posted November 20, 2003 03:00 PM            

For all that it is worth Jwhop,I'm a believer to "every action,there's a reaction",the events that has happened in the past resent years,is an echoing of the events that has happened in the past hundred years and this war that we're involved in,is just a rewrite into the servitude that we as a free people are bound by,if this ends up being another failure,it will be US that will be paying the FULL price,along with the blame attached that will be labeled onto us for TOO many years to come and we WILL lose all trust from our friends and family of political world and be avoided by future possible friends that we might have and be nothing more then used as an example to our foes that freedom and liberty doesn't work!

You got to remember Jwhop,their are people just like you and I that will argue up and down about the events of today,but tomorrow,their will be people like you and I that will argue as well about yesterday. And they will talk about us and ask "Why didn't they do anything when had they had chance?Why did all this come about?" You know we live in a country where everything changes all the time and sometimes the Just end up not getting a fair shake for they're efforts and that their are people out their that don't deserve anything,but a kick in the teeth,but that day never comes,so we rely on those that we think that can serve to our request and see to it that all is fair,but that doesn't always work out that way and end up being blinded by the this and the that and everything just gets so f*cked up,what's worse is that we end up prone to argue about things that just don't make any difference,because it's only gonna happen anyway,whether we like it or not! And yet,we'll still argue.

I have an opinion though and so do you and we live in a country that we can exercise that rite. We don't want to ever lose that. The last post you put up are nothing more then broad general statements of the opinions of journalists that are for the most part "Die-hard Republicans",but even the members of his(Bush)own party are questioning his authority. I look at what you posted and I can only tell you that what's been writen is TRUE,TOO TRUE! I see alot of double-talk here and their's just too many holes in it. If you look at what you posted you would see. Like for instance...

You wrote:But, the magazine writes, no matter what anyone thinks of Bush, good or bad, Bush has been a "'crisis president,' forced to deal with a series of traumatic events and to make decisions more difficult than those faced by his recent predecessors. "Forged in the crucible of a recession he inherited, terrorist strikes the likes of which had never before been seen in the U.S., and two wars in response to those events/threats against America, the magazine says "Bush has gone much further than nearly anyone expected."Bush took control after 9/11 and "united the nation, and sounded all the right notes. ... His natural instinct is to find a mission and drive inexorably to accomplish it.

What is he accomplishing? So far all I've seen is a man that is so naive he can fix something that isn't broken. That he can get the job gone when nobody in the world even knows what job he's talking about,none the less whether or not ANYTHING has even gotten done.If anything's gonna get done,that would be setting this country and it's allies backwards and yet he will be the only one smelling like a rose. Afghanistan seems like some made-up story that is being worked out by good journalists(as they go along) and who knows exactly what the truth is,do you? How do YOU know?

To be "audacious" is only where their is BIG money to be made. Tell me something Jwhop,what exactly is an "evildoer",is it a leader of a country that blightly walks into any given country that he or she doesn't like and points at everything but his or her own heart and names it "an axis of evil" only to rouse that country into preparation war and that leader's country become an international threat to they're society? Or is a group that sends out an army of a country whether it be a threat or not serving to thoughs that set all bets against them(knowing that they will lose)and watch innocent civilians and the solders be killed in action of a country that still to this day has NOT proven to be any threat and the families that suffered from the loss only recieve a flag,a yellow slip and a apology in return,over a "dead weight mission"?

I mean give and take,maybe your for Bush,because your governor is his brother. Tom Ridge was MY governor for the little time that he spent in Harrisberg and didn't do anything(comparison to the late Robert P. Casey) and then took no time to jump on the Washington trail to "brown-nose" George W. Bush to taking on a task(vital for it's time)and only proven to be time and time again 1. a flop 2. an international embarrassment for our enimies to see that this Super-power is presumably weak.

All in all,you feel that I don't have a clue,but the truth is,I really don't know what your looking for other then the last word. I have my opinions and I have my reasons to feel the way I feel. All the things that I have posted are findings that I didn't really didn't have to look for,believe me, it wasn't too hard to find them!

If you can find some RESULTS into this presidency other then looking for the flaws in another president's personal life,then I would/wouldn't be satisfied,but one things for certain,George W. Bush will never,ever be another FDR!

NOTE: I wrote this up before,but I got bumped off-line,so I had to rewrite it again. I dunno,maybe George W. Bush got to read this and didn't like what he saw.

posted November 25, 2003 10:37 AM            

Aye an' a bit of Mackeral settler rack and ruin
ran it doon by the haim, 'ma place
well I slapped me and I slapped it doon in the side
and I cried, cried, cried.

The fear a fallen down taken never back the raize and then Craig Marion,
get out wi' ye Claymore out mi pocket a' ran doon, doon the middin stain
picking the fiery horde that was fallen around ma feet.
Never he cried, never shall it ye get me alive
ye rotten hound of the burnie crew. Well I snatched fer the blade O my
Claymore cut and thrust and I fell doon before him round his feet.

Aye! A roar he cried frae the bottom of his heart that I would nay fall
but as dead, dead as 'a can be by his feet; de ya ken?

...and the wind cried Mary.

[In English] Thank you.

-Waters

posted November 26, 2003 12:04 AM            

quote:

---

This man has been president for almost three years and has done nothing, but for his family, his friends and himself.

---

Is this some of the nothing you say the President has done for the "almost" 3 years he's been President"----except, as you say for his family, friends and himself?

Antonio Williams Wednesday,
Nov. 26, 2003

America is a promise, a promise that hard work and sacrifice will be rewarded in the end. No one should hold this promise higher than our government, and no one deserves more than those who've donned the uniform of the United States military.

While we went to work and slept peaceably in our beds, they freed Europe, conquered communism, and brought justice to the unjust. Through two World Wars, Vietnam, Korea, the Cold War, and today in the war in terror, our military fought for liberty and delivered the promise of freedom.

But those who have sacrifice the most, military retirees injured in the line of duty, have been denied full pay by the century-old legislation of concurrent receipt.

Concurrent receipt prohibits disabled military retirees from receiving the full amount of their retirement pay while still receiving the full amount of their full disability compensation. In turn it forces our nation's greatest heroes to pay for their own disability.

These are two pays for two different earned entitlements: longevity of service and service-connected disabilities. This is wrong; these are two different earned entitlements, and we owe it to our veterans to ensure they receive both.

Looking to right a century of wrong, President Bush and a Republican-led Congress rolled back concurrent receipt, providing thousands of military retirees with the retirement and benefits they earned.
It was a historic opportunity, and President Bush and Congress showed their commitment to our nation's military by moving forward on an issue that no Congress, Republican or Democrat, had taken on in more than a century.

What They Say and What They Didn't Do

Unfortunately this monumental occasion was overshadowed by the political opportunism of the Democratic Party. As veterans celebrated the first movement on this issue in more than a century, Democrats railed against the bill, calling it divisive and accusing President Bush of back-pedaling on his promise to our men and women in uniform.

Such political opportunism saddens and dismays me. This isn’t about getting more votes, or cozying up to the military before an election year. It’s about doing what’s right, and that’s what President Bush and our Congress did.

But things are different in Washington, D.C., this is an election year, and Democrats want to distract from real issues and talk about what Bush failed to do. So if this is all about political opportunism, let's set the record straight.

In more than a decade of a Democrat-controlled House and eight years of a Democrat presidency, there was no legislation on concurrent receipt, our military shrunk by more than 500,000 personnel and $50 billion, military pay sagged behind that of the private sector, and the Department of Veterans Affairs became better known for what it couldn’t and didn’t do than for what it did.

In just six years of Republican control,
funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs increased every year for the past five years, and this year VA received the largest budget increase in its history, military pay was raised for the fifth straight year narrowing the gap between military and civilian pay, and the issue of concurrent receipt was tackled, giving thousands of seriously disabled veterans both their pension and their retirement pay.

Ladies and gentlemen, the record is clear. When it comes to our men and women in uniform President Bush and this Congress have delivered on America’s promise and will continue to do so.

posted November 26, 2003 12:17 AM            

Wednesday, Nov. 26, 2003
WASHINGTON – The economy in the third quarter galloped ahead faster than an initial estimate, which was already the swiftest in nearly two decades.
That burst, along with a surge in consumer confidence, raised hopes for the recovery's staying power.

The broadest measure of the economy's performance, gross domestic product, increased at a 8.2 percent annual rate in the July-to-September quarter, even better than the 7.2 percent rate estimated a month ago, the Commerce Department said Tuesday.

The new GDP reading, embraced by President Bush as proof of the effectiveness of his administration's economic policies, represents the strongest growth since the first quarter of 1984, when the economy surged at a 9 percent pace. The new estimate is more than double the 3.3 percent rate in the second quarter.

"I think the economy is back," declared an optimistic Mark Zandi, chief economist at Economy.com. "It has evolved from a very fragile recovery to a sustainable rebound."

In other economic news, consumers' confidence in the economy climbed in November to the highest level in more than a year as people perceived the job market to be turning around, Conference Board reported. The private research group's consumer confidence index rose to 91.7 in November, up from a revised 81.7 in October.

"The surge in consumer confidence couldn't come at a better time," said Joel Naroff, president of Naroff Economic Advisors. "Households are becoming more confident about the labor markets and the future in general, and that bodes well for this crucial holiday shopping season."

On Wall Street, the Dow Jones industrial average gained 16.15 points to close at 9,763.94.

Some analysts believe the economy is growing at a slower but still healthy rate of about 4 percent in the current October-to-December period, as some of the stimulus that helped in the third quarter - President Bush's third round of tax cuts and a wave of mortgage refinancing - fades.

Sales of previously owned homes fell by 4.9 percent in October to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 6.35 million, National Association of Realtors said. But even with the decline, October's sales marked the third best month on record and were on track to set an all-time high for 2003.

The main factors behind the upward revision to third-quarter GDP were stronger investment by business on new equipment and software, less severe cuts in companies' inventories and more brisk spending on residential projects. GDP measures the value of all goods and services produced within the United States.

'Investing for the Future'

"The economy is regaining the confidence of businesses, and they are stepping up to the plate and spending and investing for the future," said economist Ken Mayland, president of ClearView Economics.

posted December 02, 2003 12:17 PM            

I've always been partial to Texas ladies, especially those with some Scotch in them. How do you feel about Chavis Regal?

Afraid the debate has to be canceled. Time and events have caught up with the anti Bush arguments.

jwhop

posted December 02, 2003 04:53 PM            

jwhop

posted December 03, 2003 12:20 AM            

I'll stand by my statement that time and events have caught up with the anti Bush arguments, arguments that have proven to be mostly politically motivated and can't stand the test of objective scrutiny.

So, you don't like the President or his policies. That's fine, I value dissent and the right to dissent against government policies. I object to the outright lies spread by his political enemies and the incessant personal attacks.

posted December 03, 2003 11:46 AM            

quote:

---

I value dissent and the right to dissent against government policies.

---

I'm always happy to see when we agree on things, jwhop.

I was just curious about what you thought about how the city of Miami used the $8.5 million that G.W. so generously allotted for the squashing of the people's right to free assembly during the FTAA meetings?

posted December 03, 2003 03:04 PM              

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1203-02.htm

sweet harp, write to me at moonmaster@easyriders.com, I have something to share with you...

posted December 03, 2003 03:49 PM            

quote:

---

I was just curious about what you thought about how the city of Miami used the $8.5 million that G.W. so generously allotted for the squashing of the people's right to free assembly during the FTAA meetings?

---

Since all spending bills originate in the House of Representatives, without exception, I searched for a House Bill with the avowed purpose of denying the rights of the people to peacefully assemble and petition their government for redress of grievances tied to an appropriation to the state, county and city police departments.

Didn't find a thing. Since you mentioned a specific amount of money, $8.5 million, how about pointing me in the right direction to the House Bill and Senate Bill numbers that were designed to quash protester rights. Are you sure the President allocated money to deny citizens their rights to protest government policy?

Hey Harpyr, were those barricades the protesters erected in the streets of Miami? Were those fires I saw in some pictures set by the protesters in Miami? I didn't know those activities were part of the permitted activities covered by the permits issued by the city.

jwhop

posted December 03, 2003 04:18 PM            

Was starting fires in the streets a permitted activity?

Hey, let's destroy some public and/or private property! Down with that fence!

posted December 03, 2003 04:55 PM            

I thought the picture with the stormtrooper dressed protesters with hooks was frightening. Then using those hooks to tear down gates was even worse.

I am always confused with what the objective is. First the protesters want freedom, but not freedom of trade because then the Unions will lose jobs. BUT, we have to support poor countries, BUT we cannot do that by employing them through overseas companies. At the same time, we put such strict regulations on companies here in the US, only to force them to go abroad, then we are angry about losing jobs.

Then there is always the irony of the protesters taht are hired through organizations such as PETA, ALF, the ELF, The anti WTO / FTAA groups. They don't really care what they are protesting as long as they get paid. They always dress up like radical Kremlin soldiers, their garb all in black, painted faces and they are extremely threatening.

posted December 03, 2003 04:55 PM            

quote:

---

The big fund-raising windfall came this week when the U.S. Senate approved an $87 billion spending bill for Iraq, which President Bush said he will sign. Tacked onto the legislation was the $8.5 million for Miami's security costs.

---

So no, it doesn't have written in specifically in boldface anywhere that this money was to be used to keep people from exercizing their 1st Amendment rights but thats exactly what the facist Chief Timoney used it for. I don't use that word lightly either. That man makes no efforts to hide his animosity for those who choose to exercize their right to free assembly and he dealt with the protesters agressively and antagonistically, turning downtown Miami into a war zone. Complete with tanks even.

It may not say so specifically in the bill but I have no doubt that this is exactly what Bush would have wanted. Bush himself, afterall prefers to keep any visual dissent far from his sight, forcing people into designated 'first amendment zones', while his supporters get front row seats, so to speak. Forgive me, but I thought this entire country was a free speech zone.

Yes, you saw correctly, jwhop. After the people had been shoved/herded like cattle, teargassed, peppersprayed, struck with rubber bullets (several in the head-potentially fatal..) and concussion bombs, tazered, beaten with nightsticks and electrified shields..only then, after all that, did some of the protesters light small paper fires in the middle of the street in an attempt to slow the advancing line of riot cops. Then....after we'd been herded and shot at for another 30 or 45 minutes, relentlessly by these self named 'robo cops', did some of the activists errect barricades to slow down the onslaught.

Permits mean very little anyway. The unions had their permit violated every which way by the cops. Hundreds of retirees weren't even allowed into the city to attend their 'permitted' march and even more were forced to walk up to two miles to get to it after Timony decided they couldn't unload their busses where planned. He was too busy brutalizing the protesters that were already there.

*sigh* I fear for our freedom moreso now that I have seen what our own civil servants are capable of inflicting upon those whom they are sworn to protect.
I have disturbing dreams that won't seem to leave me ever since witnessing some of the things I saw in Miami.
And yet the cynicism and apathy is so pervasive in this country that most people don't bat an eyelash when hearing about it.

One of the most disturbing things for me was the second day of actions.. We created a Really Really Free Trade Bazaar on Friday where many people offered all sorts of things for free.. free food, medical care, massage, counciling, poetry reading, dance lessons, etc.. It was to be our presentation of the sort of world we want to create. Completely permitted mind you.. It was totally surrounded by riot cops and helicopters hovering overhead.. some of the cops even taunted people, saying "DO SOMETHING!" These guys were just itching to use their fancy new riot equipment on us so generously bought for them buy the feds. They we extremely dissapointed that we didn't deliver the violence they so desperately hoped we would.
It made my skin crawl.

posted December 03, 2003 05:43 PM            

Sorry you had such a bad experience. Some cops are just jerks waiting to bait someone into a fight. I grew up in law enforcement family and have known many cops and agents. I can point out the ones that get a rise (literally) out of the power and it makes me sick.

posted December 04, 2003 12:12 AM            

quote:

---

It may not say so specifically in the bill but I have no doubt that this is exactly what Bush would have wanted.
Bush himself, afterall prefers to keep any visual dissent far from his sight, forcing people into designated 'first amendment zones', while his supporters get front row seats, so to speak. Forgive me, but I thought this entire country was a free speech zone.

---

I don't know where you get the idea the President is obligated to permit protesters to disrupt his speeches or that he is doing things any differently than other President's have done including Clinton and Carter who kept people who didn't agree with them far away from the proceedings they were there to participate in and still do.

Must be nice to possess your mind reading powers that you use to ascribe evil intent to every action the President takes or doesn't take.

America is a free speech zone but your 1st Amendment right to free speech doesn't require anyone to listen to you or permit you to disrupt activities or infringe on the rights of others in the pursuit of yours.

jwhop

posted December 04, 2003 01:07 PM            

I'll find the website and information for you. I knew of two companies in Seattle and Portland that have been featured on several shows like 20/20 and 60 minutes for doing just that. Also, my ex hubby is the head of forensics for a big PD out here, on their wire it was noted that paid protestors would be gathering in Washington DC to help with the protests. The companies also hired them out for the Seattle protests / riots.

Where there is money and a profit to be made, there will be people willing to capitalize on these types of services. Some of the information I cannot give, because I don't want to identify the source (Sounds cagey, but since I am in research I worry about my safety at times). I have been on the wrong end of the ALF / PETA protests and been screamed at and harrassed at meetings and at a University I worked in here in MD.

In some of our literature they are identified, but letting out the source can also lead to identifying the person inside.

I am sure Miami wasn't hospitable at all. I know from my dealings, I have yet to see more than a very small percentage of "peaceful" protesters. So many times people are ruled by emotions and want to just tear through the line.

The scary thing is, the times that they jumped out at me, I wasn't doing ANY animal research. I know it has to be done, but I won't do it myself. But still, working in Biotech causes one to associate it with "Animal Research".

On a quick search I did find several references for "protesters for hire" In a Canadian case Greenpeace was ordered to pay the logging company for what it did.
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/05/01/loggers_court030501

Here is the actual Greenpeace courtcase:
http://www.iwa2171.bc.ca/img_eco/Greenpeace%20Decision.htm

http://williegalang.com/login/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=58

Even religious zealots hire protesters for their cause;
http://www.the-archon.com/Essays/GAMOW.htm

posted December 04, 2003 03:53 PM            

quote:

---

jwhop- I don't think corralling protesters is so much about avoiding disruption as it is keeping any dissent far from the media cameras. The administration would have the country believe that everyone supports them.
It doesn't matter if a person is perfectly calm and non-disruptive..just wearing a shirt or holding a sign voicing dissent isn't allowed. I think it's all about keeping the photo ops positive, even when it's a false sense of what people in the country really feel.

---

I don't think the protesters were corralled so much as they were confined to the area designated by the permit obtained from the city. As I said before, no one has the right to infringe the rights of others. As it was, your crowd managed to shut down traffic in the area and infringe the rights of the store owners by interfering with their customers egress to their shops. Many of the shops closed because the owners didn't want their stores trashed by the protesters.

The pictures I saw of the protesters don't back up your claim that protesters were not permitted to wear shirts with protest slogans or carry protest signs. The opposite is true.

It seems more than a little disingenuous to me for you to say the protest wasn't covered by the media cameras Harpyr. In fact any search on the Internet will reveal there was little news coverage of the FTAA meeting and massive coverage of the protests. Every story I saw, on TV and in the papers dealt mainly with the protests.

In fact Harpyr, in almost every case where an event is being protested by a group, the main coverage is on the protesters and not on the event being protested.

I think I'd be careful about proclaiming the majority of Americans agree with the protesters.

posted December 04, 2003 04:15 PM            

I don't really doubt that it goes on, I just haven't really been exposed to that information. I could completely believe it of some of the larger organizations like Greenpeace and PETA, who easily have the money to do that sort of thing. It does't sit well with me and it's just another reason for me to be extremely wary and often disgusted by those organizations. I respect the causes for which they were created but it becomes increasingly apparent that corruption, bad judgement and 'buying into the system' can creep into even some of the most ideological and initially honest institutions once big $ enters the picture.
I can see how they may think that it is helpful as a way to boost numbers in the street but I think it is more harmful than useful because it gives people a reason to feel justified in dismissing the protest all togeher.

I think it's terrible that you've had to endure being screamed at and frightened by some protesters.
They are unfortunetly focusing all of their anger at the system onto just one person. Which isn't fair, justified or useful to anyone.

It's inevitable that there will be portions of people like that in any protest. But I can say with certainty, the vast majority of people I saw in the streets in Miami were completely peaceful. That picture above, with the guys trying to pull down the fence? Well, I was standing less than 20 feet away from them when they did that. Most of the Pagan Cluster is directly behind them drumming and spiral dancing. There were exactly 6 people that rushed out of the crowd with these puny ropes in this sorry attempt to pull the fence down that probably wouldn't have worked even if the cops didn't instantly smother us with tear gas and launch their concussions bombs. *shakes head*

It's not that I think pulling down the fence is necessarily a bad idea. I can see the statement people are trying to make with it. We want a world without fences.
Actually there is another security fence a few hundred feet or so behind this one. But the goal was to just take down the first one. That was enough. Because it had nothing to do with being violent. It was a symbolic statement of our opposition to the violence of the fence.

I, along with the rest of the Pagan Cluster, had decided that we didn't actually want to be a part of the attempt to pull it down, but if it did come down some of us wanted to be a part of the movement of people that were planning on moving into the reclaimed space and joyously celebrating. (It is, afterall, public space that was fenced off from us..) The plan to pull the fence down was put together under the model that was put forth in Cancun. Four hundred members of the Padded Bloc (aptly named for obvious reasons..) were planning on using a number of ropes capable of accommodating 75 people pulling on it at once from a far enough distance from the fence to have a measure of defense from the chemical weapons and rubber bullets.
They didn't make it to the protest however. As the 400 marched from the convergence space, they were intercepted by bicycle cops who lied to them inorder to get the crowd of padded protesters to march into a trap where they were held captive for hours.

Some people may think that 'whew..the cops caught the rowdy ones and thereby prevented the destruction of the city.' I didn't see it that way at all. I felt like a sitting duck out there without adequate protection from the violence of the state. I had really counted on having padded comrades between me and the cops and when they weren't there, I was like we were missing an arm. It didn't keep the cops from being any less brutal. It just allowed the cops to wage their little war on more of the unprepared and unprotected protesters.

posted December 04, 2003 04:16 PM            

pid, you mentioned that you knew a number of law enforcement who really get a rise out of their power and authority.. Does it seem reasonable to you to imagine that some of the 'violent protesters' could be undercover cops trying to incite the violence they hope for in order to give them validation for unleashing their new toys upon the crowd? I'm asking genuinely..I don't want that to sound argumentative or condescending or anything..

behind police lines..

notice the guy with the bandanna and the tazer...
This truck was also often seen outside the convergence space, snatching small groups of people, I hear.

One minute you are standing next to a person of seemingly like mind, protesting the FTAA, next minute that fellow protester is tazering your a*$. ugh.

the snatchers behind police lines..

I thought they outlawed COINTELPRO?

posted December 04, 2003 04:30 PM            

I would have to say that no cop in their right mind would ever pose as a protester to start a riot, but I do understand what you are asking. First off, the "cop-plant" would not be distinguished from other protesters and would suffer the same fate. Secondly, should it ever come out, the media would have a field day. Last of all and most important, if the PD was ever found guilty of such a thing, they would lose all their state and government funding for training, equipment and other purchases.

If anything, I would attribute it more to a person that feels they have some personal power to gain by inciting violence. Some people, like arsonists, enjoy setting things into motion - like a frenzy- just to stand back and admire the fire / riot. They inner world is ruled by Chaos and they have no desire to make a change.

Personally, I would rather people get involved legitimately rather than in a riot. If someone breaks into your house as a way to demonstrate that there is a division among the classes, are you hearing that or are you scared to death they will kill you?

As far as animal rights, I believe that it would better serve animals for people to research other methods of conducting medical research. But, it is much easier to fight for a point, that to work the long hours in doing what is right - at least that is what I have seen. When I have asked ALF or PETA people "How would find a cure" They retort with "Animal killer, murderer" or they come up with some insane crud about "One must use cold fusion combined with protoplasm...etc" Basically, they have no idea but the words sound cool. If ALF and PETA and some of these other organization joined the research community or began research of their own without using animals, (which some do) the world would be a better place. I would love for there to be other alternatives.