Thursday, August 31, 2006

THE GOOD GERMANS

FOR THOSE WHO ARE STILL AWAKE AND PAYING ATTENTION TO THE EVENTS WHICH WILL AFFECT THEIR FUTURE, TAKE A MOMENT TO CONSIDER THE DEBUT OF THE ADMINISTRATION’S NEW FALL PRODUCT LINE.

BETWEEN NOW AND NOVEMBER, YOU WON’T BE HEARING SUCH TIRED WORDS AS HEALTH CARE, ENVIRONMENT, KATRINA, STEM CELLS, ECONOMY, WORLD OPINION, GAS PRICES, OR DEFICIT.

GET READY FOR THE REBRANDING OF THE ELECTION THEME SONG. THE WORD YOU'LL BE HEARING IS ‘FASCISM’.
FASCISM....24/7, AS THEY SAY.

THERE WILL NOT BE A SPEECH OR ARTICLE EMANATING FROM YOUR ADMINISTRATION WITHOUT THE ‘F’ WORD.
LITTLE KIDS MIGHT EVEN START USING IT ON THE PLAYGROUND.

OUR MUCH BELOVED SECRETARY OF OFFENSE, DONALD ‘HENNY-PENNY’ RUMSFELD PRESIDED OVER THE UNVEILING THIS WEEK.

HE SAID THAT CRITICS OF THE WAR IN IRAQ AND THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST TERROR GROUPS SEEM NOT TO HAVE LEARNED HISTORY’S LESSONS. HE THEN ALLUDED TO THOSE IN THE 1930’s WHO ADVOCATED APPEASING FASCIST NAZI GERMANY.
‘RELEASE THE HOUNDS!’
DICK ‘LAST THROES’ CHENEY GAVE A SIMILAR SPEECH THIS WEEK.
GEORGE 'I READ 3 SHAKESPEARES' BUSH HAS BEEN TRAINED TO WORK IT INTO EVERY AWKWARD SENTENCE.

AND WHEN THE PUBLIC STARTS SLUMPING FROM 'FASCIST' FATIGUE,
‘APPEASING’ WILL BE THE UNDERSTUDY WORD.
IT WILL BE USED AS THE DESIGNATED DRIVER WORD WHICH WILL DRIVE THE MESSAGE HOME.

THE GOOD GERMANS WERE THE ONES WHO MADE THE POST- HORROR CLAIM THAT THEY DIDN’T SUPPORT THEIR WICKED GOVERNMENT AND THAT THEY HAD NO IDEA WHAT WAS REALLY GOING ON.

I THINK THAT RUMMY IS ON TO SOMETHING. IT’S STARTING TO SMELL LIKE THE 1930’s RIGHT HERE IN HOMELAND.
SO, FOR THE GOOD AMERICANS WHO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THIS DECEITFUL, ARROGANT, AND VIOLENT ADMINISTRATION, CONSIDER THIS WORD.

‘ENABLERS’.

37 comments:

Anonymous said...

FYI--- fascism: a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

Anonymous said...

Once again, the spin doctors have found a way to reflect their personal political preference through name calling.
Instead of demonizing democrats as tax and spend liberals they will now be seen as fascist pacifying pansies while the real fascists hide behind their republican/ christian right code.

The next time you see the white house flacks on the tube,remember that fascism wears a smiling face.

Keep Smiling!

Anonymous said...

How can anyone look at that nasty Rumsfeld face and not see a "nazi" or a "facist." Usually one can't tell a book by its cover but Rumsfeld proves the execption to the rule. Has one ever seen a more mean, self righteous, or arrogant face? I certainly haven't.

And the moron Bush. He is soo proud that he read "The Stranger," (although probably with the help of a tutor, Cliff Notes, and the Classic Comic version.) He even got carried away in an interview with Brian Williams, while in New Orleans trying to look concerned and compassioinate, by proudly announcing that he had read "three Shakespeares." There is only one great Shakespeare in literature to my knowledge. Did the moron mean, "three works of Shakespeare?" He was so pleased with himself that he followed that comment up with the observation that his reading tastes are "pretty ecelectic (instead of eclectic). How did this man ever get into Yale? Oh, of course, it must have been with Daddy's help.

Anonymous said...

Wonderful commentary so far... like a bunch of sixth grade yearbook entries...Pathetic.

quicksand said...

YES, BUT THE COMMENTS ARE QUITE ECALECTIC. NO?

SO, WHY DON'T YOU HELP GUIDE THESE FOLKS.
PLEASE, WRITE YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON.

I THINK PEOPLE ARE VERY ANGRY.
ARE YOU PLEASED WITH YOUR LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD?

Anonymous said...

I'm not impressed with what I've been reading here lately. People venting and trying to be cute with their wording. No real debate... mostly people trying to feel good about agreeing with Quicksand. I think a forum such as this could be of much more use. It depends on what you want it to be.

quicksand said...

GOOD FOR YOU!

IT'S PEOPLE LIKE YOURSELF WHO CAN REDIRECT THE DEBATE.

I MEAN THAT SINCERELY.

IT'S GOOD TO POINT OUT WHAT YOU THINK ARE WEAKNESSES IN AN ARGUMENT. PEOPLE CAN ALWAYS ARGUE BACK. IT MAKES US ALL WISER.
THANKS

Anonymous said...

Nothing but sophomoric drivel and whining. Al Gore is Henny-Penny.

Anonymous said...

I didn't vote for Bush. I don't like him because of the war. Rumsfeld is a brilliant man and being degraded by mediocre blogers is childish.
all you blogers together couldn't wipe his ass.

Anonymous said...

Quicksand,

I am truly thankful for your writings. Your rantings are the best campaign ads I can pass along to my Republican friends and co-workers. The more you go on and on like Michael Moore, the more Republicans I can get to vote during the next election.
Many thanks!!!

quicksand said...

LET'S THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU SAID.
RUMSFELD IS BRILLIANT? PERHAPS.
YOU LIKE THE COACH'S WAR?

YOU DON'T LIKE BUSH BECAUSE OF THE WAR BUT YOU ARE A RUMSFELD DEFENDER?

RUMSFELD IS THE ARCHITECT OF THE WAR.

I CAN'T HELP BEING MEDIOCORE.I TRY MY BEST.
I'M SURE YOU MIGHT AGREE THAT, HERE IN OUR COUNTRY, EVEN MEDIOCORE PEOPLE CAN VOICE THEIR OPINIONS. NO?

AS FOR DEGRADING RUMSFELD...DO YOU SUGGEST THAT HE SHOULDN'T BE CRITICIZED?

MAYBE I'M AIDING AND ABETING THE FASCISTS!

I CALL RUMSFELD 'HENNY PENNY' AND I'M CHILDISHLY BEING DEGRADING.
THEN YOU CALL AL GORE THE SAME NAME.

I COULDN'T WIPE HIS ASS?
YOU COMPLAIN ABOUT CHILDISH DEGRADATION?

NOW THAT YOU'VE GOTTEN THAT OUT OF YOUR SYSTEM...HOW ABOUT SOME THOUGHTS AND OPINIONS.

quicksand said...

DEAR MR. REPUBLICAN

WHILE I GENERALLY DISAGREE WITH THE REPUBLICAN PLATFORM, I CAN LIVE WITH A DECENT REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENT.
BUT THIS ADMINISTRATION IS NOT DECENT.
I HOPE I NEVER SAY ANYTHING TO TURN ANYONE INTO A SUPPORTER OF GEORGE BUSH.

Anonymous said...

To anonymous:

O.K. I suspect that your comment suggesting that the postings were like sixth grade year book entries referred at least partially to me. You do have a point. Ad hominum attacks are clearly cheap shots. Yet, sometimes it is hard to resist. Do you dispute that Rumsfeld has a mean face? Or that Bush is much less than a genius? Shouldn't we demand that our president (and the most powerful man in the world) be able to string four consecutive words together to make a coherent sentence? Forgive me if my venting is immature, and mean spirited.

Anonymous said...

Dear Anon,
I am thrilled to know that you find my wording cute... However, I prefer poignant.. Agreeing with Bruce about the war does not make me feel good. The death of my fellow americans at 2600 plus and counting does not make me feel good.War without national committment or political will makes me ill. I love this country but am tired of mypoic ssports distracted countrymen.
A new leader needs to emerge from ..I say Hillary in 08 and Obama in 2012

Until then vote for the democrats,end the war and end the maddness of single party politics.

Anonymous said...

Hillary??? Really???
She was,and I believe still is, a Hawk I think I can count on when it comes to the war and support for Isreal, no matter what she says to appease the Liberal/Anti-war Left...If elected as our prez as you so desire, she'll have to come out swinging like a Hawk on crack cocaine to show the world she won't be weak. Don't doubt it for a second. I won't be voting for her, but I know I can count on her.

Anonymous said...

"Until then vote for the democrats,end the war and end the maddness of single party politics."

Translation: Vote for democrats, retreat, abandon a newly elected government that needs our support, and empower fanatics who already know we are weak because of people like you.

You write that the deaths of 2600 americans makes you ill. How many more americans will die in the future if we don't stay in Iraq and try to leave a government that can defend itself and her citizens? How many more americans will die if radical muslims see that they can blow themselves up and cause us to run with our tail between our legs? Beirut, Somalia, the first attack on the Twin Towers, the embassy bombings in Africa, etc. Each an example of your "concerned for american lives" policy which has empowered radical muslims into thinking they can do what they want without consequences.

quicksand said...

THERE IS NO TEXTBOOK PROCEDURE WE CAN USE TO GET OUT OF THIS IRAQIAN DILEMMA.
THE PEOPLE WHO CAUTIONED AGAINST THE INVASION WERE PAINFULLY CORRECT.WE HAVE DONE MUCH MORE HARM THAN GOOD. I INCLUDE OUR OWN SECURITY IN THAT EQUATION.
WE ARE NOW MIRED IN A LOSE-LOSE SITUATION.
THE BEST WE MIGHT HOPE FOR NOW IS FOR OUR GOVERNMENT TO SPEAK THE TRUTH. UNLIKELY.

Anonymous said...

Quicksand,

You are watching too much network news.

Many provinces of Iraq are not nearly as violent as we are lead to believe by the mainstream media.
I fully acknowledge we are facing extremely challenging circumstances. Read about any military battles this country has been in and you'll discover that we have been in pretty bleak positions before.

Your attitude will get us nowhere.

Anonymous said...

To anonymous:
I love it! You say the quicksand's attitude will get us nowhere? Bush's foriegn policies will get us nowhere.Or maybe more accurately it will get us somwhere, more trouble. He is the one who got us into this war with at best a mistake, at worst a lie about WMD. He was the one who unilaterally launched an attack on a soveriegn nation claiming that they were defying U.N. inspections (at the time we invaded, Saddam was allowing the U.N. inspectors to do their work.) He was the one who at very least allowed and possibly encouraged the perception that somehow Iraq was involved in 9-11. He was the one who even ignored the advice of his father about attacking Iraq. He was the one who squandered the good will of the entire world after 9-11 by attaking Iraq because it was a convenient target, rather than the correct target. He was the one, or at least his administration who suggested that this would be an easy victory with the Iraquis showering us with roses as we victoriously marched through the streets. And don't suggest that I am supporting the likes of Saddam Hussien, a despicable tyrant. We have often put up with, or worse supported despicable tyrants when it was in our interests. So the idea that we did this for humanitarian reasons is clearly ludicrous.

It was clearly a strategic and moral mistake to go into Iraq. Once you believe that the next logical thing to do is admit the mistake and not continue to make the same mistake. When the captain of the Titanic realized he was headed for an iceberg he tried desperately to "cut and run." He didn't "stay the course." Too bad the current administration doesn't have the same common sense, or honesty.

Anonymous said...

I refuse to debate someone who writes,"at the time we invaded, Saddam was allowing the U.N. inspectors to do their work"

Enjoy!!! Bank to ranting without any opposing views. I believe that's what is truly wanted here anyway.

Anonymous said...

I am not sticking up for Rumsfeld, but critize him for the way he ran this unholy and illegal war and not for something meaningless he said like fascist. If you think the democrats are going to do any better you are mistaken. All politicans are dishonest and crooks. Be careful what you wish for, you may just get it. Do you really want that incompetent,lying bitch, Nancy Pelosi two heartbeats away from the presidency. Be afraid,be very afraid. The republicans and democrats have destroyed this country. They can no longer be trusted. I have no idea what the answer is but I know its not John McCain or Hillary Clinton.

Anonymous said...

to anonymous
How convenient that you refuse to address any of my points, because you question the historical accuracy of one parenthetical. Of course you can refuse to debate me. That is your right, but you should know what you are talking about before you closemindedly dismiss my claim. Check the facts. It is true. For a long time Saddam Hussein was playing a game of cat and mouse with the U.N. inspectors. He would let them in, then throw them out. Then he would let them in under very strict guidelines. Then he would dismiss them again and bring them back as long as they gave prior notice as to what and where they were inspecting. Of course the U.S. legitimately assumed at this point that they were getting prior notice in order to hide things before the inspection. At one point Saddam insisted that his presidential palaces were sacrosanct and off limits. However, the inconvenient truth that you choose to ignore (and was only a very small part of my argument)is that at the time that the U.S. had decided to invade Iraq, Saddam was allowing inspectors access to sites. You have fallen prey to Bush's tactic of repeating something often enough in the hope that people will just accept it as true. He repeatedly said that one of the reasons that we must invade Iraq was because Saddam was refusing access to U.N. inspectors. That is only a partial truth. Saddam had kicked U.N. inspectors out on several occassions, but at the time the U.S. had crossed the Iraqui "rubicon" Saddam was cooperating. If you check the facts you will find that I am right. Sorry to see that you fell for the Bush administrations shell game with the truth. But take comfort. You are not alone.I dare say that many U.S. citizens still think that Saddam is the same person as Ossama. I know that you are more astute than that, however.

Anonymous said...

P.S. to anonymous

Why is it that what you have to say is
an "opposing view," while what someone else has to say which you don't like or agree with is a "rant?" Come on! Isn't this venue supposed to be a forum for us to exchange views rather than dismiss other's views as rants?

Anonymous said...

to bens friend

every intelligence agency in the world said he had WMD. All your great Democratic senators and congressmen said he had WMD. At Sadams trial his generals stated they thought he had gas because they wanted to use it on the coalition troops marching on bagdad. Only then did they realize he was lying, but you with your great intelligence knew there were no WMD, yea right. Stop patting yourself on the shoulder. Your a monday morning quaterback like the rest of us, no more, no less. The only person that knew if there were WMD was Sadam himself.

Anonymous said...

UN Report
(There's plenty more if your interested in facts)


Immediately following the Gulf war, the Iraqi Presidency collected reports on weapons remaining with Iraq's Armed Forces after the war, including its weapons prohibited by recently adopted resolution 687(1991). Such documents were provided to the Presidency in the spring of 1991. A decision was taken by a high-level committee (one of whose members was Deputy Prime Minister Mr. Tariq Aziz) to provide to the Commission only a portion of its proscribed weapons, their components and production capabilities and stocks. The policy, as deduced from a range of evidence available to the Commission including the initial false Iraq’s declarations, was based on the following Iraqi actions:
-- provide a portion of their extensive weapon stocks, with an emphasis on those, which were least modern.
-- retain production capability and the "know-how" documentation necessary to revive programmes when possible
-- conceal the full extent of chemical weapons programmes, including its VX project, and retain production equipment and raw materials
-- conceal the number and type of BW and CW warheads for proscribed missiles
-- conceal indigenous long-range missile production, and retain production capabilities, specifically with respect to guidance systems and missile engines
-- conceal the very existence of its offensive biological weapons programme and retain all production capabilities

Anonymous said...

to the political impaler:

Read carefully. Never did I make a claim that I knew before anyone else that there were no weapons of mass destruction. Don't put words in my mouth. I challenge you to show me where I made that claim. I will say that the Bush administration wasn't just caught up in the misconception. They fostered the misconception. They wanted to believe WMD's existed to justify a war that they had already decided on. They "cooked" all the evidence even to a point that they sent a witting or unwitting Colin Powell to address the U.N. with dubious intel.

Anonymous said...

to anonymous

Thanks! Sure I am interested in facts. But you never addressed the issue that you callanged me on, my claim of compliance with U.N. inspections. See my previous comments to political impaler for further thoughts.

Anonymous said...

Was the UN lying???

Anonymous said...

to anonymous:
Please answer my question first!
Why are you avoiding it?

Anonymous said...

to anonymous:
All right! I will respond even though you seem to be avoiding the issue. Your earlier posting stated, "I refuse to debate anyone who says,'Saddam....' " I think that suggested that I was talking through my ass. When I defended myself you insisted on avoiding that issue and bringing up many others to confuse the issue. Producing all sorts of "facts" all of which ignored my claim that U.N. inspectors were operating in Iraq with the consent of Saddam at the time that the U.S. decided to attack. I even conceded that Iraq was deceptive and obstructionist throughout the inspection ordeal. Now you challenge me with the irrelevant question of whether the U.N. was lying. Lying? Lying about what? That they too thought that Iraq had WMD? Perhaps they did. I never disputed that. A large part of the world's perception of this WMD business came from the U.S. which clearly spun the evidence to make it look like these weapons existed to justify starting a war with Iraq. Since you are now putting so much trust in the U.N. why do you so conveniently overlook the fact that the U.N. did not sanction the U.S. war. The Bush administration castigated the U.N. for being cautious and not jumping to conclusions. Now when it is convenient you hold up the U.N. as a justification for our war.

The simple answer to you question is , no I don't think that the U.N. was lying. They were probably simply wrong like others. I do believe that the Bush administration however, cynically used the WMD business to justify Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney's war. Did they lie? I suspect they did. At very least they were very selective and chose evidence which justified a war policy that was already decided.

Did you read the article that Blog 1 reproduced? Very interesting and enlightening.
Good night!

quicksand said...

I HAVEN'T WATCHED NETWORK NEWS IN DECADES.

MOST OF THE WORLD BELIEVED THAT SADDAM HAD WMD. THAT'S WHY THE WORLD CORNERED HIM INTO HAVING
INSPECTORS IN IRAQ.
THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION WAS AFRAID OF INSPECTIONS.
IF WMD WERE FOUND....THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN REMOVED.....NO WAR.

IF NO WEAPONS WERE FOUND....NO WAR.

THE ADMINISTRATION WANTED A WAR.
ALLOWING INSPECTIONS TO CONTINUE WOULD HAVE REMOVED ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR THE WAR.

quicksand said...

FOOTNOTE:

MY FAVORITE ADMENDMENT IS THE FIRST.
I DON'T LIKE CENSORSHIP.
I DON'T WANT TO DELETE MESSAGES HERE.

SO, IT WOULD BE A GOOD PRACTICE FOR ALL OF US TO AVOID INSULTS.
WHILE THERE ARE FACTS, OPINIONS AND PERCEPTIONS ARE REASONABLE ELEMENTS.
ALSO, IF YOU WANT TO PUBLISH A LONG DOCUMENT, PERHAPS YOU MIGHT JUST ENTER THE WEB SITE WHICH WOULD PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE DOCUMENT.

quicksand said...

BECAUSE I THINK THIS ADMINISTRATION IS DOING GRAVE HARM TO OUR COUNTRY, DOES NOT MEAN THAT I'M A FAN OF NANCY OR HILLARY OR THE PRESENT STATE OF THE DEMOCRATS.

THEY ENABLED THIS DESTRUCTIVE ADMINISTRATION. THERE IS A SCARCITY OF CLEAN HANDS IN OUR GOVERNMENT.
I'M ANGRY AT THE DIRTIEST HANDS.
THE BLOODIEST HANDS.

Anonymous said...

Quite an article by James Bamford posted by Blog 1. Certainly puts the war and the Bush administrations handling of the "facts" in perspective. Obviously, nothing was going to stop the Bush admin from pursuing this war; certainly they weren't going to let the truth get in the way.

Anonymous said...

to quicksand
This is not about you and your love for the first amendment anymore. You, Dr. Frankenstien, have created a monster! This is bigger than you...bigger than all of us. We will slash and burn and destroy each other whether you like it or not. I also plan on cutting and pasting all of REMEMBRANCE OF THINGS PAST on my nest posting.

quicksand said...

NO!
NO!
I SHAN'T HEAR OF IT.

I AM MERELY IGOR.

Anonymous said...

[url=http://aluejxfttk.com]KhOXICUiYVt[/url] , ssSfAftKjqHNuZi , http://iluubcb.com