Who is making our war policy?
JustTheFacts
How an unpaid conservative board that holds private meetings and puts
nothing in writing gets heard at the Pentagon
BY MARK THOMPSON/WASHINGTON
Monday, Aug. 19, 2002
[snip]
Rumsfeld has given some of the Republican right's most outspoken (and
forsaken) hawks a place to nest. Among them: former Vice President Dan
Quayle, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and ex-CIA and Pentagon boss
James Schlesinger. True, there are also centrist Republican members, like
Henry Kissinger. But the board has an undeniably hard-nosed tilt: seven of
the 31 members have ties to the conservative Hoover Institution at Stanford
University. Previous boards had at least a few members with views sharply
opposed to the incumbent Administration - Perle was on the board through
Clinton's two terms - but this one lacks Democratic firepower. The
sprinkling of Democrats includes token moderates and those, like former CIA
chief James Woolsey, who are hawks within their own party.
In effect, the board has become Perle's podium. It rarely achieved any
notice before he assumed the chairmanship last year, but now his position
there lends weight to his public pronouncements. His recent column in the
London Daily Telegraph titled "Why the West Must Strike First Against Saddam
Hussein" identified him as "chairman of the Defence Policy Board."
[snip]
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101020826-338628,00.html
------------------------------------------------
Fair Use Notice:
This material is made available in an effort to advance understanding of
environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and
social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such
copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
--
Meanwhile, officials said that after the Bush administration came into
office, top Justice Department officials did not initially see the urgent
need to upgrade counterterrorism. In August, officials said, the bureau's
acting director, Tom Pickard, met with Mr. Ashcroft on a supplemental
financing request for counterterrorism, but was turned down.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/01/national/01INQU.html
Werner Hetzner
How many Liberals decided to irritate BinLadin with silly, ineffective
missile attacks on their empty camps?
Julian D.
JD
"We need honest, reasoned debate, and not fear-mongering. To those . . .
who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is
this: Your tactics only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity
and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America's enemies and
pause to America's friends. They encourage people of goodwill to remain
silent in the face of evil."
-- John Ashcroft -
Testifying before congress defending military tribunals and upholding the
Constitution of the United States of America
"Critics of the war on terrorism don’t seem to understand: someone is trying to kill them."
-Jonathan Alter
NEWSWEEK
Palestinian Children's School Is In Session!!!
http://www.serve.com/lordgovernor/children/
On Islamic extremists: "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."
-- Ann Coulter, National Review Online, September 2001
"100% of the successful terrorist attacks on
commercial airlines for 20 years have been committed
by Arabs. When there is a 100% chance, it ceases to
be a profile. It's called a 'description of the
suspect.'" - Ann Coulter
'All I really need to know about Islam, I learned on September 11.'
-Me
JustTheFacts
"Werner Hetzner" <whet...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:3D62F45D...@mac.com...
> How many doves decided to bomb the Serbs who did us absolutely no harm?
The same Serbs who were murdering Bosnians and Croats?
They got their comeuppance a little quicker in Kosovo, no thanks to Bush Sr.
>
> How many Liberals decided to irritate BinLadin with silly, ineffective
> missile attacks on their empty camps?
The empty camp myth is a rightwing flim-flam. It would have been a lot
easier for Clinton and the security agencies in the U.S. to focus on bin
Laden if the rightwing wasn't trying to scam the public with their $75
million witch hunt.
You might also touch down for a little reality and realize that Clinton
didn't design and prosecute the missile attack, the military did.
JustTheFacts
"Julian D." <ju...@ersatz.com> wrote in message
news:7546muomejfshrfha...@4ax.com...
> Don't worry about it.
You're a friggin idiot if you think being led into war by radical
conservatives and corporations isn't something to worry about,
LiberalsHateAmerica.
--
Meanwhile, officials said that after the Bush administration came into
office, top Justice Department officials did not initially see the urgent
need to upgrade counterterrorism. In August, officials said, the bureau's
acting director, Tom Pickard, met with Mr. Ashcroft on a supplemental
financing request for counterterrorism, but was turned down.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/01/national/01INQU.html
>
>
>
Lowryter
Sparkup
>"We need honest, reasoned debate..."-- John Ashcroft -
> On Islamic extremists: "We should invade their countries, kill their
leaders and convert them to Christianity."
> -- Ann Coulter, National Review Online, September 2001
Ann Coulter calling for a Christian Jihad (or Crusade as its better known)
> "...and not fear-mongering."-- John Ashcroft -
> Palestinian Children's School Is In Session!!!
> http://www.serve.com/lordgovernor/children/
>
> "100% of the successful terrorist attacks on
> commercial airlines for 20 years have been committed
> by Arabs. When there is a 100% chance, it ceases to
> be a profile. It's called a 'description of the
> suspect.'" - Ann Coulter
1985 June 23rd 345 people are killed when Sikh terrorist explode a bomb
aboard an Air India 747
>
> 'All I really need to know about Islam, I learned on September 11.'
> -Me
All you wanted to know, maybe, all you need to know, obviously not.
Julian D.
<windri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>"Julian D." <ju...@ersatz.com> wrote in message
>news:7546muomejfshrfha...@4ax.com...
>> Don't worry about it.
>
>You're a friggin idiot if you think being led into war by radical
>conservatives and corporations isn't something to worry about,
>LiberalsHateAmerica.
I'm not LHA, tho we do share some of the same quotes in our sig.
Stop with the boogeyman 'all corporations are evil nonsense'.
Dave Zero
> "Julian D." <ju...@ersatz.com> wrote in message
> news:7546muomejfshrfha...@4ax.com...
>
>> "We need honest, reasoned debate..."-- John Ashcroft -
>> On Islamic extremists: "We should invade their countries, kill their
>> leaders and convert them to Christianity."
>> -- Ann Coulter, National Review Online, September 2001
>
> Ann Coulter calling for a Christian Jihad (or Crusade as its better
> known)
Little short on material there, Sparkup (nice name, incidentally)? Such
a slow news day that you've got nothing better to attack than Julian's
sig file that's been here for months?
>> "100% of the successful terrorist attacks on
>> commercial airlines for 20 years have been committed
>> by Arabs. When there is a 100% chance, it ceases to
>> be a profile. It's called a 'description of the
>> suspect.'" - Ann Coulter
>
> 1985 June 23rd 345 people are killed when Sikh terrorist explode a
> bomb aboard an Air India 747
Note to Julian and Ann: Better make that 99.9%.
>>
>> 'All I really need to know about Islam, I learned on September 11.'
>> -Me
>
> All you wanted to know, maybe, all you need to know, obviously not.
You know, though, Sparky, I'll tell you. I don't agree 100% with Julian
on this one; I'm not quite so quick to condemn all of Islam. What I
think is brilliant about this line, though, is that, like it or not,
that's how a LOT of people feel on the issue of Islam today. Probably
not a majority of us "intellectuals" here on Usenet, but the
ignorant-ass Bob Slobberts on the street of Bumfuck, USA, that gets
polled by pollsters and who votes in elections.
Accurate or not, it's a widely held public opinion.
--
Dave Zero - dave...@mindspring.com jesusofth...@hotmail.com
"And I don't care about making an ass of myself because most
people already realize I am one." - Dr. Kary B. Mullis
The Encyclopedia Tetrica: http://tetrica.com/tiz/
dapra
Werner Hetzner wrote:
>
> How many doves decided to bomb the Serbs who did us absolutely no harm?
>
> How many Liberals decided to irritate BinLadin with silly, ineffective
> missile attacks on their empty camps?
>
What's your reason for changing the subject? You don't find it
appealing?
The subject is, that RAND is advocating to the highest level of the
government and they listen!, that if Saudi Arabia will not fall in line,
we should take over the oil fields.
Is that what Bush learned in Bible school or in philosophy 101, what is
democracy is about?
Of course I am not surprised of RAND. They advocated a First Strike in
the 50's, giving little thought to killing millions of Russians in the
process and flattening all the major cities.
BTW, can you be disciplined enough, so you don't change to Clintons dick
in your reply?
dapra
Werner Hetzner
JustTheFacts wrote:
> "Werner Hetzner" <whet...@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:3D62F45D...@mac.com...
>
>>How many doves decided to bomb the Serbs who did us absolutely no harm?
>>
>
> The same Serbs who were murdering Bosnians and Croats?
>
> They got their comeuppance a little quicker in Kosovo, no thanks to Bush Sr.
>
>
They were murdering eachother. That happens in a war. But the point is
they did not harm us.
>>How many Liberals decided to irritate BinLadin with silly, ineffective
>>missile attacks on their empty camps?
>>
>
> The empty camp myth is a rightwing flim-flam. It would have been a lot
> easier for Clinton and the security agencies in the U.S. to focus on bin
> Laden if the rightwing wasn't trying to scam the public with their $75
> million witch hunt.
>
> You might also touch down for a little reality and realize that Clinton
> didn't design and prosecute the missile attack, the military did.
>
>
So Clinton failed to be Commander in Chief?
Werner Hetzner
dapra wrote:
Rand is a think tank. So they think of things. I'm sure you have heard
of options and a range of options.
I'd rather prefer Rand cousel to the Bible or philosophy 101 when it
comes to planning wars.
dapra
Werner Hetzner wrote:
>
> dapra wrote:
>
> >
> > Werner Hetzner wrote:
> >
> >>How many doves decided to bomb the Serbs who did us absolutely no harm?
> >>
> >>How many Liberals decided to irritate BinLadin with silly, ineffective
> >>missile attacks on their empty camps?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > What's your reason for changing the subject? You don't find it
> > appealing?
> >
> > The subject is, that RAND is advocating to the highest level of the
> > government and they listen!, that if Saudi Arabia will not fall in line,
> > we should take over the oil fields.
> > Is that what Bush learned in Bible school or in philosophy 101, what is
> > democracy is about?
> >
> > Of course I am not surprised of RAND. They advocated a First Strike in
> > the 50's, giving little thought to killing millions of Russians in the
> > process and flattening all the major cities.
> >
> > BTW, can you be disciplined enough, so you don't change to Clintons dick
> > in your reply?
> >
> > dapra
> >
>
> Rand is a think tank. So they think of things.
Yes, they do. They come up with some pretty awful things. But, it is
the responsibility of the administration to delegate these ideas to a
low level "sanity check" person, not to the highest level in the
government.
So what do you think of taking property by force (oil fields)? Some of
the peons would get this idea too.
Isn't this a logical conclusion? The Us military can confiscate, so can
the people or government. Bush must be a closet communist! ;-)
sparkup
> Sparkup <non...@yourbusiness.org> wrote:
> > "Julian D." <ju...@ersatz.com> wrote in message
> > news:7546muomejfshrfha...@4ax.com...
> >
> >> "We need honest, reasoned debate..."-- John Ashcroft -
> >> On Islamic extremists: "We should invade their countries, kill their
> >> leaders and convert them to Christianity."
> >> -- Ann Coulter, National Review Online, September 2001
> >
> > Ann Coulter calling for a Christian Jihad (or Crusade as its better
> > known)
>
> Little short on material there, Sparkup (nice name, incidentally)? Such
> a slow news day that you've got nothing better to attack than Julian's
> sig file that's been here for months?
I have been looking at these kinds of signatures for months now (as
you have already pointed out) and noticed that while posts were always
challenged, the sigs are taken as read. So I thought I would challenge
the hypocracy in them.
...plus I was bored, and I thought it was pretty funny, so sue me. ;)
>
> >> "100% of the successful terrorist attacks on
> >> commercial airlines for 20 years have been committed
> >> by Arabs. When there is a 100% chance, it ceases to
> >> be a profile. It's called a 'description of the
> >> suspect.'" - Ann Coulter
> >
> > 1985 June 23rd 345 people are killed when Sikh terrorist explode a
> > bomb aboard an Air India 747
>
> Note to Julian and Ann: Better make that 99.9%.
Note to Ann, dont fill you talkshow patter with inaccuracies and then
slam liberals for doing the same thing.
>
> >>
> >> 'All I really need to know about Islam, I learned on September 11.'
> >> -Me
> >
> > All you wanted to know, maybe, all you need to know, obviously not.
>
> You know, though, Sparky, I'll tell you. I don't agree 100% with Julian
> on this one; I'm not quite so quick to condemn all of Islam. What I
> think is brilliant about this line, though, is that, like it or not,
> that's how a LOT of people feel on the issue of Islam today. Probably
> not a majority of us "intellectuals" here on Usenet, but the
> ignorant-ass Bob Slobberts on the street of Bumfuck, USA, that gets
> polled by pollsters and who votes in elections.
So you agree that his opinion is wrong then? Why defend it? Just
because its a widely held opinion, it doesnt make it any more right.
>
> Accurate or not, it's a widely held public opinion.
I was pointing out an opinion held by a specific person, not by the
public in general.
Werner Hetzner
dapra wrote:
>
> Werner Hetzner wrote:
>
...
>>Rand is a think tank. So they think of things.
>>
>
> Yes, they do. They come up with some pretty awful things. But, it is
> the responsibility of the administration to delegate these ideas to a
> low level "sanity check" person, not to the highest level in the
> government.
>
> So what do you think of taking property by force (oil fields)? Some of
> the peons would get this idea too.
> Isn't this a logical conclusion? The Us military can confiscate, so can
> the people or government. Bush must be a closet communist! ;-)
>
Both the Bible and my take on philosophy 101 says stealing is wrong.
Stealing and killing is regarded as wrong by most cultures - including
Islam.
Dave Zero
> "Dave Zero" <jesusofth...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<ak0l71$rrj$1...@slb7.atl.mindspring.net>...
>> Sparkup <non...@yourbusiness.org> wrote:
>>> "Julian D." <ju...@ersatz.com> wrote in message
>>> news:7546muomejfshrfha...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>> "We need honest, reasoned debate..."-- John Ashcroft -
>>>> On Islamic extremists: "We should invade their countries, kill
>>>> their leaders and convert them to Christianity."
>>>> -- Ann Coulter, National Review Online, September 2001
>>>
>>> Ann Coulter calling for a Christian Jihad (or Crusade as its better
>>> known)
>>
>> Little short on material there, Sparkup (nice name, incidentally)?
>> Such a slow news day that you've got nothing better to attack than
>> Julian's sig file that's been here for months?
>
> I have been looking at these kinds of signatures for months now (as
> you have already pointed out) and noticed that while posts were always
> challenged, the sigs are taken as read. So I thought I would challenge
> the hypocracy in them.
> ...plus I was bored, and I thought it was pretty funny, so sue me. ;)
Hey, that's cool with me. Knock yourself out.
>>>> "100% of the successful terrorist attacks on
>>>> commercial airlines for 20 years have been committed
>>>> by Arabs. When there is a 100% chance, it ceases to
>>>> be a profile. It's called a 'description of the
>>>> suspect.'" - Ann Coulter
>>>
>>> 1985 June 23rd 345 people are killed when Sikh terrorist explode a
>>> bomb aboard an Air India 747
>>
>> Note to Julian and Ann: Better make that 99.9%.
>
> Note to Ann, dont fill you talkshow patter with inaccuracies and then
> slam liberals for doing the same thing.
Are any humans infallible and make no mistakes or factual errors? Ann's
not perfect, but I don't see her as more inaccurate than anyone else in
her line of work. She's sensationalism personified - if I disliked her
I'd probably slap the label of "attention whore" on her, but being
sensationalistic isn't indicative of inaccuracy....it just makes you
crow louder when you find one.
>>>> 'All I really need to know about Islam, I learned on September 11.'
>>>> -Me
>>>
>>> All you wanted to know, maybe, all you need to know, obviously not.
>>
>> You know, though, Sparky, I'll tell you. I don't agree 100% with
>> Julian on this one; I'm not quite so quick to condemn all of Islam.
>> What I think is brilliant about this line, though, is that, like it
>> or not, that's how a LOT of people feel on the issue of Islam today.
>> Probably not a majority of us "intellectuals" here on Usenet, but the
>> ignorant-ass Bob Slobberts on the street of Bumfuck, USA, that gets
>> polled by pollsters and who votes in elections.
>
> So you agree that his opinion is wrong then? Why defend it? Just
> because its a widely held opinion, it doesnt make it any more right.
I didn't say his opinion was WRONG - I'm not Jesus Christ or some moral
judge qualified to do that. I said I don't agree 100% with it.
I'm defending it because as much as I enjoy posting here on Usenet, I
think a lot of the posters here are really out of touch with how the
"average Joe" out there feels. The Average Joe who doesn't participate
in intellectual debates on politics and policy on the internet, the
Average Joe who, if we're lucky, remembers to vote on election day.
Julian's line about "everything I needed to know about Islam I learned
on 9/11" really comes pretty damned close, in a rather poetic way, to
capturing a sentiment that I believe exists in larger amounts than you
might think, here on this newsgroup.
>> Accurate or not, it's a widely held public opinion.
>
> I was pointing out an opinion held by a specific person, not by the
> public in general.
Well, I think we understand better where the other one's coming from
now.
sparkup
Well....using this sort of fear-mongering to sell books is in my
opinion disgusting (BTW John Ashcroft seems to agree with me ;)
>
> >>>> 'All I really need to know about Islam, I learned on September 11.'
> >>>> -Me
> >>>
> >>> All you wanted to know, maybe, all you need to know, obviously not.
> >>
> >> You know, though, Sparky, I'll tell you. I don't agree 100% with
> >> Julian on this one; I'm not quite so quick to condemn all of Islam.
> >> What I think is brilliant about this line, though, is that, like it
> >> or not, that's how a LOT of people feel on the issue of Islam today.
> >> Probably not a majority of us "intellectuals" here on Usenet, but the
> >> ignorant-ass Bob Slobberts on the street of Bumfuck, USA, that gets
> >> polled by pollsters and who votes in elections.
> >
> > So you agree that his opinion is wrong then? Why defend it? Just
> > because its a widely held opinion, it doesnt make it any more right.
>
> I didn't say his opinion was WRONG - I'm not Jesus Christ or some moral
> judge qualified to do that. I said I don't agree 100% with it.
Well..how can you not agree with it, and still not think its wrong?
>
> I'm defending it because as much as I enjoy posting here on Usenet, I
> think a lot of the posters here are really out of touch with how the
> "average Joe" out there feels. The Average Joe who doesn't participate
> in intellectual debates on politics and policy on the internet, the
> Average Joe who, if we're lucky, remembers to vote on election day.
Well..at the risk of sounding like an elitist (expecting flames from
all over), why not try to educate the ignorant in society then,
instead of feeding them more of the same tired old "evil islam"
bullshit? I mean, the US is (in theory) the most developed country in
the world, and as the most powerful country in the world, dont you
think it has a responsibility to make sure its people have the facts
before they pass judgement?
>
> Julian's line about "everything I needed to know about Islam I learned
> on 9/11" really comes pretty damned close, in a rather poetic way, to
> capturing a sentiment that I believe exists in larger amounts than you
> might think, here on this newsgroup.
Maybe it does, Im not denying it, but as I said before, it doesnt make
it right.You seem like a reasonably level-headed and intelligent
bloke, why dont you try to spread what you know, or think, about islam
in general to those on your side of the political spectrum?
>
> >> Accurate or not, it's a widely held public opinion.
> >
> > I was pointing out an opinion held by a specific person, not by the
> > public in general.
>
> Well, I think we understand better where the other one's coming from
> now.
Sorry...I dont understand what you were saying here.
StevenM135
I am a citizen. I have to worry about it. I will be asked to pay for it. I will
be asked to send my kids to carry it out. Should I leave it to a bunch of
chicken hawks?
Dread
StevenM135
>leaders and convert them to Christianity."
>> -- Ann Coulter, National Review Online, September 2001
>
>Ann Coulter calling for a Christian Jihad (or Crusade as its better known)
This was at the same time that Dimson was asking Arabs to join in a "Crusade!"