Sure, NOW he takes credit...
So here's the latest news on the War on Terror, just in time for the presidential election: Yahoo! News - Bin Laden Says He Ordered 9/11 Attacks
Isn't this, like, November 2004? So it took Osama THREE YEARS to make up his mind and say "Yeah, I did it?" Doesn't he read the newspapers or watch Fox News? We blamed this on ya a long time ago, babe, pay attention!
Is it me, or does this actually make it seem even more unlikely that he was behind the attack? And is it me, or does it seem strange that this videotape would surface at this time?
I encourage all Americans to ignore this particular videotape. It's clearly a sham, whether it's perpetrated by the actual Bin Laden or not. It's certainly meant to play head games with the American voting public. Forget it. It means nothing.
More later...
Paul
Friday, October 29, 2004
Wednesday, October 27, 2004
What Would You Do?
Say you were a major American television news network, and you somehow obtained EXCLUSIVE footage of a terrorist threatening to implement a viscious act of violence that would make 9/11 seem like a minor event. But on the tape the terrorist claims that the cause of the violence is the actions of the current American President...and you received the tape just days before a hotly contested presidential election. What would you do? Would you air the tape?
According to Matt Drudge, ABC News is in this very same predicament at this very moment:DRUDGE REPORT 2004? What will they do? What SHOULD they do? Should the safety of the American people override the concern that it might influence the election?
I think so. If the threat is legitimate, I think it would be a CRIMINAL ACT to withhold the information for political expediency. But that's just me.
More later...
Paul
Say you were a major American television news network, and you somehow obtained EXCLUSIVE footage of a terrorist threatening to implement a viscious act of violence that would make 9/11 seem like a minor event. But on the tape the terrorist claims that the cause of the violence is the actions of the current American President...and you received the tape just days before a hotly contested presidential election. What would you do? Would you air the tape?
According to Matt Drudge, ABC News is in this very same predicament at this very moment:DRUDGE REPORT 2004? What will they do? What SHOULD they do? Should the safety of the American people override the concern that it might influence the election?
I think so. If the threat is legitimate, I think it would be a CRIMINAL ACT to withhold the information for political expediency. But that's just me.
More later...
Paul
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
This is just Unfair
It's 2004 and abortion is legal...unless you're in the military. Our man in the White House, George Bush, reinstated a ban on abortions in military hospitals: Abortion Becomes Issue for Military Now, if a young female soldier were to be raped (um, that wouldn't happen in the U.S. military, would it?) and impregnated, she could get a legal abortion...BUT SHE WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR IT HERSELF. Similarly, if the pregnancy were life-threatening, a pay-for-service abortion would be available. But that's it.
Now, tell me how that's fair. A soldier NEVER stops being an American citizen, and American citizen's have the right to abortions. So it must be the issue of who pays for it, eh? So a citizen volunteers to serve their country, is sent to a war overseas and is raped and impregnated...what type of society would not pay for her abortion? How cheap and cheesy can we be?
This election is about a lot of things, and how we treat our young men and women in uniform is definitely one of the issues. Don't let them down by continuing the madness.
More later...
Paul
It's 2004 and abortion is legal...unless you're in the military. Our man in the White House, George Bush, reinstated a ban on abortions in military hospitals: Abortion Becomes Issue for Military Now, if a young female soldier were to be raped (um, that wouldn't happen in the U.S. military, would it?) and impregnated, she could get a legal abortion...BUT SHE WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR IT HERSELF. Similarly, if the pregnancy were life-threatening, a pay-for-service abortion would be available. But that's it.
Now, tell me how that's fair. A soldier NEVER stops being an American citizen, and American citizen's have the right to abortions. So it must be the issue of who pays for it, eh? So a citizen volunteers to serve their country, is sent to a war overseas and is raped and impregnated...what type of society would not pay for her abortion? How cheap and cheesy can we be?
This election is about a lot of things, and how we treat our young men and women in uniform is definitely one of the issues. Don't let them down by continuing the madness.
More later...
Paul
Monday, October 18, 2004
I Support Jon Stewart
In this poor election year, the mainstream media has finally come to grips with a shocking truth: more people trust Comedy Central's "The Daily Show" for their news than they trust "real" news outlets. And now this:DRUDGE REPORT FLASH 2004?
I applaud Stewart for doing what most of us would do if given the opportunity...to tell these overblown stuffed shirts that they've been sitting down on the job and that they need to get their respective asses in gear! I really wish I could have seen the show, but I stopped watching the crap on CNN a long time ago...
More later...
Paul
In this poor election year, the mainstream media has finally come to grips with a shocking truth: more people trust Comedy Central's "The Daily Show" for their news than they trust "real" news outlets. And now this:DRUDGE REPORT FLASH 2004?
I applaud Stewart for doing what most of us would do if given the opportunity...to tell these overblown stuffed shirts that they've been sitting down on the job and that they need to get their respective asses in gear! I really wish I could have seen the show, but I stopped watching the crap on CNN a long time ago...
More later...
Paul
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
Not Good News
Alongside mysterious black helicopters and Area 57, implantable identity chips are commonly mentioned by "conspiracy" buffs as proof of the Apocalypse. Well, here they come: FDA approves use of implantable chip in patients to pass medical information to doctors
According to the article, "It's the first time the FDA has approved medical use of the device, though in Mexico, more than 1,000 scannable chips have been implanted in patients. The chip's serial number pulls up the patients' blood type and other medical information." Soooo, what OTHER types of uses have been approved?
Well, how about shopping? Even NEWSWEEK picked up on this: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5093197/site/newsweek/. And there's more like that to come.
Many will undoubtedly say "So what? The government tracks my every movement with my ATM/Debit card anyway. And I don't have anything to hide." Well, bully for you. But keep this one little thing in mind: once we give in to implanted id chips, we open the door for other implantables, some of which will serve to control us in a more proactive manner. Just watch.
More later...
Paul
Alongside mysterious black helicopters and Area 57, implantable identity chips are commonly mentioned by "conspiracy" buffs as proof of the Apocalypse. Well, here they come: FDA approves use of implantable chip in patients to pass medical information to doctors
According to the article, "It's the first time the FDA has approved medical use of the device, though in Mexico, more than 1,000 scannable chips have been implanted in patients. The chip's serial number pulls up the patients' blood type and other medical information." Soooo, what OTHER types of uses have been approved?
Well, how about shopping? Even NEWSWEEK picked up on this: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5093197/site/newsweek/. And there's more like that to come.
Many will undoubtedly say "So what? The government tracks my every movement with my ATM/Debit card anyway. And I don't have anything to hide." Well, bully for you. But keep this one little thing in mind: once we give in to implanted id chips, we open the door for other implantables, some of which will serve to control us in a more proactive manner. Just watch.
More later...
Paul
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
WTF?
Okay, now what the hell is going on in the Nation's Capital NOW? A democratic senator, of all things, is now fearing for the lives of his staff: CBS News | Terror-Fearing Sen. Shuts Office | October 12, 2004?18:17:13
What's really interesting (and aggravating for those of us with loved ones in the city) is that NO ONE AT HOMELAND SECURITY is saying anything about it. Sure, the senator is referring to a top-secret report, but the Homeland Security people aren't even admitting a threat exists. So who's lying?
And what should my parents do? They live only a few miles away from the Capitol.
More later (I hope)...
Paul
Okay, now what the hell is going on in the Nation's Capital NOW? A democratic senator, of all things, is now fearing for the lives of his staff: CBS News | Terror-Fearing Sen. Shuts Office | October 12, 2004?18:17:13
What's really interesting (and aggravating for those of us with loved ones in the city) is that NO ONE AT HOMELAND SECURITY is saying anything about it. Sure, the senator is referring to a top-secret report, but the Homeland Security people aren't even admitting a threat exists. So who's lying?
And what should my parents do? They live only a few miles away from the Capitol.
More later (I hope)...
Paul
A Brave Statement from a Peace Prize Winner
This remarkable article was just brought to my attention. The very first African woman to ever win a Nobel Peace Prize has used her "bully pulpit" to declare her belief that the AIDS virus was deliberately created by man:HIV virus deliberately created: Wangari Maathai - The Times of India
It takes a very courageous person to stand up before the world a make such a claim. She goes as far as to say the virus was created "for the purpose of mass extermination." Already people are lining up to ridicule her.
I happen to share her belief. I have always found it very difficult to believe the concept of a deadly virus that just sprung up from out of nowhere to devastate certain populations. The article notes that of the 38 million worldwide that are afflicted with the virus, 25 million are African.
Long known as a land with tremendous natural resources, the continent of Africa has been a target for centuries. Conquered and colonized, exploited for financial gain, it's no wonder that depopulation would eventually become an accepted business tactic. Is it a surprise that the "cure" for HIV is too expensive to widely distribute in Africa?
More later...
Paul
This remarkable article was just brought to my attention. The very first African woman to ever win a Nobel Peace Prize has used her "bully pulpit" to declare her belief that the AIDS virus was deliberately created by man:HIV virus deliberately created: Wangari Maathai - The Times of India
It takes a very courageous person to stand up before the world a make such a claim. She goes as far as to say the virus was created "for the purpose of mass extermination." Already people are lining up to ridicule her.
I happen to share her belief. I have always found it very difficult to believe the concept of a deadly virus that just sprung up from out of nowhere to devastate certain populations. The article notes that of the 38 million worldwide that are afflicted with the virus, 25 million are African.
Long known as a land with tremendous natural resources, the continent of Africa has been a target for centuries. Conquered and colonized, exploited for financial gain, it's no wonder that depopulation would eventually become an accepted business tactic. Is it a surprise that the "cure" for HIV is too expensive to widely distribute in Africa?
More later...
Paul
Monday, October 11, 2004
Fear This
This election cycle is based on sustaining a climate of fear, specifically, fear of dying at the hands of a terrorist. This is a total unknown, of course, yet it is still a palpable fear in the minds of too many Americans. Yet we already know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that over 500,000 Americans will die next year because of cancer: Salon.com Technology | Ignoring the big C
Maybe we should focus our attention on preventing these senseless deaths?
More later...
Paul
This election cycle is based on sustaining a climate of fear, specifically, fear of dying at the hands of a terrorist. This is a total unknown, of course, yet it is still a palpable fear in the minds of too many Americans. Yet we already know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that over 500,000 Americans will die next year because of cancer: Salon.com Technology | Ignoring the big C
Maybe we should focus our attention on preventing these senseless deaths?
More later...
Paul
Friday, October 08, 2004
Will Wonders Never Cease?
I reported on the first phase of this story about a year ago, when Boeing announced the award of this multi-billion dollar contract...that was negotiated by a former employee of theirs. Now, some sense has apparently been found in our government: Yahoo! News - Conferees Ban Lease of Boeing Tankers
It's hard to believe, but it looks like the guilty party, Darleen Druyun, is actually going to jail over her conduct! Wow!
Now if we could only get some indictments against those fools responsible for the mortally slow air defense response on 9/11/01.
More later...
Paul
I reported on the first phase of this story about a year ago, when Boeing announced the award of this multi-billion dollar contract...that was negotiated by a former employee of theirs. Now, some sense has apparently been found in our government: Yahoo! News - Conferees Ban Lease of Boeing Tankers
It's hard to believe, but it looks like the guilty party, Darleen Druyun, is actually going to jail over her conduct! Wow!
Now if we could only get some indictments against those fools responsible for the mortally slow air defense response on 9/11/01.
More later...
Paul
Thursday, October 07, 2004
How long will we let them lie?
Do a lot of traveling and the USA Today newspaper attaches itself to your life. Given away free by most hotel chains, the often reviled “News McNuggets” is a surprisingly bi-partisan publication. Go figure. I have a new found respect for this paper because they seem to be solidly middle of the road.
USA Today’s coverage of the Vice Presidential Debate seemed fairly solid. They were willing to call the debate a basic draw, as did many other credible news organizations. But they went a bit further with an analysis of the many lies told by the Vice President. That’s right, lies. Intentional fallacies used in an attempt to both discredit his opponent and cover up his administration’s shameful record.
Once such lie was the bit about Edward’s Senate attendance record. Cheney puffed himself up about how he spends most Tuesday’s in the Senate Chamber in his role as president of the Senate…and then claimed that the debate was the first time that he has actually ever met John Edwards…clearly implying that Edwards never shows up for work. Cheney even went so far as to say that Edwards’ hometown newspaper had taken to calling him “Senator Gone”.
All untrue. All lies, according to USA Today. Yet Cheney delivered these untruths with such unwavering conviction that even John Edwards was stunned. I thought “geez, those were some pretty solid body shots” and I’m sure that Cheney’s supporters were beside themselves with glee. But USA Today checked the Congressional Record. They checked the “hometown” paper, they checked the facts. And the facts show that Cheney flat-out lied.
But the facts didn’t stop certain idiot/asshole TV talking heads from harping on it (http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/10/07/hardball/index.html), just as they won’t stop a grip of blind Bush supporters from doing their best to re-elect the fool. But as some point, the American people are going to have to demand full accountability from their elected officials, especially from the Executive Branch. As it stands now, we can’t believe a word they say. How shameful is that?
More later…
Paul
Do a lot of traveling and the USA Today newspaper attaches itself to your life. Given away free by most hotel chains, the often reviled “News McNuggets” is a surprisingly bi-partisan publication. Go figure. I have a new found respect for this paper because they seem to be solidly middle of the road.
USA Today’s coverage of the Vice Presidential Debate seemed fairly solid. They were willing to call the debate a basic draw, as did many other credible news organizations. But they went a bit further with an analysis of the many lies told by the Vice President. That’s right, lies. Intentional fallacies used in an attempt to both discredit his opponent and cover up his administration’s shameful record.
Once such lie was the bit about Edward’s Senate attendance record. Cheney puffed himself up about how he spends most Tuesday’s in the Senate Chamber in his role as president of the Senate…and then claimed that the debate was the first time that he has actually ever met John Edwards…clearly implying that Edwards never shows up for work. Cheney even went so far as to say that Edwards’ hometown newspaper had taken to calling him “Senator Gone”.
All untrue. All lies, according to USA Today. Yet Cheney delivered these untruths with such unwavering conviction that even John Edwards was stunned. I thought “geez, those were some pretty solid body shots” and I’m sure that Cheney’s supporters were beside themselves with glee. But USA Today checked the Congressional Record. They checked the “hometown” paper, they checked the facts. And the facts show that Cheney flat-out lied.
But the facts didn’t stop certain idiot/asshole TV talking heads from harping on it (http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/archive.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2004/10/07/hardball/index.html), just as they won’t stop a grip of blind Bush supporters from doing their best to re-elect the fool. But as some point, the American people are going to have to demand full accountability from their elected officials, especially from the Executive Branch. As it stands now, we can’t believe a word they say. How shameful is that?
More later…
Paul
Wednesday, October 06, 2004
On this bogus ‘War on Terror’
Last night during the Vice Presidential Posturing Session (aka the Vice Presidential Debate), flyweight contender John Edwards continued the Democratic strategy of playing into the Republicans’ hands by asserting that he and Kerry intended to win the War on Terror by tracking down terrorists and killing them before they have the opportunity to harm us. Lil’ John spoke with such conviction one could get the impression that he actually believed what he was saying. Vice President Cheney just sat there stone-faced.
Why are the Democrats playing the Republican war-mongering game? Surely they know that this so-called ‘War’ is a total neo-conservative fabrication? Terrorists did NOT declare ‘war’ on the U.S. on 9/11; they did not declare ‘war’ on us when they bombed the U.S.S. Cole, the Beirut barracks, those African embassies or at any other time in the recent or distant past. Historically, ‘terrorist’ actions have been REACTIVE events, undertaken by people who feel their backs are against the wall and that extreme retributive violence is their only remaining option. I mean, how desperate does one have to be to actually plan and execute a SUICIDE mission?
And how blind does one have to be to miss the fact that the current administration is using their so-called ‘War on Terror’ to conduct neo-imperialist military actions in the Middle East? In the same vein, does anyone believe that the Democrats are blissfully unaware of what’s really going on? Kerry and Edwards totally support the ‘War’ because they totally support the aims of the neo-imperialist movement: controlling the oil supply of the Middle East through U.S. installed puppet regimes. Folks, this is no conspiracy theory, it’s straight up historical fact. For those that have trouble believing, I have three words: Shah of Iran.
More later…
Paul
Last night during the Vice Presidential Posturing Session (aka the Vice Presidential Debate), flyweight contender John Edwards continued the Democratic strategy of playing into the Republicans’ hands by asserting that he and Kerry intended to win the War on Terror by tracking down terrorists and killing them before they have the opportunity to harm us. Lil’ John spoke with such conviction one could get the impression that he actually believed what he was saying. Vice President Cheney just sat there stone-faced.
Why are the Democrats playing the Republican war-mongering game? Surely they know that this so-called ‘War’ is a total neo-conservative fabrication? Terrorists did NOT declare ‘war’ on the U.S. on 9/11; they did not declare ‘war’ on us when they bombed the U.S.S. Cole, the Beirut barracks, those African embassies or at any other time in the recent or distant past. Historically, ‘terrorist’ actions have been REACTIVE events, undertaken by people who feel their backs are against the wall and that extreme retributive violence is their only remaining option. I mean, how desperate does one have to be to actually plan and execute a SUICIDE mission?
And how blind does one have to be to miss the fact that the current administration is using their so-called ‘War on Terror’ to conduct neo-imperialist military actions in the Middle East? In the same vein, does anyone believe that the Democrats are blissfully unaware of what’s really going on? Kerry and Edwards totally support the ‘War’ because they totally support the aims of the neo-imperialist movement: controlling the oil supply of the Middle East through U.S. installed puppet regimes. Folks, this is no conspiracy theory, it’s straight up historical fact. For those that have trouble believing, I have three words: Shah of Iran.
More later…
Paul
Monday, October 04, 2004
YIKES
Ted Rall has quickly become one of my favorite editorial cartoonists, mostly because he has a hard-hitting, take-no-prisoners sense of humor. But even I had to wince at his latest: Ted Rall online
I mean, he's talking about reality, but it is VERY UNCOMFORTABLE...but why should we be comfortable with sending American men and women to their deaths in questionable military actions?
More later...
Paul
Ted Rall has quickly become one of my favorite editorial cartoonists, mostly because he has a hard-hitting, take-no-prisoners sense of humor. But even I had to wince at his latest: Ted Rall online
I mean, he's talking about reality, but it is VERY UNCOMFORTABLE...but why should we be comfortable with sending American men and women to their deaths in questionable military actions?
More later...
Paul
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)