Date:

07/01/03

Time:

04:43 AM

Comments

Threatening Matilda with divine damnation is the funniest thing i've read here in a while. Can't you comprehend satire and ridicule youngster? Obviously not. While Matilda tries to alert people to the dangers of the Bush administration, who kill and lie and destroy the fragile environment, what are you doing? She is being a responsible human being and that is what really bugs you people, isn't it, the threat of a good example makes you shake in your shiny shoes.

Signed, Matilda's Hammer

Date:

07/01/03

Time:

04:54 AM

Comments

Oh please!!!!! It isn't the liberals who mix politics and religion. Where have you been? On the moon? Do you know who John Ashcroft is? Did you know that Bush gets his war orders DIRECTLY from the mouth of GOD?????!!!!!

Date:

07/01/03

Time:

07:09 AM

Comments

Hammer, please read the 6/28 post above regarding the latest EPA report. The "fragile environment" is in better shape now, during the Bush presidency.

The "dangers" (of the Bush administration, who kill and lie and destroy the fragile environment) are in the eye of the beholder.

PN

Date:

07/01/03

Time:

07:59 AM

Comments

Oh really, George the Liar is actually George the Green? How about some sources? Do you believe in evidence? Surely you know that the New York Times reported that Bush had forced the EPA to remove the bad stuff in the EPA report? Are you open to evidence or do you just spout opinions with nothing factual to back them up? The latter I believe.

Signed, Matilda's Hammer

Try this article, with the following quotes: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0625-08.htm

"The administration must be held to account for its stewardship of the environment. This document provides disturbing evidence of the administration’s readiness to reject or spin scientific findings on crucial environmental issues that do not suit the White House’s political agenda."

Mark Van Putten, president of the National Wildlife Federation

"The White House’s unwillingness to include all data undermines the report’s conclusions, said Greg Wetstone, director of advocacy for the Natural Resources Defense Council. “It is notable for what is not there,” Wetstone told ENS.

“There is a section on global issues that does not say a word about the most important or serious challenge we have ever faced--global warming. That detracts from credibility of the whole effort,” Wetstone said.

“It doesn’t deal with the real environmental problems. The pattern here is to ignore science, ignore law, and ignore public opinion,” he said. “It goes where the worst elements of corporate America want to go.”

Or try this recent article: http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0628-04.htm

"It was revealed recently that the ruling Republicans have shaped scientific research so that its conclusions serve the highest bidder, in this case the petroleum industry and its cohorts. The New York Times reported that the Environmental Protection Agency, which supervises US policy and practice on interactions with the natural world, succumbed to political pressure by eliminating the sentence, ‘‘Climate change has global consequences for human health and the environment,” from its draft report on the current state of the environment. Gone too was mention of a recent study documenting the rapid rise in global temperatures in the past decade. Instead, as the Times reported, two external agencies, the Council on Environmental Quality and the Office of Management and Budget, inserted a reference to another report that questioned the rise in temperatures – a report scarcely impartial, since part of its funding came from the American Petroleum Institute."

Try learning about the environmental disaster Bush left behind in Texas:

http://www.commondreams.org/news2001/0413-04.htm

"The 'compassionate conservative' has really turned out to be the 'Toxic Texan,'" said Andrea Durbin, Greenpeace Campaigns Director. "Since taking office, Bush has set a blistering pace in undermining efforts to stop global warming, improve our drinking water and protect public lands from oil development. No Earth Day spin will hide the damage he’s already done."

This action comes just days before Greenpeace holds the first "Take Back the Earth Day" on Wednesday, April 18, when Americans will rally against Bush’s anti-environmental policies in Washington, D.C. In a matter of weeks the President has rolled back decades of environmental gains. Among the environmental assaults he has already delivered:

Withdrawing U.S. support of the global warming agreement, known as the Kyoto Protocol; Relaxing drinking water standards; Supporting oil drilling in the Arctic Refuge and other public lands; Reducing forest protections; Slashing budgets for environmental protection; and Weakening the Endangered Species Act.

Texas environmental groups, including Public Citizen of Texas, the Texas SEED Coalition, Texas Campaign for the Environment and the Texas field office of U.S. PIRG, joined Greenpeace today in a joint letter (pdf file) delivered to Bush. The letter states: "We are writing to express our outrage over your Administration’s aggressive attack on the environment." It goes on to say: "The stances of your Administration, both current and in Texas, has been to back the interests of polluters, especially the oil, mining and timber interests."

"Bush thinks by making a pro-environmental announcement on Earth Day and planting a tree he’s compassionate about the environment," added Durbin. "The problem is his administration plans to trash the earth the other 364 days. From the state of Texas to nationwide to globally, the President must protect the people, not the polluters

Date:

07/01/03

Time:

08:36 AM

Comments

Ministers knew war papers were forged, says diplomat US official who identified documents incriminating Iraq as fakes says Britain must have been aware of findings By Andrew Buncombe in Washington and Raymond Whitaker in London 29 June 2003

A high-ranking American official who investigated claims for the CIA that Iraq was seeking uranium to restart its nuclear programme last night accused Britain and the US of deliberately ignoring his findings to make the case for war against Saddam Hussein.

Date:

07/01/03

Time:

09:42 AM

Comments

Matilda's Hammer (MH): I have no power to threaten damnation. I don't think anything Matilda does is satire. I do see the liberals on this page show nothing but hate for everything Republican.

I was only pointing out that if I had already lived longer than the normal life expectancy I would think about what I will be doing for eternity if I backed killing unborn children and lived with such hatred for anyone.

Is it satire you brought up the New York Times ("Surely you know that the New York Times reported that Bush had forced the EPA to remove the bad stuff in the EPA report")?

They have been proven to be anti Bush and liars.

Date:

07/01/03

Time:

03:25 PM

Comments

Six more American young men dead because of Bush's lies. Bush doesn't care, he's doing his job for the oil companies. Remember Bush went AWOL during HIS military service.

Bush allows U.S. soldiers to die for oil every day. Matilda is trying to bring those soldiers home to their family. Hooray Matilda!

Compare what you read here with what is currently reported in the mainstream media.

Signed: Matilda's Hammer

Go here:http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2003-07/01/article03.shtml

BAGHDAD, July 1 (IslamOnline.net & News Agencies) – Few hours after an American helicopter gunship reportedly bombed a mosque in Fallujah killing ten Iraqis, six U.S. soldiers were killed and four others injured in two separate attacks in central and southern Baghdad on Tuesday, June 1.

Date:

07/01/03

Time:

05:34 PM

Comments

Excuse me, We invaded Iraq because they didn't comply with UN Sanctions after 12 YEARS!

US soldiers have been killed ridding an oppressed country of a murdering dictator who would do everything in his power to hurt the US (reminds me of the liberals on this page).

A few of his followers will fight to the death against the US (like liberals here) and those are the ones that are being killed.

BTW, many, many more people die of smoking everyday than die in Iraq. Why don't you liberals do something worthwhile and fight to ban smoking? Oh, I forget, you'd lose votes.

Date:

07/01/03

Time:

07:34 PM

Comments

More on the Bush said God told him to go to war. You liberals will use anything to try and derail bush. Have you no shame?

Here is a quote to show how desparate you are and then the link to the whole article. (they are talking about the quote attributed to Bush about God telling him to go to war)

"remember that you are reading a translation of a translation of a translation. Mahmoud Abas does not speak English. Bush does not speak Arabic. If Bush said these words, or something like them, Abas heard them from a translator. Then Abas repeated them, as he remembered them a couple of weeks later, in Arabic. Some unknown person wrote down what he thought he heard Abas say. Then Regular, or someone at Ha'aretz, translated them back into English-or perhaps first into Hebrew and then into English."

http://commondreams.org/views03/0630-04.htm

Date:

07/01/03

Time:

10:42 PM

Comments

Hammer, since you call him "bush the liar", should we assume you are a fervent adorer of "Bill Clinton the truthfull" or "Honest Hillary"? That would explain a lot.

For references, since you could not find it yourself, here is the URL for the Environmental Indicators Initiative from the EPA. It took me all of three minutes to track it down. http://www.epa.gov/indicators/

In case you have trouble following links, here is the actual Draft Report on the Environment. http://www.epa.gov/indicators/roe/index.htm

Say what you want, America IS greener now than in the past, and G. Bush Is president.

Here is documentation on the EPA warning of a rise in global heartwarming. Start making your placards, gather all your friends and take to the streets to stop this menace

http://www.theonion.com/onion3413/globalheartwarming.html

Let's at least have some fun.

PN

Date:

07/02/03

Time:

04:31 AM

Comments

Cost of the war in Iraq:

If anyone hasn't checked this out, please do so. It can't be cut and pasted, so please go to the link.

http://www.costofwar.com/

Date:

07/02/03

Time:

05:30 AM

Comments

Kellogg Brown Root was awarded control of Iraq's oil fields ahead of the war under a no-bid contract. After the war, the Pentagon itself awarded the giant MCI a $45m deal to build a mobile telecoms system - despite the involvement of MCI, as WorldCom, in the biggest corporate fraud in business history.

Date:

07/02/03

Time:

06:59 AM

Comments

Re: the cost of the war in Iraq ...

Gee, what might have been the cost to us had we NOT gone to war with Saddam? Hmmm. 9/11 redux?

Does the poster have any idea as to the cost of maintaining the "no-fly zones" over Iraq for the previous twelve years? Or what the prosepective costs for same had we not finished the job?

Of course the cost/benefit to the Iraqis is of no interest to the poster. Folks in France like to cluck-cluck over the bad Americans while ignoring real horrors (like their favorite pastime, killing jews).

Date:

07/02/03

Time:

07:01 AM

Comments

Re: "Kellogg Brown Root was awarded control of Iraq's oil fields ahead of the war under a no-bid contract. After the war, the Pentagon itself awarded the giant MCI a $45m deal to build a mobile telecoms system - despite the involvement of MCI, as WorldCom, in the biggest corporate fraud in business history. "

And?

Date:

07/02/03

Time:

07:20 AM

Comments

"No votes, no inspections, no proof or lack of proof -- in fact, no earthly reason whatsoever -- could have stopped Bush's aggressive war on Iraq. It was God's unalterable will: the Lord of Hosts gave a direct order for George W. Bush to "strike at Saddam."

http://www.tmtmetropolis.ru/stories/2003/06/27/120.html

Date:

07/02/03

Time:

11:51 AM

Comments

"Gee, what might have been the cost to us had we NOT gone to war with Saddam? Hmmm. 9/11 redux?"

There is no evidence of a link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11, just the lies you choose to believe because of your own unwillingness to challenge power.

"Does the poster have any idea as to the cost of maintaining the "no-fly zones" over Iraq for the previous twelve years? Or what the prosepective costs for same had we not finished the job?"

Patrolling the 'no-fly' zones was illegal under international law. During that time hundreds of innocent Iraqi people were killed by US bombs, that was the main human cost. The job you talk of finishing is the illegal invasion of another country and mass murder of innocent civilians and poor conscripts.

"Of course the cost/benefit to the Iraqis is of no interest to the poster. Folks in France like to cluck-cluck over the bad Americans while ignoring real horrors (like their favorite pastime, killing jews)."

It is you who show no interest in other human beings. Your logic is the logic of the Nazi, might makes right, might makes me good and him bad, and for you, supporting power makes me feel like a brave person. Actually people like you who blindly support power, the power of the boot on poor people's necks, are moral cowards who dare not question the bully. Makes you afraid doesn't it? I'm sure it's not your kids over there killing civilians and getting ambushed by a resistance movement, now is it? Repeating the words of power is at the heart of the Nazi mentality. Follower you are, and base coward.

Signed: Matilda's Hammer

Date:

07/02/03

Time:

06:28 PM

Comments

Re: No votes, no inspections, no proof or lack of proof -- in fact, no earthly reason whatsoever -- could have stopped Bush's aggressive war on Iraq. It was God's unalterable will: the Lord of Hosts gave a direct order for George W. Bush to "strike at Saddam."

This is tiring, that quote was taken from a translation of a translation of a translation. Mahmoud Abas does not speak English. Bush does not speak Arabic. If Bush said these words, or something like them, Abas heard them from a translator. Then Abas repeated them, as he remembered them a couple of weeks later, in Arabic. Some unknown person wrote down what he thought he heard Abas say. Then Regular, or someone at Ha'aretz, translated them back into English-or perhaps first into Hebrew and then into English."

and

Re: the horrible Kellogg Brown Root $42 Million contract. Check out:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32190

Guess Dianne Feinstein's husband getting awarded a $600 Million contract in Iraq is ok.

Two faced, simpleton Democrats.

Date:

07/03/03

Time:

02:24 PM

Comments

Someone calling himself Hammer!! You get an A for ego. I bet you are the kind of person who demands you mate call you "Rocky" behind closed doors, regardless of your sex and orientation. You are probably more like a rubber mallet with a broken handle.

Date:

07/03/03

Time:

04:07 PM

Comments

The really fun thing about morons like the self-styled "Matilda's Hammer" (I think of him as "Matilda's Hummer") is the certainty of his angst and dismay when he reads the election returns a little over a year from now.

Guys like him (her?) don't want to know the truth -- all they can do is live in their alternate universe. The truth is the Democrat party ran out of ideas a couple of decades ago and their sole reason for existance has been the perpetuation of themselves. Perhaps the next election will force them to take stock and perhaps we'll see some vibrance return to our political system.

Date:

07/03/03

Time:

10:27 PM

Comments

MH: “There is no evidence of a link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11, just the lies you choose to believe because of your own unwillingness to challenge power. “ Ahhh … where to begin. Let’s start with the assertion that there’s “no evidence” of a link. I assume you live in France with Matilda and so can blithely demand absolute and irrefutable proofs from your betters before you’ll believe anything. We in America have learned (again) that the best way to deal with nuts who would do you harm is to kill them. Every last one. Or, at least to take their toys away. So I applaud GWB for taking the sensible steps and being “better safe than sorry”. MH, of course, would rather see millions of Iraqis murdered by the baths than see a few thousand murderers given their just deserts. As to the last of MH’s comment – “unwillingness to challenge power”. This, I think is the heart of MH’s problem – he’s a garden variety anarchist. He likes to live in the West and loves to criticize it. I suggest that MH spend a few years in the PRK to better appreciate the freedoms we enjoy in the US of A. "Does the poster have any idea as to the cost of maintaining the "no-fly zones" over Iraq for the previous twelve years? Or what the prospective costs for same had we not finished the job?" MH: “Patrolling the 'no-fly' zones was illegal under international law. During that time hundreds of innocent Iraqi people were killed by US bombs, that was the main human cost. The job you talk of finishing is the illegal invasion of another country and mass murder of innocent civilians and poor conscripts.” Illegal? International Law? Don’t let the facts tread upon your fantasies. The no-fly zones were agreed upon by Iraq and embodied in the cease fire accords at the end of Gulf War I. They were the subject of several of the twelve UN Security Council resolutions against Iraq in the intervening years between GW I and GW II. Human cost? I guess you don’t count the millions of Iraqi’s (mostly Shia) killed by the baath’s and the millions more that would have been tortured and killed had we not deposed that tyrant. OBTW, where’s your outrage over the bombing of Belgrade by Big Bill Clinton? Oh, he was a Democrat. MH can’t complain about HIM. MH: “It is you who show no interest in other human beings. Your logic is the logic of the Nazi, might makes right, might makes me good and him bad, and for you, supporting power makes me feel like a brave person. Actually people like you who blindly support power, the power of the boot on poor people's necks, are moral cowards who dare not question the bully. Makes you afraid doesn't it? I'm sure it's not your kids over there killing civilians and getting ambushed by a resistance movement, now is it? Repeating the words of power is at the heart of the Nazi mentality. Follower you are, and base coward. “ Let’s see … MH says Saddam good, Bush bad. Is that about it? OBTW, the baths ARE Nazi’s – there really are historical links. And, of course, MH has nothing to say about the blood sport of modern France – killing the few Jews they missed while carrying water for the German Nazi’s.

Date:

07/04/03

Time:

04:31 AM

Comments

"Unlike Saddam, Bush needn't cut out his opponents' tongues. They're keeping silent on their own.

It may be naive to pose the question, but where are the principled Republicans? Not long ago, conservative leaders trudged down from Capitol Hill to tell an embattled Richard Nixon that he could no longer count on their support. Now the moderate, fiscally responsible Republicans one might expect to stand up to Bush's fiscal depredations--men like John McCain, Bob Dole and George Pataki--remain mute as their party and nation are hijacked by fanatics. Bush's rich man's welfare will cost the average U.S. citizen $500,000 over the next decade--isn't that the kind of government waste Republicans are supposed to deplore?"

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3988.htm

Date:

07/04/03

Time:

07:12 AM

Comments

"where are the principled Republicans? Not long ago, conservative leaders trudged down from Capitol Hill to tell an embattled Richard Nixon that he could no longer count on their support."

An interesting observation. Of course, the better question would be, "Where were the principled Democrats who coulda, woulda, shoulda done the same for Big Bill Clinton?

This highlights the real difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. The Democrats lack moral integrity, intellectual honesty, and a sense of shame.

As to the writer's point (which was most certainly not to shame Democrats) -- Again we're told that tax cuts are "rich man's welfare" and the government is "spending" money by cutting taxes.

Earth to Democrats! You're so used to playing "tax and spend, tax and spend" -- you can't tell the difference anymore. A tax cut is a tax cut -- it's not government spending. A tax cut means you leave the people's money in their pockets. If the government ends up needing more money it can always back and reach into our pockets. The money is STILL THERE.

OTOH Government spending, once done -- cannot be undone. The money is gone forever.

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

04:25 AM

Comments

Here is an article that provides enough grounds for impeachment:

http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=3027229

'Bring Them On,' Bush Says to Iraq Attacks Wed July 2, 2003 11:33 AM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush on Wednesday challenged militants who have been killing and injuring U.S. forces in Iraq, saying "bring them on" because American forces were tough enough to deal with their attacks. "There are some who feel like that conditions are such that they can attack us there," Bush told reporters at the White House. "My answer is bring them on. We have the force necessary to deal with the situation."

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

04:50 AM

Comments

Are you better off than you were three years ago? The New York Times

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

08:30 AM

Comments

"Here is an article that provides enough grounds for impeachment: "

Boy, you Demwits can't get over Clinton's impeachment. And you just can't get comfortable with a strong, honest, and plain speaking leader.

As to the substance of the quote -- it sure makes sense to me. Any sensible person would want the crazies to spend their resources attacking our troops on foreign soil instead of our civilians at home. These people need to be killed. The more they are drawn out into the open, the sooner we can get the job done.

And you Demwits want to impeach the President for stating the obvious? This is truly delicious. I'm thinking GWB might sweep all fifty states. You're such pathetic morons. Keep it coming. BRING IT ON! Please?

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

10:28 AM

Comments

This de facto president is finally seeing his poll numbers fall. Even chauvinist paranoia has a half-life, it seems. His legitimacy is being eroded as even the mainstream press has discovered now that the pretext for the war was a lie. It may have been control over the oil, after all. Anti-war forces are regrouping as an anti-occupation movement. Now, exercising his one true talent--blundering--George W. Bush has begun the improbable process of alienating the very troops upon whom he depends to carry out the neo-con ambition of restructuring the world by arms.

Somewhere in Balad, or Fallujah, or Baghdad, there is a soldier telling a new replacement, "We are losing this war."

Stan Goff | "Bring 'Em On?" http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/070403A.shtml

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

10:37 AM

Comments

"I have a message for the president: enough of the phony, macho rhetoric. We should be focused on a long term security plan that reduces the danger to our military personnel. We need a clear plan to bring stability to Iraq and an honest discussion with the American people on the cost of that endeavor. We need a serious attempt to develop a post-war plan for Iraq and not more shoot from the hip one-liners."

Senator Dick Gephardt

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

10:44 AM

Comments

"America's free press is essential to our republic. When questions are quashed, or the press is tethered, we are no longer a free society. Once information is manipulated or withheld from us, we have lost the freedom of informed consent. Although our constitution was designed to provide a balance of power between the three branches of government, recently, that balance seems to have eroded. Our only protection, then, is a free press which thoroughly informs the public about significant issues confronting our nation. September 11th should never have happened. There should be in-depth coverage of the 9-11 Commission's investigation into the murder of 3000 people. Instead of silence about our government's seeming inability to prevent the terrorist attacks, the press should aggressively question what went wrong, in an investigation which parallels and complements the 9-11 Commission's. Until the weaknesses and circumstances which led to the September attacks have been identified and corrected, our nation is as vulnerable as we were on September 11th."

Sincerely,

Carol Ashley mother of Janice, 25 93rd floor, Tower One

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

10:47 AM

Comments

>From a soldier's father: "My son is in the U.S.Army and currently stationed in Baghdad. I hear from him every three or four days. He is like most of the young men and women who went to fight over there inasmuch as he was proud to go and achieve what President Bush said was necessary. I have seen his attitude take a U-turn during the last month. At first he was saying: "I wonder why we are not doing this or that to help make life better for our soldiers?" Then he started to wonder why we were not doing more to help the Iraqi people who are suffering under terrible conditions. Not enough water or food, no electricity most of the time, a terrible shortage of medical supplies and medical staff, basically they are living like animals. Then he started to worry about the safety of our troops in the area. He says they are sitting ducks and easy targets for Iraqi people bent upon gaining revenge for slain family members and by those who hold the U.S. responsible for the terrible conditions they find themselves in. Yesterday he had a different message altogether." "Get us out of here now! There is nothing we can do to pacify the Iraqi people except get out of their country and allow them to restore order in whatever way THEY wish." And, allow me to give you his remarks when he was informed of President Bush's brash remarks saying "Bring them on." He said: "Myself and every last man in my unit are deeply offended that our President would make such a statement inviting us to be attacked. President Bush has lost the respect of every soldier I have spoken to because of his speaking those irresponsible words. Those words spread like wild-fire amoung the troops. We are here because he ordered us to be here and now for him to make such a ridiculous statement inviting violence towards us causes us to lose respect for him and his judgement. We are learning that we never should have come here in the first place. Believe me Dad, there is a completely different attitude now. The fact that the President gave rich people a tax cut and didn't do anything for military families is hurtful. Where there was once pride and satisfaction in defeating an enemy there is now regret and shame. God Bless America." Your loving Son, Donny

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

11:03 AM

Comments

. Nearly 80 percent of all workers are in jobs that qualify them for overtime pay, which is time-and-a-half for each hour that is worked beyond the normal 40-hour week. The administration wants to make it easier for employers to exempt many of those workers from overtime protection by classifying them as administrative, professional or executive personnel.

The quickest way to determine who is getting the better of this deal is to note that business groups are applauding the proposed changes while the A.F.L.-C.I.O. held a protest rally outside the Labor Department on Monday.

Bob Herbert | Picking Workers' Pockets http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/070403F.shtml

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

11:12 AM

Comments

You need to read this veteran's story....and then think carefully about what our president is doing today. Matilda

Max Cleland, Political Veteran http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/070403I.shtml

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

11:24 AM

Comments

There is no longer any serious doubt that Bush administration officials deceived us into war. The key question now is why so many influential people are in denial, unwilling to admit the obvious...But even people who aren't partisan Republicans shy away from confronting the administration's dishonest case for war, because they don't want to face the implications...

After all, suppose a politician - or a journalist - admits to himself that Mr. Bush bamboozled the nation into war. Well, launching a war on false pretenses is, to say the least a breach of trust. So if you admit to yourself that such a thing happened, you have a moral obligation to demand accountability - and to do so in the face not only of a powerful, ruthless political machine but in the face of a country not yet ready to believe that its leaders have exploited 9/11 for political gain. It's a scary prospect.

Yet, if we can't find people willing to take the risk - to face the truth and act on it - what will happen to our democracy?

Paul Krugman, The New York Times, June 24, 2003

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

11:32 AM

Comments

From Matilda's far left leaning truthout article:

"Cleland, 60, is still livid over a now-infamous TV commercial that Republican challenger Saxby Chambliss ran against him. It opened with pictures of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, then attacked Cleland for voting against President Bush's Homeland Security bill. It didn't mention that Cleland supported a Democratic bill that wasn't radically different.

"That was the biggest lie in America -- to put me up there with Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and say I voted against homeland security!" he says, his voice rising in anger."

Biggest lie in America? Amazing how Dimocrats whine when one of their tactics is used against them. They thought it was alright when the NAACP and the Democratic party ran commericials showing chains dragging behind a truck and linking him to the murderers that dragged the black man to his death during election time.

Serves the Democratic party right to have the same technique used on them.

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

12:48 PM

Comments

" Jingoists mindlessly shout, "USA! USA! We're number one!"

In truth, we're embarrassingly behind many other countries in quality-of- life indicators from such basics as doctor-patient ratio and infant mortality, to safety on the job and in our streets, to care for the disabled, or the amount of paid vacation time we receive.

Being well and able to function is the most crucial human imperative, but the World Health Organization ranks the US a shocking 37th in healthcare, tailing even Oman and Costa Rica. Communist Cuba has long boasted of having better, more evenly provided healthcare (and education) than most of America's inner cities.

Scandinavia bests us virtually across the board, a fact which impressed an acquaintance of mine who visited Norway and wound up staying, finding a much more supportive, uplifting and secure society.

Data compiled by GeographyIQ.com reveals that 53 nations have a higher literacy rate than the U.S.; our 6% unemployment rate is shared with Fiji, The Central African Republic, and Kyrgyzstan; and we're between Thailand and Syria in percentage of population beneath the poverty line. We're 33rd in life expectancy.

Why is this unacceptable deterioration occurring?"

Read the answers for yourselves, at: http://www.liberalslant.com/dr062703.htm

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

12:52 PM

Comments

"This de facto president"

Yes, GWB is, IN FACT our President. The constitutional process worked, despite the worst efforts of the DIMS to thwart it.

What fun we'll have on election night, 2004 -- wondering if GWB will sweep all fifty states. I guess if it's less than a clean sweep, these DIMS will claim a "moral victory".

" Somewhere in Balad, or Fallujah, or Baghdad, there is a soldier telling a new replacement, "We are losing this war." "

Isn't a tad sick that you losers pray for disaster to befall us so as to try to regain the power that is your sole sense of worth?

....

"I have a message for the president: enough of the phony, macho rhetoric. ... We need a serious attempt to develop a post-war plan for Iraq and not more shoot from the hip one-liners." -- like my own?

Mesage to Carol Ashley mother of Janice, 25 93rd floor, Tower One

What makes you think your victemhood gives you wisdom none of us otherwise posess? We do have a free press. If you think there are truths out there -- then go find them. In the meantime, stop claiming half of Manhattan island (or at least all of the WTC site) as a memorial to your loss.

Memorials are for SOLDIERS lost fighting for our freedoms. They are not for hapless victims. Enough! The real memorial to our lost will be the shallow graves on a high desert where the winds uncover the bones of monsters we killed.

....

Oh sure, Danny boy wrote a letter to his dad (as quoted), bemoaning

Bush's tax cuts and claiming "Myself and every last man in my unit are deeply offended that our President would make such a statement inviting us to be attacked. President Bush has lost the respect of every soldier I have spoken to because of his speaking those irresponsible words. Those words spread like wild-fire amoung the troops" This, the day after the quote? Come on. All you Dims can do is lie. Have you no shame.

...

Krugman is a moron. His incessant Republican bashing aside, he's what's wrong with the profession of economists, today -- Paul's what is known as "a numbers guy" -- he's facile as a mathematician which got him advancement over guys and gals with real common sense. The guy can't write a lick, either.

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

03:59 PM

Comments

"George, Would You PLEASE Shut UP!"

http://www.americaheldhostile.com/ed070403-1.shtml

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

04:12 PM

Comments

"embarrassingly behind many other countries in quality-of- life indicators from such basics as doctor-patient ratio and infant mortality, to safety on the job and in our streets, to care for the disabled, or the amount of paid vacation time we receive"

Of course, all of these "more advanced" societies than ours are quickly going broke -- and none of them spend a tinker's damn on their defense. There's a reason why there are riots in France. They can't sustain their socialist societies and those who slop at the public trough are angry.

If you're not happy in the US of A, you're free to leave. I don't care what you do -- just keep your scummy hands out of my pocket.

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

04:17 PM

Comments

"Nearly 80 percent of all workers are in jobs that qualify them for overtime pay, which is time-and-a-half for each hour that is worked beyond the normal 40-hour week. The administration wants to make it easier for employers to exempt many of those workers from overtime protection by classifying them as administrative, professional or executive personnel."

And why do we need to pay government workers to supervise relationships between employers and employees? Oh, we ought to make sure we go bankrupt like France?

If you're not happy with your job -- get another one. Don't ask me to pay for my government to get between you and your boss.

Date:

07/05/03

Time:

04:23 PM

Comments

"George, Would You PLEASE Shut UP!"

Awww, does GWB get under your skin? Is he too macho for you?

If you stop and think, wouldn't you rather we goaded the crazies to attack our fighting men on foreign soil instead of our civilians at home? I would. It sure worked two months ago. Nothin like the sight of Al Quaida hooligans driving pickup trucks agains M1 tanks! Go USA!

Bring it on, George! These libs need to drink a cup of Shut the Fuck Up!

Date:

07/06/03

Time:

09:53 AM

Comments

Let's put this whole subject to rest today. The sexual behavior of former President Clinton was both unethical and stupid, not to mention embarrassing. However, this is what that behavior did not do:

1. Cost me one single dollar in either savings or retirement funds.

2. Cost me my job.

3. Add a single carcinogen to the air that my children and I breathe.

4. Increase the acid level of rain that contributes to higher mercury levels in Florida's fish.

5. Weaken or cancel a single one of my civil rights or liberties.

6. Shift the tax burden from the billionaires to me and my family.

7. Cut down a single sequoia before I can get out west to see the national forests.

8. Give a penny of my tax dollars to a minister of his own religion.

9. Turn my fair and righteous government into a "first-strike" nation.

10. Tell me to be afraid and hide under plastic and duct tape.

Instead, all of the above are some of the legacies given to me and my family by the current president, who governs by stealth, misdirection and deceit, and is held up by Republicans as a "moral" example.

PRISCILLA KRIMM

Date:

07/06/03

Time:

10:30 AM

Comments

"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country."

Ring a bell? Any idea who said it? It wasn't Marx or Lenin. Not Mao or Castro. It was none other than the father of American republicanism, Thomas Jefferson.

Jefferson, like his revolutionary brethren, was deeply wary of corporate power. In order for the people to govern, he believed the "aristocracy of monied corporations" needed to be kept on a short leash, in the form of revocable charters that limited corporations to strictly commercial activities and required them to serve the public interest.

Jefferson famously articulated the need for a wall of separation between church and state. He less famously warned that if the people were to remain sovereign for long, a wall of separation between corporations and politics was essential.

Date:

07/06/03

Time:

11:57 AM

Comments

Dear Priscilla,

Let me help you out here with a point-by-point rebuttal to your silliness.

Please tell me exactly how President George Bush

1. Cost you money from your retirement funds?

Tell me, which of his policies hurt you economically? Oh, he took office in the early stage of Clinton’s recession? And Clinton’s tax hikes didn’t take the wind out of George Walker Bush’s recovery (which Clinton inherited)?

Oh, it’s all GWB’s fault. Just like the mole on your ass.

2. Cost you your job.

If you lost your job (and I suspect you’re a liar – like all Dims, you speak for effect), it’s probably because you’re stupid. See remark #1, above.

3. Added carcinogens to the environment.

What a hoot! Did you catch him adding dioxin to the Croton reservoir? Net, Net – our air and waters are cleaner than they’ve been for over a hundred years. All you Dims can do is lie.

4. Increased the level of acid rain (which you confuse with increased mercury levels in fresh water fish). My dear, the EPA has PROPOSED new rules for upgrades to older power plants. None of this has yet to take effect – but when it does, it will yield a net decrease in emissions (both of sulfur dioxide – the acid part – and mercury compounds). Have none of you Dims ever taken a science course?

5. Weakened your civil rights? Gee, is anyone stopping you from shooting your fool mouth off? I guess not. Exactly what civil liberty can you no longer enjoy? Ooooh, can’t come up with one? What a moron!

6. Shifted the tax burden to you from billionaires? Actually, Priscilla, we don’t tax the rich. We tax the poor sons of a bitch who are trying to become rich. What does income have to do with wealth? Why should lucky-Louie-who-wins the lottery have to pay half his wealth to the tax man when school teachers like you who have as much in savings pay pennies?

7. Now I’ve heard the story of George Washington chopping down a cherry tree – but I’ve not heard anything about GWB and sequoias. Do you have your fables confused? Oh wait – I remember – you object to granting the same rights to land owners in the West that Tom Daschle slipped in for South Dakota’ins. The usual Dimocratic hypocrisy.

8. Money for ministers? I guess you’d be surprised just how much in federal grants and grants-in-aid went to religious groups during the Clinton admin. Naah, you’d ignore it.

9. First Strike? I guess 9/11 didn’t happen in your alternate universe.

10. Civil defense? Oh, you just would feel more secure with a Dimocrat in the White House. Well I wouldn’t – and the real question is whether GWB will sweep all fifty states in ’04 – because you’re the best hope the Dims have and you’re pretty pathetic.

Date:

07/06/03

Time:

03:16 PM

Comments

I wonder if dimocrats of the past ran around whining about not finding Hilter and implying WW2 was a failure because of the inability to verify finding Hitler's body?

No wonder dimocrats of today are having their patriotism questioned. I say throw all the dimocrats out.

Date:

07/06/03

Time:

04:53 PM

Comments

""When shall it be said in any country of the world, my poor are happy; neither ignorance or distress is to be found among them; my jails are empty of prisoners, my streets of beggars; the aged are not in want, the taxes not oppressive; the rational world is my friend because I am friend of its happiness; when these things can be said, then may that country boast of its constitution and government"

Thomas Paine, who also said, "My country is the world, and my religion is to do good". Bless you Thomas Paine.

Date:

07/06/03

Time:

05:17 PM

Comments

http://www.pressherald.com/religion/reflections/030705sky.shtml

Our political leaders are currently paralyzed by their fears. To prove the authenticity of their fears, they have dealt loosely with documents, selecting passages out of context, and saying, "Here's the proof. Our enemies are at our door."

Our fears displace the daily routines of life. We set aside our moral values: We ignore the hungry, the needy, the poor, the homeless, the debt-encumbered population, and the deficit budgets of our time.

In the name of these fears, everything is being derailed: our economy, our health-care system, and our education agenda. It has affected our creativity. The land of the entrepreneurs has become the land of people living in fear of the moment.

Date:

07/06/03

Time:

05:32 PM

Comments

Our Dimocrat party political leaders are currently paralyzed by their fear of being increasingly irrelevant. They conjure up all sorts of wild charges that they recite as their party line -- to no avail.

OTOH, GWB is a strong leader who has the courage of his convictions. He won't always be right, but he will always be honest and forthright. Contrast this with the Clintons or the nine dwarfs.

Date:

07/06/03

Time:

05:45 PM

Comments

The fatal error of Bush's "Bring 'em On" comment is that besides its cheap talk and bully posturing, is that it isn't true. We cannot handle what they're throwing at us. We don't know who they are and we aren't killing them in number. They wound and kill Americans every day and escape. They aren't being killed.

http://www.dailykos.com/archives/003273.html#003273

Date:

07/06/03

Time:

06:01 PM

Comments

"he fatal error of Bush's "Bring 'em On" comment is that besides its cheap talk and bully posturing, is that it isn't true. We cannot handle what they're throwing at us. We don't know who they are and we aren't killing them in number. They wound and kill Americans every day and escape. They aren't being killed. "

OMYGOD, is it a quagmire? Isn't it sick that you pathetic lefties hope and pray for a disaster? OBTW, if Clinton hadn't gutted the military, we'd have more resources to draw upon now. Never fear, our boys will get the job done. And, Yes -- Bring it on. Syria has flooded Iraw with the crazies they've trained. And, yes, we are killing them in numbers.

It's unfortunate that some of our young men will give their lives for our freedom, but such is the sustenance of our tree of liberty.

If there is a god, you lefties will burn in hell.

Date:

07/06/03

Time:

06:14 PM

Comments

Why do we celebrate the Fourth of July? After all, we are taught from kindergarten to the universities that all cultures are entitled to equal respect. Why then celebrate the creation of a nation that is no better than any other nation?

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/ts20030706.shtml

Date:

07/06/03

Time:

08:40 PM

Comments

Why do you lefties keep praying for America's defeat?

Fear not, we'll take whatever casualties we must, in the defense of our freedom. And, no -- no amount of handwringing will stay the hand of this president.

What a difference from Clinton. How many dead did we leave in Somalia? How quickly did Bill pull us out?

Date:

07/07/03

Time:

03:55 AM

Comments

My my, the middle of the night, a quick check on the message board of Let's Talk Sense, and what do I see? The Bush supporters who don't know the Declaration of Independence from a roll of toilet paper, or the Constitution from a Pentagon Press Release, are pretending to be patriots and bashing democrats.

Patriots! Hardee har har! You Bush supporters are either closet fascists or more likely just ignorant true believers who refuse to consider anything that questions your world view. You are the Taliban of American Politics and Bush is your Mullah Omar.

Believe it or not the job of U.S. soldiers is to protect our country, but you support them dying and being wounded (physically and psychologically) for Bush's mad quest to form an empire. And by the way, I did not support Clinton bombing Yugoslavia either. Tha led to the building of the biggest U.S. military base since Vietnam in Kosovo, Camp Bondsteel, whose huge services contract went to Brown and Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton, who STILL pays the real day to day ruler of the U.S., Dick Cheney, a salary!

When are you dimwits going to wake up and FOLLOW THE MONEY!!

When are you going to read the Constitution? Since when does the Constitution allow a U.S. war of agression for resource control?

Bush is the figurehead of a clique of ideologues (usually referred to as 'neo-conservatives') whose guru the late Prof. Strauss preached that an elite should govern through 'noble lies' and 'noble manipulation' of the masses. Look it up! They are manipulating you, can you not see that?

Why not be the patriots you claim to be and take back your country? Do some research, follow the money, look at the actual record of the people around Bush, they are bankrupting our country (there is a budget crisis in almost every U.S. state) and shifting money to the ultra rich, while many of you posters above do nothing but repeat what you hear on Fox and CNN!! There are destroying your heritage and the future of your children! Do you want to live in a republic, where WE THE PEOPLE run our own lives, or in an Empire where technocrats use your own money to manipulate you so they can take even more of your money.

Your mind has been colonized! Resist the occupation of your mind! Learn, research, follow the money, quit spouting off about political situations without evidence!

You country is being stolen from under your nose, because they have manipulated you to the point where you cannot understand what is happening.

Wake up before it's too late! This is not a Republican-Democrat issue, it is an issue of the survival of our representative form of government.

Signed: Matilda's Hammer

Date:

07/07/03

Time:

05:06 AM

Comments

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10344

MIT launches watch on US government System to empower an informed citizenry

By Egan Orion Saturday 05 July 2003, 10:05

"Knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and a people who mean to be their own governors, must arm themselves with the power knowledge gives." - James Madison

FITTINGLY ENOUGH ,Wired chose yesterday -- July 4, the US Independence Day -- to run the story that the MIT Media Lab has built a fully web-enabled system promoting Government Information Awareness.

What a superb response to the so-called 'Patriot' Act. Bravo MIT and Kudos to James Madison.

Date:

07/07/03

Time:

07:12 AM

Comments

So, what are to make of the latest rant by Matilda’s Hummer?

MH tells us that even Clinton was captive to the real ruler of the US, Dick Cheney, who must be one of them "neo-conservatives".

MH also tells us tells us that the facility in Kosovo, Camp Bondsteel, is “the biggest U.S. military base since Vietnam in Kosovo”. Now, MH’s command of English is not the best, so we’re not sure if he thinks Vietnam happened in Kosovo or that Vietnam was one big military base or that Bondsteel is the largest US base built in Kosovo in the last thirty years or that Bondsteel is the largest US base built anywhere in the world since the Vietnam war.

Inasmuch as Bondsteel houses 7,000 soldiers on 750 acres, the right answer is none of the above. But that pretty much sums up MH.

OBTW, the label, "neo-conservative" is applied to and descriptive of former liberals who have grown up. Do you think there's hope for you, MH?

MH, fear not. Despite the worst efforts of the American Communist Party (aka the Democrat Party), our republic is not in danger. You loonies will be free to spew your bile til the cows come home and no one will knock at your door.

Americans will put their lives at risk on foreign soil to protect the freedoms you enjoy. Happy 4th of July!

Date:

07/07/03

Time:

10:45 AM

Comments

Ah, we have a supporter of the neo-cons on board!

How about telling us what PNAC is all about mr. neo-con lover, and who was involved: perle, cheney, wolfowitz, the clique taking our government away while the american people are being frightened from asking questions. let's see, perle also wrote policy papers for an important politician of a certain middle eastern country, right? no conflict of interest there? i suggest the readers put the names Richard Perle and Clean Break in google and see what pops up.

so board readers, exactly why does the U.S. need a huge military base in Kosovo anyway? does that protect the U.S.? Isn't protecting the U.S. the constitutional purpose of the U.S. military?

you conservatives, check out www.antiwar.com for some real conservative opinions, of the classic kind. there you will find reasons to oppose bush and the neocons.

signed: matilda's hammer

during coffee break i crush bushites' arguements', now back to work.

Date:

07/07/03

Time:

12:37 PM

Comments

Dear MH,

Indeed, I’m crushed. I’m truly saddened by the anger and idiocy you display – and apparently think it passes for REALLY DEEP THOUGHTS.

Let me help you out. You used the term, “neo-cons”, apparently as a pejorative. I used the term, “neo-conservative” as descriptive. For, example, Jeanne Kirkpatrick is a neo-conservative, as is Andrew Sullivan. These are folks who have realized the emptiness of what passes for liberal thinking and become conservatives when they grew up.

Winston Churchill once famously observed, “A man, who in his twenties is not a Liberal, has no heart. A man, who is a not a Conservative, has no head.” Hence, being a neo-conservative is a mark of maturity and good sense.

I don’t know who the “neo-cons” are. Do you think they’re a secret cabal – like the Freemasons? Do you think they have secret rites? Perhaps they dance around boiling cauldrons? You seem to suggest you know all about them, MH. Please educate us. How shall we identify them? Do they have special tattoos?

Oh, wait, I get it. You call anyone who can beat you in an argument, a neo-con (that must include half the adult population in America). And you paint all those who would reason with you with the same brush.

Here’s an idea, Mr. MH. Instead of trying to label me (or anyone else), and instead of spewing bile, why don’t you articulate exactly what you think our present government is doing wrong. I’d be happy to respond.

Here’s a little sample for you to think about while drinking your next cup of coffee:

Q. Why does the US need a huge military base in Kosovo? A. I’m not sure Bondsteel counts as “huge”, but we have good reason to maintain forward bases. Do you think we shouldn’t? Oh, you’d rather wait for us to be attacked as we were on 9/11.

Q. Oops, we’ve run out of your points to rebut.

Date:

07/07/03

Time:

12:39 PM

Comments

Oops, it should have read, "A man in his forties who is not a Conservative has no head"

Date:

07/07/03

Time:

02:08 PM

Comments

So, are you enjoying the Iraq occupation as much as I am? I don't know about you, but I sleep better at night knowing that foreign policy whiz kid George W. Bush has decided to focus his keen intellect (and our troops, treasure and credibility) on solvin' that there Iraq problem. It's a piece of cake. Ya just gotta kill the right people, that's all.

Okay, Bush is not a total imbecile on international issues. I'm pretty sure that if handed a globe, he could pick out the United States, Texas, and being an expert on axes, the north and south poles. Beyond that, I wouldn't bet the farm that Bush could name too many other geographic features. Far from being a problem, I'm sure that the Bush people consider this an asset. I mean, why waste valuable time trying to understand the complex workings of the world when we can simply remake it in our image instead? After all, if given a chance, everybody really wants to be an American. All the Iraqi people need is to taste that first Big Mac and the kafias will fly off , crosses will appear above the mosques, and Joe Francis can get to work on his Iraqi Girls Gone Wild! video, right?

http://www.buzzflash.com/theangryliberal/03/07/07.html

Date:

07/07/03

Time:

03:01 PM

Comments

"Q. Why does the US need a huge military base in Kosovo? A. I’m not sure Bondsteel counts as “huge”, but we have good reason to maintain forward bases. Do you think we shouldn’t? Oh, you’d rather wait for us to be attacked as we were on 9/11."

"WE" hardee har har, who is "we"? The millionaires club that Pres. Ike, way back in 1961, called the most dangerous force in the U.S., the military industrial complex? They might make some money off the military budget, eh? Carlyle, punch that one in on google with George Bush Sr. next to it and see what you get.

So, 'we have good reason to maintain forward bases', just like the Roman Empire, eh? Over one hundred U.S. bases all over the world, so why is that.....hm, we are the biggest military power in the world, why should we need all those bases....hmm, that is SO hard to figure out!

"Oh, you’d rather wait for us to be attacked as we were on 9/11." Osama himself declared that the reason for 9/11 was the military base in Saudi Arabia! How would you like another country to have military bases in the U.S.? Would you do anything about it? (I doubt it, as I said, no true patriot can support Bush as he destroys our republic).

As far as neocons, go to www.antiwar.com and do a search for neocon and you'll learn something, unless your mind is so full on concrete that you're a danger to your own neck.

You ARE a danger to the fragile neck of our republic! Learn something! Think outside the box! Quit being the zombie of the rich elite!

coffee break over, signed matilda's hammer

Matilda For President!!!!

Date:

07/07/03

Time:

03:22 PM

Comments

To the reader of The Angry Liberal.

No, I don't think I'm enjoying the Iraqi occupation as much as you folks do. I really care about our magnificent young men and women in our armed forces who are putting their lives on the line to protect our freedoms. It's really dismaying to see what joy you Dims take in peoples' misfortune.

Oh well, I guess you'll get your just desserts come the next presidential election. Do you think GWB will really sweep all fifty states?

Date:

07/07/03

Time:

04:15 PM

Comments

MH, get a grip. I’ve just started fun’in with you. Don’t go off the deep end quite so quickly, please.

Who is “hardee har har we”? You just said it all. We are Americans who will fight for our freedoms. We don’t take them for granted. We’ll even fight for the rights of “useful idiots” like you to scoff at our values and ourselves.

OBTW, What Eisenhower actually said was, “Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations. … In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

If you’re going to quote someone, you should learn to learn what he said and what he meant. (You should learn to use Google) Eisenhower told us that there was no going back – that we were forced to maintain an enormous permanent armaments industry (think Hanford) because we could not risk “emergency improvisation of [our] national defense”., and that we should be wary of it, lest it unduly influence our policy.

Not exactly “the most dangerous force in the US”, eh MH? But why let the truth get in your way? Since you quoted Ike, (whom I did like), do you have any idea what the forward posture of American forces was when he made this speech? We had more that 3 million men in uniform in 1961. Today we have less than half of that total and a lot fewer bases. Gee, it guess it’s hard to make a case for American imperialism based on these numbers. But don’t let the facts confuse you. You know we don’t need to defend ourselves. All we have to do is be nice, right?

And, you wonder why we’re going to reelect GWB?

Lets see what other silliness you spewed:

You quoted “Osama himself” as saying his only reason for murdering our people was the existence of our bases on Saudi soil – Of course you’d believe anything your hero is reputed to have said and you’d disbelieve anything our elected President says. What does this say about you, MH? Do you think it’s a mark of intelligence?

Most folks have concluded that the Arabs hate the West because of their own impotence and backwardness – but not you. They hate us solely because we maintained bases on Saudi soil, right? So why did the (self styled) Palestinians cheer 9/11?

Now, if you really are interested in how your mind has been twisted, you do a search on “neo-cons” and “anti-Semitism”. You’ll discover that this brand of poison is really directed at the Jews – but then, you live in France where it’s a national sport to kill or maim the few Jews they missed while they were carrying water for the Nazis.

And you think I’m a danger to our republic? How? I don’t advocate laying down our swords, as you seem to do. I’m happy to hear your rants and I’ll defend your right to do so – even though I think you’re largely ignorant and silly.

Now, enjoy that cup of coffee.

Date:

07/07/03

Time:

09:52 PM

Comments

Dimocrats blasted President Bush on Sunday for his recent tough talk on Iraq, specifically his "Bring 'em on," remark. Al Sharpton said he sounded more like a gang leader and Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) called it "cocky rhetoric." Nobody in the press thought about asking our troops what they thought. But on Monday morning, Diane Sawyer did ask General Tommy Franks about it and Franks said, "I absolutely agree with the president. Bring 'em on."

Guess the Dims would rather say, "Please don't hurt us"

BTW, has there EVER been a military action that Liberals supported? No wonder the French love Dimocrats!

Date:

07/08/03

Time:

05:30 AM

Comments

Bwana Bush goes to Africa By Stephen Gowans

http://www3.sympatico.ca/sr.gowans/bwana.html

Excerpt: "Africa," America's newspaper of record says, is "the world's last largely untapped market," and, even better, "Africa's substantial oil reserves could play a larger role in fueling the American economy and perhaps serving as a counterweight to the influence of OPEC."

Now you know whence comes Bwana Bush's interest in Africa.

And don't forget "the Pentagon's interest in forging closer military ties" with African nations -- which means the promise of more arms sales abroad for the US manufacturers of guns, bullets, tanks, helicopter gunships, warplanes, and, oh yes, for the deserving, weapons of mass destruction. Plus the Pentagon gets to play rich uncle to the local military just in case the satraps get the idea that free markets aren't such a great idea after all and need a military coup, or the threat thereof, to remind them of the benefits free markets deliver (lavish riches in New York and LA, and slums, sweatshops, and IMF austerity programs at home.)

And so Bush heads into Africa, issuing ukases, top enforcer for the US corporate Mafia. "Mugabe, step down!" he commands. "Taylor, out!"

Date:

07/08/03

Time:

07:23 AM

Comments

Good Morning America!

Matilda's Hammer here, with my cup of coffee, ready to tap idols with my magic hammer so they splinter with the logical force of my words.

The neo-con anti-patriot has raised his glib head again, ho ho how does that blues song go?

Woke up this morning The neo-con's were talking I took out my hammer And they started walking I lifted my hammer And they started running Cause they know Matild's Hammer is coming!

Hey, instead of listening to neo-cons talk trash, watch this video, if you have a fast internet connection:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3995.htm

The first two minutes are in dutch, the rest in english, it's the lowdown on the Carlyle group, so you can see what President Ike was talking about, you can learn about how Carlucci (Reagan's Secretary of Defense), and Bush the First, and John Major, and other fat cats are taking your tax dollars and putting it in their pockets.

The neo-con's first line of defense is to accuse people who try to expose the truth of these neo-con traitors of anti-semitism! Oooooo! Scares me to death!

because they ARE pro Israel, and some of them are Jewish, but most of them are just thieves taking your tax dollars, through their investment in the arms industry! So, they try to scare you away with the 'anti-semite' threat.

learn first! look into perle, wolfy-witz, look how they take your money, and send your kids to die so they can continue taking your tax dollars!

it's not hard to figure out how it works....

hitler knew how to do it, and so does bush: scare people, raise the military budget, send the kids to die, take people's tax money!

anyone who defends the neo-con's is a traitor to the U.S.!

signed, matilda's hammer

time to go to work

Date:

07/08/03

Time:

08:59 AM

Comments

Dear MH,

OK, we finally got an acknowledgement from your that railing against “neo-cons” might be considered in some circles to be anti-Semitic. And, you seem to have abandoned your tirades against the “millionaires club” (whoeverinhell they may be), once I gave you the correct quotation from Ike.

I don’t want to scare you. I just want to flush you out.

Tell me specifically, who and what these “neo-cons” are, what they stand for, and how you know this to be true – and why you think they’re a danger to our republic. It ought to be clear even to you that there hasn’t been an armed overthrow of these United States. So, tell me – how would these dangers you see to our republic take form? We still seem to enjoy ALL of our freedoms – even an idiot like yourself is free to spew his silliness. We have free elections – this really galls you. And, I expect GWB will overwhelmingly be reelected, in part because of the silliness of folks like yourself.

What passes for the Democrat party has become an amalgam of special interests. The only “idea” that has been collectively expressed by this group (inclusive of you) is that GWB is the village idiot (and that you guys think you’re REALLY smart). You guys stand for NOTHING, except that power is your birthright. You need to keep stirring the pot of hatred and resentment so that the permanent underclass you try to perpetuate will return you to office so as to keep their handouts coming.

Well, the rest of us (a sizable majority) think GWB is a pretty smart fellow. Of course, he’s no Bill Clinton – but that’s going to get him reelected. Stir that into your coffee.

Date:

07/08/03

Time:

12:25 PM

Comments

To: the no-name neocon who posted above

"OK, we finally got an acknowledgement from your that railing against “neo-cons” might be considered in some circles to be anti-Semitic."

Are you so dumb to think yourself so clever that you think we are so dumb as to fall for this kind of psuedo-intellectual trickery! you way way underestimate us, the mark of arrogance, ignorance, and mental corrosion.

the neo-cons smear anyone who criticises them with the brush of 'anti-semi blah blah blah ism ism'. it doesn't work any more dude, sorry. we know who richard perle is. we know who wolfywitz studied under. we know about Project For a New American Century. Read it no-name, do some of your own research! turn off fox, get an education for gosh sakes!

hey now, read about Bechtel and water. Read about Bechtel and water and south america and bechtel and water and Iraq. Hmmm, bechtel, who is the CEO? former reagan official, yes? why did bechtel get the choice contracts in iraq? why do they want to privatize water all over the world? profit from a necessary substance, taking the public out of the picture, money in millionaires pockets.

the no-name neocon is duped, poor thang. thinks he is smart while they take his money! a sucker for the con game, while he spends his time bashing us for criticizing bush and co.! have to pity the poor fool, he's been manipulated to the point of acting against his own interests. he can't even read the sense in Ike's message from 1961. he knows how to use google and copy and paste but he (not a she, women are much more clever than this guy, i assure you) cannot think for himself! the machine has him! he's asleep! he doesn't see bechtel as a special interest! he doesn't see carlyle as a special interest! he thinks the military industrial complex is good for the economy because they take tax money and build waste products called weapons.

he signs on, through ignorance, to this immoral program: take his tax dollars to bomb and kill, take his tax dollars to build and privatize, call it bechtel and halliburton, put the money in cheney's pockets, then do it again somewhere else.

hey now, who did rummysfeld our great deefense minister work for before bushy got appointed? anybody know? he worked for a big multinational....connected with the weapons industry!

the saddest thing is the no name no brain neo con is, in the sleep that he calls life, supporting mass murder, he supports spreading depleted uranium all over the planet, he supports poisoning his own children! he has lost the ability to care for anything except to worship the money god and the war god. his soul is corrupted because his mind is colonized. no help for him now, he's a goner.

oops, lunch almost over, back to work

signed: matilda's hammer

Date:

07/08/03

Time:

01:45 PM

Comments

Dear MH,

Re: “To: the no-name neocon who posted above” Ahhhh, I get it. Anyone who paints you as the fool is a “neo-con”. Now I understand. Of course you couldn’t actually identify who this “group” actually is or how one becomes a member. It’s just your latest smear word. Because I’ve taken you task you call me names.

Well, at least you’ve identified two persons as targets of your rage, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz. Please identify ANY acts or actions of either gentlemen that is in any way inimical to the interests of these United States -- anything that would deny us our freedoms, threaten the safety and/or security of our citizens, or would defraud or cheat us of our wealth. I’m not interested in a recitation of the contracts won by Bechtel or Haliburton – unless you can provide evidence of fraud or malfeasance (identify the contract award and tell us who you think should have been given the work – and why). There aren’t too many places to turn to if you want to build something of size – especially on foreign soil.

OK, hotshot, let’s see if you can be more specific (and more accurate) than your misquotation of Dwight Eisenhower. Let’s see if you’re as ignorant and stupid as you’ve come off this far. Do you really know anything or are you an angry and mindless parrot?

And try to use proper spelling, punctuation, and grammar. You did learn something in school, did you not? Capitalize the first letter of the first word in a sentence (and try to write complete sentences). Try to gather your thoughts into paragraphs. Let’s see if you can actually express yourself coherently. Thus far you’re not doing very well. Perhaps English is not your native tongue? What is it, French?

Date:

07/08/03

Time:

03:19 PM

Comments

ah mai oui, je suis toute la fraçais, avec mon grammaire francaise parfait! ooohh la la, les neoconneries sont la pire! je suis tres afraid ov yu, yus etes la vrai sage et moi, moi est rien....mais je ne suis pas un neoconnerie! ha ha!

ah, the no-name neocon challenges me, matilda's hammer, to the game of 'pin the truth on the neocon'.

that's easy, if you do a bit of research and read a bit, not your strong suit no-name I admit. but, as i said, i take pity on you because you've been programmed brainwashed manipulated fooled conned and badly educated.

let's see, where shall i begin, seymour hersh perhaps, a fine reporter, keeps his nose clean, willing to tell the truth about vietnam massacres and israeli nukes, let's see what he says about the prince of darkness which noname worships:

"Perle threatened yesterday to sue investigative reporter Seymour M. Hersh for libel—specifically, for things Hersh wrote about him in this week's New Yorker. The article examines the potential conflict of interest posed by Perle's dual roles as official Bush adviser (in the form of non-paid chair of the Defense Policy Board) and as managing partner at Trireme Partners, a venture capital firm. Trireme appears to invest in businesses that deal in enterprises "that are of value to homeland security and defense," according to Hersh's piece. As a special government employee, Perle is subject to a federal Code of Conduct, Hersh writes, and "[t]hose rules bar a special employee from participating in an official capacity in any matter in which he has a financial interest.""

read that here, all ye truth seekers: http://slate.msn.com/id/2080100/

here's a quote from hersh's article:

"When Perle was asked whether his dealings with Trireme might present the appearance of a conflict of interest, he said that anyone who saw such a conflict would be thinking “maliciously.” But Perle, in crisscrossing between the public and the private sectors, has put himself in a difficult position—one not uncommon to public men. He is credited with being the intellectual force behind a war that not everyone wants and that many suspect, however unfairly, of being driven by American business interests. There is no question that Perle believes that removing Saddam from power is the right thing to do. At the same time, he has set up a company that may gain from a war. In doing so, he has given ammunition not only to the Saudis but to his other ideological opponents as well."

source: http://newyorker.com/printable/?fact/030317fa_fact

by the way, perle has forgotten about his threat, being, like his boss a chickehawk. don't know about the chickenhawks? noname neocon is no doubt one them too, http://www.nhgazette.com/chickenhawks.html

the chickenhawks like no name don't mind sending other people's kids to die for bushy money, because they are so blinded by their worship of the state, a most unamerican type of religion, we the people are the state monsuer no name! get used to to it, we are going to take back our country!

Matilda for president!

signed, matilda's hammer

Date:

07/08/03

Time:

04:12 PM

Comments

Quoting the database applications developer whose post and link Eddgra forwarded:

>> Here's a very important story from Bev Harris about the internal workings of the Diebold voting machines, and the ways that votes can be manipulated. As a database applications developer, this makes sense to me. A database is as secure as it is designed to be. MS Access is an outmoded database program, and does not have sufficient security to protect the data stored in it. It is scary to see how easily the investigators were able to tamper with the votes, passwords and audit log. I would suggest that the choice to use such a simple database program, with insufficient security, is a bad design decision that could be motivated by a desire to facilitate vote tampering. Once again, the fox is guarding the henhouse....

If we allow such voting systems to be put into place, we might as well not bother voting; this could be a death sentence upon our democracy. Sustainably, T. <<

Date:

07/08/03

Time:

07:26 PM

Comments

Dear MH,

I guess you didn’t take my admonishments to heart – or more likely, you’re unable to do so. If you’re going to rant (e.g. “you've been programmed braniwashed manipulated fooled conned and badly educated.”) you need to learn to use commas (and a spell checker). I guess you just can’t do any better.

Now that you’ve demonstrated that you can’t write, let’s take a look at your ability to read. I challenged you to “identify ANY acts or actions of either gentlemen [Perle or Wolfowitz] that is in any way inimical to the interests of these United States -- anything that would deny us our freedoms, threaten the safety and/or security of our citizens, or would defraud or cheat us of our wealth.”

And what did you come up with? A diatribe by Jack Shafer in Slate (of all places) that takes Perle to task for threatening to sue the New Yorker for libel – but at the same time admits that the New Yorker article (that MH quotes) doesn't actually accuse Perle of doing anything wrong. Had you read the article you cited, you would have seen this as the lead sentence of the fourth paragraph, ”The [New Yorker] article [actually] doesn't accuse Perle of breaking any laws”.

Was this your best shot, MH? Was this the best you can do? This was strike two (Your misquote of Ike and your misunderstanding of his speech was strike one). Wanna try for strike three? I’ll give you another chance. Come up with some kind of evidence of malfeasance by either man.

I understand you’re unused to being publicly challenged, but this will do you a lot of good. You see, in adult company you just don’t go around trying to shout down people who disagree with you. You don’t call them names and you come up with facts (or gracefully admit to error).

Come on, hot shot. Make your case. Show me how Perle or Wolfowitz have ever acted less than honorably. The fact is, you couldn’t wash either one’s socks,

Date:

07/08/03

Time:

07:42 PM

Comments

For MH:

Lawrence Kaplan (another Jew?) writes of the "Neo-McGovernites" in today's WSJ. You can get it from the online journal (free, but registration required) at: http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/?id=110003717

Here's the lead:

For the first time since the 1980s, events overseas may tip the balance in a U.S. presidential election. And to judge by the parade of White House aspirants complaining about President Bush's "arrogant" foreign policy and its "pattern of deception and deceit" on the Sunday morning talk show circuit, the Democrats smell blood. The good news here is that, after a decade of touting microinitiatives, school uniforms and Fleetwood Mac tunes, the party of Harry Truman has finally rediscovered its voice on national security issues. The bad news is that it's the voice of George McGovern.

It's good reading.

Date:

07/08/03

Time:

09:43 PM

Comments

For MH, Andrew Sullivan's take on the Kaplan piece:

"If the Democratic Party intends to run against a popular war, its leaders might wish to recall the lesson of a Democrat who ran against an unpopular war. He lost 49 states." - Lawrence F. Kaplan, in the Wall Street Journal today. Lawrence is basically right, I think. Many liberal Democrats - and the media in general - are beginning to act as if the war is over and they can score debating points with a president's foreign policy, rather than seriously proposing their own. That's a formula for disaster. The unseriousness of the current Democratic field in national security matters is the determining factor in the next year and a half. Forget money, personality, media. The question every voter will and should ask of any Democratic in 2004 is a simple one: would I feel as safe with this guy in the White House? Right now, the answer is a resounding no. Until the Demsfigure out a way to tackle this, they're screwed. And they deserve to be.

Yeah, let's try to nominate Matilda. She fits right in. What's her foreign policy? Bush stinks? What's her domestic policy? Bush stinks? Kind of one-dimensional, doncha think? I guess you don't think -- you just rant.

Date:

07/09/03

Time:

06:53 AM

Comments

He took over in a booming economy, we had a budget surplus, and lots of jobs. Now the economy is in shambles, and we have a huge defficit. I hope you will join me in the drive to impeach Mr Davis from the California Governorship.

Matilda's Hummer

Date:

07/09/03

Time:

11:42 AM

Comments

I woke up this morning the neocons were jumping picked up me hammer started a-thumping

hey no name neocon, learn a bit about libel law and due process, seymour hersh merely pointed the way, now it's the job of the congress to order an investigation or special prosecutor for mr. perle.

and will the republicans do that, just because he used his office to try and make some bucks? well, probably not, but have to wonder why he resigned his chair after the hersh article......hmm, damage control perhaps?

the no name neocon reminds me of those folks in the stanley milgram experiments who kept shocking people because the were told to do so, he has an obedience problem, he is afraid to question authority, he needs a leader, he's like the good germans under hitler who just could not bear to question! that of course is the opposite of the american democratic spirit, as modeled by Matilda our inspiration.

you no name would send your own kids to die for bush if he asked you, wouldn't you! because you tremble at the approach of an independent thought, even while your leader admits he lied in the state of the union address....or is 'misspoke' the word they are using.....just like the peace movement said all along!

hey, for more perle stuff folks look at these links, did vous savez that perle is on the board of directors of an israeli newspaper? no conflict of interest there for a high govt. official, is there? read on:

"Perle's resignation as chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board is bound to be blamed on his dubious business dealings involving Adnan Khashoggi and a mysterious "homeland security" outfit d.b.a. Trireme Partners. But the failure of Perle's policy, and the subsequent collapse of the military strategy that evolved out of it, is reason enough to have tossed him out on his ear." http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j032803.html

"Richard Perle's resignation Thursday as chairman of the Defense Policy Board, a Pentagon advisory group, is long overdue. Perle quit the board because he was hired to help bankrupt telecommunications firm Global Crossing win approval from the Department of Defense to sell the company to a Hong Kong billionaire and lawmakers questioned whether Perle's dual roles was a conflict of interest." http://www.antiwar.com/orig/leopold1.html

"…Perle is not only an exponent of pro-Zionist views, but has had close connections with Israel, being a personal friend of Ariel Sharon's, a board member of the Jerusalem Post, and an ex-employee of the Israeli weapon manufacturer Soltam. According to author Seymour M. Hersh, while Perle was a congressional aide for Jackson, FBI wiretaps had picked up Perle providing classified information from the National Security Council to the Israeli embassy."

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/deliso70.html

enough about the prince of darkness, quick comment on the good german, the no name neocon who said this, above:

"I’m not interested in a recitation of the contracts won by Bechtel or Haliburton – unless you can provide evidence of fraud or malfeasance (identify the contract award and tell us who you think should have been given the work – and why)."

here we see the essential fascism of the no name neocon: he talks about contracts but he does not even consider what the iraqi people want to be done with the infrastructure of their own country!!! that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt his inability to understand democracy, it's just as if the building company owned by the bin laden family (bush seniors business buddies, by the way, and investors in carlyle, bush daddy's company) was given the contract to rebuild the world trade center! the no name neocon would also call that fair and square, no doubt, if his great leader told him to.

is he hopeless folks and can he learn to stop his kneeling in front of the bushy idol and repeating bushy wushy speech like a taliban student?

i think he secretly has desire to learn, but he is afraid of what he might learn, but i will continue tapping his brain with my idol thumping hammer

Matilda's way is the American Way!

Signed: Matilda's Hammer

Date:

07/09/03

Time:

01:12 PM

Comments

MH – Strike Three – Yooooouuuuuurrrrrre OUT!

You were challenged to: “Come up with some kind of evidence of malfeasance by either man [Perle or Wolfowitz].“

What did you respond with?

“perle is on the board of directors of an israeli [i.e.”Jewish”] newspaper”

“the failure of Perle's policy, and the subsequent collapse of the military strategy that evolved out of it, is reason enough to have tossed him out on his ear.” (Tell Saddam how our military strategy “collapsed”).

“Perle is not only an exponent of pro-Zionist views [ a Jew] , but has had close connections with Israel, being a personal friend of Ariel Sharon's [another Jew], a board member of the Jerusalem Post [a newspaper owned by Jews], and an ex-employee of the Israeli weapon manufacturer Soltam [worst of all, he’s technically competent].” (Aha, Perle’s “crime” in your eyes is that he’s a Jew – no wonder you love ex-pat Matilda so much). By the way, does Matilda actually stand for anything?

Hummer, you’re a complete waste of time. You can't write, you don't read and you’re an anti-Semite (your code word is “neo-con”) -- you know nothing and you don’t want to learn.

Date:

07/09/03

Time:

01:41 PM

Comments

Wrestling for the Truth of 9/11

The Bush administration, long allergic to the idea of investigating the government's failure to prevent the Sept. 11 terror attacks, is now doing its best to bury the national commission that was created to review Washington's conduct. That was made plain yesterday in a muted way by Thomas Kean, the former New Jersey governor, and Lee Hamilton, the former congressman, who are directing the inquiry. When these seasoned, mild-mannered men start complaining that the administration is trying to intimidate the commission, the country had better take notice.

New York Times

Remember the first words out of Bush's mouth even before he left the Booker Elementary School on the morning of 9/11? He said "I intend to call for a fullscale investigation into this attack!" WHY is he doing everything possible to block an investigation? Are any of his supporters asking this important question???? Matilda

Date:

07/09/03

Time:

02:12 PM

Comments

One lies and the other swears to it.

Matilda presents this excerpt from the lead editorial from the grey lady (with the very rounded heels) -- The Bush administration, long allergic to the idea of investigating the government's failure to prevent the Sept. 11 terror attacks, is now doing its best to bury the national commission that was created to review Washington's conduct. That was made plain yesterday in a muted way by Thomas Kean, the former New Jersey governor, and Lee Hamilton, the former congressman, who are directing the inquiry. When these seasoned, mild-mannered men start complaining that the administration is trying to intimidate the commission, the country had better take notice.

But Matilda apparently suffers from the same malaise that affects her “Hummer” – she can’t read and she isn’t interested in learning.

Here’s the story AND QUOTE from yesterday’s Times that features in today’s editorial.

‘The next few weeks ``are going to be absolutely crucial'' for receiving documents to determine if the work can be completed by deadline, said Thomas Kean, the commission's chairman.’

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-security-commission.html

From this, the NYT reads “muted criticism” and a complaint that the administration is trying to intimidate the commission. And you wonder why the NYT has a credibility problem? What in hell is “muted criticism”? Where is there ANY quote from Lee Hamilton?

Matilda, do you stand for anything? Is your entire being given to hating George W. Bush? Why don't you speak out about the horrors going on now in France?

Date:

07/09/03

Time:

02:15 PM

Comments

Ah, when you can't face the truth, try to smear the truth teller.

Ain't gonna work no name, we is wise to your game.

You think you da ump, but you just a chump

i don't need a bat, troll spammer

cuz i got me a hammer

you don't want the truth to get out, do you no-name, about the connections between the neo-cons and israel? so you try to call anyone who points out the connections an 'anti-semite', so that makes over 50% of Jewish Americans self-hating jews, eh? that is so last year no name, try reading the israeli press sometime, they tell more of the truth than you find in the US media.

find a real arguement dude! do some research! the ad homey min attack is worthless, you ain't worth messing with, to be honest.

anybody else out there on Matilda's wanna take on Matilda's Hammer! the no-name neocon just conceded defeat! he don't have no arguement! claims i cant write, heck, i'm just in a hurry, gotta get back to the contract.

hey folks, read this from the Israeli newspaper Haaretz:

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=280279&sw=neocon

By no-name's standards that means the writer, Ari Shavit, and the newspaper, Haaretz, must hate Jews! Hardee har har! Gotcha again no-name!

"The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history."

"In the course of the past year, a new belief has emerged in the town: the belief in war against Iraq. That ardent faith was disseminated by a small group of 25 or 30 neoconservatives, almost all of them Jewish, almost all of them intellectuals (a partial list: Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, William Kristol, Eliot Abrams, Charles Krauthammer), people who are mutual friends and cultivate one another and are convinced that political ideas are a major driving force of history. They believe that the right political idea entails a fusion of morality and force, human rights and grit. The philosophical underpinnings of the Washington neoconservatives are the writings of Machiavelli, Hobbes and Edmund Burke. They also admire Winston Churchill and the policy pursued by Ronald Reagan. They tend to read reality in terms of the failure of the 1930s (Munich) versus the success of the 1980s (the fall of the Berlin Wall)."

Date:

07/09/03

Time:

02:54 PM

Comments

Hey Hummer, you only get three swings – But you’re still whiffing.

Where is ANY substantiation of ANY malfeasance by ANYONE you label, a “neo-con”?

Gee, some “neoconservative intellectuals” MAY have urged the President to “change the course of history” But Thomas Freidman is skeptical? These are the “crimes” of Richard Perle?

Hummer, are you as stupid as you appear? Or do you totally lack grace? If you cannot substantiate your charges, withdraw them.

Where is ANY substantiation of ANY malfeasance by ANYONE you label, a “neo-con”?

Date:

07/09/03

Time:

04:14 PM

Comments

whiffy whiffy sniffy sniffy

the no name neo con is crying, po thang!

he thought i had a bat in my hand, but it's a hammer!

he's got a snitchy stick in his hand, trying to swing for the pinata, but just keeps on spinning

let's see now, he accuses me of antismitism then i toss haaretz on the table and he has to forget that

he talks about bechtel contracts and i point out his fascist assumptions, so he has to forget that

he wants proof of evil neo con deeds and i cite the article which caused the prince of darkness richard perle to resign his post and then he wants me to provide legal proof! whoo, as if i have the resources of a us prosecutor! neocon doesn't know much about the legal system, that's for sure!

now folks, who is whiffing here? the guy is blindfolded by his own prejudice, swinging away while i dance and tap his hollow head with my hammer

tap tap tap, hello! anybody in there?

wake up neocon, life is more fun when you're not a war monger. quit advocating killing innocent people, it doesn't do the world any good. admit you are wrong dude, it's not the end of the world, you'll feel better afterwards.

did you get whacked around as a kid? is that why you are so into obedience and so angry that you want to bomb innocent people just because your great leader tells you to?

man, i'm starting to wonder about you, maybe instead of Matilda's Hammer you need a doctor, a soul doctor, to explore your sad hankering for death and destruction. you ever told anybody what happened to you no name? what made you this way?

hey, your life is ahead of you, start living for life instead of advocating mass murder, you'll feel better, you'll dance like me, Matilda's Hammer, tap tap tapping on the skulls of the blindfolded no name neocons who lust for power and destruction!

hey folks, i aint joking, look at the result of no name's warmongering desires:

Over 6000 civilian deaths in Iraq from U.S. bombing! http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

no name, i pity you, you are truly one of the most cold hearted trolls i've ever tapped with my hammer of truth, but even you, even you can awaken to the beauty of life! stop supporting mass murder no name! turn your life around!

signed: Matilda's Hammer

coffe break over, time to do some programming

Date:

07/09/03

Time:

05:51 PM

Comments

Hey, Matilda's Hummer!

Keep it up, you're making all liberals look foolish and conservatives look good.

Date:

07/09/03

Time:

06:24 PM

Comments

Poor Puppy, did I hurt Hummer’s feelings? I’m sorry, but you needed to learn a sharp lesson.

When you accuse people of crimes, you can expect to be challenged. If you can’t put up (and you have any grace) you shut up.

OBTW, since you appear to want to rant about “civilian deaths in Iraq” occasioned by our brilliant battle strategy, why don’t you compare these numbers with the numbers of ordinary Iraqis Saddam has killed, maimed and tortured in the ordinary course of his evil regime – and those he would have killed maimed and tortured had we not deposed his sorry ass.

You claim 6000, Maxine McKew of ABC (Australia) claims 4000 - http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2003/s898623.htm

While any non-combatant deaths are a tragedy, you need some perspective. Even 10,000 bodies wouldn’t fill the smallest of Saddam’s mass gravesites. Saddam murdered MILLIONS OF PEOPLE. Saddam murdered THOUSANDS each MONTH.

If you figure Saddam would have murdered even as few as 2,000 people a month (very low), we’ve already SAVED a couple of thousand people and counting.

But you’d rather see a murderous bastard like Saddam stay in power and kill millions of innocents than admit George Walker Bush did a very good deed for humanity.

Hummer, have you no shame?

Date:

07/09/03

Time:

06:51 PM

Comments

A Frenchman shocked everyone by claiming the yellow jersey in the Tour de France yesterday. Must have shocke him too, in true French style he surrendered it to the American team.

Even if you don't like the French (I don't) or cycling (I do), here is a good article on the new French hero:

http://www.bicycling.com/tourdefrance/experts/columns/0,6717,5221,00.html

Let's wait and see how long it takes for the French crowds to show their true style and accuse Lance Armstrong and the American team of cheating.

Date:

07/09/03

Time:

09:27 PM

Comments

Hammer,

You wrote three posts today, by your own admission while at work. The posts were long, and the links must have taken some time to find. It is obvious you considered the replies,undoubtedly with intensity, to your earlier posts in your subsequent rants, and all this takes time.

Would it be fair to say that your employer is not getting his money's worth when he pays you your wages for whatever you were supposed to be doing? Of course there is an obvious answer that would explain your lack of work ethics, the inefficiency of your employer, and your disconnect from reality: You work for the government.

your friend

Rocky

Date:

07/09/03

Time:

09:44 PM

Comments

For Matilda,

A while ago you opined how wonderful was the medical care in France and wondered why the US of A couldn't be as civilized. Here's part of the answer (forgive the length) from today's WSJ:

Political Malpractice

Democrats are expected to muster the 41 votes needed to kill medical liability reform in the Senate today, so why are Republicans smiling? Perhaps because they know they're teeing up what promises to be one of their better issues going into 2004.

Democrats have long made the Senate the graveyard of any and all legal reform. The news is that they're having a harder time getting away with it. The scandal of asbestos litigation has forced them at least to bargain on that issue, while momentum is also building to limit class-action suits. It says something about Tom Daschle's devotion to the trial bar that he's willing to ask his Members to walk the plank even on medical liability, just as voters are discovering the damage it is doing to health care across the country.

No fewer than 19 states are in "malpractice" crisis; Doctors have protested or walked out from Nevada to New Jersey, while pregnant women have had to cross state lines to find an obstetrician. One New Jersey doctor has held seminars to train toll-booth operators in emergency delivery, since more live births are likely to occur in transit to a distant hospital.

Before Texas passed a recent reform, 14 of 17 medical insurers had left in the past two years. In Arkansas, doctors who treat nursing-home patients face a 1,000% premium increase on renewals. In West Virginia, trauma centers closed and doctors went on strike before Democratic Governor Bob Wise led a successful reform effort. Because they contribute to the practice of "defensive" medicine -- or unnecessary procedures just to be sure -- liability suits are also a major cause of rising health-care costs.

Don't Get Sick Here

The American Medical Association says medical delivery in 19 states is in crisis.

Arkansas Missouri Pennsylvania Connecticut New Jersey Texas Florida Nevada Washington Georgia New York West Virginia Illinois North Carolina Wyoming Kentucky Ohio Mississippi Oregon

Source: AMA

All of this prompted the House to limit medical damages by a vote of 229-196 in March. But Senate Democrats continue to just say no. California's Dianne Feinstein dallied with support for a while, before the lawyers and Mr. Daschle yanked her back into line.

The irony is that the proposed Senate bill is modeled after California's own successful 1975 reform that limited pain and suffering damages to $250,000. Victims of genuine malpractice still get compensated for economic harm, but they are no longer able to win the lottery of a huge jury award. In the past 25 years premiums across the U.S. have risen three times more than in California.

Even if reform fails in Congress, the national battle has helped to trigger a wave of change in the states. Ten states have passed some liability reform in the past year, and another 17 have debated it. Nearly all of these reforms include some limit on non-economic damages, the kind that drive insurance rates out of sight and are unconnected to genuine harm.

Still more state reforms are on tap this year. Florida Governor Jeb Bush is calling his legislature back for an unprecedented second session starting today to address the problem. Connecticut, where obstetricians will see an 85% increase in premiums for next year, may also have a special summer session.

As federalists, we think this wave of state reform is probably better than a single national law. Unlike class actions, which damage commerce nationwide, medical liability affects health care in individual states. If a state's political-legal class is driving doctors away, then its voters can throw the political bums out. That may be what eventually happens in Missouri, for example, where Democratic Governor Bob Holden is promising to veto reforms passed by the GOP-run legislature. There's also a danger that a national reform might override even better state laws, such as California's.

The argument for national reform is that the crisis is too acute to wait for 50-state trench warfare, especially against a trial bar grown so rich on tobacco and asbestos shakedowns that it can buy entire legislatures. Some states in crisis, notably Pennsylvania, also have constitutional obstacles to capping non-economic damages. And yet reform's recent success shows that it can be done.

The vote in Congress will help this along by educating Americans about the problem and who refuses to solve it. Among Republicans, we'll be watching Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter in particular. He's typically a pal of the trial lawyers (his son is a medical liability lawyer), but he also faces a primary challenge next year from a reform proponent, Congressman Pat Toomey.

But the main result of today's vote will be to get the Democrats on record for killing reform one more time. They will then have handed President Bush and most Republicans an issue that is both good policy and good politics for next year. In a debate between lawyers and patients, we know where the voters will come down.

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

04:26 AM

Comments

Excellent article. When Democrats rail against "big business", I wonder why they conveniently fail to include the law profession. The cost of litigation was over $700 PER PERSON in 2002, and is expected to rise to $1000 by 2005, a definite drag on the economy. As the article stated, the attorneys have bought legistators, and probably legislatures, with their repugnant gains, so relief will be difficult to enact.

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

08:38 AM

Comments

Wrestling for the Truth of 9/11 The New York Times | Editorial

Wednesday 09 July 2003

The Bush administration, long allergic to the idea of investigating the government's failure to prevent the Sept. 11 terror attacks, is now doing its best to bury the national commission that was created to review Washington's conduct. That was made plain yesterday in a muted way by Thomas Kean, the former New Jersey governor, and Lee Hamilton, the former congressman, who are directing the inquiry. When these seasoned, mild-mannered men start complaining that the administration is trying to intimidate the commission, the country had better take notice.

Sept. 11 Panel Rips Lack of Cooperation http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/071003B.shtml

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

09:00 AM

Comments

One lies and now a second nut swears to it.

To the poster today who points to yesterday's NYT editorial -- this was discredited yesterday -- see post of 2:12 pm on 7/9.

The gist of this is that the news story printed by the NYT on 7/8 in no way supports the editorial position taken by the NYT on the 9th -- What the NYT claims is "muted criticism" by Tom Keane is anything but criticism of any kind. Once again the NYT lies and you dupes fall for it.

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

10:01 AM

Comments

Sheryl McCarthy The Candidacy of Howard Dean Takes 'Wing'

George W. Bush may be raking in campaign money hand over fist, but among the Democratic presidential hopefuls Howard Dean isn't doing too shabbily. He's raised more than any other Democrat during the second quarter of the year, and while this doesn't exactly make him the front-runner he's the one everyone's talking about.

I've followed the Democratic candidates with about as much enthusiasm as I'd muster for a high-stakes lacrosse game. But even I can see that Dean is catching on. Which makes me wonder: Does Howard Dean's growing popularity stem from the fact that people think he's Josiah Bartlet, the fictional president of NBC's "The West Wing?"

Jed Bartlet is the kind of president many of us would love to have, and the similarities to Dean are striking. They're about the same age. Both are from New England. They're both smart and intellectual: Bartlet is a Nobel laureate and former college professor, while Dean is a Yale graduate and a physician. As a colleague who follows "The West Wing" and happened to catch Dean doing a television interview the other day put it, both men can refer to the classics without coming across as highfalutin.

Bartlet and Dean are both married to doctors, women more in the Hillary Clinton than Laura Bush mode. Both are mavericks who seem to have appeared out of nowhere, although they really didn't. They're also pretty liberal, understanding that the little men and women are the ones who need the government most.

The most striking thing about Bartlet and his "West Wing" crew, however, is that they are principled. Sure, they get worked up over what to do about a presidential aide who's dating a call girl. But what they agonize over most is how not to compromise their principles for the sake of politics. As Toby, the angst-ridden director of communications would say, "We have to remember why we're here. And if we don't use this office to do some of the things we came here for, then what's the point?"

Democrats have forgotten this, which is why it's refreshing to have Dean remind us that he belongs to "the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party." In a profile that appeared on the Web site "TheStranger.Com," the words used to describe him apply equally to President Bartlet: "a muscular Democrat"; "pugnacious and a little prickly"; "doesn't back down from a fight"; "willing to play political hardball if that's what it takes to get what he wants."

Continued: http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-vpmcc033356524jul03,0,4831291. column?coll=ny-news-columnists

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

10:05 AM

Comments

" When Democrats rail against "big business", I wonder why they conveniently fail to include the law profession. "

Maybe because the majority of trial lawyers are dimocrats and most dim senators and representatives are too.

Matilda's hummer

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

12:17 PM

Comments

Matilda's Hammer here folks, ready to tap tap tap on the stony idols, the hollow men, the chicken hawks and the fascists.

Well everyday what the peace movement said months ago is being admitted by the Bushies, one of their own guys from the state department says:

"I believe the Bush administration did not provide an accurate picture to the American people of the military threat posed by Iraq."

Read it here folks: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0710-01.htm

the quote is from one Gregory Thielmann, who served as a director in the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence, so he should know eh?

Hey Rocky, good to hear from you, no I don't work for the gov, but I respect gov workers, i got friends and family who are gov workers, they make sure our food is safe, our roads are safe, take care or our national parks, nothing wrong with that in my book. The gov is necessary in my book Rocky, just got to make sure it's a democratic american representative gov, not a fascist neocon richboy gov.

now rocky you may like this website, it's conservative, procapitalist all the way, but antiBushy, check it out: www.antiwar.com

writing this stuff doesn't take me a lot of time, cause i stay on top of things, 20 minutes a day surfing and then it's back to work,

here's what i recommend, start with www.antiwar.com then try www.zmag.org for a radical view then try a brit newspaper http://www.guardian.co.uk/ then an islamic site http://www.islamonline.net/English/index.shtml then maybe a mainstream prog site www.commondreams.org then a analytical site www.counterpunch.org then a media crit site http://www.medialens.org/ try the message board, good discussions there this has some good stuff sometimes http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/ and of course there is the indymedia www.indymedia.org all over the world, post your own articles, read direct accounts then of course the wash post, cnn, nytimes and other mainstream (ie conservative) sites.

so in 20 minutes, zap zap zip, you're hip to what's happening, then use your noggin, follow the money, ask the right questions and presto, it all makes sense.

now that won't work for no name neocon, he lost his marbles long time ago, interesting psychological case though.....

but before i forget it, let me tap his hollow head again, cause hardee har har i'm gonna get him again! for the tenth time or so, heck, i'm losing count.

what'd that crazy psycho war monger say?

"OBTW, since you appear to want to rant about “civilian deaths in Iraq” occasioned by our brilliant battle strategy, why don’t you compare these numbers with the numbers of ordinary Iraqis Saddam has killed, maimed and tortured in the ordinary course of his evil regime – and those he would have killed maimed and tortured had we not deposed his sorry ass."

"While any non-combatant deaths are a tragedy, you need some perspective. Even 10,000 bodies wouldn’t fill the smallest of Saddam’s mass gravesites. Saddam murdered MILLIONS OF PEOPLE. Saddam murdered THOUSANDS each MONTH."

the way he so easily glosses over civilian casualties is a sure sign of the war monger, who sheds crocodile tears whenever challenged about real people dying under real bombs.

first off, of course, the constitutional question, a US soldier is required to defend his or her country, the US, and nothing else. that's in the constitution.

this stuff about the US going to war to save people is a crock, a lie. never happened, never will. any good history book will prove that, but to continue about saddam...

now let's see, in criminal law an accessory to murder goes to jail with the murderer, yes? and who put the guns in saddam's hands? ah yes, who? well look at this photo folks, it's rummysfeld himself shaking hands with evil saddam http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/ so if no name is truly outraged about Saddam's crime (which he isn't, it's a pose, we all know that) let's arrest the secretary of defense, yes? hardee har har! who put the guns in saddam's hand! the US under Ray Gun and bushy senior!

and should we not talk about all the ones bushy senior helped kill when he encouraged the shiites to revolt and then invited saddam to mow them down? that's also accessory to murder. so arrest georgie senior.

and no name of course doesn't have to provide any references for his 'millions and millions'! he just shouts it, repeating what his great Leader says, which brings me to my analysis....

people like no name neocon, i've studied them, they typically tick like this:

their daddy whacked them around when they were kids and like a lot of kids they identified with the agressor, the Big Daddy, so when they're adults they're terrified of challenging authority, they are drawn to militaristic solutions to conflict, they secretly enjoy violent domination and always identify with the most violent winner, though they have to dress this up, morally, because it's so shameful, so they always, like Hitler, cloak themselves in righteous language, 'we kill to save people', that sort of thing, like the taleban they repeat exactly what the great leader says, it makes them feel powerful but inside they feel small, afraid.

anyway, that's the pattern for no name neocon, and it's a pattern folks, you can predict what they're going to say and who they're going to follow, and they are ALWAYS going to follow, like the good germans followed hitler, same thing, same psychology.

now back to work, stay in touch rocky, no name you go get a shrink boy! now! I order you to get a shrink for the protection of humanity! (that's better, eh no name? you LOVE orders now don't you!)

signed: matilda's hammer

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

01:37 PM

Comments

Hey hummer, "some of my best friends" are government workers too. They keep us safe from poisons in our water, ozone in our air, global warming, little green men..... They also set up the fuel for the last few years' forest fires, and forgot to save us from the events of 9/11. BTW, the Bush administration had only been in power for a few months when we got hit with 9/11, not enough time to prepare. Which administration do you blame, the one in place or the one who had eight years to prepare?

By the way, you stated that "Matilda's way is the American Way!". Which way would that be? Leaving the United States to live in a socialist anti american country that is on strike a good portion of the year? Letting "the hammer" answer all the questions that have been presented to her? Criticizing everything republican and accepting blindly anything put forth by the liberal wing of the Democratic party without regards to objectivity?

I hope you do not waste your remaining 40 minutes of break time to reply.

Rocky

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

04:16 PM

Comments

I guess we should call you “Saddam’s Hummer”, since you seem to be his chief apologist and spokesman (now that “Baghdad Bob” has retired to Cairo).

Let me help you out, here. You wrote: “no name of course doesn't have to provide any references for his 'millions and millions'! he just shouts it, repeating what his great Leader says, which brings me to my analysis.... “

While your need for analyis is manifest, it’s beyond the scope of what we can accomplish here, and I’m not trained to help sociopaths. But I can help you learn to do research on the internet. There’s this terrific search engine called GOOGLE. If you visit their site (more advanced users use their toolbar) and enter a phrase like, “estimated deaths iraq saddam”, you gel all kinds of interesting stuff. F’rinstance …

IRAQ: Deaths under Saddam Hussein

Tom Grey answers David Crow's request the empirical basis for his statement on the number of dead under Saddam Hussein. "See http://www.gbn.org/ArticleDisplayServlet.srv?aid=2400&msp=1242

Here is an excerpt:

":Along with other human rights organizations, The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power"

But such facts are not enough -- because for him the true question is whether civilians killed by the war are "unnecessary". I need to ask whether he thinks the civilian deaths were necessary or not. I clearly believe they were necessary to oust Saddam and save the lives he would have murdered, to free the children from prison, etc. -- in fact more necessary than the atomic bombs to force Japan's surrender If Mr. Crow is willing to accept Muslim fanatic terrorists with WMDs, or Muslim theocracy, rather than fight for Western/ Christian/ Capitalist/ Freedom, then indeed comparing death rates doesn't mean much".

Ronald Hilton - 4/25/03

Here’s the link: http://www.stanford.edu/group/wais/iraq_deathsundersaddamhussein42503.html

If you’d spend a little time checking facts (this took me much less than one minute), you might learn something – but then again, that would get in your way.

It’s interesting you defend Saddam but accuse Bush of being in league with Hitler (who died before GWB was born). Saddam’s baath party was in fact facist with direct roots to the Nazi’s.

Matilda, does the Hummer really speak for you? I’ve yet to see you speak out against the horrors going on in your adopted country. What are you FOR, Matilda?

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

04:21 PM

Comments

hey rocky, hammer here, just got a second

you really think the gov does nothing useful? you really believe that? just wondering...

now about 911, that's a strange one, i admit, looked at a lot of angles on that one, and you? now how can clinton be blamed if the head of the fbi osama investigation quit in august 2001 (o'neill was the name, by the way) because of obstruction from above?

and why has bushie stalled all investigations into the atrocity? for example see this from newsday: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0710-06.htm

you looked at this site? http://www.fromthewilderness.com/

you looked at this attack on 'conspiracy' theory? http://www.zmag.org/conspirthdebate.htm

and the response to this attack http://www.globalresearch.org/view_article.php?aid=342536303

now you may know something i don't know, if so pass it on, me, i'm still collecting evidence

Rocky: "By the way, you stated that "Matilda's way is the American Way!". Which way would that be?"

Matilda has courage and committment dude, anybody can see that. That's the american way. after all, we don't have our photo up on a website stating our political viewpoint for all to see, now do we?

now i don't know why Matilda lives in France, and i don't care, lots of my heroes lived outside the US for long periods of time (hemingway for example, and tom jefferson) in france.

i don't know much about france, but i have a pen pal, a madee muwaselle, met her here in states, and she says they got seven weeks vacation, 35 hours work week, and health insurance for everybody in the country, so i personally don't see that as a bad thing, if that is socialism, well then so is medicare and my grandma sure appreciates medicare!

i'm sure matilda can defend her own liberal views, that's not my job, i'm here to have fun and state the truth as i see it and swing my hammer at false idols

and by the way, what is a liberal, in your view? how do you define the term?

back to work signed: matilda's hammer

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

05:39 PM

Comments

[from LindaO] >> This is an amazing and wonderful speech, by the conductor of the Oregon Symphony. He took the opportunity of a commencement speech to give a virtual Declaration of New Independence. A must read! <<

http://www.portlandtribune.com/archview.cgi?email&id=18988

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

09:15 PM

Comments

I believe that George Bush ingaged this country in a war with Iraq based on a falsehood. The document that said that Saddam bought Nuclear materials from Niger was announced by the CIA as forgeries. That should tell the American people something. About a man that put our soldiers in hatms way. That is appalling iam hoping that people will consider George Bush's deceit when they vote in 2004.

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

09:15 PM

Comments

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

09:19 PM

Comments

I beliebe that the deceit that George W Bush inflicted on this country is appalling. The term he used bring them on is provoking the Guerillas in IRAQ if more soldiers die that should tell the American people to consider the Falsefied papers that said that Saddam made purchases of Nuclear material from Niger. The CIA called them forgeries. This is a danger to the United States. NO one need not to discredit George Bush he is doing a good job by himself.

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

09:20 PM

Comments

Hey Hummer,

The poster from 7/10 @ 4:16 PM blew you out of the water on the slaughter by Saddam. No reply from you?

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

09:26 PM

Comments

I don't understand. Maybe the Hummer can staighten it out for me. Wasn't the justification for war against Iraq was the fact the did not comply to the UN regulations (resolution 1440 I think).

Also, It seems to me that liberals on this page support Saddam Hussein and not our President who should be a hero for stopping him.

Date:

07/10/03

Time:

09:37 PM

Comments

Who said, ""In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security."

Answer: That's Hillary Clinton in October of 2002

Hummer, read this and find another subkect:

http://www.rightwingnews.com/john/bushiraq.php

Date:

07/11/03

Time:

06:41 AM

Comments

See No Evil: What Bush Didn't (Want To) Know About 9/11

TomPaine.com Saturday, March 1, 2003

Did Our President Spike The Investigation Of Bin Laden?

On my BBC television show, Newsnight, an American journalist confessed that, since the 9/11 attacks, U.S. reporters are simply too afraid to ask the uncomfortable questions that could kill careers: "It's an obscene comparison, but there was a time in South Africa when people would put flaming tires around people's necks if they dissented. In some ways, the fear is that you will be neck-laced here, you will have a flaming tire of lack of patriotism put around your neck," Dan Rather said. Without his makeup, Rather looked drawn, old and defeated in confessing that he too had given in. "It's that fear that keeps journalists from asking the toughest of the tough questions and to continue to bore in on the tough questions so often."

Investigators were ordered to "back off" from any inquiries into Saudi Arabian financing of terror networks....

..................... If ever we can get the truth about 9/11, the Bush administration will be toast....impeached, jailed. I suspect that all this hullaballoo about WMD and when they knew about it is nothing more than damage control!! We must still concentrate on Enron and September 11, 2001. Matilda

Date:

07/11/03

Time:

08:38 AM

Comments

Gee, Matilda -- you get your silliness from the BBC. This explains a lot.

Here's an editorial from yesterday's WSJ that goes to the substance of the current spate of criticisms:

9/11 Mischief

Every American wants to know what went wrong in the lead-up to the 9/11 attacks. So it would be nice to think that the people charged with finding that out were more interested in the task at hand than in politics as usual.

That's apparently too much to ask from the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States -- better known as the 9/11 Commission. Its first notable business has been to orchestrate a campaign of media leaks and quotes (please dial Senator John McCain for on-the-record outrage) that the Bush Administration is impeding its investigation by, among other crimes, not delivering documents fast enough.

A better question is why the Administration is cooperating at all with what looks more and more like a probe with a partisan edge. At last count, the commission has requested a million pages of documents from 16 government agencies -- all of which it apparently wants right now.

Even if every one of these pieces of paper landed on the commissioners' desks tomorrow, it's preposterous to think that anyone could actually read and absorb them except at a painstaking pace. In any event, what's the rush? The point of this exercise isn't, or at least shouldn't be, to hang some public servants in the town square as fast as possible.

The charge is to discover why terrorists felt the U.S. was vulnerable enough to attack Americans in their very offices. For the purposes of deterring future attacks, the why of the attacks is far more important than the who. The mindset of U.S. policy matters as much as who held it. The evidence on this point won't only be found buried at the CIA but is available in the public record throughout the 1990s.

We're prepared to believe that the Bush Administration made mistakes, but on 9/11 it had barely been in office long enough to rearrange the furniture. The commission's passion for documents raises suspicions that it's looking for some "gotcha" memo -- a "Dear Condi" e-mail or a "Yours sincerely, Don" letter that would purportedly "prove" that someone was asleep at the switch before September 11, 2001.

This suspicion is fueled by the commission's makeup. The Republican chairman, Tom Kean, is an affable former Governor who knows little about foreign policy and defense. His fellow GOP commissioners all have other full-time jobs.

The Democrats, meanwhile, include partisans Jamie Gorelick and Richard Ben-Veniste, who'd love to be Attorney General in the next Democratic Administration, perhaps as early as 2005. A third Democrat, Max Cleland, was recently featured in the Washington Post as intensely bitter at the White House over his Senate defeat last year. None of this bodes well for high-minded, dispassionate statesmanship.

The commission's final report is due in May, and the not-so-subtle threat in this week's publicity blitz is that the commission might delay releasing its findings until the Presidential campaign is really hot. We have a better idea. If this isn't a partisan exercise, then the commission should agree to take its findings out of campaign politics altogether and report them only after the 2004 election.

OBTW, Matilda, what are you FOR?

Date:

07/11/03

Time:

08:50 AM

Comments

Yawn, matilda's hammer here, ready to ring them bells of freedom, ding dong ding dong, hey that reminds me of my favorite looney house inhabitant the no name neocon taleban troll who is hardly at this stage worth a response, he's proven his obedience problems too many times, but gosh, i'll tap tap his noggin a time or two just to send his mad eyes spinning again

no name figures the folks on this message board are too dumb and lazy to scroll up and see the proof that he's a flat out liar, like a lot of mentally challenged leader worshipping louts, but look at this, he claims i support saddam! oh ho!

now repeat after me no name: 'it's possible to be against saddam AND against bushy wushy, it's possible to be against saddam AND against bushy wushy'

no name reminds me of those commies in the 30's that orwell and hemingway wrote about, if you said you were against stalin they claimed you were for hitler! same thing happening here.

no name doesn't care about accuracy, he's a smear artist whose technique needs some work

no name gets mad if you ask for accuracy, he wants to say 'millions and millions of saddam victims' to justify his blind support for mass murder

hey, here's some math: in 150 days bushy wushy has caused 40 civilian deaths a day! (6058 from http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ divided by 150) that's not counting the kids dying from dysentery and cholera or the kids who will die from unexploded cluster bombs and depleted uranium, by hey, not your problem eh no name? not your kids!

if we take no name's figures as true: "Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power", then we figure in the FACT that the US under ray-gun and bushy senior armed him and supported him through 4000 or so of those days, that means they are ACCESSORY to the murder of around 400,000 civilians

we can also look at this grisly algebra in this way, the US CIA brought the baath party to power in a coup in the 60's, and provided then chief executioner saddam with the names of all the progressive activists in iraq at the time, so's he could liquidate them, that's a fact folks,

so the US is brought the guy to power, gave him weapons, supported him diplomatically, then destroyed the civilian infrastructure in 1991, a war crime, then bombed the country for 12 years, while maintaing a sanctions policy that killed over a million kids according the unicef, knowing that the sanctions only made saddam more powerful inside iraq, and then a few months ago bombed again! and you wonder why those people keep taking pot shots at poor us soldiers!

no name, you're hopeless dude, you don't know the history of what you're talking about, but then again i forgot, you're nuts!

how about the rummysfeld-saddam photo folks, eh?

it's da strategy, da main strategy, create a monster and use him to scare your own people, they did it noriega, with milosovich, with osama, saddam, hey it works with people like no name, they need a boogieman, they're trapped in the lowest level of the human mind, dualism, the reptilian division of good and evil, of course they always do THEIR killing on the good side! just like osama you are no name, that's why i call you the taleban troll

well enough of that innacurrate dishonest hyper obedient dull minded flat out crazy no name neocon taleban troll....

somebody else posted this

"The point is that there was very little dispute between the GOP & Democrats over whether Hussein had WMD or not."

from this aptly named site: http://www.rightwingnews.com/john/bushiraq.php

now that is interesting, and it can be interpreted in different ways, such as....perhaps there are two wings of one party, the american business party, with a republican wing and a democrat wing, both dependent on corporate contributions for elections, hmmm that is possible, the democrat wing is made up of the DLC, whose effort to change the fundamental basis of the Democratic party in the late 80's was led by one Billy boy you know who i mean....and the old democrats represented by the politicos who have remained with the people, well, it's one way to analyze it, look at this from the wa wa post: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0710-02.htm

if so, that quote makes a lot of sense, in ways that the writer surely did not intend...

well, who knows, let's be honest and accurate folks, we don't need no name's style of dishonesty to poinon the atmosphere of this fun luvin board!

oops, off to work, friday, weekend is on the way!! yippee!

signed: la hammeurista

Date:

07/11/03

Time:

09:34 AM

Comments

It seems that Fidel’s Hummer (he now signs himself as la hammeurista ) still hasn’t given up.

I’d like to help him, but his screed is all but unreadable. He really needs to learn to write in sentences, organized in paragraphs. Capitalization and punctuation would really help.

I think he offered two defenses of his previous silliness:

1. That the average civilian body count computed from the start of the American invasion of Iraq until now is greater than Saddam managed over the last twelve years (150 or so vs. 125 – granting his estimates.

2. That the US of A is to be blamed for Saddam’s murder and torture because (the idiot claims) “the US is brought the guy to power, [and] gave him weapons”

I don’t know what skills the Hummer has, but mathematics isn’t among them. Hummer would take his body count from a quick (two weeks) and stretch them out over the length to date of the occupation to try to prove that the per diem body count is higher for the Americans than for Saddam. What an idiot!

Now, even if the stories about CIA involvement in the baathist coup of 1963 are true, what relevance does that have for Saddam’s murders in the nineties or GWB’s deposing him in 2003? I don’t doubt there was CIA interest in Iraq in the sixties. But we need to remember what those times were like (I have fond memories of the sixties – I suspect the Hummer was born much later). I recommend reading “The Quiet American”, by Graham Greene – a terrific story of the CIA’s involvement in Vietnam. Anyway, JFK and LBJ were on watch during all of this – how can blame attach to GWB?

And, if we follow the Hummer’s logic on this second point, the US ought to be faulted for not taking this guy out sooner.

So, in the end I agree with the Hummer, we should have done this much sooner. The world is now a better place.

Date:

07/11/03

Time:

10:50 AM

Comments

Hammer, just a short reply while I have time. Government, is like everything else. A moderate amount is fine, but more is not better. The folks in Washington know no bounds. No one can know all the laws, regulations, guidelines we already have, but that does not stop them from cranking out more. It is like a good wine, a little is wonderful, but get too much and you will suffer, as my last encounter with a wonderful french wine exemplifies. Guess who said this: I do not believe in big government, I beleive in effective government" (JFK in the televised debate with RMN).

Regarding 9/11, the WSJ had a good editorial regarding the "conspiracy", and how it is being used for politcal gains. The ones screaming have asked unreasonableamounts of information and want them yesterdaay. If you want, go back and look at the theories on how Ron Brown died in the plane crash. There was "irrefutable evidence" he had been shot. You get credit for still searching the evidence, but keep your objectivity.

Regarding who represents the American way, I would propose that Matilda's leaving the country does not qualify. She has no more right to whine about our politics than I do of my ex-wife's lifestyle (less if you consider alimony). You will survive the Bush years, as I survived the Clinton years, and neither will threaten, a la Alec Baldwin et al, to leave the country if our man loses. Democracy works even when the election goes the other way, and we stay to participate, bitch an whine.

regarding the 7 week vacation and 35 hour work week in France, let us not forget that someone is paying for it all. If I have to pay my employees 40 hrs for 35 hrs work, my labor costs have gone up by 14%. That cost ends up passed on to the customers. Historical note: France was first to put in a shortenned work week in the thirties, and while the French were enjoying that socialist largesse, the Germans were busy at their factories, with the well known results.

Regarding what I consider a liberal, that is a good question. The easy answer would be to give the obsolete definition: lacking moral restraint. In truth, I think socialist would be a better label for today's American "liberals". I prefer Webster's definition: "of or constituting a political party in the United Kingdom associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives". Hell, I think I would qualify as a liberal.

Another great quote worth considering long and hard: "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country". Think about it.

Have fun Rocky

Date:

07/11/03

Time:

09:26 PM

Comments

Scandal! Bush’s enemies aren't telling the truth about what he said.

The president's critics are lying. Mr. Bush never claimed that Saddam Hussein had purchased uranium from Niger. It is not true — as USA Today reported on page one Friday morning — that "tainted evidence made it into the President's State of the Union address." For the record, here's what President Bush actually said in his SOTU: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Precisely which part of that statement isn't true? The British government did say that it believed Saddam had sought African uranium. Is it possible that the British government was mistaken? Sure. Is it possible that Her Majesty's government came by that belief based on an erroneous American intelligence report about a transaction between Iraq and Niger? Yes — but British Prime Minister Tony Blair and members of his Cabinet say that's not what happened.

http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/may/may071103.asp

Date:

07/12/03

Time:

07:29 AM

Comments

flip flip flip the ol hammer-obby lobby here flipping me hammer and flipping the web pages and what did i flip upon that flat flipped me out?

U.S. Representative Ron Paul (repub from texas, libertarian actually) says this:

"There is abundant evidence exposing those who drive our foreign policy justifying preemptive war. Those who scheme are proud of the achievements in usurping control over foreign policy. These are the neoconservatives of recent fame. Granted, they are talented and achieved a political victory that all policymakers must admire. But can freedom and the Republic survive this takeover? That question should concern us."

"Neoconservatives are obviously in positions of influence and are well-placed throughout our government and the media. An apathetic Congress put up little resistance and abdicated its responsibilities over foreign affairs. The electorate was easily influenced to join in the patriotic fervor supporting the military adventurism advocated by the neoconservatives." Read the speech here: http://www.antiwar.com/paul/paul69.html

hey no name neo con you crazy ol loon, i want you to rush to the phone right now and call Mr. Paul and tell him that, because he disses neocons, he's antisemitic! you go get him no name! hardee har har, gotcha again no name, man is this fun!

i hope everybody reads mr. paul's speech, cause it's a good one for all you fake conservatives who support georgie porgie, mr paul is a REAL conservative, when he says limited govt he means it! cause he includes the military budget and other things dear to ray-gun and bushy wushy.

i'm off to have my weekend fun, but hey rocky, got some analysis for you.

we never did decide what a 'liberal' was, now did we? the dictionary defintion is obviously not what we mean, eh? we use 'neo-liberal' to designate an economic philosophy of free markets, so, it's something else...now rocky forgive me if i question the 'lacking moral restraint' definition, i mean really, when somebody defines themselves as HAVING moral restraint i reach for my wallet and then grab my hat and get out cause the ones who claim to have moral restraint always want to take something away from me, namely my freedom to do as i please as long as i don't hurt other poeple: that, in good ol American terms, is called 'the pursuit of happiness' and it's at the foundations of the USA, fact Tom Jefferson wrote that in the Declaration of Independence.

now about socialism, that's a good subject, are we talking about voting for your boss, 'democracy in the workplace'? nope, don't think even ted kennedy advocates that.

how about socialization of cost, research and development, distribution, and profits: is that socialism? so the public shares all the above.

well, if so, then the US is indeed a socialist country, in some ways! i mean think about trains, you got a train and a track and you have to pay for both if you are a train company.

but the car industry does not have to pay for roads, eh? that's us, the general public paying, so part of the cost of the auto industry is socialized: the road network. and who pays the cost of pollution? uh, that's us again, the general public, so that cost is socialized also. but of course general motors does not socialize the profit! oh no....now, don't get me wrong, i'm just stating the facts, not trying to promote nothin,

now rocky, how would you like a guaranteed contract for your business that also paid all your research and development costs? not bad eh? well, that is Boeing company and many other companies have. the public, through the military budget, pays for research and development and guarantees them a market for their products, then boeing spins off products for the private sector and makes more money, so once again a large part of the costs are socialized, but the profit is kept private.

so we turn to iraq and good ol bechtel, run by a former secretary of deeefense! well did bechtel have to compete on the free market for contracts in iraq? no way! and did the democratically elected govt in iraq give them the contract? no way! and did any iraqi company get to bid on the contract? no way! so the market is socialized, the coasts of securing that market are paid by the US taxpayer and the blood of young US soldiers, and the profit from that market is kept in private hands.

anyway, that, briefly, is SOCIALISM in the US

and let's not forget my Grandma, who is perfectly content with socialism when it's called Medicare!

hey no name, you ol war monger you, you still there? check this out: "'Major Combat' in Iraq May Be Over, But the Dying Continues. So Does the Dread Larry Syverson Confronts Knowing His Sons are Still There" link: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0711-04.htm

this man has two sons in iraq and he protests daily with a sign that says 'no blood for oil'. now his name and town are in that article no name so i want you to call him up and tell him that in reality his sons are target practice for angry 'liberated' iraqis because they are bringing freedom! tell him that no name and see what HE says!

and by the way, call the young woman's parents and tell them that too; which young woman? the one who got shot in the stomach somehow and is dead in Iraq! http://edition.cnn.com/2003/US/07/11/sprj.irq.soldier.dies.ap/index.html

gosh, i thought us soldiers volunteered to defend their country! not police a desert full of angry people who just want them to leave. no name, her blood is on YOUR hands, you sent her there and you are keeping all the other soldiers there with your blind obedience to bushy the fascist. your hands no name, look at them dude, every US soldier killed and injured over there is another responsibility for you to shoulder to your grave, so enjoy it! or wake up and help bring them home for goodness sakes!

me, that's enough, i'm starting to get serious again, off to enjoy my weekend

signed matilda's hammer, aka la hammuerista, aka, hammer-obby the lobby for true US patriotism

oh yeah rocky, that quote from jfk, i've never liked it, why? because i'm an American! an american! In the U.S. 'WE THE PEOPLE' are the country, 'WE THE PEOPLE' are the government, the politicos are merely our representatives, so, in that light, jfk's quote doesnt't make sense. he tries to separate 'we the people' from the 'country' and i aint gonna let him or anyone else take my country away, not without a fight!

Date:

07/12/03

Time:

07:41 AM

Comments

" The tragic failure of the Administration's efforts to build international support before launching its impatient rush towards war against Iraq is now bearing its bitter, bitter fruit. The difficulty in finding just 20,000 peacekeepers to patrol Iraq is evidence that White House efforts to assemble 49 nations into a "coalition of the willing" was merely an exercise in rhetoric, meant to cover the lack of significant military or financial contributions from dozens of nations, save for those of Britain, Australia, and Poland.

Has the lack of a plan for post-war Iraq needlessly cost American lives? If we had not been so convinced that Iraqis would greet our armies with flowers and smiles, could we have better anticipated the chaos and lawlessness that broke out in the days after the war?

If we had not been so cocksure about our ability to neatly decapitate the leadership of the Iraqi regime, could we have fashioned a better plan to deal with the collapse of civil order as our tanks rolled into Baghdad?"

We Must Ask the World for Help on Iraq

By Sen. Robert Byrd July 11, 2003 http://www.senate.gov/~byrd/byrd_newsroom/byrd_news_july/byrd_2003_julylist/byrd_2003_julylist_6.html

Date:

07/12/03

Time:

01:51 PM

Comments

So Joe Scarborough is headed to Hollywood to talk about wether liberal celebs should express there political opinions. his opposition is kinda hypocritical on 2 points. 1: his favorite republican, Ronald Regan was once a member of the hollywood elite. since i've been watching scarborough country all he's done is bash liberals(because all we appearanly do is screw up) he's gone on about danny glover and jannine garaphelo. and that leads me to #2: almost a week has gone by and while he's talked about the comments of a member of the chicago cubs, he's said nothing about the comments of his cohort who use to be a guest of his on casual fridays. Mr. Micheal Savage who told a caller to get aids and die on live t.v. I love joe scarborough and his show and i aplaud his pro-gay rights stance but it's hypocritical for him to bash liberals (even if it is sean penn) and not also talk about this black mark on conservatism and msnbc. it's conservative cowardism because if you want to talk hypocracy then start at home. Where Micheal Savage was hired by msnbc, msn who host one of the largest number of gay and lesbian online communities and nbc who bilks in ratings from shows like will and grace and other up and comming shows. even though they were warned that he would be a liability. even the new york times fessed up to it's mistakes.

thats the real deal

Roman Vanos

new york, new york

Date:

07/12/03

Time:

01:56 PM

Comments

Dear Hammerless,

I’m having a really hard time reading your screeds because you can’t seem to even try to write garden variety English. I think you were trying to cite rep Ron Paul as having “dissed neo-cons” – thus providing you cover. Once again, you failed to read your citations thoroughly.

Rep Paul said (and you even include this in your cite), “Granted, they [the neoconservatives] are talented and achieved a political victory that all policymakers must admire.”

This is a far cry from your claims to high crimes. Indeed, Mr. Paul doesn’t identify his grouping – so we can’t tell if he includes only Jews – as you have.

Now, hammerless – you seem to be continuing to try to find some justifications for your baseless charges. And you’ve obviously spent several days at it. Don’t you think it’s about time for you to issue a retraction and/or an apology? But that would require grace, now wouldn’t it?

As to why I’m now terming you “hammerless”, two reasons.

One, if you really had a hammer, you’d have hit something by now.

Two, guys who talk a lot about their “hammers” often suffer from what is medically known as SPS -- “small ‘package’ syndrome. You know – when the ladies laugh at you.

Date:

07/13/03

Time:

04:18 AM

Comments

===== "The world expects something more of an American president than to prance around on a flight deck dressed up like [a] pilot. He's expected to be a leader. That's my fundamental issue with it. It doesn't reflect the gravitas of the office. Furthermore, it's a little phony."

-- General Wesley Clark in Newsweek, speaking of Bush's aircraft carrier landing.

Date:

07/13/03

Time:

06:26 AM

Comments

What's really (still) got you Dims steamed isn't just the image of a fit and vigorous leader of the free world emerging from a just-landed jet on the flight deck of a super-carrier. Nope, it was the spontaneous and heartfelt reaction from our men-at-arms. The troops love our president -- as do most Americans.

General Wesley (DON'T CALL ME McCLELLAN!) Clark would be afraid to appear in person in front of a crowd like that -- lest he be fragged!

Date:

07/13/03

Time:

08:44 AM

Comments

The Bush adminsitration is continuing to lie and they're getting caught.....I have some many mixed feeling and want to dis-own our leaders when they continue to deceive us. It's best discribed by a Vietnam veteran who was very badly wounded and then found out President Johnson lied about the Gulf of Tonkin so the US could go to war. Here is what he writes today:

The full story is found on http://truthout.org/docs_03/071203F.shtml

Date:

07/13/03

Time:

09:48 AM

Comments

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030630&s=brooks

BUSH USES WELL-KNOWN LINGUISTIC TECHNIQUES TO MAKE CITIZENS FEEL DEPENDENT "A Nation of Victims" By Renana Brooks

Excerpt:

<George W Bush is generally regarded as a mangler of the English language. What is overlooked is his mastery of emotional language--especially negatively charged emotional language--as a political tool. Take a closer look at his speeches and public utterances, and his political success turns out to be no surprise. It is the predictable result of the intentional use of language to dominate others.

Date:

07/13/03

Time:

08:25 PM

Comments

Bush prancing around? Letter to the editor of CNSNews.com: "Regarding the 7 May 2003 news story on Democrat criticism of President Bush's speech onboard the USS Abraham Lincoln, I will remind readers that upon termination of the bombing campaign over Kosovo, then-President Clinton and his cohorts shut down Whiteman Air Force Base for 24 hours, so he could use Whiteman as a backdrop to declare the U.S. air campaign in Kosovo over.

I was there when the White House staff showed up and ordered the construction of a 100 foot stage, the decoration of an entire hangar interior with bunting and flags, the evacuation of a major office space to be used as a pre-reception area, and the evacuation of another maintenance space to be used for press conferences - the complete shutdown of Whiteman AFB to all personnel, including the sequestering of family members on the base.

I also remember the arrival of Air Force 1 at Whiteman. I remember sending a cadre of security personnel to Kansas City Airport to secure Air Force 2.

I remember the arrival of several C-141 transport aircraft carrying the presidential motorcade to take the president from Air Force 1 to a B-2 hangar, to the site of the speech, and then back to Air Force 1 - a total distance of at least a quarter mile.

I remember it most vividly because I was appalled at the treatment the Wing leadership received from the White House staff, and was equally appalled at the fact they brought an armored motorcade to drive him a quarter mile on one of the most secure military installations on the face of the earth.

Messrs. Waxman and Byrd would be wise to recollect this photo op while they criticize President Bush, and may want to ask the OMB to check on how much that little photo op cost. They would also be wise to recollect the chilly reception President Clinton received. Perhaps that is why they are so bitter. President Clinton would have never been able to pull off what President Bush did. Those sailors who greeted President Bush have a genuine respect for him. Can't make the same assessment of Clinton's photo op at Whiteman AFB."

Steve M. Omaha, NE

Date:

07/14/03

Time:

06:56 AM

Comments

Hey Steve M., top of the morning to you! Hammerobby here, tap tap tapping around. got an article for your steve

but first

hey rocky here's a quote for you: "Do not ask what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" Adolph Hitler, 1933 Just joking Rocky, but I'm sure hitler said something just like that, he knew how to get those germans to sacrifice everything for the fatherland, watch out rocky! they want you to worship the state, just like a religion it is, with all the sacrifice and rituals, don't fall for that stuff rocky! we da people!

Steve, do you really think American soldiers support a chickenhawk like Bush, or is that just follow the leader propaganda.

Check out this article, from the front lines: http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=424006

'I don't know what I'm doing here in this city' Sitting ducks for snipers' bullets, far from home and unable to contact their families, US troops in Iraq are finding their morale slipping away. Lee Gordon talks to servicemen and women for whom victory in the Gulf now has a hollow ring 13 July 2003

'We didn't win this war, not at all," said reserve infantryman Eric Holt, on guard outside the Republican Palace in Baghdad. "I don't know what I'm doing here and I don't like what's happening in this city," continued the 28-year-old from New York State. "It ain't right for the folks here. You know, there are a whole lot of our girls getting pregnant just so they can go home quick."

Morale among troops in the Iraqi capital has plunged, not least because of new orders that could see them there for a year instead of six months. Four soldiers have been shot by snipers or at close range near Baghdad University in the last seven days, in apparently random killings similar to that of the British journalist Richard Wild last weekend. The 24-year-old former British army officer was killed by a single shot to the back of his head after leaving the university, where he had been meeting Islamic groups.

The investigation into Mr Wild's death has been hampered by the decision of the military police to withdraw from the campus, where religious edicts have appeared on the walls ordering females to cover their heads. Only one company of about 100 former New York and LA army policemen is responsible for investigating crimes, and the order to stay away from the university means it has not been able to interview witnesses or find forensic evidence such as the spent bullet. Meanwhile Mr Wild's body is understood to be at the airport waiting transfer to Britain. The British embassy has declined to say more.

Violence is commonplace in Baghdad. On Monday a soldier was killed and three others injured when a home-made bomb was tossed on to a military convoy as it emerged from an underpass. The explosion ripped into a Humvee military car, tossing it across the road.

A crowd gathered to watch as the three injured soldiers were loaded into another Humvee. Sergeant Patrick Compton, who bore the brunt of the explosion, lay across the front seat of the damaged vehicle holding his torn and badly burnt arm, screaming for help. He was helped into the rescue vehicle but later died of his injuries. Asked about the incident, a sergeant in the military police smiled and lifted his helmet to wipe the sweat that was running down his face. "We're going to help clean up this mess and move out of here. Quickly. There is no damn chance of us catching anyone." Pointing to his men, who were trying to hold back a crowd of around 100 pushing towards the debris, he said: "There is nothing more we can do."

Outside Baghdad the situation is also difficult. Border guards, far away from internet cafés and international telephones, find contacting their families particularly problematic. Forbidden from using military satellite communications, they often stop passing Iraqi traders and ask to use their telephones. A 22-year-old guard, part of a tank unit at the border, said he had not spoken to his wife for three months. It takes at least two months to receive a reply to a letter.

Perhaps not surprisingly, anecdotal evidence points to a growing number of breaches of military discipline. A spokesman said any soldier who fell pregnant would almost certainly be dishonourably discharged from the army and might even face a court martial, unless she was pregnant by her husband.

Prostitutes have now appeared. Rana, a 21-year-old Iraqi woman from Saddam's home town of Tikrit, said she had been working as a prostitute for a month near the army barracks in Abu Nawaz Street, central Baghdad. Most of her clients are US soldiers. She charges $50 for a night, including a room in a hotel in nearby Saddoon Street.

A receptionist at the hotel, where rooms are $30 for a twin, said there was no prostitution before the invasion. "We don't want our women to do these things," he said, adding that soldiers also try to sell handguns to make money. "They come in here and ask if I want to buy small guns a few times a week but we don't need any, we have a Kalashnikov."

The 11pm curfew means prostitutes and the brothels conduct their business early in the day. "Commanders turn a blind eye to soldiers who consort with prostitutes," a tank soldier said. "They understand the pressure on their troops."

"We're working 14 hours a day guarding and on patrol," a 21-year-old female reservist from Oklahoma said. "I finish and go straight to sleep then wake up an hour before duty, shower and start again. I don't think I can take an extra six months. I was looking forward to going home in October. But we're lucky in our squad because we drew down some cops from New York. The sergeant is from the Bronx. They're real tough and they're holding us together."

She spoke on the condition that she remain anonymous after her commander ordered troops not to give media interviews. Her colleague, a 26-year-old reservist from Houston who was studying to become a police officer, said she planned to quit the army as soon as she got home. "I've been in the army eight years and I can't do it any more, not after this. We're sitting here like targets and the Iraqis are getting bolder. They're taking a pop in broad daylight." One of the military policemen from her squad had cracked up and been sent home this week after a skirmish with Iraqi attackers, she said. "When I heard we might get another six months I wanted to cry." -

Date:

07/14/03

Time:

08:35 AM

Comments

More of what Matilda won't tell you about the goings-on in France:

http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,

French Actors Trip Government

Performers' Benefits Fight Brings Art Festivals To a Halt and May Boost Labor-Union Tension