posted May 05, 2011 12:52 PM            

Shall we say Cats of a claw purr together ?

JWH might give Obama a hug to make a bear proud leave alone a Lion, for Obama has fulfilled the wet dream of every Neo Con by gunning down some bloke who could be passed of as Osama.

That is one thing which is consistent among extreme fringe right wing Americans. When commanded, they sincerely obey the President.

They cannot refuse the order of the Commander in Chief, "O Bomber".

If "O Bomber" brings an idea, they will ridicule it but if he were to implement Martial Law and order that same silly idea as a rule, they will sheepishly obey.

Constitution? Whats that?

It is like that media spin on the Iraq invasion: "Support the troops". Does not matter whether the executive was lying.

Behind all the pretended hatred of "O Bomber" there is in reality nothing but deep admiration, hence so much energy is given to him. He has indeed become their subconscious Messiah.

A friend wrote: Ultimately, the only differences between Obama and Osama are two letters: BS

posted May 05, 2011 01:09 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by pire:
back to bin laden, who here would say that what terrorist do is good? ????

so why anyone here would say that when it is done by a government it is good?

democracies. the ultimate in freedom. in theory... unless enlightened anarchy should replace it since even democracy seems to behave like terrorist?

---

posted May 05, 2011 03:22 PM            

i don't know whether bin laden died in 01 or yesterday, but IF he was already dead it is about time it made the headlines, IMO. putting a boogie man to rest...

is it morally okay to do it this way? probably not, but we do not live in anything like a morally okay world these days. the best, solid-gold heart sitting in the oval office or pretty much any equivalent office is dealing with centuries of scheming, backbiting, throatcutting precedent. everyone is afraid to be the first to lay down his arms.

anyone have a WORKABLE idea as to how to correct this situation short of calling off ALL bets and debts and starting over again?

posted May 05, 2011 03:27 PM            

Now, you could have challenged my facts. That wouldn't really have helped you but at least you could have been given a grade for "effort".

Instead, you launch personal attacks with nothing to back you up but your mouths and that's not much on which to hang an argument. In fact, it's less than nothing because I simply don't give a rat's ass.

In this case, O'Bomber did the right thing...made the right move and produced a desirable result. bin Laden with bullets in his head.

So, I give O'Bomber an A in this operation.

posted May 05, 2011 04:04 PM            

There will always be some who wouldn't believe bin Laden was dead as of last Sunday if bin Laden himself whispered in their ears from the grave.

posted May 05, 2011 07:08 PM            

quote:

---

..."is it morally okay to do it this way? probably not, but we do not live in anything like a morally okay world these days. the best, solid-gold heart sitting in the oval office or pretty much any equivalent office is dealing with centuries of scheming, backbiting, throatcutting precedent. everyone is afraid to be the first to lay down his arms'.

anyone have a WORKABLE idea as to how to correct this situation short of calling off ALL bets and debts and starting over again?

---

I really appreciate the way you articulate broad multifacited ideas/thoughts/stream of conciousness. Then condense it down to a few concise elements that at the heart are very much common sense~

Or maybe it is just that 99% of the time I agree with you?

posted May 06, 2011 12:41 AM            

but from outside, I can tell how the media control the people of the US.

the general acceptance that killing bin laden would be the only outcome, and closure of this situation.

posted May 06, 2011 10:29 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlutoSquared:
I would argue that although it may appear that some of us do not hear each other, opinions are at least considered... I think in and of itself that is a good thing.

---

posted May 06, 2011 10:31 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlutoSquared:
I would argue that although it may appear that some of us do not hear each other, opinions are at least considered... I think in and of itself that is a good thing.

---

posted May 06, 2011 11:21 AM            

Nothing could be further from the truth. The press..in America, have a lower credibility rating than politicians and used car sales persons.

For instance, the Pew Report established that only 21% of respondents believe ALL or even MOST of what the NY Times prints as news. The Washington Post and Associated Press did even worse.

posted May 06, 2011 11:26 AM            

i don't think US citizens are any more or less deceived by the media than other countries.... though a third-person perspective may show a truer look AT the US, what you receive at home may not be telling you what YOU should know.

the fact is that fear sells...stupid sells...sex sells...celebrity sells...the news is riddled with these because the media are slaves to ratings for the most part, even in countries where national subsidized news and arts are available.

anyway apparently the pics are not necessary for confirmation as al qaeda has agreed it was bin laden who was taken out this week and they are vowing vengeance.

posted May 06, 2011 12:19 PM            

about his official death I personnally do not believe the politicians, from the US or Europe at least. I don't trust them and unless I decide it otherwise, everything they say is potentially a lie. may be it was the truth, may be they did kill him that day. but may be not. and the bottom line to me is that nowadays, it is commonly accepted that the governmentS are not systematically trusted.

posted May 06, 2011 02:52 PM            

We had very good articles in the local press about how the US Military changed stories about Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman. The US Military is also not new to lying.

Politicians make a career out of "spin", so that leaves only Mathematical Probability to discern. Like ascertaining the odds of an ailing man with failing kidneys surviving in an Afghan desert for years without a proper dialysis machine.

And the odds of not giving a fair trial to a man without a professional military when someone like Saddam and even a Noriega years ago got to face the court.

Plus the odds of making such an announcement 66 years after the announcement of Hitler's death.

The odds of Dr Steve risking everything and coming out with bold allegations.

posted May 06, 2011 03:55 PM            

The difference in coverage of Republicans and demoscats by the press is far too striking to deny.

Let's see. The press hounded George Bush over his National Guard records, over his school records, including his Yale and Harvard university records. When I say hounded, I mean hounded every day. One drooling moron, Dan Blather tried to interfere with the 1994 presidential election by broadcasting forged military documents about Bush. It took months for CBS to fire Blather and his producer..Mary Mapes. I think Blather is now working at the Mickey Mouse Channel.

Contrast that with John Traitor Kerry. Every attempt was made to cover up his despicable military record and his less than sterling university records.

By the time O'Bomber came on the scene, no one in the drooling press bothered to even vet him on his college admission applications, his grade transcripts, his State Senate office records, or even any of his writings as the editor of the Harvard Law review, his medical records, his passport records...or any damned thing else.

On the other hand, John McCain went through a Senate investigation as to his citizenship status. Further he furnished his health records, his military records and his school grades from Annapolis Naval Academy.

posted May 06, 2011 05:24 PM            

Bin Laden death sparks new talk over Patriot Act

The provisions that expire May 27 allow the government to use roving wiretaps on multiple electronic devices and across multiple carriers and get court-approved access to business records relevant to terrorist investigations. The third, a "lone wolf" provision that was part of a 2004 law, permits secret intelligence surveillance of non-U.S. individuals without having to show a connection between the target and a specific terrorist group.

The Senate Judiciary Committee in March approved a bill that would extend the provisions until 2013, tighten its civil liberties protections and increase oversight. But there's evidence that bin Laden's death may have marginalized any such effort to do more than extend the law, as is. A Senate official not authorized to speak for the record said it wasn't clear that there would be a full week of floor debate on the Patriot Act as Majority Leader Harry Reid had indicated.

The law's fate, for now, resides in the Republican-controlled House and the odd pairing of GOP libertarians and Democratic liberals who have long viewed the Patriot Act as an oppressive overreach.

posted May 07, 2011 05:56 AM            

"O Bomber" is your elected Chief, the thing is he did not win with hanging chads and with a Jeb Bush to help out but won decisively. He seems to be totally carried away now.

What you should be worried about is when he starts behaving like a Neo Con as far as Domestic Policies are concerned.

Like Martial Law, forced taxes, holding American Citizens without trial, overruling sheriffs authorities, stricter gun control, empowering Feds to arrest anyone speaking out etc etc.

If "O Bomber" becomes like Bush Sr with modern hi tech at his beck and call and if as you say the press is 100% behind him, you will not be able to share any critical view ever again on the internet.

posted May 07, 2011 11:58 AM            

In fact, those "hanging chads" got hung in a demoscat controlled area of Florida by a demoscat run election team.

Further, Bush won Florida...as a consortium of newspapers, including the NY Times had to admit after doing their own recounts.

You will...of course...furnish some credible evidence that those you call "neocons" advocate martial law, abolishing 1st Amendment rights to freedom of speech and strict gun control..or abolition of the 2nd Amendment. Do so, if you can!

On the other hand, it's O'Bomber who said...

"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum16/HTML/004891.html

O'Bomber...the "neocon"?

Thank you for your concern for American citizen rights IQ but we don't rely on the press for our information about what the feds and O'Bomber are doing.

Let me remind you there are more than 250,000,000 firearms in private citizen hands in America. Most of those private arms make the MP4, the M-16 and other military small arms look like popguns by comparison.

Another thing, a survey of US military forces was taken. A question was put to them. Would you fire on American citizens if ordered to do so. As I recall, about 85% said NO.

posted May 07, 2011 12:28 PM            

that's for certain!

as for our armed brethren, jwhop, they may have superior power over SMALL military weapons but since when does our military use a toothpick to kill a fly? more like a ton of bricks.

in the revolution we were disadvantaged compared to the british BUT we were fiercely unified and organized...which is the opposite of today's public. not only are they divided at every turn AND outgunned by the military, their is NO organization amongst the little guys.

on the other hand, i have to say that were the govt stupid enough to announce martial law out loud, a huge portion of americans would come out fighting even if they were UNarmed. somehow i don't think our sophisticated lie-machine is that stupid though!

posted May 08, 2011 10:00 AM            

most of what she writes resonates with me. She comes out with a phrase about our religious extremists in this country that might seem a little harsh; she calls them
America’s Taliban which led me to the definition, had I forgotten what it means?

'
Tal·i·ban
  [tal-uh-ban]

–noun
a Muslim fundamentalist group in Afghanistan.

maybe not so harsh after all. Here read the rest for yourself, i think it is good.

Osama Died For Our Sins

By Judith Gayle | Political Waves

I’d bet you’re getting tired of hearing that Osama is dead, tired of reading details that shift daily. And you may still be wondering which Osama was killed this week: the one who supposedly died years back, in a cave? The one who reportedly succumbed to renal failure in December, 2001? Today, we’ll talk about the one recently shot down in the Pakistani suburbs. We will assume that this bin Laden is — or was — the original Osama, one of the 50 children of a wealthy Saudi contractor and an ex-CIA asset in Charlie Wilson’s War.

Osama bin Laden in a 2002 broadcast for Middle East Broadcasting Corp. Photo: AP/MBC via APTN.

That would be the Osama who brought jihad to Kenya, Tanzania and Yemen and who belatedly claimed responsibility for the Twin Towers falling, whether his rag-tag group of quasi-soldiers was capable of those precision strikes or not. We’ll talk about the Osama we gave monster-status to in order to frighten cowering, politically-maneuverable Americans and little children everywhere.

Let’s talk about that one because — let’s face it — he was our own unique creation, wasn’t he? We took an obscure Islamic terrorist-*** -philosopher, bent on tribal vengeance, and made him into the global face of darkness. As a nation, we gave up our liberty, our principles and our financial security in order to defend ourselves against this one man and his small band of malcontents. Our elitist Christian apprehension met bin Laden’s elitist Islamic protestation in a head-on clash that provided cover for exploitive neo-conservatism and shock doctrine, growing and blooming on the love of oil and empire. Like “Where’s Waldo?” we saw Osama’s footprint everywhere and followed it with troops, pallets of money and camp followers: military contractors and mercenaries, Starbucks and McDonalds.

In the name of patriotism and safety, we pursued Osama’s shadowy organization with paranoid fervor, even as a new wave of yearning for secular democracy in the Mid-east began to make bin Laden’s influence — never mainstream — obsolete. We pursued him, even as the dangers of corporate plutocracy swamped our own nation and religious authoritarianism regained popularity. We pursued him, without once acknowledging that our own religious right had become America’s Taliban, that our corporate structure had grown deeply dependent upon the tribalism of violence and war, or that the nation itself had surrendered its moral clarity and Constitutional integrity to arrogant, self-serving imperialism.

Eric has already written brilliantly on the topic of projection, so I need say little about the mirroring effect, but let’s take a long look into our cracked, fissured reflection, shall we? They say you can tell the maturity of a civilization by observing how it treats its animals, but that’s not very encouraging, so let’s go on to the next example: how it treats its prisoners. No help there. Both domestically and internationally, we systematically engage in forms of torture when we have judged another’s guilt. Trying to neutralize the international outrage, Obama promised to close Guantanamo, a promise short-circuited by congressional insistence that no “enemy combatant” enter our courtrooms or be housed on our shores. Flying in the face of American tradition, Congress passed a law denying enemy combatants access to our courts or our prisons, making closure of the base infinitely harder. This is another of those blemishes on Obama’s record that he can do little to change.

Was Osama bin Laden assassinated? Was such a maneuver even legal? Michael Moore told Piers Morgan that bin Laden had been executed, and I find that hard to argue. Those who do so maintain that we were, and are, at war with Al Qaeda and there was every expectation that bin Laden was going for a weapon when he was twice shot by elite American special forces. I find that hard to argue as well. The morality of the event is dancing — with the angels — on the head of a pin.

Moore had more to complain about: