Mix some things up (warning politics)

Well I coudln’t resist, hasn’t been much action in here recenty and
definitely not much deabte, so I thought why not interject a little
something inot the mix. Now respond if you liek or you’re welcome to
completely ignore me, I would. :slight_smile: Instead of writting an elaborate
explaination of my views I figured why not just post a letter I wrote to my
rep, that basically hashes out my whole opinion on ths iraq issue, and we’ll
see where it goes from there------------
Our nation has reached a pivotal moment. It appears that war with Iraq is
imminent. We have a President who feels he can do just about anything, and
we have a congress that is willing to roll over for him at his request.

Today I read the proposed declaration President Bush sent to congress. In it
I read the same claims he has been reiterating for the past month, many of
which have been unsubstantiated. He has yet to provide evidence to the
public that an al-Qaida presence even exists there, along with any intent to
aid terrorist organizations. Also, Bush in his speech to the U.N. bemoaned
Iraq’s refusal to allow the return of inspectors. Iraq has now agreed to
allow inspectors back into Iraq, yet instead of claiming this as a victory
and supporting the immediate return of inspectors, Bush has asked for
authorization to attack anyway. Iraq isn’t being truthful Bush claims, then
why did he call for inspectors, per UN Security Council resolution to return
only a week ago?

We have the opportunity to return inspectors to Iraq. We should not commit
to military action, at the very least, until their return is meet with
resistance. Furthermore, the United States has never formally initiated a
military action without provocation, we should not do so now. We are
inviting more pain upon ourselves with the likely increase of terrorist
attacks on our country, and the deaths of our US servicemen. This is not
even mentioning what would happen if a broader conflict broke out in the
Middle East. Those who were in Vietnam have warned publicly that action here
could create a similar situation, one which is not so easily resolved. But
the majority of representatives prefer to listen to saber rattling, war
mongers like Donald Rumsfeld.

As a young American, I fear the day when we are committed to an unjust war
where I am forced to take up arms regardless of my personal beliefs. We
should not be in the business of regime change. It was unsuccessful and
wrong in Latin America, and we have yet to see how successful we will be in
Afghanistan. We are not world dictators, or at least we shouldn’t be.

I would hope that politicians from both sides of the aisle would see through
Bush’s remarks and allow reason to dictate their actions, and not allow a
President to play with powerful “toys,” as he seems to think our armed
forces are. Few in congress, Democrats and Republicans, have been willing to
stand up to Bush and tell him he is wrong and we will not roll over for you.
Some have lightly tapped him on the shoulder, but its time for a rhetorical
punch. Americans have only heard what Bush has to say its time they hear the
other side. It is not unpatriotic to disagree, it is however to remain
silent.

I urge you to be that voice, to stand up for what’s right and American, and
to lead your party away from complacency. I plead with you to stop this
lunacy that makes me shudder every day I open the paper. We should be
building bridges in a world torn after September 11th, but instead we’re
saying “with us or without us.” The cycle of war will only continue.


Brian Wilmot

http://www.jumpnow.net/
http://www.uglybillboards.com/
http://www.jumptraveler.com/

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

“Brian Wilmot” <bwilmot@jumpnow.net> wrote in message
news:anib5k$vuh$1@www.t-shirtcountdown.com
> Some have lightly tapped him on the shoulder, but its time for a
rhetorical
> punch. Americans have only heard what Bush has to say its time they hear
the
> other side. It is not unpatriotic to disagree, it is however to remain
> silent.

what is a rhetorical punch?


Rodney Blackwell - site owner/administrator

http://T-ShirtCountdown.com http://RateMyTee.com/
http://ihateclowns.com/ http://Globie.com/
http://DomainJunkies.com/ http://5R5.NET
http://GotPaintball.com/ http://CircleRPrinting.com

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

“Brian Wilmot” <bwilmot@jumpnow.net> wrote in message
news:anib5k$vuh$1@www.t-shirtcountdown.com
> Well I coudln’t resist, hasn’t been much action in here recenty and
> definitely not much deabte, so I thought why not interject a little
> something inot the mix. Now respond if you liek or you’re welcome to
> completely ignore me, I would. :slight_smile: Instead of writting an elaborate
> explaination of my views I figured why not just post a letter I wrote to
my
> rep, that basically hashes out my whole opinion on ths iraq issue, and
we’ll
> see where it goes from there------------

My point of view is slightly different.

The government supposedly has information on Iraq as being “gravely
dangerous” that none of us are permitted to access. Yet they expect us to
approve action based on what their interpretation as relayed through means
of mass information of that threat is. I don’t trust media “experts” because
I’ve seen how naively wrong they are when they analyze fields that are my
area of expertise. It appears that they are doing it on purpose. The Midwest
has elected this President, not the coastal states. They believe the media.
They will authorize the strike by their sheer population numbers, while we
will try to stop it but fail. Current polls indicate that only 20% agree
with the President on the necessity of this war here in California.

I personally don’t see the threat of Iraq. Show me the documents that
convinced the Congress and our allies. But that’s right, I don’t need to
know. I am supposed to be drenched in filtered information that is so
watered down that I don’t need to take a shower. When our people are asked
to kill people for some reason, they don’t need to know that reason either.

I have long ago correlated the current Iraq situation with what little I
know about the Vietnam situation. It’s obvious that U.S. doesn’t like
dictatorships and is looking for every excuse to “liberate” Iraq of its
despot. Iraq has equal access to pull our media reports right off our
satellites and from the web. I can only imagine what Saddam was thinking
when we were saying “there is no way he will agree to such terms” and
actively plotted open aggression against a sovereign country. He allowed
such access, although it’s commonly known that it takes under 6 hours to
hide any trace of secrets before any inspection. He probably thought “I’ll
let them in, and they won’t have any excuse to attack me”.

For the record, I am a U.S. citizen (today is my 8th anniversary of entering
the U.S. on 10/3/1994) and I have consistently made the necessary calls and
sent the necessary faxes to make my concerns known to my senators and
congresspeople. Have you done the same?

Leonid

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

I’m not sure where I stand on Iraq. I do believe he has helped
Al-Queda, seeing as it would only match his past activities - you have
to remember that Saddam became good friends with Aideed in Mogadishu
(Somalia) in the early 90’s (before the whole Black Hawk Down thing),
and we now know that Al-Queda defintely played a role in that. I’ve
also read a lot of other stuff that makes the link fairly obvious.

As for UN inspections, they’re a joke. 4 years is more than enough time
to hide just about anything you want, so what’s the point of inspecting
the facilities we know about (given that there could be tons of them
hidden from us)?

I dislike Bush as much as anyone, but I’m not about to jump on any
bandwagon (for or against) until I have enough information to make an
accurate assessment of the situation. I see enough of that sort of
thing taking place on the Berkeley campus everyday and I’m not about to
join the parade. Do I think we should attack…? I really don’t know,
but I do know that most of us don’t have enough information to make that
decision.

You should also keep in mind that you’re judging a lot of politicians,
etc. who have had access to far more information relevant to the topic,
so be careful before you jump to any conclusions. A lot of them
probably hate Bush 100 times as much as you do, but perhaps they see a
reason to attack.

Furthermore, statements such as “We are not world dictators, or at least
we shouldn’t be” are simply vague rhetoric that is just as bad as the
other side’s rhetoric. It’s about taking an interest in the wellfare of
your people - so let’s not go there.

Brian Wilmot wrote:
>
> Well I coudln’t resist, hasn’t been much action in here recenty and
> definitely not much deabte, so I thought why not interject a little
> something inot the mix. Now respond if you liek or you’re welcome to
> completely ignore me, I would. :slight_smile: Instead of writting an elaborate
> explaination of my views I figured why not just post a letter I wrote to my
> rep, that basically hashes out my whole opinion on ths iraq issue, and we’ll
> see where it goes from there------------
> Our nation has reached a pivotal moment. It appears that war with Iraq is
> imminent. We have a President who feels he can do just about anything, and
> we have a congress that is willing to roll over for him at his request.
>
> Today I read the proposed declaration President Bush sent to congress. In it
> I read the same claims he has been reiterating for the past month, many of
> which have been unsubstantiated. He has yet to provide evidence to the
> public that an al-Qaida presence even exists there, along with any intent to
> aid terrorist organizations. Also, Bush in his speech to the U.N. bemoaned
> Iraq’s refusal to allow the return of inspectors. Iraq has now agreed to
> allow inspectors back into Iraq, yet instead of claiming this as a victory
> and supporting the immediate return of inspectors, Bush has asked for
> authorization to attack anyway. Iraq isn’t being truthful Bush claims, then
> why did he call for inspectors, per UN Security Council resolution to return
> only a week ago?
>
> We have the opportunity to return inspectors to Iraq. We should not commit
> to military action, at the very least, until their return is meet with
> resistance. Furthermore, the United States has never formally initiated a
> military action without provocation, we should not do so now. We are
> inviting more pain upon ourselves with the likely increase of terrorist
> attacks on our country, and the deaths of our US servicemen. This is not
> even mentioning what would happen if a broader conflict broke out in the
> Middle East. Those who were in Vietnam have warned publicly that action here
> could create a similar situation, one which is not so easily resolved. But
> the majority of representatives prefer to listen to saber rattling, war
> mongers like Donald Rumsfeld.
>
> As a young American, I fear the day when we are committed to an unjust war
> where I am forced to take up arms regardless of my personal beliefs. We
> should not be in the business of regime change. It was unsuccessful and
> wrong in Latin America, and we have yet to see how successful we will be in
> Afghanistan. We are not world dictators, or at least we shouldn’t be.
>
> I would hope that politicians from both sides of the aisle would see through
> Bush’s remarks and allow reason to dictate their actions, and not allow a
> President to play with powerful “toys,” as he seems to think our armed
> forces are. Few in congress, Democrats and Republicans, have been willing to
> stand up to Bush and tell him he is wrong and we will not roll over for you.
> Some have lightly tapped him on the shoulder, but its time for a rhetorical
> punch. Americans have only heard what Bush has to say its time they hear the
> other side. It is not unpatriotic to disagree, it is however to remain
> silent.
>
> I urge you to be that voice, to stand up for what’s right and American, and
> to lead your party away from complacency. I plead with you to stop this
> lunacy that makes me shudder every day I open the paper. We should be
> building bridges in a world torn after September 11th, but instead we’re
> saying “with us or without us.” The cycle of war will only continue.
>
> –
> Brian Wilmot
> ----------------------------------------
> http://www.jumpnow.net/
> http://www.uglybillboards.com/
> http://www.jumptraveler.com/


Jay Tierney – jay@jaytierney.com

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

Though I disagree with much of what you say, I am impressed with the
quality of your writing. Well-reasoned debate is absolutely necessary
(and often lacking) in political discourse. Thank you for your interest
in and passion for your country.

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

Though I disagree with much of what you say, I am impressed with the
quality of your writing. Well-reasoned debate is absolutely necessary
(and often lacking) in political discourse. Thank you for your interest
in and passion for your country.

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

I agree with some of the points you make, but there is one I tend to
disagree about. I believe that although it would be great for me
personally to know everything the government knows, that’s not
necessarily a good idea. In this circumstance they aren’t telling us
everything because we don’t want Saddam to know all that we know. They
aren’t being secretive to “protect us from knowledge,” but instead to
not reveal their hand to the enemy- a logical tactic.

Leonid S. Knyshov wrote:
> I personally don’t see the threat of Iraq. Show me the documents that
> convinced the Congress and our allies. But that’s right, I don’t need to
> know. I am supposed to be drenched in filtered information that is so
> watered down that I don’t need to take a shower. When our people are asked
> to kill people for some reason, they don’t need to know that reason either.

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

> what is a rhetorical punch?

Basically a strong statement of disgust with the manner in which Bush and
his advisors are handling the situation.


Brian Wilmot

http://www.jumpnow.net/
http://www.uglybillboards.com/
http://www.jumptraveler.com/

“Rodney Blackwell” <rodney@webdiscuss.com> wrote in message
news:anic3d$eo6$1@www.darklock.com

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

But considering the secrecy with which this administration likes to play
games, Cheney’s energy conferences, it truly makes me wonder what is really
going on. The rhetoric is also a little worrisome. The fact that any time
talk about terrorism, or iraq dies down, “new shocking” information
surfaces. It may jjust be a coincidence, but I get the impression they are
withholding information and using it whenever its politically most effective
for them. That in turn causese me to distrust them. If they knew information
why did Powell dissappear also??? They guys with the most experiencee
during the 1st gulf war are being restrained.


Brian Wilmot

http://www.jumpnow.net/
http://www.uglybillboards.com/
http://www.jumptraveler.com/

“ted” <ted@freemathhelp.com> wrote in message
news:anihcv$d2p$1@www.t-shirtcountdown.com
> I agree with some of the points you make, but there is one I tend to
> disagree about. I believe that although it would be great for me
> personally to know everything the government knows, that’s not
> necessarily a good idea. In this circumstance they aren’t telling us
> everything because we don’t want Saddam to know all that we know. They
> aren’t being secretive to “protect us from knowledge,” but instead to
> not reveal their hand to the enemy- a logical tactic.
>
> Leonid S. Knyshov wrote:
> > I personally don’t see the threat of Iraq. Show me the documents that
> > convinced the Congress and our allies. But that’s right, I don’t need to
> > know. I am supposed to be drenched in filtered information that is so
> > watered down that I don’t need to take a shower. When our people are
asked
> > to kill people for some reason, they don’t need to know that reason
either.
>

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

I make vague statements because I’m being given vague information by the
government. Have you lstned to any of the Senate and House commitees lately.
They don’t ask tough questions, they toss easy ones at Rumsfeld, Rice, …
None are shoing a willingness to stand up to anything. And looking at the
dems. I am a dem. On issues they used to be strong on, tax cuts, yada, they
don’t seem to care about anymore. Bush has gotten more done int he last year
with a dem. contorlled xsenate than a lot of guys have, yet they allow Bush
to contorl both the rhetoric and the agenda. They are afraid to disagree, or
at leas that is the impression I get. Why is gephardt holding hands with
Bush? Cause it might win him more votes with Moderates? They have lost any
interest in sticking their necks out and in times liek this, where our
freedoms, tha patriot act, are being limited and infringed upon, they are
rolling over unwilling to risk it.


Brian Wilmot

http://www.jumpnow.net/
http://www.uglybillboards.com/
http://www.jumptraveler.com/

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

“Brian Wilmot” <bwilmot@jumpnow.net> wrote in message
news:aniibc$esq$1@www.t-shirtcountdown.com
>
> > what is a rhetorical punch?
>
>
> Basically a strong statement of disgust with the manner in which Bush and
> his advisors are handling the situation.

Is that an actual phrase, or did you make that up?

I always thought rhetorical meant something that wasn’t meant to be
answered.

Dictionary.com says http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=rhetorical&r=67

rhe·tor·i·cal Pronunciation Key (r-tôr-kl, -tr-)
adj.
Of or relating to rhetoric.
Characterized by overelaborate or bombastic rhetoric.
Used for persuasive effect: a speech punctuated by rhetorical pauses

Are you sure that was the word you were looking for?

Rodney Blackwell - site owner/administrator

http://T-ShirtCountdown.com http://RateMyTee.com/
http://ihateclowns.com/ http://Globie.com/
http://DomainJunkies.com/ http://5R5.NET
http://GotPaintball.com/ http://CircleRPrinting.com

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

Thanks, I hate it when people say shut up your unpatiotic, or you are wrong
and I’m right. talk is good. even if I dissagree with you, I want ot hear
you tel me your point fo view, and have a discussion about why we each think
the way they due. That way we can at least understand each other while
hating each other :slight_smile:

Isn’t a lack of understanding, ignorance, blind allegience what causes
terrorism and hatred?


Brian Wilmot

http://www.jumpnow.net/
http://www.uglybillboards.com/
http://www.jumptraveler.com/

“Ned Wolfenbarger” <nwolfenbarger@las.yesco.com> wrote in message
news:Xns929C956B0BAB0nwolfenbargerlasyesc@64.23.60.23
> Though I disagree with much of what you say, I am impressed with the
> quality of your writing. Well-reasoned debate is absolutely necessary
> (and often lacking) in political discourse. Thank you for your interest
> in and passion for your country.

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

yeah thats what I was looking for. Rhetoric is also “The art of effective or
persuasive speech or writting.” Basically the art of human communication.


Brian Wilmot

http://www.jumpnow.net/
http://www.uglybillboards.com/
http://www.jumptraveler.com/

“Rodney Blackwell” <rodney@webdiscuss.com> wrote in message
news:anii5p$l3k$1@www.darklock.com
> “Brian Wilmot” <bwilmot@jumpnow.net> wrote in message
> news:aniibc$esq$1@www.t-shirtcountdown.com
> >[color=darkred]
> > > what is a rhetorical punch?
> >
> >
> > Basically a strong statement of disgust with the manner in which Bush[/color]
and
> > his advisors are handling the situation.
>
> Is that an actual phrase, or did you make that up?
>
> I always thought rhetorical meant something that wasn’t meant to be
> answered.
>
> Dictionary.com says http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=rhetorical&r=67
>
> rhe·tor·i·cal Pronunciation Key (r-tôr-kl, -tr-)
> adj.
> Of or relating to rhetoric.
> Characterized by overelaborate or bombastic rhetoric.
> Used for persuasive effect: a speech punctuated by rhetorical pauses
>
> Are you sure that was the word you were looking for?
> –
> Rodney Blackwell - site owner/administrator
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> http://T-ShirtCountdown.com http://RateMyTee.com/
> http://ihateclowns.com/ http://Globie.com/
> http://DomainJunkies.com/ http://5R5.NET
> http://GotPaintball.com/ http://CircleRPrinting.com
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

“Brian Wilmot” <bwilmot@jumpnow.net> wrote in message
news:anij4e$gb3$1@www.t-shirtcountdown.com
> yeah thats what I was looking for. Rhetoric is also “The art of effective
or
> persuasive speech or writting.” Basically the art of human communication.
>

Interesting…that’s my new word of the day :slight_smile:

I really need to read more…

Rodney Blackwell - site owner/administrator

http://T-ShirtCountdown.com http://RateMyTee.com/
http://ihateclowns.com/ http://Globie.com/
http://DomainJunkies.com/ http://5R5.NET
http://GotPaintball.com/ http://CircleRPrinting.com

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

There are a lot of college programs dealing strictly with rhetoric, though
somewhat tied to theater. They often include logical reasoning, argument
analysis type stuff. Basically Debate realted things. Its pretty cool stuff.


Brian Wilmot

http://www.jumpnow.net/
http://www.uglybillboards.com/
http://www.jumptraveler.com/

“Rodney Blackwell” <rodney@webdiscuss.com> wrote in message
news:aniimi$lmf$1@www.darklock.com
> “Brian Wilmot” <bwilmot@jumpnow.net> wrote in message
> news:anij4e$gb3$1@www.t-shirtcountdown.com
> > yeah thats what I was looking for. Rhetoric is also “The art of
effective
> or
> > persuasive speech or writting.” Basically the art of human
communication.
> >
>
> Interesting…that’s my new word of the day :slight_smile:
>
> I really need to read more…
> –
> Rodney Blackwell - site owner/administrator
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> http://T-ShirtCountdown.com http://RateMyTee.com/
> http://ihateclowns.com/ http://Globie.com/
> http://DomainJunkies.com/ http://5R5.NET
> http://GotPaintball.com/ http://CircleRPrinting.com
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

Just curious, what are your views, Ned?

-Mike K.

Ned Wolfenbarger wrote:
>
> Though I disagree with much of what you say, I am impressed with the
> quality of your writing. Well-reasoned debate is absolutely necessary
> (and often lacking) in political discourse. Thank you for your interest
> in and passion for your country.

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

In the end, I do believe Bush and Cheney care about the American people
and I don’t think they’re starting this war for the sake of polishing
their laurels. Keep in mind that Tony Blair is supporting them and
wouldn’t have any ulterior motives (I can think of) along the same
lines.

People are forgetting the fact that Saddam DID invade another country a
decade ago, so why we would suddenly hesitate to put something past him,
I don’t know.

Brian Wilmot wrote:
>
> But considering the secrecy with which this administration likes to play
> games, Cheney’s energy conferences, it truly makes me wonder what is really
> going on. The rhetoric is also a little worrisome. The fact that any time
> talk about terrorism, or iraq dies down, “new shocking” information
> surfaces. It may jjust be a coincidence, but I get the impression they are
> withholding information and using it whenever its politically most effective
> for them. That in turn causese me to distrust them. If they knew information
> why did Powell dissappear also??? They guys with the most experiencee
> during the 1st gulf war are being restrained.
>
> –
> Brian Wilmot
> ----------------------------------------
> http://www.jumpnow.net/
> http://www.uglybillboards.com/
> http://www.jumptraveler.com/
>
> “ted” <ted@freemathhelp.com> wrote in message
> news:anihcv$d2p$1@www.t-shirtcountdown.com
> > I agree with some of the points you make, but there is one I tend to
> > disagree about. I believe that although it would be great for me
> > personally to know everything the government knows, that’s not
> > necessarily a good idea. In this circumstance they aren’t telling us
> > everything because we don’t want Saddam to know all that we know. They
> > aren’t being secretive to “protect us from knowledge,” but instead to
> > not reveal their hand to the enemy- a logical tactic.
> >
> > Leonid S. Knyshov wrote:[color=darkred]
> > > I personally don’t see the threat of Iraq. Show me the documents that
> > > convinced the Congress and our allies. But that’s right, I don’t need to
> > > know. I am supposed to be drenched in filtered information that is so
> > > watered down that I don’t need to take a shower. When our people are
> asked
> > > to kill people for some reason, they don’t need to know that reason
> either.
> >[/color]


Jay Tierney – jay@jaytierney.com

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

Not announcing specific information is probably a good idea. People
suspect that this evidence doesn’t exist just because they aren’t
sharing it. But did you ever consider that by doing so they could
potentially blow an agent’s cover or expose other intelligence tactics?

Brian Wilmot wrote:
>
> I make vague statements because I’m being given vague information by the
> government.


Jay Tierney – jay@jaytierney.com

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

You can only take that theory so far. The United States is transparent
enough as it is… frankly, I’m GLAD their not sharing everything for
once.

Brian Wilmot wrote:
>
> Isn’t a lack of understanding, ignorance, blind allegience what causes
> terrorism and hatred?


Jay Tierney – jay@jaytierney.com

Re: Mix some things up (warning politics)

I also beleive that Cheney honestly beleives this is the right thing to do,
I disagree, as do many others with just as much if not more experience with
it than him.

Bush I think truly is an idiot, I know this comes off as rash and people may
find it inappopriate, but any one who has trouble constructing coherent
sentances does not deserve to be president. He is HANDLED masterfully by his
advisors. He has made america a joke because he is a joke. SO no I don’t
trust him to make any decision for anyone.

And on a related note, if there really was such strong evidence of Saddam
having nukes, bio weapons etc. we would have acted already. We wouldn’t have
waited around. Teh admin. has admited they want regime change, we tried that
in South America, and Guatamala is doing just great. We suppsoedly had our
heads on straight there.

Brian Wilmot

“Jay Tierney” <jay@jaytierney.com> wrote in message
news:3D9CF0C1.3A25C791@jaytierney.com
> In the end, I do believe Bush and Cheney care about the American people
> and I don’t think they’re starting this war for the sake of polishing
> their laurels. Keep in mind that Tony Blair is supporting them and
> wouldn’t have any ulterior motives (I can think of) along the same
> lines.
>
> People are forgetting the fact that Saddam DID invade another country a
> decade ago, so why we would suddenly hesitate to put something past him,
> I don’t know.
>
> Brian Wilmot wrote:
> >
> > But considering the secrecy with which this administration likes to play
> > games, Cheney’s energy conferences, it truly makes me wonder what is
really
> > going on. The rhetoric is also a little worrisome. The fact that any
time
> > talk about terrorism, or iraq dies down, “new shocking” information
> > surfaces. It may jjust be a coincidence, but I get the impression they
are
> > withholding information and using it whenever its politically most
effective
> > for them. That in turn causese me to distrust them. If they knew
information
> > why did Powell dissappear also??? They guys with the most experiencee
> > during the 1st gulf war are being restrained.
> >
> > –
> > Brian Wilmot
> > ----------------------------------------
> > http://www.jumpnow.net/
> > http://www.uglybillboards.com/
> > http://www.jumptraveler.com/
> >
> > “ted” <ted@freemathhelp.com> wrote in message
> > news:anihcv$d2p$1@www.t-shirtcountdown.com…[color=darkred]
> > > I agree with some of the points you make, but there is one I tend to
> > > disagree about. I believe that although it would be great for me
> > > personally to know everything the government knows, that’s not
> > > necessarily a good idea. In this circumstance they aren’t telling us
> > > everything because we don’t want Saddam to know all that we know. They
> > > aren’t being secretive to “protect us from knowledge,” but instead to
> > > not reveal their hand to the enemy- a logical tactic.
> > >
> > > Leonid S. Knyshov wrote:
> > > > I personally don’t see the threat of Iraq. Show me the documents[/color]
that[color=darkred]
> > > > convinced the Congress and our allies. But that’s right, I don’t[/color]
need to[color=darkred]
> > > > know. I am supposed to be drenched in filtered information that is[/color]
so[color=darkred]
> > > > watered down that I don’t need to take a shower. When our people are
> > asked
> > > > to kill people for some reason, they don’t need to know that reason
> > either.
> > >
>
> –
> Jay Tierney – jay@jaytierney.com[/color]