If you disagree with the Iraq War please take a moment to sign this pledge which is being conducted by a grass roots organization, Democracy for America.
Also please consider passing this pledge along to your family, friends, and co-workers.
Pledge: http://tools.democracyforamerica.com/local/
Thanks,
-Anthony Brooks
Monday, November 21, 2005
G.W. Bush Put us in Debt
Republicans must take voting American citizens as fools if they think we believe the way in which they are currently running our government is “fiscally responsible”.
G.W. Bush has borrowed more money than any U.S. President. Yes, more than all Democrat Presidents combined. Wars cost for much more than reasonable Social Programs that Democrats are trying to push. For example: Universal Healthcare. it’s a matter of priorities and fiscal responsibility.
Democrats are for the People. Republicans are for their Pocket.
Report:
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/viewstory.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200511%5CNAT20051104b.html
The Iraq War, God’s Way.
I quote a Republican calling Muslim Fanaticism as an “evil ideology”. He said that “people of good will” are trying to eliminate such an ideology which believes that a man that kills innocent in the name of their God will have “72 virgins” waiting for him in heaven (I saw a Muslim youth say this on TV).
Now, when it comes to War must we be partisan? Honestly, as a Christian, this concept of defeating evil ideology is important. However Religion/Faith can define “people of good will” through examples such as Jesus Christ.
“And the World was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten son of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” - John 1:14
The Bible says Jesus Christ was “full of truth” As I see it, I gotta tell you the truth:
If America is truly a Christian nation this specific War we are waging on Terror & in Iraq is in itself supporting an “evil ideology”. Let me be very clear: I am not a pacifist, I believe War can be justified. Through the execution of this War in Iraq, we the United States of America are killing innocent people, women, and children. And listen, with no justification! I’m not trying to appeal to Democrats or Republicans but Americans and especially Christians whom may feel a call from the spirit of God.
Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, Prince of Peace gave himself for the World and the individual soul. It is through this example that America, which proclaims to be a Christian nation must not take for granted one individual life especially when our God tells us, his way, not that of military force is the path to Victory.
Republican leaders say Democrats want to “cut and run” and have no alternative plan for this failing War. Why don’t we contemplate trying this War on Terror God’s way? Being “full of truth”, the Christian Faith and its believers should be called & compelled to demand an immediate end to the War in Iraq. G.W. Bush and Dick Cheney have said ’ don’t loose your memories’. We, the People of the United States of America were told Iraq and Saddam Hussein were a threat to our security, possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction, and were linked to 9/11. All of these allegations told to use are false, therefore there is no truth nor justification for American soldiers to continue to occupy the sovereign nation of Iraq.
-Anthony T. Brooks
Checks & Balances Blog
Thursday, November 17, 2005
A Call to Bring Our Troops Home
"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Warning that other global threats "cannot be ignored," Rep. John Murtha, D-Pennsylvania, a leading adviser on defense issues, called Thursday for the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
"U.S. and coalition troops have done all they can in Iraq," the senior lawmaker said. "It's time for a change in direction.
"He said he believes all the forces could be redeployed over a six-month period.
Murtha, a former Marine Corps colonel and veteran of the Vietnam war, is the first senior lawmaker to call for an immediate withdrawal. Other critics of the war have asked President Bush to set up a timetable for withdrawal. GOP lawmaker: Withdrawal 'a mistake'Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois, blasted Murtha for his comments.
"I am saddened by the comments made today by Rep. Murtha," Hastert said in a statement. "It is clear that as [House Minority Leader] Nancy Pelosi's top lieutenant on armed services, Rep. Murtha and Democratic leaders have adopted a policy of cut-and-run. They would prefer that the United States surrender to the terrorists who would harm innocent Americans.
"Rep. Duncan Hunter, a Republican from California and chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, described calls for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq "a mistake," arguing that leaving Iraq would make it appear that America cannot sustain prolonged military operations."I just wanted to remind our friends that now is the time for endurance," Hunter said. "Right now, in Iraq, we are changing the world. ... We're changing a very strategic part of the world in such a way that it will not be a threat to the United States and, in fact, will be an ally in the global war against terror.
"A respected voiceMurtha's call for a withdrawal, however, could have a significant impact on the debate over the future of the Iraq war, as both Democrats and Republicans seek his advice on military and veterans' issues."A man of stature of John Murtha -- that's a pretty heavy hit, I don't mind telling you," said North Carolina Republican Rep. Walter Jones, sponsor of the House resolution that calls for a timetable for withdrawal. "He ... gives a lot of weight to this debate." Jones said he thinks this will make "some Republicans think about their responsibility as relates to the war in Iraq" and that "this is a week that will help further the debate -- ignite the debate."Another Democrat who voted for the war, Rep. Harold Ford of Tennessee, said he had heard of Murtha's comments and wouldn't endorse his call for immediate withdrawal.But, Ford said, "It a powerful statement coming from arguably the most respected voice in the Congress," and it will be hard for the White House and Vice President Dick Cheney to dismiss these comments as easily as other Democratic criticisms on the war. Presence 'uniting enemy against us'Murtha, who has served in the House for over three decades, is the senior Democrat and former chairman of the Defense Appropriations Committee and voted in favor of the Iraq war. Now, he said, the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq are "uniting the enemy against us.""Our military has accomplished its mission and done its duty," he said. "Our military captured Saddam Hussein, captured or killed his closest associates, but the war continues to intensify."He said the redeployment will give Iraqis the incentive to take control of their country.The statement comes amid increasingly heated debate over the Iraq war and the intelligence leading up to the March 2003 invasion. A recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll also found the public increasingly dissatisfied with the Iraq war. The poll, released Monday, found that 60 percent of Americans said the war was not worth fighting, while 38 percent said it was worthwhile. (Full story) Monday's poll found that 19 percent of Americans want to see the troops come home now and 33 percent said they wanted them home within a year. Only 38 percent said they should remain "as long as needed." On Tuesday, the Senate also voted 79-19 for an amendment that called for progress reports on the Iraq war every 90 days. The amendment's purpose was "to clarify and recommend changes" to U.S. policy in Iraq. The vote was seen as a reflection of the increasing bipartisan dissatisfaction over the war's progress.On Wednesday, Vice President Dick Cheney dismissed Democratic critics, calling allegations that the administration misled the country as "one of the most dishonest and reprehensible charges ever aired in this city." (Full story)Murtha took issue with the administration's counter-criticism, specifically President Bush's Veterans Day speech in which he said it is "deeply irresponsible to rewrite how that war began."'Flawed policy'"I resent the fact that on Veterans Day, they criticized Democrats for criticizing them," Murtha said. "This [the war] is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion. The American public knows it, and lashing out at critics doesn't help a bit. You've got to change the policy. That's what's going to help the American people. You need to change direction.
"Murtha -- who recently visited Iraq's Anbar province -- said it is Congress' responsibility to speak out for the "sons and daughters" on the battlefield, and relayed several emotional stories from soldiers recovering at Bethesda's Walter Reed Medical Center.
"I tell you, these young folks are under intense activity over there, I mean much more intense than Vietnam," he said. "You never know when it's going to happen."
CNN Reports:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/17/murtha.iraq/index.html
"U.S. and coalition troops have done all they can in Iraq," the senior lawmaker said. "It's time for a change in direction.
"He said he believes all the forces could be redeployed over a six-month period.
Murtha, a former Marine Corps colonel and veteran of the Vietnam war, is the first senior lawmaker to call for an immediate withdrawal. Other critics of the war have asked President Bush to set up a timetable for withdrawal. GOP lawmaker: Withdrawal 'a mistake'Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois, blasted Murtha for his comments.
"I am saddened by the comments made today by Rep. Murtha," Hastert said in a statement. "It is clear that as [House Minority Leader] Nancy Pelosi's top lieutenant on armed services, Rep. Murtha and Democratic leaders have adopted a policy of cut-and-run. They would prefer that the United States surrender to the terrorists who would harm innocent Americans.
"Rep. Duncan Hunter, a Republican from California and chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, described calls for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq "a mistake," arguing that leaving Iraq would make it appear that America cannot sustain prolonged military operations."I just wanted to remind our friends that now is the time for endurance," Hunter said. "Right now, in Iraq, we are changing the world. ... We're changing a very strategic part of the world in such a way that it will not be a threat to the United States and, in fact, will be an ally in the global war against terror.
"A respected voiceMurtha's call for a withdrawal, however, could have a significant impact on the debate over the future of the Iraq war, as both Democrats and Republicans seek his advice on military and veterans' issues."A man of stature of John Murtha -- that's a pretty heavy hit, I don't mind telling you," said North Carolina Republican Rep. Walter Jones, sponsor of the House resolution that calls for a timetable for withdrawal. "He ... gives a lot of weight to this debate." Jones said he thinks this will make "some Republicans think about their responsibility as relates to the war in Iraq" and that "this is a week that will help further the debate -- ignite the debate."Another Democrat who voted for the war, Rep. Harold Ford of Tennessee, said he had heard of Murtha's comments and wouldn't endorse his call for immediate withdrawal.But, Ford said, "It a powerful statement coming from arguably the most respected voice in the Congress," and it will be hard for the White House and Vice President Dick Cheney to dismiss these comments as easily as other Democratic criticisms on the war. Presence 'uniting enemy against us'Murtha, who has served in the House for over three decades, is the senior Democrat and former chairman of the Defense Appropriations Committee and voted in favor of the Iraq war. Now, he said, the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq are "uniting the enemy against us.""Our military has accomplished its mission and done its duty," he said. "Our military captured Saddam Hussein, captured or killed his closest associates, but the war continues to intensify."He said the redeployment will give Iraqis the incentive to take control of their country.The statement comes amid increasingly heated debate over the Iraq war and the intelligence leading up to the March 2003 invasion. A recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll also found the public increasingly dissatisfied with the Iraq war. The poll, released Monday, found that 60 percent of Americans said the war was not worth fighting, while 38 percent said it was worthwhile. (Full story) Monday's poll found that 19 percent of Americans want to see the troops come home now and 33 percent said they wanted them home within a year. Only 38 percent said they should remain "as long as needed." On Tuesday, the Senate also voted 79-19 for an amendment that called for progress reports on the Iraq war every 90 days. The amendment's purpose was "to clarify and recommend changes" to U.S. policy in Iraq. The vote was seen as a reflection of the increasing bipartisan dissatisfaction over the war's progress.On Wednesday, Vice President Dick Cheney dismissed Democratic critics, calling allegations that the administration misled the country as "one of the most dishonest and reprehensible charges ever aired in this city." (Full story)Murtha took issue with the administration's counter-criticism, specifically President Bush's Veterans Day speech in which he said it is "deeply irresponsible to rewrite how that war began."'Flawed policy'"I resent the fact that on Veterans Day, they criticized Democrats for criticizing them," Murtha said. "This [the war] is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion. The American public knows it, and lashing out at critics doesn't help a bit. You've got to change the policy. That's what's going to help the American people. You need to change direction.
"Murtha -- who recently visited Iraq's Anbar province -- said it is Congress' responsibility to speak out for the "sons and daughters" on the battlefield, and relayed several emotional stories from soldiers recovering at Bethesda's Walter Reed Medical Center.
"I tell you, these young folks are under intense activity over there, I mean much more intense than Vietnam," he said. "You never know when it's going to happen."
CNN Reports:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/17/murtha.iraq/index.html
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
The Budget II: Damn Republicans!
Those damn Republicans instead of decreasing funding from the Department of Defense, the Wars in Iraq & Afghanistan, the pork within the Highway Bill, and incentives to Oil companies found in the Energy Bill are cutting Billions from Education.
There is a myth that the United States Government spends to much money on Social Programs like Welfare, and Food Stamps. This is outright false.
Let me break this Down for You:
Spending on Defense & Security = $533 Billion Dollars
Spending on Health, Education, Labor = $141 Billion
Spending for Veterans, Housing & Urban Development = $90 Billion
And to fund efforts to rebuild regions affected by Hurricane Katrina the Republicans don’t look to cutting from Defense but plan on spending more money that we do not have. Call this fiscally responsible? Hell no! It’s Reckless.
The needs of American soldieries, American Veterans, American children & families, American workers are being neglected. Politicians are elected to serve.A specific example of their dereliction of their duty to the People: Republicans are proposing cutting $15 Billion from Education, leaving Veteran Hospitals $1 Billion in the red, and $50 Billion from Social Programs needed for victims of Hurricane Katrina. Money that should have already been in place.
The Dept. of Homeland Security which is funded Billions of your Tax Dollars was created by Bush under his watch but I failed to prepare the nation for a natural disaster.
On Labor, American jobs are being taking by illegal aliens and outsourced to India while at the same time the United States is falling behind other nations in the education & training of its work force.
On Education President Bush said we need to send more people to school and that we would “leave no child behind”. However these budgets cuts seek to do just that in decreasing financial assistance, therefore many poor but bright young people will not even have the opportunity to go to school.
Republicans are even turning their back on funding social programs for Churches which provide vital support to local communities.
I am tired of hearing those of you that blindly support President Bush. Common sense should tell even the strongest Conservative (whom claim to be fiscally responsible) that policies and priorities of the current Administration need to change.
White House Budget:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/tables.html
Churches Oppose Cuts:
http://www.ncccusa.org/news/051020BudgetCutPlans.html
News Report:
http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?f...%20and%20Policy
There is a myth that the United States Government spends to much money on Social Programs like Welfare, and Food Stamps. This is outright false.
Let me break this Down for You:
Spending on Defense & Security = $533 Billion Dollars
Spending on Health, Education, Labor = $141 Billion
Spending for Veterans, Housing & Urban Development = $90 Billion
And to fund efforts to rebuild regions affected by Hurricane Katrina the Republicans don’t look to cutting from Defense but plan on spending more money that we do not have. Call this fiscally responsible? Hell no! It’s Reckless.
The needs of American soldieries, American Veterans, American children & families, American workers are being neglected. Politicians are elected to serve.A specific example of their dereliction of their duty to the People: Republicans are proposing cutting $15 Billion from Education, leaving Veteran Hospitals $1 Billion in the red, and $50 Billion from Social Programs needed for victims of Hurricane Katrina. Money that should have already been in place.
The Dept. of Homeland Security which is funded Billions of your Tax Dollars was created by Bush under his watch but I failed to prepare the nation for a natural disaster.
On Labor, American jobs are being taking by illegal aliens and outsourced to India while at the same time the United States is falling behind other nations in the education & training of its work force.
On Education President Bush said we need to send more people to school and that we would “leave no child behind”. However these budgets cuts seek to do just that in decreasing financial assistance, therefore many poor but bright young people will not even have the opportunity to go to school.
Republicans are even turning their back on funding social programs for Churches which provide vital support to local communities.
I am tired of hearing those of you that blindly support President Bush. Common sense should tell even the strongest Conservative (whom claim to be fiscally responsible) that policies and priorities of the current Administration need to change.
White House Budget:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/tables.html
Churches Oppose Cuts:
http://www.ncccusa.org/news/051020BudgetCutPlans.html
News Report:
http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?f...%20and%20Policy
Monday, November 14, 2005
A Lack of Leadership
I have spent much time on Checks & Balances condemning Republican policy and promoting Democrats. Now in November 2005 the United States finds itself at a moment where we must shed our political affiliations and have a frank discussion on certain matters.
I also ask you this: is your political interest and your side winning so crucial that Integrity, Character and Truthfulness are no longer important, and God forbid, necessary?
Issues where there is a lack of leadership within the United States:
- The economy
- Profiteering by Corporations and Politicians
- Corruption
- Poor approval of the Government
- An economically stretched population
- Uncommon natural disasters raising the issue of global warming
- Energy Independence, and alternative energy technologies
- Poverty
- The Voting System
- The Patriot Acts
- The War in Iraq
- Monetary & tax policies regarding corporations, & the wealthy versus the worker & Consumer
- Education
- Health Care
- Work Force Training
- Trade
Where is the leadership on these matters?
The Budget: Damn Republicans!
Those damn Republicans instead of cutting funding from the Department of Defense, the Wars in Iraq & Afghanistan, the pork within the Highway Bill, and incentives to Oil companies found in the Energy Bill are cutting Billions from Education.
And to fund efforts to rebuild regions affected by Hurricane Katrina they don’t look to cutting from any of the mentioned above but plan on spending more money that we do not have. Call this fiscally responsible? Hell no! It’s Reckless.
And to fund efforts to rebuild regions affected by Hurricane Katrina they don’t look to cutting from any of the mentioned above but plan on spending more money that we do not have. Call this fiscally responsible? Hell no! It’s Reckless.
"Mr. Danger"
One world leader calls G.W. Bush “Mr. Danger”. 9/11, the War on Terror, the Iraq War, the Afghanistan War, NASA Space Shuttle Blowing Up, Asian Tsunami, Hurricane Katrina, Abused Prisoners, Secret Laws, Secret Police, Secret Courts, Secret Prisons, Bird Flu, and Weapons of Mass Destruction.
The South American President calling Bush “Mr. Danger” however is referring to his economic policies.
Is this Karma, coincidence or all Bush’s fault?In the entire Presidency’s of Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr. and Clinton did the U.S. endure so many negative occurrences? Maybe this title of “Mr. Danger” is warranted.
Links:
http://www.newshounds.us/2005/11/03/venezu...h_mr_danger.php
http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/050506/w050658.html
The South American President calling Bush “Mr. Danger” however is referring to his economic policies.
Is this Karma, coincidence or all Bush’s fault?In the entire Presidency’s of Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr. and Clinton did the U.S. endure so many negative occurrences? Maybe this title of “Mr. Danger” is warranted.
Links:
http://www.newshounds.us/2005/11/03/venezu...h_mr_danger.php
http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/050506/w050658.html
Friday, November 11, 2005
Great Britain Rejects "Patriot Acts"
Blair Suffers Major Defeat on Terror Bill By Ed Johnson
The Associated Press
Wednesday 09 November 2005
London - In a political blow to Prime Minister Tony Blair, British lawmakers on Wednesday rejected tough anti-terrorism legislation that would have allowed suspects to be detained for 90 days without charge.
The House of Commons vote was the first major defeat of Blair's premiership and raises serious questions about his grip on power. Blair had staked his authority on the measure and doggedly refused to compromise.
Lawmakers, including 49 members of Blair's Labour Party, opted instead for a maximum detention period for terror suspects of 28 days without charge.
Michael Howard, leader of the opposition Conservative Party, said Blair's authority had "diminished almost to vanishing point" and said he should consider resigning.
"This vote shows he is no longer able to carry his own party with him. He must now consider his position," said Howard.
But Blair was defiant. He ruled out resignation and insisted lawmakers had been wrong to put the civil liberties of a small number of terrorists ahead of the "fundamental civil liberty of this country to protection from terrorism."
"The country will think that Parliament has behaved in a deeply irresponsible way today," he added.
Lawmakers voted 322 to 291 against 90-day detentions and backed the 28-day period by 323-290 votes.
The result is a humiliating blow to Blair. For eight years, his Labour government commanded an unassailable lead in the Commons and easily swatted aside opposition to its legislation.
But Blair's popularity has slumped in the wake of the divisive Iraq war, and his party was punished in national elections earlier this year. Labour's huge 161-seat advantage in the Commons shrunk to just 66, making the government vulnerable.
In the immediate aftermath of the July attacks on London's transit system, Blair had considerable cross-party support for new anti-terror legislation.
He drafted the Terrorism Bill, which aims to tackle Muslim extremism by outlawing training in terrorist camps as well encouraging acts of violence and glorifying terrorism.
But the political consensus broke down over the plan to extend the period terror suspects can be held without change from the current 14-day maximum to three months. Authorities argued more time was needed in complex cases where suspects have multiple aliases or where the help of foreign intelligence agencies is needed. But critics countered that extending it to 90 days would erode civil rights.
Blair took a considerable political gamble in refusing to back down and had called in every supporter to shore up numbers. Treasury chief Gordon Brown was called back from an official visit to Israel only two hours after arriving there. Foreign Secretary Jack Straw cut short an official EU visit to Russia, while Labour Party chairman Ian McCartney, who is recuperating from heart surgery, volunteered to return for the vote.
The defeat comes at a difficult time for the prime minister. His party, and even his Cabinet, is split over his plans to encourage greater private sector investment in public services such as health care and education. Earlier this month, Blair's strongest ally, Work and Pensions Secretary David Blunkett, was forced to resign due to a scandal over his business dealings.
The prime minister has said he will not seek a fourth term in office. He could serve until 2010, but pressure for him to quit sooner may intensify following Wednesday's vote.
Bookmakers Ladbrokes cut the odds on Blair stepping down next year from 11 to 4, to 5 to 2 in the wake of the defeat.
"The prime minister has just fallen off the high wire," said Scottish Nationalist Party leader Alex Salmond. "He is a victim of his own arrogance. He may well be on the way out of office."
The Associated Press
Wednesday 09 November 2005
London - In a political blow to Prime Minister Tony Blair, British lawmakers on Wednesday rejected tough anti-terrorism legislation that would have allowed suspects to be detained for 90 days without charge.
The House of Commons vote was the first major defeat of Blair's premiership and raises serious questions about his grip on power. Blair had staked his authority on the measure and doggedly refused to compromise.
Lawmakers, including 49 members of Blair's Labour Party, opted instead for a maximum detention period for terror suspects of 28 days without charge.
Michael Howard, leader of the opposition Conservative Party, said Blair's authority had "diminished almost to vanishing point" and said he should consider resigning.
"This vote shows he is no longer able to carry his own party with him. He must now consider his position," said Howard.
But Blair was defiant. He ruled out resignation and insisted lawmakers had been wrong to put the civil liberties of a small number of terrorists ahead of the "fundamental civil liberty of this country to protection from terrorism."
"The country will think that Parliament has behaved in a deeply irresponsible way today," he added.
Lawmakers voted 322 to 291 against 90-day detentions and backed the 28-day period by 323-290 votes.
The result is a humiliating blow to Blair. For eight years, his Labour government commanded an unassailable lead in the Commons and easily swatted aside opposition to its legislation.
But Blair's popularity has slumped in the wake of the divisive Iraq war, and his party was punished in national elections earlier this year. Labour's huge 161-seat advantage in the Commons shrunk to just 66, making the government vulnerable.
In the immediate aftermath of the July attacks on London's transit system, Blair had considerable cross-party support for new anti-terror legislation.
He drafted the Terrorism Bill, which aims to tackle Muslim extremism by outlawing training in terrorist camps as well encouraging acts of violence and glorifying terrorism.
But the political consensus broke down over the plan to extend the period terror suspects can be held without change from the current 14-day maximum to three months. Authorities argued more time was needed in complex cases where suspects have multiple aliases or where the help of foreign intelligence agencies is needed. But critics countered that extending it to 90 days would erode civil rights.
Blair took a considerable political gamble in refusing to back down and had called in every supporter to shore up numbers. Treasury chief Gordon Brown was called back from an official visit to Israel only two hours after arriving there. Foreign Secretary Jack Straw cut short an official EU visit to Russia, while Labour Party chairman Ian McCartney, who is recuperating from heart surgery, volunteered to return for the vote.
The defeat comes at a difficult time for the prime minister. His party, and even his Cabinet, is split over his plans to encourage greater private sector investment in public services such as health care and education. Earlier this month, Blair's strongest ally, Work and Pensions Secretary David Blunkett, was forced to resign due to a scandal over his business dealings.
The prime minister has said he will not seek a fourth term in office. He could serve until 2010, but pressure for him to quit sooner may intensify following Wednesday's vote.
Bookmakers Ladbrokes cut the odds on Blair stepping down next year from 11 to 4, to 5 to 2 in the wake of the defeat.
"The prime minister has just fallen off the high wire," said Scottish Nationalist Party leader Alex Salmond. "He is a victim of his own arrogance. He may well be on the way out of office."
Sunday, November 06, 2005
“Regrettable Unfortunate Phenomenon”
Because of the extremely polarized political climate within the United States intensified by the Wars in Iraq & on Terror, liberals and conservatives have both been accusing each other of literally being Nazis. I am not Jewish but I do write out of respect to this community. I write this as an opinion, not fact and welcome discussion on my remarks.
Adolf Hitler referred to the “ethnic cleansing” resulting in the death of Jews and other “classes” of people as Regrettable Unfortunate Phenomenon. Some said the Holocaust was in the name of God. I viewed an interview from a survivor, they said a thought they focused on was to “wait a while.” “wait a while”.
As an American citizens no matter your political or religious affiliations you must be aware of the direction our nation is being led. The alarms being raised no longer equate to partisan politics. The International community, President Jimmy Carter, and President Bill Clinton are attempting to raise public awareness. When you hear these former guardians of our democracy speak, what they are saying is practical.
The comparison of specific activities of the G.W. Bush Administration to that of Adolf Hitler possesses merit.
The United States operates under a system of Checks & Balances, however under G.W. Bush’s watch this system has been corrupted threatening our very institution of Democracy. Systematic and Legal changes that are gradually chipping away at freedoms and increasing the tangible powers of the Executive Branch, Law Enforcement and the Military.
These measures were achieved by taking advantage of national disasters such as 9/11 (resulting in the Patriot Acts & Iraq War) Hurricane Katrina (policy of using the Military for Domestic/ Civilian responsibility instead of fixing FEMA), Bird Flu ( a plan to use the Military to quarantine cities instead of utilizing our Health Care Infrastructure). These plans came directly from the G.W. Bush Administration
Adolf Hitler took control of Germany in part by altering laws, usurping existing Ministries/Departments, and through ambiguous laws exactly like the Patriot Acts.
Specifically there are 3 Items that must be done dealt with:
I: Provisions of the Patriotic Act, which permit for sneak and peak searches. Our Constitution guards against unlawful searches and seizures. There should be no exceptions. Provisions which allow for law enforcement to have surveillance on citizens or seek information on a citizens without first going through judge. These provisions overrides the People’s power of Oversight.
II. Detaining Prisoners, the U.S. now under G.W. Bush’s watch has a policies that are in the “spirit of the Geneva Convention” towards detainees. In my opinion this is crime. I strongly believe we should follow the Geneva Convention and other humanitarian standards with no exceptions.
II. Voting: the situation with voting machines must be corrected immediately. There should not be any voting district that cannot be accurately audited. Furthermore citizens being given a receipt after they vote is entirely reasonable.
“Divide & Rule” was Hitler’s policy. It is to the advantage of politicians for our nation to be divided. But let me tell you, there is no reason why America cannot pursue policy that benefits all of its citizens and that adheres completely to its Constitution, with no exceptions and no ambiguous interpretations.
Also, with all do respect to President George W. Bush and advocates for the present Wars, what do you call the civilians and children dying in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunate Phenomenon? How much longer must these people live in such conditions? And how much longer will the American people continue to permit & tolerate bad leaders to take our country in the wrong direction?
President Jimmy Carter Speaks on Secret Prisons:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9903864/
Adolf Hitler referred to the “ethnic cleansing” resulting in the death of Jews and other “classes” of people as Regrettable Unfortunate Phenomenon. Some said the Holocaust was in the name of God. I viewed an interview from a survivor, they said a thought they focused on was to “wait a while.” “wait a while”.
As an American citizens no matter your political or religious affiliations you must be aware of the direction our nation is being led. The alarms being raised no longer equate to partisan politics. The International community, President Jimmy Carter, and President Bill Clinton are attempting to raise public awareness. When you hear these former guardians of our democracy speak, what they are saying is practical.
The comparison of specific activities of the G.W. Bush Administration to that of Adolf Hitler possesses merit.
The United States operates under a system of Checks & Balances, however under G.W. Bush’s watch this system has been corrupted threatening our very institution of Democracy. Systematic and Legal changes that are gradually chipping away at freedoms and increasing the tangible powers of the Executive Branch, Law Enforcement and the Military.
These measures were achieved by taking advantage of national disasters such as 9/11 (resulting in the Patriot Acts & Iraq War) Hurricane Katrina (policy of using the Military for Domestic/ Civilian responsibility instead of fixing FEMA), Bird Flu ( a plan to use the Military to quarantine cities instead of utilizing our Health Care Infrastructure). These plans came directly from the G.W. Bush Administration
Adolf Hitler took control of Germany in part by altering laws, usurping existing Ministries/Departments, and through ambiguous laws exactly like the Patriot Acts.
Specifically there are 3 Items that must be done dealt with:
I: Provisions of the Patriotic Act, which permit for sneak and peak searches. Our Constitution guards against unlawful searches and seizures. There should be no exceptions. Provisions which allow for law enforcement to have surveillance on citizens or seek information on a citizens without first going through judge. These provisions overrides the People’s power of Oversight.
II. Detaining Prisoners, the U.S. now under G.W. Bush’s watch has a policies that are in the “spirit of the Geneva Convention” towards detainees. In my opinion this is crime. I strongly believe we should follow the Geneva Convention and other humanitarian standards with no exceptions.
II. Voting: the situation with voting machines must be corrected immediately. There should not be any voting district that cannot be accurately audited. Furthermore citizens being given a receipt after they vote is entirely reasonable.
“Divide & Rule” was Hitler’s policy. It is to the advantage of politicians for our nation to be divided. But let me tell you, there is no reason why America cannot pursue policy that benefits all of its citizens and that adheres completely to its Constitution, with no exceptions and no ambiguous interpretations.
Also, with all do respect to President George W. Bush and advocates for the present Wars, what do you call the civilians and children dying in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunate Phenomenon? How much longer must these people live in such conditions? And how much longer will the American people continue to permit & tolerate bad leaders to take our country in the wrong direction?
President Jimmy Carter Speaks on Secret Prisons:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9903864/
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
