Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Latest on DSM; Iraq (conyersblog.us)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
brettdale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-06-05 02:19 AM
Original message
Latest on DSM; Iraq (conyersblog.us)
Latest on DSM; Iraq

http://www.conyersblog.us

Being the first week of recess and all, I have not been as dilligent about posting as I'd like to be. Although things are quiet on Capitol Hill, there is no shortage of stories. On Tuesday, we had the near miraculous comeback in the Ohio Special, where our great candidate Paul Hackett almost pulled out a win in one of the reddest districts in the nation. When (not if) we retake the House in '06, I believe we will see his stand in OH-2 as a bellweather. And how can we not point out that yesterday, our friend, Bob Novak, at the heart of treasongate, came unglued on the air -- pretty much like his weak cover stories for Rove and Libby?

But tonight, let me note in particular, that Michael Smith of the London Times, who broke the DSM story, has another excellent analysis carried on RawStory. This reviews the bombing sortie data uncovered by my friend M.P. Campbell, that pretty much demolishes the UK's (and by inference, our own government's) claim that we were reacting to some increased threat from Iraq before we invaded. The data show quite clearly the threat via air was diminishing. Clearly, this new information warrants review over here as well. Given continued stories like, this, is it any wonder trust in the president's handling of Iraq is at an all time low, as today's AP-IPSOS poll shows? It is a sad state of affairs when we cannot trust our government's handling of the military.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DemInDistress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-06-05 02:26 AM
Response to Original message
1. brett....you know with all this "bad news"
downing street memo's,rove plamegate,iraq war out of control,deficits,approval ratings sinking,boltongate and a variety of thefts from Halliburton, do you think bush will allow/assist in another 911 type event or even something greater? Would this chickenhawk-in-cheif call Martial Law??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brettdale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-06-05 02:32 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. maybe
I beleive he will call some sort of martial law, i dont see him lasting till 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemInDistress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-06-05 02:41 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. all the Bush Crime Family needs is a
"New Pearl Harbor" atomic,bio,chem.or can even be an economical crash.All chimpy needs is just "one more attack"..hell FEMA has 600/800 prison camps staffed and ready for inmates...its scary,remember we're dealing with scumbag OILMEN from TEXAS
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmatthan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-06-05 02:53 AM
Response to Original message
4. I posted this on the Conyers blog
Edited on Sat Aug-06-05 03:01 AM by jmatthan
"I must strongly disagree with your comment:

"where our great candidate Paul Hackett almost pulled out a win in one of the reddest districts in the nation. When (not if) we retake the House in '06, I believe we will see his stand in OH-2 as a bellweather."


1. In elections you either "win" or "lose". Looking at your Report on the Ohio Elections in 2004, the Republicans have mastered the technique of winning. The margin is close for a particular purpose - to lull an observer into accepting the result.

2. Paul Hackett was not a good "Democrat" candidate. He was Kerry-lite and a Bush stay-in-Iraq apologist.

3. Hackett participated in the "Christian" Fallujah massacre. Listen to the testimony of eye-witnesses was at the War Tribunal on Iraq for the other side of the story.

4. Just because he said Bush was a "chicken-hawk" and gained the mainstream media notoriety, did not make him a good candidate.

5. Hackett was for sending more troops to Iraq and prolonging the suffering of the Iraqis and the massacre of more people who are fighting for their freedom from the illegal occupiers.

6. Hackett had no vision, except his own myopic view of the American military. Militarism, per se, creates such a myopic view. Hackett does not have your global vision to be called a true leader or a person with any political vision."

Jacob Matthan
http://jmpolitics.blogspot.com
Oulu, Finland
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlakeB Donating Member (286 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-06-05 04:44 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Hmm...
Kerry lite is still a better congressman than a radical conservative. And I'm not sure what you're talking about in refering to the "Christian Fallujah" massacre, but if you mean he was one of the soldiers that attacked Fallujah-how can you fault him for that? It was his duty. Please elaborate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmatthan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-06-05 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Never heard of the anointment before the attack on Fallujah?

Google that please.

Jacob Matthan
http://jmpolitics.blogspot.com
Oulu, Finland
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 04:34 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC