero sum" mentality -- will make headway in the fall on key political resolutions, the report concluded. "In the short term, Iraqi political leaders will likely be less concerned about reconciliation than with consolidating power and posturing for a future power struggle," it said.
Overall, the report detailed both progress and setbacks. It highlighted positive trends such as a recent nationwide drop in sectarian violence, high-profile bombings and total attacks -- albeit from the record-high of approximately 5,200 "enemy initiated" attacks in May. Total monthly attacks against U.S. and Iraqi forces and civilians fell to about 4,800 in July and to 3,500 in August, the report said, reflecting what it called "a substantial improvement in overall security."
Casualties rose from about 130 killed or wounded on average per day in June to nearly 150 a day in July and August, but that remains below the level of more than 150 a day in the previous quarter. Still, there was a significant increase in Iraqi civilians killed or wounded compared with U.S. and Iraqi forces from June to August, reflecting in part some massive bombings that the U.S. military attributed to the Sunni insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq in remote parts of the country.
Baghdad remained the most violent part of Iraq when measured in attacks by province, with about 58 attacks there a day between early May and late July. Attacks fell sharply in the western Anbar province -- to about 10 a day compared with 25 a day between February and May -- as Sunni tribes stepped up efforts to expel al-Qaeda-affiliated insurgents and supply manpower for Iraqi security forces, part of a "bottom up" reconciliation effort that the report called the most promising trend in Iraq today.
But in another trend seen in earlier reports, attacks spread outside the Baghdad area, rising in neighboring Diyala and Salahuddin provinces, where security remains "fragile," as well as in some southern provinces, the report said.
Violence and instability in some southern provinces reflects primarily the growing strength in the region of the Mahdi Army or Jaish al-Mahdi (JAM), the militia of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, the report said.
"An increase in its militia members has emboldened JAM to increase the frequency and intensity of attacks on Coalition and Iraqi forces," the report said. "This influx has occurred as militant elements moved out of Baghdad to avoid FAQ-related operations," it said, referring to the Baghdad security plan, known in Arabic as Fardh al-Qanoon.
Moreover, the Pentagon assessment said the Mahdi Army reasserted itself in Qadisiyah province after coalition forces withdrew, illustrating how areas can revert to violence.
In Basra, the city through which 90 percent of Iraq's oil is exported, the report said that the expected continued reduction of British forces had led to insurgent groups "posturing themselves to control the city, where violence has increased due to the presence of multiple Shi'a militias -- most notably JAM and its splinter groups, the Badr Organization and the Fadilah Organization -- and criminal groups."
Meanwhile, the report stated that Iraqi security forces, though improving and maturing, remain hindered by sectarian infiltration. "Shi'a militia control over significant portions of southern Iraq and Baghdad competes with legitimate Iraqi forces for popular trust, and in some cases, causes increases in sectarian behavior by these security forces," the Pentagon found.
Amid uneven trends in security and the Iraqi government's "indecisiveness and inaction" on key political goals, the report found that some segments of the population have lost confidence in the government's ability to improve the situation.
The report said that Iran's support for Shiite extremists is "one of the greatest impediments to progress on reconciliation" in Iraq. It said most of the explosives and ammunition for such groups -- which are battling U.S. and Iraqi troops -- was supplied by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force.
Despite the report of continued Iranian involvement in Iraq, a former top U.S. Middle East commander, retired Army Gen. John P. Abizaid, emphasized in a speech yesterday the need to "contain" the Iranian regime -- even if it becomes a nuclear-armed state -- and stressed that war with Iran should be considered a last resort.
"I believe that we can contain Iran," Abizaid said in a talk at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. He said the United States and other countries must vigorously press Tehran to "cease and desist" from obtaining nuclear weapons.
Still, he said, "There are ways to live with a nuclear Iran," adding: "Iran is not a suicide nation. . . . I don't believe the Iranians intend to attack us with nuclear weapons. We have the power to deter Iran should it become nuclear."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/17/AR2007091701880.html
>>>When we did dismount our Humvees every civilian on the street except vendors dropped what they were doing and came forward to greet us.<<<
I take it they didn't dismount their Humvees unarmed?
(CBS/AP) The United States suspended all land travel by U.S. diplomats and other civilian officials in Iraq outside Baghdad's heavily fortified Green Zone, amid mounting public outrage over the alleged killing of civilians by the U.S. Embassy's security provider Blackwater USA.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/19/iraq/main3273980.shtml
General "Betrayus" coined by US troops...not moveon.org
Nov. 2005...
Posted by: Brad R. Torgersen | November 18, 2005 at 07:23 PM
I don't know GEN Petraeus personally...but when I was in the "Devil Brigade" folks called him "Colonel Betrayus". He came up with things like the "Devil button" (button your BDU collar up to the top when on jumps) and the "Devil grip" (special name for keeping your trigger finger out of the trigger well) which sounded hokey to most of the troops at the time.
Can any other All American paratroopers out there expand on my comment?
http://www.blackfive.net/main/2005/11/generals_of_yes.html
GOP: We feel good about Larry Craig
Senator Orrin Hatch, said that, just this morning, he personally read the motion that's been filed by his attorney, by Larry Craig's attorney, and said that the appeal makes it is clear there's no underlying crime.
And then Specter said that there's been a lot of positive talk about Larry Craig in the Republican cloakroom
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0709/18/sitroom.01.html
Positive talk in the cloakroom? Like...."Look guys.....Larry's so sleazy we can all come out as regular queers now and look good to the base".
>>>You think that figure is higher or lower than the amount of people who think Bush put bombs in the WTC?<<<
For the population as a whole, a lot higher.........I hope. For this board, probably too close to call.