Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Bush slept through Saddam’s hanging

December 30, 2006

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Bush_statement_on_execution_of_Saddam_1230.html
Bush slept through the Aug 6, 2001 PDB briefing, bin Laden determined to attack in the United States.

Bush slept through the Skeptics Annotated Quran class, that the Quran is bigoted and the Verse of the Sword 9:5, slay them where you can find them, commanded 9-11.

Bush slept through the complicity of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia in 9-11.

Bush slept through NoKo getting nukes.

Bush slept through Pakistan developing a new nuclear reactor to produce smaller warheads that can go on sub missiles for its subs from its sub shipyard that France built.

Bush slept through China getting our night vision to supply to insurgents to kill and maim our troops.

LA Times Bush Statement
This article represents hypotheses, speculation or opinion. All other disclaimers apply.

Advertisements

Paul Begala waylays Bay Buchanan, Virgil Goode, and 9-11 Truth

December 22, 2006

Begala Bay Buchanan CNN Transcript

PAUL BEGALA, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: You know, well, first, just call a spade a spade. Virgil Goode is a bigot and he’s an idiot. Let’s hope he clears that up when he has his press conference, because lots of people misspeak.
The real hate is Begala towards Virgil Goode for telling the truth. Begala was part of the Clinton administration that deliberately attacked Pat Buchanan for saying in 1992 (and in 1996) to restrict immigration as a re-election ploy. This was before and after the WTC 1993 attacks.

The Clinton team cynically chose to risk American lives in order to attack Pat to get re-elected. Begala was part of that political team with Carville in 1992 that made this choice. On 9-11, that risk taking resulted in almost 3000 people being killed.

Begala can’t call the 9-11 Families bigots, he knows that. But he can call Virgil Goode a bigot. Virgil Goode is a spokesperson for the 9-11 Families who do think immigration should have been restricted after 9-11 and really WTC 1993.

Begala was in the Clinton administration during the WTC Feb 26, 1993 attack. He knew that day that Pat Buchanan had been right in his 1992 speech to call for immigration restriction and that Begala had endangered the country by calling Buchanan a bigot. Rather than apologize then and stop immigration, Begala kept silent.

Begala’s real hate is for his victims, the 9-11 Families, and those who died. Begala knows he can’t vent his real hate on the dead or their widows and orphans, but he can vent his hate on those who champion the cause of the 9-11 Families, Virgil Goode.

Begala deliberately did this to Pat Buchanan’s sister, Bay Buchanan so that she couldn’t tell the above truth, which is true on Begala.

==Now they question Bay Buchanan

BLITZER: Let me read once again for you, Bay, and for our viewers precisely what is in this letter that he wrote: “If American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration, there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran.”

(You have to see the video to see how she was put on the spot throughout this question and the subsequent discussion.)

BAY BUCHANAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: I can understand what he is trying to say. I think that his choice of words were outrageous. I think it’s a clear mistake that he made, to suggest that we should be worried that Keith Ellison is a — happens to be a Muslim, and is elected now to the Congress, wants to use a Koran.

I don’t see any problem with any of the above, none whatsoever. I think what he — what he is trying to say, which I think is a legitimate point, is that, as a nation, we should get control of our immigration laws, and make certain we have a national debate as to what is our best interests as to who is coming and who we are inviting into this country.

And that is a legitimate national debate, not what we’re doing today. But I think this is something not quite that. And I think this is a mistake.

== end of Bay Buchanan quote
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0612/21/sitroom.01.html

Begala and Blitzer both knew this history. They both were there in 1992 when the Democrats and the MSM attacked Pat Buchanan after Buchanan’s key note speech at the RNC convention.

==
After Virgil Goode they go on to Sandy Berger, a Clinton administration member who took documents out of the National Archive and tried to destroy them. He hid some under a trailer near the National Archives on a break, and then came back and retrieved them later. This was during his testimony to the 9-11 Commission.

Begala pre-emptively attacked Bay Buchanan before the Berger segment so that she couldn’t hold Begala and the Clinton team responsible for letting in the 19 hijackers as immigrants between Pat Buchanan saying stop immigration in 1996 and 9-11.


More on Begala and Bay Buchanan

This article represents opinion, hypotheses, and speculation. It is draft and preliminary. All other disclaimers apply.

Rawstory Comments October 2006

December 16, 2006

October 5th, 2006 at 05:14:12
Russia, India, China worst for bribery
http://www.rawstory.com/comments/20701.html

Iran: Sanctions won’t derail enrichment

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/20702.html

“Nato’s top brass: Pakistan aids Taliban”

October 7th, 2006 at 17:49:33

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/20818.html

http://www.rawstory.com/comments.php?id=20818

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/20844.html

October 8th, 2006 at 13:35:49 From: Fallaci Admirer
The whole govt is afraid of the Bush team
There is a vast amount of info known about the Bush team. This includes in staff of DOJ perhaps.

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/20834.html

October 8th, 2006 at 16:11:21 From: Fallacie Admirer
Reply to Gandhi
NATO is in Afghanistan to protect the West. Pakistan is intentionally undermining it by training the Taliban and supporting them with funds from Saudi Arabia that they take a cut of. Iran is supporting international terrorism and developing nukes. Pakistan developed its nuke in May 98 and then attacked India in 99 and in effect has attacked us through the Tablian and al Qaeda in Aug 98 embassies, 2000 Cole, 2001 WTC and Pentagon. Saudis are funding this. We have to go to the two sources Pakistan and Saudi Arabia or we will lose. They will fund and support rebels against us in Afghanistan and Iraq forever. Iran is part of this combination and it sees that like Pakistan, once it gets nukes, it can go on the offensive. So we need to attack them now when battle phase deaths are 200 v. occupation deaths per month in Iraq are 70. Deaths in Iran may be higher than in Iraq for the battle phase, but we are bleeding in Iraq and Afghanistan while our main opponents sit back in Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia without being touched.

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21350.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6069230.stm

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21416.html

October 23rd, 2006 at 11:14:53 From: Fallaci Admirer
re johns
Jack Straw may not be eaten by snakes but he is getting hissed at for asking Muslim women to take their veils off. But being thrown to crocs by new Britons may be next for him if he keeps immigration going strong.

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21420.html

===

October 23rd, 2006 at 11:16:39 From: Fallaci Admirer
Musharraf knew better
Mush didn’t go on the Colbert report but instead the Daily Show, where he was treated with the same respect dictators who kill Americans get at the White House, a plug for his book.

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21429.html

==
==

October 23rd, 2006 at 12:07:44 From: Fallaci Admirer
Sibel has my vote
Hastert should go. Hastert needs to testify. Mostly about everything he knows about the Clinton and Bush administrations and people in all 3 branches of govt at high levels.

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21445.html

==

October 23rd, 2006 at 17:55:33 From: Fallaci Admirer
Iraq 200 Battle Phase Deaths 70/mo occupation
We lose 70 deaths a month occupying Iraq. The two main drivers of occupation deaths are foreign Sunni Arab fighters that Iranians won’t take in and the historical Shiite Sunni struggle in Iraq for control. These won’t be present in Iran. Invading Iran will help the struggle in Iraq. Thus by leaving Iraq and invading Iran we help Iraq at lower cost. If Iraq gets very bad while we are gone, we can always swing through it later. But in Iran we position our army on the Pakistan border to denuke and deLaden Pakistan.

==

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21463.html
http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21432.html

October 23rd, 2006 at 11:11:15 From: Fallaci Admirer
New Deal = Old Deal Kill Americans
This has been the Pakistan ISI and Taliban deal since 1993/94 when the ISI created the Taliban. The deal is that Pakistan and the Taliban join forces to kill Americans and Brits everywhere in the world. Oh and also Hindus, Jews, French, Spanish, etc.

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21433.html

God Bless Internet Trolls

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21729.html

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21759.html

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21767.htm

http://www.rawstory.com/comments.php?id=21767

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21846.html

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21885.html

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21895.html

Harvard paper suspends ‘plagiarists’

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21922.html

http://www.rawstory.com/comments.php?id=21925.html
http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21925.html

“Nigerian leaders ‘stole’ $380 billion”

October 22, 2006

“Nigerian leaders ‘stole’ $380 billion”

BBC News

“More than $380bn has either been stolen or wasted by Nigerian governments since independence in 1960, the chief corruption fighter has said.

Nuhu Ribadu told the BBC that Nigeria has “nothing much” to show for the missing money. “

October 20th, 2006 at 16:03:27

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6069230.stm

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/21350.html

October 20th, 2006 at 16:44:14 From: Fallaci Admirer
IMF World Bank corruption part of this
The IMF and World Bank themselves are corrupt. Russia has extensive files on US profs who are at the top of the IMF and World Bank and US Treasury, fed, Antitrust Division, judges, etc. From the very beginning this was true. Harry Dexter White was a Soviet spy in WWII and was part of setting up the IMF. Nigeria has likely known of this for decades and used that as a way to get away with this. This is a hypothesis and speculation.

This post represents opinion, hypotheses, and speculation. All other disclaimers apply.

“Nato’s top brass accuse Pakistan over Taliban aid”

October 21, 2006

The Telegraph

Nato’s top brass accuse Pakistan over Taliban aid

By Ahmed Rashid in Kabul
(Filed: 06/10/2006)

“Commanders from five Nato countries whose troops have just fought the bloodiest battle with the Taliban in five years, are demanding their governments get tough with Pakistan over the support and sanctuary its security services provide to the Taliban.

Nato’s report on Operation Medusa, an intense battle that lasted from September 4-17 in the Panjwai district, demonstrates the extent of the Taliban’s military capability and states clearly that Pakistan’s Interservices Intelligence (ISI) is involved in supplying it.”

“Nato’s top brass: Pakistan aids Taliban”

October 7th, 2006 at 17:49:33

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/20818.html

http://www.rawstory.com/comments.php?id=20818

October 7th, 2006 at 20:31:02 From: Fallaci Admirer
Takes an army to change Pakistan
It takes an army to change Pakistan. Our army is in Iraq getting itself shot for nothing. Iran is in the way. Going through Iran on the way to Pakistan is the fastest and best route to get there. Also by the time we subdue Iran, Pakistan may get the message.

October 7th, 2006 at 22:13:56 From: Fallaci Admirer
Scott l
At the end of another thread, you said that Iran like Russia would fight us through proxies and that getting nukes doesn’t mean we won’t have conflict with them. The point of invading Iran is to fight them when we can defeat them now with low casualties. We decided not to fight Russia in 1945, and lost 50k+ in Korea and Vietnam each. Battle phase deaths in Iraq were 200, occupation deaths are 70. So if we leave Iraq and invade Iran we can avoid greater deaths later.

October 7th, 2006 at 22:15:42 From: Fallaci Admirer
reply to Piltdown
“We should have dealt with the Taliban long ago, and done it properly.” They are still a threat as is Pakistan. The levels of deaths we have in battle now are very low compared to wars past. When they catch up with us in technology this will pass. We need to defeat them now when its very low. This won’t last forever.

October 7th, 2006 at 22:19:32 From: Fallaci Admirer
reply to Gandhi
“But to state that Pakistan’s Interservices Intelligence (ISI) is involved is clearly speculation.” Frontline went to Pakistan and filmed the Taliban in the tribal regions. They have killed over 100 tribal elders. The head of NATO in Afghanistan is a Brit. The Brits are facing up to the reality of Pakistan because of Pakistan’s role in terrorism there and their much greater links and respect for India, something you, Gandhi, should appreciate. The Seymour Hersh New Yorker article on Kunduz airlift says that India’s RAW (their intel) monitored it. This was the Nov 2001 airlift of Pakistan generals and adviers to the Taliban out of the Afghan city of Kunduz. They were fighting us even after 9-11. Saudis give them money to fund the Taliban and they skim a percentage. They have 38 billion in foreign debt.

October 7th, 2006 at 22:24:58 From: Fallaci Admirer
Gandhi
Many of your points are well taken. But those emphasize why we need to denuke them and keep them from funding terrorism or immigrating here. We should realize Iraq was a failure. We also failed to set up a secular govt and abolish religious law and courts so that we were at least fighting for what we believe.

October 7th, 2006 at 22:28:03 From: Fallaci Admirer
Dmaker
You are right that fighting in Afghanistan is a losing proposition, like Iraq. We need to think in terms of raids instead of occupation. That is why we need to denuke Pakistan, and not waste our effort on Afghanistan that we can never win. Same with Iraq. Denuke Iran and Pakistan and leave.

October 7th, 2006 at 23:00:12 From: Fallaci Admirer
Terrible
You are right, invading Iraq was a mistake. It was a Bush, PNAC obsession. When we were attacked on 9-11, they should have reoriented to Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and UAE. If they had done that, we might have gotten Iran to give up its nukes, or we could blow them over quickly like we did Iraq and can now.

October 7th, 2006 at 23:01:53 From: Fallaci Admirer
Dmaker
Not sure your point, but I think if Bush explains a real strategy to the American people they will support it. He can explain we had 200 battle phase deaths in Iraq and have 70 occupation deaths per month. So the logic is leave Iraq but denuke Iran while its easy. He can then say that lets us combine our armies together without spelling out the threate to Pakistan in public.

October 7th, 2006 at 23:20:01 From: Fallaci Admirer
Piltdown
“Put your money where your mouth is.” The point is we can lose a few lives now or more later. In Iraq we had 200 battle phase deaths and lose 70 deaths per month of occupation, which gains us nothing. We want to denuke Iran and Pakistan and stop the funding of terrorism by Saudi Arabia and UAE. So we should do exactly those things. That’s what the neocons want to do, but they think they have to lie to the American people instead of just say, this is our plan. They can do each part of it one at a time so as not to tip off the others, but each part makes sense. If they tell the American people we are leaving Iraq so the 70 deaths per month are over, but we have to denuke Iran by ground invasion and point out this cost only 200 deaths in Iraq, they have a plan to sell.

October 7th, 2006 at 23:21:31 From: Fallaci Admirer
Piltdown, Secular rulers gone
We have focused our efforts in the wrong direction in Iraq and Afghanistan, you are right. If we invade Iran, we will be taking out theocratic rulers. All rulers in that part of the world are unpopular. If you depose theocratic rulers, the people will support non theocratic ones, adn vice versa. So depose the theocrats in Iran and Saudi Arabia.

October 7th, 2006 at 23:34:39 From: Fallaci Admirer
Thank you

October 7th, 2006 at 23:36:08 From: Fallaci Admirer
re Dmaker
We Pakistanis and Saudis agree to what we ask but then do what they want. They both keep supporting terrorism. So we have to create change.

October 7th, 2006 at 23:45:01 From: Fallaci Admirer
Rephrase
The Pakistanis and Saudis agree to what we ask but then do what they want.

October 8th, 2006 at 09:19:24 From: Fallacie Admirer
Terrible
Since Iran has no nukes, this is the time to keep them from getting them. North Korea is a problem as is Pakistan because they have nukes and spread missile and nuclear technology.

October 8th, 2006 at 09:24:36 From: Fallaci Admirer
reply to Scott l
“I will have to settle for the natural course of cultural evolution to get my wish. ” So in the meantime, we need to contain the violence that may come towards us. As you point out, their masses are programmed with extreme views towards us that include what we call suicide bombing, but which they call maryrdom. Until that view changes, we need to keep nukes out of their hands. How long is this? Arabia attacked the West in 633 AD. Its now 2006. The Middle East and Pakistan were more Western in the 1960’s than now. Thus the evolution has been towards extremism. Iran, UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan are all funding or supporting that movement. Changing the governments can stop that direction. They can’t start getting better until we stop their governments and rich sheiks from making it worse. Denuke them in the meantime.

October 8th, 2006 at 09:26:54 From: Fallaci Admirer
Dmaker
FA: The Pakistanis and Saudis agree to what we ask but then do what they want. “you mean what is good for the usa and conspirators???????? and for themselfs!!!” Its what we ask them to do and then they don’t do. We ask them to stop supporting terrorism and in reference to Scott l’s comments, to stop teaching hate of the West in their schools. Saudi textbooks have such ideas in them, and they spread those textbooks in other lands, even in the US and Europe.

October 8th, 2006 at 09:27:35 From: Fallaci Admirer
Dmaker
FA: The Pakistanis and Saudis agree to what we ask but then do what they want. “you mean what is good for the usa and conspirators???????? and for themselfs!!!” Its what we ask them to do and then they don’t do. We ask them to stop supporting terrorism and in reference to Scott l’s comments, to stop teaching hate of the West in their schools. Saudi textbooks have such ideas in them, and they spread those textbooks in other lands, even in the US and Europe.

October 8th, 2006 at 10:13:32 From: Fallaci Admirer
Baz
“Ask whether can America afford the losses that have been the only reward for her unstinting support for Isreal?” The attack on the West started in 633 and was against the Christian Eastern Roman Empire. The Pope quoted Manuel II from 1500 and indicated it was a brusque statement, and there have been death threats. In France, the police have had 2500 wounded in 2006 from going into the projects of immigrants. Women are raped routinely in Malvo Sweden for not wearing veils and the government covers it up. A car dealer in Ohio just got death threats for an ad about Discounts for Dhimmis. Its not limited to Isreal in space or time. It started in 633 and is almost global in scope. They attacked India in 1999 and said it was terrorists when it was Pakistan’s army. When the invaders reached India they killed millions, some estimate tens of millions.

October 8th, 2006 at 12:59:59 From: Fallaci Admirer
Reply Dmaker
The Western doctrine is not just a random doctrine that we have and others have one just as good. The West’s doctrine reflects the wisdom of the ancient world around the Mediterranean basis. This includes the ancient Middle East. The Ancient Greek city states were based on democracy and on free state on the sea. They learned from each other, debated, and advanced science, law, freedom, etc. That was partly preserved by the Eastern Roman Empire. The attack in 633 was an attack on the ancient laws of Babylon and the Middle East for trade, commerce, interest, etc. The idea is to not have to nuke the rest of the world later by acting now when battle phase deaths in Iraq were 200 v. occupation deaths of 70 per month. We can invade Iran, leave Iraq, cut our total deaths and help Iraq by cutting of the aid to the rebels from Iran. Thus invading Iran dominates staying in Iraq.

October 8th, 2006 at 14:29:16 From: Fallaci Admirer
Gandhi
Good link and point. “Gen. David Richards, a British officer who commands NATO’s 32,000 troops here, warned in an interview with The Associated Press that if life doesn’t get better over the winter, most Afghans could switch sides.” We need to take this to the source, Pakistan which is training them and Saudi Arabia and UAE that are funding them.

October 8th, 2006 at 14:29:48 From: Fallaci Admirer
Tom3
We need to increase our army size, good point Tom3.

October 8th, 2006 at 14:57:17 From: Fallaci Admirer
Tom3
So we agree on the diagnosis, that Pakistan is the source and that it seeks to harm the West. So the question is the remedy. Invading Iran lets us surround Pakistan. We can then exert pressure on it by sanctions and even blockade. We can bomb their nuclear processing plants to stop their producing more fuel. Nuclear weapons have to be touched up or they become inert. Without a source, they become inoperative.

October 8th, 2006 at 15:48:54 From: Fallaci Admirer
Tom3
“So, tell me again Fascist Admirer, how are we going to invade Iran and Pakistan, when we are LOSING in Afghanistan and Iraq?” We are fighting wars on the periphery in Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are funding or supporting those wars. That is why we must take the war to the source. Our main army is in Iraq. That army can leave Iraq and knock over Iran. Battle phase deaths in Iraq were 200, occupation deaths are 70 per month. We take out Iran and that positions us to surround Pakistan. We then offer them to give up their nukes or face sanctions and blockade and we hit their reactors so they can’t maintain their nukes, nukes decay over time and become inert.

October 8th, 2006 at 15:52:04 From: Fallacie Admirer
Gandhi
“Afghanis’ lives don’t improve”. Thus showing our current strategy isn’t working. Which is why going to the source can work. Defeating Iran will change perceptions in Pakistan of US capability. It also puts the army that defeats Iran on their border and unites the army in Iraq with the NATO army in Afghanistan. It gives direct supply from the sea through Iran to Afghanistan, so that we don’t depend on Pakistan. They have leverage on us because we don’t have a path from the sea to Afghanistan that doesn’t go through them. That will change their leverage, which will change their behavior.

October 8th, 2006 at 16:11:21 From: Fallacie Admirer
Reply to Gandhi
NATO is in Afghanistan to protect the West. Pakistan is intentionally undermining it by training the Taliban and supporting them with funds from Saudi Arabia that they take a cut of. Iran is supporting international terrorism and developing nukes. Pakistan developed its nuke in May 98 and then attacked India in 99 and in effect has attacked us through the Tablian and al Qaeda in Aug 98 embassies, 2000 Cole, 2001 WTC and Pentagon. Saudis are funding this. We have to go to the two sources Pakistan and Saudi Arabia or we will lose. They will fund and support rebels against us in Afghanistan and Iraq forever. Iran is part of this combination and it sees that like Pakistan, once it gets nukes, it can go on the offensive. So we need to attack them now when battle phase deaths are 200 v. occupation deaths per month in Iraq are 70. Deaths in Iran may be higher than in Iraq for the battle phase, but we are bleeding in Iraq and Afghanistan while our main opponents sit back in Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia without being touched.

October 8th, 2006 at 16:14:27 From: Fallaci Admirer
To Tom3
Why do you want to let Pakistan and Saudi Arabia fund the deaths of Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq, and likely 9-11, the Cole and the embassy attacks? Why is your anger at the neocons but not at those who are the real source against us? Why do you want the Saudis to fund world wide terror and get away with it? Why let Pakistan fund the Taliban right now? 2 Pakistani generals were airlifted out of Kunduz in Nov 2001 according to Seymour Hersh. They have been fighting us the whole time. Doesn’t that mean anything to you?

October 8th, 2006 at 16:15:01 From: Fallaci Admirer
To Tom3
Why do you want to let Pakistan and Saudi Arabia fund the deaths of Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq, and likely 9-11, the Cole and the embassy attacks? Why is your anger at the neocons but not at those who are the real source against us? Why do you want the Saudis to fund world wide terror and get away with it? Why let Pakistan fund the Taliban right now? 2 Pakistani generals were airlifted out of Kunduz in Nov 2001 according to Seymour Hersh. They have been fighting us the whole time. Doesn’t that mean anything to you?

October 8th, 2006 at 17:37:29 From: Fallaci Admirer
Scott l
First, over the last half century they expropriated our oil contracts, leases, and more. “Historically the West has shown a greater propensity for aggression and domination than the Muslim world. ” The West has been subject to barbarian invasions from the East for millenia. The current immigration based version is the same as in millenia past. They attacked us in 1993 at WTC. That was intended to kill 250,000 people. They attacked us again and again. We took until 2001 to notice they were really at war with us. The Saudis are funding the Taliban against us now with Pakistan. Iran is funding terrorism like Hezbollah. You seem to be proposing surrender as the solution. The extremism came from the Muslim Brotherhood. Qutb came to America around 1950, had a bad reaction, and pushed modern extremism. Khomeini was pushing it in 1942. The Ottoman Empire was against us in WWI as part of the onslaught that started in 633 against the West. But your conclusion Scott is that we should surrender?

October 8th, 2006 at 17:53:11 From: Fallaci Admirer
Link on the relativism argument.
http://islamstrueface.blogspot.com/2005/07/muslim-atrocities.html

You can also look at jihadwatch.org for the latest atrocities and terrorism incidents.

October 8th, 2006 at 20:15:52 From: Fallaci Admirer
West Bank: Buy in Buy Out
I propose Buy in or Buy out for the West Bank. Buy in is cut all outside aid, and aid creates rage, and instead have them spend their time at work to support themselves. Now they are paid to resist. Those who don’t like buy in, can go for buy out, they get 750 dollars per year per person and the host country gets the same. Jordan, Syria, Egypt can be hosts. The money can come from the oil fields in Iraq and Iran.

October 8th, 2006 at 20:18:05 From: Fallaci Admirer
West and violence
It is true the West has had violence in its past, but it was attacked at WTC 93 and didn’t really respond until 8 years later after WTC 01 and Pentagon attacks. So the West is peaceful and is being set upon by the non peaceful.

October 9th, 2006 at 08:48:46 From: Fallaci Admirer
re Buy Out Move Out

It has a nice ring to it Scott, so the question is which group to buy out and move out. Economically it applies better to the Palestinians. Per capita income of Israelis is 20k or more, while on the West Bank, Jordan, Egypt, its 2k or less per year. There are approximately 6mm Palestinians and Israelis. So the buyout plan makes more sense for the Palestinians. Once they are gone, the per capita income of Israelis will likely rise by 10 percent or more, and security costs will fall, so that this pays for the buy out move out of the Palestinians.

“Iran: Sanctions won’t derail enrichment”

October 5, 2006

Ground invasion will though. Iraq battle phase deaths were 200, occupation deaths are 70 per month. The drivers of occupation deaths are foreign Sunni Arab fighters and Sunni Shiite clash in Iraq. Both won’t happen in Iran, since Iranians won’t allow Sunni Arab fighters nor do they have the clash.

So if we invade Iran we cut the Iranian supply of Iraq and if we leave Iraq we cut our casualties after an initial bump up. This then positions our army on the Pakistan border to pressure them to give up their nukes as well.

October 5th, 2006 at 08:59:55   From: Fallaci Admirer
Scott l
The Mideast Minute Men we could call them? What about you Scott, do you want to join? You can be a Captain of the Minute Men. We are running out of time. Bush will likely strike Iran with air power only. He may hope that will give a warning to North Korea and Pakistan of what a US air strike is like.

October 5th, 2006 at 14:03:35   From: Fallaci Admirer
Faulty logic?
Not for us, but it is for them. Pakistan got the bomb in May 98. Al Qaeda attacked our embassy in Aug 98. Pakistan attacked India in 1999 when both had the bomb. That was Musharraf’s idea. Musharraf pretended the Pakistani troops were terrorists and wouldn’t accept back their dead bodies from India. Al Qaeda attacked the Cole in 2000.

All through these years, Pakistan was talking to US and IMF on refinancing its debt. Musharraf said he felt US owed Pakistan for opposing Soviets in 80’s and, in effect, disliked us extremely for dropping them. Mush also called saying Pakistan’s bomb was Muslim racist in his book. On Sep 11, 2001, Pakistan had 38 billion in debt including to IMF and World Bank.

US told them they couldn’t refinance it unless they gave up their nukes perhaps, Pakistan was under sanctions.

On 9-13, General Ahmed of ISI and Armitage got into a shouting match it appears. What did Ahemd say? Give us money if you want the terrorism to stop? Pakistan has gotten over 4 billion since 9-11 and refinanced its debt. Armitage promised them F16s in 1988/89 and they resented they hadn’t gotten them.

Frontline did a special this week, see their webpage, that basically showed the Taliban have killed the Tribal Leaders in Waziristan that Mush said made the deal not the Taliban. They showed Mush saying two different things in the same interview.

In their minds, their nuke let them attack India, Musharraf admits that. On 9-11, they either gave up their nukes to refinance or let al Qaeda attack us and charge protection money is one interpretation. Their logic means we have to denuke them now.

October 5th, 2006 at 14:06:48   From: Fallaci Admirer
gregdn “They can fight back”
The reply to “Faulty logic” address this. They got a nuke and attacked India in 1999. MAD says nuclear powers won’t fight. Instead Pakistan got a nuke in May 98 and unleashed terrorist attacks and their own military pretending to be terrorists in every year since. That includes every year since 9-11, since as Frontline shows they are giving money they get from us to the Taliban who are fighting us with al Qaeda. Their concept of war is that their people are not productive and they have to attack us until we pay them money. Their concept is if we kill their people its less people to share the protection money they make us pay them.

Iran: Sanctions won’t derail enrichment

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/20702.html

October 5th, 2006 at 05:45:04 From: Fallaci Admirer

This post is hypothesis and speculation. All other disclaimers apply.

Fallaci Admirer Rawstory Links Sep 2006

September 26, 2006

(more…)

Mission Statement

September 21, 2006

Mission is to maintain the spirit of supporting Western Civilization shown by Oriana Fallaci.