Ham's To Support Veteran's and Troops [Archive]

kb9ibw

10-22-2005, 04:21 AM

Amateur Radio Military Appreciation Day (http://www.armad.net)

# # Amateur Radio Operators will once again unite to show support to those on Active Duty, our National Guard, Reserves, and Veteran’s. #On Monday November 14, 2005 from 5:00pm till 8:00pm Amateur radio operators will be on the air providing live messages of support and appreciation as a public service during Military Appreciation Monday. #
# # Amateur Radio Operators will set up at locations across the United States, and will be contacting each other, and allowing the general public to participate by expressing their positive messages on the air that our military members, and veteran’s are not forgotten. #
# # #The event, which coincides with the Golden Corral’s National Military Appreciation Monday, will help bring public awareness to the hobby, and serve as a way to recruit new licensed Amateur Radio Operators.
This is a good way to get your Amateur Radio club or just a group of Ham’s together to demonstrate the good deeds that Ham’s provide during emergencies, and disasters.
# # To get involved visit www.armad.net and click on the “Events” link at the top of the page. #Amateur Radio Operators, let’s help build up our hobby by “Hamming It Up For The Troops.”

k5wta

10-24-2005, 11:19 PM

What freqs will you be using?
Jake
USN ret.

KI4GXD

10-24-2005, 11:55 PM

I have applied to the S.C. army mars ,and awaiting approval,and call.We need more participation in all areas of traffic handling,and public exposure on what we do as operators,so lets all try to participate and have fun doing so.

k4lem

10-25-2005, 01:23 AM

Best way to support troops is to get them OUT of Iraq.
I support the US Military because one does not select his/her duty. That is assigned. With over 1900 dead I hardly think Amateurs should give the impression they support the lies of George W Bush.

WB4UIC

10-25-2005, 03:07 AM

Quote[/b] (w1it @ Oct. 24 2005,19:23)]Best way to support troops is to get them OUT of Iraq.
I support the US Military because one does not select his/her duty. That is assigned. With over 1900 dead I hardly think Amateurs should give the impression they support the lies of George W Bush.
Good deal on the event. I, being a USAF MARS member, USAF retiree will check it out.

Gary - Point well taken, and all, but lighten up, eh? We're supporting the troops who ARE there, and have supported the effort - not the politics involved in keeping them there.

wu5e

10-25-2005, 06:57 AM

W9GRN

10-25-2005, 02:08 PM

Quote[/b] (w5ssg @ Oct. 24 2005,23:57)]Quote[/b] (w1it @ Oct. 24 2005,18:23)]Best way to support troops is to get them OUT of Iraq.
I support the US Military because one does not select his/her duty. That is assigned. With over 1900 dead I hardly think Amateurs should give the impression they support the lies of George W Bush.
I feel you should keep your Political views off of QRZ. If you feel that strongly vote!

Extra Class
US Army Mars
HAM IT UP!

W5SSG
Agreed.

K3ESE

10-25-2005, 03:42 PM

"If you feel that strongly vote!" ? ? ?

I do vote, and I'm guessing the op who advised us to speak up in denunciation of Bush's lies did, too.

The perception we'd like to present, as responsible citizens, is that while we support the brave troops who volunteer to protect our country, we deplore sending these same brave troops to senseless deaths for wars based on lies.

Doing a "support our troops" activity is great, but let's be sure our support is not confused with support for their current mission in Iraq.

K4JF

10-25-2005, 04:18 PM

n1uq

10-25-2005, 04:31 PM

Quote[/b] (K3ESE @ Oct. 25 2005,08:42)]"If you feel that strongly vote!" ? ? ?

#I do vote, and I'm guessing the op who advised us to speak up in denunciation of Bush's lies did, too.

#The perception we'd like to present, as responsible citizens, is that while we support the brave troops who volunteer to protect our country, we deplore sending these same brave troops to senseless deaths for wars based on lies.

#Doing a "support our troops" activity is great, but let's be sure our support is not confused with support for their current #mission in Iraq.
Was 9/11 was a lie too? It's fools like you that will be the ruin of this great country. When they come banging on your door it will be too late. That will be alright with you as you can't think for yourself.

GOD BLESS THE AMERICANS WHO ARE RISKING THEIR LIFES TO KEEP US FREE.

VE7RFH

10-25-2005, 04:54 PM

KD6NIG

10-25-2005, 08:40 PM

Why am I not shocked. #Want to show support for our troops, former and current, its instantly contrived to be a Bush support thing.

So I guess if I trip and fall down today I should blame Bush, right? #I break wind? #Must have been Bush's fault that I chose to eat beans today.

For all of you people who thinks that EVERYTHING you do in America including breathing is attributed to Bush, please, take a dollar out of your wallet (ok, thanks to Bush, if you want to totally blame him, we can call it about a quarter gallon of gas, and it couldn't be that gas guzzling SUV costing you all that money, right?) and BUY A CLUE, please.

I can't WAIT for Bush to be out of office, not because I want him in or out of there, but because then you can at least blame someone else when the wind blows your hat off or something.

Lets not ruin an event meant to honor those serving and those who have served. #Without them, you probably wouldn't have the right to cry about Bush constantly every day. #Can't we just let this event go and keep all the Bush bashing or praising in the 100 other topics on this BB?

k4lem

10-25-2005, 08:46 PM

Quote[/b] (K3ESE @ Oct. 25 2005,08:42)]"If you feel that strongly vote!" ? ? ?

#I do vote, and I'm guessing the op who advised us to speak up in denunciation of Bush's lies did, too.

#The perception we'd like to present, as responsible citizens, is that while we support the brave troops who volunteer to protect our country, we deplore sending these same brave troops to senseless deaths for wars based on lies.

#Doing a "support our troops" activity is great, but let's be sure our support is not confused with support for their current #mission in Iraq.
[QUOTE]

K3 EME, you clarified my views precisely.

Thanks!

W9AFB

10-25-2005, 09:17 PM

It took 3 posts from a message about supporting the Military on Veterans Day to one about Bush and politics.

You guys are ridiculous.

VE7RFH

10-25-2005, 09:41 PM

Quote[/b] (W9AFB @ Oct. 25 2005,14:17)]It took 3 posts from a message about supporting the Military on Veterans Day to one about Bush and politics.

You guys are ridiculous.
I don't think it is ridiculous at all, especially as today US military deaths in Iraq passed the 2,000 mark (but still only a fraction of the Iraqi civilian deaths at the hands of the American military). #I think people have every right to feel emotions heating up when the subject of the US military is raised, especially on a ham radio chat board that has nothing whatsoever to do with the military. Never forget, the military is merely an extension of the political arm so when the politics is despised, the military will inevitably catch some of the flak.

10-25-2005, 09:54 PM

Still curious to know:
What frequencies?
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # thankyou.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/blues.gif

k4lem

10-25-2005, 11:09 PM

Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 25 2005,09:18)]Quote[/b] (w1it @ Oct. 24 2005,18:23)]Best way to support troops is to get them OUT of Iraq.
I support the US Military because one does not select his/her duty. That is assigned. With over 1900 dead I hardly think Amateurs should give the impression they support the lies of George W Bush.
Those of you who want out of Iraq had better really support the military so that they will be here to help you when the fight comes here, as you want.
[QUOTE]

Actually, I worked for three years to get a net going on 40 meters where people in a civil way could discuss divergent views on any topic. But, unlike the interneters Hams tend to be too sensitive to issues and especially those who may disagree.

Truth is Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11. Many still in ignorance believe the non sense Bush spews. The problem is facts do not support it. In fact by destabalizing Iraq and burning 2000 American lives and its said 200,000 Iraqi, terror has increased not decreased. Iraq was a diversion from the so called WAR on Terror.

VE7RFH

10-26-2005, 12:50 AM

And Osama bin Laden is still a free man despite George Dubya's promises.

kf9xz

10-26-2005, 01:57 AM

Hearing some of the posts on this thread, I wonder why I ever served in the military. Simply our freedoms come at a cost. Why don't you quit bashing our government and show a little appreciation for what our troops do for us every day. Even if you don't support the President, don't turn your back on the troops. They give more than most Americans would ever consider. Remember they volunteered to protect "our way of life".

KI4GXD

10-26-2005, 02:49 AM

as far as politics,or any other problems we have one thing is for shure.(THIS COUNTRY IS SLOWLEY BEING DESTROYED BY THOSE THAT COULD NOT HAVE CREATED IT!) so next time you talk about our troops remember they are trying to save what little country we have left.

WA5BEN

10-26-2005, 06:58 AM

Quote[/b] (w1it @ Oct. 24 2005,18:23)]Best way to support troops is to get them OUT of Iraq.
I support the US Military because one does not select his/her duty. That is assigned. With over 1900 dead I hardly think Amateurs should give the impression they support the lies of George W Bush.
Just once, I wish those of you who are so convinced that you are all knowing about what is good for our troops would go to any military base and LISTEN to the troops.

Over 95% of the military voted for the President in 2000 and again in 2004. They overwhelmingly agree that we need to be in Iraq and Afghanistan. And, yes, my child is in the military -- as are numerous other family members.

Our members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Guard units understand the risks -- but they also understand keeping battles away from our shores. If the previous administration had acted decisively, when he had clear evidence of Al-Quaida involvement in the African embassy bombings -- and/or in Somalia -- 9/11 might have been avoided.

That administration's failure to act when the U.S. was clearly attacked created the Bin Laden "warrior hero" and made possible many things that would not have been possible had Bin Laden been taken out -- or even just attacked. Two cruise missiles were a joke of a response -- and that joke was not lost on potential militants.

Somalia laid the pattern for the Al-Quaida thinking: Create casualties, and the U.S. will pull out. This administration -- and Iraqis seeking freedom -- have had the task of disproving that assumption. Many people have died because the assumption was permitted in the first place.

The lies are not from the President. The lies are from those who tell only one side of the story.

I can cite chapter and verse of two separate instances of being in two different countries and experiencing wonderful treatment and coming back to the U.S. and hearing totally different stories being broadcast by the press here. In one case, a riot was reported at my hotel -- but it did not happen -- and the local newspapers (and people) were 180 degrees from attitude "reported" by the U.S. coverage.

When a cabbie refuses to take a tip because you are an American, and he calls his friends to greet you because he is proud to have you in his cab, that says something! When the shoe-shine guy and the waiters in the hotel are shaking your hand just because you are an American, that says something. ...and when you return home to see the news reporting that these same people are "spitting on Americans", that says something is wrong -- with the news.

The troops on the ground in Iraq report great optimisim among the Iraqis, and many have volunteered to go back to "finish the job". ...but that news doesn't fit the agenda of the network, so it goes unreported.

And that's the way it is

(Come back Uncle Walter! We need you.)

k4lem

10-26-2005, 02:02 PM

Quote[/b] (kf9xz @ Oct. 25 2005,18:57)]Hearing some of the posts on this thread, I wonder why I ever served in the military. #Simply our freedoms come at a cost. #Why don't you quit bashing our government and show a little appreciation for what our troops do for us every day. #Even if you don't support the President, don't turn your back on the troops. #They give more than most Americans would ever consider. #Remember they volunteered to protect "our way of life".
[QUOTE]

Perhaps you served out of a sense the Nation, your country could be served by you in that way. There is nothing wrong, as I see it, in your belief. Which is after all much of the time true.

However, this is a special time in history with the most incompetent President this country has had perhaps since Nixon or more distantly Calvin Collidge.

The military should not take umbrage at every one who is critical of policy. You and others are to be respected for your service, but do you understand exactly what it was you defended?

In the current horrifc onslaught of lies and deceptions, the military at civilian command, ie. GW Bush was sent on a miscalulated and impossible mission. The sad part for me is my state Vermont, has had per capita more young people die in Iraq than any other.

If you believe Bush a great man so be it, but your evidence like that of the Iraq invasion to stop terrorism is very (in my opinion) not supportable by fact.

Lets hope the Plame scam will expose Bush and Cheney for what they have done. The young lives lost cannot be brought back. Time is a one way street.

W9GRN

10-26-2005, 03:13 PM

I fully support the men and women in the military where ever they are stationed at.Also,I have no regrets for having supported President Bush in his election campaign http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif He's doing a great job as president and I would vote for him again if I could.

n1uq

10-26-2005, 04:23 PM

To Larry Randall,

Thank you for your words.

Wayne, wb1wmb

k5xs

10-26-2005, 05:28 PM

Larry,

Well said.

Gary (W1IT): I wonder how much time you spent in uniform. It seems to me your declaration of "The best way to support our troops" presupposes some understanding of them. Have you been one? Do you know what they regard as "the best way to support them"?

As Larry pointed out, they are the ones giving their lives and limbs. Why do you suppose they are doing it, Gary? They aren't doing it because it's fun. They are doing it because they--the ones there--know the cause is right.

Have you read about the 167 new medical clinics and 628 school construction projects have been completed in Iraq? Would you prefer the rape chambers be still in operation? Would you like to see the child-sized manacles back in use?

It's a real shame so many have accepted the media-generated notion that our president is somehow incompetent. If his predecessor had shown a fraction of the courage of leadership that he has, maybe we woudn't need to be doing what we are today.

But here we are off topic....

k4lem

10-26-2005, 06:32 PM

Quote[/b] (k5xs @ Oct. 26 2005,10:28)]Larry,

Well said.

Gary (W1IT): #I wonder how much time you spent in uniform. #It seems to me your declaration of "The best way to support our troops" presupposes some understanding of them. #Have you been one? #Do you know what they regard as "the best way to support them"? #

As Larry pointed out, they are the ones giving their lives and limbs. #Why do you suppose they are doing it, Gary? #They aren't doing it because it's fun. #They are doing it because they--the ones there--know the cause is right.

Have you read about the 167 new medical clinics and 628 school construction projects have been completed in Iraq? #Would you prefer the rape chambers be still in operation? #Would you like to see the child-sized manacles back in use?

It's a real shame so many have accepted the media-generated notion that our president is somehow incompetent. #If his predecessor had shown a fraction of the courage of leadership that he has, maybe we woudn't need to be doing what we are today.

But here we are off topic....
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[QUOTE]

Yup. you as I are entitled to your spin of reality. That we disagree and still may speak out, I say is what the US is all about.

Its not about empire, oil, greed. And that is all Bush really has as an agenda. Where was your GREAT Bush during Viet Nam? Oh, well that's off topic.

k5xs

10-26-2005, 06:59 PM

Gary,

Since you didn't respond to my questions, we'll have to guess at your answers:

73,
Bernie K5XS

KC0NBW

10-26-2005, 07:11 PM

VE7RFH

10-26-2005, 08:21 PM

"I wonder how much time you spent in uniform."

Just what does that have to do with support for American troops, the wisdom of George W. Bush's policies or the right of anybody to criticise them?

k5xs

10-26-2005, 09:09 PM

Quote[/b] (VE7RFH @ Oct. 26 2005,13:21)]"I wonder how much time you spent in uniform."

Just what does that have to do with support for American troops, the wisdom of George W. Bush's policies or the right of anybody to criticise them?
It has nothing whatever to do with the wisdom of President Bush's policies or the right of anybody to criticize them. Anyone is welcome to criticize away, and I don't think anything I or anyone else has said suggests to the contrary.

But it has a great deal to do with proclaiming "The best way to support the troops is..." If the gentleman has never been a "troop," I submit he has very little knowledge of the best way they'd like to be "supported."

I also offer that if one were to ask the troops there whether we should stay (President Bush's policy) or cut and run (a popularly stated alternative), the vast majority will say let's finish the job we started.

That's what how much time he did (or didn't) spend in uniform has to do with the topic.

KI4GXD

10-26-2005, 10:06 PM

Larry,well said:cool:

w6em

10-26-2005, 10:16 PM

Quote[/b] (KC0NBW @ Oct. 25 2005,15:11)]Quote[/b] (w1it @ Oct. 24 2005,18:23)]Best way to support troops is to get them OUT of Iraq.
I support the US Military because one does not select his/her duty. That is assigned. With over 1900 dead I hardly think Amateurs should give the impression they support the lies of George W Bush.
you should be ashamed of your attitude towards our people in the military by blaming the whitehouse for what the arabs have done to their own counties over the years.

if you are at all an honorable person, you will delete your original post and tell everyone your are sorry for making it in the first place.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif
I don't think you can understand words, my friend. #He supports the military, as I do, but doesn't support a police-action, based on fraudulent pretext.

Its really sad that disrespect for liars gets twisted into claimed shameful behavior. #

The saidest thing I can imagine is for young men and women to march up and down streets in a foreign land and give their lives in vain. #A completely different scenario than Afganistan. #We've now lost over 2000 of our best in Iraq. #How many gave their lives in Afganistan? #Certainly not that many.

We are not, now, fighting a war. #Wars are declared, by Congress, against sovereign nations, not a collection of hoodlums. #Iraq is a police-action operation, plain and simple. #War on Terror? #No more than a War on Speeders by the local PD and the Highway Patrol.

Afganistan was different. #The whole world virtually declared war on the government of Afganistan, the Taliban. #Completely appropriate. #In contrast, the invasion of Iraq was already being planned by Rumfilled, Wolfiewitz and Cheney in the early days of the present administration. #Over the ensuing months, after September 11, RUmmy directed the Central Command to develop attack plans. #At the same time the Afganistan effort was underway. #Lots of evidence that Iraq was NOT involved. #Ah, but some got 'manufactured' and shuffled to appear legitimate. #And, when it was found to be untrue and wouldn't admit it, they tried to shoot the messenger by harming his wife.

Let's not forget, of course, the Dick Cheney-sponsored special Haliburton "feed and greed" deal either. #After all, we needed a quick meal-preparing, fuel transporting contractor to be ready when we were. #Keeping the blind trust in mind, Halliburton's stock was about $15 a share, so Dick needed to help boost the value of his shares and deferred compensation.

So, let's keep it simple, go to the local Golden Corral on November 14, take your HT, international orange traffic vest, and advertise ARMAD. #Free meals for active-duty military, reserves, and veterans. #And, a chance to promote amateur radio to boot. #Maybe even a free meal for active-duty hams in orange vest uniform.

73,

Lee

n4gsa

10-26-2005, 10:57 PM

This thread sure went OFF topic. Remember my fellow hams, this thread is about RADIO and Support for OUR Military.

Join in but leave your darn politics aside.

The many posts that I have read tells me some have never put on a military uniform. Irag is not a police action, when the first shot is fired that's war, same as Korea and Nam.

By the way, YES, I wore the uniform of the USA.

"God Bless America"

k4lem

10-26-2005, 11:07 PM

Quote[/b] (n3brs @ Oct. 26 2005,15:57)]This thread sure went OFF topic. Remember my fellow hams, this thread is about RADIO and Support for OUR Military.

Join in but leave your darn politics aside.

The many posts that I have read tells me some have never put on a military uniform. Irag is not a police action, when the first shot is fired that's war, same as Korea and Nam.

By the way, YES, I wore the uniform of the USA.

"God Bless America"
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Actually this thread started as a request for "all hams" to show support for the US Military. I said, it is hard to not support people doing a difficult job they did not specifically request. And, further, it is very easy to confuse a flag wave for the military with an out right sheep like, support for the illegal invasion and continued occupation of Iraq. The pretext for such invasion was a lie. That Saddam Hussein had WMD, which he did not. In fact I believe the "plame-gate" will blow the cover off.

Now as for Afghanistan, I think most supported the military action to kill OBL. Now, isn't it remarkable with all the expense, men and women dead, the US does not to this day have OBL!

Amazes me how some can over look the obvious.

Ham radio can be fun and personally I do support rag chews and nets allowing people to express political feelings. I know, there are plenty of these Jesus nets around so why not politics too.
But, this is my last contribution to this thread. Changing somebody's mind once made up is down right impossible. People are very closed and galvanized in their convictions. Perhaps this is a genetic trait, dunno. I do know it serves to specific good for humanity that I can see.

Peace, 73 Gary

AE5MH

10-27-2005, 12:48 AM

Quote[/b] (w1it @ Oct. 25 2005,01:23)]Best way to support troops is to get them OUT of Iraq.
I support the US Military because one does not select his/her duty. That is assigned. With over 1900 dead I hardly think Amateurs should give the impression they support the lies of George W Bush.
I hardly think there is room for rhetoric here. #The issue is the support for our armed forces around the world. #Your ideology is irrelevant to the point.

MSgt
USAF (Ret) 2000

w6em

10-27-2005, 01:35 AM

Quote[/b] (n3brs @ Oct. 25 2005,18:57)]Irag is not a police action, when the first shot is fired that's war, same as Korea and Nam.
Colloquially, people called them wars, but they were "police actions" and weren't declared wars. #That's why the military had to ask for permission to do this, and weren't allowed to do that, and had their hands tied.

Some people call our activities in Iraq the "Halliburton War." #Yes, I guess you could say, Halliburton declared it. #Or, certainly, its esteemed CEO-emeritus did. #:-)

Some good reading for the curious: "Worse than Watergate," by John Dean and "Plan of Attack" by Bob Woodward. Both inexpensive and quite informative.

Let's get back on track. #Is there a Golden Corral in your town? #If not, surf the web and find a close-by one for the November 14 activities. #The faire's actually quite good. #And, they offer discounts for seniors too.

73,

Lee
W6EM

wc4rav

10-27-2005, 05:30 AM

Quote[/b] (wb1wmb @ Oct. 25 2005,09:31)]Was 9/11 was a lie too? It's fools like you that will be the ruin of this great country. When they come banging on your door it will be too late. That will be alright with you as you can't think for yourself.
I guess Oklahoma city was a lie , so was the 96 Olympic bombings in Atlanta, the church bombings that occurred all over the south east in this century, all lies, I guess.

America is under no more threat of terrorism than it was in 1977 and we have never gone to war over terrorism before.why now

the fact is that our war on terrorism is a lie.

designed to instill fear in all of us to give our gov't more authority than it had before , sacrifice more of our liberties as Americans - all in the name of homeland security... which is a lie.

Bring the boys home and fight the good fight within our borders..
caues after all how can we prstice homland security if our troops are in sombody elses house "liberating " them
while we are here getting raped and robbed here at home.
bring the boys home
we need them fighting at home.

n1uq

10-27-2005, 01:13 PM

Well, there are those who believe in a great wonderful world. A world where no one wants to hurt another person, a world where all live in happiness, a world where there are no bad boys, nirvana.

A world where we cause or have caused all the problems and we deserve what we get. What right did we have trying to stop Germany in WWI and WWII? We even threw good tea into the harbor. #9/11 was our fault as we forced "them" into it. The A-Bomb drop was our fault as we were being bullies.

NO one will hurt us as long as we leave them alone, bring all the killers (our military) home, open up all the boarders, let everyone in. Peace, Love, Happiness, we have no problems and we don't have to worry (what me worry?). Mommy and daddy will watch over us, feed us, cloth us, allow us to rejoice in our little heaven on earth.

OOOH, I can see myself now, tossing rose pedals in the air and dancing on my tip-toes.

Yes, one big happy world and if a bully comes and hurts us then they will slap the bully's hands and tell them that they are being bad boys and to please stop. If the bullies come and hurt 100s of us then they will jump up and down crying "You can't do that, that's not playing nice, don't hurt us because we don't believe as you do", boo hoo.

A world where we give them all our secrets and weapons, "Here you go, now you don't have to be afraid, you can kill as many as we can. You promise not to use them, right?"

Yea, right.

The problem is that we are still human. Our human intellect, for a large proportion of the human race, has far exceeded our basic survival instincts, that basic animal brain where ones physical survival and one's believe system's survival is still the driving force. Until the whole Human race reaches the point where our intellect and understanding has put the basic animal instinct to rest (not necessarily the best thing for the human race survival while we expand and explore the vastness of space) we will need to defend our way of life and survival from those who do not believe as we do.

Our fighting forces protect our way of life, our survival, and our belief systems. They are protecting our rights to disagree and the freedom to do so.

Support them for they are putting their life in harms way to protect the greater thing that we represent and that which would be distroyed by those who are afraid.

K3ESE

10-27-2005, 03:37 PM

[/quote]
Quote[/b] (w1it @ Oct. 25 2005,01:23)]Best way to support troops is to get them OUT of Iraq.
I support the US Military because one does not select his/her duty. That is assigned. With over 1900 dead I hardly think Amateurs should give the impression they support the lies of George W Bush.
I hardly think there is room for rhetoric here. The issue is the support for our armed forces around the world. Your ideology is irrelevant to the point.

MSgt
USAF (Ret) 2000

Well, Sergeant, when you say "I hardly think there is room for rhetoric here," what I'm hearing is: " don't dare think that you should open your mouth and voice your opinion about what our government is doing with our troops and our money - they are the Government, and they are therefore right, and if you're not on our side, you're on the side of the terrorists, so just shut up."

Of course, I don't want to put words in your mouth, just sharing my perception. Have I read you wrong?

VE7RFH

10-27-2005, 06:05 PM

As an objective outsider it is really gratifying to see that there are indeed some Americans at least who have not been taken in completely by the selfserving GWB administration. There is hope yet for the USA.

w6em

10-27-2005, 11:00 PM

Quote[/b] (wb1wmb @ Oct. 26 2005,09:13)]Support them for they are putting their life in harms way to protect the greater thing that we represent and that which would be distroyed by those who are afraid.
Funny, but so far, no one has hinted at anything less than their greatest respect for the military. #Those men and women who serve. #And, are ordered, lawfully, to fight in foreign lands in defense of our freedom.

A few of us, for what we have seen, have read, and have deduced, expressed displeasure with our elected or appointed government officials. #Specifically, with Alfred E. Newman-personified at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. #That, friend, is a considerably different issue. And far afield from respect for our military.
#
Your entire submission renders down to the conclusion that if our country were to yield to those who are afraid, all would be lost. #Courage is but the ability to overcome fear. #To assume that those who are afraid would abolish our defense, give away our assets and compromise our national security and our way of life is at best a strange convolution. #Not at all the case. #If some of our ancestors weren't afraid of the consequences of inaction or unpreparedness, #we probably wouldn't be around today.

US citizens will fight to the last man for what is honest and just in the defense of our country. #However, if our leaders send our military to foreign lands under false pretenses and purposes, it is up to us, as citizens, to demand accountability for their illegitimate decisions and countermand their actions.

I think that is what you are hearing from some of us here. #Please don't mix your love of Alfred with the respect for our military institutions. #That really reeks.

73,

Lee
W6EM

WA5BEN

10-28-2005, 01:48 AM

Quote[/b] (w6em @ Oct. 27 2005,16:00)]A few of us, for what we have seen, have read, and have deduced, expressed displeasure with our elected or appointed government officials. Specifically, with Alfred E. Newman-personified at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. That, friend, is a considerably different issue. And far afield from respect for our military.

US citizens will fight to the last man for what is honest and just in the defense of our country. However, if our leaders send our military to foreign lands under false pretenses and purposes, it is up to us, as citizens, to demand accountability for their illegitimate decisions and countermand their actions.

I think that is what you are hearing from some of us here. Please don't mix your love of Alfred with the respect for our military institutions. That really reeks.

73,

Lee
W6EM
What part of "over 95% of the military voted for President Bush in both 2000 and 2004" do you fail to understand?

Go talk to the guys and gals at any military base, and you will not fail to understand that they trust this president -- and were absolutely afraid of what would happen if the other guy won. They voted with this country's best interests in their hearts, and they voted for the man they could trust.

All of this "keep our troops safe by getting them out of Iraq" crap is 180 degrees from the feelings of the vast majority of the military. They see the problems, they see the gratitude of the Iraqi people, and they see the hope of a future.

What is sad is that there was only one party with a candidate who could be trusted. That is what needs to be fixed, and only the Democrats can fix that. I want to see TWO (or more) parties with good, decent candidates. I trust neither the left nor the right to do well for the nation. When they have to meet in the center, we are much safer.

W2RM

10-28-2005, 12:00 PM

Can we please get back to "Ham Radio" "The Hobby" and communicating with our fellow amateur's....(Ham's to Support Veteran's and the Troops) I too, would like to know what frequencies will be used for the event.

w6em

10-28-2005, 12:08 PM

Quote[/b] (WA5BEN @ Oct. 26 2005,21:48)]What part of "over 95% of the military voted for President Bush in both 2000 and 2004" do you fail to understand?
Interesting statistic. #I guess they checked the outgoing absentee ballots and made sure they were for the *right* candidate.
#
I actually voted for Newman-personified in 2000. #Something I've regretted ever since. #But, that's not at issue here. #I learned from my mistake quickly.

We deserve leaders that we can trust. #With unimpeachable integrity. #Afraid we aren't there yet. #People that make decisions based on true facts, and don't assume office with pre-conceived plans of financial self-embellishment at the expense of United States citizens and the lives of our children. #Above and beyond their salaries and retirement benefits, of course.

Today's course of events in Washington will exemplify the caliber of individuals who were part of the *team* from the beginning. #Just good 21st century White House Plumbers, I suppose, following orders. #That, we won't hear, but can easily surmise.

Ms. Jackson Lee is about the only voice of recent memory in Texas politics that appears to meet the ethics profile. #She should be your next Senator. Come to think of it, maybe soon-to-retire Austin prosecutor Earle should toss his 10-gallon into the ring...... #Ah, but his retirement had to be DeLayed.

73,

Lee
W6EM

n1uq

10-28-2005, 12:15 PM

Quote[/b] (w2rm @ Oct. 28 2005,05:00)]Can we please get back to "Ham Radio" #"The Hobby" and communicating with our fellow amateur's....(Ham's to Support Veteran's and the Troops) # I too, would like to know what frequencies will be used for the event.
We have not drifted that far off the subject.

What is being shown here is an over whelming support for our veterans and troops, disregarding the tippy toe rose peddle throwing members of our society, as we wait for someone, anyone to publish those frequencies....... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

n3bm

10-28-2005, 12:25 PM

Quote[/b] (wb1wmb @ Oct. 28 2005,05:15)]
We have not drifted that far off the subject.

What is being shown here is an over whelming support for our veterans and troops, disregarding the tippy toe rose peddle throwing members of our society, as we wait for someone, anyone to publish those frequencies....... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/QUOTE]
Hooyah!

W2RM

10-28-2005, 12:37 PM

The discussion is WONDERFUL, I like all you guy's but, I gotta go now and pick up 200 gallons of assorted juices for making my wine for next year. Would someone E-mail me and let me know what the frequencies will be by the time I get back home? (ex U.S. NAVY) Tnx W2RM@ARRL.NET

kg5vk

10-28-2005, 01:07 PM

I knew it would not take long for this thread to turn into a GW Bush diatribe.

Those of us that have served always seem to remember those that hated us and what "they" think we stood for. It is much harder to remember those that appreciated us.

Because those that don't like it seem to the ones that get all the news coverage.

Getting spit on when you arrive home from service in a far away land, sucks and leaves a very indelible impression.

Steve
TSgt USAF Retired
KG5VK

kg5vk

10-28-2005, 01:14 PM

the freqs are listed on their web site
HF: 7230 mhz, and 14330 mhz + or - QRM.
November 14th
this info was on their Events page...
Military Appreciation Events Page (http://www.armad.net/events.htm)
73
steve
KG5VK

W9GRN

10-28-2005, 02:26 PM

Quote[/b] (kg5vk @ Oct. 28 2005,06:14)]the freqs are listed on their web site
HF: 7230 mhz, and 14330 mhz + or - QRM.
November 14th
this info was on their Events page...
Military Appreciation Events Page (http://www.armad.net/events.htm)
73
steve
KG5VK
Thankyou Steve. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

W9GRN

10-28-2005, 02:28 PM

Quote[/b] (w2rm @ Oct. 28 2005,05:37)]The discussion is WONDERFUL, I like all you guy's but, I gotta go now and pick up 200 gallons of assorted juices for making my wine for next year. #Would someone E-mail me and let me know what the frequencies will be by the time I get back home? (ex U.S. NAVY) #Tnx W2RM@ARRL.NET
Mind sharing your recipes? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

W9GRN

10-28-2005, 02:38 PM

Quote[/b] (VE7RFH @ Oct. 27 2005,11:05)]As an objective outsider it is really gratifying to see that there are indeed some Americans at least who have not been taken in completely by the selfserving GWB administration. #There is hope yet for the USA.
As an objective insider it is really gratifying to see President Bush win another term in office. Unlike you, I see hope.

VE7RFH

10-28-2005, 03:40 PM

Er, I don't believe your rules permit him to win another term, he is already serving his second and last ever thank goodness.

k4lem

10-28-2005, 04:30 PM

Quote[/b] (W9GRN @ Oct. 28 2005,07:38)]Quote[/b] (VE7RFH @ Oct. 27 2005,11:05)]As an objective outsider it is really gratifying to see that there are indeed some Americans at least who have not been taken in completely by the selfserving GWB administration. #There is hope yet for the USA.
As an objective insider it is really gratifying to see President Bush win another term in office. Unlike you, I see hope.
[B][QUOTE]

Hope for what? It is well known members of the armied services are generally non criticial (this is taught) and conditioned NOT to think, rather to accept orders from someone higher up.

However, although, the military did over whelmingly support Bush over Gore in 2000, there was more skepticism in 2004.

The truth for whatever reason is the military is more conservative than the average citizen and no better informed.

I still say, support the men and women in the military by being critical of those that misuse them.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif Sunny Days to you all. I've been working in my orchard speculating where a tower would raise the fewest eyebrows. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

W9GRN

10-28-2005, 05:52 PM

Quote[/b] (VE7RFH @ Oct. 28 2005,08:40)]Er, I don't believe your rules permit him to win another term, he is already serving his second and last ever thank goodness.
I meant the year 2004. Too bad he can't serve a third.

W9GRN

10-28-2005, 06:11 PM

Quote[/b] (w1it @ Oct. 28 2005,09:30)]Hope for what? It is well known members of the armied services are generally non criticial (this is taught) and conditioned NOT to think, rather to accept orders from someone higher up.

However, although, the military did over whelmingly support Bush over Gore in 2000, there was more skepticism in 2004.

The truth for whatever reason is the military is more conservative than the average citizen and no better informed.

I still say, support the men and women in the military by being critical of those that misuse them.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif #Sunny Days to you all. I've been working in my orchard speculating where a tower would raise the fewest eyebrows. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
First of all, the armed sevices don't want mindless robots, they want trained people who work together as a team. You been watching too many movies. You say military people are more conservative... add also realistic about world events. That's why they train as if another war will happen.Because it will.Have a great day! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

W6YDK

10-28-2005, 06:57 PM

I'm in regular contact with Marines in Iraq, Afganistan and the gulf, both family and friends. All volunteered to go there and strongly believe in what they are doing. They, as I, think of the whiney complaining and protesting clowns the same way I thought of the people who threw feces in my face when I returned from Vietnam. After almost two years as a MARS operator running phone patches from the grunts in the field in some of the worst fighting of that war, when greeted with the anti-war sentiment here, I immediately volunteered to go back to my MARS unit.

I'm still active in Navy/Marine Corps MARS and am sorry I'm too old to go help my brothers there, because after hearing the attitude of some of the naive wimps here, I'd rather be there.

Barry
W6YDK

Freedom isn't free. But don't worry. The United States Marine Corps will pay most of your share.

VE7RFH

10-28-2005, 08:20 PM

W6YDK your loyalty to your brothers in arms is laudable, but be careful that you keep separate and distinct the duties and responsibilities of a professional soldier and the actions, policies and decisions of your country's political leaders. #They are not synonymous. Don't sink to the level of those who threw feces in your face upon your return from Vietnam because they disapproved of the politics behind your mission. #One can support and admire the dedication and professionalism of soldiers carrying out their orders without necessarily agreeing with the politics behind their mission. #Regrettably too many Americans cannot or will not make this distinction.

w6em

10-28-2005, 09:06 PM

Quote[/b] (VE7RFH @ Oct. 27 2005,16:20)]W6YDK your loyalty to your brothers in arms is laudable, but be careful that you keep separate and distinct the duties and responsibilities of a professional soldier and the actions, policies and decisions of your country's political leaders. #They are not synonymous. Don't sink to the level of those who threw feces in your face upon your return from Vietnam because they disapproved of the politics behind your mission. #One can support and admire the dedication and professionalism of soldiers carrying out their orders without necessarily agreeing with the politics behind their mission. #Regrettably too many Americans cannot or will not make this distinction.
Thanks, neighbor!! #For saying it so well.

The pundits yesterday were saying that IF I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby were indicted, that the stock market would crash, and all wouldn't be well. #The exact opposite happened. #It went straight up. #It reflects the faith by the majority that justice will prevail.

Libby, now formerly an assistant to the President and the #Chief of Staff of the Vice President was indicted on 5 very serious criminal charges. #And, who gave him the classified information to mishandle, ostensibly on purpose? Well, his notes say, noe other than the former CEO of Haliburton himself.

Hopefully, our first 21st century Plumber will talk. #Then, we will see who else at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue was involved. #Involved in the fabrication that has cost over 2000 loyal, dedicated soldiers, marines, airmen and sailors their lives.

While I will never accept that their lives were spent in vain, or anyone who would denigrate the honor of their service, those who sent them to fight under false pretenses need to be brought to justice.

Today, I'm celebrating the first step, along with most other US citizens. #A step taken by a Special Prosecutor from the same political party of those accused.

Our system of justice works. #It may take a long time, but, it works. #Now, what else did Scooter help arrange at the behest of Mr. Cheney?

Lee
W6EM
Bradenton, FL

kc2egl

10-29-2005, 03:17 AM

I bet those of you who do not care for President Bush thought that 'fat pantload' Clinton was a great leader? Funny how the one who evaded the draft by claiming to attend university in England in all reality spent most of his time traveling to Moscow to visit the former Soviet Union.

Long live those who fight for freedom no matter what the cost, and God keep those who gave the ultimate sacrafice while fighting for freedom.

73's
Mike
6 year active Army vet.

K4JF

10-29-2005, 03:19 AM

Quote[/b] (W9GRN @ Oct. 28 2005,11:11)]You say military people are more conservative... add also realistic about world events.
That's why they tend to be more conservative. They see more of the world's events, essentially first hand.

K4JF

10-29-2005, 03:21 AM

Quote[/b] (w6em @ Oct. 28 2005,14:06)]Our system of justice works. #It may take a long time, but, it works. #Lee
W6EM
Bradenton, FL
Beg to differ, Lee. It didn't work very well in the case of the prior administration.

AE4FB

10-29-2005, 06:12 AM

Support Our Troops or Support George Bush. Make UP YOUR MIND!!!

AE4FB

10-29-2005, 06:14 AM

Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 28 2005,20:19)]Quote[/b] (W9GRN @ Oct. 28 2005,11:11)]You say military people are more conservative... add also realistic about world events.
That's why they tend to be more conservative. #They see more of the world's events, essentially first hand.
Ah, the advantages of Imperialism.

WA5BEN

10-29-2005, 06:25 AM

Quote[/b] (AE4FB @ Oct. 28 2005,23:12)]Support Our Troops or Support George Bush. Make UP YOUR MIND!!!
The troops think it is the same thing. They support the President, and he supports them.

WA5BEN

10-29-2005, 06:56 AM

Quote[/b] (w6em @ Oct. 28 2005,14:06)]Quote[/b] (VE7RFH @ Oct. 27 2005,16:20)]W6YDK your loyalty to your brothers in arms is laudable, but be careful that you keep separate and distinct the duties and responsibilities of a professional soldier and the actions, policies and decisions of your country's political leaders. They are not synonymous. Don't sink to the level of those who threw feces in your face upon your return from Vietnam because they disapproved of the politics behind your mission. One can support and admire the dedication and professionalism of soldiers carrying out their orders without necessarily agreeing with the politics behind their mission. Regrettably too many Americans cannot or will not make this distinction.
Thanks, neighbor!! For saying it so well.

The pundits yesterday were saying that IF I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby were indicted, that the stock market would crash, and all wouldn't be well. The exact opposite happened. It went straight up. It reflects the faith by the majority that justice will prevail.

Libby, now formerly an assistant to the President and the Chief of Staff of the Vice President was indicted on 5 very serious criminal charges. And, who gave him the classified information to mishandle, ostensibly on purpose? Well, his notes say, noe other than the former CEO of Haliburton himself.

Hopefully, our first 21st century Plumber will talk. Then, we will see who else at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue was involved. Involved in the fabrication that has cost over 2000 loyal, dedicated soldiers, marines, airmen and sailors their lives.

While I will never accept that their lives were spent in vain, or anyone who would denigrate the honor of their service, those who sent them to fight under false pretenses need to be brought to justice.

Today, I'm celebrating the first step, along with most other US citizens. A step taken by a Special Prosecutor from the same political party of those accused.

Our system of justice works. It may take a long time, but, it works. Now, what else did Scooter help arrange at the behest of Mr. Cheney?

Lee
W6EM
Bradenton, FL
I strongly suggest that you get a plexiglass bellybutton to enable you to see where you are going. Obviously, you haven't a clue about the real world.

Nobody sent anyone under false pretenses, and the military believe in their mission.

Had the previous administration not virtually dismantled all of the intelligence assets in the Middle East, there might have been better intelligence to work with. What little assets were left had a difficult job, and their effectiveness were hamstrung by decades of "turf" battles and compartmentalization of intelligence.

As someone who was in Iraq pre-war, I can tell you that taking down Saddam has probably saved at least a hundred thousand Iraqi lives. Balance that with the roughly 1500 U.S. losses from hostile action. Also take into account that most of the insurgents are foreign fighters, and we are taking out a good many potential attackers on U.S. soil.

This President has been faced with a situation that has not existed since Pearl Harbor, and he has done a *damned* fine job of handling it. Unfortunately, unlike in WWII, the opposition party has sought political gain at the expense of the country. They have tried every trick in the book to discredit every move. That has put our troops at risk, and the voters should not forget that.

In the previous administration, Clinton and Gore got away with taking millions from the Chinese (and paid them back handsomely with favorable deals and laws), and avoided all inquiries by stonewalling and making accusations. This administration appointed a tough prosecuter, gave him no boundaries, and has fully cooperated to get to the bottom of a serious issue. The contrast is amazing.

w6em

10-29-2005, 01:03 PM

Quote[/b] (WA5BEN @ Oct. 28 2005,02:56)]Had the previous administration not virtually dismantled all of the intelligence assets in the Middle East, there might have been better intelligence to work with. #What little assets were left had a difficult job, and their effectiveness were hamstrung by decades of "turf" battles and compartmentalization of intelligence.

As someone who was in Iraq pre-war, I can tell you that taking down Saddam has probably saved at least a hundred thousand Iraqi lives. #Balance that with the roughly 1500 U.S. losses from hostile action. #Also take into account that most of the insurgents are foreign fighters, and we are taking out a good many potential attackers on U.S. soil.
First off, what were you doing in Iraq "pre-police" action? #Delivering Texas kick-back dollars to Saddam in the UN Oil-for-Food program? #Or, laying the groundwork for your Texas Kellogg, Brown & Root "Mobile McDonalds?"

Better intelligence? #Yes, we needed better intelligence alright. #Like a National Intelligence Estimate request from the President B4 he sent our military. #Congress, not the President, had to ask, and got one that was doctored-up to fit the pre-conceived Rummy, Wolfie, Cheezy (Cheney) plan by the players who wanted to please Bush (and keep their jobs).

Get your numbers straight. #So, out of 2,011 military fatalities, only 1,500 are legitimate? #BS.

Don't think that we are insulated from those really intent on coming here by what goes on over there. #Undoubtedly, we are safer here thanks to very thorough law enforcement screening and our accomplishments in reducing Al Qaeda's capabilities from our original mission in Afganistan. #I think that a reasonable perspective on many of the insurgents is that their intent is to somehow grasp control of Iraq for self-serving purposes. #Not, particularly to attack the US.

I've got more news for you buddy. #Your knowledge of the intelligence community and classified procedures is shallow, at best. #Compartmentalization of intelligence is and has been and will always be a means to protect sensitive, national security information. #To help preserve the secrecy and prevent leaks. #Inadvertent leaks, buddy, not Scooter-type revelations, designed with a purpose to harm innocent people. #If you meant the uncooperative nature of some bureaucrats and their unwillingness to listen to subordinate investigators and take action on their findings, yes, that was a problem, and hopefully is less of a problem now. And, while we're on the subject, Libby and his cohorts have now harmed immeasurably the ability of the CIA to recruit covert operatives and for them to be able to recruit agents in foreign countries. The spectre of the consequences to a foreign agent who was seen in the presence of an uncloaked operative isn't a pleasant thought.

73,

Lee
W6EM
Bradenton, FL

w6em

10-29-2005, 01:40 PM

Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 27 2005,23:21)]Quote[/b] (w6em @ Oct. 28 2005,14:06)]Our system of justice works. #It may take a long time, but, it works. #Lee
W6EM
Bradenton, FL
Beg to differ, Lee. #It didn't work very well in the case of the prior administration.
Ah, you must be referring to the alleged perjurious statement "I did not have sexual relations with that woman!" #Well, he's an attorney, and a darn sharp one. #By the strictist definition, his statement was accurate. #No perjury occurred.

Now, thanks to your comment, and WA5BEN's arrogant diatribe, let's examine what may yet happen with the Plame leak investigation.

The Vice President of the United States provided to Scooter Libby, prior to his alleged offenses, specific details concerning Ms. Valerie Plame. #That she was employed in Counterproliferation, in the Operations Division of the Central Intelligence Agency. #Operations is the covert side of the Agency. #Cheney knew it was classified information. #And, Libby knew it as well. #His testimony, notes and other evidence detail Cheney's involvement in the text of the 5 count indictment. #Its available online at cnn.com/LAW. #Don't believe me. #Go there or click on this #INDICTMENT (http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/images/10/28/indictment.pdf) and read it for yourself. #

If Cheney obtained and provided the information to Libby as a component of a plan that he was aware of, conceived of, or participated in, knowingly, to release the information, he has at least committed the crime of conspiracy. #The House of Representatives must now begin an investigation, to determine if that occurred and whether Articles of Impeachment should be prepared against Cheney.

That, my friend, is where we are right now. #And, I'm sure Scooter will talk very soon and provide the Special Prosecutor and Congressional investigators with much more information, to try and save his own neck. #Just like the Plumbers did in the Nixon administration. #John Dean's book, entitled "Worse than Watergate" is, sadly, right on the mark.

73,
Lee
W6EM

I fully support our men and women in the military and respect the military as a necessary institution to preserve and protect our freedom. #I hold accountable those government officials who sent them to fight in a foreign land under false pretences.

W9GRN

10-29-2005, 03:04 PM

Quote[/b] (AE4FB @ Oct. 28 2005,23:14)]Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 28 2005,20:19)]Quote[/b] (W9GRN @ Oct. 28 2005,11:11)]You say military people are more conservative... add also realistic about world events.
That's why they tend to be more conservative. #They see more of the world's events, essentially first hand.
Ah, the advantages of Imperialism.
Thanks man,I needed a good laugh. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif And just when I thought the 60's rhetoric has passed away.

W9GRN

10-29-2005, 03:06 PM

Quote[/b] (AE4FB @ Oct. 28 2005,23:12)]Support Our Troops or Support George Bush. Make UP YOUR MIND!!!
Both. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

AE4FB

10-29-2005, 06:47 PM

No doubt about it. One can see that "Mr. Uniter, Not a Divider", has been hard at work on what passes for the American "mind" these days.

Ever So Sincerely,
Mikey

VE7RFH

10-29-2005, 09:42 PM

WA5BEN

10-29-2005, 10:42 PM

Quote[/b] (w6em @ Oct. 29 2005,06:03)]Quote[/b] (WA5BEN @ Oct. 28 2005,02:56)]Had the previous administration not virtually dismantled all of the intelligence assets in the Middle East, there might have been better intelligence to work with. What little assets were left had a difficult job, and their effectiveness were hamstrung by decades of "turf" battles and compartmentalization of intelligence.

As someone who was in Iraq pre-war, I can tell you that taking down Saddam has probably saved at least a hundred thousand Iraqi lives. Balance that with the roughly 1500 U.S. losses from hostile action. Also take into account that most of the insurgents are foreign fighters, and we are taking out a good many potential attackers on U.S. soil.
First off, what were you doing in Iraq "pre-police" action? Delivering Texas kick-back dollars to Saddam in the UN Oil-for-Food program? Or, laying the groundwork for your Texas Kellogg, Brown & Root "Mobile McDonalds?"

Better intelligence? Yes, we needed better intelligence alright. Like a National Intelligence Estimate request from the President B4 he sent our military. Congress, not the President, had to ask, and got one that was doctored-up to fit the pre-conceived Rummy, Wolfie, Cheezy (Cheney) plan by the players who wanted to please Bush (and keep their jobs).

Get your numbers straight. So, out of 2,011 military fatalities, only 1,500 are legitimate? BS.

Don't think that we are insulated from those really intent on coming here by what goes on over there. Undoubtedly, we are safer here thanks to very thorough law enforcement screening and our accomplishments in reducing Al Qaeda's capabilities from our original mission in Afganistan. I think that a reasonable perspective on many of the insurgents is that their intent is to somehow grasp control of Iraq for self-serving purposes. Not, particularly to attack the US.

I've got more news for you buddy. Your knowledge of the intelligence community and classified procedures is shallow, at best. Compartmentalization of intelligence is and has been and will always be a means to protect sensitive, national security information. To help preserve the secrecy and prevent leaks. Inadvertent leaks, buddy, not Scooter-type revelations, designed with a purpose to harm innocent people. If you meant the uncooperative nature of some bureaucrats and their unwillingness to listen to subordinate investigators and take action on their findings, yes, that was a problem, and hopefully is less of a problem now. And, while we're on the subject, Libby and his cohorts have now harmed immeasurably the ability of the CIA to recruit covert operatives and for them to be able to recruit agents in foreign countries. The spectre of the consequences to a foreign agent who was seen in the presence of an uncloaked operative isn't a pleasant thought.

73,

Lee
W6EM
Bradenton, FL
First of all, I was in Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war, and at the time Saddam gassed the Kurds. Just for the record I found 3 audio bugs in my hotel room, which was not a surprise. (When you know they are there, they can be made into a useful asset.)

I undoubtedly have more experience with intelligence operations than you, as I have worked with every level through the highest levels (ministerial and beyond) of intelligence organizations in well over 30 countries. I know what fieldcraft is, why it is vital, and why it should be respected. I also know that the wife of a senior official would have limited exposure -- and probably would not go on any actual missions. There are many ways to gather intelligence, and not everyone in intelligence organizations is a "spook".

Nobody should ever leak the name of anyone involved in intelligence, and this president has made it a priority to find and punish any and all responsible. That said, there is and was no danger to Ms. Plume -- but that does not excuse the leak.

I also know how badly hamstrung we were after Clinton's idiots effectively dismantled our assets in the Middle east. I also know that we have received "intelligence" from supposedly a friendly country (Israel) that we could not validate -- because we no longer had assets -- and which proved to be false and injurious to our interests. Relying on someone else's supposed assets -- and motives -- is an absolute guarantee of a SNAFU/FUBAR.

My casualty numbers were published on Friday by the AP. Just over 1500 as a result of hostile action is the correct and verified figure.

Yes, there is compartmentalization of intelligence for secrecy. That is valid. What is not valid -- but what was occurring -- is compartmentalization by agencies from other agencies. Part of that was by law (FBI limited in discussion or sharing of data with CIA and/or DIA, and vice versa), but the majority was by turf protection.

You have to blame President Bush for everything. Let's look at some simple facts about his predecessor: If Clinton had acted effectively against Bin Laden after the embassy bombings, we might not have had 9/11. If Clinton had not caved in to others in the U.N. and permitted U.S. troops to be deployed without effective support in Somalia, we would not have had "Blackhawk Down" -- and those soldiers would be alive today. (The designated "armored support" was a squadron of WWII tanks from a minor third world nation -- and they never arrived.) If Clinton had not "cut and run" from Somalia (following a totally predictable result), we might not have had 9/11 -- and Bin Laden definitely would not have achieved "greatness" as the lone attacker of the U.S. If Clinton had not essentially dismantled the U.S. intelligence community, we might not have had 9/11. If we had had intelligence operatives in the Mid-East and in Europe in 2000 / 2001, we might not have had 9/11.

You blame the President who had 8 months in office, and ignore the guy who spent 8 years messing things up. Amazing!

WA5BEN

10-29-2005, 10:47 PM

Quote[/b] (VE7RFH @ Oct. 29 2005,14:42)]Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 28 2005,20:19)]Quote[/b] (W9GRN @ Oct. 28 2005,11:11)]You say military people are more conservative... add also realistic about world events.
That's why they tend to be more conservative. They see more of the world's events, essentially first hand.
Yeah right, through the windows of armoured Humvees!
Actually, most of the time, they are face to face with the Iraqi and Afghani people. Most of those people are rather happy that the U.S. soldiers are there, because they know what kind of hell existed before those soldiers arrived.

k4lem

10-30-2005, 02:04 AM

Quote[/b] (WA5BEN @ Oct. 29 2005,15:47)]Quote[/b] (VE7RFH @ Oct. 29 2005,14:42)]Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 28 2005,20:19)]Quote[/b] (W9GRN @ Oct. 28 2005,11:11)]You say military people are more conservative... add also realistic about world events.
That's why they tend to be more conservative. #They see more of the world's events, essentially first hand.
Yeah right, through the windows of armoured Humvees!
Actually, most of the time, they are face to face with the Iraqi and Afghani people. #Most of those people are rather happy that the U.S. soldiers are there, because they know what kind of hell existed before those soldiers arrived.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif [QUOTE]

From what I have read over the past 13 months, Iraq are very displeased with US military presence and recently almost 50 percent say terror against GI and Brits is legitimate.

It's unfortunate many in the military believe the best gift they give is to kick somebody's rear.
Viet Nam was a lie- Recall Johnson's phony Gulf of Tonkin event? The theory was if Viet nam fell to the north eventually the Communist would dominate SE Asia. The US withdrew from Viet Nam and history is showing none of the supposed justification for the US involvement was correct. Its too bad Johnson and Nixon are dead because they should be tried for treason.

Even war "brains" Mackey- Macnamera says how wrong he was and how pointless the war.

w6em

10-30-2005, 02:22 PM

Quote[/b] (WA5BEN @ Oct. 28 2005,18:42)]I undoubtedly have more experience with intelligence operations than you, as I have worked with every level through the highest levels (ministerial and beyond) of intelligence organizations in well over 30 countries. #I know what fieldcraft is, why it is vital, and why it should be respected. #I also know that the wife of a senior official would have limited exposure -- and probably would not go on any actual missions. #There are many ways to gather intelligence, and not everyone in intelligence organizations is a "spook".

Nobody should ever leak the name of anyone involved in intelligence, and this president has made it a priority to find and punish any and all responsible. #That said, there is and was no danger to Ms. Plume -- but that does not excuse the leak.
Comparing and contrasting clearances isn't at issue. #Your charactization of compartmentalization being the root cause for intelligence failures. #Specifically, wrong conclusions or worse: #Fabrication of false intelligence, to justify preconceived and desired outcomes.

A wife of a former diplomat, a Republican-appointed ambassador I might add, might make a fine operative, depending on the circumstances and her abilities and education. #More importantly, who knows how long she had been one? #For example, that's how they may have met and later married. #She's on the job investigating counterproliferation in Africa and they bumped heads. #I believe that he's quite a bit older than she is.

Agreed, it is almost treasonous to intentionally leak an identity. #Do you think Bush's interest to "find and punish any and all responsible" would extend to Cheney? #I think not. #Anyone except the inner circle. #I've already asked my Representative to request that the House begin an investigation, based on what is contained in the indictment of Libby. #And, if warranted, prepare Articles of Impeachment.

A good boss always asks a subordinate *why* they would want to know something that sensitive. #To determine their "need to know." #Then again, why did Cheney ostensibly ask the CIA for the details on Wilson's wife in the first place? #I suspect that Mr. Cheney may have been very involved in and knowledgeable of the intentions of Mr. Libby. #No reason, therefore, to question his "need to know."

You might want to read the online versions of today's New York Times and the Washington Post. #Interesting perspectives.

I'm not blaming Bush, at this point. #Primarily, because I don't think he's sharp enough to have planned and directed the conspiracy to identify Ms. Plame. #But, we'll see how sharp he really is after Cheney announces he has to resign for health reasons..........

73,

Lee
W6EM

AE4FB

10-30-2005, 11:13 PM

Quote[/b] (W9GRN @ Oct. 29 2005,08:04)]Quote[/b] (AE4FB @ Oct. 28 2005,23:14)]Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 28 2005,20:19)]Quote[/b] (W9GRN @ Oct. 28 2005,11:11)]You say military people are more conservative... add also realistic about world events.
That's why they tend to be more conservative. #They see more of the world's events, essentially first hand.
Ah, the advantages of Imperialism.
Thanks man,I needed a good laugh. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif And just when I thought the 60's rhetoric has passed away.
Delusions of Empire
The epistemology of imperialism – the problem with you peaceniks is that you're too 'reality-based'!
by Justin Raimondo

Ron Suskind, former Wall Street Journal reporter and author of The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House, and the Education of Paul O'Neill, has a piece in last Sunday's New York Times Magazine that is the talk of the internet, and with good reason: it is a devastating portrait of this "faith-based" presidency, with its religio-cultural idiosyncrasies and foibles. But it is not only that. Suskind manages to capture, in a series of vivid anecdotes, the political psychopathology that motivates this administration and shapes its perception. Here is the money quote:

"In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn't like about Bush's former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House's displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn't fully comprehend – but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

"The aide said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. 'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. 'We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality – judiciously, as you will – we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'"

w6em

10-31-2005, 12:30 AM

Quote[/b] (AE4FB @ Oct. 29 2005,19:13)]Quote[/b] (W9GRN @ Oct. 29 2005,08:04)]Quote[/b] (AE4FB @ Oct. 28 2005,23:14)]Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 28 2005,20:19)]Quote[/b] (W9GRN @ Oct. 28 2005,11:11)]You say military people are more conservative... add also realistic about world events.
That's why they tend to be more conservative. #They see more of the world's events, essentially first hand.
Ah, the advantages of Imperialism.
Thanks man,I needed a good laugh. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif And just when I thought the 60's rhetoric has passed away.
Delusions of Empire
The epistemology of imperialism – the problem with you peaceniks is that you're too 'reality-based'!
by Justin Raimondo
Thanks for the cite. #An excellent read. #Abeit the date is a bit late. #"Without a Doubt" by Suskind was published in the October 17, 2004 New York Times Magazine. #It's available at their website, if you log in.

What an eyeopener and precisely correct description of how the entire Executive Office cadre operates. #After reading it, it was so easy to predict and then see why Powell left. #Although Bob Woodward, in his book, "Plan of Attack" describes a less-than-cordial atmosphere that existed between the rational, analytical Powell and the Emperor and All the Emperor's Men (and Woman).

It must have been very difficult for Powell to have accepted that fact that one of his deputies prepared a background paper on Ms. Plame and gave it to Libby.

Perhaps the now-very-real risk of loss of majorities in both Houses in the upcoming Congressional election will motivate the Congress to properly investigate the Vice Emperor's conspiratorial, retaliatory activities, and perhaps even those of the Emperor himself.

73,

Lee
W6EM

K4JF

10-31-2005, 01:31 AM

K4JF

10-31-2005, 01:36 AM

Quote[/b] (w6em @ Oct. 29 2005,06:40)]Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 27 2005,23:21)]Quote[/b] (w6em @ Oct. 28 2005,14:06)]Our system of justice works. #It may take a long time, but, it works. #Lee
W6EM
Bradenton, FL
Beg to differ, Lee. #It didn't work very well in the case of the prior administration.
Ah, you must be referring to the alleged perjurious statement "I did not have sexual relations with that woman!" #Well, he's an attorney, and a darn sharp one. #By the strictist definition, his statement was accurate. #No perjury occurred.
By the strictest definition, that was an obvious and blatant lie. Beyond any argument.

But I'm not referring to that. I'm referring to the records his administration set with numbers of indicted officials, number of illegal actions, number of coverups, graft, etc. By a long shot the most corrupt administration ever. Even worse than Grant's.

K4JF

10-31-2005, 01:38 AM

Quote[/b] (w1it @ Oct. 29 2005,19:04)]Recall Johnson's phony Gulf of Tonkin event? The theory was if Viet nam fell to the north eventually the Communist would dominate SE Asia. The US withdrew from Viet Nam and history is showing none of the supposed justification for the US involvement was correct. Its too bad Johnson and Nixon are dead because they should be tried for treason.
Events have shown that the predicted domination is exactly what happened. #Many people have suffered because we would not let our military win.

And they couldn't be tried for treason, because neither sought the overthrow of the U.S. government. #(Check the definition before you use the word.) #To his shame, Nixon was the one who pulled us out. #

Why do you put him with the one who kept us in? #(Kennedy was the one who got us in, where are your comments about him?)

K4JF

10-31-2005, 01:42 AM

Quote[/b] (w1it @ Oct. 29 2005,19:04)]From what I have read over the past 13 months, Iraq are very displeased with US military presence and recently almost 50 percent say terror against GI and Brits is legitimate.
Ya need to quit reading that BS and find out a little about the world from the ones who are actually there!

And terror is never legitimate. Against anybody!

AE4FB

10-31-2005, 01:47 AM

Quote[/b] (w6em @ Oct. 30 2005,17:30)]Quote[/b] (AE4FB @ Oct. 29 2005,19:13)]Quote[/b] (W9GRN @ Oct. 29 2005,08:04)]Quote[/b] (AE4FB @ Oct. 28 2005,23:14)]Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 28 2005,20:19)]Quote[/b] (W9GRN @ Oct. 28 2005,11:11)]You say military people are more conservative... add also realistic about world events.
That's why they tend to be more conservative. #They see more of the world's events, essentially first hand.
Ah, the advantages of Imperialism.
Thanks man,I needed a good laugh. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif And just when I thought the 60's rhetoric has passed away.
Delusions of Empire
The epistemology of imperialism – the problem with you peaceniks is that you're too 'reality-based'!
by Justin Raimondo
Thanks for the cite. #An excellent read. #Abeit the date is a bit late. #"Without a Doubt" by Suskind was published in the October 17, 2004 New York Times Magazine. #It's available at their website, if you log in.

What an eyeopener and precisely correct description of how the entire Executive Office cadre operates. #After reading it, it was so easy to predict and then see why Powell left. #Although Bob Woodward, in his book, "Plan of Attack" describes a less-than-cordial atmosphere that existed between the rational, analytical Powell and the Emperor and All the Emperor's Men (and Woman).

It must have been very difficult for Powell to have accepted that fact that one of his deputies prepared a background paper on Ms. Plame and gave it to Libby.

Perhaps the now-very-real risk of loss of majorities in both Houses in the upcoming Congressional election will motivate the Congress to properly investigate the Vice Emperor's conspiratorial, retaliatory activities, and perhaps even those of the Emperor himself.

73,

Lee
W6EM
Lee,
Sorry for the sloppy sourcing. Here's the URL on Ramando
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=3822

The "60s Rhetoric" comment stimulated me. It confirmed to me that you were arguing with a fully developed propaganda meme and not reasoned thought..., especially not the reasoned thought of old school intelligence professional. Top intelligence professionals used to be by nature and necessity contrarians. Casey, under Reagan started the kill off of the contrarians by demanding the same, misuse and shaping of intelligence for political ends that you saw in the build up for the Iraq debacle.

I'm sitting several terabytes of Geo-Political Intelligence I've collected in the last 10 years with which I can bury any Ideologue in any argument but I've lost my verve for the good fight. To me, too many tipping points have passed and many of them passed before the ill advised invasion of Iraq.

In December of 2002, three months before the invasion, Anthony Cordesman published a paper for the Center for Strategic & International Studies entitled “Planning for a Self-Inflicted Wound: US Policy to Reshape a Post-Saddam Iraq (December 3, 2002)
http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/iraq_wound.pdf

It obviously was not as interesting a read as “My Pet Goat” but...

Read it and weep.

Cheers anyway,
Mikey
de AE4FB

AE4FB

10-31-2005, 02:49 AM

AE4FB

10-31-2005, 03:02 AM

Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 30 2005,18:42)]Quote[/b] (w1it @ Oct. 29 2005,19:04)]From what I have read over the past 13 months, Iraq are very displeased with US military presence and recently almost 50 percent say terror against GI and Brits is legitimate.
Ya need to quit reading that BS and find out a little about the world from the ones who are actually there!

And terror is never legitimate. #Against anybody!
I'm trying to stay interested in shooting all these right finned fish in a barrel of their own making;-) The Right Finned Bushiviks appear to read nothing at all but they know exactly what "BS" you need to quit reading. Here's an article on a British Ministry of Defense research poll you need to not read;-)

Published on Sunday, October 23, 2005 by the Sunday Telegraph/UK #
Secret MoD poll: Iraqis Support Attacks on British Troops #
by Sean Rayment #
#
Millions of Iraqis believe that suicide attacks against British troops are justified, a secret military poll commissioned by senior officers has revealed.

The poll, undertaken for the Ministry of Defence and seen by The Sunday Telegraph, shows that up to 65 per cent of Iraqi citizens support attacks and fewer than one per cent think Allied military involvement is helping to improve security in their country.

It demonstrates for the first time the true strength of anti-Western feeling in Iraq after more than two and a half years of bloody occupation.

The nationwide survey also suggests that the coalition has lost the battle to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people, which Tony Blair and George W Bush believed was fundamental to creating a safe and secure country.

The results come as it was disclosed yesterday that Lt Col Nick Henderson, the commanding officer of the Coldstream Guards in Basra, in charge of security for the region, has resigned from the Army. He recently voiced concerns over a lack of armoured vehicles for his men, another of whom was killed in a bomb attack in Basra last week.

The secret poll appears to contradict claims made by Gen Sir Mike Jackson, the Chief of the General Staff, who only days ago congratulated British soldiers for "supporting the Iraqi people in building a new and better Iraq".

Andrew Robathan, a former member of the SAS and the Tory shadow defence minister, said last night that the poll clearly showed a complete failure of Government policy.

He said: "This clearly states that the Government's hearts-and-minds policy has been disastrous. The coalition is now part of the problem and not the solution.

"I am not advocating a pull-out but if British soldiers are putting their lives on the line for a cause which is not supported by the Iraqi people then we have to ask the question, 'what are we doing there?' "

The Sunday Telegraph disclosed last month that a plan for an early withdrawal of British troops had been shelved because of the failing security situation, sparking claims that Iraq was rapidly becoming "Britain's own Vietnam".

The survey was conducted by an Iraqi university research team that, for security reasons, was not told the data it compiled would be used by coalition forces. It reveals:

• Forty-five per cent of Iraqis believe attacks against British and American troops are justified - rising to 65 per cent in the British-controlled Maysan province;

• 82 per cent are "strongly opposed" to the presence of coalition troops;

• less than one per cent of the population believes coalition forces are responsible for any improvement in security;

• 67 per cent of Iraqis feel less secure because of the occupation;

• 43 per cent of Iraqis believe conditions for peace and stability have worsened;

• 72 per cent do not have confidence in the multi-national forces.

The opinion poll, carried out in August, also debunks claims by both the US and British governments that the general well-being of the average Iraqi is improving in post-Saddam Iraq.

The findings differ markedly from a survey carried out by the BBC in March 2004 in which the overwhelming consensus among the 2,500 Iraqis questioned was that life was good. More of those questioned supported the war than opposed it.

Under the heading "Justification for Violent Attacks", the new poll shows that 65 per cent of people in Maysan province - one of the four provinces under British control - believe that attacks against coalition forces are justified.

The report states that for Iraq as a whole, 45 per cent of people feel attacks are justified. In Basra, the proportion is reduced to 25 per cent.

The report profiles those likely to carry out attacks against British and American troops as being "less than 26 years of age, more likely to want a job, more likely to have been looking for work in the last four weeks and less likely to have enough money even for their basic needs".

Immediately after the war the coalition embarked on a campaign of reconstruction in which it hoped to improve the electricity supply and the quality of drinking water.

That appears to have failed, with the poll showing that 71 per cent of people rarely get safe clean water, 47 per cent never have enough electricity, 70 per cent say their sewerage system rarely works and 40 per cent of southern Iraqis are unemployed.

But Iraq's President Jalal Talabani pleaded last night for British troops to stay. "There would be chaos and perhaps civil war," he said. "We are now fighting a world war launched by terrorists against civilisation, against democracy, against progress, against all the values of humanity.

"If British troops withdrew, the terrorists would say, 'Look, we have imposed our will on the most accomplished armed forces in the world and terror is the way to oblige the Europeans to surrender to us'."

© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2005

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

AE4FB

10-31-2005, 03:38 AM

Quote[/b] (wb1wmb @ Oct. 25 2005,09:31)]Quote[/b] (K3ESE @ Oct. 25 2005,08:42)]"If you feel that strongly vote!" ? ? ?

#I do vote, and I'm guessing the op who advised us to speak up in denunciation of Bush's lies did, too.

#The perception we'd like to present, as responsible citizens, is that while we support the brave troops who volunteer to protect our country, we deplore sending these same brave troops to senseless deaths for wars based on lies.

#Doing a "support our troops" activity is great, but let's be sure our support is not confused with support for their current #mission in Iraq.
Was 9/11 was a lie too? It's fools like you that will be the ruin of this great country. When they come banging on your door it will be too late. That will be alright with you as you can't think for yourself.

GOD BLESS THE AMERICANS WHO ARE RISKING THEIR LIFES TO KEEP US FREE.
Actually 911 was a lie and even more a lie when it is related to Iraq. It was the "Pearl Harbor Type Event" called for by the Neocons in their "Project for a New American Century" tome.

Also noted are the de rigueur personal attacks in this post and that the "they" that will come banging on American doors will not be foreigners but rather Homeland Security Goons with secret warrants by secret judges.

w6em

10-31-2005, 03:45 AM

Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 29 2005,21:36)]Quote[/b] (w6em @ Oct. 29 2005,06:40)]Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 27 2005,23:21)]Quote[/b] (w6em @ Oct. 28 2005,14:06)]Our system of justice works. #It may take a long time, but, it works. #Lee
W6EM
Bradenton, FL
Beg to differ, Lee. #It didn't work very well in the case of the prior administration.
Ah, you must be referring to the alleged perjurious statement "I did not have sexual relations with that woman!" #Well, he's an attorney, and a darn sharp one. #By the strictist definition, his statement was accurate. #No perjury occurred.
By the strictest definition, that was an obvious and blatant lie. #Beyond any argument.

But I'm not referring to that. #I'm referring to the records his administration set with numbers of indicted officials, number of illegal actions, number of coverups, graft, etc. #By a long shot the most corrupt administration ever. #Even worse than Grant's.
I guess the strictest definition part is key. #You know, in the traditional, usual sense. #I won't go further.

As to the rest, well, I seem to recall a majority in both Houses from across the aisle. #Opposite Willie's side, of course. #With zealots accusing and hyping at every opportunity. #A pack of wolves. #Things were pretty hot until the Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, suddenly had to leave, since he too had an embarrasing sexual engagement of sorts.

The allegation you make about the Clinton Administration is quite baseless, since I don't recall convictions of anyone on anything of significance. #Lots of attempts at creative, imaginary dirty laundry and the like. #Ah, I think I remember one about some Chinese political contribution. #But, then, what about Ken Lay? #The single biggest Bush contributor and ex-Enron CEO that's still walking the streets of Houston. #Something about Billions of US citizens assets blown away. #Every heard of Harken Energy? #Or, Dubyah's close friend in the Texas Air Guard being the Bin Laden family financial advisor about the time Dubyah dumped his shares before the bad news was released publicly? #Ah, but that was back when his daddy was President, and their personal attorney was appointed head of the SEC's Enforcement Division. #Not a problem for Dubyah then. #Do you suppose that the Bin Laden family lost a little money, thanks to Dubyah? #John Dean's Book, "Worse Than Watergate" has this and more. #Quite an interesting read.

The next few months should really be interesting. #Especially for those in Congress up for re-election. #For Republicans, darned if they do, and darned if they don't...... Impeach, that is.

But, Cheney, being the pluralist that he is, will have a bout of illness and save the day. #Then we'll see how Dubyah does after he's in charge.

You might want to read Suskind's piece. #Its quite interesting. #Apparently, there are more disenchanted Republicans, like me, than I thought.

w6em

10-31-2005, 02:23 PM

Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 29 2005,21:38)]Quote[/b] (w1it @ Oct. 29 2005,19:04)]Recall Johnson's phony Gulf of Tonkin event? The theory was if Viet nam fell to the north eventually the Communist would dominate SE Asia. The US withdrew from Viet Nam and history is showing none of the supposed justification for the US involvement was correct. Its too bad Johnson and Nixon are dead because they should be tried for treason.
Events have shown that the predicted domination is exactly what happened. #Many people have suffered because we would not let our military win.

And they couldn't be tried for treason, because neither sought the overthrow of the U.S. government. #(Check the definition before you use the word.) #To his shame, Nixon was the one who pulled us out. #

Why do you put him with the one who kept us in? #(Kennedy was the one who got us in, where are your comments about him?)
Strangely, this issue was settled, according to an article by Scott Shane in this morning's New York Times. #Apparently, it was discovered about 4 years ago by an NSA historian that NSA officers purposely covered up misinterpretations of the North Vietnamese intercepts back then and, instead of the government releasing it then, and perhaps not precipitating the conflict, it didn't. #Even worse, after the historian's discovery four years ago, still kept it quiet. #Imagine that. #They knew it was forged for over four years, and didn't want to tell us. #Now, why would they keep it quiet for four more years?

Misconstruances of intelligence, on purpose, apparently has quite a following........ #According to the reporter, insiders wanted to keep it quiet to avoid the likely public comparisons between Vietnam and faulty intelligence justifying our conflict in Iraq. #

Isn't it just amazing how history repeats itself.

As I firmly believe, the most often-used justification for classification is to prevent the accountability or at least the embarrassment of errant government officials. #In the private sector, similar behavior is called Conspiracy or Obstruction of Justice.

W9GRN

10-31-2005, 02:47 PM

Quote[/b] (VE7RFH @ Oct. 29 2005,14:42)]Quote[/b] (K4JF @ Oct. 28 2005,20:19)]Quote[/b] (W9GRN @ Oct. 28 2005,11:11)]You say military people are more conservative... add also realistic about world events.
That's why they tend to be more conservative. #They see more of the world's events, essentially first hand.
Yeah right, through the windows of armoured Humvees!
This is getting pathetic.Totally clueless. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

w6em

10-31-2005, 10:44 PM

Quote[/b] (AE4FB @ Oct. 29 2005,21:47)]Lee,
Sorry for the sloppy sourcing. Here's the URL on Ramando
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=3822
Mikey: #Thanks for this link as well. #Here's his latest, written today, entitled: #"Earth to Bush: Ditch Cheney"

Ramando's Latest (http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=7845)

n1uq

11-01-2005, 05:53 PM

Quote[/b] (AE4FB @ Oct. 30 2005,20:38)]Quote[/b] (wb1wmb @ Oct. 25 2005,09:31)]Quote[/b] (K3ESE @ Oct. 25 2005,08:42)]"If you feel that strongly vote!" ? ? ?

#I do vote, and I'm guessing the op who advised us to speak up in denunciation of Bush's lies did, too.

#The perception we'd like to present, as responsible citizens, is that while we support the brave troops who volunteer to protect our country, we deplore sending these same brave troops to senseless deaths for wars based on lies.

#Doing a "support our troops" activity is great, but let's be sure our support is not confused with support for their current #mission in Iraq.
Was 9/11 was a lie too? It's fools like you that will be the ruin of this great country. When they come banging on your door it will be too late. That will be alright with you as you can't think for yourself.

GOD BLESS THE AMERICANS WHO ARE RISKING THEIR LIFES TO KEEP US FREE.
Actually 911 was a lie and even more a lie when it is related to Iraq. It was the "Pearl Harbor Type Event" called for by the Neocons in their "Project for a New American Century" tome.

Also noted are the de rigueur personal attacks in this post and that the "they" that will come banging on American doors will not be foreigners but rather Homeland Security Goons with secret warrants by secret judges.
Like I said, you can't think for yourself if you really think that this is all about; "they" that will come banging on American doors will not be foreigners but rather Homeland Security Goons with secret warrants by secret judges."

However, if we sit and do nothing about innocent children, mothers, fathers, and freedom loving people being killed in the name of a "Holy War" then maybe you are right. The Homeland Security Goons with secret warrants by secret judges will be banging on doors all because we didn't stop the virus NOW when we have the upper leg.

w6em

11-01-2005, 10:00 PM

Quote[/b] (wb1wmb @ Oct. 31 2005,13:53)]Like I said, you can't think for yourself if you really think that this is all about; "they" that will come banging on American doors will not be foreigners but rather Homeland Security Goons with secret warrants by secret judges."

However, if we sit and do nothing about innocent children, mothers, fathers, and freedom loving people being killed in the name of a "Holy War" then maybe you are right. The Homeland Security Goons with secret warrants by secret judges will be banging on doors all because we didn't stop the virus NOW when we have the upper leg.
While your remark wasn't directed at me, I'm having a little trouble understanding what you are trying to say.

Just a couple observations. #Call it (9/11) stupidity, or derelection of duty on the part of our Executive Branch. That's one thing. #Call it opportunism, rewarded at a cost of thousands of innocent lives, then its a conspiracy of incredible dimension. #It's true that the terrorists were taking flying lessons and setting things up on Clinton's watch. #But, particularly disturbing is the evidence of law enforcement officers discovering #wrong doing, reporting it to their superiors, and nothing of substance happening. #To know about the threat and intentionally do nothing to allow such a horrific occurance, is the most treasonous behavior imaginable. #Based on what has transpired since the Dubyah Empire began, it is plausable. #Destruction of our freedoms and rights in the name of 'homeland' security has been scary.
#
Save people from being victims of a Holy War? #Which one would that be? #Its hard for us to understand all perspectives in the Middle East. #Why? #We aren't being allowed to see the Palestinian case; #or, what is driving the insurgency in Iraq from an Iraqi perspective. #I'm pretty sure we won't either. #As an example of why not, try this: #Whenever Bush organizes a 'visit', only strong supporters are invited to be in attendance. #So, only pre prepared questions with pre determined answers. #Now, why is that? #Cut off dissent? #Hide dissent? #The former Soviet Union made similar arrangements for May Day celebrations, I'm sure. Managed information. I think that's called propaganda.

If this Administration is truly concerned about operating eithically and morally, why would the Vice President try to talk a Senator out of an amendment specifically prohibiting torture at the hands of our military? One backed by at least a dozen former generals and admirals?

We need to return to government By the People.

Lee

VE7RFH

11-01-2005, 10:39 PM

I have to agree. As a disapassionate outside observer I have to shake my head in wonder at the way this George W. Bush administration operates. This is not what I have come to expect from America during my 60 odd years on this planet.

WA5BEN

11-03-2005, 02:05 AM

Quote[/b] (w1it @ Oct. 29 2005,19:04)]Actually, most of the time, they are face to face with the Iraqi and Afghani people. Most of those people are rather happy that the U.S. soldiers are there, because they know what kind of hell existed before those soldiers arrived.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

From what I have read over the past 13 months, Iraq are very displeased with US military presence and recently almost 50 percent say terror against GI and Brits is legitimate.
I can only imagine where you read crap like that. I have been in Iraq under Saddam. I have also had numerous opportunities to talk to the U.S. "grunts" on the ground there.

Your story is extremely out of whack with the facts -- but that is not unusual for the U.S. press and electronic media. When I was in El Salvador, I had several chats with network news people who wer staying in my hotel. They detailed how New York told them they were "too close to the story to see the facts" -- and that the managment in New York "knew what the real truth was". In other words, "You had better report what we want." One guy was ready to get on a plane and quit, but the other guys convinced him that he could get SOME of the truth out -- and a replacement might not care. The stories I saw when I returned were so biased and contrary to fact it was disgusting.

I was in Kingston, Jamaica when the Granada invasion went off. I had a cabbie who wouldn't accept a tip because I was an American, and he introduced me to everybody he knew. The shoe-shine guy at the hotel gave me a free shine. The waiters practically fell over themselves to wait on my table. My arm was literally tired from shaking hands!

The Kingston papers were praising the U.S. for providing the logistic support for the forces of the Carribean nations to permit them to remove that dictator. They were also praising the Jamaican forces and the forces of the 20 or so nations who participated in the invasion.

Imagine my surprise to see that "all" of Kingston was rioting in protest -- and that one of the riots was at my hotel! This was especially amazing as that supposed riot happened while I was in the hotel lobby eating -- and getting that shoe shine. Strangely, one of the Jamaican papers was there at that time, and had a picture of the hotel lobby on the front page the next day. Obviously, there had been no riot!

I called two news director friends at two local TV stations, and a guy at the paper. When I gave them copies of the Jamaican papers that I had brought back with me, they couldn't believe their eyes. They raised holy Hell with the networks, and suddenly there was NO mention of Granada on the news. No retraction, no rebuttal -- just SILENCE.

K3ESE

11-03-2005, 02:53 PM

Quote[/b] (WA5BEN @ Nov. 02 2005,19:05)]Quote[/b] (w1it @ Oct. 29 2005,19:04)]Actually, most of the time, they are face to face with the Iraqi and Afghani people. Most of those people are rather happy that the U.S. soldiers are there, because they know what kind of hell existed before those soldiers arrived.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif Quote[/b] ]

From what I have read over the past 13 months, Iraq are very displeased with US military presence and recently almost 50 percent say terror against GI and Brits is legitimate.
I can only imagine where you read crap like that. I have been in Iraq under Saddam. I have also had numerous opportunities to talk to the U.S. "grunts" on the ground there.

Your story is extremely out of whack with the facts -- but that is not unusual for the U.S. press and electronic media. When I was in El Salvador, I had several chats with network news people who wer staying in my hotel. They detailed how New York told them they were "too close to the story to see the facts" -- and that the managment in New York "knew what the real truth was". In other words, "You had better report what we want." One guy was ready to get on a plane and quit, but the other guys convinced him that he could get SOME of the truth out -- and a replacement might not care. The stories I saw when I returned were so biased and contrary to fact it was disgusting.

I was in Kingston, Jamaica when the Granada invasion went off. I had a cabbie who wouldn't accept a tip because I was an American, and he introduced me to everybody he knew. The shoe-shine guy at the hotel gave me a free shine. The waiters practically fell over themselves to wait on my table. My arm was literally tired from shaking hands!

The Kingston papers were praising the U.S. for providing the logistic support for the forces of the Carribean nations to permit them to remove that dictator. They were also praising the Jamaican forces and the forces of the 20 or so nations who participated in the invasion.

Imagine my surprise to see that "all" of Kingston was rioting in protest -- and that one of the riots was at my hotel! This was especially amazing as that supposed riot happened while I was in the hotel lobby eating -- and getting that shoe shine. Strangely, one of the Jamaican papers was there at that time, and had a picture of the hotel lobby on the front page the next day. Obviously, there had been no riot!

I called two news director friends at two local TV stations, and a guy at the paper. When I gave them copies of the Jamaican papers that I had brought back with me, they couldn't believe their eyes. They raised holy Hell with the networks, and suddenly there was NO mention of Granada on the news. No retraction, no rebuttal -- just SILENCE.
"I can only imagine where you read crap like that. I have been in Iraq under Saddam. I have also had numerous opportunities to talk to the U.S. "grunts" on the ground there.

Your story is extremely out of whack with the facts -- but that is not unusual for the U.S. press and electronic media."

Here's some of these facts...and, not from the US Press:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news....op.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/23/wirq23.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/10/23/ixportaltop.html)

Millions of Iraqis believe that suicide attacks against British troops are justified, a secret military poll commissioned by senior officers has revealed.

The poll, undertaken for the Ministry of Defence and seen by The Sunday Telegraph, shows that up to 65 per cent of Iraqi citizens support attacks and fewer than one per cent think Allied military involvement is helping to improve security in their country.

It demonstrates for the first time the true strength of anti-Western feeling in Iraq after more than two and a half years of bloody occupation.

The nationwide survey also suggests that the coalition has lost the battle to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people, which Tony Blair and George W Bush believed was fundamental to creating a safe and secure country.

another? here:

http://direland.typepad.com/direland/2005/10/secret_brit_pol.html