posted July 19, 2006 05:28 PM            

You know what I mean about the ex Rainbow. You LOVE to bring him up.. so I just supplied you with more.

Oh by the way, since you are on the pristine kick to purify LindaLand from any sexual speech whatsoever - will you be censoring Sue G? How about going into Soul Unions or Astrology and making sure no one discusses penis size, sexual positions or anything of that nature since you seem so sensitive these days.

Are we going to name you the purity police now?

posted July 19, 2006 05:30 PM              

quote:

---

I thought the video was immature and pretty lame...not because the subject matter was Bush, but because it was well..just not very well done. The song wasn't even well written

---

Actually you'e right, Isis...

The song certainly didn't sound like it was coming from professional musicians......but I think the emphasis here was on what they had to say rather than how professionally they sounded.

....and being the bush lover that I am....couldn't help but get a huge kick out of it....

http://www.bushflash.com/idiot.html

...and oh....this is a fun thing too.....

http://www.peacecandy.com/gwbush/dishonestdubya/

.....and this is STILL what I think of bush and his perverted buddy

posted July 19, 2006 05:37 PM              

the "purity police" began when they were so "offended" by references to "gash Limbaugh"

posted July 19, 2006 05:39 PM              

quote:

---

and Rainbow blathers on and on and on....

---

posted July 20, 2006 02:11 AM              

quote:

---

Like Rainbow, you twist things as you would like to and I believe jwhop has you pegged. You put lies out there that have a possible Kernal of truth, or so it appears to people uninformed, and then less informed people think it's true.

For example "Pidaua you and Bear Leo forget to mention that anyone in the military cannot say bad things about the war, the president or tell how they really feel. It is my understanding that they can be court martialed for doing that. So would we expect anything else from Bear Leo than what he said here? "

You're wrong. A Soldier can disagree and say he does not believe in the war. The Soldier can say he did not vote for the President or doesn't believe in the President.

You have only a tiny kernal of understanding about a court martial system and you would have looked a hell of a lot more intelligent if you had looked it up instead of posting it as though you had a clue- thereby, just like many liberals in the media, making others believe what is not fact.

---

So who is really twisting things and putting out lies from what could be possible kernals of truth around here? It isn't me. Maybe a soldier can say those things in private to a wife or circle of friends but he sure as hell can't say it publically. Maybe a soldier could say those things publically in the past but not with Bush in office. Apparently you don't keep up on the news. This happened some time ago and it made all the news. Gee, Pidaua, that should give you at least a clue that what you said in your post here is WRONG.

You wanted me to post it so here it is:

Soldiers and free speech: What are the limits?

Army officer denounces Iraq war as illegal, faces possible court martial for refusing to deploy.
By Rebecca Carr
WASHINGTON BUREAU
Saturday, July 08, 2006

WASHINGTON — Army 1st Lt. Ehren Watada doesn't want to fight in Iraq.

He isn't a conscientious objector, he says, and he has offered to fight in Afghanistan. But the 28-year-old contends that agreeing to fight in Iraq would violate his oath as a soldier to resist unlawful orders.

At a news conference last month in a Tacoma, Wash., church, Watada denounced the Iraq war and accused the Bush administration of lying to start it. The Army charged Watada on Wednesday with publicly declaring the war illegal, criticizing the president and refusing to deploy with his unit.
Watada's case, his attorney says, will raise important questions about soldiers' First Amendment rights and what punishment they should face for questioning superiors' actions and orders.

The Army, and some legal experts, say that Watada doesn't have the right to openly criticize the war in a way that would be contemptuous toward a superior officer, including the commander in chief. He also doesn't have the right to disobey an order to fight, they say.

Watada said at his June 7 news conference that he had researched the evidence for going to war in Iraq and concluded that America entered the war under false pretenses.

"The war in Iraq violates our democratic system of checks and balances," he said, according to documents released by the Army. "The wholesale slaughter and mistreatment of the Iraqi people is not only a terrible moral injustice, but a contradiction to the Army's own law of land warfare. My participation would make me party to war crimes."

In addition, Watada, who is based at Fort Lewis, Wash., said he became "ashamed of wearing the uniform" after reading about "the level of deception the Bush administration used to initiate and process this war."

The next day, Watada's superior officer told him that those statements could be considered unbecoming of an officer and a gentleman and contemptuous against a superior officer, both violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, according to Eric Seitz, Watada's attorney.

Now that Watada has been charged, the next step is for an Army officer to conduct a pretrial inquiry known as an Article 32 investigation, similar to a grand jury investigation in civilian criminal courts. The officer will review the charges and hold a hearing on evidence. If the officer agrees with the charges, he will order a court martial.

If Watada is convicted, he may face eight years in a military prison, forfeiture of all pay and a dishonorable discharge.

Army spokesman Sheldon Smith said that because Watada chose to become a commissioned officer, it is his duty to set an example for his unit and follow orders to fight in Iraq.

Watada's words and refusal to deploy could cause other soldiers to think negatively about the war, Smith said. "What message does it send? They are putting their lives on the line to do what is honorable, and the man who is supposed to be in charge of them is backing out?"

Seitz said he was astounded that the Army was moving forward with charges against Watada for speaking out against the war because it probably will mean a fresh examination of the administration's reasons for going to war.

"We are delighted that the Army has given us the opportunity to litigate these questions," Seitz said.

Legal experts say that a soldier's right to free speech is a gray area, and cases involving it are rarely prosecuted in a military court.

The last time a soldier was prosecuted for making contemptuous statements about a superior officer was in 1965, when an officer faced a court martial for holding a sign at a Vietnam protest that suggested that the president was a fascist. That soldier was sentenced to a two-year prison term.

In 1974, the Supreme Court ruled that the military code trumps free speech rights for certain kinds of expressions. Although military personnel aren't excluded from First Amendment protection, the court found that there may be occasion to restrict speech to ensure discipline in the ranks.

"It may seem ironic that some of the very constitutional rights that soldiers swear an oath to defend are not always or fully available to the soldiers themselves," said Paul McMasters, ombudsman at the First Amendment Center, a nonprofit educational organization. "But the military deems that condition essential to its mission."

"You do not surrender your First Amendment rights when you become a soldier," Seitz said, adding that the Nuremberg principles that evolved from an international trial over the atrocities of World War II dictate that an officer has an obligation to reject orders he or she considers illegal.

Most legal experts and peace groups say that Watada has a difficult road ahead to avoid punishment for criticizing the war and refusing to deploy. "I think he's trying to break new ground, but I think he's going to dull his pickax in the process," said Eugene Fidell, a Washington lawyer who specializes in military legal issues.

posted July 20, 2006 03:35 AM              

quote:

---

I dont have to be a phychic to tell you anything about you or Mirandee. All I have to do is read your posts. The things you two post are Hyprocritical!!! Oh the people oh the people we need to leave the country and let them do their own thing. Yes, then guess what? The terrorist are still there killing the people off like they have been all along. You werent saying much before we went there cause the news only follows the US and likes to broadcast negative crap.

---

Okay, Bear, show me the posts and things that I said that are hypocritical. How many of my posts have you actually read with an open mind? What is hypocritical to you, Bear? Anything that differs from your world view?

I take it by "negative crap" you are referring to anything that disagrees with the positive propaganda that the military and the government want the American people to hear and believe. I take it that to you what happened at Abu Gharib was "negative crap," I take it that to you holding people all over the world in secret prisons without due process of law just based on suspicion that they might be a terrorist is "negative crap" and I take it that our government going against everything that this nation always stood for by advocating the use of torture on those prisoners and treating them inhumanely is "negative crap." In fact I take it that to you anything that the military or the government does not want the American public to know is "negative crap." That would be my "psychic" insight to a career military man who is trained to be obedient and not question authority and who is trained to dehumanize the named enemy. It's much easier to kill someone that you don't consider to be human isn't it? Dehumanization of the person is also what serial murderers and rapist do as well.

If in reading my posts you found me to be a fighter for justice and equality, a fighter for peace and only going to war as a last resort with all else fails, if you found me to have an open mind and make much effort to see all sides of issues and if you found me to be compassionate towards the inhumane way that the Israelis treat the Palestinian people, if you found me to see all peoples of the world in spite of their race, religion as deserving to be treated as equals and in a just, humane way then your psychic abilities are pretty good from reading my posts. Otherwise your opinion of me means nothing because it is biased based on what Pidaua who does not even know me says and on your own narrow minded viewpoint and your need to put people in neat little categories and boxes as well.

You know that the world is based on negatives and positives, Bear. You cannot have one without the other. That is unless you wear rose colored glasses through life and do not deal in reality.

You can't tell anyone about me at all Bear because you don't know anything but what you are told and what you want to see and believe. That maybe makes you a good soldier but it makes you a lousy psychic when it comes to other people.

For a neo-con Republican to call anyone else a hypocrite is really a joke because everything that comes out of Bush's mouth and every other neo-con, everything that comes out of the mouth of the Religious Right is nothing but one hypocrisy after another. Bush is always saying one thing and doing the opposite. So it's really a laugh to hear any of you call someone else a hypocrit. Hypocrisy means saying one thing and doing another. I have always been consistent in what I say and do. It also takes a hypocrit to accuse others of the very things that they do.

posted July 20, 2006 01:19 PM            

It boggles the mind such idiotic mindsets exist in leftist ranks as to lump the 2 together under a general heading of things which will bring on a court marshall or action of the government against military personnel.

Flash to all idiots.

Some military personnel do speak out against the war as long as it's made clear they're speaking only on their own behalf and as long as they are not attempting to undermine the war effort and as long as they are not attempting to lead protests within the military ranks...nothing happens.

Military personnel who refuse orders are subject to discipline proceedings.

posted July 20, 2006 04:40 PM            

1. He is an Officer in the United States Army. He is not enlisted and he stated it about a Superior Officer.

The article states:
“statements could be considered unbecoming of an officer and a gentleman and contemptuous against a superior officer, both violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Watada chose to become a commissioned officer, it is his duty to set an example for his unit and follow orders to fight in Iraq.”
What an example this guy set. Not.

2. When you become a Soldier you give up a few rights.

Article also states:
“a soldier's right to free speech is a gray area, and cases involving it are rarely prosecuted in a military court.

In 1974, the Supreme Court ruled that the military code trumps free speech rights for certain kinds of expressions. Although military personnel aren't excluded from First Amendment protection, the court found that there may be occasion to restrict speech to ensure discipline in the ranks.”

This offense should not go unpunished. If it doesnt it ruins the discipline and good order of a unit.

"When you join the military, you lose your right to be an individual."
I agree with this statement to a point. In the Military you are bound by laws and regulations. Though you are not dictated which way you will lead or the style you will lead with. Your individual actions and deeds will determine if a Soldier will follow you into combat. No matter what the situation is. Being an individual helps you and your Soldiers grow and learn as a team.

Well, Since you cant seem to grasp the concept of "negative crap" I will tell you. Lets take Abu Grabi for example since you brought it up. Its ok for these people to take american human lives. For example, recording the chopping or sawing of the head off of a victim then putting it on the back of the victim. But, its not ok to make prisoners walk or crawl around with a leash around the neck and underwear on their head.
Hmm I think I know which one I would prefer. There are worse things that could be done to them that have been done to Soldiers most of which never make the media. Thats the negative crap I am talking about. Trust me I know.

Your post
I take it that our government going against everything that this nation always stood for by advocating the use of torture on those prisoners and treating them inhumanely is "negative crap."

Not at all I think its about time we start giving the medicine back to the doctor. at least we arent depriving them of their head or live.

You said it yourself:
"You know that the world is based on negatives and positives, Bear."
Yes but the media needs to start showing the positive, also. There is so much the military does over there for the population yet very little of it is ever shown or even printed. reporters have that whole concept of that story wont sell.

"your opinion of me means nothing because it is biased based on what Pidaua who does not even know me says and on your own narrow minded viewpoint and your need to put people in neat little categories and boxes as well."
I dont care what my opinion of you means to you or anyone else for that matter. Pid hasnt influenced my opinion about you not one bit, your posts have. Dont get offended that you fit a neat little category and by the way some people deserve to be in little boxes as well.

Just to let you know he (Bush) hasnt cut any benefits. They have made changes to give the Soldiers options. I say that cause you forgot about the House they need to have their say also. they made it more suitable for everyone as a whole.

Obviously you dont know me and I really dont care that you dont either. I do stand up for what I believe. You just have to know how to approach people and use a little tact, if appropiate when voicing your opinion.

As for me going and reposting hypocritical crap that you have posted. You are out of your mind if you think I am going to use my time to go, cut and past all that stuff. You know what you said then counterdicted.

posted July 20, 2006 05:47 PM            

I do not influence Bear to make decisions on who he likes and doesn't like. He's his own man and has been working his butt off since he was 17 years old. How many men do you know graduate high school, move to a different state to attend college, get their own place and work three jobs WITHOUT any help from any one? Mommy and Daddy didn't come to his rescue to pay his way. (and before someone thinks he's 17.... that was years and years ago... he's just about 33)

As to your article - Once again you are way out in Right field (I'd say left, but they get a hell of lot more action) and you've missed the point entirely.

You, Rainbow and the other less intelligent peeps on this board LOVE to lump to extremely different cases together to make a point. An NCO refusing an order is quite different than an NCO stating he or she is a Liberal and doesn't believe in why we went to war.

As to cutting benefits - I LOVE how you talk about things you don't have a clue about. How many people do you know in the Military that have suffered benefits cuts AS A RESULT OF BUSH? How about the severe cuts to the military by your god Clinton? Hmmm..... Clinton turned the Military into a skeleton crew. He HATED the Military and made his animosity QUITE clear - yet you people seem to forget that tidbit.

Jwhop and Bear have once again popped your inflated balloon with facts instead of the hot air, twisted truths you and your friends seem to expel on a daily basis.

Next time, get some real information to back up or lame assertations.

Nice post Bear... I almost missed it since I was crazy-busy girl in the office.... Kisses

------------------
The democratic world believes that it is not the terrorists that are to blame, but us. Us, the westerners.
WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And the sooner you eliminate this misconception from your minds, the better.
We are NOT to blame. It is the freaking terrorists and the freaking terrorists only!!!! They are the bad guys. They do not understand concepts like peace, democracy, and respect for human life. They are, pure and simPle, EVIL!!!!! Behind all their political manipulations, if you carefully look at the actions of these MONSTERS, they are EVIL!!

http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000489.htm

Provided by the lovely Lady Lioneye

posted July 21, 2006 02:54 AM              

I notice your name is mentioned with mine frequently....

....and I want to tell you what an honor it is, to be included in such delightful company...truly....

...because I really admire your style...

You are a discerning lady who has a bright mind. What you say is clear, to the point and understandable (always easy to fathom, which is not true of everybody's contrubitions here)...and you're not timid about saying what is in your heart, in spite of knowing there are those here who will give you flack....because you're daring to disagree with their point of view!

I think it's kinda cute that Mirandee and Rainbow are always mentioned in the same sentences and paragraphs....I am pleased to be linked with a person of your worthy character, Mirandee....

May we always be a "team."

posted July 21, 2006 12:46 PM            

You both were instrumental in destroying Greg's CE site with your constant biitching and moaning about the US and the President. I hope you're happy with your effort.

posted July 21, 2006 03:16 PM              

quote:

---

I suppose you and Mirandee could be considered a team Rainbow.
You both were instrumental in destroying Greg's CE site with your constant biitching and moaning about the US and the President. I hope you're happy with your effort.

---

jwhop...I'm disappointed that a person of your intelligence would make such a ridicules accusation, when you know better than that...

Isn't that kind of like playing the "little kid" game, where one's gotta think up "reasons" so someone can but the "blame" somewhere?

Come on, using that sort of flimsy dynamic is beneath you.

Granted, there is not as much activity at Greg's site as there once was.....but Greg was such an extraordinary man, with great heart and spirit; his very essence was such a shining beacon there....

Many of us had come to love and respect him, for the wonderful man he was, and his sudden and unexpected death was a great shock!

.....and while Maria has done a terrific job taking over the reigns of the site, there's no question that Greg's absence leaves a great void for many and always will...cuz damn it! WE MISS HIM!

My guess would be that the recent inactivity of some of the members there, would be because of Greg's absence....and NOT because Mirandee and I destroyed the site.

What a dumb thing to day...

Shame on you!

PS....the site is not destroyed!

posted July 21, 2006 03:33 PM              

quote:

---

Most people here recognize the stuff you post is utter crap or so juvenile it had to come from low voltage mind...a leftist mind.....like the pictures and captions putting words in the President's mouth he didn't say.....

---

First of all jwhop, I don't have a "leftist" mind, bceause there is no such thing....but there IS a NWO mind....

.....and as far as putting words in the president's mouth that he didn't say....tee hee....well yeah, I've been guilty of that....but it really wasn't necessary, because bush is capable of saying moronic things all by himself....

Here are some examples from the mouth and mind of the "brilliant" man whom you hold in such high esteem

***

"I think — tide turning — see, as I remember — I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of — it's easy to see a tide turn — did I say those words?" —George W. Bush, asked if the tide was turning in Iraq, Washington, D.C., June 14, 2006

"It's a time of sorrow and sadness when we lose a loss of life." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Dec. 21, 2004

"I like the idea of people running for office. There's a positive effect when you run for office. Maybe some will run for office and say, vote for me, I look forward to blowing up America. I don't know, I don't know if that will be their platform or not. But it's -- I don't think so. I think people who generally run for office say, vote for me, I'm looking forward to fixing your potholes, or making sure you got bread on the table." —George W. Bush, on elections in the Middle East, Washington, D.C., March 16, 2005

Because the — all which is on the table begins to address the big cost drivers. For example, how benefits are calculate, for example, is on the table; whether or not benefits rise based upon wage increases or price increases. There's a series of parts of the formula that are being considered. And when you couple that, those different cost drivers, affecting those — changing those with personal accounts, the idea is to get what has been promised more likely to be — or closer delivered to what has been promised. Does that make any sense to you? It's kind of muddled. Look, there's a series of things that cause the — like, for example, benefits are calculated based upon the increase of wages, as opposed to the increase of prices. Some have suggested that we calculate — the benefits will rise based upon inflation, as opposed to wage increases. There is a reform that would help solve the red if that were put into effect. In other words, how fast benefits grow, how fast the promised benefits grow, if those — if that growth is affected, it will help on the red." —George W. Bush, explaining his plan to save Social Security, Tampa, Fla., Feb. 4, 2005

"I speak plainly sometimes, but you've got to be mindful of the consequences of the words. So put that down. I don't know if you'd call that a confession, a regret, something." —George W. Bush, speaking to reporters, Washington, D.C., Jan. 14, 2005

*********************************

posted July 21, 2006 10:39 PM            

If there's any group on earth intellectually disqualified to judge the intelligence of Bush, it's leftists who collectively don't have a whole functioning brain between them.

Now Rainbow, don't try to float that crap that you're not a leftist. You post their bullsh*t, you signed and promoted communist petitions, you repeat their sloagans and you post their bullsh*t pictures and captions of Bush. I have you down as a hardcore leftist.

You and the rest of your leftist friends, including Mirandee couldn't have done a better job destroying Greg's Linda Goodman site if it was planned. You did exactly that and I don't give a rip if you now deny it. I posted the numbers here for everyone to see.

Yes Greg was a great guy and I'm sure he's missed but CE was in a deep tailspin well before Greg's sudden passing...and I've posted the numbers here for everyone to see.

Deny it all you want to Rainbow, the numbers of posts over the time frames I posted don't lie. Lying leftists do lie and that's all they have going for themselves.

Just be aware, you, Mirandee and other leftists aren't going to be permitted to take Randall's LindaLand site down the way you destroyed Greg's Conscious Evolution.

posted July 22, 2006 02:09 AM              

You're not only EXTREMELY angry, but you're now revealing that you lack the intelligence I gave you credit for.

I've tried to cut you some slack here jwhop, no matter how mean you got, because you seemed to "fight" in a fairly honorable way, but I'm seeing now, that you don't deserve it....

You finally showed your true colors....

*********

Anyway, Jwhop says in a most worshipful way.....

quote:

---

Bush may not be articulate but when he speaks, people know what he means...and that he means what he says

---

Okay, jwhop... if you know what he means, .....decipher this bit of astute profundity from the idiot....(speaking of blithering and blathering.......sheese)

quote:

---

Because the — all which is on the table begins to address the big cost drivers. For example, how benefits are calculate, for example, is on the table; whether or not benefits rise based upon wage increases or price increases. There's a series of parts of the formula that are being considered. And when you couple that, those different cost drivers, affecting those — changing those with personal accounts, the idea is to get what has been promised more likely to be — or closer delivered to what has been promised. Does that make any sense to you? It's kind of muddled. Look, there's a series of things that cause the — like, for example, benefits are calculated based upon the increase of wages, as opposed to the increase of prices. Some have suggested that we calculate — the benefits will rise based upon inflation, as opposed to wage increases. There is a reform that would help solve the red if that were put into effect. In other words, how fast benefits grow, how fast the promised benefits grow, if those — if that growth is affected, it will help on the red." —George W. Bush, explaining his plan to save Social Security, Tampa, Fla., Feb. 4, 2005

---

.....and bush is not only inarticulate the pitiful man lacks thinking power...

In the past, I gave you credit for being an intelligent man in spite of your stubbornly blind allegiance to the moron. But now you're finally revealing to me that you couldn't possibly be intelligent if you think that bush is "just gosh-darn inarticulate," and that's all there is to it....it's so obvious that he's not playing with a full deck....my cat could see it....*sigh*

....and this one from Mr. Hop...has got to take the cake....

quote:

---

Just be aware, you, Mirandee and other leftists aren't going to be permitted to take Randall's LindaLand site down the way you destroyed Greg's Conscious Evolution

---

OMG, jwhop! You ARE delusional!

If you recall, Greg had YOU booted from there....NOT us..

Greg was my friend, and you know it.

People of like-mind you might say, and for you to suggest that Mirandee and I destroyed his site (which btw is NOT destroyed) makes me not only question your intelligence.....but your sanity as well!

posted July 22, 2006 02:34 AM              

jwhop also said...

quote:

---

All your blithering, blathering and mindless screeching is being refuted with facts and will continue to be refuted.....

---

Facts?

What facts?

I didn't see any facts....except for the ones I presented....