“He had his whole life ahead of him.”
Like most troops of the 3rd Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment, Sims had been in Iraq on a previous tour of duty. The Covington, Ky., native graduated high school in 2003 and married the following year, just before heading out on his first tour in Iraq.And in an instant he was gone.
Some Marines carry "lucky charms" with them to keep them safe. Sims said he carried only two things at all times: a cross and most importantly his wedding band, which he wore on a necklace.
"It didn't fail me last time I was in Iraq," he said one day this month, turning the wedding band around and around in his fingers, just a few weeks into his second deployment.
On April 15, Sims was on the way to Government Center, manning his turret as he rolled through the city, past U.S. observation posts and destroyed buildings flattened by U.S. airstrikes or shot up by insurgent weapons fire.
As they pulled through a deep moat of sewage water just outside a gate at Government Center in the lead Humvee, Sims was on the gun turret facing the buildings around them, providing security for the convoy.
Just before they entered the compound, a rocket-propelled grenade came out of nowhere, killing him instantly.
In the dark dust of that moment, "time stood still," said an Iraqi interpreter who was with them at the time, a bespectacled man more than twice the age of the Marines. The interpreter declined to be named for fear of reprisals for working with Americans in Iraq.
The driver and the vehicle commander were fine. The interpreter, sitting in the back seat, was hit by shrapnel in the arm and leg. Some shrapnel hit a pistol in a holster on his hip. The pistol may have saved his life.
Hours later, deeply saddened, the interpreter sat against a wall in a blue chair near where Sims' Humvee was often parked at Hurricane Point.
There were bandages around his arm and leg, blood covering his boots. "He was like a son to me," the interpreter said. "He had his whole life ahead of him."
Justin Sims was just 22 years old.
How many more young men must time stand still for?
When will our leaders treat our soldiers like their sons?
Our sons were not created to die young in an unjust war for oil. They deserve better.
Who among our leaders will demand it for them?
And if there are none, then let us be among those who demand it for themselves.
NO MORE of OUR BLOOD for THEIR OIL and for Israel.
posted by qrswave @ Friday, April 21, 2006
71 Comments:
I took a nap, and when I woke up, I realized I am wholly convinced that this blog will accomplish zippo and is a waste of internet space.
You said that anyone who was for the war in Iraq in 2003 gets no free pass - they cannot change their mind. In fact, you almost implied they should be jailed!
So what the f*ck do you hope to accomplish????
The war in Iraq had a 70% approval rating when it was waged. How do you hope to change public opinion if you claim anyone who was for the war originally can never redeem themselves? Do you hope to form a break off country, or something???
I want to add something else. You have said again and again that somehow American foreign policy is dictated by the demands of Israel. In fact, this is far from the truth. Israeli foreign policy is dictated by America, not the other way around. Stating that the war is fought for Israel only fans the flames of anger against Israel for something it frankly DID NOT DO. Israel does not have that sway over American foreign policy. It was one factor amongst many. In fact, Evangelical Christians have a far bigger documented influence. Yet instead...it's blame Israel, blame Israel.
We should leave Iraq. But this blog will not change a single opinion to ensure that happens. Not when it doesn't even attempt to reach out to those who don't have preset opinions that the blog shares (and openly scorns those who disagree), and not when it spreads disinfo.
If this blog is "a waste of internet space," like you say, then what do you propose be done with it? It sounds like you advocate its removal. That's odd coming from an avowed champion of free speech.
And, saying that senators and congressman who were originally for the war should not remain in office is not the same as saying they can never redeem themselves. So, don't put words in my mouth. They can redeem themselves as private citizens. They have failed as leaders.
And re: Israel, it's glaringly obvious that American and Israeli policies are intimately intertwined. Whether this administration is leading Israel by the nose or vice versa doesn't really matter, does it? The point is their interests undeniably and invariably coincide.
What other conclusion can you draw from this affair except that one country's policies dictates the other's?
QRS,
I like to live in reality-land, not fantasy land.
The reality of the situation is that we cannot expect 90% of Congress to be voted out immediately. The reality of the situation is that what you are suggesting can only be accomplished via an armed uprising - which is wholly unrealistic. The reality of the situation is that there are brave Congressmen, like Jack Murtha, who have changed their mind on the war and are working to ensure it is ended.
I see no reason why people like Murtha - who in fact served in the military and is uniquely qualified to lead America out of war - should be thrown out for what they did in the PAST. If your belief was THE BELIEF of the left, then you can bet your bippy we never will leave Iraq, because there would be no incentive to change an opinion.
I do not advocate silencing the blog. I am just saying that such a belief system accomplishes zippo. I live in reality land, NOT FANTASY LAND!
Re: Israel. Um, yes it does make a big difference if Israel's policies are dictated by America, rather than the other way around. Because if Israel's policies are dictated by America, then you should blame America, not Israel, for the problems you see. Now, I don't see Israel as America's hand puppet, HOWEVER, there has been documented evidence of changes in policy simply due to American presidents asking for it to be so. That is NOT the case for America, which has NEVER changed its policies solely because of what Israel wants.
I am sick and tired, and hugely offended, with the constant "blame Israel" that I see on this blog. The facts do not support it, and in fact, there are many more nations that have done ten times the crap you pin on Israel. Yet there is the focus on Israel. In that sense, the blog parrots the trends of the mainstream media in the Arab world. You complain about the mainstream media all the time, and yet this blog parrots the mainstream media - just not American mainstream media.
There is ample evidence that Israel has influence beyond the point of practical in our foriegn policy.Don't forget that the main reason for all this Muslim discontent is the treatment of the Palestinian people.Israel remains in violation of 136 UN sanctions and the US supports them unconditionaly in their agression against the Palestinians.The unfortunate thing is that the state of Israel has nothing to do with honest Jewery but instead Zionist bankers and extremist sects who feel that gentiles and Arabs are inferior.Israel is the nuclear fly in the ointment of the middle east.Remember the USS Liberty.
It's sad that this soldier had to die, but he did it defending the US from the terrorists in Iraq! I'm sure his family is proud of him for sacrificing his life for strangers so they could have a democracy! We are bringing freedom to the Muslims and if you don't like it you should just l;eave America because you hate it so much!
Carrie, you mean this democracy?
BTW, interesting plug you have for your profile:
"I'm just a good Christian girl, trying to make my way in the Jew dominated entertainment industry"
The way to end this illegal and immoral war is to remove Bush from power immediately! Don't buy the 'can't do anything republican congress' excuse. John Conyers waited until the illegal wiretapping came out to introduce a censure over Iraq. It is a bait and switch when illegal wiretapping alone is enough to impeach Bush. We must force congress to do their jobs starting with the phony democrats pretending to be an opposition. Demand John Conyers introduce articles of impeachment over illegal wiretapping!! Remember Nixon?!
Anon 2:55 pm,
You are confusing John Conyers with Russ Feingold.
Anon 2:39 pm,
Your statement is so blatantly biased and false, that I will not respond except to say that I hope you have fun stewing in your hatred.
Oh they'd like us to shut up and go away so they can continue to rape America with no one to stop them.
What are you-crazy? If people don't continue to speak out like this author, kiss it all good bye. NOW is the time-keep talking!
Goddamn, Carrie you can't be that dumb. I'm sorry but I had to say it. I wish people would educate themselves and think outside of Fox News.
I have not confused John Conyers and Russ Feingold.
Feingold recently came out with a resolution for censure based on illegal wiretapping. However, impeachment proceedings begin in the House of Representatives and John Conyers has taken the lead role being on the judiciary committee. So after the illegal wiretapping came out, he immediately offered a censure resolution over Iraq. Not only did he forget to include illegal wiretapping which is a cut and dry case for impeachment, he is trying for censure instead.
WTF is going on in this country. Nixon resigned over illegal wiretapping. Everyone knows it, Conyers was in congress at the time, and I can find no explanation as to why no one is introducing articles of impeachment. Why won't Conyers introduce a resolution about illegal wiretapping? No investigation is needed. Bush admitted to an impeachable offence on national TV...the easiest way to stop the war is to get rid of Bush immediately!
John Conyers has appeared on panels dicussing impeachment over the illegal wiretapping but has not included it in his resolution in congress. Why?
I am not stewing in hatred, but I want action from congress and I am tired of excuses. Why don't you tell me why no one has pursued impeachment over Bush's illegal wiretapping? Why does John Conyers discuss the issue as if he is pursuing it?
Perhaps Conyers is afraid of ending up like him.
He does what he can but needs more people to support him. We must exert more pressure on our local representatives to support Conyers in making such a move. The assassin's bullet is less likely to strike when the targets are too many.
We must have the courage to stand and be heard. If 91yr old grandmothers are standing up against this monstrous government, the rest of us sure as hell can.
Q. This is the first time I've seen this blog. Damned good one. Personally, I would totally ignore Miss R as she appears to be baiting but Carrie hasn'nt a clue. She actually is stupid enough to believe that we are bringing freedom to the Muslims. LOL!! She's also apparently mixed up. If anyone believes for one minute that Murtha, Feinstein, Conyers or Paul or McKinney have any interest in stopping this war or have any interest in you then you should have stayed asleep. You could have continued with your dreamlife that way. Carrie needs to go to sleep. she's dream waking. The stupidest statement anyone could make is that this soldiers family is proud of him for defending us from terrorist in Iraq. The terrorists are not in Iraq, they are in Washington, DC. How can you be SURE they're proud Carrie? I'm glad you feel sad. Open your eyes girl! Q, your blog does make a difference. As the fearless navigator said, every little bit helps.
No, it will not make any difference to the whores in the House & Senate but, if enough people are awake & know the truth when they come for us then it has accomplished it's objective.
The NWO crowd has come too far to allow us to make a difference in what they do. They will continue, now, no matter what.
Miss R, As a retired soldier who spent four tours in the Republic of Viet Nam seeing the "reality", I can tell you now that armed uprising is reasonable. Probably won't do a damned thing except get those of us who refuse to quietly goe with the nice young men who come to take us for a vacation at the Halliburton Chalets killed but at least we die on our feet with our eyes wide open & take a few of them with us.
The greatest asset anyone can have is to know what is true from what is not.
Anon 5:48 pm:
You are right, I was wrong, my appologies. I misread what you wrote. Conyers should have included the wire tapping, I agree.
Anon 5:51 pm:
When I said "stewing in hatred," I was referring to the individual who said that Israel is only supported by "Zionist bankers and extremist sects who feel that gentiles and Arabs are inferior."
QRS,
I agree, we need to get more people in Congress to support impeachment. This is why we should applaud, and not denigrate, brave people like Murtha who speak out. We need them on our team to impeach.
Oldranger68,
I am NOT baiting. I find it inexplicable that this blog seeks to denigrate brave people who say "I was wrong" and work to make this world a better place. If that is the modus operendi of this blog, then I do not see it as accomplishing anything.
Armed uprising is NOT reasonable. This would involve a massive death count, and can be avoided if we celebrate those like Murtha who admit they were wrong and want to end the war. Murtha has staked his political career on ending the war, so yes, I would say he has an interest in ending it. I find it deplorable that this blog should denigrate such a man who is working to make the world a better place, even if he made mistakes in his past.
miss r, I find your fixation on Murtha amusing. I don't care one way or another about Murtha. If he can convince his constituents that he was genuinely tricked into this war (which I don't think is possible since any idiot knew it was a lie) then he will continue to lead them.
So, your accusation that I "denigrate those brave people who say "I was wrong" is utter nonsense. In fact, Mike Rivero from WRH says it best in his comment to this story about the fictional WMDs:
"Bush KNEW Iraq did not have the weapons of mass destruction that he told you they did.
In other words, the defense that Bush meant well and that the claim that there were 'nookular' bombs in Iraq was never a simple "honest" mistake, but an outright boldfaced lie with malice aforethought.
Bush lied.
There can be no greater crime by a leader against his own people then to lie them into a war. None.
Bush's credibility is gone. And with it that of every other politician, official, and media talking head that supported that lie. If there is one lesson to be learned from the blogs, it is that the lie was an obvious and easily discredited one. It is beyond the realm of possibility that Congress and the mainstream media, with their vast budgets and huge staffs, could not find the obvious signs of deception being reported by blogs operating on spare change found under seat cushions.
We are witness to an historic first. It is not new that wars are started with lies. Indeed it is hard to find one which is not. What is new is that because of the Internet, the lie that started the war is exposed for all to see and is widely known while the war stared with that lie is still being fought, is still killing and crippling our young people.
There is no "middle ground" when dealing with a lie on any scale. Either one denounces the lie, or one is complicit. In the case of a lie on such am horrific scale, complicity is a grave sin."
Also, I don't think what Oldranger described can rightly be called "armed uprising."
What he described is more accurately characterized as legitimate self-defense.
Regarding genuine armed uprising, I agree that it would be both dangerous and counterproductive as the media would swiftly paint armed political dissidents as criminal militants.
Having said that, Oldranger, you're right. The greatest asset anyone can have is truth. And so we continue to spread the word for others to decide for themselves what truth is.
QRS,
First of all, Congress received intelligence reports that were lies doctored by BushCo. The fact that they relied on these lies is unfortunate, though understandable.
Second of all. War was never declared. In fact, the vote was to allow Bush to use arms as a last means necessary. In fact, Bush used arms as a FIRST means necessary. Thus, again, it is not wholly Congress's fault for their vote.
Thirdly, to the extent that Congress was at fault - and I am angry with them and do believe them to still be culpable - I do not understand why you would not be applauding those who now speak out against the war. It takes guts to say I was wrong. You yourself say that armed uprising is dangerous and unproductive, so why not support the democratic process?
To paraphrase Ayn Rand, "You cannot reason with an unreasonable person. Reason is not contagious."
Miss R, I find it totally unreasonable to assume that Murtha has the credentials to lead us out of anything. He has a war record? Ha! I have a war record! That is not a credential for stopping a war, only fighting in one. If he were the saviour & messiah on the scene he would have disected this outrage before it ever occurred. He would never have been for it. He is not angry because it was a lie nor for any other just reason. He's angry because we're losing & he's on the wrong side! He's just another rat jumping ship in preparation for the 06 elections.
Before you make the mistake of thinking I'm demeaning any part of his war record you better read closely.
I would no more demean his war record than demean my own but that was then & this is now. I, too, hold the purple heart, Viet Nam Medal of Honor, bronze star, ad nauseum. I can't even buy a cup of coffee with it nor does it define me now.
Nor does it define him now!
It always amazes me how people think a war record defines a person's ability to lead. All we were were you thrown into a situation we wanted to survive.
His combat CV doesn't make him the automatic messiah.
Actually, you're right, armed uprising is not reasonable. It's all that's going to be left. It's not reasonable now but when they show up to invite us to yhe Halliburton Arms Chalets it's all there will be.
Then it will be reasonable!
Miss R., If you think that Congress was manipulated into the war, you think that they have failed. And, if they wanted Bush to use force only as a last resort, they should have impeached him as soon as he broke with the terms of the AUMF. They did not. Most of them did not lift one finger until so many people were so pissed off that they could not believe that if they ignored the discontent with the war it would go away. How long ago was it that Murtha was calling for additional resources to be devoted to Iraq? A couple months? Wow, yeah, that is the kind of principled leadership we need[/BS]. The Congresscritter democrepublicans are pretty much all part of the problem.
Remember, the presidential candidates in 2004 were members of the same politicoreligious Order. That's what you call false opposition. Keep your head in the sand for as long as you want.
charity, thank you for sharing your thoughts.
It is a crime and a travesty that so many good young men should perish fighting a phantom enemy when the real one continues to drive them to the arms of war in search of money for their futures and their families.
It is the banks that are killing our communities and the banks - and their offspring corporations - that our children are dying for.
And if our soldiers make it out alive, they return shattered and destitute - abandoned by the same corporations for which they risked their lives.
QRS, I'm not religious but I say 'amen to that!'
oldranger,
I do not think Murtha's war record makes him more qualified to lead per se, but it does make him more persuasive to others when he says what he says. I do not think you are demeaning his war record. (just so you know)
ZenMonkey,
You have a point, with one caveat. Articles of impeachment should have been brought years ago, however, given Dems are a minority party, it is unclear they ever had the political backing to accomplish anything.
As far as Kerry v. Bush. I do not see the two as of the same order, though I did reluctantly vote for Kerry. My personal choice was Kucinich or Dean. I think Kerry would have been a far superior president than Bush, though I do not think he would have been "good."
I want it to be clear that I am against the war and believe we should not attack Iran. I think the troops have been shat upon, in terms of their treatment, and that the entire enterprise in Iraq is illegitimate. I just don't know if denigrating those who change their mind is a good thing.
Would I vote for Murtha (or someone like him)? I don't know - I don't have that moral issue to deal with, as my own representative, Major Owen, voted against the war. It would depend upon who Murtha (or someone like him) is running against. But I also wouldn't not vote for him based on his original position re: Iraq. I tend to think that a policy encouraging people to change their minds is a good one.
PRINCIPLES don't change. They are what keep people grounded in humanity - as opposed to barbarism or slavery.
Effective representatives make policy choices that are anchored in GOOD SOLID principles, i.e., those that advance the GENERAL WELFARE - not special interests.
When they do not base their decisions on good principles, but instead on the outcomes of political battles between competing special interests, they are not fit to represent us.
on c-span, 2002, i watched the senate debate the resolution to give bush the go ahead to go to war as a last resort. senator Byrd in what i consider one of the top speeches in the history of the senate questioned why congress was giving bush dictorial power. BUSH WAS IN A HURRY TO INVADE IRAG at this time. They knew they were giving bush the go ahead to invade Irag
i remember the 76 democratic members of the house of representative on the grounds of congress, pleading their case not to go to war with Irag because there was no proof of Irag involvement in 9-11 or whether they had wmd. telling bush to give the inspector a chance to complete their mission. Don't rush to war.
in both instances, they were totally ignored by the rest of the democrats and republicans.
i remember the hundreds of thousands of e-mails, faxes, phone calls to all of congressional member asking them not to vote for the resolution. they totally ignored us.
i remember before the passing of the resolution, there were many question about the truthfullness of the bush administration claims about irag.
so, don't tell me about people changing their minds about Irag. they knew these were lies. Hell nearly 2400 troops have died, 1000s wounded for life. over 100,000 maybe more innocent Iragi woman and children blown to pieces for nothing. THEY KNEW! CHANGED THEIR MINDS. BS!
Well Qrswave, you know you have made it big in the blog world when all the nutjobs show up and get all pissy, because they know that you are a threat to exposing the truth underneath all of the lies.
And I haven't read this whole discussion, but when I talk about nutjobs I mean stupid dumbass white girl Carrie. Your white. So you think your God's ^%$#% gift to the world? Your not. What are you going to bring to the world stupidy, greed, and then more stupidity and greed. Oh and here is a news flash Carrie: the terrorists are white! Carrie if you like the war on dissent so much then why don't you go enlist and fight in it, you stupid yellow elephant.
I don't consider miss r a nutjob, I think she is just in the violent oppression stage of the truth.
It is very sad all the murders such as this one that are going on in the name of the corporate terrorists. The 2006 election doesn't matter much. To me a good election would be to put even just 1 Green Party member in Congress to show people that yes the Green Party can win and to help them accept that truth that it is the Green Party vs. the Democratic-Republicans.
"Violent oppression of the truth."
That implies I advocate censorship. I never once said this blog should be censored, so do not put words in my mouth.
I am one of the biggest free speech advocates out there.
I just simply do not think this blog will be effective if it castigates those who disagree with it.
I want to add another NEWSFLASH.
Have corporations raped the environment and not treated workers with respect? Have they engaged in unfair and monopolistic practies? NOT DENYING THAT. But not every corporation is bad.
Furthermore, to say "the only terrorists are white people" is flat out UNTRUE.
So all the suicide bombers thus far are...actors? The people who died from suicide bombs...were faking it?
I know the world I am about to suggest is complicated, but it is reflective of reality, unlike the world you suggest exists.
We live in a world with good and bad corporations. We live in a world with good and bad white people, good and bad black people, and good and bad brown people. We live in a world where corporations may not treat everyone with respect, but certainly neither do most Middle Eastern states - ESPECIALLY Saudi Arabia and Iran. We live in a world where corporations help fund illegitimate wars, and yet where certain Middle Eastern nations also fund suicide bombers.
It is possible to have such a world. To say that Muslims have suicide bombed is not to say all Muslims are evil or that they are less deserving of American citizenship.
I fail to understand the inability to admit the obvious - that there are non-white people who have been and will be terrorists.
Blaming everything on "corporate terrorists" is itself a form of a tin foil fat.
Check out the song by Ken Clark "21 Today" and "Red Sea"
http://cdbaby.com/cd/kenclark
you're not alone
Miss R,
I am one of the biggest free speech advocates out there.
Your words.
It appears that you are an advocate of free speech as long as it is free only for you. The free exchange of ideas is rarely accomplished in a strictly politically correct arena. Sometimes bad words get spoken in an effort to drive the point home. And (gasp), sometimes vehement castigation occurs.
So what the f*ck do you hope to accomplish????
Those were your words in the opening volley, which you fired here. Appears to me to be pretty vehement & reeks of opinion castigation.
The war in Iraq had a 70% approval rating when it was waged. How do you hope to change public opinion if you claim anyone who was for the war originally can never redeem themselves? Do you hope to form a break off country, or something???
We should leave Iraq. But this blog will not change a single opinion to ensure that happens. Not when it doesn't even attempt to reach out to those who don't have preset opinions that the blog shares (and openly scorns those who disagree), and not when it spreads disinfo
You again.
I believe that most of us are fully aware that the minds & opinions of the House & Senate will not be changed. They knew that the whole thing was a lie from the beginning. The only minds to be changed by the presentation of the truth will be the public who comes searching for the truth. They have been treated like mushrooms, “kept in the dark & fed shit”. The MSM only fed the party line. No one can be forced to read the blogs and other alternative media but if all they do is read the lies then that’s all they will know.
I want to add something else. You have said again and again that somehow American foreign policy is dictated by the demands of Israel. In fact, this is far from the truth. Israeli foreign policy is dictated by America, not the other way around. Stating that the war is fought for Israel only fans the flames of anger against Israel for something it frankly DID NOT DO. Israel does not have that sway over American foreign policy. It was one factor amongst many. In fact, Evangelical Christians have a far bigger documented influence. Yet instead...it's blame Israel, blame Israel.
You, again.
Do you know anything of the dream & history of Israel (Zionism) from the 19th century to present? You need to brush up. This is not a joke. These people are deadly serious & are in complete control of America. Study your history Miss R.
"Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it." - Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001."
"Our race (the Jews) is the Master Race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves."
Prime Minister of Israel, Menechem Begin - 1977-1983
You said that anyone who was for the war in Iraq in 2003 gets no free pass - they cannot change their mind. In fact, you almost implied they should be jailed!
Ibid. (just getting tired of saying, “you, again”)
I have a better idea. After their trials are over & they are all found guilty (and they are guilty) they should be sentenced to life in Abu Ghraib under the guard of those they tortured for so long. There should be no oversight by anyone as to their fate. Let the victims of their cruelty mete out the punishment to them.
You are saying, in essence, that a murderer, who changes his mind after he is caught red handed, should be given back his gun and set free. Justin Sims & hundreds of thousands of innocent human beings have been murdered by our government. The terrorists are us!
BTW, Carrie Oakey (Karioke) must be a joke. I spent a little time reading her blog last night. It has to be a parody. No human being (except maybe W) can be this gullibly stupid! When I clicked the link to her "evil stepbrother" I knew her whole site was a big, elaborate joke. Check her out.
He voluntered for the job, and all that came with it. I shed no tear for brainwashed men who trade their lives for lies and so called honour and duty. What about the duty to your family and comunity. Iknow ,I know.... somne of you wackos are gonna say "he died for our freedom, he died so you can type what you are typing". Your just as brainwashed. It is openen and admitted that the reasons for the war were false and in some cases outright lies. No one is dying for your freedom, they are dying for the rich men controling the USA. Where are these , strong , brave,free americans, I have heard so much about???? I see nothing but brainwashed sheep being sheperded by a ex drunk, fake texas cowboy , high schooll chearleader (LOL!!)). I believe the founding fathers of the USA are turning so fast in their graves thatit has caused a vortex that has succesfully sucked the ability of free will and critical thought out of the majority of the american population. Americans wake up, take to you streets and take your country back!!!!!
Oldranger,
I never said the blog should be censored. I said it is a waste of space that is not accomplishing anything. BIG DIFFERENCE.
As far as Israel goes. I want the citations to those "quotes" said by Ariel Sharon and Begin. I want to add that I could list 100's of quotes by Arab leaders that say ten times worse, but I simply do not believe that Sharon or Begin said what you CLAIM they said. So back up your "quotes" with verifiable and trusted citations. I would like to add that actions speak louder than words, and by ACTIONS, it is clear Israel does NOT have the kind of sway over American policy that your (most likely made up) quotes says it has.
I am well aware of the history of Israel. I know more than the average person - having spent countless hours reading and researching the subject.
As far as Congress goes. It was not so clear at the time that the war in Iraq was "mass murder." I would not even list Iraq as clear cut "mass murder" now.
The intelligence community was pretty uniform back in 2003 with the belief that Saddam had WMD. The question at the time was whether he had a massive stockpile or a small one, and whether he would actually going to use what he had and was a threat. It's easy to play Monday morning quarterback, but in fact in 2003, not now, it was widely accepted that Saddam had WMD. Hell, Saddam HIMSELF said he had WMD.
None of that justifies going to war in Iraq, but I do not see Congress as necessarily having been complicit in a war crime. They believed the intelligence given to them, and public opinion was heavily in favor of war. Now, on the other hand, the executive branch did commit a war crime, by sending Congress doctored intelligence to fit their predetermined decision to invade Iraq.
When a Congressman recognizes that they were duped and appologizes for voting for the war, I think this is something to celebrate, not denigrate. I would say it's not even so much "changing the mind" as it is "recognizing the error of their ways."
Was the war in Iraq a terrible idea? Yes. But then again, was it easy to be mislead into thinking the war was a good idea back in 2003? Again yes. My own father was mislead, and has since come to realize the error of his original ways. He is but one of MANY people.
I never said that all white people are terrorists, what I said is that terrorists are white people. Even given the most likely incorrect assumption that 911 wasn't blanned by Bu$h and the corporate terrorists, it was an act of retallion for years of far worse terrorism (starvation of children, unjust wars, lack of needed medical and health care)and the result of a corporate terrorist government that refuse to listen to anyone who isn't rich, male, and white. You can't expect to that you can just terrorize the world and that karma won't come back to hit you ever.
Anon 12:17,
That is a completely callous and ignorant way to look at the American armed forces.
Let's look at the soldiers in the army. Most of them barely have a high school education. They face unemployment or the army. The American army is a welfare army, with the poor people in the country fighting a war to benefit the rich chickenhawks in the White House. Go look up the stats yourself. As someone who grew up in a relatively privileged world of Long Island, I knew of one person out of the entire graduating class who volunteered for the military after graduation - and this person actually signed up elite air force school. Do you really believe such statistics exist in Akron, Ohio, or Flint, Michigan?
Wake up. The average soldier in the army has a "choice" to serve in name only.
Of course the war on dissent is was murder. Only in the United States could people consider 911 mass murder, and what we are doing to the children (and adults too) in Iraq just a war gone bad. Of course, that is excluding all the other children in the world murdered by the corporate terrorists, including the World Bank.
The good news though Miss R. is that you are close to accepting the truth, you only have one more stage left to go.
What are you talking about? I was talking about the trade towers in 911 and the corporate terrorists in them who have murdered who knows how many extra children to get an extra rolex. Yes there were people in there who weren't corporate terrorists, but that is what happens because the corporate terrorists insultate themselves.
Citisucks,
So you are saying that there are no Muslim terrorists, or terrorists who aren't white people? Is that what you are saying? Whoa.
I want to add something else. Corporations, for all their faults, have also existed in a world which allows their existence. Don't think for a second that corrupt regimes in the Middle East, especially the House of Saud, is not complicit with EVERYTHING. Furthermore, regimes such as Saudi Arabia and Iran heavily discriminate against all religious minorities, and will hang someone for being gay. In addition, corporations are not necessarily "white." There are women and minorities that also populate corporations.
To pin it all on "white corporate terrorists" is both ignorant and inaccurate.
Citisucks,
Not all mass finance is "terror."
Calling it as such, and implying that those within the WTC were "asking for it" is not only untrue, it is a very callous thing to say of the dead.
Has the IMF contributed to world problems? Yes. But it also has helped finance countries that were desperately in need of cash. I do not see the IMF to be all evil, or financiers to be all evil.
I see a world that is far more complex than the black and white world you live in. Some banks have actually funded public parks and educational programs, as well as all sorts of programs to benefit the public. Of course, they do not get credit for that, as they are all "corporate terrorists."
Wednesday, October 3, 2001
[What Ariel Sharon Said]
Occupied Jerusalem: 3 October, 2001 (IAP) -- According to Israel radio (in Hebrew) Kol Yisrael, [Shimon] Peres warned [Ariel] Sharon Wednesday that refusing to heed incessant American requests for a cease-fire with the Palestinians would endanger Israeli interests and "turn the US against us."
At this point, a furious Sharon reportedly turned toward Peres, saying "every time we do something you tell me Americans will do this and will do that. I want to tell you something very clear, don't worry about American pressure on Israel, we, the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it."
The radio said Peres and other cabinet ministers warned Sharon against saying what he said in public because "it would cause us a public relations disaster."
More to follow Miss R.
Oldranger,
I asked you for a link or a citation. You gave neither. I also said that actions speak louder than words, and the history of American-Israeli relations simply contradicts that quotation.
Oldranger,
Let me be clear. I want a citation as to where that "quote" came from. I want a full context in which it was said, and the reaction to that quote.
The IMF delibertly and knowingly ripped these countries off, causing them to be in worse situations then they were before.
I'll say whatever I want about the dead. There are dead corporate terrorists who got exactly what they deserved. Just because karma hit them and they died, doesn't make it any less true.
Corporations are dominated by white men. To say anything otherwise is simply ignorant. And even the minorities and women in corporations act like rich white men, for example Condelesa Rice is may be "female and black", but her actions and behavior is that of a rich white man.
Sure banks fund things, to make themselves look good. But who *&^*^%^ cares when they are funding it with blood money from stealing food of the tables from children through ridiculous interest. What they do is the equivalent of if I murdered 10 people and stole there money and then gave the money I stole from one person to fund a park.
Let me be clear. I don't care about a &^%$$& citation. If the moderate Democraps at daily kos don't need to site anything, than why should us true progressives have to site everything.
Miss r said: "The intelligence community was pretty uniform back in 2003 with the belief that Saddam had WMD. The question at the time was whether he had a massive stockpile or a small one, and whether he would actually going to use what he had and was a threat. It's easy to play Monday morning quarterback, but in fact in 2003, not now, it was widely accepted that Saddam had WMD. Hell, Saddam HIMSELF said he had WMD."
I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are on drugs, because the alternative is, to say the least, not at all flattering to your level of integrity.
And I don't have time to give you all the links of RECENT reports that flatly refute your ridiculous assertions. There's a report from just yesterday linked at WRH (up further in these comments), and this is the first in a series of stories revealing your assertions as either drivel or deliberate disinformation.
Colossal waste of time.
You'll come to accept the truth eventually. Go take another nap, and hopefully when you wake up you will be in the acceptance stage of truth.
Citisucks,
Let me quote you right now, so there is no mistaking what YOU said.
Let me be clear. I don't care about a &^%$$& citation. If the moderate Democraps at daily kos don't need to site anything, than why should us true progressives have to site everything.
Okay, so you obviously do not care about the truth. You obviously feel it okay to just spout off at the mouth without providing a shred of evidence for what is said. I just want to be clear that these are YOUR WORDS and not mine.
Corporations had done good and done bad. They have financed good and bad things. It is that simple. Let's look at Starbucks as an example. It is considered a "big evil" corporation, and yet it also has done the following:
1) Provided GOOD healthcare to all its employees.
2) Has a policy from buying coffee beans from sustainable farmers. (it has a line of "fair trade" coffee)
3) Has monetarily supported progressive causes.
It did all this while ALSO driving the small coffee shop out of business with its business practices. So there are good and bad things about Starbucks. BIG SURPRISE.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starbucks
Then let's look at Microsoft - another supposedly evil corporation.
We all know about the hazards of Windows and the various antitrust issues.
Did you know that Microsoft also provides free computers to poor countries? That Microsoft was named one of the Best 100 Companies to work for by Working Mother Magazine? That it received a 100% rating in the Corporate Equality Index from the Human Rights Campaign? (http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Section=Home&CONTENTID=28841&TEMPLATE=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm)
See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft
What about the fact that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the largest charitable foundation in the world?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_and_Melinda_Gates_Foundation
The bottom line is that there are good and bad aspects to corporations. It is NOT so clear cut "corporate terrorists." Seeing the world in such black and white terms is inaccurate and flat out offensive. (when you say somehow those in the WTC "had it coming.")
QRS,
I am not JUSTIFYING the war in Iraq. However, back in 2003, the intelligence community actually was pretty uniform in the belief that Saddam had WMD. Obviously they were since proven wrong. I am not saying any of this justified war in Iraq. But I am saying that there has been much engagement in Monday morning quarterbacking without looking at how the situation existed as of 2003, NOT 2006.
Oldranger,
Let me be clear. I want a citation as to where that "quote" came from. I want a full context in which it was said, and the reaction to that quote.
Umm, Miss R! I love it when you talk dirty to me!
If you noticed the date you'll also notice that it was more than 5 years ago.
Hey, lady. I got that much for you, are you not concerned enough to search some yourself? Or are you so happy in your ignorance that you prefer someone else do your work for you.
I am not your lackey. It was Irael radio. It's given. Find it.
Oldranger,
YOU are the one who quoted something. YOU are the one who is responsible for backing it up. You did not list where the quote came from, and yet you insist on its accuracy. In order for such an assertion to have validity, it needs PROOF. If I were the one who quoted something, then I would be the one responsible for quoting where it came from. IT IS THAT SIMPLE.
HA! I knew that the quote cited re: Sharon was flat out garbage.
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=22&x_article=766
Oldranger, you are spewing anti-Israeli lies. Keep the quote coming, as I will keep on refuting them.
"America is no problem, we control America." This was a statement made by Ariel Sharon to his ministers in year 2003, (can't remember the month). Read it in the Newsweek magazine, and several websites ran the article too.
Should have had an exclamation mark after the last sentence. I would have flat fallen in lust then.
I gave you the source of the statement. There is no law which states that I have to look up everything else for you.
Don't know how you work things but I generally trust my own research more than sending lackeys to find things for me. I stopped being a First Sergeant 20 years ago. Then, when I gave an order, it was instantly obeyed. I was kind of a hypocrite in those days though. I gave the orders but I was hell about following them.
I haven’t changed much. As Q said, principles don’t change.
Google it or forget it. I have a feeling it's really outside of your comfort zone & you would rather quibble the small stuff than to search for the truth yourself.
Anon and oldranger,
I cited a link flat out disputing that Ariel Sharon ever said that. My blood is boiling at your flat out lies/disinfo about Israel and about America.
Miss R,
Many kudos! I never saw any of that site in my searches. Whether or not he said that does not alter the rest of history.
As long as your blood is boiling though we should have one helluva good discussion.
I will never take away from someone else what they labored for & you have proven me errant here. Again;
KUDOS!
I am only musing now but, I believe we are off the subject of Justin Sims & I am as much or, probably more, than most.
You have given me much to think about for writing. Keep an eye out on my new blogsite &, if they don't kick me off, I'll talk dirty to you too.
Oldranger,
Is that a threat? Do you think I care even half a crap you "talking dirty to me"?
Unmighty Thor has wished me dead on numerous occasions. I am supposed to care when you say such a comment?
First off, my comment about the citation was a playful jest in regards to your obsession around this quote. It wasn't meant seriously.
If you think Starbucks and Microsoft are good companies you are fooling yourself. Starbucks has children picking coffee beans with chemicals on them, that scar their hands and cause them pain. Yeah that's a really good company. Go on though keep enjoying your child labor coffee like a good Democrap.
Microsolft is a sick twisted **&^*& up monopoly. Microsoft and their ridiculously overpriced monopolized software that I could not afford was the reason I had to go the library in grad. school to write all my papers.
These are just one example of why each of the above company is evil. There are many more.
Citisucks,
I never said Microsoft OR Starbucks were good companies. I said they were not fully EVIL companies.
BOTH companies did good and bad things. If you want a sophisticated critique of American capitalism, you have to acknowledge that there is GOOD as well as bad within corporations.
There are good values, as well as abuses, within capitalism and America. Failure to recognize that is a failure to recognize the nuanced truth that is reality. Such a failure to notice nuance is one of the greatest failings of the Repug party.
Are you hoping to be the flip side of Repugs? Just as bad, only from a different perspective? Because that is what you are if you fail to acknowledge some BASIC TRUTHS.
Oldranger,
Wow, I just read the most recent posting on your blog. What a great posting. I will have to stop by it and visit more often (I'll probably put up a link from my blog to yours as well).
Almost every corporation in this country has any good they do, strongly outweighed by the evil they do.
We are also no longer in a capitalistic era. We are in the corporate terrorist era where companies are allowed to outright lie to consumers, therefore denying them one of the main tenants of capitalism, which is informed choice.
Citisucks,
That is a rather strong statement you made. Let me quote it so there is no mistaking it.
Almost every corporation in this country has any good they do, strongly outweighed by the evil they do.
You do realize there are hundreds of thousands of corporations in America. For such a loaded statement, you need to provide PROOF, as it is NOT a self evident FACT.
I could fill a library full of books that prove my statement. But keep sucking up to your Democrap corporate terrorist sponsors! And I don't see you providing proof for anything anyway either!
Citisucks,
I actually did provide proof that corporations do good as well as bad, and YOU are the one who has the claim of "corporate terrorists." YOU are the one who is saying all (or most) corporations are bad. Therefore, YOU bear the burden of PROVING not that SOME corporations are bad, but that MOST corporations are bad.
I do not get a penny from corporations and I actually think they have too much of an influence over policy. But that is seperate and distinct from whether there is a monolithic "corporate terrorist" out there. It is seperate and distinct from whether "there are only white terrorists."
YOU are the one espousing an extremist viewpoint. Therefore, YOU are the one who is required to PROVE IT.
Let me add something. Citisucks, you have to prove not only that corporations have a negative influence, but rather, that there is a monolithic "corporate terrorist" out there, and that MOST corporations actually behave as terrorists.
THAT is what you have to prove, and THAT is what I flat out refute.
I suppose it is my responsibility to inform you because you are a good old white girl and we are suppossed to be your slaves.
Why don't you prove to me why the white corporate terrorists who were hit by karma, didn't deserve it?
Miss R., The "politicoreligious Order" I referred to is Skull and Bones 322 at Yale. There are 15 S&B's each year; assuming that they live for approximately 50 years after graduating college, there are approximately 750 total in the US. If you estimate the population of the US at a round 300 million, that is exactly .00025% of the population. Both presidential candidates came from a very exclusive group that comprises about .00025% of the population. The biggest difference between them would have been whose smiling face was put on policies that were not in our interest. John Forbes Kerry is still a senator. What has he done for The People of the United States of America lately?
My point on Murtha was that he is not against the war, he thinks it was lost, much like all the retired generals who are speaking out against -how the war is being conducted-. Until a couple months ago, Murtha was all over it, trying to get more "boots on the ground" and what not. On the one hand, it would be better to end the war now and deal with the ideological pigs later than to end the war later; on the other hand, leaving Iraq because it was lost is not what we should be seeking, because it leaves open the possibility that US will continue to use lies to invade countries for realpolitik.
I suppose it is my responsibility to inform you because you are a good old white girl and we are suppossed to be your slaves.
Why don't you prove to me why the white corporate terrorists who were hit by karma, didn't deserve it?
There you go again. Anyone who disagrees with you is a "good old boy" or a "good old girl," or, according to QRS, a "shill."
Very mature.
What about the waiters of Windows on the World, secretaries, janitors, and mail room clerks who died on 9/11? Are you saying that thsi was justified? Are you saying you think 9/11 was a good thing? What about the firefighters and police officers who died? They deserved it, huh? Because if you add up all of those who died, the MAJORITY fit into those categories.
Furthermore, whatever beef you have with the Wall Street types, you bear a VERY heavy burden to say they were "corporate terrorists."
Continue to engage in weak intellectualism and reductionist thinking. It really helps your cause! *said sarcastically*
Zenmonkey,
If you actually looked at the positions of Bush v. Kerry, there were stark differences. It was the media and Kerry's ineptness that caused many to think Kerry did not stand for anything, when in fact he was one of the more liberal senators throughout his long tenure in Congress. Of course it is well known that they came from similarly privileged backgrounds, but it doesn't mean they were the same person.
Re: Murtha and people like him. As a matter of fact, the only way to secure Iraq would be to bring in another 150,000 troops. To keep the current level of troops is a waste of life and limb of those within the armed forces. And let me clarify my position on Iraq.
Before the war, I believed it was a grave mistake to go into Iraq. Once the war was already started, I wanted America to do right by Iraqis, and enable Iraq to set up a new government, and adequately replace the infrastructure. I felt we owed it to the Iraqis - hell, we STILL owe it to the Iraqis. It has been clear for a long time that Rummy et al never really cared to set up a government in Iraq, and never really cared for the well being of the Iraqi people and were inept at reconstruction. Instead, they did a half assed job in Iraq - sending less than half the number of troops needed, and without adequate equipment. Murtha's position (and the Dem position in general) was that more troops are needed because we are already in Iraq and owe it to the Iraqi people to do right by them.
It has since become very clear that more troops will never come, and that we NEVER will do right by the Iraqis, so we might as well cut our losses and leave now. That is the position of most of thsoe who now believe we should leave Iraq. I do not see this as an immoral position, and I do not see Murtha or those who advocate leaving where they previously advocated more troops as necessarily immoral.
Kerry was not inept. You do not get to be a senator through ineptness. You do not get to be the presidential candidate for the Democratic Party through ineptness. Or are you saying that the political process failed completely, and it really was just a choice between which incompetent boob you thought would bungle things less? But I guess I'm just living in fantasy land when I think it's a relevant fact that the two candidates for president were members of the same elite political club at the same school.
US never wanted to do right by Iraqis. US never tried to do right by Iraqis. "You broke it, you bought it" is great when you're talking about some trinket, it doesn't quite work for countries; this is particularly the case when US presence, support, and funding is making the situation much much worse. Read the Downing Street Memo and tell us again about how the "Intelligence Community" (what, do they all live in the same suburb, with white picket fences and occasional BBQ's?) believed Iraq had significant "WMD"'s. Please note also that Bush and Blair were desirous of bringing about a situation in which Iraq could be found to be in violation of a resolution of the UN so that they could invade. This was not a cock-up, this was not a "half assed job". This was not "a grave mistake". This was (and is) malice, plain and simple, and anyone who supported it is complicit.
Saying otherwise is saying, "Well, yeah, this guy murdered people three years ago, and he wanted more people to be murdered right up 'til about 4 months ago, but now he thinks we should stop, because it's not worth the number of troops we're losing. So he's not immoral." This entire war is a crime.
And Citisucks, drop the race card. White racism is worse than any other kind of racism only as a matter of contingent historical fact. There are any number of other cultures who have tried to do what Uncle Sam accomplished.
Miss R,
You're so pissy!
Who the hell is "unmighty Thor"?
Oldranger,
Unmighty Thor is someone who has wished death on all Jews and said that America is a White Christian nation - exclusively. I do not see how he is "mighty."
And I am pissy? For saying a racist/hater/wannabe mass murderer is unmighty? Oh, you shouldn't have! Thanks for the wonderful compliment!
*grins widely*
124 Israeli children have been killed by Palestinians and 720 Palestinian children have been killed by Israelis since September 29, 2000
7,633 Israelis and 29,731 Palestinians have been injured since September 29, 2000.
The U.S. gives $15,139,178 per day to the Israeli government and military and $232,290 per day to Palestinian NGO’s.
http://www.ifamericansknew.org
Arab League - Death Star Music Video
http://mparent7777.livejournal.com/8002186.html
lyrics:
1st Verse:
It happened in a galaxy not so far away
With a dark force mounting, it’s a land in disarray
He who has the will and wants to get their way
Cuts deep to reap, carpe diem (seize the day)
Hack out an empire by hook and by crook
Machiavelli would have gagged at the steps that they took
Improve all instruction, act according to the book
But it came on the sheeple with the ground that they shook
Hands set in motion by the notion of control
Of the souls of those who do exactly what they are told
Stand in line for the ration as the facism unfolds
They twist an iron fist as they tighten their hold
As they come from an acorn of a mighty oak grove
So the tentacles of empire expand and flow
Roots of this dynasty founded long ago
By the thief of the skull and bones of Geronimo!
Chorus:
Wake up, infidel, they’ve taken it too far,
Wake up, infidel, blow up the death star!
Wake up, infidel, you are paying for this war,
Wake up, infidel, destroy the death star!
Post a Comment
<< Home