Shrub is a Certifiable Loon & The Whole World Knows This.
AbelM...@webtv.net
this incompetent imposter of a President remain our leader? It's
absolutely amazing. That's why I think he's not going to be President
that much longer, in just a few months, mark my words, he'll be
impeached or imprisoned or something like that.
Less than 24 hours after the idiot Shrub gives that disasterous
inaugural speech of his, the Shrub's daddy goes to the media to
apologize to the world for his son's crazy talk. Shrub's daddy is now
going around trying to reassure other countries that his son didn't
really mean what he said and that he is not really going to invade them
after all.
I mean the Shrub is a grown man, isn't he? So why is his Daddy going
around trying to do apologize for his kid? I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING
LIKE THIS.
Shrub's inaugural speech was basically about threatening to go to war
against anyone in the world who disagrees with Shrub's definition of
democracy.
Do you realize how horribly BAD we look to the world? We look like such
a dangerous bunch of idiots, and the WHOLE world sees us that way. In
Europe, the headlines are screaming to Bush and reminding him that the
whole world hates him anyways so he should stop this war talk, they are
saying that he's such a hated figure that he will simply fail in pushing
his brand of democracy down other people's throats.
Russia, China, Egypt, Pakistan, and all the other allies in the fight
against terrorism are now being reassured by the other members of
Shrub's administration that the Shrub didn't really mean what he said,
this according to last Sunday's Washington Post.
I guess Shrub only meant to say that he will attack Iran and Syria only,
that's what the PNAC document states. Well, the front runner in the
Iraq elections just sent a reply to Bush, saying that the Iraqi people
do not want Bush to use Iraq as a base to attack neighboring Iran and
Syria from. He says that the Iraqi people want good relations with
their neighbors, and that the Iraqi people are perfectly capable of
defending themselves and that they also want U.S. troops out of their
country. He's going to be the next President of Iraq, and he says he
wants U.S. troops out.
In Venezuela, an already existing democracy that the Shrub tried to
overthrow last year, there were mass protests there following Shrub's
inaugural speech, and the protestors held signs reading, "We will not be
another Iraq".
Russia used to have one-third of their military forces bogged down on
the Chinese border, even at the heighth of the Cold War, they were more
afraid of their own neighbor than of America. But now the Russians and
the Chinese are forming a military alliance, because they both share a
deep distrust of the loony Shrub. And then, India & Iran are joining
them too. Even the E.U. (that is, Europe), they are forming a military
alliance with China, the latest news is that they are selling weapons to
the Chinese despite U.S. objections, they are getting closer to China,
because Europe doesn't trust Shrub's sanity either. This is how bad it
has become. Shrub ran as a "uniter". Well he's uniting somebody
alright, but it's not the American people. Shrub is uniting the whole
world against America, because of Shrub's dangerous lunacy.
People are reading into Bush's bellicose speech a new and aggressive
military posture that will define the rest of his term. Apparently the
lessons of Iraq have not been learned. Peggy Noonan, Reagan's
speechwriter, pretty much described Bush as an overly ambitious nutjob.
"Tyranny is a very bad thing and quite wicked, but one doesn't expect
we're going to eradicate it any time soon. Again, this is not heaven,
it's earth," Noonan wrote in The Wall Street Journal.
Notice that in his inauguration speech, Bush didn't even once mention
Iraq, because he knows it's a disaster. He obviously agrees with me and
the Democrats and everything we've all been saying about Iraq, that's
why he didn't even once mention the subject of Iraq in his inauguration.
There's nothing positive he can say about Iraq or anything else he's
done. It's going to be more war, more fear mongering, more job losses,
more of all the same crap we've already seen, basically more lunacy for
the rest of the Shrub's presidential term, which like I said, won't last
4 years but will only last a few more months. You'll see. We still have
a democracy, you know, and there are ways to remove bad leaders. I
think Bush should be professionally diagnozed for his sickness, put in a
straightjacket and then hospitalized, for his own good, the good of the
country, and the good of the world.
http://www.webindia123.com/news/showdetails.asp?id=62376&cat=World
Abel Malcolm
THE PRICE OF FREEDOM IS ETERNAL VIGILANCE
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Educate yourself & go to these links:
www.moveon.org & www.buzzflash.com &
http://ww11.e-tractions.com/truemajority/run/oreo & www.democracynow.org
& http://www.airamericaradio.com/ &
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/fourteencharacteristicsfascism03jan04.shtml
+-(*TêeInnTêe*)-+
Steven L.
> I've never seen anything like this, nobody has. How much longer will
> this incompetent imposter of a President remain our leader? It's
> absolutely amazing. That's why I think he's not going to be President
> that much longer, in just a few months, mark my words, he'll be
> impeached or imprisoned or something like that.
By a Republican Congress???
In U.S. history, there has NEVER been a President who came close to
being impeached by a Congress controlled by his own party.
You're really freaking out more and more every week.
> Less than 24 hours after the idiot Shrub gives that disasterous
> inaugural speech of his, the Shrub's daddy goes to the media to
> apologize to the world for his son's crazy talk. Shrub's daddy is now
> going around trying to reassure other countries that his son didn't
> really mean what he said and that he is not really going to invade them
> after all.
>
> I mean the Shrub is a grown man, isn't he? So why is his Daddy going
> around trying to do apologize for his kid? I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING
> LIKE THIS.
>
> Shrub's inaugural speech was basically about threatening to go to war
> against anyone in the world who disagrees with Shrub's definition of
> democracy.
If you Dems don't like Bush's vision statement about the future of the
world and America's role in it, why don't you come up with a better one?
Go ahead, let's see a Dem give a major foreign-policy speech that tries
to be visionary and inspiring.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email: sdli...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
+-(*TêeInnTêe*)-+
hook line & sinker. ;-)
"Steven L." <sdli...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
news:tm8Jd.5771$cZ1....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Eyeball Kid
<AbelM...@webtv.net> wrote:
Well said, Abe.
I have a darker version of what you believe will be the means of Bush's
removal. If it happens, it won't be pretty, and it won't be peaceful.
He's made too many enemies who are well-connected to those who live by
contracts.
I'd rather see it happen through peaceful means, such as the exposure
of the Bush/Cheney cabal's participation in the 9/11 events. That would
be most relieving. But there's a smaller chance that poetic justice
will be meted out in this way, rather than in the old-fashioned way.
E. K.
> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
>
> Educate yourself & go to these links:
>
> www.moveon.org & www.buzzflash.com &
> http://ww11.e-tractions.com/truemajority/run/oreo & www.democracynow.org
> & http://www.airamericaradio.com/ &
> http://educate-yourself.org/cn/fourteencharacteristicsfascism03jan04.shtml
>
--
"Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision that he
makes and we should just support that."-Britney Spears, 9/2003
"The American Way of Life is not negotiable." Dick Cheney, 2001
Free humor. Whenever you want. http://www.psmueller.com
Roedy Green
quoted :
>People are reading into Bush's bellicose speech a new and aggressive
>military posture that will define the rest of his term
The leaders of the world are not looking at Bush's speech in a vacuum.
They look at the Iraq rhetoric and the Iraq reality. They know what
that speech REALLY means.
They look at the neocon manifesto which people originally took as a
sort of debating stance. Now they realise these loons are serious,
serious as Hitler was about Mein Kampf.
The Department of Defense currently lists 725 official U.S.
military bases outside of the country and 969 within the 50
states (not to mention numerous secret bases). To defend the
USA, there would only need to be bases in and near the USA.
These bases are for world domination not defense. The USA
military spends many times the rest of the world put
together. This is not needed for defense, but for world
hegemony.
The Project For a New Century PNAC is a group of neocons who
have been promoting the idea of American dominion over the
entire planet for over a decade. They have a website at
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
PNACers include well-known Bush advisors: Perle, Wolfowitz,
Kristol, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Libby, Feith, Bolton and Abrams.
Their "mein Kampf" is a Pentagon Document entitled "Defense
Planning Guidance" on Post-Cold-War strategy dated
1992-02-18. Some key sections are as follows. I quote
verbatim:
THE NEOCON MANIFESTO
1. Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a
new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet
Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat to the order of that
posed by the former Soviet Union. This is a dominant
consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy
and requires we endeavour to prove any hostile power from
dominating a region whose resources would, under
consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global
power.
2. The U.S. must show the leadership necessary to establish
and protect a new order that holds promise of convincing
potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater
role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their
LEGITIMATE interests. In non-defense areas, we must account
sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial
nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership
or seeking to overrun the established political or economic
order. WE MUST MAINTAIN THE MECHANISMS FOR DETERRING
COMPETITORS FROM EVEN ASPIRING TO A LARGER REGIONAL OR
GLOBAL ROLE.
3. Like the coalition that opposed Iraqi aggression, we
should expect future coalitions to be ad hoc assemblies,
often not lasting beyond the crisis being confronted, and in
many cases carrying out only general agreement over the
objectives to be accomplished. Nevertheless, the sense that
the world order is ultimately backed by the U.S. will be an
important stabilizing factor.
4. While the U.S. cannot become the world's policeman, by
assuming responsibility for righting every wrong, we will
retain the preeminent responsibility for addressing
SELECTIVELY those wrongs which threaten not only our
interests, but those of our allies or friends, or which
would seriously unsettle international relations.
5. We continue to recognize that collectively the
conventional forces of the states formerly comprising the
Soviet Union retain the most military potential in all of
Eurasia, and we do not dismiss the risks to stability in
Europe from a nationalist backlash in Russia or efforts to
reincorporate into Russia the newly independent republics of
Ukraine, Belarus, and possibly others ... We must, however,
be mindful that democratic change in Russia is now
irreversible, and that despite its current travails, Russia
will remain the strongest military power in Eurasia and the
only power in the world with the capacity of destroying the
United States.
6. In the Middle East and Southeast Asia, our overall
objective is to remain the predominant power in the region
and preserve the U.S. and Western access to the region's
oil.
This document was prepared primarily by Paul Wolfowitz. It
was leaked to the New York Times in 1992-03. There was a
firestorm of controversy, and the document was redrafted in
more politically correct language.
I first became aware of this when Paul Hellyer, Canada's
former, and most famous, defense minster, came to Victoria
to talk about it. I bought a copy of his book One Big Party:
To Keep Canada Independent
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0973311606/canadianmindprod
at his lecture. Since the U.S.A. is the major threat to
Canadian independence, much of the book is about the neocon
machinations in the U.S.A.
Bush has kiddie porn anal rape videos made at Abu Ghraib.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040717-082858-3675r.htm
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/iraq.html photos of Bush's war crimes
Roedy Green
quoted :
>I mean the Shrub is a grown man, isn't he? So why is his Daddy going
>around trying to do apologize for his kid? I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING
>LIKE THIS.
Think how many people you have seen over the years who if by some
fluke they got into the white house would trigger thermonuclear war.
Look at poor Bush 41. His son was an idiot. He expected him to act as
a pretty face front end for his old buddies. Then Bush 43 got the
idea HE was president. For Bush 41, it must be like being Dr.
Frankenstein.
It is really is foolish to take any sort of chances with nuclear war.
At the very least I want Bush 43 to submit to random drug tests.
Bush 43 is certifiably nuts as far as I am concerned. Anyone who
orders up videos of little boys being raped automatically disqualifies
himself as a leader. His compassion circuits are fried. I don't have
to know anything else about him.