my thoughts.

They'll just lie about the estimate too, but if they are stupid enough to make one, then we have something to go back on them with.

We just have to set a date, establish the funding to get to that date, and roadblock any additional funding beyond that date.

Bring the damn troops home!!

I'm with nezua. [It's time to get MAD.]

Even Bin Ladin's family can't get George out of this one. History has ALREADY repeated itself. What does it take!

Agent 99

Good clip! I remember seeing that movie so long ago and thinking it was silly.

Silly me.

Funding can have more strings than time and amount. It can be about how money is spent. E.g. Congress can authorize x bazillion spent solely for the purpose of bringing current soldiers home safely --- not surge. In other words, IF Congress had the will, they could "support the troops" and stop the war.

Recall at the outset that the assumed, siezed assets of Iraq (oil) would virtually "pay for the war" and cost US taxpayers next to nothing. Our bill is currently about 10 times the original estimate and the Pentagon is still asking for more. But that original estimate was just a number. It doesn't really mean anything.

Bush Co. already has long passed the three strikes rule on lying. Congress has long passed the opportunity to call him on any of them. It is no longer appropriate to assume that the executive, legislative or judicial branch will do the right thing here.

With polls hovering around 30% in favor of the war and with the Senate voting 100-0 to continue funding the war, you have to ask: Who in Congress is representing the 70% who want us out?

What makes you think that the White House would have any remorse or that Congress would take any action because the projected casualty estimate was exceeded?

Demanding a projected body count estimate from a surge means nothing. Ten years ago, US sanctions on Iraqis resulted in half a million dead children. At the time, that was "worth it". No one asked how many dead it would take before it is no longer worth it. So sanctions continued.

Similarly, the Lancet report of 655,000 dead Iraqis meant nothing. 3000 dead Americans meant nothing. What makes you think anyone would care about more dead from a surge? Our leaders will be glad to give you a number. But what does it mean?

Ultimately, you are suggesting that you haven't had enough yet. So how many more dead will it take before you say, "No more!"?

Nopiknik said:

Our leaders will be glad to give you a number. But what does it mean?

Let's see 'em do it. I don't think they will. And if they do, I think it'll change the entire debate.

Note the numbers you quoted were both retroactively reported (not in advance) and, of course, weren't Americans, which (appallingly) have a lesser value to those in power, including media, congress, general American public, etc.

I am happy to say "no more". Have done so many times, in fact, but it doesn't matter what I say. It matters what Congress says. And that will only change in the media and public change in their tactics.

Forcing the White House to show accountability and report their estimated numbers (or the fact that they carelessly don't have any) will, I believe, have a significant change in the tone and effect of the debate.

HANG BUSH

Wonder if the timing has anything to do with this?

Blood and oil: How the West will profit from Iraq's most precious commodity
The 'IoS' today reveals a draft for a new law that would give Western oil companies a massive share in the third largest reserves in the world. To the victors, the oil? That is how some experts view this unprecedented arrangement with a major Middle East oil producer that guarantees investors huge profits for the next 30 years
Published: 07 January 2007

So was this what the Iraq war was fought for, after all? As the number of US soldiers killed since the invasion rises past the 3,000 mark, and President George Bush gambles on sending in up to 30,000 more troops, The Independent on Sunday has learnt that the Iraqi government is about to push through a law giving Western oil companies the right to exploit the country's massive oil reserves.

I wonder. If the Democrats were really any different from the Republicans when it came to our pro-US Corporations Foreign Policy, would not at least a couple of Democrats talk about the money being spent on that monstrosity of a US Embassy in Iraq or all those 5-Star luxury rated permanent US Military Bases? I would have thought that would be one of the issues that would naturally come up when you discuss waste of money in Iraq.

Do you know of any change in any US Foreign Policy issue - ever - that was caused by the change of color that occupied the White House, much less that controlled the Congress? If so, please let me know. I crave a reason to be optimistic about Iraq now that the Democrats are not entirely powerless.

I like what Brad's saying...but I want to point out that under the Constitution, Congress has the power

"to make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces."

So they're NOT restricted to purse-strings and information requests. Nothing could be more repugnant to the spirit of the Constitution, whose framers envisioned nothing like the Imperial Presidency of the last sixty years, let alone Dubya. Congress has DIRECT power to determine how the armed forced are used. The President, as Commander in Chief, only has supreme EXECUTIVE power over the military (and the rest of the government as Chief Executive), not power to override Congress.

The last clause of the same section of the Constitution ( Article I, Section 8 ) gives Congress the power

"to make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

On what grounds, then, can a president possibly claim that his executive powers preempt the legislative authority of Congress?

Now, I grant you, given the veto power--not to mention the profound state of Constitutional confusion that shills for the imperial presidency have created in the national consciousness--it would be difficult for Congress to effectively assert the power I'm talking about. Maybe as a rider to a bill Bush desperately wants? If he signed the bill and tried to signing-statement the rider away, then there would be some chance of recourse in the courts, kangarooish though they are.

What Brad's suggesting is probably more practical. But I think it's still important to discuss all options. We need to keep up a discourse about what our actual rights are as Americans, and not get discouraged into letting the obfuscators with the megaphones trim them away on the grounds that "there's nothing we can do about it." That defeatism got us here, bit by bit, and if there's more hope now, it's because people have started taking destiny back into their own hands.

THE SUPREMACY OF CONGRESS

Biden (D-MBNA) was saying there is no way to stop the President from having his way about the smae time he announced he was running for President and would be the best Biden he could be.

If he reads the blogs, he got an earful for even suggesting Congress could not manage the use of money authorized for the war. Brad's suggestion is one of many which could put an end to Cheney/Bush's war of choice. Impeachment is daily being degraded in the Press as inviable. (I don't agree, but that's just me.) The blogs in some quarters (like Alternet and Findlaw/John Dean's column) are using words like "Constitutional Crisis" in connection with the impending fight over testimony and evidence at Congressional hearings. Can the Executive be required to release evidence?

I don't think there is any such Constitutional Crisis looming. That is hyperbole. The best response--and the one I enjoy repeating since reading it by another commenter is this:

Let the Constitution defend itself. The way is there. It is not imperiled unless by politicans who afraid to use their last remaining shred of God-given gumption.

And note to G Bush: The Constitution is not just some fucking piece of paper.

It has to start with the military mutinying our government. Down to the individual's level, they have to ask themselves, "Was I put on this earth to die in Iraq for Bushco?" As long as they keep following orders from chickenhawks that "don't have skin" in it (as Cindy Sheehan says), we will have wars and deaths. And, are there any politicians in American govt who will stop this insanity? If not, the military must mutiny these insane civilian chickenhawks.

#13..Have you read about mutiny in Iraq? Movement that is growing. The suits hate to talk about it because the more publicity the more people sign on. I'm sure it's scary for the officers and I hope the madness stops before it comes to mutiny.As to the dems. not getting US out of the quagmire...read that Rahm Emanuel did not support peace candidates. Our dem. opponent to Snowe in Maine got no money from the dem party.She was a peace candidate. Not hard to see the way things are going. ..Both parties need to be energized by a true progressive party.

Accountability in the form of "on the record" estimates, most definitely, but Congress should go one step further.

The best defense is a good offense. Congress needs to lay out their OWN plan - and I don't mean for a surge, I mean for a withdrawal - BEFORE Bush can put his own plan out for the general public. Details will take time, of course, but at least their statement of intent would be on record BEFORE Bush can lay out the "I tried, but Democrats wouldn't let me win in Iraq" trick.

I'd bet there are a lot of generals and military advisors who'd be more than happy to advise them on how to do it, since "the Decider" had decided not to listen to anyone who doesn't tell him what he wants to hear.

If I were somehow in the U.S. military...I would QUIT! And F*CK them, if they say I'm unPatriotic. THEY are unPatriotic! Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, the CMSM, Malkin, etc...THEY are unPatriotic! The ones always calling everyone else unPatriotic!

As per Thom Hartmann:

It's a rues to cover a hidden Marshall plan so they can claim success from the troop surge...

It's a simple thing,why not simply cut funding to the White House. Doesn't Congress also vote on funds to the White House?

... molly said...

#13..Have you read about mutiny in Iraq? Movement that is growing.

Big Dan said: "mutiny these insane civilian chickenhawks. "

The point being that mutiny is a specific charge, and while you may mean just organized disobedience the military does not distinguish between inciting a sit-down strike and inciting outright rebellion in the ranks. And if you egg on the military to take down the administration what guarantee do you have that they'll stop there?

Afterwards the courts-martial may... may... determine lesser punishments, but the fact is that the max penalty is still death.

If the troops drop arms and say "no more" that's their choice, but inciting them without being very clear as to what you intend is extremely foolish... and mutiny is, of course, a very quick way to terminate one's career no matter what.

We are the ones who need to fix it so that the soldiers don't have to make such a choice.

Bush knows he can't win this war. The troop surge is a political game of dare and a distraction thats taking our attention away from the real problems. That being Zionist control of the world, banks, money, oil, war machine, armament sales and use of stolen US tax money to finance these ambitious plans. All based upon Zionist control of the US Government.

Americans live in the "United States of Israel"... they just haven't figured it out.

It will take years to happen... in the end... America will be saved by the segment of its population treated poorly by both the rich and natural born populace... "minorities".

They fought like hell for entry into America, to survive and will continue to fight for basic rights... and freedoms.

Don #18 --- what a great idea! in practice, i don;t know that it would accomplish what we seek, but it would sure be funny to watch 'em squirm.

i think the Dems should continue to gradually shift gears and carefully take over the helm. we have a big ol' ship of State, and even if one wants it to turn on a dime, it physically cannot without capsizing. (and ultimately, that is the stated goal of the Big Bad Scary People --- hey, it is a tactic that worked tremendously well against the USSR in Afghanistan...)

much like playing that childhood game "Operation", wherein if you move too quickly you will make a mistake, and instantly lose the game --- this crossroads in history is too crucial, too many lives are riding on the successful negotiation of the course ahead.

IMHO, if the Dems in Congress move too quickly, the whole operation could blow up. a Constitutional Crisis would then take over everything, bring the country to a glacial standstill, eclipsing everything else --- it would be nigh on impossible, methinks, to bring our soldiers home, address global warming, the healthcare mess, edcuation, social security --- oh hell, basically the future of our nation in all other aspects --- while everything comes to a standstill during the unprecedented spectacle of a president and Congress in a Gunfight at the OK Corral.

remember the law of unintended consequences. unprecedented situations will lead to unpredictable results.

Comment #19: i'm about fcking sick of the Zionist bushit story. In case you are unaware G, the President, the Vice President and a majority of elected (so called elected for the sake of this comment) individuals who are running this world into the ground AND responsible for orchestrating 911 war games as their blanket terror excuse are NOT JEWS/JEWISH. If you really think some rich group of hebrews are telling Bush and the Bushit administration what to do, lie on top of lie, then start naming names. If you cannot support your claim, then i think you should consider taking your racist unsupported comments to Mel Gibson's website you stupid predjudice cunt. If you can name these Zionist birds then i will consider retracting my statement about you. Until then fck off>

Grizzly Bear Dancer - RE g... A-FUCKING-MEN

Pelosi will not cut troop funding...is this true?

http://www.rawstory.com/...ll-not-cut-off-iraq.html

Is funding the war, and funding the troops, two different things?

I'm surprised big dan, 99 ect are not getting on ...g's

That being Zionist control of the world, banks, money, oil, war machine, armament sales and use of stolen US tax money to finance these ambitious plans. All based upon Zionist control of the US Government.

Band Wagon . . . . . They do elsewhere. . .

... big dan said...

"Is funding the war, and funding the troops, two different things?"

It's an imaginary difference brought about by the assumption that all congress can do is fund/not fund Bush's idiocies.

So if congress refuses to further fund the war Bush will play it as "You are abandoning our troops in a foreign land!"... with the carefully unsaid assumption that Bush will not recall the troops even if their operations aren't funded.

The "War on Terror" is really The War on the Middle Class and Poor!

As per Thom Hartmann:

It's a ruse to cover a hidden Marshall plan so they can claim success from the troop surge...

#26 and #28

While I sure do feel that Zionism is some pretty sick form of geopolitical psychosis, and agree that central bankers' not-so-subtle ruse/s to loot the blood, sweat and tears of Your Average Joe are purposefully misnamed, I do not equate these. Having engaged in lengthy discussion with him, it's also pretty clear to me that big dan doesn't either. Maybe if you stopped lumping every expression of displeasure with Israel or Zionism into one mental category, you'd stop making it easier for the greedy fucks --- whose religion is mammon --- to keep playing on fears and prejudices for fun and profit. Maybe if a critical mass of people stopped being so easily blown into one or another kneejerk reaction, we could actually begin using our brains to stop the senseless slaughter and start taking care of our planetary emergency.

Well, JOJ, I have always said, that if I point out that the U.S. govt's policies are too pro-Israeli, which I think they are, then I should not be called "anti-semetic". I fully think that we should keep our noses out of the Arabs AND Israeli's business. But, what do we do? We are totally one-sided helping the Israeli's. Am I "anti-semetic"? Absolutely not! Does anyone disagree with that? I am fully ready to argue the point.

oooooooo....let's hear it, I'm anti-Semetic, right? I hate ALL religions equally: Jews, Muslims, Catholics, I think they're ALL full of shit. My comments about Israel have NOTHING TO DO with that they are Jewish. It is the OPPOSING SIDE that always uses the "anti-Semetic" card. And that's an immediate flag that they are trying to suppress debate, legitimate debate. There IS NO debate in this country, or examination, of whether our Israel policy is not in U.S. citizens' interests.

In fact, everyone here who thinks that we are NOT tilted fully to one side, the Israeli's side, please provide your arguement. There is not arguement.

I am for isolationism. Don't side with the Arabs OR the Israelis. I am always saying that we definitely side with the Israeli's, and pointing this out does NOT make me anti-semetic.

JOJ: Do you have an arguement with this?

IE: If we were favoring the Arabs over the Israeli's, I would definitely be pointing that out, and demanding we cease doing that. If we favor ANY country against our U.S. interests, I'm against it.

Why did we ship emergency shipments of bombs to Israel as they were dropping them in Southern Lebanon? Why don't the SAME people who call others "anti-semetic", stop avoiding topics like that?

The Harvard professors who came out with a study concluding that U.S. policy favors Israel to the point where it is against U.S. interests, were immediately attacked in the CMSM as "anti-semtic". Instead of their report being examined, they called them names. I am totally against that.

There's ONE Muslim (ever!) in the U.S. congress. On CNN, he was asked point blank, "Are you a terrorist?" Is that right? I guess it's OK, because he's a Muslim, right? Did Glen Beck ask Netenyahu or any Jewish congressmen, "Are you a terrorist?" He would be forced to resign within 24 hours. Does anyone think this one-sideness in the CMSM is acceptable? I'm not for the Arabs, but how come it's OK on CNN to ask a Muslim congressman, "Are you a terrorist?"

How come the Republican congressman from Virginia didn't resign, after all his comments on a fellow congressman's religion??? That guy Virgil (something...I can't remember his name). What would have happened if "Virgil" said to a Jewish Senator or Congressman, "So, pretty soon there's gonna be all Christ-killers in congress, if we don't do something now." He'd be resigned within 24 hours. Not only did he NOT resign, he was RATIONALIZING his statments for weeks afterwards. Where was the CMSM pressuring him to resign???

There is a double-standard, and when you point it out, the name-calling begins: "anti-semetic", "Hitler-lover", "holocaust denier"...IT'S BULLSHIT!!! And it's a great time-tested tactic that always works, but not with me!

So, what's your arguement, JOJ?

Why are we always attacking Arab countries? No wonder they hate us! We should be minding our own business, and putting our tax money towards FREE COLLEGE for our kids! And FREE HEALTH CARE... Instead, be spend billions of dollars attacking Arab countries.

I calculated, that I spent THOUSANDS of dollars on health coverage premiums, co-pays, and deductibles. AND THEY CALL ME "INSURED"??????????

I am PARTIALLY-INSURED, if it's not FREE. There's 50 millin UNINSURED Americans, and 300 million PARTIALLY INSURED Americans, because everyone's paying thousands of dollars in premiums/copays/deductibles!!! But we have endless billions to attack Arab countries. And a lot of that has to do with AIPAC's pressure, and our pro-Israeli policies, and that's a fact!

#29-33

Maybe if you stopped Blaming the worlds problems on Israel or Zionism,
you'd stop making it easier for the greedy fucks --- whose religion is mammon --- to keep playing on fears and prejudices for fun and profit. Maybe if a critical mass of people stopped being so easily blown into one or another kneejerk reaction, we could actually begin using our brains to stop the senseless slaughter and start taking care of our planetary emergency.

Gaseous smell permeates New York City because Donald Trump Farted . . .

Comment #30: While you were not addressing me directly, you make some very good points that i agree with. The arab countries have always gotten the short stick compared to Isreal. It has been portrayed in the media that Israel has had a good relationship with the U.S. government while Arab leader are not to be trusted although i no longer trust any mass media with their election coverups. As far as G saying zionist are responsible for our problems, i have to say proove it!

The people in charge of running our country answer to themselves. Of course with a Congress and judiciary let alone the corporate mass media being compliscent to let the little fcknut bushshit administration continue to send our soldiers to their sitting duck death as well as accept 911 as attack by a group of arabs in a cave, well that's another can of worms. Even if greedy Israel-loving bankers own this world (and i want a list of these people so i can save our planet), the mismanagement of the Bushit administration knows no bounds.

The Bush-Cheney administration of lying murderers need to be impeached and go to jail. The 200 environmental laws that the 109th Congress reversed under their watch need to be restored and as well as the rights and freedoms of all US citizens.

Let Bush and Cheney get up in a court of law and say it was the zionists that made them do it. Bible talk: Plenty of generations believe that while the Romans actually killed Jesus, it was Jews that got the blame so maybe it will work for these murderous lying bastards:) Not in my world.

Ah, GBD, thank you! I was beginning to think somebody'd put LSD in my coffee.

Grizzly: I think our govt's (both Dem & GOP) blatant pro-Israeli stance is only PART of the picture. Bushco has THEIR agenda, too. Their OWN agenda. All these parts are part of a policy that isn't for US...the middleclass & poor...95% of our country.

No one ever talks about how much we pay on copays, deductibles, and % of coverage, like some health care coverage pays 70% or 80%. I have had BOTH plans at good companies, too. 70% of a $30,000 hospital stay is $2,100, my friends!!! And they call that "being covered" by health insurance. They take $500 out of your pay for this "coverage" per month. That's $6,000.00/year + $30,000.00 YOUR share of 70% coverage if you had a hospital stay. And that's not to mention $500 deductible per family member. 4 family members = another $2,000.00. That's a lot of money out of your pocket, not spent on Christmas gifts, etc...cars, etc... How much money do Americans spend per year on health coverage premiums out of their pay, 70-80-90% coverage, $30 prescriptions, $15/$30 copays??? Thousands and thousands of dollars YOU and EVERYONE pays, and that's COVERED people!!! That's a BIG JOKE...when you say you're not one of the 50 million uninsured!!!

NO ONE's insured...if you have to get cherry-picked to death with copays/deductibles/and not 100% coverage...which is rare. Years ago, when you were covered, you paid no copays, no deductibles, and everything like hospital bills were 100%.

Am I the only person in America ever writing about this? I have never seen ANYONE complain, or point out, that we are paying THOUSANDS of dollars per year...AND WE'RE "COVERED"!!!! That is a JOKE!!!

Imagine how much money you'd have, if there was national health care! But the politicians say we can't afford it. But they somehow have enough every couple of months for $99 billion extra for the Iraq War!

And college? I have 2 kids in college, and they will come out with debts equal to a mortgage! How are they going to get married and get a REAL mortgage when they get out?????

You can't have TWO mortgages! It makes the military more attractive, which I think is their plan. Make college unaffordable, so our kids join the military.

Where is all our tax money going??? We should refuse to pay taxes! They're taking it all for wars and themselves! We saw what Duke Cunningham and the likes were doing with our tax money, didn't we? They're bleeding us dry, and giving HUGE tax cuts to the super rich, who don't need it!

Rush Limbaugh, the idiot shill, has a graph on his website, that tracks that the super rich pay most of the taxes. But he doesn't point out that THEY ALSO HAVE ALL OF THE MONEY!!! Duh! Rush Limbaugh is a real jerk.

Our govt is sucking us dry, with all these wars. What is it, a trillion dollars? While we're dying here, with health care bills and college bills.

And Netenyahu is on TV, saying Iran is really behind the insurgents. Fuck you! Netenyahu! (hey, that rhymes!) Fight YOURSELF, and leave us out of it...and Republicans and Democrats, STOP TAKING ALL OUR MONEY FOR WARS!!!!!!!!!

Grizzly Bear Dancer,

Nice try.

The truth is what it is whether you or I like it or not.

You assume that I'm anti-Israel... as if that would make a difference in the validity of my statements.

How many countries do you know that brag about the US politicians they own? Israel does... Click on the link below--

http://www.ynetnews.com/...7340,L-3326053,00.html#n

You ask for a list of Zionist Neocon's in the Bush Adminstration.… your kidding right? That would read like a list of who's who in that administration.

I have several questions for you. Lets talk about the 3rd largest lobbying group in America AIPAC and their goals. For what purpose does AIPAC exist and what common goals do they share with "all" Americans/?

Then explain to me why Israel, a country with 5 million people, receives over 3 1/2 billion dollars in foreign aid from America in addition to military aid… why? Israel receives more foreign aid from America then any other country in the world…. why? That's American tax money that should be used for American schools, students, medical care for America's poor and much, much more.

Why does America fight Israel's war with Iraq and the Middle East?

The American press never speaks poorly about Israel or AIPAC, nor the Zionist or questions any of their political policies and how they really relate to America…. Why?

The Zionist and Neoconservative Republicans have sold Red & Blue State America and our Democracy to the highest bidders for their own personal gain. Americans now live in the "Untied States Of Israel".

Some of the people of Jewish extraction who work for the Boosh administration,

* Some are Rabbis of ultra orthodox/extreme fundamentalists Jewish sects/synagogues.

* Some hold dual America/Israeli citizenship.

* Some are the engineers/authors/signatories of the "Project for a New American Century Plan" - AEI.

* Some are the engineers/authors/signatories for the "Clean Break Plan" - the B. Netanyahu plan to negate the land for peace, Palestinian State Plan - AEI.

* Some are the engineers/authors/signatories to the "Rebuilding Americas Defences Plan" - AEI.

* Some are either heavily involved in the planning and decision making process of the Department of Defence and/or The US State Department with blatant conflicts of interests which brings into serious question whether these individuals are capable to act in the best interests and goals of the USA.

++++++++

* Elliott Abrams Director of the National Security Council's Office for Democracy, Human Rights and International Operations
* Jeffrey Berkowitz (2005-2006) White House Liaison to the Jewish Community and then office of presidential scheduling
* Stuart Bernstein Ambassador to Denmark
* Brad Blakeman White House Director of Scheduling
* Josh Bolten (2006- ) Chief of Staff
* Nancy Brinker Ambassador to Hungary
* Michael Chertoff Head of the Justice Department's criminal division
* Douglas Feith (2001-2005 ) Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
* Ari Fleischer (2001-2003) White House Press Secretary
* David Frum (2001-2002) Speechwriter
* Chris Gersten Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Administration for Children and Families at HHS
* Adam Goldman (2001-2003) White House Liaison to the Jewish Community
* Blake Gottesman President's personal aide
* Daniel Kurtzer Ambassador to Israel
* Frank Lavin Ambassador to Singapore
* Jay Lefkowitz (2001-2004) Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of the Domestic Policy Council
* I. Lewis Libby (2001-2005)
Chief of Staff to the Vice President
* Ken Mehlman White House Political Director
* John Miller Director, State Department Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons
* Noam Neusner (2004-2005) White House Liaison to the Jewish Community
* Mel Sembler Ambassador to Italy
* Martin Silverstein Ambassador to Uruguay
* Cliff Sobel Ambassador to the Netherlands
* Tevi Troy (2003-2004) White House Liaison to the Jewish Community
* Mark D. Weinberg Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for Public Affairs
* Ron Weiser Ambassador to Slovakia
* Paul Wolfowitz (2001-2005) Deputy Secretary of Defense
* Dov Zakheim (2001-2004) Undersecretary of Defense (Controller)
* Jay Zeidman (2006- ) White House Liaison to the Jewish Community

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources: News reports, Republican Jewish Coalition

Source link : click link, then click name at link for bio details,

http://www.jewishvirtual.../US-Israel/bushjews.html

++++++++

The same individuals that control the international banking houses (Europe) are the same that control the American banking system (Federal Reserve Bank).

snip :

Moreover, until recently by law, the names of the owners of the Federal Reserve were kept secret due to a provision of the Federal Reserve Act, which stated that the identities of the Federal Reserve Bank Class A stockholders couldn’t be made public. It is now believed that original Federal Reserve Bank principle stockholders at the time of its founding were the ROTHSCHILD banks of London and Berlin; the LAZARD BROTHERS Banks of Paris; the ISRAEL MOSES SEIF Banks of Italy, the WARBURG Bank of Hamburg and Amsterdam; the LEHMAN BROTHERS Bank of New York; the GOLDMAN, Sachs Banks of New York; the KUHN, Loeb Bank of New York; and the CHASE MANHATTAN Bank of New York. These are the principle interests, which own and operate the Federal Reserve System, which has expanded to approximately three hundred stockholders. All of these interests are very well known to each other through many banking business relationships, and in fact many are related through marriage and biological decent.

: end snip

Source : http://www.answers.com/t...international-financiers

oldturk g

SO WHAT, would ya like to do? warm up the ovens... then take their money perhaps...

JofJ :

So what is your implication ? If I am critical of the conduct of Israel, and her blind support for the rabid Zionist who are habitually on a land and natural resource grab-fest of her neighbors in the Middle East - that I am some how a Nazi concentration camp and Fascist death oven advocate ? Or do you mean to imply I am a Christian heathen/goyim white trash scum -Jew/hater,.. anti-Semite ?

And who are you again ?

Mis-judgement and unwarranted grudges ???

Here's what I am looking for from Israel, some long over due corrective action, stop being a warmongering bully who is constantly throwing her weight around the Middle East. Israel's ass should have long ago been dragged in front of the World Court and the the United Nations to answer for her criminal conduct. For starters why doesn't Israel come in compliance with these United Nations Resolutions, (Peace is not found with the jab of the point of the bayonet),...

Resolution 42: The Palestine Question (5 March 1948) Requests recommendations for the Palestine Commission
Resolution 43: The Palestine Question (1 Apr 1948) Calls upon Arab and Jewish armed groups to cease acts of violence
Resolution 44: The Palestine Question (1 Apr 1948) Requests convocation of special session of the General Assembly
Resolution 46: The Palestine Question (17 Apr 1948)
Resolution 48: The Palestine Question (23 Apr 1948)
Resolution 49: The Palestine Question (22 May 1948)
Resolution 50: The Palestine Question (29 May 1948)
Resolution 53: The Palestine Question (7 Jul 1948)
Resolution 54: The Palestine Question (15 Jul 1948)
Resolution 56: The Palestine Question (19 Aug 1948)
Resolution 57: The Palestine Question (18 Sep 1948)
Resolution 59: The Palestine Question (19 Oct 1948)
Resolution 60: The Palestine Question (29 Oct 1948)
Resolution 61: The Palestine Question (4 Nov 1948)
Resolution 62: The Palestine Question (16 Nov 1948)
Resolution 66: The Palestine Question (29 Dec 1948)
Resolution 72: The Palestine Question (11 Aug 1949)
Resolution 73: The Palestine Question (11 Aug 1949)
Resolution 89 (November 17, 1950): regarding Armistice in 1948 Arab-Israeli War and "transfer of persons".
Resolution 92: The Palestine Question (8 May 1951)
Resolution 93: The Palestine Question (18 May 1951)
Resolution 95: The Palestine Question (1 Sep 1951)
Resolution 100: The Palestine Question (27 Oct 1953)
Resolution 101: The Palestine Question (24 Nov 1953)
Resolution 106: The Palestine Question (29 Mar 1955) 'condemns' Israel for Gaza raid.
Resolution 107: The Palestine Question (30 Mar)
Resolution 108: The Palestine Question (8 Sep)
Resolution 111: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people".
Resolution 127: " . . . 'recommends' Israel suspends it's 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem".
Resolution 162: " . . . 'urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions".
Resolution 171: " . . . determines flagrant violations' by Israel in its attack on Syria".
Resolution 228: " . . . 'censures' Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control".
Resolution 237: " . . . 'urges' Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees".
Resolution 242 (November 22, 1967): Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area. Calls on Israel's neighbors to end the state of belligerency and calls upon Israel to reciprocate by withdraw its forces from land claimed by other parties in 1967 war. Interpreted commonly today as calling for the Land for peace principle as a way to resolve Arab-Israeli conflict
Resolution 248: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan".
Resolution 250: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem".
Resolution 251: " . . . 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250".
Resolution 252: " . . . 'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital".
Resolution 256: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation".
Resolution 259: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation".
Resolution 262: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for attack on Beirut airport".
Resolution 265: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan".
Resolution 267: " . . . 'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem".
Resolution 270: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon".
Resolution 271: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem".
Resolution 279: " . . . 'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon".
Resolution 280: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon".
Resolution 285: " . . . 'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon".
Resolution 298: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem".
Resolution 313: " . . . 'demands' that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon".
Resolution 316: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon".
Resolution 317: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon".
Resolution 332: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon".
Resolution 337: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty".
Resolution 338 (October 22, 1973): cease fire in Yom Kippur War
Resolution 339 (October 23, 1973): Confirms Res. 338, dispatch UN observers.
Resolution 347: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli attacks on Lebanon".
Resolution 425 (1978): 'calls' on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon". Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon was completed as of June 16, 2000.
Resolution 350 (31 May 1974) established the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force, to monitor the ceasefire between Israel and Syria in the wake of the Yom Kippur War.
Resolution 427: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon.
Resolution 444: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces".
Resolution 446 (1979): 'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention".. Israeli settlements in the occupied territories thus declared illegal.
Resolution 450: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon".
Resolution 452: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories".
Resolution 465: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel's settlements program".
Resolution 467: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's military intervention in Lebanon".
Resolution 468: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return".
Resolution 469: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's failure to observe the council's order not to deport Palestinians".
Resolution 471: " . . . 'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
Resolution 476: " . . . 'reiterates' that Israel's claim to Jerusalem are 'null and void'".
Resolution 478 (August 20, 1980): 'censures (Israel) in the strongest terms' for its claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'.
Resolution 484: " . . . 'declares it imperative' that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors".
Resolution 487: " . . . 'strongly condemns' Israel for its attack on Iraq's nuclear facility".
Resolution 497 (17 December 1981) decides that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan Heights is 'null and void' and demands that Israel rescinds its decision forthwith.
Resolution 498: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon".
Resolution 501: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops".
Resolution 508
Resolution 509: " . . . 'demands' that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon".
Resolution 515: " . . . 'demands' that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in".
Resolution 517: " . . . 'censures' Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
Resolution 518: " . . . 'demands' that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon".
Resolution 520: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's attack into West Beirut".
Resolution 573: " . . . 'condemns' Israel 'vigorously' for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters.
Resolution 587: " . . . 'takes note' of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw".
Resolution 592: " . . . 'strongly deplores' the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops".
Resolution 605: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians.
Resolution 607: " . . . 'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention.
Resolution 608: " . . . 'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians".
Resolution 636: " . . . 'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians.
Resolution 641: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians.
Resolution 672: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount.
Resolution 673: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United Nations.
Resolution 681: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of Palestinians.
Resolution 694: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return.
Resolution 726: " . . . 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians.
Resolution 799: ". . . 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return.
Resolution 1559 (September 2, 2004) called upon Lebanon to establish its sovereignty over all of its land and called upon Syria to end their military presence in Lebanon by withdrawing its forces and to cease intervening in internal Lebanese politics. The resolution also called on all Lebanese militias to disband.
Resolution 1583 (28 January 2005) calls on Lebanon to assert full control over its border with Israel. It also states that "the Council has recognized the Blue Line as valid for the purpose of confirming Israel's withdrawal pursuant to resolution 425.
Resolution 1648 (21 December 2005) renewed the mandate of United Nations Disengagement Observer Force until 30 June 2006.
Resolution 1701 (11 August 2006) called for the full cessation of hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah.

The American government caters to people who pull this crap. Our mission, our only mission is to STABILIZE the Middle East !! Why do we support these rabid Zionist warmongers ?

Here is an Iraqi/Jew who worked side by side to help establish the State of Israel with the Zionists, once he saw the deplorable conduct he fled to America to tell his first hand story and write books with the help of his wife, his story is here.

The cult of rabid Zionism,.. trickery, deception, bombing, murder, deceit, treachery, false flag-psyops and racist supremacy.
As told by an Iraqi/Jew who left his family to move and help build/populate the new State of Israel. Induce other Jews living through out the Middle East to move to Israel. After he saw the deceit and treachery used by Zionist to bomb Jewish communities in Arab countries to induce the Jewish populations to move to Israel - blaming the Zionist bombs on the Arabs as false terrorist acts. And after he saw the deplorable way the Palestinians were treated and wrongfully/illegally driven from there lands. How the boarders of Israels neighbors were regularly crossed and those lands seized. And finally how Israel in order to change the geopolitics of the Middle East in Israel's favor would stage a bombing and cast the blame on the Arabs. This Iraqi/Jew left Israel in disgust having moved to America to write books to correct history and explain the atrocities that have been committed by Israel on a regular basis, without concern of the Israeli government censors preventing him from publishing his work.

snip :

We Jews from Islamic lands did not leave our ancestral homes because of any natural enmity between Jews and Muslims. And we Arabs—I say Arab because that is the language my wife and I still speak at home—we Arabs on numerous occasions have sought peace with the State of the Jews. And finally, as a U.S. citizen and taxpayer, let me say that we Americans need to stop supporting racial discrimination in Israel and the cruel expropriation of lands in the West Bank, Gaza, South Lebanon and the Golan Heights.

: end snip

Source : http://www.ameu.org/prin...er.asp?iid=36&aid=72

Brad, To pull this back on topic a little bit... I am as surprised at your response as I am at your original question.

Not all my numbers were retrospective. The "cheap" cost of the war was a pre-invasion estimate. I don't hear Congress critters drawing lines in the sand about how much money is too much and threatening the Pentagon with serious consequences for overspending.

The press has informed us of grim milestones along they way: 50 dead, 100, 1000, 2000, 3000, the first Lancet report (shocking), the second Lancet report (655,000 --- yawn), etc. Maybe a number we can all agree on (including JOJ and GBD) would be 6 million dead.

None of these figures has caused Congress to act except to employ the current xxx number of the day in feigned concern. As in: "To show that xxx Americans have not died in vain in a war I don't approve of, I hereby authorize the Pentagon more money to continue their efforts."

Your desired debate in Congress distracts from your own stated mission of "No more." The "significant change in the tone and effect of the debate" I fear would become about the validity, accuracy, or patriotic meaning of the number itself rather than on the issue of No More. Then the argument will devolve into what is actually counted: American lives, Iraqis lives, dollars, or Rights legislated out of the Constitution.

In the end, no action happens and Bush rides through his term unscathed. And we get Lots More. Stay focused: Troops Home Now.

I have been impressed with your ability to cut through the bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo regarding our elections and the equipment and processes used and abused in them. Your goal is to ensure that each citizen can vote and that each vote is counted accurately and verifiably.

I don't hear you asking congress or state officials to set some standard like 3 more elections or 10 more Diebold infractions e.g. before they should really get serious about it.

Finally, I dropped my jaw when you wrote: "...but it doesn't matter what I say. It matters what Congress says." And you run a popular blog site?!

I do not really give a crap what anyone thinks of me anymore. YOUR WRONG IM RIGHT.

A Surging corporate mainstream media.

They surge for our time. Malibu fires, hey we can cover that for the next four weeks.

Did anyone watch the Purina ™ Dog Show?

What your going to watch Bush speak on tuesday-wednesday?

You already know what ever dribbles out of his mouth is the opposite of the truth.

A pathological liar.

Situation of America 2007

big oil shortage created by man
saudi terrorists
screw the poor
break the oath of office (Worst evil)
unvalidatable electronic voting machine failures (Third worst evil)
never ending undeclaired war
kiss our health, wealth and prosperity goodbye
the best of our best (e.g. military) being killed daily
contractors and out sourcing
industrial age is gone
less flags flying
media controls
judicial controls
control of life itself!!!!!
ARNOLD broke his leg (fit for duty?!)
fear uncertainty and doubt (not just microsoft)
anger hatred frustration powerlessness
loss of constitution (the 2nd worst evil)

I am so sick of this. so sick.
I have the flu. the anger beyond words flu.

the surge flu.

Nice list.
To criticize is absolutely fair with statements if you can back it up. To just say it's the Blacks or the Germans, or the the Native American homeland security force, you have to back it up. Why should anyone sugarcoat the truth in world spinning out of control being run by greedy destructors who don't mind if it goes down due to fit their private Armagedon result? That is playing God. Using that kind of vulgar display of power and using that impact to just destroy the whole thing fall. i will fight these fckers! King, President, Dictator whatever that person calls him/her self.

G, while Old Turk has provide a list of people in conjunction with your last comment, i will take back what i said about you. However be careful making open ended assumption about entire groups of people. While there can perhaps be some degree of truth like a stereotype, it is general NOT true of an entire people being lumped together. i believe individuals stand accountable for their own actions.

The Federal Reserve names being kept SECRET reminds me of the protection of the names of the people who bought put options on United stock before 911 and Congress never using their supena powers to force the release of 80 Pentagon videos that would have shown the Shrub missle that struck at by the white lawn marker. What a load of crap. It's one thing giving Israel aid for Defense since i imagine the U.S. uses Israel as a port for balance in the middle east??? I also believe Iraq was an oil mission of the Bushit administration not an Israel war. i don't care to figure out the middle east problem/s because that is not a priority for me.

1. Global Warming and environmental issues
2. Ending Bush's oil war and re-investigating 911 because the Bushit administration are the real TERRORIST who orchestrated 911 even though they still use it as an excuse for everything they do.
3. See these lying murderers in the Bush administration and their accomplices go in front of a world court and then onto jail or hung.

Grizzly Bear Dancer-

Turk actually left a few out... such as Perle, Kristol and several others.

Let me make this perfectly clear... I don't blame all America's for our political and/or social economic problems nor do I label all Jews "Zionist Neoconservatives". A handful, I repeat... a handful of elitists in several different countries control our banking, monetary, minerals and political systems in a quest for world domination.

When will Americans wake up and realize this war and other events are diversion tactics taking attention from the real problems.

Yes, you are right...in the end its about oil, money, armament sales, greed and power. But Elitist controling vastly different interests have merged their efforts in this Zionist 60 year quest for world domination and total control of what makes the world function.

When they say jump were suppose to respond "how high"… that’s it in a nutshell.

"Old Turk"... thanks for the info and web sites… I appreciate it.

Nopiknik said:

Brad, To pull this back on topic a little bit...

Thank you!

Not all my numbers were retrospective.

Begging forgiveness for my very quick reply in that regard. Should have said "most" instead of "all". But with that in mind...

Your desired debate in Congress distracts from your own stated mission of "No more." The "significant change in the tone and effect of the debate" I fear would become about the validity, accuracy, or patriotic meaning of the number itself rather than on the issue of No More.

I agree with general point your trying to make, btw, of both replies. But you may be missing my general point, or disagree with it (or I didn't explain it well enough).

If the Bush Admin is forced to say: "This 'surge' is estimated to increase the daily body count of US troops by X" I believe the headlines the next day will be "Bush Admin Says Surge Will Increase US Troop Deaths" which will change the tenor of the debate and give the Congress additional ammo to fight against such a surge.

Saying "No more!" is great. Similar to saying "Ban all voting machines!". But the more effective political strategy to accomplish both ends, is to build a public case for those things in order to give the Congress the courage (and the cover, since they lack courage) to do the right thing in both matters.

For too long, the cost of the war --- as generally dealt with by Congress --- has been dollar amounts. I'm suggesting Congress force the Bush admin to put a BODY COUNT on that number as the "debate" moves forward.

Purse strings aren't the only thing the Congress has control over. They can also have an effect on the public discourse, which, in turn, effects the debate.

Then the argument will devolve into what is actually counted: American lives, Iraqis lives, dollars, or Rights legislated out of the Constitution.

Actually, if you're right about that, I don't see that as a "devolution". I think it'd be a very good debate to have, and one which, ultimately, the Bush dead-ender side of the argument would lose. Leading to the "no more" side winning! BTW, such a debate should have happened long ago!

In the end, no action happens and Bush rides through his term unscathed. And we get Lots More. Stay focused: Troops Home Now.

Sounds like we agree on the need, but disagree (if only slightly) on the best way to accomplish it politically.

I don't hear you asking congress or state officials to set some standard like 3 more elections or 10 more Diebold infractions e.g. before they should really get serious about it.

Neither am I asking Congress to allow for XXX more bodies before they get serious about ending the war. But things don't happen simply because we wish them to happen. Like it or not, there is a political process that must occur. Granted, we're about 6 years behind in that political process, but like it or not, such a process will be a part of ending this thing.

Finally, I dropped my jaw when you wrote: "...but it doesn't matter what I say. It matters what Congress says." And you run a popular blog site?!

That's right. Ultimately, it doesn't matter what my opinion is. What matters is what Congress says and does, since they control what will happen, or not, with our military, ultimately. Or, at least, they are suppose to.

Given the Congress additional weapons to fight for (and win) the fight we want them to win is the point of the piece...and my subsequent replies to you.

Hope that helps to clarify.

Senator Edward Kennedy tells george boo$$h enough is enough - no more card blanche oil baron glamour petroleum wars. The Republican Party left the money spigot on full blast 24/7 for bu$s$hco,.. this congress just turned the valve down to a trickle. This oil war is going to be forced to a conclusion. Wrap it up frat-boy the war profiteers party is over. You and your cronies go get an honest job,.. stop pilfering the US Treasury, and robbing the Iraqi's of their oil resources, with your false, fake, and illegal war.

Link to blog write up.

For this day Feb. 27th, 2007 - I want only to leave my observation - that this forum discussion [so far] is more open and astute than most that I have come across.

The only discouragingly chilling comment that I noticed on here was that someone exhorted the 'moderator' Brad, to restrain the contraversy in someway. A proclivity to 'tone things down' is disturbing because it is not so much simplistic vulgar rants and explitives that destroy forums - but rather priggish self-righteous 'moderation'.

Any discussion that is not to a degree emotionally charged - usually becomes one of effete egoism [full of people whose unconscious urges are gratified primarily by merely seeing their words on an internet site}.

When a speaker has an emotional investment in a widely public debate he will more dilligently attempt to craft more logical declamations.

I am an ex-USMM officer with a Master's (captain's) license - who has commented on several forums but has found it difficult to locate one drawing consistantly logical commentators.

(And one that does not 'cookie' the commentators.)

The Software format here for dialogue, is excellent.

Now i will enter the anti-spam letters and see it this posts.