Do You Feel Safe Now, American? Proud?

Bill, you get more gross with each successive post.

The Bush regime with its comic huffings and puffings is unaware that it has made itself the laughingstock of the world, a comedy version of the Third Reich.

What ludicrous drivel. Could I get another order of lame Nazi-comparisons please? Toss in a side of "impeach Bush" and a cup of good ol' fashioned America self-loathing.

Seeds like this do nothing to further the debate. They do inflate certain people's sense of self importance, and they make for mighty fine echo chambers, but they don't help tackle the issues...

E.D:

I agree. The guy is tried, that's what so many pushed for.

And it worked. Some of the claims were dismissed, some were not, and he got 5.5 years.

What's the beef?

No need to shout, bold, etc. You can get your point across in friendlier fashion.

Safety and pride don't come from imprisoning people. We are dealing with memes here, not individual madmen. We protect ourselves from terrorist and tyrannous memes by committing en masse to self-sufficiency and fearlessness. Until we do that we will continue as pawns in the game of lies.

Well said.

HA! Bin Laden is going to have to ... ummm....

WALK!

(insert evil laugh here).

-J

All I know, is that no matter what the bad press the Reps get in the media, the fact of the matter is there are still millions of people in this world who would kill an American for being an American.

How do you know that? Is it because some conservative commentator told you so? Is it because, on some level, you feel you *deserve* that?

cartoonmohammed

Very insightful and useful comments. I noticed you said you have been deployed there and know you have a perspective on the middle east most people here will never fully comprehend. Let me be the first to to say thanks here for your service to America. I always not sometimes but always hold our service members in the highest respect and admiration. I'm not going to into a war debate here with the people who only want to call names and argue. Just wanted to express my gratitude to you for your dedication to this great nation.

@cartoonmohammed,

They would probably tape your eyes open, kill your mom and dad in front of you, rape your sisters and daughters and then behead you on the world stage [...] Terrorism exists.

When have terrorists done this to Americans?

We have killed approximately 1,250,000 Iraqi civilians in the past 5 years. Each killing has cost our country approximately $1,000,000 - the total cost of the war is well over a trillion dollars. And in return Iraq has killed no American civilians.

Not one.

We do to others what we are afraid they would do to us, if they were us. That is the cause and form of terrorism - acting out of fear.

It is time we wake up from this expensive delusion, that there are people who hate us because we are American. There are people who hate us because their loved ones were among the 1,250,000. We made them hate us by acting out of fear.

If we stop acting out of fear, renounce violence, lies, and theft, they will no longer hate us. Just as we no longer hate the germans for their terror under the Nazi regime. And the Vietnamese no longer hate us for our terror under Johnson and Nixon.

How can we free ourselves of fear, lies, violence, and theft? How can we free ourselves from the present reign of tyranny? The cynics among us say there is no way to do this. But there is a historical precedent for doing it. There is a moral, effective, pragmatic way to end tyranny here and abroad.

This way is called Satyagraha. It involves a personal commitment to self-sufficiency, self-control, and fearlessness. It is the only way for we Americans to become a free people again.

Thank you again for an interjection of reality back into the debate. While the actual numbers are still staggering there far more what is to be expected than the bloated hype you often see. I would like to ask your opinion on something though that I often do from the people who are or have been there and hope I don't offend you in doing so. I like most Americans have not been in Iraq and therefore only honestly learn about it from those of you who have. That said what I'd like to ask is do you personally believe we have accomplished good there and helped to put that country on a track to a better future?

Killfile I know that's a little off topic but I think relative to the debate since Iraq is commonly referenced in it. Hope you don't mind my curiosity.

1.25 Million dead Iraqis @ $1 Million per dead Iraqi. There's nothing figurative about these studies as far as I can tell.

Now I understand that fearlessness, non-violence, self-sufficiency and uncompromising truth are confronting ideas, my friend. Indeed I picked on your post because I expect these concepts to confront you. I raise them because I trust you to discuss them with the clear logic I've seen you apply on many other threads. And from that logic, I expect you will find them inarguable.

I appreciate that voting Republican or Democrat cannot end tyranny in our country. The polls are rigged, and if they weren't the media is monopolized, and if it wasn't the electoral college is gerrymandered, and if it weren't both parties stand for the same thing, and that thing has nothing to do with fearlessness, truth, non-violence or self-sufficiency.

As to your comment on the American civilians killed by Iraqis, I wonder whether you mean this figuratively as well? If not, who were these civilians and how were they harmed by Iraq?

I'm no mathmagician but as far as I can tell 1.25X10^6*1.00X10^6 is equal to 1.25X10^12 or about 1.25 trillion. Also, I think much of the Iraqi death toll counts all deaths due to the invasion and occupation, i.e. disease, malnutrition, etc. not just attacks.

@Prophet,

Also, I think much of the Iraqi death toll counts all deaths due to the invasion and occupation, i.e. disease, malnutrition, etc. not just attacks.

Yes. They also ignore people across the Middle East and Europe dying from cancer and birth defects from Depleted Uranium dust created by our armor and weapons.

In any war there are arguments over the number of killings. The point is not the number. The point is the killings. Cartoonmohammed conjures up an imaginary world in which Iraqis kill Americans, rather than the other way around. Operating from fear, rather than truth, it is easy to justify killing innocent people simply because they are not American.

If we commit ourselves to what we know, rather than what we fear, we can become rational beings again. So personal commitment to truth is not itself a political subject - it is a transforming and viral social force.

One death is a tragedy. A million deaths is a statistic. I don't know who said that but it seems true. When I saw an image of a dead Iraqi child I was horrified. I thought of my own young son, if that had been him, I would become a terrorist. I wouldn't have a choice.

Operating from fear, rather than truth, it is easy to justify killing innocent people simply because they are not American.

Right on, Peter. I'm sending you a friend request.

From an Essene song:

Love is letting go of fear
Forgiveness is the key to happiness.

I thought of my own young son, if that had been him, I would become a terrorist. I wouldn't have a choice.

Yes, you would. There is scene in the film of Gandhi's life. I have no idea whether it actually happened as it is represented, but it is the perfect illustration of Satyagraha.

A hindu comes to Gandhi in despair, having lost his child to violence committed by muslims and murdered a muslim child in revenge. He says he is in hell. Gandhi says,

I know a way out of hell.

Find a child, a child whose mother and father have been killed and raise him as your own.

Only be sure that he is a muslim and that you raise him as one.

That's certainly a different perspective but everyone is different. My first baby died and my son had a pretty rough time too. We weren't sure that he was going to make it. Losing my first baby changed me. I'm not nearly as "nice" as I used to be.

I have to wonder if those dead Iraqi children were loved as much as I love my son. Somehow it doesn't seem possible but I know that it has to be.

I actually don't think it is just the Germans who went through war, I think it is most Germans that do worry. Let's face it, Hitler didn't come to power by making his plans of genocide and war known. He seemed at the time the best solution, because he promised to fix the economy, fight poverty and reclaim Germany for the Germans.

What I personally find most amazing/ironic, is that the US which prides itself in liberty and freedom is seeing a large movement towards more of a national socialist approach then countries they associate with national socialism. It seems to me that many Americans are displaying an American citizen is of greater value/more deserving then anybody else in the world, while at the time arguing for a fence/wall at the Mexican border. So at one hand you are trying to lock everyone else out, but yet you fail to realize that you are locking yourselves in as well.

I am saddened and worried about following message boards, like NV, and seeing large amounts of people dehumanizing Muslims and other foreigners. The shouts for "terrorists" to be killed get louder, and the collective American conscience seems to be gone. It indeed is very worrying to see Americans to be more concerned over somebody not getting sentenced to death then about the issues at their door. Let's face it, these tribunals are just a first step in taking the constitutional and international rights away, and where will the government stop in demolishing rights? Will it suffice to take away the rights of a few hundred people they proclaim to be terrorist, despite obviously not really having a lot of proof (why else would so many have been released even after being tortured) or will it soon be the liberal, the homosexual, the christian or perhaps the native American? This is kind of like Hitler did start out.

It's hard not to see the parallels.

So sad many chose to ignore the paralells. Well, I will keep my hopes up for you guys and keep my fingers crossed, that the momentum will get changed and you will look to a brighter future.

"China is a serious human rights abuser, because China is complicit in Bush's human rights abuses."

How is it possible for Bush to dare bring up Human Rights? He is so out of touch with reality that I believe he is certifiably insane.

I think people ignore the parallells between what is happening now and Nazi Germany because people have become desensitized to that comparison. The Dems use it against the Reps, the Reps use it against the Dems and people just roll their eyes when the hear it.

Not only that, but I think to some large degree, much of the American public has become desensitized to suffering. Period.

I'm sorry, but I must have missed something... can someone please show me where we've implemented a "final solution" in Iraq?

Let's face it, Hitler didn't come to power by making his plans of genocide and war known

You have got to be kidding. You know he published Mein Kampf in 1925-26, which laid out exactly what his plans were. If Hitler's agenda wasn't "known," that's because average Germans decided not to "know."

You know he published Mein Kampf in 1925-26, which laid out exactly what his plans were.

As a German I was never allowed to read this book, but it is my understanding that it was outlining what he intented to do politically. Of course, if it was something else, I wouldn't know.

Nonetheless, his early speeches consisted of punch lines like, a job for everyone, a Volkswagen for everyone, .... Not really what he ended up doing, is it?

You have got to be kidding. You know he published Mein Kampf in 1925-26, which laid out exactly what his plans were. If Hitler's agenda wasn't "known," that's because average Germans decided not to "know."

Ahhhhh yes, the same thing that happened with W Bush, and is happening with McCain. Ironic.

I was never allowed to read this book

German Version online:
http://www.radioislam.org/historia/hitler/mkampf/pdf/ger.pdf

English:
http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0200601.txt

Thanks for the link! Where was the internet 20 years ago when I still had the stamina to sit through this lengthy text.

Also I stand corrected, it is not prohibited from being read rather it is prohibited from being distributed. This means you can't just sell it in a book store.

Thanks for the correction - that makes me feel a bit better about rights over there ;)

More then willing to discuss rights over there and over here, but I am afraid this would be the wrong place for it ;-)

America is not approaching the Nazi model. Period. In a few months we'll elect a new leader. Hopefully we'll elect a new Congress, too. And Hitler wasn't simply voted in. He strong-armed his way into power. He was dealing with a Germany far, far different than modern America--impoverished, beaten down, desperate.

And killfile, likening terrorists to Jews is absurd. I'm sorry, but we treat our terrorists a whole hell of a lot better than the Nazis treated their Jews. And, you know something, terrorists actually do commit acts of terror--they are an actual threat--whereas Jews were not responsible for all the madness Hitler and his cronies accused them of. What a disgusting parallel.

And Hitler wasn't simply voted in. He strong-armed his way into power.

Not true! He bargained his way in. After several government collapses in the Weimarer Republic, the NSDAP and the DNVP formed a coalltion and that rightfully elected government had most cabinet posts occupied by conservatives, but allowed Hitler to become chancellor to be able to build a stable government.

He kept his chancellor position by way of power later though. After arresting the members of the communist party he managed to convince others to sign the Enabling act and de facto skip any basic laws applicable in Germany before.

Xantheia,

It was complicated, but yes there was a great deal of brown-shirt bullying going on in the lead-up to said negotiations. Hitler was quite good at mixing strong-arm tactics with negotiations. He learned from his mistakes.

Well he might have been a bully, but the chancellor position in the beginning was legally his. He played his cards well enough to come out on top. Was there bullying involved? I think the brown shirts gained momentum very fast and probably intimidated one ore more politicians, but once he gained Hindenburg's approval it was done and over with.

And you may deny as much as you'd like, but I still see some parallels with today's world. To this day there are plenty of people claiming the presidency in 2000 was stolen. That the governor of the deciding state was the current president's brother of course doesn't help. There are plenty of claims about voter fraud in the 2004 election also. The administration uses vetoes and such to keep the congress and house in check, aka bullying. The dropping on news lines to Fox is much like Göhring's propaganda machine, ...

You are of course correct in claiming that Jews were innocent and terrorists are not, but the scare tactic paints every Muslim with the terrorist brush, and this is how it began back then too. Of course the Jews were an easy victim, because they had been persecuted since the middle ages.

Its only a few more steps for us all to be required to be having ID Cards & Muslims becoming the next jews..

Indeed, most students of history are. Read Theodore Adorno sometime though, you might learn a few things yourself about the sort of political climate and rhetoric that accompanied Hitler's rise to power. There are more than a few similarities.

I've read plenty of the histories of WWII, Nazism, and the Holocaust. I've spent plenty of time reading about Hitler's rise to power.

George W. Bush, on the other hand, was elected into office, following 8 years wherein the White House was occupied by a Democratic president. Likely, a Democratic president will follow Bush's eight years.

During Bush's eight years, Muslims have not been put in internment camps. We went into a war with Iraq that (if you'd paid attention since the early 90's) had been brewing for quite some time. I was against going into that war for a number of reasons. The Bush administration has done both positive and negative things in its 8 years, but none of those things come even close to the things the Nazis did when they assumed power.

And someone being German may make them qualified on German history (or does it, by default?) but it doesn't on American history. I'm American, so I could use that qualifier as well. Fact is, being German or American does not automatically qualify or disqualify somebody regarding their country's history.

Here's a question for you (no looking it up) when did Germany become a country? I bet Xantheia knows the answer.

No looking it up? Well, I can tell you it was rather late. I can't remember exactly but I'd hazard a guess for the second half the the 19th century...18xx.

Here's another question, and one that has been pestering me (and to lighten the mood a bit):

What happened to Prussia???

E.D.-

He was dealing with a Germany far, far different than modern America--impoverished, beaten down, desperate.

-I'm sure there are plenty of people, with first hand experience, who would beg to differ with this categorization

Yeah boy. America's just reeling like Weimar Germany with 25% unemployment and a worthless currency that required people literally to bring a wheelburrow full of notes to buy a loaf of bread. Perfect parallel. But I must have missed the part where the Bush Sturmabteilung burned the Capitol and tried to blame it on the Democrats. LOL.

And I must have missed the part as well where Roland Freisler gave out 5 year sentences to people considered to be enemies of the state. He was more of a fine wire kind of guy.

Well the mere 10% unemployment in Detroit/Livonia (with several metropolitan areas living with rates above 15%) might not seem like much to you, because you haven't lost your job, but considering that depression era employment levels hovered just below 10% at the beginning, before climbing into the 20% range, maybe it is pretty significant in reality. I'm also fairly certain that the feelings of desperation and impoverishment are fairly palatable to those growing up in areas in and around Baltimore and Washington D.C. (where the police felt it necessary to institute military style checkpoints). It seems that nuance and context are lost on you, but you don't see any parallel between "enemies of the state" and the politically motivated firings and character/career assassination engaged in by the current administration? As to the sarcasm, come on now Bill, for someone who trolls through Newsvine as often as yourself I know I shouldn't expect you to base your views on the realities that other people face, but you could at least come up with something a little more original than sarcasm.

Of course Detroit and MI and most big cities are the haven of the Dem party. Ever look at a map of elections. NY goes Rep except for NYC which carries the state. Pa goes rep except for Phily and Pit. CA goes rep except for LA and SF which carry the state. Seems to me that the areas that are run by Dems are the areas that are in real trouble. Maybe just a coincidence. Just for the record I am an independent and not a Rep.

Evidence does seem to contradict your assertion seeing that, for example, El Centro, CA has been close to or above 20% the last couple years (in CA but not SF or LA) and Yuma, AZ has been around 17% (was a red state in the last election).

phantom

Never, ever try and post something within the realm of reality on one of Killfile's patented rabble-rouser seeds. Everyone knows that it was those two Bushlickers Mayor Adrian Fenty and Police Chief Kathy Lanier who instituted those police checkpoints in Trinidad here in DC after years of oppressive rule by GOP apparatchiks like Marion Barry and Sharon Pratt Kelly.

Lono, you have got to be kidding me. I post about large cities in the US and you come back with two small towns out in the desert? Both El Centro and Yuma are gas stops on the way to somewhere. El Centro is a made up town in the desert for farming. Could the unemployment be because some stupid liberal judge in northern CA cut the water supply because of some stupid little fishy? Hard to grow crops without water, especially in the desert. Also since both places are gas and foood stops could not the high price of gas be a cause? Also, both are heavily Hispanic which means they tend to be Dems anyway so what is the point?

As an aside, guess it is hard to improve jobless rate in Det when the mayor is spending the night in jail. New story in case you missed it? BTW, what about New Orleans unemployment? How about Rep Jefferson and his cold cash?

Its only a few more steps for us all to be required to be having ID Cards & Muslims becoming the next jews..

And the former as I understand it close to becoming a feat complete.

And I like the parallel of Germany--->Jews

USA--->Muslims

Phantom- they were meant to be examples, it even says so in the post. The point was that the picture, for everyone, isn't as rosy as bill's glasses purport them to be. But far be it from me, judging by your string of follow up questions... that I'm sure were some flailing attempt at humor... to expect you to look at the issue with any type of objectivity.

Demmey your completely correct in your comment here if the department of homeland security (i prefer homeland insanity) gets their way we will have a standardized national drivers license "id card". That issue was about as relevant to security as the passport requirements for Canada. I'm still waiting for someone from homeland security to show me the Canadian terrorists or the millions of illegal Canadian immigrants.

Found an interesting article that tries to express the same views as I did, might be worth a read.

Thanks for the article link I read it and it was fascinating. I actually found a little bit of myself in it also. I'm one of those republicans holding onto the idea of reforming the party back to our ideals of constitutional government. I guess a lot of us while disagreeing with the leadership have not been willing to give up on the ideals that the party is supposed to stand for.

I think we were blindsided by party loyalty and for a long time just voted for the guy who had a R by his name. In 94 with Newt's contract with America and the retaking of congress we had a few years of complacency and at a local and state level didn't exercise proper oversight of candidate selection and communication between state and local committees. And frankly when Bush got elected we got lazy and quit holding our representatives accountable. I think what's been going on the past 3 or 4 years though is the party has basically had an internal civil war, and while at a federal level we've still been overly too complacent we've been unseating some bad ones in primaries and trying to recruit more moderate candidates.

You make an excellent point when you said

"Now, as much as the traditional Republican Party might want its party back, I'm not convinced that they are ever going to see it again. "

We've made some strides in the past couple of years at local levels and to a degree state level at removing some of these undesirable elements. But it's going to be a long hard fought road, and while I'm personally very committed to that, I'm not certain myself that we still have the numbers and the overall drive to make that long haul. Many have abandoned the party and just become independents, and there's been valid reason for that. Only time will tell now if we can reintegrate those people back in and accomplish a resurrection of the traditional GOP. And the one thing that is certain is it's not going to happen in 2008.

I think both parties are actually suffering from that problem right now. On our side it's common knowledge that the far right dominates the leadership. On the other side the far left dominates the leadership. And the far right for all the goodness of the beliefs would essentially create a Theocracy( I hope I got that word right). The far left is indicative of at best socialism at worst communism. I think the vast majority of Americans are not desiring either of those two options. And you brought up a very good point about Rove as well. He seems to be very good at dividing people and the divisions today with this constant us versus them on any topic has severely weakened our country. You might even call me an idealist for hoping we can restore the party or for that matter both parties back to their original glory. I sometimes think that the best method of achieving that goal would be to hand both sides massive defeats at the hands of independent candidates. I'm even considering running as one myself for the purpose of making that point.

Believe it or not I did seek party nomination this year to run for a congressional seat. But a series of miscommunications and lack of information caused me to miss a state deadline to be on the ballot. I'm actually registered with the FEC as a candidate but wont be on the ballot this year. I'm thinking of going 2010 as an independent and then I'll be better prepared from what I've learned this year anyway.

Sorry the words came out wrong. I don't scare easily either. And the fear of terrorism has never pervaded my life. What I meant was. I never felt safe (comfortable) with leaders before and that will never change. They have their own agendas. Not the peoples. This is what causes me discomfort.

id like to point out again for any who havent seen it in a few other threads ive posted

from 1968-2004 there were just over 25000 deaths in the world from terror attacks

in 2004 there were just over 42000 deaths from car accidents in the united states

so 50 years of terror attacks in the WHOLE world, still dont add up to car deaths in ONLY the united states in a single year

how realistic is the threat i ask you? if you have a higher chance getting struck by lightning TWICE is it really a "threat" at all?

it really is time we start smashing faces on people who would use terrorism as a tool to scare and get agendas pushed through, that includes the media,congress,pres.,VP. etc,etc,etc

we need to take our freedoms back before they are gone forever

hard to argue with that,...I love this list because it brings the things many fear into focus and become aware that this administration has brainwashed us. In seeking revenge for 9/11 George lied us into a war really about oil. We have now lost 1000+ of our citizens fighting this war than died in the world trade center.

I fear the loss of our liberties more than I do the loss of my life. At some point I will die, most assuredly, but many more have died to secure our liberties. Which do you value more, your life or your liberty?

"I fear the loss of our liberties more than I do the loss of my life."

Prophet,...I couldn't agree more. The way I see it my life is insignificant when we consider the American experiment that has lasted for more than two hundred years.

Exactly, lives are going to be lost regardless. Our liberties are hard fought for and invaluable. Once lost they'll take a lot more lives before they're recovered, if they're recovered.

Hey Gene good to see you on.

I might want to add to this discussion here that while I don't really see any significant reason to feel any fear to put it that way. I do think that certain aspects of the "liberties" we've supposedly given up do no harm and do increase safety. Case in point and probably only example that I don't have any problem with is the so called "warrantless wiretap" program. Despite the outrage over this huge loss of "liberty" I don't see where an NSA computer monitoring phone calls for activity that might indicate terrorism is a threat to my freedom. Unless your talking about some form of mass destruction it's not paying any mind to you anyway. The computers were only listening for certain trigger phrases that would only be reviewed by an agent if those phrases were said. Now I can't see how that jeopardizes my liberties and would actually like someone to explain that me.

My concern really isn't about warrantless wiretapping; it's about the slippery slope. Once we allow one civil liberty to be limited for the illusion of safety, it becomes easier for the state to remove the next right, and so on. I completely agree that, for myself, there's been no loss of liberty, but my point was simply that I don't want to experience that loss, not that I thought we had already suffered wholesale destruction of our guaranteed freedoms.

Ok I was just curious on that point because I knew a big deal had been made over it in the past. I just wondered if others were like me and basically saw that as little more than system monitoring rather than individual liberty infringement. As for anything else the stuff with checking library records that worries me, that was a very poor part of the Patriot Act. The detaining of the foreign combatant's as they want to call them, I have no real problem with that but do believe they should be charged and tried or released after a time not just held in limbo. I'm probably missing things here I'm not exactly up to date on this whole issue so I'll look forward to this one being a horizon broadening experience.

The detaining of the foreign combatant's as they want to call them, I have no real problem with that but do believe they should be charged and tried or released after a time not just held in limbo.

Listening to an interview with a reporter who had attended the Hamdan trial I learned an interesting factoid regarding the "enemy combatant" status. The status entitles to administration to hold them indefinitely during the war time. Even though Hamdan has been tried and sentenced under the tribunal system, even after serving the sentence he's been issued unless his status as an enemy combatant is changed he may continue to be detained.
IMO we should close GITMO & abolish the enemy conbatant status & tribunal justice system under which they are being tried.

Even though Hamdan has been tried and sentenced under the tribunal system, even after serving the sentence he's been issued unless his status as an enemy combatant is changed he may continue to be detained.

In the German News today they mentioned that he will most likely stay in Guantanamo until the "war" is officially over. Hope it's not going to take 100 years, else this is as good as a life sentence.

That's exactly why I stated it the way I did as not being held in limbo. I see no true reason why we even need "gitmo" these so called combatants could be just as easily held in our existing federal prison system till trial at greatly lesser cost than a military installation while still ensuring security and just as importantly fair access to counsel and the US court system. I agree with most that military tribunals are not a good way to handle these cases. Our court system is not perfect but it is to the largest degree possible fair, and it is the method designed to handle these types of trials.

Xanthiana you made an excellent observation too. If they are convicted when the sentence is up that "enemy combatant" status should be mandatorily removed. Same holds true if they are found not guilty.

Somewhere along the line paranoia took over from common sense in this detainment program. If you capture Bin Laden's second in command, OK fine hand him over to the CIA, NSA, or whoever and deal with him. But someones driver or a guy just picked up on the street who may have connections is pushing it to a very iffy extreme in calling them a major threat to national security.

Imagine how such a court would deal with the current administration.

actually thats sort of what i thought about the outcome

I understand that the Bush Admin has changed very few procedures for these tribunals from what they were prior to Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006), and that this verdict will likely be challenged up the chain of Federal courts. There hasn't been any judicial review of the newer procedures, that I'm aware of, which means we may go through several iterations of all this before we finally get it right.

Well, the one change I can recall off the top of my head is the admissibility of hearsay evidence. For those not familiar, hearsay is "a statement made out of court offered at trial to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement." There are a number of exceptions in the federal rules of evidence to the hearsay rule but, in general, hearsay is not permitted because it precludes the possibility of cross examination. But Bush's rules of evidence permit all hearsay testimony.

Why is this important? Suppose you went to court and testified "Sally told me that she heard Roger confess to killing his wife." This is a textbook example of inadmissible hearsay testimony because, in this example, Sally isn't around to verify your claim. In other words, without the hearsay rule, witnesses can claim to have overheard anything, and there's no mechanism for determining the veracity of the claim.

"...I am more afraid of my government than of any terrorist today."

I agree - if terrorism is defined as inspiring terror then who are the real terrorists? Of course. that sentiment labels me as 'unpatriotic' when it is defined as one who disagrees with the bush administration.

It is really unpatriotic if you support the Bush administration.

The neocons are American brownshirts. Their unilateral aggressions are the same as Hitler's Empire building strategy of attack and occupy. He even has the SS for torture. (I don't Social Security either)

I can still remember Bush campaigning in 1999 AGAINSt nation building.

What irony.

If that were to occur the second amendment would come into play.

But didn't SCOTUS recently rule that almost every had the right to carry heat?

that was the same thought i had when i read it jade

Obviously for me guns are not an issue I don't go out much. I grew up around guns but had an unfortunate accident with my first Bee-Bee gun. I think the civil state is corrupt beyond repair.

Jen

To some extent, Bush was influenced by the neocons who surrounded him. Now that McCain is surrounding himself with these same people in an attempt to win the White House, we have a lot to fear.

Have Doug Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, Scooter Libby and David Wurmser joined McCain's team or am I missing something?

Article II of Our Constitution gives the people the right to keep and bear arms, a right that shall not be infringed.

We also have Article X, Powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

In Article II of Our Constitution Powers are not delegated to the United States or the States but to the people.

George Washington commanded, "Let there be no change in our constitution by usurpation; for although this , in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed."

Only tyrants fear arms in the hands of the people

When the United States government hires a mercenary army, providing them with training camps and all the munitions of war, Americans beware.

Thomas Jefferson warned, "It would be a dangerous delusion if our confidence in the men of our choice should silence our fears for the safety of our rights."

I'd say using the same team that could get Bush voted in twice is pretty sound judgement in trying to win an election. Beyond that I'm curious to see if the association is more than just what's temporarily beneficial.

McCain.. Obama... they both work for the same guys... guess its a write in... and if everybody just didnt vote for those two... yay!... when I voted for the nominees my district has about 25,000 people.... i was one of the last to go in and vote.. maybe 30 minutes left and about 350 people had voted... what kinda ratio is that??

damn straight

those who would undermine our freedoms must answer for their crimes, in a way that will send a message to any future criminals that it will not be tolerated

well put

Al 616:
Just as a side note I will say that the European community had no urge to go into Iraq because they still had Billions of unpaid bills from Saddam's military up-grade spending between 1991 to 2003. The United Nations "Oil for Food" program failed not by the US but by the lack of support from Europe and China in controlling the mass corruption that was going on by members of the UN Oil for Food program and 3rd world countries making untold and unreported billions in the selling of black market crude oil from Iraqi production sites. France was pushing for increase oil production rights in Al Basrah as well as sites located in Mosul and Kirkuk. Crates of new weapons were sitting in warehouses that had recently been transferred from the port of Umm Qasr.

Production codes coming from countries like Germany, France, Yugoslavia, Poland, Romania, North Korea, China, Swiss, etc. I didn't vote, want, or was gung-ho when the push came to head into Iraq, but at the same time I do not place Europe on some level of immunity when it comes to the situation in Iraq. They supported Saddam even after the 1991 Gulf War ended. Sorry to hear that you feel unsafe in your own country, that is unfortunate because I have been putting my life on the line so that you wouldn't feel like that.

But before I get swamped with the anti-Bush crew comments, I follow orders and people above my pay scale makes those calls.

Fight the good fight Mac.

Prophet:
Thanks, although I am not attempting to start a fight, I just wanted to point out that while America has fallen short in the eyes of Europe and the rest of the world, Europe can by no means just sit back and claim a "moral victory" for not assisting US operations in Iraq. Europe is Europe and that is why most Americans go and vacation there and that is it. I am sad to hear that the man mentioned above has had a difficult life. Maybe in a few more years such resentment will grow less and less, but there will always be people who are racist.

AL616

wow, so watching people fall to their deaths or being crushed when the towers came down is not a reason to shed a tear unless you knew someone? I guess all the people who cried after Pearl Harbor were also being melodramatic if they didn't have someone in Hawaii at the time? How about people who cry when they see a child's body discovered after the child was kidnapped, rapped and killed, are they being melodramatic if they don't know the child? How about women who feel threatened walking alone in an area after another one was raped, do they make you sick because they now feel threatened?

Another point, since you don't feel safe here being either/both gay and black can you tell me in what country you would feel safe in? If there is one why would you not go there? And why do you feel unsafe here being gay or black? Just curious if you, yourself have actually been attacked because you are gay and/or black? I am actually surprised that you would feel unsafe since you said you were from CA. Isn't CA very accommodating to the gay community? Do you not have the right to marry now? Is not San Fran a safe place for gays?

As for me: I am very proud to be an American and I feel safe. I felt safe watching the towers come down but I did know that the world had changed at that moment and it was not for the better. I also know that since 9-11 and our response that there have been no attacks on US soil or US embassies or US ship (USS Cole) since then.

Brilliantly said Phantom!!!

I also know that since 9-11 and our response that there have been no attacks on US soil or US embassies or US ship (USS Cole) since then.

I found a rock next to a sign that says "These rocks keep tigers away" and I have yet to be attacked by a tiger.

quixiotic......are you allowed to walk around with a rock in our hand???? sounds like a sting thing.

Quixiotic,

And your point is what?

I think what he meant was, just because the sign says so, doesn't make it so.

To Mac:

I do truly thank you for the sacrifices you and your comrade officers are making for our country. And, though it may seem so from my entry, I am not an embittered soul who is trapped by my own childhood experiences. I do not and have never questioned those serving in the military. It is the government's judgment that I question.

Phantom - in answer to your FIRST paragraph:

Pearl Harbor and 9/11 are analygous situations. Europe was being bombed heavily before D-Day. The Mid-East was being bombed -- all over the place by everyone else -- before 9/11.

I saw no great grief, except in the people who had friends and love ones killed. We didn't see any great reaction in the populace until AFTER America was attacked. And there were two principle emotional reactions:

1) We are no longer safe!
2) Revenge!

I could see some tears, yes. But the gut-wrenching emotions that I saw -- aside from those who lost loved ones -- came from somewhere else.

In fact, I don't see that level of gut-wrenching emotion when we watch the news about someone being murdered or raped. We might be extremely moved. We might shed a tear or two. We might shake our heads and say, "What a shame." But, no...no histrionics. The only raw emotions I see in reported violent crimes are from those who were personally related to the victim(s).

To Phantom: Paragraph 2

I grew up in the Deep South, where I have seen my share of physical, social, and emotional abuse due to the fact that I am different. And, I have seen people who were supposed to protect my rights as a US Citizen sit by and do nothing while one of those incidents occurred. I moved to California as a young adult.

I am NOT going to be run out of the country of my birth because of racist, bigoted jerks. As a teacher, I can and will do the best job I can to make sure that gay students are not harrassed on my watch, and that they have a supportive adult on their side.

I am proud of my country. But, I am NOT proud of some of the policies and decisions of its administrators. I express my views by voting and by educating others about the problems and societal consequences of racism and homophobia.

To Phantom - Your final paragraph:

The sense of security in our society is an illusion. That doesn't mean I have to live my life in fear. However, I do have a heightened awareness of my immediate environment out of necessity...much like a police officer must have a heightened awareness of his/her immediate environment.

Also, Quixote's made an excellent point. True, America has not suffered any more terrorist attacks on its native soil since the government increased its security measures. But it's also true that New Orleans hasn't suffered a devastating flood from a Class 5 Hurricane since "Brownie" was fired from FEMA.

Al 616:
Thanks for your support and hope that times will get better for you instead of the tough times you have had to deal with in the past.

many thanks.

Al 616

You make some very well reasoned and accurate observations. I would like to add a quick to note to this point however.

Phantom - in answer to your FIRST paragraph:

Pearl Harbor and 9/11 are analygous situations. Europe was being bombed heavily before D-Day. The Mid-East was being bombed -- all over the place by everyone else -- before 9/11.

"I saw no great grief, except in the people who had friends and love ones killed. We didn't see any great reaction in the populace until AFTER America was attacked. And there were two principle emotional reactions:

1) We are no longer safe!
2) Revenge!

I could see some tears, yes. But the gut-wrenching emotions that I saw -- aside from those who lost loved ones -- came from somewhere else. "

The somewhere else you reference was patriotism. There was a collective shock that our country had been attacked at home. And that was a concept that I believe was completely foreign to peoples thoughts at the time. And yes much in the same way a family member of a violent crime victim would seek or desire revenge. We as a nation collectively sought revenge for the murder of our countrymen. As 9-11 unfolded I did not see democrats,republicans,liberals,conservatives, or other such division. I saw people of every background, race, creed, or anything else unite as Americans. In that type of unimaginable situation the first reaction by human nature is revenge.

AL 616,
I am a little confused. How would one show great emotion/reaction BEFORE an attack? As for the comment about "Brownie", it is also a true statement that New Orleans did not suffer a terrible flood before he was hired? Thus using your logic the reason for the flood was the hiring of "Brownie".

Quixiotic, have you been attacked by a tiger before you saw the sign or picked up the rock? There is no connection between your statement an the reality that we have not been attacked since our response. It isn't because of a sign but because we have been on the offensive instead of waiting to be attacked.

Al 616,

In reply to your reply to paragraph 2. I also grew up in the Deep South and saw racism. I also have seen racism in the enlightened liberal Northeast. It is not limited to the south. I have talked with several friends (who are black) who grew up in the south and experienced probably the same things you did but they moved back after being gone. I asked them why would they go back to Mississippi or Alabama etc instead of staying in the Northeast or plains states etc. They all said was that while there is racism in the south it is more open and easier to deal with than the hidden racism in the north. Ever wonder why so few blacks who move to places like Minnesota (not singling out them, just using them as an ex) move back to their home state in the south.

Finally, there is NO PLACE on earth that does not have racism, sexism etc. While the US is certainly not perfect, I have not seen a place in all my travels (Europe, Middle East, and Asia) that if better regarding how the population deals with those who are different from the "norm".

Forgot the manicurist.

It's so ridiculous. People would more likely be in a car accident or slipping on something in the house than being worried about mad bombers or meteorites smashing in our heads.

Yeah, it's really crazy. And disheartening that people use fear as a weapon.

Though he was awful he was wise.

Quit running scared.

It is silly to sit in fear of terrorism, as it is very unlikely that it will occur. It was, however, rather tragic when it did occur. 9/11 does not mean we should worry that this will constantly be a threat to every American. However, that does not mean we should not be vigilant. More vigilance might have saved lives in 2001.

On that note, however, we should not sacrifice our liberties to achieve this. There is a balance.

That is, however, the first time I've ever heard Sept 11 described as "rather tragic," however.

That is, however, the first time I've ever heard Sept 11 described as "rather tragic," however.

Yes, it was an attempt at irony, actually.

I'm pretty sure that was fully answered in the first post, right above yours. Not sure how to make it any plainer or simpler for ya.

To be honest, I had to read the title a couple different ways before I got it as well.

Amazing...

Amazing...

?

Oh....well, question was still answered in my post regardless. I just added another part that shouldn't have been there.

The title was as bad as the article.....not very well thought out.

?

That KF had to explain his title, twice.

I thought it was a typo.

Do you feel safe now, America?

It works as well. And if I read every comment in every thread I clicked on, I wouldn't have time for anything else.

Yea, "America" would have been clearer but more generalized, "American" is more personalized.

I tend to skim through them, mostly reading friends comments.

It means that after he serves the six months in Gitmo he will than stay in Gitmo until the military says its safe to let the driver out. Meantime the White House crew putter around the Rose Garden as freemen.

I wonder if he still goes by Tim Osman?

"The guy has admitted to aiding terrorists." Let's say Bush was tried for war crimes would his driver be put in prison for "aiding" him? What about his cook, Doctor, Minister or decorator?