Maybe you can explain how Kerry's infering that the President of Iraq is a liar will encourage other countries to get on board and help in Iraq? Is that some type of reverse psychology diplomacy or what?
"I think the prime minister is, obviously, contradicting his own statement of a few days ago, where he said the terrorists are pouring into the country," Kerry said. "The prime minister and the president are here obviously to put their best face on the policy, but the fact is that the CIA estimates, the reporting, the ground operations and the troops all tell a different story."
Subjective interpretation? Note the "I think the prime minister is, obviously, contradicting his own statement" part. This is diplomacy?
"But it certainly is not very 'diplomatic' - from a candidate who seems intent on telling us all how he will employ 'diplomacy' to solve all problems."
Mr. Allawi probably knows election year politics when he sees it. If not, he'll learn on the job.
"You have no comment on news on NATO."
Not really, What's the significance?
"or SKorean troops?"
I wonder how it's playing on the streets of Seoul.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Sep 23, 2004 at 11:05am.]
which I am assuming are Kerry's words describing part of his proposals on Iraq. Looks like his "plan" is already in the works - and has been for some time. NATO is becoming more involved in training Iraqi forces, and SKorea sends in add'l troops. The diplomacy thing Kerry is promising, however, is so far nowhere to be seen.
That's just a bunch of ranting against Dubya. He makes one bullet point, then continues on several paragraphs of rants against Dubya.Â
He gives no clear insight into what he would do or not do. What little he does provide is just that, very little. It's sure easy to say "You're doing this wrong Mr. President". It's a lot harder to say "This is what I would do differently" and provide details.
First, the President has to get the promised international support
He has international support. Just not the support of everyone. Mainly those that were gaining while Saddam was in power. So what would you do differently Mr. Kerry, to get this "International Support"?
Second, the President must get serious about training Iraqi security forces.
How is he not serious? You could start Mr. Kerry, by not voting against funding for the war. Tell us what would you do today to get the Iraqi security forces trained? I can tell you this, Mr. Kerry, voting against funding won't get them trained.
Third, the President must carry out a reconstruction plan that finally brings tangible benefits to the Iraqi people.
Please be more specific Mr. Kerry, because from what I can tell, that's what we've been doing. What tangible benefits are you speaking of? Roads? Schools? Electricity? Oil production? And once again Mr. Kerry, voting against funding brings zero benefit to the Iraqi people.
Fourth, the President must take immediate, urgent, essential steps to guarantee the promised elections can be held next year.
Talk to the insurgents about that. Dubya's not standing in the way of free elections. What would you do, Mr. Kerry, to guarantee elections take place?
if being diplomatic was a requirement for serving in the Senate, old Bobby KKK-recruiter "white nigger referencing" Byrd would have been long gone......
I wouldn't begin to speculate on whether or not Allawi is or was offended. I have no way of knowing and that really isn't the point anyway. It has more to do with how "diplomatic" (key talking point of dems) Kerry is or isn't. I'm making an assessment on that by what he has said and continues to say.
I'm thinking he's not very diplomatic at all; even though one of his big promises is to use diplomacy to solve problemos.
During a 1997 debate on CNN's "Crossfire," Sen. John Kerry, now the Democratic presidential nominee, made the case for launching a pre-emptive attack against Iraq.
So reveals Rep. Peter King, New York Republican, who appeared with Mr. Kerry on the program.
Mr. King says the U.N. Security Council had just adopted a resolution against Iraq that was watered down at the behest of the French and the Russians. Yet the candidate who now criticizes President Bush for ignoring French and Russian objections to the Iraq war blasted the two countries, claiming that they were compromised by their business dealings with Baghdad.
"We know we can't count on the French. We know we can't count on the Russians," said Mr. Kerry. "We know that Iraq is a danger to the United States, and we reserve the right to take pre-emptive action whenever we feel it's in our national interest."
 >.....After Mr. Thornburgh's appointment was first announced, Dan Rather, the anchor on the broadcast who initially vouched for the documents undergirding it, was said by several colleagues and associates to be upset by the choice. He was reacting, in part, to Mr. Thornburgh's having served two Republican presidents - Mr. Bush's father and Richard M. Nixon - with whom Mr. Rather had clashed publicly.
 >But colleagues said Mr. Rather's ire abated on Wednesday.
Think there may be someone posing as you, THX. Just got an e-gram from a fake THX - text of which reads:
From:Â
THX l l38
(PFID:f2fc9b4)
To:Â
kim a lewis
Subj:Â
moron
I can't believe some of the STUPID statements you make around here! half the time I can't tell if your KIDDING or just DRUNK! you are an embarassment to the conservative party...maybe you should stick to putting on pantyhose and make up and leave politics to us guys who UNDERSTAND them.
Prior to taping "Topic A with Tina Brown" last week, I was shown some footage of the latest decapitation by Islamic jihadists. There was talk on the set of the high production values, with the video including singing in a Middle Eastern style that was, perhaps, close enough to Western music to remain in the mind of one listening.
It seemed, some thought, that these murderous clowns are on to something, that they have learned how to create visual "product."
Apparently, they have studied MTV and other such television phenomena to learn how to put together a moment that builds up to a murder.
By the time the man was pushed flat and had his head sawed off, though, I found myself not frightened or intimidated by this "product" but filled with a combination of revulsion, gloom and fury.
These murderers are the same kind of people we see photographed and standing proudly at lynchings, happy as the day is long because the strange fruit of a Negro is hanging from a tree. Anybody who believes differently is some species of lunatic or naif or fool.
History is always a hard taskmaster.
Human beings can quite often be no more compassionate than nature, which maintains its balance through one species eating enough of another to keep things from getting out of order.
Of course, there is little compassion in nature and even less empathy.
As far as we know, human beings are the only ones who can imagine themselves outside of their bodies and even outside of their cultures to the extent that empathizing with others is possible.
I am not at all interested in empathizing, in "understanding" how America and Israel have, through warlike blunders of one sort or another, given life to the cause championed by these murderers. No atrocities, real or asserted, validate the actions of these people or dealing with them on any terms defined by them.
Xenophobia is at the root of what we are looking at when we see these beheadings or read about them. The destruction of that xenophobia - the fear of others - is what must breed civilization in our time.
There is no point in bargaining with barbarians. They can only take you into a world of black air.
We can never give in to them or let them believe that kidnapping and videotaped murder - no matter how sophisticated the production - is going to turn any nation around.
The Real Jimmy Carter reveals a man who has been given a dangerously free pass by historians, but who in reality is not only a failed ex-president. As vindictive as he is egotistical, Carter is a self-righteous busybody who leaves disaster in his wake.
America's best ex-president? Only if you're not bothered by the resurgence of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism (which started on his watch), the shamefaced foreign policy of Bill Clinton and John Kerry (ditto), and think that ex-presidents should travel the world coddling dictators and bad-mouthing America a la Jesse Jackson. Bank robber Willie Sutton said of Carter: "I've never seen a bigger confidence man in my life, and I've been around some of the best in the business." It's time to set the record straight. Finally, an honest historian - Steven F. Hayward, author of The Age of Reagan, 1964-1980, demolishes the myth of "Saint" Jimmy and exposes how he created today's leftist Democratic party of John Kerry and Hillary Clinton. Jimmy Carter's laundry list of failures aren't just accidents of history: They're rooted in Carter's deeply flawed character and ideology - a smugly pious arrogance matched with a profound distrust of America. The Real Jimmy Carter reveals:
Carter as meddling ex-president: Why a Time magazine columnist wrote that some of Carter's "Lone Ranger work has taken him dangerously close to the neighborhood of what we used to call treason"
How Carter made direct contacts with Soviet officials to try to subvert President Reagan's anti-communist policies
The shocking extent of Carter's clandestine efforts to sabotage the first Gulf War in 1990 and how he used Gulf War II to publicly question the Christian faith of America's commander in chief
How Carter befriended Yasir Arafat - making himself an enemy of Israel
Carter as politician: a vicious campaigner - and even race-baiter
The Carter White House during the disasters of the Sandinista takeover of Nicaragua, the energy crisis and stagflation, the Iranian revolution and hostage crisis, and the invasion of Afghanistan
How a Nobel official inadvertently revealed that Carter's Nobel Prize was actually meant as a slap at America
The Real Jimmy Carter is a shocker, showing why the peanut president should never have left his farm.
Jimmy Carter is a flyfisherman. That's all you need to know to have window into his heart.
"He told us about Christ's disciples being fisherman, and we were left to assume...that all great fishermen on the Sea of Galilee were fly fisherman and that John, the favorite, was a dry-fly fisherman." - Norman Maclean-A River Runs Through It
Last day of the trout season, and I'm missing it.
[Edited 4 times. Most recently by on Sep 30, 2004 at 10:04am.]
Rick 9/23/04 9:43am
NATO to expand Iraq training mission
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200409/s1205067.htm
S.Korea troops complete Iraq deployment
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040922-034019-2714r.htm
Maybe you can explain how Kerry's infering that the President of Iraq is a liar will encourage other countries to get on board and help in Iraq? Is that some type of reverse psychology diplomacy or what?
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=703&e=1&u=/ap/20040923/ap_on_el_pr/kerry
Kim
"Maybe you can explain how Kerry's infering that the President of Iraq is a liar will encourage other countries to get on board and help in Iraq?"
That's subjective interpretation on your part.
"I think the prime minister is, obviously, contradicting his own statement of a few days ago, where he said the terrorists are pouring into the country," Kerry said. "The prime minister and the president are here obviously to put their best face on the policy, but the fact is that the CIA estimates, the reporting, the ground operations and the troops all tell a different story."
Subjective interpretation? Note the "I think the prime minister is, obviously, contradicting his own statement" part. This is diplomacy?
Kim
"This is diplomacy? "
No, it's politics.
Rick 9/23/04 10:12am
I agree - it is politics -
But it certainly is not very 'diplomatic' - from a candidate who seems intent on telling us all how he will employ 'diplomacy' to solve all problems.
Kind of like 'the coalition of the bribed and coerced' comment earlier.
You have no comment on news on NATOÂ or SKorean troops?
Kim
"But it certainly is not very 'diplomatic' - from a candidate who seems intent on telling us all how he will employ 'diplomacy' to solve all problems."
Mr. Allawi probably knows election year politics when he sees it. If not, he'll learn on the job.
"You have no comment on news on NATO."
Not really, What's the significance?
"or SKorean troops?"
I wonder how it's playing on the streets of Seoul.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Sep 23, 2004 at 11:05am.]
I wonder how it's playing on the streets of Seoul.
"The older generation is probably o.k with it."
They're not the ones wearing the uniform.
Niether are the kids on campus.
We're both speculating. I'm sure public opinion is more diverse and complicated.
Rick 9/23/04 11:00am
   >Mr. Allawi probably knows election year politics when he sees it. If not, he'll learn on the job.
Election year politics or not, it is neither diplomatic nor prudent to insult the leader of Iraq, imo.Â
  >Not really, What's the significance
It was in response to this post -
Rick 9/23/04 9:43am
which I am assuming are Kerry's words describing part of his proposals on Iraq. Looks like his "plan" is already in the works - and has been for some time. NATO is becoming more involved in training Iraqi forces, and SKorea sends in add'l troops. The diplomacy thing Kerry is promising, however, is so far nowhere to be seen.
Kim
"The diplomacy thing Kerry is promising, however, is so far nowhere to be seen."
That's not his job right now.
Rick 9/23/04 12:24pm
   >That's not his job right now.
That much is certainly obvious.
Just wondering if he's even capable of it --
Can't tell by watchin'
Kim
That's not his job right now.
Did he resign his senate seat and I just missed it on the news?
I didn't read a blistering attack on Mr. Allawi. I doubt Kerry burned his bridge with him. Judging from where he's from, he's probably heard worse.
If he is offended, the man's more thin-skinned the Jesse Ventura.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Sep 23, 2004 at 12:44pm.]
Rick 9/23/04 9:43am
That's just a bunch of ranting against Dubya. He makes one bullet point, then continues on several paragraphs of rants against Dubya.Â
He gives no clear insight into what he would do or not do. What little he does provide is just that, very little. It's sure easy to say "You're doing this wrong Mr. President". It's a lot harder to say "This is what I would do differently" and provide details.
First, the President has to get the promised international support
He has international support. Just not the support of everyone. Mainly those that were gaining while Saddam was in power. So what would you do differently Mr. Kerry, to get this "International Support"?
Second, the President must get serious about training Iraqi security forces.
How is he not serious? You could start Mr. Kerry, by not voting against funding for the war. Tell us what would you do today to get the Iraqi security forces trained? I can tell you this, Mr. Kerry, voting against funding won't get them trained.
Third, the President must carry out a reconstruction plan that finally brings tangible benefits to the Iraqi people.
Please be more specific Mr. Kerry, because from what I can tell, that's what we've been doing. What tangible benefits are you speaking of? Roads? Schools? Electricity? Oil production? And once again Mr. Kerry, voting against funding brings zero benefit to the Iraqi people.
Fourth, the President must take immediate, urgent, essential steps to guarantee the promised elections can be held next year.
Talk to the insurgents about that. Dubya's not standing in the way of free elections. What would you do, Mr. Kerry, to guarantee elections take place?
Figured it wouldn't satisfy you.
Luv2Fly 9/23/04 12:33pm
heh -
if being diplomatic was a requirement for serving in the Senate, old Bobby KKK-recruiter "white nigger referencing" Byrd would have been long gone......
Rick 9/23/04 12:38pm
I wouldn't begin to speculate on whether or not Allawi is or was offended. I have no way of knowing and that really isn't the point anyway. It has more to do with how "diplomatic" (key talking point of dems) Kerry is or isn't. I'm making an assessment on that by what he has said and continues to say.
I'm thinking he's not very diplomatic at all; even though one of his big promises is to use diplomacy to solve problemos.
Kim
Well come on Rick, do you really see that as a platform to run on?
He doesn't say anything.
He shows no knowledge of what he himself would do.
All he does is point fingers at Dubya.
He simply gives me no reason to vote for him, other than he's not Dubya.Â
That may be good enough for some people. I don't know.
[Edited by on Sep 23, 2004 at 12:50pm.]
I'm thinking he's not very diplomatic at all
Ask his secret service agents if he's diplomatic.
:-)
Yea but caslling the guy who might take a bullet for you a sonofabitch is probably not a good idea.
During a 1997 debate on CNN's "Crossfire," Sen. John Kerry, now the Democratic presidential nominee, made the case for launching a pre-emptive attack against Iraq.
So reveals Rep. Peter King, New York Republican, who appeared with Mr. Kerry on the program.
Mr. King says the U.N. Security Council had just adopted a resolution against Iraq that was watered down at the behest of the French and the Russians. Yet the candidate who now criticizes President Bush for ignoring French and Russian objections to the Iraq war blasted the two countries, claiming that they were compromised by their business dealings with Baghdad.
"We know we can't count on the French. We know we can't count on the Russians," said Mr. Kerry. "We know that Iraq is a danger to the United States, and we reserve the right to take pre-emptive action whenever we feel it's in our national interest."
THX 1138 9/23/04 12:52pm
oops - forgot about that slip of the tongue! ;)Â
'Bill - Fold' 9/24/04 7:06am
'The Communists had Pravda, the Republicans have Fox'
and now, to even things out,
'the Liberals have CBS!'Â
;)
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/24/politics/campaign/24cbs.html
Investigator for CBS Criticized '60 Minutes'
 >.....After Mr. Thornburgh's appointment was first announced, Dan Rather, the anchor on the broadcast who initially vouched for the documents undergirding it, was said by several colleagues and associates to be upset by the choice. He was reacting, in part, to Mr. Thornburgh's having served two Republican presidents - Mr. Bush's father and Richard M. Nixon - with whom Mr. Rather had clashed publicly.
 >But colleagues said Mr. Rather's ire abated on Wednesday.
Kim
His Agents are ONLY there to protect him.
Yeah, those little pissants! Screw those sonofabitches. Who the hell are they? John Kerry is much more important than them.
Oh, and like it or not Bill Fold, the best predictor of tomorrow is today.
Think there may be someone posing as you, THX. Just got an e-gram from a fake THX - text of which reads:
From:Â
THX l l38
(PFID:f2fc9b4)
To:Â
Subj:Â
Has wrong PFid #
Just an FYI!
Kim
Yeah Kim, I'm aware of the poser.
What can ya do?
Thanks
Those ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it....
What history? American history? Iraqi history? French history? Japanese history? World history?
Truth is, that theory has never been tested.
By the way, "The Best Predictor Of Tomorrow" is only meaningful about 50% of the time, and in the Weather.
Well, you're wrong.
THX 1138 9/24/04 8:50pm
Okay, then!Â
The poseur is probably just some NAMBLA member with too much time on his hands!
Kim
Defying terror is
the only answer
Stanley Crouch
Prior to taping "Topic A with Tina Brown" last week, I was shown some footage of the latest decapitation by Islamic jihadists. There was talk on the set of the high production values, with the video including singing in a Middle Eastern style that was, perhaps, close enough to Western music to remain in the mind of one listening.
It seemed, some thought, that these murderous clowns are on to something, that they have learned how to create visual "product."
Apparently, they have studied MTV and other such television phenomena to learn how to put together a moment that builds up to a murder.
By the time the man was pushed flat and had his head sawed off, though, I found myself not frightened or intimidated by this "product" but filled with a combination of revulsion, gloom and fury.
These murderers are the same kind of people we see photographed and standing proudly at lynchings, happy as the day is long because the strange fruit of a Negro is hanging from a tree. Anybody who believes differently is some species of lunatic or naif or fool.
History is always a hard taskmaster.
Human beings can quite often be no more compassionate than nature, which maintains its balance through one species eating enough of another to keep things from getting out of order.
Of course, there is little compassion in nature and even less empathy.
As far as we know, human beings are the only ones who can imagine themselves outside of their bodies and even outside of their cultures to the extent that empathizing with others is possible.
I am not at all interested in empathizing, in "understanding" how America and Israel have, through warlike blunders of one sort or another, given life to the cause championed by these murderers. No atrocities, real or asserted, validate the actions of these people or dealing with them on any terms defined by them.
Xenophobia is at the root of what we are looking at when we see these beheadings or read about them. The destruction of that xenophobia - the fear of others - is what must breed civilization in our time.
There is no point in bargaining with barbarians. They can only take you into a world of black air.
We can never give in to them or let them believe that kidnapping and videotaped murder - no matter how sophisticated the production - is going to turn any nation around.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/235966p-202626c.html
[Edited by on Sep 27, 2004 at 03:34pm.]
Very well written article. Thanks for posting L2F
'Bill - Fold' 9/29/04 9:23am
Let's see, Jimmy Carter tried, and is considered by many to be the worst President ever.
The Arab that went along with him (Anwar Sadat) was assasinated
Brilliant plan you got there, Bill Fold.
Thank God you're on Kerry's side.
[Edited by on Sep 29, 2004 at 09:30am.]
Is he considered that because of his attempts to bring peace to the middle east?
Get right on that foldy.
Is he considered that because of his attempts to bring peace to the middle east?
No. He had good intentions.
He actually delivered.\03
One of only two peace agreements in the whole region.
Egypt is leading candidate to host Iraq conference in late November: Powell tells AFP
Â
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040929/wl_mideast_afp/us_iraq_egypt_conference_040929222918
not as long as there is Gerald Ford
Carter may have been judged at the time as worthy of only 1 term, but if he was runing NOW, he would easily win.
You've got to be kidding! Man you are way, way out there.
not as long as there is Gerald Ford
He may not have been the worst PRESIDENT when in office....
but you could argue that he is the WORST EX-PRESIDENT for his actions.
The Real Jimmy Carter
reveals a man who has been given a dangerously free pass by historians, but who in reality is not only a failed ex-president. As vindictive as he is egotistical, Carter is a self-righteous busybody who leaves disaster in his wake.
America's best ex-president? Only if you're not bothered by the resurgence of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism (which started on his watch), the shamefaced foreign policy of Bill Clinton and John Kerry (ditto), and think that ex-presidents should travel the world coddling dictators and bad-mouthing America a la Jesse Jackson. Bank robber Willie Sutton said of Carter: "I've never seen a bigger confidence man in my life, and I've been around some of the best in the business." It's time to set the record straight. Finally, an honest historian - Steven F. Hayward, author of The Age of Reagan, 1964-1980, demolishes the myth of "Saint" Jimmy and exposes how he created today's leftist Democratic party of John Kerry and Hillary Clinton. Jimmy Carter's laundry list of failures aren't just accidents of history: They're rooted in Carter's deeply flawed character and ideology - a smugly pious arrogance matched with a profound distrust of America. The Real Jimmy Carter reveals:
The Real Jimmy Carter is a shocker, showing why the peanut president should never have left his farm.
Â
Â
Sounds like a good book...
I recall a poll that had Carter voted as the worst president ever. The same poll also voted him as the nicest.
[Edited by on Sep 30, 2004 at 09:51am.]
Gotta link for that book review, Kitch?
Jimmy Carter is a flyfisherman. That's all you need to know to have window into his heart.
"He told us about Christ's disciples being fisherman, and we were left to assume...that all great fishermen on the Sea of Galilee were fly fisherman and that John, the favorite, was a dry-fly fisherman." - Norman Maclean-A River Runs Through It
Last day of the trout season, and I'm missing it.
[Edited 4 times. Most recently by on Sep 30, 2004 at 10:04am.]
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=%22The+Real+Jimmy+Carter+%22
Â
THE BEST
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
.
THE WORST
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Â
http://www.pollingreport.com/BC-hstry.htm
Gerald Ford...worst.
Whip
Inflation
Now
what a dolt.
and don't forget his role in selling America the pack of lies what was the Warren Report.
Hey Kitch! Are you drunk or pregnant today?
neither ---been sick for 2 days----and feel like dog----------
AH HA! Morning sickness.
ya...
since I was told I need to drink for two....those hangovers are twice as bad :)
Â
Â
(fold----I'm not a drunk and I'm not prego)