From: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org (shindell-list-digest) To: shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Subject: shindell-list-digest V6 #286 Reply-To: shindell-list@smoe.org Sender: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk shindell-list-digest Tuesday, November 30 2004 Volume 06 : Number 286 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [RS] (Off Topic) - see my CORRECTION - apology to Joe!!! [] Re: [RS] Lawrence, KS show ["kunigunda" ] [RS] Did Iraq have Wmd's [Jason Stanley ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 9:42:57 -0600 From: Subject: Re: [RS] (Off Topic) - see my CORRECTION - apology to Joe!!! Christy, Of COURSE! Even people who vote correctly make mistakes ONCE in a while. Joe > > From: Christy Thomas > Date: 2004/11/30 Tue AM 08:28:37 CST > To: shindell-list@smoe.org > Subject: [RS] (Off Topic) - see my CORRECTION - apology to Joe!!! > > Joe - it was a terrible, TERRIBLE error!!! i am so, > SO sorry!!!! i meant Bill...but also had in my head > that i wanted to mention your post (in which you wrote > many things i AGREE with wholeheartedly!)... > > i shouldn't be posting without the usual amount of > coffee - SORRY...i would be horribly insulted if > someone confused ME with a Bush supporter - please, > PLEASE accept my apology!!!! > > Peace, > christy > > > Christy, > > Not sure which "Joe" you are referring to, but I hope > it wasn't me. I would > NEVER vote for Bush! Perish the thought. > > Joe > > > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 09:33:55 -0800 From: "David Pancoast" Subject: [RS] Apology I would like to apologize to anyone offended by my inappropriate reference to the eastern U.S. as "icky". That wasn't nice of me. We (Westerners) sometimes get a bit resentful of our federal Big Brothers. Those guys brought us the 55 mph speed limit in a place where it's hundreds of miles between towns; they own 85% of my state and force us to pay taxes to maintain the land we're not allowed to set foot on and now they want to send all their nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain (sitting right on top of the major aquifer that feeds our valley just 100 miles north of town). Anyway, it was still rude, and I'm sorry. David Pancoast Las Vegas, NV ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:39:37 -0600 From: "kunigunda" Subject: Re: [RS] Lawrence, KS show Kristen, anybody - What schedule? It's not on the one linked to his website. > *grin* Yes I'm sure...trust me! Oh, I just checked... it's on Richard's > schedule now. Frantic for confimation in KC Carrie ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:39:02 -0600 From: Jason Stanley Subject: [RS] Did Iraq have Wmd's Chris, Just this Thanksgiving in Fallujah, Iraqi forces found a lab that contained among other things instructions for making anthrax. I don't know about you but personally I don't keep intruction books around to make something unless I have the means of making it. Odds are they have been shipped to Syria, time will tell. Here is the article for you to read. http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/25/iraq.main/index.html Every other major country thought Saddam had WMD's so Bush did not lie. Seeing as you haven't seen even one intellegence report on the matter I doubt you are qualified to make that determination. My money is on he had them and moved them. I don't think Al Qaeda had much to do with it other than maybe a meeting or two, but he definitely had people in his country that were part of Al Qaeda that if the time was right could have taken some the weapons and used them against the West. As far as freeing how many ever people were freed, I don't know if you have seen tapes of what Saddam's people have done to people, but trust me, they are happier without him and keeping their body parts intact. Unfortunately it is the U.S.'s job to be a world cop. It has been this way for many many years and we have saved millions upon millions of people by standing up for what is right. Who else is going to do it? France? China? Russia? They were too busy selling weapons to people like Saddam to worry about things like that. As a side note, if someone know's this please let me know where to find it. I once heard a Canadian news reporter give a speech about why American's do what they do and how many times they have saved other countries and never gotten anything in return. He named time after time that we sacrificed American lives to help other countries but when the US needed help with something the other countries wouldn't lift a finger. I am pretty sure he is a famous reporter but I heard it on NPR and can't remember who it was. Believe it or not, the U.S. is a safer place because of GWB's presidency. Name the last attack since 9-11 on the U.S. Also you didn't say it but someone else said there rights were being taken away. I would like you or anyone else to name something you used to could do but now you can't because of the patriot act. I would be interested to hear something since personally I haven't noticed a thing. The government is by no means perfect and there actually a few things republicans do that piss me off, namely denying pot to sick people, allowing euthanasia, etc. But there are plenty more that Democrats do that are worse. I think I may be more Libertarian than either one of them, who knows. I do know Bush is doing his best to protect the american people and he has not lied one single time. Granted there have been Intel failures, but that isn't a lie. Kerry saw the same info and said the same things but changed his tune depending on what day it was. I prefer a president who sticks to what he says and when he says he is going to do something he does it. As far as the comment on Vietnam, it would take another 40-50 years to have losses comparable to Vietnam so that is a pretty lame comparison. Time will tell whether this war was justified, but the info they went by about the WMD's was serious enough to take action and it happened to free millions in the process. I would venture to say Richard Shindell and I have zero ideas in common other than he is a great singer/songwriter and an incredible guitar player. I may not agree with some of the songs, but he can write a song about it better than anyone I have ever heard. > > Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 00:48:00 -0500 (EST) > From: Chris Foxwell > Subject: Re: [RS] (OT: politics) Long Time Away > > Hi all. I figure I'll tackle the first of these reasons. My thoughts > are > pretty obvious, not at all startling or new, but they really should be > said by someone. Apologies for the length of this; it's late and I'm > afraid I get carried away a little. > > On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 Wchmelir@aol.com wrote: > > >> 1. With Bush as commander-in-chief, the American military and our >> allies have removed probably the 2 most evil dictatorial regimes of >> the 1990s-2000s. Something like 47 million people in Afghanistan and >> Iraq breath freer air today because of decisions make by GWB. I for >> one am happy that Afghani women aren't subject to beatings for >> leaving their homes without a male relative. I'm also happy that >> Uday is no longer feeding men he doesn't like to his tiger. >> > > > Everyone in his right mind is happy about Uday being gone, and the > infinitely-more-difficult-to-prove "better treatment of women" in > post-Saddam Iraq. That isn't the point. The point is that Dubya lied to > his country and to the world about why he started the war. He lies about > it every day, with a big vacant smile on his face. Go back and research > the "bluster trail" left behind by the Bush administration in trying to > justify the war. "We're doing this for the people of Iraq!", that proud > and noble claim, is the third reason cited for the war, after the first > two "reasons" were disproved. First was "they have WMDs, and they're > going to attack us!" Eh...wrong. Definitely, and embarrassingly, wrong. > The second reason--that is, the first excuse--was "well, they have close > undeniable links to al-Qaeda!" Eh...wrong, conclusively. Third, only > third, do we hear "well, we've done a good thing, look at Democracy being > spread in the Middle-east!" (even though "sprayed" is more like it). > That's the current official spin: "we're out to sow the seeds of > democracy > in Iraq!" I would be spluttering with laughter, if I weren't already > shaking in anger. > > The president of our country lied to us. He lied to the world. And he > broke countless international laws in doing so. Yes, it can be > argued--with difficulty--that Iraq is better off now, and putting aside > all sarcasm, I do believe that Iraq has the potential to become MUCH > better than it ever could have, *if* things are handled well by those who > plunged Iraq into the mess. No pain, no gain, ain't it the truth...but > not all pain leads to gain. But that doesn't excuse the fact that we > were > bullied and intimidated into this war by lies and menacing hints of doom. > The reasons that the United States entered this war are NOT the reasons > that our president cited, and NOT the reasons that many Congressmen and > lawmakers voted for the war, and we must never forget that, regardless of > what ultimately happens in Iraq. > > I dearly, dearly wish that our president chose to stand up in front of > us, > address his country, and say "Look, we made a mistake. We thought they > had WMDs, but they didn't. We used the best intelligence available to > us, > and it turned out to be wrong. But we're in this now, we cannot abandon > the people of Iraq, and so we have to try to make the best of this, and > here's what I think the best can be." That would have won him SO many > respect points, among everyone that I know, and would have gone a long > long way towards restoring confidence in our leadership. > > But there was no trace of such humility or respect. Instead we are > treated to one insulting lie after another, arrogant bluster followed by > cowboy bravado, and the American people swallowed it up, hook, line, and > sinker. It is amazing and terrifying that many people, when asked why we > went to war, say "to free Iraq from Saddam." It's terrifying how quickly > we forget, and how afraid we are to challenge that which is said to us. > Any attempt to justify this war by pointing to that "reason" is blatant > revisionist history on the government's part...and this, *this*, is what > makes folks suspect conspiracies, such as constructed WMD evidence, wars > conducted for oil, the quiet enforced spread of Christianity, etc. Such > things become all the more palatable after we witness these staggering > lies and coverups, quite aside from any intrinsic plausibility they may > contain. > > It's appalling to watch Bush, Cheney, and the crowd glibly take us from > one reason to another, appalling to see them stand up in front of us and > proudly lie about why we started this mess. Some good may come of it, > certainly, and that remains to be seen...but if it does, that will not > change the fact that we were led into this war by lies. > > - --Chris ------------------------------ End of shindell-list-digest V6 #286 ***********************************