Security Job Security [POL]
The Sanity Inspector
<b...@NIXTHISPARTstudionotes.org> just wrote!
>"Hardly a surprise," said one former intelligence official. "We have =
>sacrificed
>a war on terror for a war with Iraq. I don't blame Randy at all. This =
>just
>reflects the widespread thought that the war on terror is being set aside=
> for
>the war with Iraq at the expense of our military and intel resources and =
>the
>relationships with our allies."
> ~On the resignation today of Rand Beers, the top National Security =
>Council
>official in the war on terror. (UPI, By P. Mitchell Prothero, From the
>Washington Politics & Policy Desk)
Well, at this moment we're raiding an Afghan village, in hot pursuit
of al-Qaeda, with the biggest force we've deployed there in a year.
This is directly due to intel gleaned from that high-ranking hedgehog
we captured the other week. So, we're multitasking just fine so far.
Does this make you sad?
Obquote:
Make no mistake: The anti-war voices long for us to lose any
war they cannot prevent.
-- Ralph Peters, "Coward's Counsel",
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/49030.htm
--
bruce
The dignified don't even enter in the game.
--The Jam
alohacyberian
news:5vki7vghlo6jcc49f...@4ax.com...
This is a very intriguing decision (by Beers). . . .There is a predominant
belief in the intelligence community that an invasion of Iraq will cause more
terrorism than it will prevent.
It's interesting to note that such sentiments are identical to those
expressed on the eve of American military into Afghanistan and troops taking
the Taliban to task for harboring terrorists. And since the invasion of
Iraq, there have been no terrorist attacks against America or Americans. The
proof is in the pudding. KM
OBQ:
"Remember: Al Qaeda flourished in the '90s - precisely when America was doing
its utmost to appease the Arab world by sponsoring the Oslo peace process and
limiting its response to terrorism to pinprick strikes. This only convinced
the Islamists that America was ripe for attack.
"And when the United States finally took firm action, by invading
Afghanistan, there was no rejoicing in the Arab street and no sign of
increased recruiting for al Qaeda. The prospect of spending the rest of their
lives in Guantanamo Bay may even dissuade some of the more faint-hearted
Islamists from taking up arms. Whatever its impact on enemy morale, the
conquest of Afghanistan definitely denied the terrorists an important base of
operations. The ouster of Saddam Hussein will achieve the same purpose."
~ Max Boot, "Key Qaeda Capture"
http://nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/69753.htm
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and more: http://keith.martin.home.att.net/
PollyC
> Make no mistake: The anti-war voices long for us to lose any
> war they cannot prevent.
> -- Ralph Peters, "Coward's Counsel",
ąąąąąąąąąąąąąą
Really? Well, I find that comment and quote ignorant, insulting and
unhelpful. But who am I to judge?
'Tis true that tho' People can transcend their Characters in Times
of Tranquillity, they can ne'er do so in Times of Tumult.
~Erica Jong
PollyC
ąąąąąąąąąąąąąą
PollyC
> It's interesting to note that such sentiments are identical to
those expressed on the eve of American military into Afghanistan and
>troops taking the Taliban to task for harboring terrorists.
May I remind you that (among other allies) Australian military were
also in Afghanistan - one killed.
He needs to be assured that when they make the movie, all references
to allies (other than disparaging ones) will be removed and it will
be seen that the US won the conflict all on their own.
~ Graham Weeks in AQ post
> And since the invasion of
> Iraq, there have been no terrorist attacks against America or
Americans. The proof is in the pudding. KM
Amongst the incidental 88 Australians and even more of the less
important Indonesians killed in the Bali terrorist attack there WAS
two Americans! The latter must make it worthy of a mention.
People are often unreasonable, illogical, and self-centered; forgive
them anyway.
~Mother Teresa
PollyC
北北北北北北北
alohacyberian
news:3e798742$1...@news.chariot.net.au...
>
> > It's interesting to note that such sentiments are identical to
> those expressed on the eve of American military into Afghanistan and
> >troops taking the Taliban to task for harboring terrorists.
>
> May I remind you that (among other allies) Australian military were
> also in Afghanistan - one killed.
>
Which isn't relevant to the remarks about the cessation of terrorist attacks
against America or Americans.
OBQ:
"We do know that Iraq has weaponized thousands of gallons of anthrax and
other deadly biological agents. We know that Iraq maintains stockpiles of
some of the world's deadliest chemical weapons, including VX, sarin and
mustard gas. We know that Iraq is developing deadlier ways to deliver these
horrible weapons, including unmanned drones and long-range ballistic
missiles. And we know that Saddam Hussein is committed to one day possessing
nuclear weapons. If that should happen, instead of simply bullying the Gulf
region, he could dominate it. Instead of threatening only his neighbors, he
would become a grave threat to U.S. security and to global security. The
threat posed by Saddam Hussein may not be imminent. But it is real. It is
growing. And it cannot be ignored."
~ Tom Daschle
PollyC
terrorist attacks against America or Americans.
Sorry, I really must get my priorities straight and reply to posts
in the approved manner.
Did you find the second part of my post more relevant to the
*cessation of terrorist attacks* issue? Any comment on that part,
then?
btw Anyone know an emoticon for <shake head in disgust while
raising eyes to the ceiling>?
OBQ
The selective memory isn't selective enough.
~Blake Morrison , Independent on Sunday (London, 16 June 1991).
PollyC
±±±±±±±±±±±±±±
The Sanity Inspector
> > Does this make you sad?
>
> > Make no mistake: The anti-war voices long for us to lose any
> > war they cannot prevent.
> > -- Ralph Peters, "Coward's Counsel",
>
>
> Really? Well, I find that comment and quote ignorant, insulting and
> unhelpful. But who am I to judge?
Ditto me when I and mine are called warmongers, and accused of taking
action from sheer bloody-mindedness. Doesn't feel good, does it?
> 'Tis true that tho' People can transcend their Characters in Times
> of Tranquillity, they can ne'er do so in Times of Tumult.
> ~Erica Jong
Be thou as chaste as ice, as pure as snow, thou shallt not escape
calumny.
-- Shakespeare
PollyC
> Really? Well, I find that comment and quote ignorant, insulting
and
> unhelpful. But who am I to judge?
> Ditto me when I and mine are called warmongers, and accused of
taking
> action from sheer bloody-mindedness. Doesn't feel good, does it?
±±±±±±±±±±±±±±
Do I read your final comment above to mean that we are now down to
trying to inflict *pain* on each other at a personal level for our
individual ideological stance.
Have I missed where the *hawks* have been accused of
wanting to see their own troops fail and die?
It's a mighty big jump.
I stand by my comments ..do you stand by your judgement that those
who are anti-war long for the coalition to fail -with everything
that failure would mean ? ( As I see it could only mean being
totally
wiped out with some form of mass destruction)
I have found that in many threads your comments and choice of quotes
have exceeded the bounds of issue- debate eg comments on the woman
killed by the bull-dozer, inferences that the French wanting to see
US soldiers die and now this on those anti-war... You go *too* far
for my comfort zone (farther than most posters in here) and now I
must give some thought to Frank's POL tax suggestion.
Perhaps this is will be my last POL post -enjoy!
OBQ
What difference does it make to the dead, orphans and the homeless,
whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of
totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy?
~ Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violence in Peace and War (1948)
PollyC
±±±±±±±±±±±±±±
Flash
> >
> > Really? Well, I find that comment and quote ignorant, insulting
> and
> > unhelpful. But who am I to judge?
>
> > Ditto me when I and mine are called warmongers, and accused of
> taking
> > action from sheer bloody-mindedness. Doesn't feel good, does it?
>
> Do I read your final comment above to mean that we are now down to
> trying to inflict *pain* on each other at a personal level for our
> individual ideological stance.
-----
"Why do you keep nagging at the boy?...
Why don't you let him *enjoy the War* ? "
-- Jiggs, in _Bringing up Father_
-----
--Flash
Flash
[.....]
> > Really? Well, I find that comment and quote ignorant, insulting and
> > unhelpful. But who am I to judge?
>
> Ditto me when I and mine are called warmongers, and accused of taking
> action from sheer bloody-mindedness. Doesn't feel good, does it?
>
-----
> (Btw, bruce, if these are not radical or unaccountable enough, let us
> know! )
> --Flash
"Have at it, so long as they're good. It doesn't give _me_ soulquakes
to view quotes I disagree with."
--TSI
-----
Nathanael Thompson
> Have I missed where the *hawks* have been accused of
> wanting to see their own troops fail and die?
> It's a mighty big jump.
>
> I stand by my comments ..do you stand by your judgement that those
> who are anti-war long for the coalition to fail -with everything
> that failure would mean ? ( As I see it could only mean being
> totally
> wiped out with some form of mass destruction)
Hmmm... what about these morons?
THE FIRST INSTANCE OF FRAGGING HAS HAPPENED! (english)
The grenade attack that took place today in Kuwait is alleged to be
committed by another AMERICAN SOLIDER. Repeat. The Grenade attack
today was an example of Fragging--not a terrorist attack. This shows
that RESISTANCE and REBELLION ARE ON THE RISE! Watch the American Free
Press downplay and try to bury this incident. Support our Troops--but
only those who Frag their commanding officer.
http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=301605&group=webcast
http://no-treason.pmachinehosting.com/images/uploads/shoot-officers.jpg
-+-
Nate Thompson
Parents need to use common sense: Let a kid play in the dirt, but
don't let a kid play with a raw chicken in the dirt.
--Susan McCarthy, Salon.com
Joe Gilman
"Nathanael Thompson" wrote
> The grenade attack that took place today in Kuwait is alleged to be
> committed by another AMERICAN SOLIDER. Repeat. The
> Grenade attack today was an example of Fragging--not a terrorist attack.
As two Kuwaiti Arabic translators are held along with an American Muslim
sergeant in the fragging attack at Camp Pennsylvania, questions are being
raised about the Army's heavy reliance on local translators rather than
qualified U.S. military Arabic speakers and interrogators.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31675
Flash
[.....]
> Hmmm... what about these morons?
>
> THE FIRST INSTANCE OF FRAGGING HAS HAPPENED! (english)
>
> The grenade attack that took place today in Kuwait is alleged to be
> committed by another AMERICAN SOLIDER. Repeat. The Grenade attack
> today was an example of Fragging--not a terrorist attack. This shows
> that RESISTANCE and REBELLION ARE ON THE RISE! Watch the American Free
> Press downplay and try to bury this incident. Support our Troops--but
> only those who Frag their commanding officer.
Actually, Nate, those morons have the same mindset as your
libertarian buddies. Are you *sure* they're not libertarians?
-- Flash
Obquote:
-----
When it comes to defining its enemies, militias tend to confuse
individuals with institutions. That is, they "take aim" not at a
social order but at individuals, threatening to murder members of
specific group of people -- government employees, simply by virtue of
their holding government office. Militias have sent death threats to
senators and local officials alike. In 1995 the "Justus Township"
members of the "Freemen" placed a million-dollar "bounty" on the
sheriff of Garfield County -- they said they would try him in one of
their own "common law courts" and hang him if he were found guilty.
They threatened to hang the county attorney by a rope from a bridge,
without even the nicety of a "common law" trial. Two other "Freemen"
issued a death threat against a U.S. district judge in Billings. Such
tactics are calls not to social revolution but to private acts of
cold-blooded murder.
-- Janet Biehl (_MILITIA FEVER -- The Fallacy of "Neither Left nor
Right"_)
Gareth Owen
> Actually, Nate, those morons have the same mindset as your libertarian
> buddies. Are you *sure* they're not libertarians?
Nah. Libertarians believe in widescale government intervention,
as long as its they limit that intervention to places overseas.
They also believe in gun control, as long as the guns belong to foreigners.
--
Gareth Owen
Nathanael Thompson
> Actually, Nate, those morons have the same mindset as your
> libertarian buddies.
No. Militia nuts who threaten to initiate force are *not*
libertarians. I support only peaceful attempts at reform. For
example:
http://www.freestateproject.org
>Are you *sure* they're not libertarians?
>
> -- Flash
Certainly not. They're more likely left-anarchists (very different
from market-anarchists) or possibly Marxists like yourself.
The leftists were the ones throwing bombs at the WTO riots.
ObQ:
I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no
vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of
justice is no virtue.
--Barry Goldwater
speech, accepting Republican presidential nomination (July 16, 1964)
A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation
in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a
vice.
--Thomas Paine
_The Rights of Man_ (1792)
-+-
Nate Thompson
Tax avoidance is legal and heroic. Re-incorporate in Bermuda today.
Flash
> CLEARL...@aol.com (Flash) wrote in message news:<e808c4a5.03032...@posting.google.com>...
>
> > Actually, Nate, those morons have the same mindset as your
> > libertarian buddies.
>
> No. Militia nuts who threaten to initiate force are *not*
> libertarians. I support only peaceful attempts at reform. For
> example:
>
> http://www.freestateproject.org
>
> >Are you *sure* they're not libertarians?
> >
> > -- Flash
>
> Certainly not. They're more likely left-anarchists (very different
[.....]
Mary Lou Seymour, one of your "Organizers," talks about a hot new
book:
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the
system, but too early to shoot the bastards." So wrote Claire Wolfe in
her wildly popular _101 Things To Do 'Til the Revolution_. It's still
not time to take down the scoundrels, but Claire Wolfe has come up
with another batch of ideas to counteract the abuses government so
routinely practices. In this follow-up to _101 Things To Do 'Til the
Revolution_, she provides more ways to monkey wrench a system that
keeps citizens in a stranglehold. She teaches how to prepare for a
truly independent lifestyle, and imparts further insight on how to
liberate people from the Powers that Be......
How can you acquire firearms without ending up on a government list?
Is there any way to tell if a supposed friend is really a government
snitch? You'll find all that and more in _Don't Shoot The Bastards
(Yet): 101 More Ways to Salvage Freedom_.
-- from Mary Lou Seymour's website:
http://www.libertymls.com/libertyactivist/
And the libertarian extremist McVeigh decided the time *was*
right to "take down the scoundrels."
"Timothy McVeigh is not just a mass murderer; he's a very
confused mass murderer," said Steve Dasbach, Libertarian Party
national director. "Besides having no appreciation for the value of
human life, McVeigh apparently has no understanding of the meaning of
the word libertarian......."
But then, who does?
-- Flash
"This American Life" has emailed us to let us know that the promos
going out on some NPR stations are incorrect. The feature on the Free
State Project will probably be running on the 15th, not the 8th, but
it is not absolutely certain.
-- http://www.freestateproject.org/
Frank Lynch
Something to be said for a web site whose *advertisements* produce
404's (click on 'Bill of Rights Enforcement')
Frank Lynch
The Samuel Johnson Sound Bite Page is at:
http://www.samueljohnson.com/
The Sanity Inspector
>"Have at it, so long as they're good. It doesn't give _me_ soulquakes
>to view quotes I disagree with."
>--TSI
You call _that_ a soulquake?
Obquote:
Do I contradict myself? Very well, I contradict myself.
Every goddamn day.
-- Walt Patton
Nathanael Thompson
Perhaps you'd like to be accountable for Ted Kaczynski? Is there a
distinction between the Unabomber and Al Gore who both mouth similar
rhetoric?
CLEARL...@aol.com (Flash) wrote in message news:<e808c4a5.03032...@posting.google.com>...
> ...has no understanding of the meaning of
> the word libertarian......."
>
> But then, who does?
>
> -- Flash
Initiating force (which includes killing innocent people) is
proscribed by the Non-Aggression Principle.
No one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force [or
fraud] against another human being, nor to delegate its initiation.
--L. Neil Smith
http://www.nonaggression.org/what.html
Political tags -- such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist,
fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth -- are never basic
criteria. The human race is divided into those who want people to be
controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists
acting from the highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest
number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in
altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.
--Robert Heinlein
_Time Enough for Love_
-+-
Nate Thompson
If you want government to intervene domestically, you're a liberal. If
you want government to intervene overseas, you're a conservative. If
you want government to intervene everywhere, you're a moderate. If you
don't want government to intervene anywhere, you're an extremist.
--Joseph Sobran (1995)
Flash
> Your smear job is dishonest.
I quoted LIBERTARIANS to refute your statement below:
>Are you *sure* they're not libertarians?
>
> -- Flash
"Certainly not. They're more likely left-anarchists (very different
from market-anarchists) or possibly Marxists like yourself."
-- Nate Thompson
Mary Lou Seymour is a market-anarchist AND libertarian AND a gun
nut whose writing encourages people to consider using force against
others.
>
> Perhaps you'd like to be accountable for Ted Kaczynski? Is there a
> distinction between the Unabomber and Al Gore who both mouth similar
> rhetoric?
>
My defense of Gore ("Gore VS. Unabomber Quiz") can be found
here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=e808c4a5.0204131707.780032c1%40posting.google.com&output=gplain
We beat that topic to death last year in the "Radicals" thread. I
compared P. J. O'Rourke's rhetoric to the Unabomber's:
A psychotic hatred of the Leftists (or other groups), is what seemed
to inspire the more recent American terrorists, and [O'Rourke] does
fan that fire. In _ Unabomber's Manifesto_, 47 out of 232 paragraphs
are dedicated to anti-leftism, and only twice was conservatism
mentioned. I don't know what P.J.'s percentage is.
> I wonder how many of the people who profess to believe in the leveling
> ideas of collectivism and egalitarianism really just believe that they
> themselves are good for nothing. I mean, how many leftists are
> animated by a quite reasonable self-loathing? In their hearts they
> know that they are not going to become scholars or inventors or
> industrialists or even ordinary good kind people. So they need a way
> to achieve that smugness for which the left is so justifiably famous.
> They need a way to achieve self-esteem without merit. Well, there is
> politics. In an egalitarian world everything will be controlled by
> politics, and politics requires no merit.
> - P.J. O'Rourke-
19. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of
inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter,
a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith
in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but
he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong,
and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant
behavior. But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings of
inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as
individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the
leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization
or a mass movement with which he identifies himself.
--The Unabomber
".........or possibly Marxists like yourself."
-- Nate Thompson
Another good call, Nate. I am still registered as a Republican.
-- Flash
Nathanael Thompson
>
> > Your smear job is dishonest.
>
Don't be obtuse. What is true for one isn't by default true for all.
> Mary Lou Seymour is a market-anarchist AND libertarian AND a gun
> nut
So what? Market-anarchism isn't violent. [As a classical liberal I
disagree with her philosophy.]
The Clinton administration launched an attack on people in Texas
because those people were religious nuts with guns. Hell, this country
was founded by religious nuts with guns. Who does Bill Clinton think
stepped ashore on Plymouth Rock? Peace Corps volunteers?
--P.J. O'Rourke,
speech at the Cato Institute (5/6/1993)
> whose writing encourages people to consider using force against
> others.
In what context? Does she encourage people to *initiate* force? If
the feds began conducting gun confiscation sweeps, disregarding the
Second Amendment, many libertarians and conservatives would resist.
ObQ:
When they kick at your front door
How you gonna come?
With your hands on your head
Or on the trigger of your gun
--The Clash,
#10. 'The Guns of Brixton'
_London Calling_ (1979)
PC
>Don't be obtuse. What is true for one isn't by default true for
all.
<snip>
> [As a classical liberal I
> disagree with her philosophy.]
= = = = = = = = = =
Mmmm -do you? So, enlighten those of us uninformed on such
philosophies- is it *just* possible ..............
What is true for one isn't by default true for all.
~Nathanael Thompson, AQ thread, Security Job Security (see above)
You never win arguments talking like that. But you WILL win if you
say: "Let me put it this way. In terms of appetizers vis-a-vis
Peruvians qua Peruvians, they would like to order them more often,
so to speak, but they do not have enough money per se, as it were.
Q.E.D." Only a fool would challenge that statement.
~Debating for Dummies
PC
= = = = = = = =
Flash
> Like wow, Scooby, look what CLEARL...@aol.com (Flash) just wrote!
>
>
> >"Have at it, so long as they're good. It doesn't give _me_ soulquakes
> >to view quotes I disagree with."
> >--TSI
>
> You call _that_ a soulquake?
Well, I'll admit it took an expanded scale to detect the
difference (the Quaylescale, also applicable to Al Gore).
> Obquote:
> Do I contradict myself? Very well, I contradict myself.
> Every goddamn day.
> -- Walt Patton
And twice on Sundays.
-- Flash
Quote:
-----
Fluff up that comfy chair, get the cooler iced down with the Buds, get
a big bag of pretzels and be sure to tune in Fox News this time where
it will be much more fun seeing more carnage in less time since
Nagasaki. We are just so much better, smarter and more Christian than
everyone else. It's good to be an American. Well, so long as we don't
hang a nail on a snap-top or choke on a pretzel.
-- Our American Comfy Chair - 3/18/03 http://rackjite.com
-----