If you’ve ever felt the urge to shoot state Sen. Pam Roach, here’s your chance. But be careful. She’s armed and loaded.
Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!
And don’t forget, she has shot house guest before.
This could get interesting if Dick Cheney shows up!!!!!
MTR’s Moonbat Poll:
Which is worse:
1) Having one senator that is stoopid beyond belief having been a multiple “winner” of the “No Rocket Scientist” Award.
2) Having a senator who is enmeshed in kickback scandal that is certainly well beyond the bounds of ethics rules, and quite possibly criminal?
Day 18 September 8 2006 Where’s Goldy?
Mayor Nickels’
unprecedented tax increase proposal and
Tim Eyman’s opposition campaign not only screws the taxpayers into paying extra for basic services, but it also really puts Goldy and the rest of you seattle moonbats in a helluva predicament. I’ve been taunting Goldy for some time now with my “Where’s Goldy” series, and he still won’t tell us where he stands. No doubt, he’s between a rock and a hard place trying to figure out what to do. So as a true compassionate conservative, I’ll lay out the options here for ya Goldy:
1) Open up your wallet and pay more and more property tax every year until you are forced out of your home. Even if you can do it, do you want to make seattle a place where only the rich can live? Or do you not give a fuck about anybody else?
2) Join Eyman’s campaign to fight defeat the tax increase, and expose yourself to be the fucking hypocrite that you are. Admit that you are wrong about taxpayer rights, and thank Tim in pubic for giving you the right to vote on major policy issues.
3) Support the tax hike and agree that the tax money has to be raised, but make somebody other than you pay. You could take the tried and true class envy approach and make those “rich people” in Magnolia and Queen Ann pick up the tab. Remember, a “fair tax” in moonbat parlance is a tax that the other guy has to pay.
4) Or just keep quiet and hope I go away. That’s not gonna happen.
From the Best of Moonbat Economic Theory File:
Government exists to make private wealth possible.
Commentby Belltowner— 3/12/06@ 4:15 pm
Government does make private wealth possible. What part of that don’t you understand????
Jesus H. Christ, you’re fucking stupid.
Commentby GBS— 9/6/06@ 2:03 pm
From the “Why Democrats are Nazis” collection:
Democrats excel in the use of the politics of envy, hatred and division—just like the Nazis—and emphasize our differences, rather than celebrate our commonalities. They try to pit us against each other by using classist terminology such as upper-class, middle-class, lower-class, working-class, white-collar and blue-collar, or by hyphenating us into rich-Americans, poor-Americans, far-right, far-left, Asian-Americans, white-Americans, Afro-Americans, Mexican-Americans, Cuban-Americans, native-Americans, Jewish-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, straight-Americans, gay-Americans, urban-Americans, rural-Americans, and on and on and on. In the attempt to divide us, most Democrat leaders today engage in scapegoating—just like the Nazis. And then, using the “big-lie” technique, they accuse their opponents of being divisive.
Tax RATE cuts still increase revenue:
http://www.treas.gov/press/rel.....growth.jpg
http://www.heritage.org/resear.....s_R/R1.cfm
You libs sure don’t want that ABC 9-11 movie to get on TV. Guess you don’t want anybody to find out that Clinton let Bin Laden go time after time, resulting in 9-11. Makes it hard to blame Bush, doesn’t it.
It’s another rightwing conspiracy, moonbats. ABC is a rightwing network; Rove probably owns it.
Oh, JB, don’t be shy. Tell us how you really feel…
What the Left Never Will Understand About the War on Terror
Written by JB Williams
©2006
“ The first thing liberals fail to understand is that war is a serious business. If you are not prepared to take a side, you had better not stand in the middle of the battle field. Sit it out and remain silent, because the minute you speak, you have taken a side, whether you meant to or not, and if you speak against your own, you have chosen the wrong side. This error in judgment among liberals has earned them the current title of un-American or even Al Qaeda sympathizer. “
“ Wrong from the start, the left actually thinks that the war on international terrorism is all about one man, one terror network, one event, one country and one day. How many liberals have you heard ask the question, “What about Bin Laden?” or, “What did Iraq do to us?” or, refer to Iraq as the “wrong war” in the “wrong place”, a “departure from the war on terror” – a war which in their feeble minds, exists only in Afghanistan. “
“ This notion is akin to suggesting that WWII was only about Pearl Harbor. Like Pearl Harbor, 9/11 was just a calling card, an invitation to engage in a much bigger (world) problem. Like Pearl Harbor, 9/11 was not our first invitation to engage in what was fast becoming a world-wide threat. Like Pearl Harbor, it was an invitation we couldn’t afford to leave unanswered. “
““ We received an invitation to the war on terror as far back as 1979 in Tehran. We received several more invitations throughout the 80’s and 90’s. We were invited in no uncertain terms in 1993, when Bin Laden first attempted to level the World Trade Towers. We were invited again in 1995 by Hezbollah in Saudi Arabia and yet again by Bin Laden in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. We received yet another open invitation to join the war against international terrorism in October of 2000 with the bombing of the USS Cole, again, courtesy of Al Qaeda. Meanwhile, much of the free world was already engaged. We declined to answer any of these invitations… “
“ We were not just patient in ignoring these invitations – we were cowardly and short sighted. Only when the invitation reached the massive intensity of 9/11, with nearly 3000 innocent American men, women and children dead, our financial center, defense center and government center under attack all at once, were we ready to accept these invitations. “
“ A year before 9/11, the FBI had identified the New York Al Qaeda cell that would one year later, fly planes into the WTC, the Pentagon and even the White House, if not for the brave souls on Flight 93. But the Clinton administration looked at the threat as a “criminal” matter. That meant that the FBI and CIA could not share information concerning the New York cell and without proper warrants based on indisputable evidence, they did nothing… “
“ One year later, that cell killed almost 3000 American citizens with apparent ease and liberals still contend today, that the war on terror is a “criminal” matter. They insist that the terrorists have civil rights and that our courts, filled with frivolous law suits, is the place to deal with this threat. “
“ Despite numerous attacks and arrests all over the world, liberals still think that the war on international terrorism is limited to one man, Bin Laden, one network, Al Qaeda and one event, 9/11. Had we thought the same after Pearl Harbor, we would have leveled Japan and come home. Most of Europe would be speaking German and every Jew on earth would be baked to extinction. Most of the world would be living under communist rule and America would not be America today. ““
“ Yet the leftists in control of the once great Democratic Party fail to see reality. When they search for the enemy, they only see Bush. When they plot their military strategy, they only see defeat. When you ask them about terrorists, they think you are talking about American soldiers and when you ask for their victory plans, retreat is their answer. The retreat plan was tried in Vietnam and we are still trying to justify that decision today. “
“ Prior to the Clinton administration, dangerous regimes like that in North Korea, Syria, China and Iran, had the desire but not the means to strike terror world-wide. By the time the Clinton’s left office, both China and North Korea had long range nuclear warheads, Iran and Syria were working on it. But liberals will tell you that Bush made America less safe, answering the invitation and taking the fight to the enemy on their soil. Has there been another successful attack in the US that I am unaware of? Not that it can’t still happen. That’s really the point. It can still happen and if we don’t get more serious about winning this war, it will. “
“ The Hussein regime in Iraq had terrorized its citizens and neighbors throughout the 90’s, broken every UN resolution ever written and played cat and mouse with UN inspectors until Hussein finally got bold enough to just toss them from Iraq, telling both Clinton and the UN to shove it. But according to leftists, they had Hussein “contained”. Doing UN paper work I guess? “
““ Today, as we head into the 2006 mid-term elections, liberals remind us that they have changed their collective minds about none of this. They still think the world wide war against international terrorism is about one man, one terror network, one country, one event and one day. They still believe it is a criminal matter for our police and our courts and they still insist that America, more specifically Bush and our military, are the real terrorists. They still believe that Bush lied, that Iranian, Syrian and Arabian terrorists killing innocent Iraqi citizens are just “civil insurgents” and that the central front in the war on terror, is a departure from the war on terror. “
“ Now if you can sleep well at night with your families’ lives in the hands of people like this, God Bless! Knock yourself out at election time. Vote yourself more money from the federal trough of socialist handouts and let the chips fall where they may on national security. “
“ But if on the other hand, like me, you have something to lose, something worth fighting for, someone to pass this country on to in one piece, then pay attention… “
“ Clearly, liberals don’t get it. They don’t like Bush’s war because they can’t begin to comprehend the very real world wide threat that Bush decided to confront on September 12, 2001. They don’t get it because unlike the rest of us, they see more wrong than right with America and therefore, nothing worthy of defense. They won’t fight because they don’t know how and that limits their thinking to faux diplomacy via the most corrupt institution on earth, the United Nations. “
“ They fear Bush more than Bin Laden. They trust those European nations that profited by keeping the most brutal regime on earth in business while holding the UN and US hostage as the international terror threat gathered global strength and reach. They trust the UN more than the US and firmly believe that we can negotiate peace with Muslim extremists willing to strap bombs on the chests of their grade school children and send them into a pizza parlor. “
“ In short, liberals don’t know anything at all about real American values or principles today and they know even less about what it takes to protect and preserve those principles and values for future generations. Therefore, the idea that they can be entrusted with upholding, protecting, defending and preserving the very principles that they spend every day attacking, is insane. But if insanity is your thing…go for it! “
“ NO! They just don’t get it… any of it – and apparently, no matter the mountain of evidence before them, they never will. “
“ Those they have trained to be federal dependents will vote for them no matter what. Those who can’t tell the difference between an American soldier and a real terrorist will vote for them too. Those who can’t read a butterfly ballot will vote for them. So will those just released from prison and even those without a pulse. “
“ People who believe that Americas “bubble of supremacy” needs to be “burst”, like billionaire socialist and currency wrecker George Soros will fund them, as will Hollywood limousine liberals, New England ketchup queens and tree dwelling former draft-dodgers in the North West. “
“ And that’s why the rest of us better show up on Election Day… “
To the bet-welshing, lying coward called MTR:
1) Pay off the bet YOU LOST to Goldy!
2) A “moonbat” publication called The Economist otherwise know as the voice of global capitalism has just editorialized the following:
Mr Bush has got two years left in the job. He would like to be remembered as a straightshooter who did the right thing. Tackling climate change would be one way to do that.
Read it and take your chi-squared bullshit over there.
Thanks for the public service announcement Goldy. This is actually probably the most useful thing that’s appeared on your blog for a few months. I’m always looking to get some trigger time in.
Although you might want to change your accidental typo in your post. Should read “If you’ve ever felt the urge to shoot ALONGSIDE state Sen. Pam Roach…” or something of that meaning.
I hope Black Diamond has a Bolting Rabbit course (when they roll the clays along the ground to simulate a rabbit’s movement).
Reporterward @11,
Yeah… that’s it… a typo.
Global Warming denier Don Ward:
You might want to read that Economist editorial too. See comment 10.
Seems like the rightwing screech monkeys going to have to take over spreading the lies about the war on terr’r, since Disney is getting cold feet about doing it for them.
” Those they have trained to be federal dependents will vote for them no matter what. Those who can�t tell the difference between an American soldier and a real terrorist will vote for them too. Those who can�t read a butterfly ballot will vote for them. So will those just released from prison and even those without a pulse.” Commentby howcanyoubePROUDtobeanASS� 9/8/06@ 4:35 pm
===================
Bingo, look at the cities with the highest crime rates, lowest school test scores, and the most welfare mamas and they’re always the most solidly Dem. Dems are the party of felons, morons, and welfare mamas.
Just don’t take Pam’s flowers or she might go all Cheney on you.
I note from the picture that Pam doesn’t appear to be wearing ear protection. This may explain why she doesn’t seem to be listening most of the time–she probably can’t hear.
ArtFart @ 17
She has earplugs by the looks of it. The 25 cent small rubbery affairs that most gun ranges sell to folks who don’t bring their gun muffs.
Goldy @ 12
I figured it was an honest mistake…
Has anybody ever seen “howcanyoubePROUDtobeanEVILfuckingchristianistBITCH” and “Pam Roach” in the SAME ROOM???
Huh?
Well HUH?????????????????
Makes sense doesn’t it…
…same WINNING personality!
…same INCISIVE grasp of the ISSUES!
…same COMPASSION and UNDERSTANDING!
Got it, gang! Mystery SOLVED!
MTRollfuck @ 4:23pm,
well that one pretty much confirms what an economics genius you’ve turned out to be.
That’s some get-rich-quick scheme you’re laying on Cantwell. No wonder you Republicans always manage to fuck up the federal budget whenever you get control of it. You can’t even tell the difference between profit and loss.
…same affection for TURKEY BASTERS!
trollfuck @ 4:24pm
I thought Lieman’s whole shtick was about giving voters choices. Even Lieman is okay with with voter approved tax hikes.
So which non-voter-approved tax hike is Nickels responsible for?
“Democrats excel in the use of the politics of envy, hatred and division.” MTR @ 6
Lord, Mark, please share with us an example of how you reach out to those of us on the other side of the political fence. The Bushite strategy of “bipartisanship” goes like this: agree with us or you are (fill in the blank-your options are terrorist, Nazi, un-American, all of the above) ______. Democrats are lovers, Republicans are haters. That is an unfortunate division between us. But, man, I still believe in redemption, even for people like you.
See, here’s the Republican (karl Rve) playbook. Run a candidate who lies to the public to appear to be a “moral moderate.” Then start whispering campaigns to tar the Democrat as “corrupt” so that the candidate can say he’s not going negative. Maria’s sexual orientation or religiosity will be next.
Wow we’re being showered with conservative op-eds. You can now see the insular little world they inhabit. Where they’re alwasy right and the liberals are always evil, Iraq was a great idea and everything there is just peachy, Afghani
opium isschools are the best in the world, we fight them there so we don’t fight them here, and the terrorists don’t hate our imperialism and military domination, they hate our FREEDOM.The Rethug playbook is simpler than that.
Whatever your liabilities are, that’s what you go after in your opponent – only worse. If you fuck around, then you accuse your opponent of being a whoremonger. If you snort coke, then you accuse your opponent of dealing heroin to kids. That way, when the truth about your weaknesses emerges it melts into a backdrop of negativity that the voters are more likely to ignore.
“I don’t belong to an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.” – Will Rogers.
Commentby howcanyoubePROUD — 9/8/06@ 4:35 pm
Ok, you asked how I really feel, here it is.
“ The first thing liberals fail to understand is that war is a serious business. If you are not prepared to take a side, you had better not stand in the middle of the battle field. Sit it out and remain silent, because the minute you speak, you have taken a side, whether you meant to or not, and if you speak against your own, you have chosen the wrong side. This error in judgment among liberals has earned them the current title of un-American or even Al Qaeda sympathizer.”
Ah, but what conservatives fail to understand is that to disagree with the tactics of a battle is not the same as to disagree that the battle should be fought. While we on the left have a very few “moonbats” that think that anything America does is wrong, most liberals simply think that the tactics we are using are not just wrong, but are actually hurting our cause (stopping global terrorism). If we think that the current tactics are ineffective or worse, we would be criminally negligent if we did not object.
“We received an invitation to the war on terror as far back as 1979 in Tehran” (several other examples given)
And, contrary to the author’s contention, we answered all of them, in ways that were slowly building relationships and allies in that fight. Ramsey Yousev (spelling uncertain) is currently rotting in jail, other various terrorists are also in various other jails. Saddam Hussain, evil bastard that he was, was effectively frustrated and contained.
To make an analogy, if there are gang members terrorizing your street, you can run out the door swinging a baseball bat and try to chase them off – or – you can organize a neighborhood watch, meet the parents of the gang members and try to defuse the situation.
The first way might even work for a while, but not for long. It is far more emotionally satisfying than the second way, and gives an immediate feeling of accomplishment, but it doesn’t solve the problem. The gang members will be back, in greater force.
The second method is slow and frustrating. Some folks will stand up and say “why aren’t we DOING something?”, but it’s more likely to solve the problem.
“They fear Bush more than Bin Laden.”
In some ways, yes. Bin Laden only has the power to kill limited numbers of Americans. This is a terrible thing, but President Bush has the power to diminish our precious civil liberties for generations. Speaking only for myself here, “Give me liberty or give me death” is more than a phrase in the history books. It is the way I think. I put my tender pink skin on the line for many years to defend that liberty, and I’m not willing to give it up to gain some temporary security.
History teaches us that we are far more likely to lose that liberty to an internal threat than we are to some external enemy. The Germans, Spaniards, and Italians did not lose their liberty from some external enemy. Further back, the Russians and French did not lose their fledgling republics to external enemies. It was home-grown “leaders” that convinced the people to give up those precious liberties.
“In short, liberals don’t know anything at all about real American values or principles today”
Perhaps not. Perhaps security is more important than liberty to Americans today. I hope not, because if that is true, I really don’t understand the priorities of today’s America. Still, I’m not going down without a fight.
(Oh, and all the responses here are from yours truly.)
HOUSTON – More than 80 percent of Hurricane Katrina evacuees surveyed in the Houston area are unemployed one year after the storm forced them to flee New Orleans, according to a study released by Rice University on Friday. Sixty-six percent of the 362 evacuees surveyed had full- or part-time jobs before Hurricane Katrina battered the U.S. Gulf Coast on August 29, 2005, the study said. [………Perhaps these Democrat “unemployed homeless” might find jobs in Cape Cod, MASS, or the East Hamptons, NY. These are fine Democrat areas!!!]
Ok, you asked how I really feel, here it is.
And that, friend, is what I really think. -Commentby John Barelli— 9/8/06@ 6:55 pm
LOL John Barelli… I just knew you’d read that wrong…
I was actually commenting on the stridency and passion of the AUTHOR of the piece…
What the Left Never Will Understand About the War on Terror
Written by JB WilliamsJB… allllll those bold QUOTE marks…
Too funny.
I’ll go back and read PAST the 1st line of your ‘rebuttal’ now…
Fair enough John… you argue quite eloquently.
However, No one has yet been able to name one single liberty they have lost under the policies of President Bush.
Not one.
Ever.
Secondly, the terrorists that despise all of us, liberal and conservative, Christian and Jew, black, white, rich, poor, educated or uneducated would care even LESS for our civil liberties. Their goals are to destroy us or CONVERT us to their way of thinking. It seems to me forcing women to hide in burkas is far more ‘civil liberty’ diverting than monitoring overseas phone calls and banking records of terrorist supporters.
Personally, I will give them written PERMISSION to monitor my phone, email, banking transactions… whatever, if it would keep my children safe because I have nothing to hide. But I also find it totally unnecessary because, as I said, no one has yet been able to claim even one liberty they have lost.
Bin Ladens power is not his ability to pick off a few Americans at his pleasure.
His true power is the devisiveness he foments… successfully I might add.
His power is the fear of unknown terror.
His power is in convincing stupid little sheep that they will gain some otherworldly glory by sacrificing themselves now.
His power is convincing them their only worth can be claimed by their death in his name.
Talking to your neighborhood bullys is just grand.
But first you have to get their attention.
Granny with her baseball is attention getting.
And, contrary to the author’s contention, we answered all of them, in ways that were slowly building relationships and allies in that fight.
And the terror attack against America did not stop. How many Americans died at the hands of terrorists since all that talking began? Is there a magic number that indicates too many before giving up on talking?
Since we went to Afghanistan, since we went to Iraq, there has not been a terror attack against America.
Talk only “works” if the other guy listens, cares about what he hears and has something to lose if he doesn’t listen.
I’m glad those guys are in jail. However did you happen to catch that Hezbollah struck BECAUSE Israel had a couple of the Hezbollah guys in their jail?
Organized terror against a country is an act or WAR and must be responded to as such.
Do you know any Holocaust survivors? Have you ever met or known anyone with a Holocaust tatoo on their arm? Ask them how much solace they found when the Nazi’s were acquited, when the Nazi’s were given 20 years imprisonment, or even when the Nazi’s were given life. Ask them if that was solace enough for the purposeful butchering of their parents, their children, their siblings.
The Path to 9/11, Teddy the Sot style!
proudsweetASScheeks, if you came out of your cave more often you might have noticed that it was Israel striking because Hezbollah had 2 Israeli soldiers. Oops, I forgot that you are allergic to facts.
Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah has demanded the release of three Lebanese prisoners held by Israel. The prisoners include Samir Kantar, one of the seaborne PLO guerrillas who raided a house in the northern Israeli coastal town of Nahariya in 1979, took a man and his 5-year-old daughter hostage and then killed them. Israel did not provide details on the two other prisoners.
Palestinian Prisoners:
–Israel holds an estimated 9,000 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails. After Shalit’s capture, Israel also arrested 64 top Hamas officials in the West Bank, including eight Cabinet ministers and 20 lawmakers.
–The Hamas-linked militants holding Shalit originally demanded all Palestinian women and minors be released from Israeli jails, then increased their demands to include another 1,000 Arab prisoners.
I just want all you wingnuts to know that is your asses I will be laughing at in november when your tired, spent, petulant rants here are all you are left with in the election.
You COULD on the other hand actually try and do something intelligent like join the reality-based community… but no… there will be much mirth, at your expense.
Carry on.
How did that Merry Fitzmas work out for you? I’ll bet that BushCheneyRove gang looks good in prison stripes.
OOPS.
How did that “bellweather” CA 50 election work out for you? I bet Busby is working her buns off.
OOPS.
How did those Election 2004 exit polls work out for you? Pleased with President FiFi la Kerry?
OOPS.
The Path to 9/11 a la Clinton
“Glorified version– of a PELLET GUN,
Glorified version — of a PELLET GUN,
Glorified version — of a PELLET GUN,
Feels SO MANLY in MY HAND…” — Pearl Jam
We now know why so many conservatives crave guns!
Wow howcanyoubePROUDtobeanEVILfuckingchristianistBITCH has got her rethuglican talking points trading cards and her Dick Cheney secret decoder ring out and all shiny and clean.
What a good lilttle girl in her plaid jumper and mary janes..
Just waiting for creepy uncle dick to put his turkey baster in her pants.
How do you think she got to be “howcanyoubePROUDtobeanEVILfuckingchristianistBITCH”.
yes but rugrat, you never answered the questions, sweetcheeks…
How did that Merry Fitzmas work out for you?
How did that “bellweather” CA 50 election work out for you?
How did those Election 2004 exit polls work out for you?
How did that Alito filibuster work out for you?
How did that homo-marriage thing in the Supreme Court work out for you?
How did that Patriot Act thing work out for you?
how did that tax cut defeat work out for you?
oh, one last question…
how can you be such an immature moron and still live… I guess Michael Schiavo hasn’t taken your case yet, eh?
I have a question for you rugrat, since you seem to be such an expert in this particular area…
Do stupid people actually know they are dumb as goats? Or, do you think you’re at least as smart as your goat?
[/LMAO]
So, OK, I’ve been on the other tread because Pam “I’ll move anywhere there’s an open seat” Roach reples me. Let’s try a few points from over there.
Where’s the outrage over the Bush administration paving the path FROM 9/11 with lies? See the Senate report http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiinc.pdf
Where’s the outrage over the abandonment of the 9/11 first responders?
“Today it appears the public health approach to lingering environmental hazards remains unfocused and halting,” said Representative Christopher Shays, a Republican from Connecticut, and chairman of the House Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations, which held the hearing in Lower Manhattan, a block from ground zero. “The unquestionable need for long-term monitoring has been met with only short term commitments.”
Where’s the outrage over the Ted “when the money goes to my folks” Stevens earmarks?
It is abundantly clear power is more important to the Republican party thay principle.
“I don’t belong to an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.” – Will Rogers.
Commentby howcanyoubePROUD — 9/8/06@ 8:28 pm
However, No one has yet been able to name one single liberty they have lost under the policies of President Bush.
Not one.
Ever.
How about three for starters
Amendment VI – In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....ge=printer
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
http://www.veteransforpeace.or.....020704.htm
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....EDMKC1.DTL
And just to add to the pile, we have two US citizens, charged with no crime, refused entry into the United States
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....6/LODI.TMP
In all of these cases, you could argue necessity. The government needed to violate these US citizen’s rights in order to protect us. After all, neither of us is Muslim, or look Arabic. The only war protest I’ve attended, no records were kept. One person who was taking pictures for his website was asked politely to desist. It was a candlelight prayer vigil for peace.
I will not give them permission to listen to my phone calls, even though I say nothing that would be of interest to them.
I will not give them permission to read my private papers, even though they would find them to be excruciatingly dull reading.
I will not give them permission to enter my home, even though there is nothing hidden there.
I will not give them permission to question me, even though I do not fear the answers.
I am a free citizen of the United States of America. My government works for me, and answers to me. Not the other way around. That is the most basic freedom inherent in the Constitution, and I will not give it up. Not for a little security, not for my own life or the lives of my family.
Too many have died to give us that freedom.
It is tempting to say that these are lofty ideals, but we’re talking about real dangers here.
I know that the danger is real, perhaps better than most. I’ve walked the streets of Kuwait City.
I’ve also been to countries where the liberties we take for granted are absent. Some of these countries are even nice places to visit. Clean, safe, secure, even happy.
Watch what you say there. Be careful what reading material you bring along. Check your jewelry for forbidden symbols.
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
Lies and lying liars. As Atrios would say, time for another blogger ethics panel.
I am now beginning to understand why the Democrats are so hysterical about “The Pathway to 9/11” after reading the following interview on “Hardball”.
You really have to wonder how much longer these people can keep the american public from the truth…..
O‘DONNELL: Welcome back. We‘re coming up on the four-year anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. And there is new information that they could have been prevented. An upcoming four-hour miniseries on the National Geographic Channel takes an in-depth look. And in this excerpt, we hear the voice of lead hijacker Mohammed Atta talking to passengers aboard American Airlines Flight 11.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MOHAMMED ATTA, 9/11 HIJACKER: Nobody move. Everything will be OK. If you try to make any move, you‘ll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: That is very spooky. Michael Scheuer left the CIA in 2004 after 22 years with the agency. He was the CIA‘s man in charge of tracking Osama bin Laden and what he was up to. And he warned the CIA director that our country faced an imminent threat from Osama bin Laden.
Michael, what can you tell us about these newly declassified memos from July and August of 1996, that the Clinton State Department knew that Osama bin Laden had the wherewithal to attack the United States?
MICHAEL SCHEUER, FORMER CIA TERRORISM ANALYST: Well, it was very much common knowledge across the intelligence community that if—once Osama bin Laden moved from Sudan to Afghanistan, that he would be much freer to operate. There was no government in Afghanistan, it was a free range sort of territory.
From the CIA‘s perspective, it was the best possible place for him to go because we could operate there more freely. And we thought for sure we would be able to provide the government with chances to capture or kill him. As it turned.
O‘DONNELL: But many people have made the impression that something in the Bush administration was done wrong. But there‘s evidence that the Clinton administration knew full well that bin Laden had the wherewithal and was planning to attack the United States. Who is to blame and did the president, Clinton, get this information?
SCHEUER: Certainly the president got the information. And most certainly his closest adviser, Sandy Berger and Mr. Clarke—Richard Clarke, had the information from 1996 forward that bin Laden intended to attack the United States. There‘s no question of that. And in terms of which administration had more chances, Mr. Clinton‘s administration had far more chances to kill Osama bin Laden than Mr. Bush has until this day.
O‘DONNELL: That‘s very interesting. I don‘t think that many Americans know that or think that everything that they‘ve heard—you‘ve spent your life tracking Osama bin Laden. From what we know now and what you know, how many missed opportunities were there to prevent the 9/11 attacks?
SCHEUER: Well, we had—the question of whether or not we could have prevented the attacks is one you could debate forever. But we had at least eight to 10 chances to capture or kill Osama bin Laden in 1998 and 1999. And the government on all occasions decided that the information was not good enough to act.
O‘DONNELL: What—who then is to blame? I think the American people want to know, then, who then is to blame for this?
SCHEUER: It can only be the policy-makers and the elected officials. The CIA provides the intelligence, the actual decision to act using military force or using.
O‘DONNELL: So what you‘re saying is that when you ran the bin Laden desk, you knew where bin Laden was. You knew that bin Laden was trying to attack the United States. You knew that bin Laden had the wherewithal and that the policy-makers in the Clinton administration and then the Bush administration did not heed your warnings?
SCHEUER: Not my warnings. I hate to make myself the center of anything, ma‘am. But the intelligence community as a whole had warned the administration repeatedly. And I think there‘s no lack of record of that. It just—the 9/11 Commission failed to find anyone responsible for anything. The CIA can‘t order an attack. Only the National Security Council and the president can order an attack.
O‘DONNELL: Let me ask you what you know about what we‘ve read recently about a secret military operation known as Able Danger. There are people involved in that that say that the United States knew about Mohammed Atta a year before the 9/11 attacks. Is that true? And was there a massive failure by our government?
SCHEUER: I don‘t know firsthand information about Able Danger, ma‘am, but from what I‘ve read in the media, that the lawyers prevented them from passing the information to the FBI, that certainly rings true. The U.S. intelligence community is palsied by lawyers.
When we were going to capture Osama bin Laden, for example, the lawyers were more concerned with bin Laden‘s safety and his comfort than they were with the officers charged with capturing him. We had to build an ergonomically designed chair to put him in, special comfort in terms of how he was shackled into the chair. They even worried about what kind of tape to gag him with so it wouldn‘t irritate his beard. The lawyers are the bane of the intelligence community.
O‘DONNELL: Let me ask you, because you spent 22 years tracking Osama bin Laden, he is still at large, we are fighting an insurgency in Iraq where there are allies of Osama bin Laden, what threat do you think bin Laden poses to the United States now?
SCHEUER: Well, at first—I only tracked him for the last 10 years, ma‘am. I tracked him for as long as the U.S. government has been tracking him. He‘s an existential threat, as they say, to the United States. He can detonate probably a weapon of mass destruction inside of the United States, be it a suitcase nuclear weapon or a chemical or biological weapon. And we‘ve done really very little to stop him from proceeding along that course.
O‘DONNELL: Do you think that he is in Afghanistan?
SCHEUER: I think he is along the border. I think the general judgment that he is on the Pak-Afghan border hiding or at least living is very accurate. He is very comfortable there. He is protected by the tribes that live on the border. And the one thing we would hate to say but it is perfectly true is that he is the most important leader and hero in the Muslim world today. There are very few Muslims who would ever think of turning him over to the Americans.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9005619/
Here’s another report that would never see the light of day if Dems had their way….
Clinton aide says 9/11 film ‘correct’
Producer consulted with military attaché
who saw aborted attacks on bin Laden
Posted: September 8, 2006
3:33 p.m. Eastern
By Art Moore
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Buzz Patterson with President Clinton
A former military aide to President Clinton who claims he witnessed several missed opportunities to capture or kill Osama bin Laden says the producer of the ABC mini-series “The Path to 9/11” came to him in frustration after network executives under a heavy barrage of criticism from former administration officials began pressing for changes to the script.
In an interview with WND, retired Air Force Lt. Col. Robert “Buzz” Patterson said producer and writer Cyrus Nowrasteh called him the morning of Sept. 1, explaining he had used Patterson’s book “Dereliction of Duty” as a source for the drama.
Later that day, Nowrasteh brought a preview copy of “The Path to 9/11” to Patterson for him to view at home. Patterson, who says he has talked with the director seven or eight times since then, also received a phone call from an ABC senior vice president, Quinn Taylor.
Patterson told WND he recognizes the television production conflates several events, but, in terms of conveying how the Clinton administration handled its opportunities to get bin Laden, it’s “100 percent factually correct,” he said.
“I was there with Clinton and (National Security Adviser Sandy) Berger and watched the missed opportunities occur,” Patterson declared.
The five-hour drama is scheduled to air in two parts, Sunday night and Monday night, Sept. 11.
As a military aide to President Clinton from 1996 to 1998, Patterson was one of five men entrusted with carrying the “nuclear football,” which contains the codes for launching nuclear weapons.
Reached by phone at his home in Southern California, Nowrasteh affirmed to WND he consulted with Patterson and gave him a preview of the drama.
Lt. Col. Robert “Buzz” Patterson (FrontPageMagazine.com)
During the interview this morning, Nowrasteh took a moment to watch as President Clinton’s image turned up on his nearby TV screen to criticize the movie. The director did not want to respond directly to Clinton’s comments, but offered a general response to critics.
“Everybody’s got to calm down and watch the movie,” Nowrasteh told WND. “This is not an indictment of one president or another. The villains are the terrorists. This is a clarion bell for people to wake up and take notice.”
Patterson pointed out the Bush administration also is depicted in an unfavorable light in the months before 9/11.
An ABC executive who requested anonymity told the Washington Post the network has made “adjustments and refinements” to the drama that are “intended to make clearer that it was general indecisiveness” by federal officials that left the U.S. vulnerable to attack, and “not any one individual.”
Yesterday, the New York Post reported Clinton wrote to ABC officials, complaining the “content of this drama is factually and incontrovertibly inaccurate and ABC has the duty to fully correct all errors or pull the drama entirely.” Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, according to the Washington Post, has described a scene, in which she is depicted, as “false and defamatory.”
The Senate Democratic Leadership sent a letter to Robert Iger – president and CEO of ABC’s corporate parent, the Walt Disney Co. – urging him to cancel the “grossly inaccurate” drama.
The Democratic National Committee today said it delivered a petition with nearly 200,000 signatures to ABC’s Washington office calling on the network to drop its “right-wing factually inaccurate mocudrama.”
Democrats have been particularly critical of a scene that depicts Berger refusing to authorize a mission to capture bin Laden after CIA operatives and Afghan fighters had the al-Qaida leader in their sights.
Nowrasteh acknowledges this is a “conflation of events,” but Berger, in a letter to Iger, said “no such episode ever occurred, nor did anything like it.”
Patterson contended, however, the scene is similar to a plan the administration had with the CIA and the Afghan Northern Alliance to snatch bin Laden from a camp in Afghanistan.
The scene in “The Path to 9/11,” as Patterson recalled from the preview version, unfolds with CIA operatives at the camp on the phone with Berger, who is expressing concern that an attack could result in innocent bystanders being killed. An agent says he sees swing sets and children’s toys in the area. The scene ends with Berger hanging up the phone.
Patterson says his recollection is that Clinton was involved directly in several similar incidents in which Berger was pressing the president for a decision.
“Berger was very agitated, he couldn’t get a decision from the president,” Patterson said.
Patterson noted he wasn’t sure what Berger wanted to do – whether the national security adviser wanted the answer to be yes or no – but the frustration, at the very least, was based on the president making himself unavailable to make a decision.
In “Dereliction of Duty,” published by Regnery in 2003, Patterson recounts an event in the situation room of the White House in which Berger was told by a military watch officer, “Sir, we’ve located bin Laden. We have a two-hour window to strike.”
Clinton, according to Patterson, did not return phone calls from Berger for more than an hour then said he wanted more time to study the situation.
Patterson writes: “We ‘studied’ the issues until it was too late-the window of opportunity closed.”
Harvey Keitel plays counter-terrorism expert John O’Neill in ABC’s “The Path to 9/11
In another “missed opportunity,” Patterson writes, Clinton was watching a golf tournament when Berger placed an urgent call to the president. Clinton became irritated when Patterson approached him with the message. After the third attempt, Clinton coolly responded he would call Berger on his way back to the White House. By then, however, according to Patterson, the opportunity was lost.
As WND reported, Berger was the focus of a Justice Department investigation for removing highly classified terrorism documents before the Sept. 11 Commission hearings that generated the report used for the television program.
FBI agents searched Berger’s home and office after he voluntarily returned some documents to the National Archives.
Berger and his lawyer told reporters he knowingly removed handwritten notes he made while reading classified anti-terror documents at the archives by sticking them in his clothing. They said he also inadvertently took copies of actual classified documents in a leather portfolio.
Patterson said Berger’s response to the “The Path to 9/11” is similar to his response to the accounts in “Dereliction of Duty,” insisting the incidents attributed to him “never occurred.”
Patterson said his book put him under intense pressure from Clinton officials – an aide even spoke of taking away his military retirement benefits – but when the title reached No. 1 on Amazon.com, “they shut up.”
There are others who can corroborate his accounts, Patterson insisted, but they are still in military service and therefore legally bound not to come forward and make statements.
Three of the four other military aides who rotated being at the president’s side were additional sources for his book, Patterson affirmed.
If ABC ends up pulling “The Path to 9/11,” it won’t be the first time Democrats have succeeded in pressuring a network not to air a politically charged film during a major election season.
During the 2004 presidential campaign, as WND reported, the Sinclair Broadcast Group canceled a planned showing of “Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal.” The documentary featured former POWs who told how John Kerry’s 1971 testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was used as propaganda against them by their North Vietnamese captors, allegedly intensifying their persecution and prolonging the war and imprisonment.
http://www.wnd.com/news/articl.....E_ID=51898
Ha! “Buzz” Patterson and Wingnut Daily. Excellent sources.
As you can see in #50, the movie misrepresents the 9/11 commission report. Even Sean Hannity broadcast Bill Clinton explaining that we never had good enough intel to guarantee getting bin Laden. We could have killed hundreds of people, with a less than 50-50 shot at bin Laden. The reason we did is that we’re not monsters.
Even conservatives are abandoning the mini-series. Only a few dead-enders and ABC are left defending it.
Commentby jaybo— 9/9/06@ 9:23 am
Here’s another report that would never see the light of day if Dems had their way….
Clinton aide says 9/11 film ‘correct’
Producer consulted with military attaché
who saw aborted attacks on bin Laden
Posted: September 8, 2006
3:33 p.m. Eastern
Is that the same “Buzz Patterson” that wrote a “tell-all” book about the Clinton administration “Dereliction of Duty: The Eyewitness Account of How Bill Clinton Compromised America’s National Security” that was reviewed by Publishers Weekly saying “Patterson’s rendition is too anecdotal and brief, as well as too disgruntled – offended, even – to convince many.”?
Mr. Patterson is currently is promoting his new book “The Left’s Campaign to Destroy Our Military and Lose the War on Terror”, which is sure to make the top of Ann Coulter’s required reading list.
Oh, yeah. There is a real, unbiased witness to events. He’s got no axe to grind here, and no reason to get on TV and
lie through his teethgive his unvarnished and absolutely accurate version of events.(Got the HTML right, but missed cleaning up my phrasing. – I’d really like a “preview” function.)
Barelli,
I noticed that you danced right by O’Donnel’s interview.
What’s wrong, can’t find any way to smear a fellow lib?
jaybo, who do you think is the liberal in that interview?
I have found it!
The DEFINITIVE article most accurately describing the male LIBERAL mindset.
My God! It’s eerie the way the La Goldies pink parade of femimen LIVE this guys philosophy. Please, please, please, …KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!
The High Cost of Manliness
By Robert Jensen, AlterNet. Posted September 8, 2006.
Excerpts:
“ So, guys, I have an idea — maybe it’s time we stop trying. Maybe this masculinity thing is a bad deal, not just for women but for us. “
“ We need to get rid of the whole idea of masculinity. It’s time to abandon the claim that there are certain psychological or social traits that inherently come with being biologically male. If we can get past that, we have a chance to create a better world for men and women. “
“ I don’t think the planet can long survive if the current conception of masculinity endures. We face political and ecological challenges that can’t be met with this old model of what it means to be a man. At the more intimate level, the stakes are just as high. For those of us who are biologically male, we have a simple choice: We men can settle for being men, or we can strive to be human beings. “
My God, this nutburger is lamenting his biological ‘maleness’.
No wonder people attribute ‘cojones’ to Hitlary, queen chrissy and mariacantwalkandthinkwell… their “men” {/snicker} prefer not to have them at all!
{/LMAO}
Laughter is the single best stress reliever known… and you libs are the best providers of it! Thanks. I will be laughing all day!
jaybo- so what to you have to say about the Senate Intelligence committee report?
And look…. this little gal describes (laments?)la goldie and her pink parade of femimen PERFECTLY:
“ Welcome to the new breed of healthy young men who rate sex way beneath their other appetites. In this brave new world, girls are a pain, a disappointment, and rather dangerous to the soul. Self-preserving boys would rather be satisfied with a brew and bit of beef than an erotic tide of reckless passion. “
So let’s see if we can YET make sense of these liberal nutburgers… the liberal “men” lament being men and the cojone laden liberal women lament “men” with out them… of course she blames it on the environment…
“ The most alarming possibility as to why cocks are sagging is that something poisonous is in our water — or our air, or our food — you take your pick. “
She asks…
“ There’s an unhappy host of young men who seem to have soured on the mating game — but why? “
Um, because you ‘girls’ have been EMASCULATING THEM since you decided your bra was optional and learned makes good kindling???
{/LMAO}
Laughter is the single best stress reliever known… and you libs are the best providers of it! Thanks. I will be laughing all day! … x2!
MANLY
“MEN”
and
LIBERAL
HEROES
PAST
and
FUTURE!
MANLY
“MEN”
and
LIBERAL
HEROES
PAST
and
FUTURE!
Urging people to shoot State Senator, how mean spirited. Perhaps the Washington State Patrol needs to visit you Goldstein. That sounds like you are threatening her.
“I don’t belong to an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.” – Will Rogers.
Commentby jaybo— 9/9/06@ 10:12 am
“I noticed that you danced right by O’Donnel’s interview.”
I’m not exactly sure what you’re talking about here. My comment was not about the O’Donnel interview, but about the report from a “former military aide to President Clinton” that somehow failed to mention that he has already written one book critical of President Clinton, and is currently promoting a second one.
That doesn’t make his statements automatically false, but the failure to mention that does make them highly suspect.
Are there any corroborating witnesses? We have one person, who apparently has a rather large axe to grind, and who has a financial interest in making President Clinton look bad as the “witness” to these events.
There were also other military officers, senior CIA personnel and others supposedly present. You’ll note that I’m not counting the principles themselves or other political types, who would also be somewhat suspect as witnesses.
As to the quote from Publishers Weekly, I remember reading it in another venue and checked it myself before using it. The fact that LtCol Patterson wrote his book is common knowledge, but you are welcome to check that on either Amazon or Barnes & Noble’s websites, along with the pre-sale offers on his next book.
However, since you seem to want me to comment on the O’Donnel interview, I will.
First, I notice that Mr. Schuer does not corroborate LtCol Patterson’s version of events.
He does note that the Clinton administration had reports about Bin Laden, and decided that the information was not reliable enough to actually use deadly force, an opinion that he does not apparently share.
It also seems that Mr. O’Donnel tried rather hard to put words in Mr. Schuer’s mouth regarding the whole affair and, despite the fact that Mr. Schuer was rather frustrated by the response from the Clinton administration, the worst condemnation he can extract was “the government on all occasions decided that the information was not good enough to act.”
If you want someone to flatly say that the Clinton administration was the greatest thing since sliced bread and that President Clinton will be remembered as the greatest President since Lincoln, you’ll have to talk to someone else. The best I’ll say about him is that he was better than his predecessor. I’ll also say that his predecessor was better than our current president. Sorry, JayBo. I don’t parrot anyone, and frankly I was not the biggest fan of President Clinton.
(Oddly enough, the last President I really liked was a Republican, President Ford, who, even though he’s over 90, I’d take him over all of the Republicans and most of the Democrats running.)