A One-Act DC Summertime Tragedy
[The scene as the curtain rises -- A young woman staggers into a police station. Her hair is a mess, her clothing is torn in places, and she is visibly bruised. One of her eyes is almost swollen shut. She is dragging an elegant handbag, but her grip on the purse strings is tenuous, at best. She staggers up to the desk sergeant.]
"Please, you've got to help me. I've been mugged."
"Certainly, Ma'am. Please follow me," the sergeant replies. He escorts her up a dingy flight of stairs to the detectives' area, and sees that she is comfortably seated. Because she's in such bad shape, he gets her a cup of coffee and introduces her to Detective Justin Farce, before returning to his post.
"What seems to be the trouble?" asks Farce gently.
"I think I've been mugged," she replies forlornly.
The detective rolls a form into a typewriter and begins asking her the standard questions.
"What is your name?"
"Connie Gress."
"OK, Mrs. Gress..."
"Actually, it's 'Miss.' "
"OK, Miss Gress..."
"Please, call me 'Con,' everyone does," she demurs.
"OK... Con... I'm going to ask you for all the details of the crime that you can remember. Anything you can recall will help us to do our job. Now, who was it that attacked you?"
The woman furrowed her brows. "Actually," she said haltingly, "I'm not really sure they attacked me..."
Detective Farce arched his eyebrows in disbelief. "But, you're..." he begins, and motions toward her bruises and ripped clothing.
Connie Gress looked down at herself, and sighed. "Well, that happened later."
"Why don't you start at the beginning and tell me what happened." Farce gave up on typing the form. He sat back, crossed his hands over his belly, and waited for her story.
"Well, I was trying to do my business, when I was jumped in a hallway by two guys. They forced me to give up what they wanted, and then they walked away. The worst part was there were like 16 people I thought were my friends standing around just to hold the coats of the two guys who were pestering me."
Detective Farce picked up the purse she had placed on his desk, and asked, "May I take a look to see if anything's missing?"
"Oh, sure. There's a lot in there -- it's bigger inside than it looks."
Farce opened the small evening bag, and was astonished to find that she was right. The second shock was that the purse was absolutely crammed with money. He quickly riffled through the bills, and exclaimed: "There's over a trillion dollars here!"
"Two trillion, actually." She slid the purse over, and checked quickly for herself. "No, it's all still here."
Farce's brain blew a few circuits. "So you're telling me that you have two trillion dollars on you, you 'think' you were mugged, and the muggers didn't touch any of it?"
"I know it sounds incredible," Miss Gress admitted. "But they took something far more valuable."
"What could be more valuable than..." Farce choked on the words again... "two trillion dollars?"
"They made me give up the Fourth Amendment."
"The Fourth Amendment?" echoed Farce, more puzzled than ever.
"Well, actually, they didn't make me give it up. They couldn't do that. You see, I'm heavily armed. Dig down to the bottom of the bag, you'll see."
Farce returned his attention to her handbag. Digging past the outrageous wads of bills, he found two objects at the bottom. He pulled the first out. It was a gigantic medieval shield, something a knight in full armor would carry into battle. He pulled it out by its straps, and slowly turned it over to reveal the text of the Constitution on the face of it. He noticed right away that in the midst of the Bill of Rights, the Fourth Amendment had indeed been blacked out. Crudely spray painted on top of it in blood-red letters was the phrase: "In Gonzales we trust."
Incredulously, he laid it aside on his desk. It barely fit.
He then gingerly drew out of her purse the remaining item. It was an enormous rifle -- but what a weapon! It looked like a science fiction movie prop -- like something out of Star Wars, or Men In Black. Somehow, though, Farce knew it was real, so he very carefully laid it on top of the shield. "What exactly is this?" he sternly asked Miss Con Gress.
"It's a 'Democratic Majority, Mark 2006,' " she helpfully explained.
"So let me get this straight," said the detective, trying to get some sort of grasp on the situation. "You've got an enormous Constitutional shield, you've got this deadly weapon -- the Democratic Majority -- and you still got mugged?"
"Well, actually, I guess it wasn't really a mugging at all. But the two guys really threatened me."
"Who were these two guys?" asked Farce suspiciously, somehow anticipating her answer.
"Bush and Cheney," she promptly replied, confirming his suspicions.
"But how could they threaten you when you had such a powerful weapon? And such defenses?" Farce asked, stupefied.
"Well, they said they were going to say mean things about me on the campaign trail."
"You gave up the Fourth Amendment just for politics?!?" the detective almost screamed at her.
"Well, yeah, that and the fact that my vacation was starting, and if I didn't do what they wanted, I might have had to cut it a few days short."
Farce just stared at her, absolutely speechless.
"Hey, don't look at me like that!" she protested. "I had to get home to start my vacation so I could tell everyone how horrible it is that the Iraqi Parliament is also on vacation." She pouted her lips, and looked like a stubborn 10-year-old girl.
"I'm sorry, but there was no crime committed here," pronounced Farce. "Unless... how did you get so bruised? Who hit you?"
"Well, the media beat me up pretty good, but it was my constituents who really did this number on me." She began crying, pathetically.
"You know, Miss Con Gress," the detective replied, quite obviously enraged, "there actually was a crime committed here.
"You mugged yourself. And, in doing so, you mugged the American people as well. I have absolutely no sympathy for you whatsoever.
"To be honest, you disgust me. Your job is supposed to be to stand up to such blatant rewriting of the Constitution. Please take your things and go.
"And one final word of advice -- you don't deserve to be carrying that weapon, and if you're not careful, the voters will take it away from you as easily as they gave it to you."
[The moral of this story is: A Democratic Majority is only a powerful weapon IF you actually pull the trigger.
MISCONGRESS indeed.]
[Here is the shameful official list of the Senate's "16 people I thought were my friends" (plus Lieberman, of course, making 17) who held Bush's coat and allowed this mugging to happen. Since they're all home for vacation during August, I encourage you to let them personally know what you think of their vote -- but only use profanity if you feel it absolutely necessary.
Oh, hell... go ahead and use profanity. They need to hear it. Loudly.]
Cross-posted at The Huffington Post
-- Chris Weigant
WOW!!
That about sums things up perfectly...
However, consider that maybe there is a very good reason why the Democrats in Congress supported Bush's NSA program...
Isn't it possible that things are just as Bush has said they are?? That this program IS needed and there IS a real threat from terrorists??
Surely that is a more palatable situation than accepting the fact that your Democrats are lazy, selfish and are only concerned about their own interests and to hell with the country...
Talk about being between a rock and a hard spot, eh??
Michale.....
Nice bit of writing there Chris!
Enjoyable read!
Fiction touching on current events!
You should be writing campaign speeches!
Chris,
Indeed...
There are only two options here to explain this:
1) That the Democrats are exactly what they have been called; spineless, weak, and unable to govern.
or,
2) That the Democrats and Republicans want, first and foremost, to save their own bacon first and the rest of the country be damned.
Let me explain the second option a bit more...
Government is an institution. Whether it is Democrats or Republicans in charge, the "government" is run by those who feel they are above the law, that they deserve to vote themselves all the pay raises they can, and get the best health care.
Now, what happens when the people no longer have faith in that government? Worse, what occurs when the people come to realize that they are nothing more than sheep and that government is only there to shear them?
They revolt.
The French Revolution. The American Revolution. The Iranian Revolution. Go to every country where the people finally had enough of their government and how it turned out.
So, it has truly become "us" vs "them"... the people vs the government.
And what better way to protect yourself than to have the unchallenged right to spy on everyone, everywhere, with no oversight whatsoever?
Sure, you can spy on your political opposition. Sure, you can spy on the journalists. But, those are merely obstacles to you... the people... they can drag you down totally.
So you make sure you can spy on anyone, anywhere, at anytime... you take away the rights that founded our country... you make a new "justice system" where heresay is the only evidence you need present... and you make prisons that nobody ever leaves.
The Republicans started it and the Democrats have now decided that these tools are also in their best interest.
If they didn't... they would have fought... would they not?
oh.. and Chris... here is just how bad it was:
(quote from Truthout.org)
"Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), an Intelligence Committee member, on Tuesday released a letter from Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Mike McConnell that said the spy agency has no plans to cast an improperly wide net."
No PLANS to abuse it? Like... say... the FBI... who when given the authority to use NSL's without warrant abused it?????
(from CNN)
Audit: FBI's Patriot Act snooping broke rules
"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The FBI is guilty of "serious misuse" of the power to secretly obtain private information under the Patriot Act, a government audit said Friday. The Justice Department's inspector general looked at the FBI's use of national security letters, in which agents demand personal and business information about individuals -- such as financial, phone, and Internet records -- without court orders. The audit found the letters were issued without proper authority, cited incorrect statutes or obtained information they weren't supposed to. As many as 22 percent of national security letters were not recorded, the audit said."
As much as 22% of ALL NSL's issued were abuses. So, just HOW MANY NSL's were issued total?
"The FBI has made as many as 56,000 requests a year for information using the letters since the Patriot Act was passed in October 2001, the audit found."
Let's do the math, shall we... what is 22% of 56,000? 12,320.
That is how many times... in ONE YEAR ALONE... the FBI ABUSED the power they "never planned on abusing"... that we were SWORN we could trust to give to them.
12,320 people had their rights violated in ONE YEAR. Let's times that by 6 years. 73,920.
That is how many people have had their rights violated in the 6 years of the Patriot Act. 73,920 AMERICANS.
But.. we can TRUST the NSA doesn't have "plans" to abuse a power where they have no checks, no restriction, no oversight...
There is a reason our forefathers wrote so many checks, so many balances, into our constitution; they knew without them, power would be abused.
If I can get Michale, CDub, and Michael Gass to agree on something, I've either done something very right... or horribly wrong!
All kidding aside, thanks for the comments. CDub, I'm still waiting for that call from someone's campaign manager offering me a job...
Michael Gass - interesting you brought up the French Revolution. You may be interested in my earlier piece, which dealt mainly with NSLs. I also kinda/sorta predicted VA Secretary Nicholson's resignation, but I gotta admit I just got lucky, his name was among many I was speculating about resigning, and none of the others did.
I wrote one other article on the subject as well, but it's mostly clips from other news articles.
To all, thanks for commenting!
-CW
@Michael Gass
>There are only two options here to explain this:
There is a third possibility...
That the threat is real and the changes in the laws are necessary to counter the threat..
Surely that is more attractive an possibility than the idea that your Democrats are "spineless, weak, and unable to govern"..
After all, YOU voted them into office..
Well, I did too, so..... :D
Michale.....
Michale,
Yeah... sure...
And the threat that you could be shot in a drive-by is real too. So, let's give up all of our guns, give the government the right to enter our houses whenever they want (with no restriction whatsoever), because you could be hiding one and there is that threat... let's also let the government spy on us in case we actually got a gun (because the threat is real!)... in fact, let's just change to a Kingship, get rid of Congress and courts, and have King-appointed assassins to kill anyone who they BELIEVE might get a gun...
... because you know... the threat is real... so, why have any oversight, any restriction, whatsoever...
.. right ..
Now that I've shown you just how stupid that sounds, here is WHY the so-called "justification" was pure garbage.
FISA allowed a 72 hour RETROACTIVE time to get a warrant. That means (in case you don't know), that the NSA could spy for 3 WHOLE DAYS without a warrant... they just had to OBTAIN the warrant within 72 hours of ACTUALLY doing the spying.
WHY did they HAVE to have a warrant you ask? BECAUSE OUR FOREFATHERS GOT TIRED OF A KING SAYING "BECAUSE I WANT IT THAT WAY" and they wrote it into our CONSTITUTION. That's why!
I was a cop for 6 years. I could determine if I had probable cause for a warrant within, MAX, an hour... not even 3 days. But the NSA can't do it in 3 days and find the most basic of reasons to tell a secret panel of judges known to bend over backwards to issue warrants?
Give me a break!
If the NSA felt they couldn't get the FISA court to give them a warrant for whoever they are spying upon, then whoever it is they are spying upon has absolutely ZERO connection to "terrorism" or "foreign intelligence".
And by the NEW law... now... they don't! It can be an American citizen who is doing ANYTHING and the NSA can spy on them, for whatever reason they want... all without a warrant.
In effect, Michale, you are now complicit in the total dismantling of what our forefathers gave us... congratulations! I hope your mother is proud of you.
Hay, it was YOUR Democrats who allowed this to happen..
I guess that makes YOU as complicit as I allegedly am, right..
I was also a cop for a while... And I have worked CT as well.. And I can assure you that, these days, there is more military in CT than there is conventional law enforcement. You need to have the ability to move fast and completely compartmentalized intel.. Having to go thru the warrant process completely negates BOTH of those actions..
Apparently your Democrats realized this and that is why they voted to give Bush the powers he needs to fight terrorism. Just like they did 5 or 6 years ago..
If you have a problem with that, take it up with your Congress Critter.. Don't bitch at the messenger...
Michale.....
There is a fourth possibility.
What if the government just does what's best for the government?
The notion that Democrats and Republicans are on different sides is just a way to divide up the electorate and provide grist for the theater that passes for public discussion.
America doesn't need it's freedoms weakened, but government becomes freer every time they can dispense with another constitutional constraint.
They make a big show about how bad something like this wwt bill is, but Bush's threat to interrupt their vacations becomes the flimsy excuse they use to do what they were going to do anyway.
WMDs, performance issues, vacation interruptions. The excuses just get flimsier, as if they're getting tired of pretending to represent the people.
With a lucrative lobbying career just waiting in the wings, maybe they don't even care that they're looking less and less electable.
CDUB,
I think that is Michael Gass' 2nd possibility. That the Democrats and Republicans are in collusion to make their lives easier and to hell with the rest of the country..
But do you know what I find interesting??
That you and Michael would prefer to demonize your own Democrats rather than concede the possibility that maybe, JUST MAYBE, Bush and the GOP is right in what they do and say..
That's where I get the idea that ya'all are blinded by partisan hatred.. You two are willing to cast ANYONE into the pits of hell, even your own Democrats, before you will admit that Bush and the GOP just might be right about things...
Don't ya'all find that interesting?? I do..
Michale.....
The thing I find interesting is that you keep thinking the democrats are mine. Even more interesting that you find partisan hatred in that post.
Micheal's point is similar, but still assumes that there are 2 parties involved, my suggestion is that parties are an illusion created for your entertainment.
In order to admit something, I'd have to believe it, and I don't believe for a minute that the admin is interested in my safety, they'd sell me tomorrow if the price were right.
Michale,
You make what the NSA is doing sound like you have a counter-terrorism team that has to be on a plane the minute they get information, and suddenly, the information, location and people change and BAM! they are off to a new locale.
In other words... you are TOTALLY and BLATANTLY misrepresenting what is going on!
The NSA is intercepting COMMUNICATIONS. They can, and HAVE, been doing so under the old guidelines just fine!
I'll even grant you your nightmare scenario!
The CIA gets a hint that there is a terrorist plot cooking up from a minor informant who only has a name. They tell the NSA who then has to find that person. Once they find that person, they need a warrant to eavesdrop IF the person was a U.S. citizen IN the United States. Then, any actionable intelligence gleamed is passed back to the CIA and FBI who then have to find the person...
Oh wait... nevermind... your nightmare scenario is pure BS.
First of all, even IF the CIA got the hint of a terrorist plot being hatched, the NSA could spy on the individual for 3 DAYS before they had to get a warrant. In that time, they SURELY could find probable cause to get the warrant to continue spying, or, deem it a hoax or non-threat. The CIA, FBI, having probable cause, could always send some desk-jockey to a judge, even at 2am, to get a warrant signed if they had to.
Once again... the justification to do away with our constitution is BS... it's a Republican talking point... nothing more... and they get away with it because Joe Six-Pack doesn't know better. I do.
And yes, I voted Democrat in 2006, and yes, they stabbed us in the back by not fighting for our constitution just as they stabbed us in the back by taking impeachment, the ONLY remedy for an out-of-control President in our Constitution "off the table".
And the difference Michale, is I'm not sitting here cheerleading the loss of our liberties.
@Michael
>is I'm not sitting here cheerleading
>the loss of our liberties.
And yet, you cannot tell me ONE liberty you have lost..
All you have is theory and potential..
I can show you the potential for NOT being vigilant. It happened on 11 Sep 2001...
As for doing away with the Constitution, nothing could be further from the truth... The system worked EXACTLY how it was meant to work.. Checks and balances, new technology and new situations require new laws to deal with things. Just like the idea of enemy combatants beget the MCA and just like LSD beget new drug laws... If you were to have your (apparent) way, the Laws would NEVER be changed.. The Constitution is an ever morphing and changing document. It is NOT a suicide pact..
Let me ask you something... The President sees this as necessary.. The Republicans in Congress see this as necessary. The DEMOCRATS in Congress see this as necessary..
Isn't it SLIGHTLY conceivable in your mind that EVERYONE ELSE is right and YOU are wrong??
Can you even acknowledge the possibility???
Michale.....
Michale,
You are STILL so wrong.
First of all, Bush was WARNED before 9/11. The intelligence was there and he was given it in the Aug 6th intelligence memorandum. In addition, John Ashcroft STOPPED flying commercial airlines MONTHS prior to 9/11 specifically because of an FBI terror notice. An FBI agent has flat said, publically, that the 9/11 investigation was hampered (see Sibel Edmunds CBS article):
"(CBS) This is the story of hundreds, if not thousands, of foreign language documents that the FBI neglected to translate before and after the Sept. 11 attacks -- documents that detailed what the FBI heard on wiretaps and learned during interrogations of suspected terrorists. Sibel Edmonds, a translator who worked at the FBI's language division, says the documents weren't translated because the division was riddled with incompetence and corruption. Edmonds was fired after reporting her concerns to FBI officials. She told her story behind closed doors to investigators in Congress and to the Justice Department. Most recently, she spoke with the commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks."
Did you get that? BEFORE AND AFTER 9/11. So quit with your Republican talking points that are easily refuted.
I've not lost any liberties? Wrong again...
Just because I haven't had the lack of these liberties used against me personally, doesn't mean I still have them... it means just what it is; I haven't had them used against ME yet. Talk to Jose Padilla what rights, AS AN AMERICAN, he's lost. I'll refresh your memory; the 4th and 5th Amendments to start. Talk to the protester's in Oregon and Washington what rights they've lost. Again, let me refresh your memory; the right to peaceably assemble (1st Amendment). You DO remember that the police FIRED upon the protester's don't you?
As for your argument that I would "never change the laws", you are (once again), sticking out a strawman without facts. A law can be changed to accomodate new TECHNOLOGY without doing away with CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS and OVERSIGHT. It was done in 1978 with FISA, which btw, was put into effect BECAUSE our government was doing illegal spying on Americans and they used the EXACT SAME ARGUMENT THEN to get that law. The Congress said "ok, we'll lesson SOME constitutional protections, but not ALL of them!" That law weakened the protections, but it didn't remove them. Bush has SPECIFICALLY stated that they don't want ANY OVERSIGHT... ANY PROTECTIONS... AT ALL. And you are CHEERING for it, sitting here debating it repeatedly, and then trying to go "but, but, I'm NOT a troll... reallly... why don't you believe meeee".
I'll tell you why. Because once someone totally destroys your psuedo-attempts at argument, you run right to the Republican talking points and RW sites for your sources (The site by William Kristol???? OMFG! Only one of the men who got EVERYTHING wrong about Iraq!).
And finally, your last BS statement:
"Let me ask you something… The President sees this as necessary.. The Republicans in Congress see this as necessary. The DEMOCRATS in Congress see this as necessary.. Isn't it SLIGHTLY conceivable in your mind that EVERYONE ELSE is right and YOU are wrong?? Can you even acknowledge the possibility???"
No. You know why? We lost habeas corpus before. It was used against AMERICAN CITIZENS first and foremost. That we regained it was a miracle (both times), since once you lose a right, you generally never get them back.
The same arguments can be used for drugs.
"oh, but, we have to find the drug dealers before they destroy our society, our children... think of the children... no warrants, we need no warrants, no oversight, no protection for Americans"... only even WITH the protections, there are still abuses of people's rights.
The same arguments can be used for guns. (read above).
The same arguments were used to keep blacks as slaves and women from voting.
They were wrong then, they are wrong now.
We can live, within rules, with protections and oversight, with our constitution intact, and we can still fight crime. We can fight terrorists as well.
Nixon wanted the same thing. He was wrong. He was held accountable for his crimes.
Bush wants, and for the most part has gotten, the same thing. He is wrong. He is not only NOT being held accountable for ADMITTING he violated the law for YEARS... STARTING PRIOR TO 9/11 BTW... but now, Congress is GIVING it to him.
I have already proven the FBI abused their powers given to them with the NSL's. The NSA WILL abuse this power, too. The ONLY people it will hurt are American citizens... and INNOCENT one's at that... not even JUST the guilty... because even WITH all of our protections, you have people on death row for crimes they didn't commit.
And you are cheerleading for a Kingship... a dictator... who wants to have the sole right to determine who goes to prison forever based solely on HIS word they are a criminal, a terrorist. Bush is no better than Stalin, Hitler, Saddam, and every other dictator who came before him.
Oh... and Michale,
Here is something you should read.
It was authored by Paul Craig Roberts. Who is that you ask?
"Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions."
I'll give you his opening salvo:
"Unless Congress immediately impeaches Bush and Cheney, a year from now the US could be a dictatorial police state at war with Iran."
That is a REPUBLICANS opening salvo against Bush and the Congress that has aided and abetted him and his corrupt administration. It gets worse from there.
First off, let me say that I have read everything you posted, Michael. I was going to go thru it, point by point and explaining why you are so wrong about everything..
But then I came across this.
.... and felt this says it better than anything else.
Michale.....
I will also agree with you, Michael, that these things we are experiencing are not "right", but they are NECESSARY...
You are under the mistaken impression that, when Habeas Corpus was suspended under Lincoln, it was later restored because it was WRONG in the first place.
Habeas Corpus wasn't restored because it was wrong. It was restored because the emergency had passed.
When FDR (a Democrat) incarcerated thousands and thousands of American Citizens who had committed NO crime and they were later released, they weren't released because it was "wrong". (it WAS wrong) They were released because the emergency had passed..
What you cannot seem to fathom is that there IS a real and bona fide enemy out there intent on killing Americans. And they can use our freedoms AGAINST us to do it. The government has a DUTY to stop them.
Your entire government (Democrats and Republicans) are united in that these actions are necessary. They have knowledge that you do not have... And you can sit there and claim that THEY are wrong and YOU are right??
That's like me walking into NASA and, amongst a bunch of rocket scientists, claim that THEY don't know what they are doing and only I have the knowledge to properly build a rocket..
Congress has all the knowledge and all the intel and yet THEY are wrong and you are right..
Do you not you see the utter arrogance of such a position??
You elected your representatives to speak for you and take action for you.
Let them do their jobs, for christ's sake.. If you don't like the way they are doing their jobs, you can fire them in about a year and hire the Republicans again...
Michale.....
Michale,
That you felt a person CALLING for another 9/11 to be worth repeating says it all.
However, like all of your Republican talking points, this one too is easily refuted.
Who disbanded the CIA task force whose job it was to track down Bin Laden? BUSH.
Who diverted the majority of our resources from Afghanistan and finding Bin Laden to Iraq? BUSH.
Who said he would get Bin Laden dead or alive, then later, AFTER he attacked Iraq, said he really didn't think about Bin Laden anymore? BUSH.
And yet you have the gall to sit here and say we NEED another 9/11 when it is YOUR King Bush who decided to do all of these things?????
IF Bush had done all he could, you MIGHT have an argument. But he's done the EXACT OPPOSITE, which leaves you with as little clothes as your Emperor; NONE. Bush wants MORE authority to track down terrorists he's ALREADY said he doesn't think about!
That there are STILL idiots like YOU defending him just goes to show how brainwashed the RW'rs truly are.
After Colin Powell LIED to the UN General Assembly (knowingly or unknowingly is immaterial.. they were LIES)... his BIGGEST concern wasn't that he helped start a war that has gotten hundreds of thousands of innocents killed... thousands of our troops killed... it was that his LIES put a BLOT on his record!!!
The neo-con's who sold us the war are STILL denying that THEY had ANYTHING to do with it!!!
The media who beat the drums for the war in Iraq and passed the false intelligence (read as LIES) off to the public as fact is now beating the same drums, using the SAME LIES, to attack Iran who has done NOTHING against the United States!!!
IF you had half of a brain, you would KNOW why Congress is with the President on this; because oil has ALREADY hit peak... because since the 1950's, our foreign policy objectives were to get control of that oil and get military bases into the Middle East to secure it. Even THAT mission hasn't been accomplished.
The Iraqi Hydrocarbon Law is nothing more than a give-away to Exxon-Mobile and British Petroleum. Go READ IT. I HAVE. Even the PUPPETS we helped into power in Iraq can't get it passed and are, in fact, looking to OUST US from their country... and RIGHTFULLY SO!
ANY country that invaded the United States, deposed our government, put into place puppets, and DEMANDED that we hand over to them all of our resources, all while killing and/or imprisoning our friends, our neighbors, our family... you would see an "insurgency" that is no different than the one in Iraq. Do you know why?
Because Paul Bremer took away EVERY part of government, EVERY bit of stability, Iraq had; the army, the police, the leaders. It would be no different if you went into L.A. and removed all of the police, the Army, the Guard, and every politician in every capacity. The Bloods and the Crips and the Kings would tear L.A. apart fighting for control. Welcome to what we unleashed on Iraq as a COUNTRY... not just a CITY.
THAT is why your "surge" is NOT working. It was never designed TO WORK. It was to make CERTAIN areas LESS dangerous so the Iraqi politicians could pass the Oil Law... NOTHING MORE... and that hasn't occurred (nor should it). So what if only 1500 people died instead of 3000. THAT is not progress because we cannot sustain our forces indefinitely. EVERY General in EVERY capacity has said that, REPEATEDLY. WE CANNOT SUSTAIN THESE LEVELS. That means we MUST leave and when we do, the violence WILL return, just as it has in Basra as the Brit's leave.
But, unlike YOU, I've BEEN to Iraq... twice... and in 2006, I was at Al-Faw, just south of Basra. That "success story" that you and the rest of the RW'rs want to tout in Basra wasn't a success. We couldn't get NEAR Basra WHILE the Brit's occupied it. It was too hot, too dangerous, and we avoided it like the plague. We were flat told; if we got near Basra we'd be DEAD. D. E. A. D. Some success. And as the Brit's leave, it is only getting WORSE, but they cannot sustain the levels either.
When the Iranian's revolted against our imposed dictator from the 1953 coup, it took the clerics stepping in to regain order for the country. THAT is why the Ayatollah was the one on television; he HAD to be to restore order. AFTER they got their country back, AFTER the Ayatollah's restored order, AFTER they got the U.S. OUT, Iran stabilized and we didn't hear sh*t from them until BUSH called them the "axis of evil"!
It will take us leaving Iraq, TOTALLY, and the clerics in Iraq standing up, restoring order, restoring their government, before Iraq STARTS to stabilize. THAT is what it will take and NOTHING else will work. NOTHING.
Ya know, Michael?? You remind me of one half of a newly divorced couple..
When the marriage was new (Nov 2006) you couldn't stop raving how great your "spouse" (The Democrats) were, how perfect your "spouse" is and how you two are going to change the world..
Now, you are a bitter spouse and you are going on and on about how deceitful your "spouse" is and how back-stabbing your "spouse" is etc etc..
That's the problem with heaping so much praise on your Democrats. When they do what is right for the country, you people turn on them..
I'll ask again.. And please try not to answer with more Bush bashing.... again......
What makes YOU right and your entire government wrong??
Michale.....
Ya know, something we DO agree on..
The Democrats are no better than the Republicans..
But, you really are in a pickle, ain'tcha?? You won't vote Democrat, you can't vote Republican....
Who ya gonna vote for??
Ya see, THAT is the problem with putting party before country.. THAT is the problem with being so enslaved by party dogma..
When your party comes to their senses and does things that are actually good for the country, but contrary to your wishes, you are abandoned and alone.. You become a rebel without a cause...
I feel for you...
Michale.....
Michale and Michael Gass -
I have edited one comment each from you.
I have not removed anything, what I did is put your links within your text rather than as a separate line. The only reason I did this is that it looks nicer in the comments boxes (long links run over and it looks weird). Not one other word has been edited.
If you know how to use "href" tags, you can do this yourself when you post. If you don't know how to do this, just post the link as you have been doing and I'll clean it up for you.
Just wanted you to know that nothing else has been changed.
OK, I want a clean fight, no hitting below the belt, no hitting the ref. On three... break!!
Heh heh.
-CW
THanx for the info on HREF links..
Do we also have access to BOLD and ITALICS, etc etc??
Michale.....
Let's see.
Oh, yer good...
Yer really good...
:D
Michale.....
Don't think I don't see you two in the back of the classroom, drawing on your desks!
Keep it up and there'll be some detention and cleaning erasers for you both!!
Heh heh.
Most tags work, just try not to go overboard. The little comments boxes are kind of wonky to begin with...
:-)
-CW
I'm really not that emphatic, and I say that emphatically
Michale,
I will agree that the Democrats have now shown that they are no better than Republicans.
Who to vote for? That's easy. MYSELF if need be.
My vote goes to whoever I believe is going to HELP my country, not destroy it for profit.
@Michael Gass
>My vote goes to whoever I believe
>is going to HELP my country, not
>destroy it for profit.
Does this mean that, if you could vote for a Republican Candidate, if you felt it was good for your country??
If so, then there is hope for you after all.. :D
Michale.....