Everyone is stunned that a process that should be occurring 9 months to a year from now is occurring now: the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. It is completely premature. And now the Republicans seem to be following in this daffodils-in-winter behavior. The cable stations are talking about Giuliani’s numbers against McCain.
The prematurity has a simple explanation: We want the election to happen now; no one wants George Bush to be president any more. He is a disgrace and a failure. While Cheney is just crazy. It is truly scary to have this kind of leadership. If you polled the elite, I venture that most of them are actually frightened; and that few have any confidence in Bush. He is not a lame duck. He’s a mad duck. (And I am someone who gives Bush credit for the fact that there have been no terrorist attacks in nearly 6 years…)
Yet impeachment (which I favor) is obviously unpopular. Wise men don’t seem to think it is a good idea. We are in some kind of war, these are dangerous times. Impeachment is enormously disruptive.
The answer is obvious. Bush and Cheney should both resign. Bush would cement his legacy. He would show that he is actually, as he claims, a spiritual man, who did not want to sacrifice one more American life to his obstinate pride. And he would do something historic and great (and thumb his nose at the Clintons one more time): make Pelosi President.
Yet another example of Phil Weiss's historical ignorance. The reason this is happening is because of the explosion in cable stations, the internet, and the collapse of party organizations and the things they used to do. Not because of Bush. A candidate has to a lot of money and has to do it early. That's whats happening
Bill – Agreed. I think it's important to realize that the only reason these things are happening so early is that the media has taken the power away from the national conventions. It really ought to be the other way around.
Isn't it more that AIPAC and the Soros combine (whose name I forget) are making rival bids for the support of each candidate?
I agree with phil, there is a feeling on both sides that 08 can't come soon enough. the second term has been a total disaster.
Yes Rowan, its about the Jews, always the Jews. Everything. By the way, how is life on your galaxy
He can't leave yet. He has to finish the job and start a war with Iran.
who will in turn destroy israel
Excellent post Phil in terms of the cultural and political analysis etc.
Your giving credit to Bush for no terrorist attacks in 6 years is going way to far (down the giving him credit line) though I think.
Bush as a man of religion is in his heart as much a sectarian as those who proclaim there is no God nut Allah and Mohommad is his prophet. In Bush's mind, there is no God but Bush's and he GWB is his prophet.
Whilst Bush's relationship with his God is a matter for him, his relationship with his fellow human beings is a matter for those he has made promises to and who relied om those promises. I would refer folks specifically to the Presidential Oath of Office which the founding fathers saw fit to include in the US Constitution because they really did want a government of the people by the people for the people – as Lincoln (a truly great wartime leader and the first Republican president) reminder the folks of his time at the end of his Gettysberg address.
Nice work Phil. But don't put to much stock in expecting Bush to resign. Fanatics have to be removed sometimes. Not violently, but firmly and reasonably. The world really cannot wait much longer.
As an Australian of no religion and no political affiliation with either the Democrats or the Republicans I think I have a bit of detachment from the local heat of your domestic politics. As a child of the West and a respecter of the East, South and Northern peoples I try to see things from their perspective too.
Nothing so aggravates people of all cultures and creeds as hypocrosy coupled with aggressive wars that led to massive unnecessary loss of life. When Bush gave the order as commander in chief to invade Iraq against international law the whole world watched him do it through the modern communications technology of the media. They saw that it was he, not the united nations and not the US Congress that decided (usurped in fact) the authority of the security council under resolution 1441 to afford Iraq (i.e Saddam) one final opportunity.
Bush broke his oath of office when he usurped the UN Security councils right (a right seded them by the US Congress when it ratified the UN Charter and also by the Bush administration when it joined the unanimous 15-0 resolution giving Iraq a final opportunity. The Security Council was seized of the matter of Iraq and of the concerns re WMDS and it was acting on its concerns but oh no GWB, the prophet of God, or the ego of his normally more prudent family just could not wait.
Bush must be impeached. Resignation is almost not an option for him unless he also apologies to the entire world and asks the victims of his ego for forgiveness.
These are very very serious matters but Bush's secular sins are very very greivous indeed. Of his own actions George W Bush had conspicuously undermined the rule of secular law everywhere. He has sullied the reputation of the US in the world for honesty and forthrightness deeply.
I almost hate America now. Because you are taking so long to bring your rogue president to account for the promises he made you and for the breach of trust you are allowing him to work on the matter of the United States treaties with the rest of the world.
The idea that the problem is merely Bush/Cheney and the neocons is puerile. After Clinton was kicked out, Soros still had control of the desired Balkan mines etc., Camp Bondsteel was still sitting on top of the proposed pipeline route, and destroying civil life and welfare throughout the Balkans was written off as something from ancient history.
The idea that the parties have significantly different imperial policies is incorrect. The difference between them is analogous to the tough cop, con cop duo of police procedurals. One cop (the GOP) spends all its time yelling "let me kick his teeth in, Larry" while the other cop (Dems) mutters excuses to the suspect about how his colleague has had a very rough day.
Gore (say) would not have gone to Iraq. That's a significantly different imperial policy.
A Giuliani run for the White House will be a candidacy like no other American politics has seen. Giuliani's private life – three-times divorced and plagued by scandal – makes Bill Clinton's chequered past look almost virginal. Giuliani is a man whose father was an enforcer for organised crime. A man who separated from his first wife when he discovered she was his second cousin. And there's more: scandals, rages and grudges galore. And yet, though officially he is only 'exploring' the idea, most political insiders are betting Giuliani is going for it. The political winds of a world defined by 9/11 are blowing at his back. The signs are good. Welcome to the 'Rudy for 2008' show. It's going to be a wild ride.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Observer/magazine/story/0,,2012260,00.html
– nothing like a bit of filth to get noo yawkers goin'.
Why do you say that, Ashley? I know we can't tell for sure, but wasn't the Senate under Democrat control at the time of the 2002 war vote?
Kameraden Rowan, Giuliani was a great mayor and is going to be a great president. "Red Ken" on the other hand is a friend to terrorists everywhere. By the way his present wife is hot.
well guliani will have plenty of cash. the guy he hired to run his campaign is a master level scumbag who made his fortune by buying countries debts, than jacking the interest way way up and taking them to court in america.
I also liked how rudy blamed the troops for insurgents raiding the al qaa qaa munitions dumps.
He was a great mayor though.
But a guliani for the NATION would be hagel or ron paul.
C'mon, people – if Nine Eleven Was An Inside Job, then Rudy was one of the perps.
Absolutely kameraden Rowan. you got us, it was the Jews, the masons, the elks, the rotary clubs, Elvis, and of course the skull and bones and the eating clubs at Harvard. Never liked those Ivy guys myself. But that's why I'm giving it all up and looking forward to testifying in front of congress. But are they not in on it too?
Ashley, had Gore been in the master seat at 911 the disaster would be far greater. Can you imagine it? A terrorist attack inside the continental borders under a democrat president? This would be the end of the Donkeys, unless they could prove they are far more aggressive than the Elephants. They would have been pushed to still greater crimes than we have seen… and they would love it. Wouldn't they, Mr. Saban?
Giuliani, who is "three-times divorced . . . separated from his first wife when he discovered she was his second cousin."
That's too much numerology for me. But what's so awful about marrying your second cousin? We're not talking sister here.
The wheels are so coming off the zionist entity.
Kameraden Rowan, How does the Hort Wessel song go, exactly I mean. Surely you must know the words by heart.
PS. Back from the other galaxy you inhabit I see
Phil,
Pelosi as President?
You are nuts. Pretty soon you'll be inhabiting the same space as Rowan and he can finally meet a Jew up close and personal.
Addy
Rowan,
I've been away from the Blog for awhile and boy, have I missed your musings!
After I destroyed your Silverstein-Chertoff 9/11 conspiracy theory with the simplest of Wikipedia entries, I think I'll take a crack at your Jewish banking theory.
Given your complete lack of knowledge on the global financial system, I would be surprised if you could give me just a couple of names of bankers who supposedly control Britain, for one, and the US, for another. Given China's rising status why don't we throw her in as well — who are the bankers who control China?
Name names Rowan. Throw out some evidence. Don't give me your ersatz bullshit and Marxist Rabbi references.
Only facts will do. the ball is in your court.
Addy, you never destroyed any conspiracy theory 'cause your logic kinda sucks.
Your argument was that there was not enough time to come up with the 9/11 plan after Silverstein got the lease of the Towers.
Umm, did it ever cross your mind that the plan was conceived before Silverstein got the lease? Not to mention that the lease could have been a necessary part of the plan?
No? I thought so. This is like the third time in this blog you are exposed as a complete moron.
Hey Phil, you seem to have a big fan base among neo-nazi's and conspiracy nuts. Not to mention the stray jihadi. Way to go man
"I've been away from the Blog for awhile and…"
a) you were not missed;
b) you should stay there;
c) Phill has done the same;
d) all of the above.
Actually, here is a more detailed refutation of your moronic arguments by some annoyed person:
"Addy, not that I particularly care about conspiracy theories, but once again, you need a lesson in logic:
1) "Not a heckuva lot of time to plan something so intricate."
Silverstein being the leaseholder 7 weeks prior to 9-11 doesn't mean the plan wasn't conceived earlier. First you have a plan, and then you get on with it. Get it? If that's your idea of debunking a conspiracy theory, then you are even sillier than your other posts indicate.
2) Chertoff could have been very helpful, being head of the criminal division in the DOJ in 2001. In every cool conspiracy theory, compartmentalization is essential. That means co-conspirators in key positions. Are you implying that the criminal division of the DOJ could not have been a key position in such a conspiracy? For example, he could be of great help if the need of a cover-up arose.
3) Who provided security: Between 1993 and 2000, Marvin Bush (President Bush's brother) was a principal in a company that provided security for both the World Trade Center and United Airlines. According to an article by David Ray Griffin "from 1999 to January of 2002 their cousin Wirt Walker III was the *CEO."[154] According to its president CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down". This last statement has been used by some conspiracy theorists to say that the contract "expired" on September 11, 2001. Barbara Bush allegedly confirmed this theory in her book Reflections (ISBN 0-7432-2359-4) also stating 9/11 was the day the contract expired.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories
If you are going to debunk 9-11 conspiracy theories, you'll have to do better than that. And when you do, go to the relevant sites. Thank you."
Posted by: irrelevant discussions | February 2, 2007 6:33 PM
Conspiracy Theorist,
Touched a chord, did I?
Larry Silverstein was the LEASEHOLDER. Leaseholders are never responsible for infrastructure or security in buildings. Owners are. Who owned the Towers — the Port Authority of NY and NJ.
So start there, Schmuck. 7 weeks as leaseholder is nowhere near enough time to gain access to the Towers, which he would have needed. Moreover, Silverstein's access would be proscribed.
So unless you produce some actual evidence — you know, some verifiable facts instead of the Rowan Berkeley model of "blame the nearest Jew" — your conspiracy theory is debunked. Live with it.
Chertoff — again, he was in the criminal division of the DOJ. Rowan Berkeley said he was among the "homeland security gangstas". The homeland security dept. didn't even exist and he was years away from heading it, ergo, Rowan's theory doesn't hold water.
So, dearest schmuck, please give me one F*ing iota of evidence. Until then, please go away and spontaneously combust.
If you prefer, we can go with the theory that the Towers were demolished by Klingons firing from cloaked anti gravity vehicles.
"It is a wretched thing for a people to be saved only by its persecutors or its fools." – Zangwill
You got us Rowan, we did it. Along with the Hindenburg, and the Lindburgh baby, Kennedy, Lincoln, not to mention th black plauge. I don't know how you figured it out Rowan my man but your truly a genius, a man among men. kudos
Lol. Adolf, you show up after a few weeks and again all it takes is your macho posturing and faulty logic to demonstrate you have no brains. Your backpedaling regarding your moronic assertion that there was not enough time to come up with a plan in 7 weeks, even though it didn't occur to you the plan could have been conceived earlier, is exemplary.
As for concrete evidence, I probably have to inform you that once there is more than simply circumstantial evidence, like when the smoking gun is found, a conspiracy theory is not a theory anymore. It becomes a fact. Get it?
P.S. That internet macho posturing is always a sure sign of an insecure little man. What's the matter, being bullied too often in school?
Dear Fools,
In order to have a theory — at least one that will hold water, you have to base it on some known facts.
here are the known facts on which you base the "Silverstein did it" theory.
1 — Silverstein was the leaseholder.
2 — Silverstein is jewish.
Wow!! ya got me there. If that's all you have you are all truly part of "Team Moron."
What you ignoramuses ignore — because you have no interest in actual facts — is that Silverstein was involved in litigation with his insurers to the tune of billions of dollars — over whether the terrorist attacks were 1 or 2 "incidents". You would think his insurers, with billions to lose, would be able to come up with some evidence that he knocked down the towers.
But they didn't.
'Cause he didn't.
You people are truly idiots. Read a F'ing book.
Rowan —
How 'bout — Al Qaeda did it. since they admitted it and all.
Might that be 'nuff for ya?
Addy
Dispute with Insurers
As a private developer with a 99-year lease on the World Trade Center, Silverstein insured the property. Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, he sought payment for the destruction of the towers as two incidents. The two dozen insurers held that it was one incident. If it were considered to be a single incident, the payout would be $3.55 billion and if it were two incidents, it would be $7.1 billion. Silverstein sued the insurers. In October of 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld a Southern District verdict by a jury that the attacks must be considered a single occurrence. Yet, the same court also upheld a victory in the second phase of trial which was awarded to Mr. Silverstein in which temporary insurance policies in effect when the buildings were destroyed did require that the attack to be treated as two occurrences. Thus, nine insurance companies will pay double the approximately $1 billion in coverage under their policies.[9]
On December 6, 2004, a federal jury ruled in favor of Silverstein giving him an additional $1.1 billion from nine insurers, declaring it to be two "occurrences". [10] However, in a previous trial, a different federal jury delivered a mixed verdict which highly favored insurers on April 29, 2004 [11]
At dispute in the trial were interpretation of standard forms used in the application for property insurance and when particular insurers saw which documents.[12]
In total, Silverstein was awarded nearly $5 billion in insurance money following the destruction of the Twin Towers [13]. He plans to use some or all of the settlement to rebuild. [14]
Silverstein's lease with the Port Authority for the World Trade Center requires him to continue paying $102 million annually in base rent.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/911myths/
Rowan — you might want to learn to read. You can learn something from the above.
for "Conspiracy theorist" — there is still hope for you. Repent. You sinner. Repent. …and learn to use logic and evidence to make your case.
Stop posting under 3 people's names.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_P._O%27Neill
For those who care — this is the gentleman that was in charge of security at the towers on 9/11. It wasn't marvin bush.
Addy,
That's pretty good work. i think I'll rethink my positions.
thank you for helping me to see the light.
CT
Dear All —
I hate myself and my puerile existence.
I have this jew in my head that won't go away. he's haunting me. Please go away. Go away and stop running the world. Go away and let me live in peace with Ein Volk and Ein Fuhrer.
Please. Please. Please.
Save me from my ersatz self.
I like to F**K pigs.
That's why I hate Jews.
I like to F**K pigs.
they don't.
Please help me find some pigs to F**K.
Addy, do you enjoy being a boring troll?
Same Old,
If troll means someone who has a brain and doesn't take to the groupthink of people like CT and Rowan Berkeley, I'll gladly be a troll on this blog.
Or is it that you lack the brainpower to debunk anything I've said.
Too much for ya?
Rowan fan girl, you will have to drink dry a very fat Simon of Trento if you want powers to convincingly emulate that English Klingon.
i've been away.
i see phil is still stirring a cesspool.
pathetic.
Just to return some sanity to the discussion:
A 30-min. interview with a rather remarkable Palestinian woman on the subject of the Wall and the settlements going up in the Jerusalem area.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgCi6PZmGcY&eurl=
http://alternate-focus.blip.tv/file/150152/
Does the assembled multitude feel that 'Michael Savage' is in some sense still a Jewish responsibility? I do.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200702210005
It would be interesting to hear ToughDove's response to that, Rowan. I have a feeling he's never even noticed all the hate spewing from large swathes of the Jewish community.
Rowan, David, whats happening guys. First of all Savage is a radio guy and they tend to be on the extremes. Second, read the link. And I ask you, so what. The only thing that he says that I think is wrong is that there are many ,journalists in America lower than Diane Sawyer. Other than that, whats the problem,
Posted by Eva Jlassi:
"New York Times journalist Chris Hedges stated about Israeli Soldiers in Palestinian Occupied Territories: " And it was–I mean, I've seen kids shot in Sarajevo. I mean, snipers would shoot kids in Sarajevo. I've seen death squads kill families in Algeria or El Salvador. But I'd never seen soldiers bait or taunt kids like this and then shoot them for sport. It was–I just–even now, I find it almost inconceivable. And I went back every day, and every day it was the same."
Official israeli response:
"Well, we have lots of radio guys in the army and they tend to be on the extremes. Other than that, what's the problem? Oh, by the way, we deny whatever you were talking about."
pretty witty my friend. Next I suppose your going to tell me that Chris Hedges is an impartial journalist, doesn't have an ax to grind. not him
Hedges seems to have a lot of pass philo-Semitic leftist views, granted, but that isn't why you hate him, Bill – you hate him because he is not enamored of Khazar terrorism.