Walsingham

*ear piercing shriek of animalistic primaeval fury and frustration*

"A new al Qaeda tape is circulating; a sort of montage honoring the "fallen martyrs" of the Afghan war. Within the tape is a 50-second clip of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden discussing his thoughts on the subject. The tape was first released July 14, but now news commentators aplenty are citing the video as proof of al Qaeda's strength in general, and of bin Laden's vitality in particular. However, judging from the camera angle, the clothing and what appears in the video's background, the tape is more than five years old and was filmed on the same reel used to assemble a video released in May 2002. " Quote from Stratfor report.

I think taks is on the CFR.

Behold! The mighty power of British pagans to produce RAIN! On command!

I'll spam YOU!

That's how I greet people. At least, from now on, that's how I'll greet people.

Pop, I don't know if this is sufficient support, but there are three things I'd say about Reagan. 1. He was a president with a strong faith, but also able to let his departments get on with things without being micromanaged. To the best of my knowledge. That's actually an immensely rare combination. Possibly arose because he was a bit of a dunce, but rare nonetheless. 2. The Star Wars initiative really did have an immense draining impact on Russia. I've heard this from ex-KGB officers in their cups, not just western books. You should also note that the Chinese aren't falling for the same trick. Suggesting Soviet behaviour really caused problems. 3. He backed the mujaheddin in Afghanistan with arms (chinese arms if you must know). Afghanistan, more than anything else lead to the fall of old style communism. It broke the faith of the people. Carter might have done 1 and 2, but he would not have done 3.

Nuts to that. I hope the kids turn on CBS a la Jurassic Park.

It's an M113, with a mockup of a turret stuck on top! Shows how even simple camouflage can be effective.

Well, they'll be artificially restricted. So dictatorship will be woefully under-represented.

Using people is a damned silly way to get cheap meat. Pigs grow so fast it's madness not to use them.

I did, however, just recently discover Youtube.

Actually I can say I honestly had heard of Thomas Dewey. Wasn't there a TIME photo of him with a hole in his shoe?

In the theatre of awesomeness that is my mind I cut the glass down to size with a samurai sword. While wearing spandex. It is then full. And highly disturbed.

WITHTEETH I was just about to apologise for being a bit stentorian there. Sorry to bite at you. I think your instincts are fine. It's fine to get miffed if you think somebody is trying to cheat you or is taking your cash and laughing at you. Hell, like I say I get mad at GWB for being such a cretin in charge of the most important campaign of our generation. But if you plan to do anything about it, being mad isn't much use for anything more than punching someone on the nose.

That's quite nicely done! I liked the one about nothing important happening.

Thanks for explaining that. My legal experience is limited to cash cases.

I missed out the whole Twin Peaks thing. I can't remember why. I think I was trapped in a curtain closet with a dwarf.

That's appalling. They obviously knew what they were doing was basically illegal, and hijacked these kids for their sordid profit lust. I'd boycot the bastards but firstly I don't get CBS, and secondly I don't have a TV.

Naive question, possibly: would the state pursue another suspect when they've already got a conviction?

GD has a very good point that there is a strong emphasis on emotion here. I may point out that I have never ever said I like GWB on this or any other forum. I think his administration is corrupt and poorly setup to make good decisions. But that does not make him impeachable. Simply disliking a president is no grounds for impeachment. WITHTEETH, I apologise but I'm unclear whether you have accepted that the presentation of military intelligence to Congress is not an impeachable offence. I think you have, but it's a bit of a shift so I don't want to presume too much. Your objection now seems to be that this was immoral. Immorality is of course quite a difficult thing to define, and often depends upon your perspective. I, for example, have always acknowledged that the primary motivation _in the White House_ (not the State Dept or Pentagon) for the war was self-interested. The Bush administration is founded on two platforms - the big business and christian fundamentalist parts of the Republican party. Both these groups supported intervention in Iraq for reasons you probably already know. I don't consider this immoral, because if i did I would find it impossible to deal with politics in any way shape or form. I am concerned not with motivations but with results. Results which have been very poor in the post-war period due largely to Bush, but also to Congress constantly nitpicking and chaffing. I should thank you for the link to the New Yorker report. I knew the details, but it puts it together very well. However the guilty party there is Rumsfeld, not GWB. He has of course already left, so there's not much you can do about it. I woudl add that not only was Rumsfeld behind the whole warfighting lite doctrine which left the Army undermanned to provide security post-saddam, but since he left ther have been significant improvements in the higher echelons. US operational behaviour in Iraq has improved, as has a tendency to devolve power lower down. The removal of habeus corpus certainly would be serious trial by our peers is essential to the principle of democratic law. On the other hand GD has already addressed this at some length in this thread. I suggest you re-read his comments. However, I would ask to what extent several other governments have done this without being accused of the same. That dear sweet duffer Roosevelt locked up the Japanese Americans without a by your leave.

Probably owns a motorola.

I ploughed in here like a P-51 on a strafing run, then realised it was Gorth. I believe I am entitled to a little profanity. WTF?

Hotdog. When else am I going to eat them?