Dear Neighbor,
I dropped in to Shades Cafe Monday to affirm Lisa, the owner, for her closing to allow her employees to participate in the protest. While I disagree with the protesters, I admire people who care and take a stand in concert with true American traditions. More of us should follow her example of getting involved.
Liberals and conservatives alike properly condemned the lack of civility repre
sented by kicking the head of the effigy of the Vice President of the United States, and prefer a more civil response to disagreement. Attack a person's ideas, not the person. In Parenting 101, we are told to never say "you are a bad boy," but instead, "what you did was wrong, but you are special and loved." For intelligent exchange of ideas, civility is essential. "Treat others as you want to be treated" is a proverb intended for all of us and not just for people holding high office. The protesters have a right to demonstrate, whether it’s civil or uncivil, actions are easily forgiven. But when people actively promulgate lies against individuals, we need to ask, are our neighbors simply ill-informed or deceitfully willing to destroy another's reputation to advance their own selfish political agenda?
There are those in our community who adamantly state that the Vice President was ultimately behind the "outing" of CIA Agent Valerie Plame, despite the fact Scooter Libby was found not guilty and I personally heard Colin Powell tell several hundred people in Aspen, CO, several weeks ago, that his colleague Richard Armitage, was the person who revealed her name.
Still others accuse the Vice President of "lying" about WMD in Iraq and tricking us into invading. Have they forgotten the October 1998 passage of the Iraq Liberation Act, without a single dissenting Senator, that supported removing Saddam from power and promoting Iraqi democracy in its place? Two months later President Clinton bombed facilities in Iraq he believed were connected to Saddam's WMD production. In 1998!
Have none of the protestors read the July 7th, 2004, report of the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence which included Democratic Senators Levin, Feinstein, Wyden, Durbin and John Edwards which concluded: "The Committee did not find any evidence that Administration Officials tried to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction"?
Are they unaware of the Silberman-Robb Intelligence Committee Report which revealed the information developed by our intelligence community was less than stellar. Turns out crucial sources came from an informant code named "Curveball," handled exclusively by German Intelligence Agencies. Our guys never talked to him.
Have they forgotten President Bill Clinton's comment of February 17th,1998 (even before George Bush and Dick Cheney were even nominated): "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear; We want to seriously diminish the theat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." or....
Madeline Albright's February 1, 1998, statement: "We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the civility and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction.”
Later in 2002 Al Gore pronounced: "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country" and Ted Kennedy added: "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction. " Were all these knowledgeable political leaders "lying" too?!
John McCain said it well: "It’s a lie to say the President lied to the American people".
Why hasn't the lie that the Vice President is personally profiting from the war been confronted? Those promulgating this lie need to tell us how much and how! The Cheney's 2006 tax return reflect a tax bill of $413,326.00 from his VP salary; a $27,500 pension from Union Pacific; her royalty advance on her upcoming book about growing up in Wyoming and her $32,000 pension as a former director of Reader's Digest. Not a penny from Halliburton, so I guess their tax accountants must be lying as well. Their $104,425 donations to charity in 2006 brings their total to $7,800,019 during his vice presidency.
So what do we do now?
We can argue and disagree all day about the circumstances in which we entered Iraq, which are completely irrelevant now. What do we do going forward? The past is the past. Colin Powell reminded all of us, "If you break it, you own it." He did not say, "If you break it, get out of the store as soon as you can." Our efforts in Iraq do not constitute "a war". As al-Qaeda's #2 man, Ayman Al-Zawahiri wrote to his Chief Deputy in Iraq, Zarqawi, that this is the most important front in their larger plan of imposing an Islamic Caliphate across the broader Middle East, and Spain to Indonesia. There are bin Laden clones in 60 different countries and Iraq would become a haven and a staging ground to attack neighboring nations.
Do the protestors believe that if we retreat, all the al-Qaeda fighters who have come to Iraq will return to their countries to happily grow poppies in peace and contentment or will they gather strength and encouragement and proceed to invade neighboring countries? Can the protestors make a case that we will be better off with bin Laden and Zawahiri in control of Iraq?
What credibility will America have in aligning ourselves in the future with other people in need of democracy? Are we asking Maliki to perform the impossible by coalescing Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites into a cohesive government? Maybe he can reconcile Rosie O’Donnell and Donald Trump too.
Dick Cheney is a decent human being. I like him. I like his wife. It's fun to see him and his daughter, Mary hunting together. I'm grateful for his leadership and curious why, if everyone accuses the Bush/Cheney Administration for the failures of Katrina, they don't give them credit for the fact that we've had no terrorist attack on our soil since 2001.
We must all educate ourselves about the enemy we face and realize that it’s far more ominous than our confrontations with Nazism and Communism. How many of the protesters have seen the documentary Obsession?
I invite the protestors and everyone to engage in a civil discussion of these issues by logging onto http://www.fosterfriess.com/ and sharing your comments below (you don't have to be civil, if you don't want to). The mission of the site is to provide you with information on important issues you can pass along so that your fellow Americans will know as much about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as they know about Anna Nicole Smith.
God bless,
P.S. If you would like to make a comment, scroll down to the end of the other comments; click on "post a comment"; type in your message; click on "other"; and enter your name (or your initials or brother-in-law's initials so I can respond directly back to your comment); then click "publish your comment". I'll be waiting for you at "the campfire"
61 comments:
great article!!
Foster,
I applaud you for engaging our community in this dialogue about the war.
I disagree with you on several points, but I concur with your very rational debunking of the "war on terror" a la a "war on blitzkriegs."
One question for you: Have you ever been to a Muslim country? Visited a mosque? Seen what a simple, humble religion Islam is?
Best wishes,
JS
Foster - Great comments. I agree you never attack someone personally, just their ideas. I also find it hard to believe that Dick Cheney is attacked as the person responsible for the Iraq war. 911 is responsible for the Iraq war and if any one person is responsible for 911 it is Jamie Gorelick, The Clinton’s Deputy Attorney General who created the memo that kept intelligence agencies from sharing information.
According to Gorelick's op ed letter in the Washington Post she states that: "At last week's hearing, Attorney General John Ashcroft, facing criticism, asserted that "the single greatest structural cause for September 11 was the wall that segregated criminal investigators and intelligence agents" and that I built that wall through a March 1995 memo. This is true."
Enough said !
When American citizens exercise their right to protest, it seems to me it would be time better spent protesting the right person and policies.
Funny. Before I clicked "comments," I thought to ask you exactly what Jim did -- have you ever been to an Islamic country, and spoken with those whose motives you're so certain of?
So I'll ask some other questions: do you really feel safer now than before the inception of the "war on terror"? And has this administration shown any regard, whatsoever, for our national credibility?
Certainly there are those who disagree with the American ethos, and we have to think strategically about dealing with those adversaries. Cheney and Co. have botched the job, and ought to be removed before they do any more damage.
Thanks Jim and David for taking the time to challenge my remarks (and a special thanks for the civil way in which you did it); Yes, I just visited the Muslim country of Iraq and that is why I plead with you and all your friends to view Obsession. I met a young Iraqi woman serving in the parliament in the northern region who thanked me as an American for saving her people from Saddam and pleaded that we continue to keep her safe and not abandon them. All the Muslims I met there were peace loving and that is why I want to help them from the OTHER Muslims who want to kill them. Remember that Sadat a Muslim was killed by Muslims. Are you and I going to join together to help the peaceful Muslims we both admire? I DO NOT feel any of us are safe despite the noble efforts of our country to confront our enemies. We will fight this war for decades regardless if we leave Iraq or not-----again PLEASE view Obsession so we can continue our dialogue with a knowledge base more similar and I'll gladly read/view resources you send me to make your points. Maybe the election of Sarkozy in France who is more pro-American than previous French leaders is an indication that we are not as hated as the mainstream media would like us to believe. Our nation's credibility would plummet if we abandoned all those Iraqis who risked voting and siding with us. I will long remember looking in the eyes of the young Iraqi woman and all the other Iraqis I met who know they will be killed if we leave. That is why Hillary Clinton has abandoned her "get out of Iraq" position as some polls have shown 62% of Americans believe it wrong (maybe even immoral) to abandon them. I agree many mistakes have been made in executing. We could spend some time sharing our perspectives on that but it doesn't address what we do now. What do you think of the Gelb Biden idea of partitioning? Jim, you mentioned you disagreed with me on some points. What are they so I can learn your point of view? Do you share my perspective on the main thrust of my comments that John McCain is correct when he says it is "a lie to say the President lied to the American people"? Good night and thanks for your thoughts. Foster (<:)
Foster,
For starters, don't you think that our actions in Iraq have poured gasoline on the fire of Islamic jihadism?
Much as our arming of Israel, at the expense of the Palestinian people, did before it?
The jihadism in Iraq is of our own creation, Foster.
If your friend Dick Cheney is such a fine and decent fellow, why don't you ask him to conduct the people's business in the open, to give up the secrecy that has been a hallmark of his administration, to comply with even the most rudimentary requirements for maintaining public records? Even routine business is classified, or marked with a special designation and essentially classified, in the OVP. What is he hiding?
Cheney, Feith, Wolfowitz et al set up their own "unit" within the DOD to produce the intelligence they wanted to justify invading Iraq. Here's a snipped from just one Newsweek story I could readily find:
"In particular, the report concluded that analysts working for Feith presented top policymakers with “alternative” intelligence assessments that suggested a direct link between Saddam’s regime and Al Qaeda (as well as a possible Iraq connection to the September 11 attacks). The analysts did so, the report concluded, without fully disclosing that their portrayal of the evidence conflicted with the consensus views of the U.S. intelligence community."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17154137/site/newsweek/
The Cheney-Bush administration has so badly botched the invasion of Iraq that one of my ultra-conservative friends accuses them of "criminal negligence."
Even if you think the cause was noble, the invasion has backfired horribly.
I hope your friendship with the vice president does not blind you to that fact.
best,
Jim
Jim,
Thanks for your comments and yes you are correct that our invasion has made it easier for the Jihadists to recruit;however they did a pretty good job of recruitment BEFORE we invaded if you assess not only 9/11 but all the other attacks they pulled off AROUND THE WORLD before we invaded Iraq.
We can discuss at another time whether they are stronger or weaker now as a result of President Bush's aggressive confrontation. They have been clobbered in Somalia, badly hurt in Afghanistan and now apparently are losing ground in Iraq, particularly in Anbar province, and practically non-existent in KRG region in the North.
But that is a different topic than the ones I raised in the article. Also you raise very relevant additional issues of rather or not we should support Israel as almost all my Jewish friends encourage; if the "secrecy" of the Bush/Cheney administration was any different than prior adminsitrations, whether Al Qaeda and Sept 11th had Iraqi connections; whether or not toppling Saddam with so few casualties and so quickly can really be characterized as a "botched invasion" because of what happened subsequent to that invasion; whether our efforts there have "backfired" or if we eventually will prevail as current trends are turning more positive; and the relevance of what Feith and Wolfowitz did or did not concocthave to the assessment key Democrats made PRIOR to our invasion (have you viewd the 4 minute video clip revealing their prior comments?)
All these issues are legitimate points of discusssion but before we move on to does "three plus three equal six or something else?" lets first decide if two plus two is really four and focus on the issued raised in the article.
Do you agree we can achieve more progess as a society if you and I engage in this type of CIViL dialogue the miracle of the internet makes possible rather than kicking the head of Dick Cheney's effigy?.
Secondly do you agree with Senator McCain that; "it is a lie to say the president lied to the American people"?
These are my two main points. Would you agree it makes sense to come to a conclusion on those points before moving on to the other ones you legitimately raise.
We can discuss for example your assessment that we "created the Jihadism". As I prepared for my trip to meet with Shimon Peres,
Dore Gold (former Israeli ambassador to U.N., Netanyahu and other key Israeli leaders as well as the Ministers of Finance, External Affairs, Internal Affairs, the Prime Minister and President Barzani of the Kurdistan Regional Govenment in the north of Iraq, I emailed Colin Powell for his recommendation of books I could read. Michael Oren's book "Power, Faith and Fantasy" which tracks U.S. involvement in the Middle East from 1776 to present was his best suggestion. Look on page 124 where the representative of Algiers tells John Adams and Thomas Jefferson who are trying to reduce the tribute from $1,000,000 demanded to $250,000 in order not to attack and enslave the crews of our merchant ships plying the Mediterranean Sea.
Abn Ramadah told them something like: "It is written in the Koran that all nations that do not submit to Muslim authority, their subject are deemed sinners and its appropriate to take them as prisoners and make Slaves of them and any "Musselman" who dies in the process goes to Paradise"
You can check the exact wording if you read for yourself that book and you will also be reminded of the Muslim slaughter of the Armenians in "the teens"; additionally when you read the Quran (have you?) you will note Jihad has been the mandate since the 7th century.
But, first things first:
Should we strive for greater civility than that displayed by the protestors?
Should those who say Dick Cheney lied about WMD be corrected?
I am grateful for your willingness to dialogue. I have found those who begin to see the validity of my points either change the subject or run from the discussion. Thanks for continuing with me. Foster (<:)
Jim,
Thanks for your great comments! I totally agree. Many in this country have forgotten the price of freedom. We take a lot for granted these days, but it will not last if we don't recognize the mentality of our enemy~~the radical Muslims. Their sole purpose is to destroy anything or anyone that represents freedom. Wake up, America! A house divided will not stand!
Carolyn
Foster -
Please pardon the length, I have tried to remain civil while also expressing my own perspective, but I have perhaps not been succinct.
It appears to me that Vice President Cheney has made errors in judgment in relationship to Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran and the world in general. It appears to me that he advocated for actions that have cost lives, honor and treasure with little care for the ancient and intractable divisions in the world of Sunni and Shi’a, Arab and Persian, Far Eastern Muslim and Mid Eastern Muslim, moderate modernist and traditional Wahhabist, the beliefs of the average Muslim and marginal theology of Khomeini's new age messianic claptrap, etc., etc. It seems to me that, if he did not lie, then that he made serious error in judgment.
You do not agree with me, drawing on a personal knowledge of the Vice President and his family allowed you by your access to him. I don't have that access. The only access I have is via his public persona, a persona I experience as arrogant, autocratic and self-absorbed. I view him based on the experiences of my generation in Viet Nam and his 'other priorities' at the time. My perspective on him is based on his unwillingness to share himself with me and other members of the electorate. He apparently feels quite superior to the many of us and doesn't hesitate to make that clear. He may indeed be smarter than I am, but he’s certainly never proven that to me and, while he may not like it, he owes that to me if he wants me to trust him. To give of oneself to an ungrateful constituency is challenging and many find it degrading; it is also required of leaders I am willing to follow. If the Vice President controlled a private company in the way he's performed in public service I would have no complaint (other than probably choosing not to do business with him and certainly not to work for him). The government of the United States, however, is not his personal bailiwick; he is responsible directly to me just as he is to every other citizen. Given that he chooses not to share himself in ways that permits me to judge him as you do means that he has not given me the information to develop the same perspective you have. That's his choice. It's my choice to find him distasteful. I will certainly not kick his effigy down the street. I will do all that I can to insure that the only organization in which he will ever wield power again is a private company, not in a position that influences public policy.
Do not quote a tax return as a testament to a person's wealth. I don't know whether the Vice President is personally profiting from the war in Iraq. I do suspect that he is not suffering any personal financial harm from it as are many Americans and Iraqis. In any case I certainly don’t have to tell you that tax avoidance is a basic survival skill, especially for people of wealth.
So, what do we do?
I believe you propose a false dichotomy when you offer an Iraq controlled by a monolithic Al-Qaeda as the alternative to pursuing our current policies there. You fail to exhaust the collection of alternatives. The departure of our nation from a Shi'a dominated Iraq, allied to a Shi'a dominated Iran, does not lead ineluctably to a country dominated by a fractured Sunni Wahhabist group like Al-Qaeda. Yes, we are fighting Al-Qaeda in Iraq, and it reminds me of Willie Sutton's explanation of why he robbed banks: "Because that's where the money is." I wish we'd focused on Afghanistan after 9/11; we might have done some good, there, and we still might be able to.
We realize that not all problems have a solution driven by the United States; failing to do so will lead us to intrude ourselves in situations where the principals find our needs at least venal and perhaps antithetical. Our interposition in every problem in the world may be required by the world view of the neo-conservative who is still wondering where the flower throwing Iraqis are, but not by the brutal noir perspective of the foreign policy realist or even the rose-colored world view of the committed liberal internationalist. We talk to our enemies, not just our friends; I applaud the current administration's choice to engage with Iran and perhaps Syria, a viable long term solution in Iraq isn't possible without their participation, but why did it have to take so long to realize that?
We certainly need to rethink our commitments to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, places that are already havens and staging grounds for al-Qaeda.
As for the statements of Clinton and Albright in 1998, I would suggest that we had accomplished those goals of diminishing the threat and protecting Saddam's neighbors. At least that seems to be the opinion of Iraq's neighbors at this point.
Our country was led into Iraq with the assurance that we would see an Iraq where Kurd, Sunni and Shi'a would unite to greet us. It was starkly obvious even then that those divisions would not be healed by an invasion or any other U.S. action; only by internal Iraqi effort. If we can't expect Maliki to lead an Iraq that provides that we should either get out or change the government we essentially created and that we back.
Right now it would be unlikely and probably absurd for any group in the Islamic world to ally itself with the United States in pursuit of modernity and democracy. It would be political suicide in the Arab street. If we ever want to be asked to align ourselves with any popular movement in that arena we have a long way to go.
I have not seen Obsession. I have lived and worked with Persians and Arabs and Iranians and Iraqis and a few Muslims from sub-Saharan Africa and Indonesia. The Muslims of my acquaintance view Wahhabist Sunnis and Khomeini’s apocalyptic variant of Shi’ism as something akin to snake-handling, tongue-warbling fundamentalist 'Christians' who believe that their way should dominate in the law and morality of the United States. I am not convinced of the dichotomy you present.
OK, that’s enough for now. Thanks for being civil. We could do worse than to participate in a rising spiral of mutual respect.
Foster,
I agree with you in your defense of our president and vice-president. As a country, we have been blessed beyond what we probably deserve to have the leaders we have at time such as this.
One of the scariest things I can imagine is to have a limp wristed girlie man type (J.Edwards)in power the next time we're attacked.
Even more frightening would be her thighness or Obama at the helm.
As a country, we have been divided into two basic ideologies:
Republicans vs Demorats
Right vs Wrong
Good vs Evil
Almighty God vs Satan and his many names.
For some reason, political correctness has made it worse to judge evil than to do evil. They aren't terrorists... they're just silly impoverished people that we have done something to upset. Give me a break.
I agree with Doug Giles, "the West’s growing unwillingness to say the Islamofacist ideology is uncut crap to the third power and that their adherents need to be deleted like KFed’s website history."
We are a divided country.
1. Liberals don’t want to stay abreast about what militant Islam is up to these days.
2. Libs want to believe the spin coming from CAIR [The Council on American-Islamic Relations] because the truth about Muslim mayhem is too brutal. Because of our aversion to the rawness of what the West is really facing with militant Islam, we want to believe CAIR’s talking heads.
3. Libs think we can talk our way out of this mess. They believe we can Eddie Haskell militant Islam and bebop and scat our way out of their ill will. The only problem is that Islam is not some June Cleaver that can be manipulated by our impish charm. Can’t we all get a long? We should talk more often . . . maybe get together play some checkers . . . and we’d love to have you over for dessert to eat a piece of strawberry pie.”
Militant Islam has got to be loving the indecision, division and erosion of the West’s will to war. They understand the ancient maxim that a kingdom divided against itself cannot stand. We’re increasingly becoming so divided and defeated that if we don’t watch it, as one comedian said, we could be approaching a long drawn out debate regarding which shade of white to use as our surrender flag.
God Bless our leaders and our troops.
GS
Foster,
In response to question No. 1, 98 percent of what occurred at the Jackson Peace Rally on Aug. 11 would meet your definition of "civility." You weren't there, and are making judgments based on a short video clip and spotty media coverage.
I'm not going to split hairs over the circumstances of how a demonstrator came to be kicking an effigy of Dick Cheney's head around his driveway. Suffice to say, it was unintended.
We're talking about a papier-mache head falling off a dummy, Foster. Egad.
The toppling of the statue was a very real, valid expression of the strong dislike the majority of our community has for the way the vice president has run our country. It was a symbolic gesture intended to show we reject his policies.
And it was effective, serving as smelling salts in the GOP dream world where people believe the war is going well and everything is okay.
We had been getting nowhere with what you would consider more "civil" discourse for six and a half years, and our frustration finally boiled over. We made a strong statement.
In response to question No. 2, sixteen words:
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
— State of the Union address, January 2003
That was a lie.
There has been a maddening pattern of this administration making misleading or downright false statements, particularly the vice president. The latest line is that Al Qaeda in Iraq is "the same people who attacked us on Sept. 11th."
No, actually, AQ in Iraq did not exist until after our invasion and occupation. They are some of the terrorists we have spawned.
This pattern of misconstruing the truth has been chronic, extending to Orwellian policy nomenclature like the "Clean Skies" and "Healthy Forests" initiatives, which in fact do the opposite.
It's an assault on reason, Foster, when the very people who are ordering our troops into an ill-conceived war, making them targets in the mess of civil strife we have created, then turn around and say opponents of that policy are not "supporting the troops."
Here in Wyominig, we call that bullshit, Foster. And the 300-plus people who marched on Teton Pines on Aug. 11 are sick of it.
Your ad contains inaccuracies. For instance, your reference to Curveball.
This is from an excellent Washington Post story on June 25, 2006:
<< In late January 2003, as Secretary of State Colin Powell prepared to argue the Bush administration's case against Iraq at the United Nations, veteran CIA officer Tyler Drumheller sat down with a classified draft of Powell's speech to look for errors. He found a whopper: a claim about mobile biological labs built by Iraq for germ warfare.
Drumheller instantly recognized the source, an Iraqi defector suspected of being mentally unstable and a liar. The CIA officer took his pen, he recounted in an interview, and crossed out the whole paragraph.
A few days later, the lines were back in the speech. Powell stood before the U.N. Security Council on Feb. 5 and said: "We have first- hand descriptions of biological weapons factories on wheels and on rails."
The sentence took Drumheller completely by surprise.
"We thought we had taken care of the problem," said the man who was the CIA's European operations chief before retiring last year, "but I turn on the television and there it was, again."
While the administration has repeatedly acknowledged intelligence failures over Iraqi weapons claims that led to war, new accounts by former insiders such as Drumheller shed light on one of the most spectacular failures of all: How U.S. intelligence agencies were eagerly drawn in by reports about a troubled defector's claims of secret germ factories in the Iraqi desert. The mobile labs were never found.
Drumheller, who is writing a book about his experiences, described in extensive interviews repeated attempts to alert top CIA officials to problems with the defector, code-named Curveball, in the days before the Powell speech. Other warnings came prior to President Bush's State of the Union address on Jan. 28, 2003. In the same speech that contained the now famous "16 words" on Iraqi attempts to acquire uranium, Bush spoke in far greater detail about mobile labs "designed to produce germ warfare agents." >>
I can go on and on, Foster.
Your pals have lied to you. And if and when that finally dawns on you, you'll be outraged, too.
best,
Jim
Foster,
Either you're not keeping up with the news or you made a typo. But the fact is: Scooter Libby was found GUILTY by a jury, not, "Not Guilty" as you have written.
Just because President Bush commuted Libby's sentence in no way legally clears him of being found guilty of lying.
We are all certainly entitled to our opinions, but not to our version of the facts.
You should immediately correct this error so as not to mislead others.
Best,
The Cowboy Times
Foster,
Sorry, but I'm beginning to think you're not just mistaken or out-of-touch with the latest facts, but you're deliberately dissembling and spreading falsehoods; thereby, undermining you're purported Good Samaritan spiel and campaign to promote "civil" discourse on Iraq and whether evidence exists to substantiate the charge of our leaders having deceived us.
Civil discourse requires that no one gets to spin stubborn facts inconvenient to their version of events or reality.
In your post, you cite from the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence’s Phase I findings, released last September, on pre-war intelligence analysis regarding Iraq.
Instead of properly summarizing the majority Senate report, which both Democrats and Republicans signed off on, you lifted a very selective quote irrelevant to the central argument of whether the White House was duly informed of dissenting views and evidence germaine to whether Iraq did or did not have a role in 9/11.
According to the bi-partisan Senate Select Committee’s report, the fact is U.S. intelligence analysts were in widespread disagreement about whether Iraq was behind 9/11.
Further, U.S. analysts were telling White House and other Bush administration policymakers of their doubts as the president, vice-president, Nat’l Security Advisor, Secretary of Defense and other administration officials made repeated public statements to the contrary.
The only remaining question, which is what the second phase of Sen. Rockefeller’s investigation is all about, is whether President Bush’s crew selectively ignored those analysts who challenged the White House's rationale for invading Iraq, and whether administration officials deliberately manipulated public opinion with statements they knew to be false, half-true or misleading; thereby defrauding the Congress and the America people.
So, to be most accurate and up-to-date, it is yet unknown whether official evidence exists to conclude that the White House and its surrogates lied or mislead the Congress and the America people into supporting the invasion of Iraq.
Sincerely,
The Cowboy Times
PS: Anyone who is intellectually curious enough to discover for themselves what are the latest findings of the Senate Select Committee's ongoing investigation, can go here: (http://intelligence.senate.gov/pubcurrent.html), click on "Prewar Intelligence Assessments About Postwar Iraq" read for free and decide for yourselves.
Richard,GS,Jim and Cowboy Times,
Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts, I'll hope to get a response back to you later today or tomorrow. Lynn and I have had guests from SLC. You raise some excellent points. God Bless, Foster
Foster: First off I would like to
commend you on your mission to assist those families that are
struggling with handicap children, it is a great cause and it shows the type of human being you are.
Now for the gist of my opinion on
your policy ad.
Why didn't you mention the fact that Dick Cheney didn't vote for
six years before appointing himself
Bush's running mate?
Why did you exclude the fact that
Cheney had five deferments from the military during the Viet Nam War, and when asked why he didn't
enlist in the service his response was "I had better things to do".
Dick Cheney when CEO of Haliburton
was instrumental in doing business
with Iran, even though Iran was
designated as a terrorist State.
This Foster is Treason!
Cheney predicted that trying to
enter Baddad during our first war
with Iraq would incite a civil war
between the religious factors, why did he then approve of our invasion knowing the problems it would cause?
How come you omitted the fact tha we allowed the Bin laden family to
to depart the United States after the 9/11 attack? Why is Bin Laden is
still at large after Bush proclaiming that he will be captured "Dead or Alive" this is
after having him trapped in Tora Bora, yet turned our attention to Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with attacking our Nation?
Rumsfeld proclaimed that he knew
where Saddam was hiding his weapons of mass destruction, the U.N. approve U2 flights over Iraq and we had aatelites focusing on every inch of Iraq and could have
tracked any arms transport, so the theory that the weapons were shipped to Syria is a fablication.
I agree that dragging an effigy
of Cheney through the streets was
in bad taste, I believe that the
protestors should have gone to the
visitors center and handcuffed Cheney and made a citizens arrest charging Cheney with war crimes,
This Foster would be justice.
Butch Krichmar
bkrichmar@msn.com
Richard and GS, Jim, Cowboy Times and Butch,
Its too nice a day too spend too much time on the computer; Lynn and I are headed for the lake but let me say a few things:
While my position is closer to GS's than Richard's, Richard wins the Gold Star for Civility. Your comments GS about "girlie man type John Edwards" and referring to Senator Clinton as "her thighness" knocked you into second place.
I sort of sense that for some of you, that if you had a five year old son who told you two plus two was five you would call him a liar.
I will need to do more research on the points you make BUT lets focus on what my article said and not bring in issues of whether or not the Vice President snores or is a bad speller (I have no evidence of either).
My points were quite simple:
1)Thanks to the protesters for caring; more of us should follow their example.
2) All of us benefit if we work to be more civil in our public discourse.
(Your acknowledging that the kicking of the head was unintended and that "98% was civil", admitting therefore that 2% was not, is wonderful to hear from you, Jim. Thanks for that).
3)That it is dishonest and deceitful to spread lies to impune another person's reputation. For people to say the Vice President was ultimately behind outing Valerie Plame after Scooter Libby was found NOT GUILTY of doing so and Colin Powell revealed Richard Armitage 'fessed up does a disservice to not only the Vice President but to the concept of truth. (Yes, Cowboy Times, you are correct Scooter was found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice----but innocent of the original crime of revealing Valerie's name.)
4)To confront the accusation that the Vice President was personally benefitting financially from the Iraq war.
5)That he "lied" about Saddam having weapons of mass destruction.
If he did, you need to agree he had a LOT of company!!
The article DID NOT address his voting record, military career, whether there was a connection to 9/11 and Iraq; if the WMD were transported to Syria and all the other objections the protesters seem to have----some of which I might even agree with, having been to Iraq to hear first hand perceptions of errors the officials there thought were made.
All of these points are worth pursuing (but not with the sun shining and the lake beckoning---so later).
In the meantime, its great for some of you to acknowledge you really don't know if the VP benefits financially from the war and that your negative impressions are formed without ever having met the man and that kicking the effigy head was unduly disrespectful-----we are on the right track to come together so we can concentrate on an enemy that might just possibly be more detrimental to our well being than our own government.
Thanks again for being honest with your feelings and observations. Foster (Head for the lake!)
If all you object to in GS's post are the references to John Edwards and Hillary Clinton, then I am led to believe that you agree on the listed attributes of Democrats (Wrong, Evil and allied with Satan) vs. Republicans (Right, Good and allied with Almighty God). If that's so, then please let me know so I can drop this attempt to be civil and fair and just come out swinging. It is possible and perhaps desireable to be civil with those with whom I don't agree; it's futile to attempt it with people who believe I am an ally of Satan.
Richard,
You are right that I did ignore all of GS's points except the ones that allowed you to win the Gold Star for Civility.
I also regret my self indulgent eagerness to get to the lake (What a great ride!! Wish Lynn and I had done it on our motorcycles rather than car, but maybe tomorrow)caused me to defer commenting on the many excellent points, you "Cowboy" and Butch made.
I'll try to get my act together but tomorrow is busy day including 8 a.m. radio interview on The Range.
Are you on the same page with me concerning the points I tried to make in article before moving on to other points you and others presented? Foster
My point in my original post(or at least one of them) was that I can't know whether the Vice President is a liar or not. All I can use to make that judgement is the information I have about him and his behavior. With the information I currently have I doubt his sagacity, his veracity and have considerable doubt as to his civic virtue. His behavior in the past make it very difficult for me to see him as a person of courage or rectitude. So, while I don't explicitly accuse him of profiting from the war in Iraq or of being complicit in the revelation of the name of a CIA operative, it will take much more than a simple denial to make me believe he was definitely not culpable in those areas.
If he wishes me to make a different judgement then he needs to provide me with more information, something he has been unwilling to do for me or for the many Americans who disagree with him. Instead he claims special information and repeats the same flawed talking points. I find it particularly troubling that he now espouses, without a shred of doubt, a course of action that he was totally against in 1994. I am also troubled by his willingness to spend the lives of our soldiers when he worked so carefully to avoid service (in a war he supported).
The Vice President is NOT a five year old. He is a grown man with a graduate education who has managed to remain in high public office for nearly two decades. If he tells me again and again that 2 + 2 = 5 I have to wonder just what's going on.
For now, I would not accept bread and salt from him. Nor would my father (a highly decorated veteran of World War II) my uncle (who left his youth in Korea) or the family of my best friend from college (who didn't return from Viet Nam).
Foster,
You're getting hammered at Newwest.net's JH page.
Check out "Fostering More Deadly Propaganda"
Mickey Splean
Foster,
Scooter Libby was neither charged with "outing" Valerie Plame or on trial for allegedly "outing" Valerie Plame.
Why you keep insisting on this only serves to show how uninformed you are.
Libby was on trial for perjury, making false statements and obstructing justice.
Please read the original indictment and tell us where it says Patrick Fitzgerald, or any federal prosecutor for that matter, charged Libby with "outing" Valerie Plame?
Incredible how much useless energy is being wasted on invented controversies when all one has to do is read the public record before going off half-cocked about nonsense.
CitizenKane
ci·vil·i·ty /sɪˈvɪlɪti/
1. courtesy; politeness.
2. a polite action or expression: an exchange of civilities.
I will try to remain "civil" when talking about people that want to kill us. I will refrain from calling them the murderers that they are.
My words were "as a country, we have been divided into two basic ideologies:
Republicans vs Demorats
Right vs Wrong
Good vs Evil
Almighty God vs Satan and his many names.
For some reason, political correctness has made it worse to judge evil than to do evil."
My point was that our country is deeply divided. Don't read into my statement that Republicans=Almighty God
or that Democrats=Satan. We all know better than that.
This is, however, a holy war. It is a war about protecting us (U.S.) from those who want to kill us. There is a right side to be on and a wrong side to be on in this conflict. We value human life... they live to die.
I feel very strongly that George Bush and our beloved troops are fighting for our protection. I don't agree with Bush on many other subjects such as spending and immigration. I do think that we should support our president in a time of war.
I'll be honored to give Her Thighness and the Breck Boy the respect they deserve as soon as they start showing some CIVILITY towards MY president and the war that MY country in fighting in.
Foster, I only have one child (7) that would be capable of fighting for his country someday ...my other child is handicapped.
It is my hope that my son would be willing to fight for the freedoms that allowed Michael Moore to make million$ and live the American dream.
God Bless our Country and our troops.
PS. I have my 5wt and some Chernyobl Ants & Grasshoppers ready if you need some help.
(The above reference to Chernyobl and Ants was not intended to imply that all ants are Russian or that all Russians fly fish.) You and I both know that the world would be a better place if more time were spent at the lake or standing in a stream.
Geo
Foster-
The number of factual inaccuracies contained in you diatribe is astounding. I don't have the time to refute every one of them, and not because I'm cruising to the lake on my motorcycle but because I have to earn a living to support my family.
I cannot ignore the spin on the Scooter Libby issue. Scooter Libby was not found innocent or not guilty of outing a covert CIA operative. He WAS found guilty of obstructing the investigation of the outing of a covert CIA operative, and the accompanying charges of perjury and making false statements. The prosecutor, appointed by GW Bush, said that he was prevented from discovering who ordered the outing of Valerie Plame by Scooter Libby's perjury and false statements to prosecutors and FBI agents. He in no way stated that Libby was innocent of that charge, and insinuated that the Vice President was directly involved, although that could not be proven due to the obstruction of the investigation.
You are not preaching to sheeple here, we prefer facts to opinion. Please be intellectually honest and correct your error.
Foster,
You've hit the target again. Personal attacks only diminish true and honest dialog about differences in opinion. I am disgusted with the continual attacks of the left on President Bush and VP Cheney. It is no wonder Americans on both sides of the aisle have no respect for politicians.
Harry R
Foster
Thank you for trying to keep things civil. Your example is to be commended and your motives are pure.
I just read 1776 and was amazed at how they made decisions in those early colonial days -- in the taverns, talking and discussing -- at times heated, but usually with good candor.
Let's all talk. Let's even argue. Lets get it all on the table. But none of us should resort to calling people names (i.e. "girlie man," "liar," "stupid", "fundie") -- its a short-cut that is immature and intellectually stunted.
Thanks for your work and heart for reconciliation.
David Rupert
www.redletterbelievers.blogspot.com
Jim,David,Richard,GS,CitizenKane and "Cowboy Times",etal,
Forgive my absence of comments but I've got a few balls in the air. Let's see if I can renew our interchange by starting at square one and trying to understand your perspectives:
Was Scooter Libby guilty of outing Valerie Plame? Foster
And...."Obsession" is a riveting piece that accurately portrays what we are against. Its not a political film -- it's educational intent is a primer for this entire discussion.
David Rupert
I hold the American people responsible for 911 and for the mis-conduct of our President and Vice President while in office.
In the case of the VP, any man who raises a daughter that practices openly as a lesbian says a great deal about her father's suitability to hold public office. Unfortunately, our nation continues to overlook such misconduct and even to embrace it as politically correct, that incurs that rightful wrath of both God and Allah and their followers. Jihad visits the unrighteous and not the righteous. When Ramadan is celebrated in the White House, and our southern borders are not immediately closed after 911, we are not safe. Both the President and the Vice President are responsible for this and this fact is not hidden. It does not involve secrecy. Even the administration agrees that it is not the 99.5% of those non-Jihad illegal alien crossers; rather, it is that very small number that endangers millions of Americans.
Sanctuary cities encourage it. Blackwater USA, the new Crusaders in liberal Catholic garb are just one of the constituencies of the administration that allow it. If we are at war as some presume, this activity would be prohibited in order to protection America. This war is phony through and through and has been introduced by the Bush clan ALONG WITH THE CLINTONS. And our hope is in Mrs. Thighness?? I think not!!
We are mocking God as a people and God will use even the wicked to correct our behavior as Americans if we do not recognize that sodomy is out and Jihad is death even though Republican neo-cons current activity is little better. Foster, even if morality were present in our national leaders (which it is not), (see movie Bohemian Grove by Alex Jones), we would not be spared from Jihad because Jihad has not only a historical agenda but also a very real and present danger. The problem is that both administrations have stirred up the fundamentalist wrath of Jihad and now there is no out except extinction for one side or the other. The game we are playing is a no-win war with a no-win agenda for the west, BECAUSE THERE WAS A PROFIT TO BE MADE FOR CHENEY'S CONNECTIONS AND FOR BUSH #1'S CONNECTIONS.
Every war is about profits to somebody and it sure is not the American people. Misplaced patriotism is loyalty to dishonorable projects and authorities of which Cheney in his person is Chief. Of course there are many others including Sen. Spector supporting his staying in the US Senate while he as a coming-outted Republican Idaho US Senator ALSO does not know where (with whom) to entertain his penis. We are sick and the Great Physician cannot fix it until we go to him both individually and nationally.
The refrain, “God Bless America” right after 911 will not do. What is necessary is 2Chron7:14.
Maybe then by God's mercy we will be given another chance. I hope so. But it is a conditional contract. 2 Chron 7:14
Civility when the unrighteous rule is treason of the people against their sworn duty to protect and defend. Imagine while crimes are being committed admonishing our local police officers to be civil. They should aggressively root out corruption lest they be accessories after the fact like President Bush is.
Foster, thanks so much for your attention to the need to cultivate and encourage civil discourse. A great resource I've discovered on this topic is an effort called "Speak Your Peace: The Civility Project", which was developed in Duluth, MN. http://www.dsacommunityfoundation.com/initiatives/syp.html
The Project’s key message is to promote nine simple tools for practicing civility, taken from P.M. Forni’s book Choosing Civility. The tools are:
Pay Attention. Be aware and attend to the world and the people around you.
Listen. Focus on others in order to better understand their points of view.
Be Inclusive. Welcome all groups of citizens working for the greater good of the community.
Don’t Gossip. And don’t accept when others choose to do so.
Show Respect. Honor other people and their opinions, especially in the midst of a disagreement.
Be Agreeable. Look for opportunities to agree; don’t contradict just to do so.
Apologize. Be sincere and repair damaged relationships.
Give Constructive Criticism. When disagreeing, stick to the issues and don’t make a personal attack.
Take Responsibility. Don’t shift responsibility and blame onto others; share disagreements publicly.
Here's to encouraging a more civil society!
Dan Johnson
Kinship of Greater Minneapolis
Foster,
My vision is normally 20/20 in hindsight. That is not the case in the war on Iraq. I, as did most Americans, supported it. I, as most Americans, now wish it hadn't turned out as it has. I suspect that our President and Vice President would agree. Knowing what we know today vs. what we knew prior to the invasion leaves me with one very strong feeling. I'm glad I wasn't the one that had to make the decision to invade Iraq. I agree wholeheartedly with you on the point that we can disagree with the premise without launching personal attacks. I can't for the life of me imagine why someone would accuse either the President or Vice President of lying about this. What do they have to gain? That logic is beyond me. I am naive enough to think that having all the resources of the greatest nation the world has ever seen at their disposal puts them in a much better position than I to make the tough decisions. As you espouse, go ahead and have the debate but please make it about the issues and don't call my President and Vice President liars. They deserve better.
I don’t agree with you on everything, as I think you know. I do stand four square behind you on your effort to return us to civility. The fact that you have taken the time to visit the Middle East and gather first hand information from those involved speaks well of you and your efforts to present an accurate appraisal of the situation. I wonder how many of the reporters, or our fellow citizens, that like to opine on these issues would take the time and effort to gain that much firsthand knowledge even if they resources to do it.
Thanks a lot Foster for writing this honest and correct view.
I believe that the concessions that were done to Islamists during the war on Iraq and the Anti-war demonstrations have actually encouraged Jihadism in Iraq and aggravates the problem.....you can see how many innocent people were killed in Iraq (more than a thousand) in the weak immediately after the Anti-war demonstrations lead by Jane Fonda. As an Ex-Islamic Extremist and as a reformer of Islam, I confirm that these demonstrations were perceived as weakness by the jihadists and thus encouraged the terrorists to launch more attacks on innocent people.
The terrorists will be defeated when they see US united rather than divided.
Many thanks Foster once more for writing such a great article and for addressing the issue that US has not been attacked again -for six years- since Sep 11 (compare this to the major attack of Sep 11 that happened only after 3 years after the US responded in a weak manner to the attack on its embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998).
G-d bless you and all those who speak the truth in this critical time of history.
I only wish to see people blaming the Islamists for ruining the constructive part of the war on Iraq rather than blaming themselves.
If the US involvement in Iraq was the cause of terrorism why then the Iraqi Christians who live in Iraq never contributed to terrorism.
Also, can any sane person convince me that Sunnis killing innocent Iraqi Sheias in such brutal manner and mutilating their dead bodies is also caused by the US!!!!!!!! If Islamism did not exist in Iraq OR if all the population were Christians (this is based on both logic and statistical evidence) we would not have seen such barbaric terrorism and the US plan to built Iraq would have succeeded by now.
It is time to point our finger to the true cause of the problem which is……VIOLENT ISLAM…..it is time to tell the truth & stop blaming ourselves for every thing….it is time to face the reality of Islamism otherwise the reality of this ‘parasitic cancer’ will face us…….withdrawal from Iraq in a humiliating manner will only encourage the Jihadists all over the world to use the same barbaric tactics they used in Iraq to destroy any democratically elected government and to subjugate the whole world to Taliban or Islamic Sharria law. …Would you like to see this happening in US?
Tawfik Hamid
www.tawfikhamid.com
Foster-
The simple answer to the last question you posed is...we don't know if Scooter Libby is guilty of outing Valerie Plame and neither do you. Scooter Libby was never charged or tried for outing Valerie Plame due to the fact that he obstructed the investigation of that crime. And as far as that goes, do you even agree that it was a crime? The standard spin on that is that she wasn't a covert agent, ignoring the fact that it was the CIA itself that asked for an investigation into the outing of it's own covert agent. Just wanted to make sure we're on the same page.
Also, to address your point that Colin Powell said that it was Armitage who outed Valerie Plame. Richard Armitage indeed told Robert Novack the identity of the covert CIA agent, as did Karl Rove by his own admission. What you are leaving out is that Novack was not the only reporter given this information. This information was given to a number of reporters including Matt Cooper, Bob Woodward and Judith Miller by a number of White House officials. Novack was the only one who printed it. So, once again you have muddled the facts with your assertion that Armitage was the perpetrator of the crime.
Hello all,
I'm joining the conversation late. There sure have been lot of words written about the article. I'll try to write as few words as possible to make my points.
Foster, I believe you are focusing on the wrong issues. The protesters also focused on the wrong message - they focused on Cheney, when they should have just focused on their stop the war message.
I don't care if Bush/Cheney lied. I don't care if Sadam was a bad person. I don't care that a paper replica of Cheney got destroyed.
I do care about the 5000 dead Americans (includes contractors) and the $1,000,000,000,000 we have spent. But I care about the future more than the past because we can't change the past, but we can change the future. Foster, you are focused on the past. I respectfully suggest you focus on the future.
It is my opinion, shared by tens of millions of Americans, that we need to take our troups out the Arabian peninsula ASAP. Israel, with our financial support, can defend themselves (they have dozens, if not hundreds, of nuclear weapons, and the will to use them). If we don't leave, and leave soon, our country will go the way of all empires throughout history - death by slow decay. Our armed forces are strained to the point of breaking. We are borrowing billions of dollars per week from the Chinese to finance the war. The other countries that had troups in Iraq have mostly picked up and gone home. We're alone, and we can't sustain our current policies in Iraq. It's really that simple.
Sincerely,
Don Wills
organizer, Teton County Citizens for Ron Paul
don.wills@mac.com
Dear Foster and Others,
Thank you Foster for taking the time and energy to create this form! I see this form as a serious attempt to create a dialogue type of discussion on these important issues rather than the usual debate which seldom gives rise to viable courses of action. In the last week or so additional issues have been raised for discussion by others and some tangents around who said what, when, where and why have added to your already substantial list of issues.
I note that you are using the “Golden Rule” to help define what you call a more civil discourse. The version you use in your article is consistent with much of the existing American culture, but may not be consistent with other cultures or even with the direction our culture is moving toward. This egocentric version of the Golden Rule seems to cause as many problems as it solves. As such less egocentric versions have emerged such as “Treat others as they would have you treat them”. These types of underlying principles tend to lead to a serious dialogue conversation rather than debate. People don’t start discussion with others with the purpose of convincing them that they are wrong and you are right. Rather, discussion is initiated by everyone for the purpose of exploring the issues for greater understanding around beliefs, values and underlying assumption regarding the issues.
My experience suggest that if our political leaders and decision makers took the time to explore issues more deeply we would get more viable decision making and less violent solutions. For example, many believe that one of the objectives of the military effort after getting rid of Saddam is to promote Iraqi democracy as you state in your original article. In fact, this seems to have been a major foreign policy objective since the end of WWII and it is one that can be seriously questioned. Democracies such as ours are complex systems for political representation in decision making. Our system has evolved substantially over time as our culture has changed and while appropriate for us, it would be quite inappropriate in many other places such as Iraq. The most the US could probably do is help another country achieve its next level of development and in the specific case of Iraq it would not be democracy since it is little more than a collection of tribes. The framework, structures, traditions and cultural norms in Iraq are not consistent with an emerging democracy so it shouldn’t be surprising that the effort to date has not been effective. All the efforts to impose democracy in Iraq have reinforced their traditional ways of dealing with disagreement—violence. Doing more and more of what hasn’t worked does not seem to me to be a very productive road forward for Iraq or the USA. Maybe these types of discussions will reveal the need to truly define issues before we act.
Foster -
To respond to your query: LIbby was never tried for outing Valerie Plame. Based on our system of justice we therefore say his is innocent, by default. But that's not the same thing as saying he didn't do it, just that he's never been tried and convicted of it.
Foster,
Regarding your comment "... despite the fact that Scooter Libby was found not guilty...". If Tony Soprano whacked Joey Bananas but was never charged you wouldn't say that Tony Soprano was found "not guilty" of murdering Joey. Similarly, because he wasn't charged, you can't say that Scooter was found "not guilty" of outing Valerie Plame. If Armitage outed Plame as Powell claimed, why hasn't Armitage been charged with outing a covert agent, which is a federal crime. This raises the question, did Powell report Armitage? If not why not?
Clark
Dear Mr. Friess,
You show great courage in opening your views to public discourse, I applaud your concern for the dire situation the world has found itself in.
I was at that peace rally that you discredit in your article and yes I saw 'Obsession' and I read the book “Why we want to Kill You” by Walid Shoebat and I went to the lecture you brought to Jackson starring Mr. Shoebat. Like you Islamist fundamentalism does indeed scare me. The way women are treated in Saudi Arabia, by the Taliban and by Arabs throughout the Middle East is nothing short of appalling. However what the discourse on this site seems to miss is the real reason why we are in Iraq.
Why we really went to war in Iraq is critical to understanding why we are still there and will likely remain there. I unfortunately don’t have the difinitive answer to that question but I know where the evidence points and I know it makes no logical sense that we invaded because we were afraid of Saddam and his WMD’s, nor was it for revenge for 911. I also find it hard to swallow that we invaded to liberate the Iraqi people (you gotta admit with our style of friendly humanitarian liberation who needs enemies?) No it must have been something else entirely.
If anyone had any illusions about why we invaded Iraq they were quickly dispelled when the military guarded the Oil Ministry while letting the national museum of Iraq be looted!
The invasion of Iraq was not an act of a benevolent super power risking its wealth, blood and reputation to rescue a weak powerless country from a brutal dictator (that had been our ally even after using nerve gas -we had sold him- against his own people), no this was clearly a move of an imperial power to control its vital life blood - the flow of oil- not only from Iraq but from the entire region, and make a tidy profit for the military industrial complex in the process. To think otherwise is to live in an incredibly naïve bubble.
It is time wealthy and influential men like you get off the train to nowhere and start supporting LIFE through innovative conscientious policies rather than the death and destruction support of empire and the military industrial complex brings us.
We will never stop those that want to do us harm by destroying their homes families and livelihoods. “You break it you Own it” does not mean keeping our boots on their throats to maintain control. WE CANNOT SAVE IRAQ FROM THE IRAQIS. Eventually we have to leave and the sooner we do the sooner they can sort out their own country. That is of course if you believe the Pollyanna version of why we are there in the first place. If we are there to control mid east oil then obviously we are not leaving. The massive bases and embassy we have built would certainly suggest the latter.
If you are worried about the Islamic threat, as Walid Shoebat seems to be, then you need to come to grips with the reality that no amount of bombing and occupation of Islamic lands is going to stop Islamic radicalism, quite the opposite. There is only one weapon we posses that could be put to use to stem radical Islam and it is one you should be familiar with – it is the Christian ethic Jesus Christ embodied; the sentiments of love thy neighbor, turn the other cheek, do unto others… When we treat the rest of the world as if they deserve to have productive lives and self determination, control of their own resources and in fact actually help them (not invade them or overthrow their governments) to have better lives – the extremists will lose their power. Keep attacking sovereign countries while ignoring world opinion and ignoring justice for all people regardless of race or religion and we will never be safe.
Try reading and 'The Great Turning' by David C. Korten for an alternative direction to empire.
Keep up the good work,
Rob
Foster et al -
About a year ago a friend who previously served in the intelligence community directed me to a web site for a 'fee for service analysis resource' called Strategic Forecasting (www.stratfor.com). They provide some free content on their home page to give a flavor of what they offer in depth to members. They seem to have no political agenda, they are 'realists' in the geopolitical sense. I strongly suggest that anyone who wants some useful background on the Middle East, terrorism in general or geopolitical realities that bear on market behavior take a look at the service and consider joining up. I maintain an annual premium membership and consider it well worth the price.
I mention this especially because there is currently content on the site that bears on our current discussions, but due to subscriber agreements I can't post copies of it.
Dear Foster and Others,
Now that General Patraeus , Congress and the President have had their say on what is to happen in Iraq, it appears that the more people talk about change, the more things stay the same. This should scare the hell out of anyone except those who share the President’s value system. Even if continued US military involvement is successful, a very doubtful proposition at best, there is little guarantee that democratic institutions will be established within a culture that will support them without violence. As such, a stable non-violent society which has been stated as preconditions for democracy to develop will not come into existence.
We heard the President asserted that our troops are there to protect US interests. But, as before he has not stated what those interests are and why they need protection by us.
I don’t believe that democracy American style is in the best interest of Iraq right now or possibly ever. For those interested in helping Iraq with a path forward toward democracy, I would suggest the Singapore example. Check this out on Wikipedia and you will see some of the reasons why it might be a more appropriate example. It would also be interesting to find out whether Singapore was ever considered an appropriate example for Iraq. If not why not and if it was and rejected, why?
I am now getting tired of the same old, same old and strongly suggest that whatever party is interested in winning the next presidential election they begin to explore new and different approaches to foreign policy. Making the world safe for American style democracy is a lose-lose strategy and we should be beyond it.
Cliff Senf
Dear Foster and Others,
Well, I guess it’s official now that Thomas Friedman has noted that President Bush in his recent speech has declared that there will be no change in US policy in Iraq and is leaving it to his successor to deal with it. In my opinion, this amounts to a complete abrogation of responsibility in both military and foreign policy. I suspect that this course of action will not work for the President simply because things in Iraq are changing too rapidly and that some policy change will be forced on the US if only in reaction to other's actions. This approach to Iraq has nothing to do with fighting terrorism and once again raises the issue of “why the US is still there participating in the continued killing of so many people.”
In recent days, ex Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan has raised the question whether the military action of the last few years is any more complicated than seeking control over oil reserves. If true or even partially true then the war makers should be turned over to the War Crimes Tribunal for prosecution.
Ending this war is not very complicated. Repairing the damage done by the US actions of the past four or five years may be difficult or even impossible. When will the US politicos learn that military violence seldom if ever solves problems, but, often exacerbates them?
Cliff Senf
Cliff,Jim,David,Mags,Dan,Rob,Butch,
Don,Cowboy,gs,etal,
With all the discussion regarding Scooter we have missed a more important issue. How do we get more of our fellow Americans to know about the letter Osama bin Laden sent to Ayman al-Zawahiri stating that Iraq is their most important FRONT (and not a "WAR")?
Have all of you viewed "Obsession" which is now available on Amazon and in many bookstores? It is difficult to dialogue with out all of us being on the same page with basic facts.
Do we support our President and VP in their efforts to confront the most significant threat to our freedoms and way of life since Communism and Nazism or do we embrace John Edward's perception that the effort is no more than a bumper sticker?
How would each of you confront the threat? Foster
Dear Foster et al,
Thanks Foster for jumping back into the blog! You raise an interesting and important question at the start of your piece; how to raise the awareness and understanding of more Americans to the greater threat provided by radical Islam. Well, we know that what has been done for the last 5 years hasn’t work as just about the opposite result has been achieved. Doing more of what hasn’t worked for that long is a definition of __________!
I viewed the 12 minute on line version of Obsession and I am wondering what would be the benefit of the full version as I learned nothing new from the short version. It appears to be a well done presentation of “the facts” from a particular perspective only. I am a little suspicious of those who make comparisons with Nazi fascisms. While there are a lot of similarities in tactics the overall approach fails as the important dissimilarities dominate. For example, Germany was a unified country with a history of such. Iraq is a collection of tribes with little sense of country and it was artificially created in the first place. Germany was a very literate country with high technical skills. Radical Islam as practiced in many of the 55 countries doesn’t need or use literacy. Basically it uses violence as a way of recruiting converts. Radical Islam is not a country limited movement; rather, it is a concept based ideology using religion as the way of spreading hate and violence. With respect to “Obsession”, I think it is more than just a presentation of facts; it is in its own way a presentation of an ideology. So, Foster what are the basic facts that you want us to agree to as a basis for dialogue? If my memory serves me correct dialogue is a way of looking behind the facts to get at fundamental beliefs and assumptions that underlie the facts.
Thus, do I support the President and the VPs “efforts to confront the most significant threat” to our freedoms? No, I do not since I believe it is only superficially a military problem. I should note that I didn't support the first Gulf war as it was essentially a regional issue and we should ave forced a regional approach to a solution. Anyway a military solution alone can essentially miss the most important part of entire solution set. The past five years lend support to this view.
How would I confront this threat? First, I would dialogue what is the total nature of the threat. What do their tactics and strategies appear to be and what are the possible outcomes and consequences. What are the likely targets? How do we counter these strategies? How can we begin to turn their approaches around so that they can begin to raise some serious questions in the 55 countries? We need to surface our own assumptions, beliefs and values and discuss the impact of these on our own perceptions as well as on the terrorist. If we are to stand a chance in meeting the challenge posed by this greatest of all threats, we will need more than a “surge”. A surge is after all just another four letter word.
Cliff
I have not viewed the entire video; I have seen large segments of it in clips available on the Internet. I certainly do not deny Mr. Shoebat his experience, and that doesn't make what he has to say fact.
As a counterpoint to giving the video blanket acceptance you might want to review
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/03/27/112/
or any of the other investigations that call into considerable question the perspective under which the video was produced.
Foster, can you give me a reference for the facts you want us to agree upon, rather than a set of beliefs and harsh rhetoric?
I would certainly like to see more Muslims repudiate Osama bin Laden and Political Islam, just as I would like to have more Christians denounce R.J. Rushdoony and Christian Reconstruction, but I don't make any final judgements about either population on that basis. The actions of Salafist takfiris and the millenialist claimants to the mantle of the Hidden Imam are no more the true face of Islam than were the hundreds of years of the Christian Crusades.
I''m glad to be back on The Campfire,
My absence if partly due to being in SLC to support son Steve and his wife Polly as they deal with some very serious health issues with our new four month old granddaughter, Ginger. Our family would cherish your prayers.
You all have raised some great questions, some of which I need to do more research to make an intelligent response. Let me just address just a few.
I feel it ESSENTIAL that we focus on the overriding issue, beyond Scooter, Cheney and Iraq. What are we going to do about the "WAR" Osama bin Laden declared on us in 1998? Can you send me your reactions to Dr. Tawfik Hamid's comment posted Sept 6th, 8:56 a.m. above. I have spent hours with this Egyptian trained medical doctor who loves his Islam religion and wants to convince his fellow believers to embrace a more peaceful interpretation of many of the Koran's verses.
He speaks with GREAT WISDOM!!
We also should all read the two sits Cliff and Richard shared with us and also Tom Friedman's NYT article on Kurd's Secret. Then lets converse some more. Would be fun to get all of us together for coffee Oct 1,2nd or 3rd. Regards, Foster
Foster,
I'm sorry to hear about the health issues in your family. My hopes and prayers are with them.
With respect to the idea of a coffee, I agree it would be fun and instructive. My preference would be for Wednesday Oct. 3, but I could free up either of the other two days if necessary.
Cliff
I'm afraid my work situation makes it difficult to get away Monday through Thursday. Friday's can work most weeks.
I can make Fridays.
Cliff
Foster, I just wanted you to know that Ginger has been added to our prayer list.
We have an 11 year old angel with "special needs" that is a living reflection of our awesome God. She is a great example of the power of prayers.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your support during Taryn's fight. She was (is) my hero.
G.S.
The war on Iraq is quite illegal - war was never declared. This fact is avoided by most in the media and most in Congress with few exceptions, like Ron Paul. We also can't forget that the invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq were predicated as responses to the 911 attacks. However it has yet to be demonstrated that Al Quaida was behind the attacks. Many unanswered questions remain, such as how did WTC 7, a 47 floor building, collapse when it was not hit by a plane? There is no official explanation of the collapse of WTC 7 in the 911 Commission report or any other government report to date. A number of prominent people including Morgan Reynolds, who served as served as chief economist for the US Department of Labor during 2001–2, George W. Bush's first term, have concluded that 911 was an inside job. See http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds12.html
If the "War on Terror" is real why does the Bush administration let about 3000 illegal aliens enter our country every day? Why should the people of the USA believe that our country is safer by invading Iran when the borders remain open?
Foster Friess, having examined your website I have concluded that you, like so many so-called Christians, are completely deluded and far, far from the truth of Christ. You state: "and a special thanks for the civil way in which you did it" to compliment one of your commentors...but...YOU ARE A HYPOCRIT of the worst sort. Where was the Bush Administration's [including the war-mongering Cheney] "civility" in dealing with Iraq? I know you by your words. You are the modern day equivalent of the Pharisee's who made a show of piety but were "full of dead men's bones" corruption within. In my opinion this murderous foreign war was not worth the death of a single child. You are a false teacher (in my opinion) and you shall incur a stricter judgement for leading so many people down the path you lead toward greater war, death and destruction. When you get to hell, say "hello" to Cheney and the rest of the International War Criminals and I can prove it: via this YouTube film: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Khut8xbXK8
Like Pontius Pilate washed his hands of the innocent blood of Christ...so have I washed my hands of any support of the MURDER of other humans. See my 'International Public Notice' at
http://www.1-free-dvd.com/About_photo_front_of_Embassy.html
You--like your Neo Con cronies--are violating the mandates of Christ in a manner that shames all that He stood (and still stands) for. You will stand before His throne with the blood-stained hads of countless tens of thousands of innocents. The war "protesters" are nearer the Kingdom of Heaven than you, sir.
Clarence Malcolm
Private Criminal Investigator
Ted Gunderson Professional Investigations
www.tedgunderson.com
www.1-free-dvd.com
Dear Foster et al,
It appears that this blog has slowed to a crawl and taken a bit of a backward spin. The first comment by Anonymous falls into the category of conspiracy theory. I have spent 32 of the last 35 years working as a consultant in the Washington, DC area working for numerous Federal and international agencies. I have great difficulty believing that a conspiracy of this magnitude could ever be developed let alone implemented. Of course, a commonality of values and beliefs could create an unconscious set of policies and actions that take on the look of a conspiracy without being one. Concerning the second statement by Anonymous, I’m not sure what it has to do with the subject of this blog.
The October 12 entry appears to be a return to name calling and bringing the Christian God into the discussion without any stated purpose. I really don’t understand what was intended by the entry.
I think we can conclude based on events and words of the past few weeks that the current Administration intends on a long term presence in Iraq with long term meaning a generation or more. Why? What is it that is going to take that long for the US to accomplish? The war in Iraq is a battle in the so called war on terrorism. If this battle is going to take another generation to complete, what chance do we have in the broader war? If the War on Terrorism is the greatest threat facing this country,(I believe it is) then why haven’t we had a broad and deep discussion of it, and as a country declared war on it?
I recently read an article that stated that the US spends more on military goods and services than all the other countries in world combined. Why are we fighting this battle in Iraq? Why are we taking such a hard line with Iran? Does either of these countries provide a real threat to the US? If so what is it? Why should I support the continued violence associated with military solutions when the war on terror is a much broader entity?
Cliff Senf
To All,
I appreciate everyones input. What I do not appreciate is the implication that anyone in the US, except maybe some really weird extreme psycos, WANT war. Nobody WANTS war, some see it as a way, probably the last option, to achieve a purpose...and I resent the notion that our leaders purpose is "personal profit". The current adminstration, though far from perfect, are not criminals, at least no more than any other administration that preceded them. Secrets are implicit to national security, and during times like these, YES most of what is done in the White House is secret...and for national defense, not marital bliss. The War on Terrorism and subsequant invasions in Afganistan and Iraq are an administrations direct response to attacks and ongoing threats to our nation. You may disagree, but when it comes to the security of the United States, I prefer something be done rather than talk. Our previous administration, in the face of almost 8 years of attacks on US soil and US interests around the world did a lot of talking with a token act here and there, and all that got us was 911. By the way, I really resent the implication or accusation that WE, the people and/or government of the United States, are responsible for the attacks on 911. Extremists are responsible, and have been for decades. As Foster is trying to promote in this forum, just because you disagree with someone doesn't make it right or even justified to attack that person...or country. I've visited the Persian Gulf region while serving in the military. I've seen first hand the arab culture. It is not a culture of civilized equality and harmony with your neighbor. And while the US and the West are, again, far from perfect, we are at least trying to progress towards a more harmonious culture , filled with diversity. That being said, if these eastern cultures want to contiue to live as they lived literally thousands of years ago, fine. Just don't attack us because you disagree with the way we live. You may think I am naive for believing the US and people in it are good and well intentioned. Mistakes have been made and will be made in the future. It is all of our responsibilities to put the best best people in the position of leadership. If you don't vote, you have no ground to complain. And if you complain, make sure you speak from a factual perspective, rather than emotional. I recently saw an interview with Whoopi Goldburg where she was challanged to back up her claims that we were loosing the war in Iraq. She responded by saying something to the effect, "I don't have to have facts, I speak from my heart and it's what I feel." While fealings may guide you in your personal life, when running a company or country, or speaking for more than yourself or with the intent to influence others, I think your perspective needs to backed up by more than a gut feeling. I think there is way to much emotion and not enough fact in most debates regarding this administration.
Foster – reasoning is tough sometimes isn’t it!
Making the argument for war
As a well informed political wonk and news junkie the only argument George Bush had to present to me for war with Iraq was the well documented fact that Saddam Hussein was giving the parents of Palestinian suicide bombers (terrorists) $25,000. This inducement for Palestinian parents to sell their children on the idea of an early death was a good investment for terrorist supporter Saddam Hussein to stir the pot further fomenting the Palestinian/ Israeli conflict that is the burr under the saddle of every Muslim alive. This animus by design practiced by Osuma, Saddam and others bonds Muslims together against a perceived evil (the USA) and aids despots like Saddam to rally their subjects against a common enemy therefore becoming distracted from their domestic oppression at home. As an informed person I understand that as long as there is unrest in Israel Muslim's will hate Americans for our support of Israel. I also realize world opinion negates George Bush's ability to make this argument as a primary reason for war.
Some in this country need a little more reason than I do to remove megalomaniac, genocidal, hate mongering, despots from power. So George Bush had to argue the 17 United Nations resolutions that Saddam flagrantly had violated during the 10 years since Gulf War One, defaulting on his cease-fire agreement, thereby circumventing the need to make the first argument. This second argument also wasn't enough for some.
To convince green party members, anti-global anarchists, Frenchmen, earth-firsters, ACLU supporters, and Democrats, George Bush had to put forth another argument by using Bill Clinton's explanation for bombing Iraq in 1998, "weapons of mass destruction." The fact is, when some people make up their minds about someone (George Bush), there isn't an argument in the world that will sway them as their faith in opposition of their opponent defies reason. Even if it is an argument, they have gladly swallowed previously delivered by a different messenger.
Some argue that Saddam's fingerprints weren't on 9-11. I agree but that doesn't exonerate him from being a terrorist enabler, financier of notorious magnitude, and a "go to" guy for volatile goodies to fight the west and quite worthy of our pursuit and annihilation in our war on terror (islamo-fascism).
Do I believe that Saddam has WMD's? Undoubtedly! Was it a pivotal argument? No! Was it the only argument for war? No! In retrospect George Bush shouldn't have put forth redundant arguments in his effort to sell everyone on war as to try to reason with the unreasonable is a fool's errand.
Those who oppose George Bush despite what he says and does have seized on the WMD argument because we have yet to find small hidden items in a large country. There is evidence that Saddam redeployed his WMD’s to Syria and Israel may have found some of them then blew them up.
Regardless of non-acceptance by some of George Bush's redundancy in argument, one less megalomaniac, genocidal, hate mongering, despot controls a rogue nation to harbor terrorists and manufacture, market, hide, or launch his present or future WMD's and I'm damn glad about it and the world is a safer place.
The English Translation of Ayman al-Zawahiri's letter to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is enlightening.
The English Translation of Ayman al-Zawahiri's letter to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is enlightening.
Wow, Darryl Hunter finally found some like-minded, kindred fascist that he can sit down and circle jerk off with while enjoying mutually stimulating elitist rants based on false notions of American exceptionalism and sophist reasoning.
Whack away little boys, but don't pull your dumb-dumbs off while you jerk away.
The bad president and evil vice-president lied about Iraq and 9/11, because they didn't want to crassly say it was all about O-I-L.
And oh yeah, while Darryl and Foster choke their wrinkly ol' puds, you don't hear them screaming out in orgiastic ecstasy about how great torture and water boarding that this dumb president and evil vice-president advocate for is. Would that be because even these two neo-con jerkoffs realize endorsing torture equates America with such fine examples of historical fascist practices as the Natzis, Tito, Stalin, and the evil-doers of the Spanish Inquisition?
So, who�s really flirting with terrorism and lowering America's reputation as that "shinning city on the hill" down to the gutter standards of those we aim to destroy?
Sorry, guys. But beating terrorism with fascism and more terrorism does not make us superior to our enemies, only more like them.
--Thomas Dewey Paine
Mr. Paine,
If you want people to take what you say seriously, you need to avoid the emotional and polarizing statements like "kindred fascist", "circle jerk" and "dumb president and evil vice-president". As stated above, mistakes have been made by not only this administration, but by every administartion before it. We need to keep our criticism constructive and based on fact rather than opinion and speculation. With the exception of his first reason, Mr. Hunter laid out two globally accepted facts justifying the invasion of Iraq. At the time, not everyone, but most of the WORLD supported our cause. Now that things haven't gone as well as everyone had hoped, a very loud minority is spouting hate rhetoric and frankly, the rest of the world is getting sick of it.
F. Wheeler,
I believe that the real Thomas Paine was a bit more eloquent and articulate than our Mr. Anonymous.
wow, Daryl yuse so brite and artstickulat. maybes Us can xplains how you blindlys support a prezident and vice prezident who rationalize torture nder the bannrs of freedoms and democracie?
--Painz in URs arse
Painz in URs arse,
Did you notice that because of water boarding Osama Bin Laden is dead or is your television broke?
I bought the product after my hairdresser used it on my hair once. It was great. The hair stays smooth and frizz-free until your next wash. Don't have to worry about
doing it again the next day. Love it.
Post a Comment