Entries Tagged with Terrorists
October 25th, 2006
- Why do the evil usually triumph? — Omni @ Every Topic in the Universe(s?) has some interesting insights into the whole good vs. evil thing. Of course, she starts off correctly pointing out that there are very few good people in the world. For the most part, people are generally neutral. To be good, you have to be willing to actually take action against evil and few people are willing to do so.
10) Evil is persistent: They’ll gleefully do an infinite # of evil deeds, and will literally NEVER grow tired of it, because they LOVE what they’re doing; if there’s a goal other than just causing trouble forever, they’ve got what it takes to see it through. On the other hand, if you can get good or neutral people to make ONE decisive move, they act as if they’ve just climbed Everest and are all done in… and just plain DONE, because, no matter how obvious it is that the evil have NOT been stopped yet, their attitude will be that they did their best and that’s it. Even if they’re being personally attacked, even if they stand to lose a great deal if the attack “destroys” them, they’ll rarely put forth more than a token effort before giving it up as hopeless.
More
Tags: good vs. evil, voting, no-fly list, Terrorists, GAO
September 6th, 2006
- We Know The Who And The What, But What About The Why? — The (liberal)Girl Next Door asks what I’ve been asking all along: “Why out Valerie Plame?” The media seems content to have the mystery of who did the outing solved without wondering as to the why. Now that new evidence has come to light that Plame was working on the task force to determine whether or not Iraq had WMD, why was it so important to get her out of the way?
- But Bush has nothing on at all! — lambert @ CorrenteWire theorizes as to why there haven’t been any more terror attacks on American soil since 9/11 since we’re told every other day that an attack is right around the corner. If the terrorists are so competent and dangerous, why aren’t we living in a war-torn country where things are being blown up on a weekly basis? It can’t be that our security is safer; we’ve prove it isn’t.
A fully credible explanation for the fact that the United States has suffered no terrorist attacks since 9/11 is that the threat posed by homegrown or imported terrorists — like that presented by Japanese Americans during World War II or by American Communists after it — has been massively exaggerated. Is it possible that the haystack is essentially free of needles?
More
Tags: George W. Bush, terror attacks, 9/11, Terrorists, economy, irresponsible government, failed policy, Valerie Plame, WMD, Iraq, Conspiracy Theories, Matthew Fenton, National Naval Medical Center, Bathesda, Walter Reed, War, American soldiers, 101st Fighting Keyboarders
June 13th, 2006
My mother was telling me the other day about a weird set of events that occurred one night while she was on-call for Red Cross. In the middle of the night, the Red Cross cell phone rang and she got up to answer it, but no one was there. She checked the number but it was all 9’s across the screen. She went back to bed and went to sleep.
Several hours later, the same thing occurred.
Well, the next morning, she got to thinking about it and she thought she remembered hearing about some scam where people can call your phone and when you answer they can dial all nines and use that to make long distance phone calls. So, dutifully, she called the cell phone company to aske them about the calls and report what had happened. The cell phone company said they’d never heard of such a scam nor did they show any record of the calls my mother had received that night.
So, I commented that maybe some terrorist had used her cell phone to call Iran to get his orders. I was joking of course. I don’t actually believe that.
My mother however accused, “You and your father and your conspiracy theories!”
My reply was, “What? You don’t think it’s possible?”
“No.”
“Why do you think your President is recording all of your calls, Mother?”
“Because he’s stupid.”
I had to laugh. “Mom, you should be careful. After the terrorist used your phone last night, he’s probably listening in right now. He won’t like being called ’stupid’.”
Tags: Terrorists, phone scams, Red Cross, Conspiracy Theories
March 24th, 2006
This Week the Republicans released a new radio ad in Wisconsin:
RNC AD: “Censure”
Announcer: September 11th changed our country. And it changed how America responds to terrorists. President Bush is working to keep American families safe. Passing the PATRIOT Act which has disrupted over one hundred and fifty terrorist threats and cells making sure the US is monitoring terrorist communications. But some Democrats are working against these efforts to secure our country, opposing the PATRIOT Act and terrorist surveillance program. Their leader is Russ Feingold. Now Feingold and other Democrats want to censure the President. Publicly reprimanding President Bush for pursuing suspected members of al Qaeda. Some Democrats are even calling for President Bush’s impeachment.
Is this how Democrats plan to win the War on Terror? Call Russ Feingold and ask him why he’s more interested in censuring the President than protecting our freedom. Paid for by the Republican National Committee not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee www.gop.com. The Republican National Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising.
FactCheck.org does a nice analysis of the inaccuracies and mischaracterizations of Feingold’s Censure Resolution in the Repulican’s ad. I’d like to review some of that here, but I want to be fair and point out that these kinds of commercials are a personal pet peeve of mine as they come from both sides. They were particularly aggrevating during the 2004 election and after awhile they sound less like spin and more like lies and after awhile I’m just offended by both sides.
Now Feingold and other Democrats want to censure the President. Publicly reprimanding President Bush for pursuing suspected members of al Qaeda.
This must be more of that “if they aren’t with us, then they’re against us” mentality. Feingold nor any Democrat has ever reprimanded President Bush or anyone for pursuing suspected terrorists. In fact, Feingold has repeatedly, publically said that we should be wiretapping terrorists and suspected terrorists; that isn’t the issue — the issue is the wiretapping of Americans on American soil without obtaining court orders as well as a failure to disclose what he was doing to the appropriate Congressional committees.
Some Democrats are even calling for President Bush’s impeachment.
But not Russ Feingold. John Conyers in the House, yes, but he isn’t even calling really for an impeachment so much as an investigation that could lead to an impeachment. The implication is that the Democratic agenda is to impeach President Bush, which I find hilarious because if they were paying attention, they’d know that the Democrats are too scared to do any such thing.
It’s really all about the spin. Scare Americans into thinking that only Republicans can keep them safe. God knows that the terrorists are going to attack Wisconsin any day now. You aren’t a patriot if you vote Democrat.
Tags: Terrorists, Patriot Act, Russ Feingold, Republicans, Democrats, George W. Bush, factcheck.org, Censure, 2004 election, Impeach
March 3rd, 2006
Well, it’s long been joked that credit card debt is the real American Dream just like Mom and Apple Pie. The government must think there’s some truth to it because apparently if you pay off or even just down your credit card debt, it sets off alarms in Homeland Security. Yup. You don’t have to even try to carry a lighter on the airplane or use your cel phone to call the “wrong” person overseas. All you have to do is try to be a responsible adult and Homeland Security could be investigating you, holding your bank account hostage, looking into your every little charge whether it’s at Publix or Fredrick’s or the place that mails you things in the brown packaging.
Feel safe yet?
(Hat Tip to All Spin Zone)
Tags: Terrorists, Homeland Security, stupidity
March 1st, 2006
I think I’ve reached a low point today. Reading the news.
More violence in the Middle East. People are dying. Who cares what color their skin is or their nationality or their god? People are dying and it’s just another bullet on the news. Just another day. How easy it is to be detached way over here on this continent in the safety of our living rooms.
More arguing between the Left and Right. Excuses from the Right. Fingerpointing from the Left. No one seems to be doing anything to stop the spiral of this country into a new dark ages.
More
Tags: depression, Middle East, Terrorists, George W. Bush, Democrats, hopeless
October 15th, 2005
The Spy Museum in Washington D.C. claims the government has labeled the KKK as a terrorist group. Apparently, terrorists are allowed to have their own television shows on public television in Michigan. Trust me, as a supporter of public radio and television, that is not where I want my tax dollars and donation dollars to go.
What is this country coming to? We just seem to be sliding further and further backward into the Dark Ages.
Hat tip to All Spin Zone.
Tags: KKK, Terrorists, public television
August 16th, 2005
I heard this story on NPR this morning and it made me laugh. It’s funny because of the ineptness of the whole thing and not because it’s becoming a hassle to people.
I’m all for airport security. I’ve said so in the past — even if I’m inevitably the one watching them take out every single item from my purse to display to the world because the combination of an iPod Mini and a Palm Pilot in one small bag might indicate evil-doing. If it makes me safer in the long run, I’m good. I hate flying as it is, I don’t want to add worrying about terrorists on the plane to my list of worries like plunging from the air and smashing into the ground.
[“Israeli military releases another baby photo(Scarily, this is a real Middle Eastern baby in military garb)”] Anyway, so I heard this story on NPR this morning about children being stopped from boarding planes because their names match or are similar to names from the Transportation Security Administration’s no-fly list. This results in a major hassle as parents are forced to miss flights while trying to have birth certificates, passports, and other identification faxed to the airport security folks.
Critics including the American Civil Liberties Union say the government doesn’t provide enough information about the people on the lists, so innocent passengers can be caught up in the security sweep if they happen to have the same name as someone on the lists. [“Babies Caught Up in ‘No-Fly’ Confusion”]
I think if a child is five or under, he or she is probably not a terrorist…unless maybe it’s that baby from Family Guy. I also think that real terrorists don’t fly under their real names, but that’s just me. Anyway, I think airport security needs to exercise some common sense here — especially since TSA claims they’ve instructed security not to detain anyone under 12. Really, is this too hard to figure out?
The TSA has a “passenger ombudsman” who will investigate individual claims from passengers who say they are mistakenly on the lists. TSA spokeswoman Yolanda Clark said 89 children have submitted their names to the ombudsman. Of those, 14 are under the age of 2. [“Babies Caught Up in ‘No-Fly’ Confusion”]
Tags: NPR, no-fly list, Transportation Security Administration, ACLU, innocent, Terrorists
August 10th, 2005
In 1620, a group of English separatists left Europe in search of a place to settle and practice their Puritan lifestyle without persecution. You remember? The Mayflower? Plymouth Rock? If my memory of School House Rocks! and all those years of American History classes serves me right, then this country started with a colony of people who just wanted to be able to worship freely and live a peaceful life.
Oh, I know there’s more to the story than that and I know they weren’t the only ones setting up shop, but every Novemeber for some reason we’re forced to celebrate it and while it’s not any where near Thanksgiving, I do actually have a point. (In case you were wondering.)
So here’s a scenario for you, imagine if you will two men trying to escape religious persecution and seeking assylum where they can live and worship in peace. They have harmed no one. They are pilgrims in search of freedom. Now imagine, these two innocent men have been mistaken for criminals — worse, they’ve been mistaken for possible terrorists and they’ve been captured and hauled off to prison. Now imagine that it’s not just any prison, but the one prison that supposedly houses the worst of the worst of the suspected terrorists. Now believing whatever you want about Guantanamo, imagine being two innocent men, arrested mistakingly, and left to rot in a prison of suspected terrorists.
O.K. But then suddenly they’re cleared not that they were ever really accused. So they can just be shipped off back home like all of the other freed suspected terrorists.
Oh, but wait, in a sudden unusual feeling of guilt, the government realizes that they can’t ship the poor guys home because they were escaping home due to religious persecution. In fact, the country they were running from is well known for it’s persesecution of this particular religion and now all of a sudden since the government has a heart, they want to protect them…
…the detainees before Robertson — Abu Bakker Qassim, 36, and A’del Abdu Al-Hakim, 31, both Muslims and ethnic Uighurs from China — are different from the other 500 Guantanamo prisoners. A military tribunal has found the men were in the wrong place at the wrong time and ordered them released. But the men are languishing at the prison because the United States cannot send them back to China, which has a history of persecuting Muslims, and no other country will take them.
US judge eyes moving 2 Guantanamo detainees - The Boston Globe - Boston.com - Washington - News
District Judge James Robertson is the judge considering this case.
So, the catch is that we don’t want to send them back to China because it’s a bad place for them and we don’t want them to stay in the U.S. for whatever undisclosed reason (after all, we aren’t going to offer assylum to any religiously persecuted folks…that’s not we’re about…we’re about freedom…in other countries…um…yeah, that’s it…freedom and democracy…)
”They are not soldiers. They are not criminals. They are just Uighur people,” Willett said. ”There might not be a more pro-US Muslim group in the world because the Uighurs have traditionally suffered under the oppression of the Communist Chinese. I can remember a time when we liked people like that.”
The military, however, insists it must keep them in custody for ‘’safety and security” reasons.
(Willett is the lawyer who volunteered to help the two men.)
By the way, these innocent men who are still being kept in jail (a bit like Cyrus Karr) have still been denied access to telephones to contact their families. Don’t convicted fellons get treated better or is that just the movies?
Oh, and who identified them as terrorists in the first place? Pakastani police arrested them and handed them over to the U.S. for $5,000 bounties. Next thing you know, every greedy bastard in your neighborhood will be eyeing you up wondering what he might get for turning you in — innocent or not.
Makes me feel good about this fair and free country I’m living in right now. What about you?
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
“The New Collossus” by Emma Lazarus
Tags: Guantanamo Bay, innocent, Terrorists, detainees
August 10th, 2005
I’ve read or heard several articles about the U.S. negotiating with 34 countries to send 80% of the Gitmo detainees back to where they came from. I’m sure you’ll understand that I’m apprehensive and a little distrustful of the whole thing.
According to CNN.com the conditions that the other countries have to agree to are:
- treat detainees “humanely and in a manner consistent with applicable international obligations”
- refrain from torture
- allow the United States or a third party such as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) access to the detainees to “verify the assurances”
- “investigate, detain and prosecute” the detainee to the fullest extent possible; and
- provide the United States with “advance notice” and place the detainee on “watch lists” should a country decide to release a detainee.
I admit to suspicions that despite the “refrain from torture” clause, we are sending them to countries were torture is more acceptable or their definition of torture is more lenient or their media is less likely to report any infractions.
Most of these people have never been charged with anything by the U.S. but we’re going to send them back where they came from (reminiscent of the Sedition Act) and expect their own people to investigate and try them for supposed crimes against the U.S. America is one of the few countries where you are innocent until proven guilty, which is why there’s been such an outcry about holding these people without charging them without allowing them contact with their families or lawyers, so since we can’t keep holding them here without losing face, we’ll send them somewhere else and let them handle it.
For those of you who are true believers in George Bush and his administration and believe that they like the Knights of the Round Table can do no wrong, please excuse my little feeling of unease and suspicions that this is more of a shell game than anything else. Now you see the detainee; now you don’t!
Oh, just one more thing…
Detainees whom the United States considers “really bad guys” will remain in Guantanamo, the officials said, but in coming months the facility population could drop to about 100.
Now I had to giggle at this quote and wonder who exactly CNN was quoting. Really, I can guess, but doesn’t that sound so intelligent and prestigious. Right up there with “evildoers”.
Tags: Guantanamo Bay, detainees, Red Cross, torture, Conspiracy Theories, politics, Terrorists
July 29th, 2005
From The Guardian in the UK:
Brazilian did not wear bulky jacketJean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian shot dead in the head, was not wearing a heavy jacket that might have concealed a bomb, and did not jump the ticket barrier when challenged by armed plainclothes police, his cousin said yesterday.
Speaking at a press conference after a meeting with the Metropolitan police, Vivien Figueiredo, 22, said that the first reports of how her 27-year-old cousin had come to be killed in mistake for a suicide bomber on Friday at Stockwell tube station were wrong.
“He used a travel card,” she said. “He had no bulky jacket, he was wearing a jeans jacket. But even if he was wearing a bulky jacket that wouldn’t be an excuse to kill him.”
Flanked by the de Menezes family’s solicitor, Gareth Peirce, and by Bianca Jagger, the anti-Iraq war campaigner, she condemned the shoot-to-kill policy which had led to her cousin’s death and vowed that what she called the “crime” would not go unpunished.
“My cousin was an honest and hard working person,” said Ms Figueiredo who shared a flat with him in Tulse Hill, south London. “Although we are living in circumstances similar to a war, we should not be exterminating people unjustly.”
Another cousin, Patricia da Silva Armani, 21, said he was in Britain legally to work and study, giving him no reason to fear the police. “An innocent man has been killed as though he was a terrorist,” she said. “An incredibly grave error was committed by the British police.”
Mr de Menezes was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder at 10am last Friday after being followed from Tulse Hill. Scotland Yard initially claimed he wore a bulky jacket and jumped the barrier when police identified themselves and ordered him to stop. The same day the Met commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, said the shooting was “directly linked” to the unprecedented anti-terror operation on London’s streets.
The following day Sir Ian apologised when detectives established that the Brazilian electrician, on his way to a job in north-west London, was not connected to attempts to blow up three underground trains and a bus in the capital.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission has began an inquiry which is expected to take several months. Yesterday it emerged one armed officer involved has been given leave, and two have been moved to non-firearm duties. Ms Figuerdo condemned Sir Ian’s decision to authorise the leave, saying she wanted to see the man who shot her cousin, and he should be in jail.
Read the rest of the story…
Next thing you know, our neighbors, our loved ones, our co-workers will just start inexplicably disappearing in the night. No judge. No trial. A strange feeling of deja vu is coming over me…didn’t they try this in Germany at one point?
Are we supposed to be fearing the terrorists or ourselves?
And how far away are we from Guatamo Bay to death squads and the Gestapo?
Why isn’t anyone doing anything about this? Why are those of us who actually care, written off as bitter sore losers and non-Patriots? More and more I feel like I’m in a horrible Twilight Zone episode.
Tags: Jean Charles de Menezes, London, Terrorists, Conspiracy Theories, innocent
July 13th, 2005
Where’s the website crying out against the terrorists who sent a suicide bomber to kill 27 people, mostly children getting free candy from American soldiers, in Iraq this morning?
And really, what was the suicide bomber trying to accomplish? I really wish someone would explain the minds of the terrorists to me. I don’t understand how attacking Iraqis, particularly children, will help their cause or get them more support.
OK I don’t understand war at all, but I really don’t understand the murdering of noncombatants.
Tags: Suicide Bombers, Terrorists, American soldiers, Iraq
July 12th, 2005
Yesterday, on one of the message boards I frequent, we were talking about the website We’re Not Afraid and someone commented that it’s a shame that there isn’t the same sort of outpouring of concern and dismay and rage over the same sorts of bombings that happen everyday in Iraq, Afghanistan and all over the Middle East.
The truth is that those who live in the Middle East live with almost daily bombings and assassinations and the like and those “incidents” are merely blurbs on the evening news, slipped into the days events with the Sports scores and weather updates. Every day, I hear about another bomb and more dead but no one seems to be making a big deal about those bombings and attacks.
But attack the UK, Spain, or NYC and suddenly it’s a crisis of monumental proportion.
And, yes, I understand that those things aren’t supposed to happen here and that’s why everyone is up in arms, but why is it o.k. that they’re happening there?
Why is it o.k. that it’s happening anywhere?
Tags: Middle East, Suicide Bombers, Terrorists, terrorism
July 7th, 2005
I really want to say something enlightening and intelligent about what is happening with the bombings in London this morning, but I just can’t. I’m just stunned and overwhelmed and swimming in that strange surreal sea of confusion, just as I was on that September 11th. It all seems so unreal and yet I can’t deny it happening. It’s like something out of an action thriller and any moment Keanu or Arnold or Vin Deisel is going to appear and save the day…and yet, there aren’t heroes like that in the real world. The real heroes are the rescue workers, the medical folks in the field and hospitals, the troops, the police, the every day people who helped strangers despite their own fears and injuries. It’s not like the movies. There is no happily ever after right before the credits. London and the rest of the world will have to deal with the aftermath for a long time to come.
And the saddest part is that I think that this will never end. There will always be some group or another that wants to wage a holy war against someone or some country or some ideology or whatever. You can’t wipe this sort of thing out. The War on Terrorism isn’t like any war we’ve fought. There’s no capital to storm, no country to embargo, no real cities to drop bombs on. These fanatics have infiltrated everywhere and every one we kill or capture is a martyr and a recruitment tool.
Iraq has become the ultimate training ground for terrorists because of us. We opened the borders to them. We made ourselves targets. We killed innocent men, women, and children and left relatives and friends with vendettas. We made this mess and we should take responsibility. We have to stop lying to ourselves. The world is not a safer place because of anything we’ve done since 9-11. If anything, we’ve made it worse by fueling the fire and giving them reasons to justify their hatred of us.
This is never going to end. There’s not going to be an action hero to save the day for us before the credits roll.
Tags: London bombing, Suicide Bombers, Terrorists, terrorism
June 16th, 2005
According to CNN.com House limits Patriot Act rules on library records!
WASHINGTON (AP) — Advocates of rewriting the USA Patriot Act are claiming momentum after the House, despite a White House veto threat, voted to restrict investigators from using the anti-terrorism law to peek at library records and bookstore sales slips.
Wednesday’s 238-187 vote came as lawmakers ramped up efforts to extend the Patriot Act, which was passed quickly in the emotional aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. When Congress passed the law, it included a sunset provision under which 15 of its provisions are to expire at the end of this year.
Since the Patriot Act passed, liberals and libertarian-oriented conservatives have pressed for changes, citing privacy and civil liberties concerns. The administration has said weakening of the act would draw a veto from President Bush.
“No question, this is a real shot in the arm for those of us who want to make changes to the USA Patriot Act,” said Rep. Bernard Sanders, I-Vermont, sponsor of the provision that would curtail the government’s ability to investigate the reading habits of terror suspects. He said the vote would help “rein in an administration intent on chipping away at the very civil liberties that define us as a nation.”
The real irony is that the Patriot Act hadn’t been used to investigate bookstore receipts or library records as of March 30th. Yet, the Justice Department claims that the authority to be able to do so is a great benefit to investigating possible terrorists and terrorist enablers. WTF? Shouldn’t there be a rule that if they haven’t used it in 3 years, then it should just go away? Obviously they don’t need it. It’s kind of like my George Foreman Grill. Yeah, it’s trendy to have but I never use it and it’s just taking up space in my cabinet. 
I particularly like this quote:
“It bodes well that the first vote Congress has taken on the Patriot Act this year has been in favor of liberty and freedom,” said Gregory Nojeim, a lobbyist for the American Civil Liberties Union.
And this is actually kind of funny:
Supporters of the Patriot Act countered that the rules are potentially useful and argued that the House was voting to make libraries safe havens for terrorists.
So, now I’m seeing the backrooms of libraries filled with smoke and bomb-making supplies and little gray-haired ladies in bifocals running after shady-looking types and fussing about how they treat the books on bomb-making. I really think that’s a bit extreme. Like the House wants terrorists to win. Please.
Anyway, it’s a small victories for people concerned with civil liberties and the freedoms Americans claim to be passing on to other countries, but with President Bush’s promise to veto any “weakening” of the Patriot Act, we still have a long way to go.
Tags: Public Library, Patriot Act, ACLU, House of Representatives, Freedoms, Terrorists
June 30th, 2004
Talking politics is a quick way to make friends and enemies these days. Personally, I have tried not to discuss politics or religion in my journals or with my friends “back home”. For the most part I discovered that some people tend to take both subjects way too personally and feel the fanatical need to convert everyone they know to the “right” way of thinking which is of course always their way. Some of my friends “back home” had a penchant for getting into loud, angry, pissing matches over politics, religion, and sometimes even books and movies and while I enjoy a good debate, I don’t like shouting matches or banging my head against a wall.
For the most part, many people either make up their minds and cling to those opinions no matter what the facts or opinions of others or they do as their parents or spouses do and believe what their parents or spouses believe. Sometimes both options play a part. Unfortunately many people never let exeriences or newly learned facts to change their opinions; they cling to the belief that they are right despite everything.
Some of my friends “back home” are like that which is why I don’t allow such topics on the mailing list we all use to keep track of each other. People become too easily offended, emails fly back and forth because people are offended or they want to force others to see things their way. It’s all very unpleasant and sad.
I like to keep an open-mind. I won’t say that I don’t think I’m right. I just admit that I could be wrong. In fact, it wouldn’t surprise me. In fact, my opinions on many things have changed over the last 33 years. Things I believed in with all my heart when I was a teenager have proven themselves not true or have become questionable as my experiences and new facts have reared their ugly heads. I may still be a bit naive. I may still not understand every facet of everything going on in the world, but at the very least I have an open-mind and I accept when I’m wrong and I find talking, debating with others either strengthens my beliefs or changes them.
I think it’s a sign of a mature individual…though I don’t know that I’m all that mature or that I’m even mentally healthy at times.
So, I’ve come to enjoy in my new life the ability to have mature, adult conversations about politics with people here and people I’ve met online — people who don’t just shout rhetoric back and forth and people who have a clue not only about what is going on in the world but don’t believe everything they hear or read.
So, here is my political stance for those of you who are interested:
- I have voted for every President who has been in office since I started voting at 18 years old — I’m 33 now.
- I have been registered as a Republican, a Democrat, and an Independent at various times in my life. Currently, I am registered as a Democrat though 3 months ago I was an Independent.
- I have never believed that we should invade Iraq. I never thought they had weapons of mass destruction last year. I can’t believe the Bush Administration keeps insisting that is why were are there. I don’t know why other countries who do indeed have weapons of mass destruction have been left to their own devices. I believe we were lied to and if we weren’t lied to then the Bush Administration can’t admit they made an error in judgement and I don’t know which is worse.
- I was for invading Afghanistan but very disappointed that Bush didn’t finish the job.
- I am offended that Bush doesn’t think the outsourcing of American jobs to other countries is an issue. The companies might be saving money but they aren’t passing along that savings to the unemployed masses.
- I am offended that Bush’s administration thinks that the 1.25 million jobs they “created” in the last few months should quell the rising voices when the jobs that have been created are not equivallent in skill or money to the ones that millions of Americans have lost over the last 4 years.
- I am horrified that Bush wants to change the law to keep Americans who love each other from any kind of union, whether you call it a marriage or not, and the rights and benefits such a union should have.
- I am against abortion but believe it’s not my place to tell anyone they can’t have one for whatever reason.
- I am against the draft.
- I am against any merge of church and state and yet Bush’s administration is constantly dragging religion into their politics.
- Bush’s administration scares the hell out of me. I really believe they are out of control and believe that they are too powerful to be ruled by the laws, standards, and beliefs they hold everyone else to.
- It scares me to talk to people who still believe there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. It scares me to listen to people who swear by every word that comes out of Bush’s mouth.
- It scares me that people still think there was a connection between Sadaam and 9/11. I never thought there was and it makes me sick to think that propaganda was used and so widely believed.
- It scares me that people don’t realize that some of those prisoners in those Iraqi prisons were innocent bystanders who were arrested by accident, tortured and humiliated, and even killed. People were killed in inhumane and compassionless ways and yet we are justified because other people that look like them caused 9/11 and other people who look like them have been killing hostages in the Middle East — ironically, the terrorists weren’t in Iraq before we arrived and opened the door but their presence now is used as a reason why we invaded…
- I am afraid of the Homeland Security and the Big Brother concept that it is.
- I am afraid that the terrorists have won by causing us to step closer to losing the freedoms they hate us for.
Tags: politics, dysfunctional drama, George W. Bush, outsourcing, Afghanistan, Gay Rights, abortion, pro-choice, WMD, innocent, detainees, Homeland Security, Terrorists
