A Triumph for America

The news that greeted me this morning when I turned it on was uplifting and
generally an event that is long overdue.. Our Nation has been in need of
such a boost for several months.. We have chased the "Butcher of Baghdad" to
ground and captured him.. As I watched and felt as though a great burden
was lifted, the reporting of the good news began to tarnish itself..
Political posturing from both the Republican and Democratic aisles never
cease to amaze me.. Exploitation of this historical capture commenced ..
The expected praising of our true heroes and warriors began to take on an
eerie exercise of "who" could leap in front of the cameras first to publicly
exhibit their patriotism and support of our magnificent men and women who
have captured this dispicable maniac, who tortured his people and
slaughtered them.. My feelings of elation at the capture began to "morph"
into disgust.. Announcements of George W. Bush addressing the Nation and
world is timed for 12:00 noon.. This capture of this animal is a wonderful
opportunity for Bush to turn the tide for some of the ill feelings of the
world community and truly unite a Global committment to make our world a
better place to live.. Needless to say, in past experience with this
president, he seems to not have the statesmanship expertise to contribute to
that unification.. So .. I am waiting to see what he brings to the table and
presents to the nation and world.. I am praying that he will not blow this
opportunity, as he has consistently done in the past.. I did not intend to
make this post at this time, maybe never.. There is no mention of motorcycle
in this post and it is totally off topic.. Those who do not approve of it
are welcome to criticize.. Think about it.. Perhaps the capture of Osama bin
Laden is forthcoming.. I believe that we made a tragic mistake and cost many
lives by not pursuing Bin Laden and running his sorry ass to ground before
the action in Iraq commenced.. Maybe now, we can be about the business of
bringing the perpetrators of the dastardly attack on our Nation in 2001..
The statesmanship of George W. Bush is completely on the line, now.. The
handling of this event is going to be the true test of his mantle to lead
this country and the world and make it a better place.. Political posturing
and political assets in the exploitation of this event will be the true
judge of the leadership of our country.. Let's be careful in our own
judgements..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

Hey Bill -

I just watched Bush's speech. I didn't think it was too bad.
Short, direct, and to the point. A small warning that it's not over
for people that might think that it is.

I think the other thing I liked about it is that he didn't
say, nor imply, what was going to happen with Saddam. I'm sure the
reporters had a ton of questions, but he left it wide open when he
walked off the stage.

We'll have to wait and watch.


--Fullstate

 

To my knowledge and from the statements made by Bush in the past several
weeks, there has been no connection established..

Only the rumors and innuendo.. From what I understand, it is very unlikely..

I fully emphasized with you.. Not a good experience.. None of us can afford
to not be as informed as the media will permit.. In addition to the network
news, I look into many of the alternative sources for more complete
information and especially the conservative sources that are available..

Maybe I have been unclear in my position on the "republic" and "democracy"
detail.. First .. we live in a Republic.. Our form of government has been
(notice "has") a democracy..Our Constitution and Bill of Rights secure for
us, certain inalienable rights and spells out the basic principles of our
government.. I fear that those most revered and suffered instruments are
being marginalized and become irrelevant in the face of the policies of the
past few administrations.. The current administration seem determined to
undermine the Constitution and Bill of Rights.. We must stay informed to
assure that our way of life is not threatened furthur.. Thanks for your
response to my post..

Bill Walker
Irving, Tx.

 

Osama Bin Laden's stated claim for the attack was that the US had troops in
Saudi Arabia.
The US had troops in Saudi Arabia solely because of Saddam Hussein.

There's your connection.

 

tenuous connection at best and not totally accurate. we were militarily
in saudi long before troubles with iraq/kuwait in 91. double speak by
an ambassador of ours was interpreted as a green light by hussein to
invade kuwait, but no one mentions that much any more. hussein figgerd
it was ok because he did our bidding in messing over iran for a while
and kuwait would be his payoff. the ambassador at fault got recalled and
buried in a state department desk job.

we were in saudi big time under reagan after iran flipped out and we
were supporting hussein's war with iran in the 80s very quietly thru
saudi. that's where he got chemical and bio weapons from in the first
place. oops.
the "enemy of our enemy is our friend" is not the best basis for foreign
policy, even when it seems pragmatic at the time.
saudi was more scared of the iranian revolution than iraq and still is
because of the jihad nutcases like bin laden. obl wants to destroy the
house of saud and establish sharia (islamic law) in saudi.
hussein/baath party are socialists of the stalin school and had no use
for obl religious nutcases, including the baathists being sunni whereas
obl is shiite. that's like asking catholics and pentacostalists to have
a meeting of the minds. sure they are both christian sects, but it ends
there. same thing with extreme sunni/shiia. to muddle things further,
the saudi royals are wahhabi, who think the everything after the 3rd
century in islam is false and should be eliminated. needless to say,
those groups have their differences that haven't been resolved in over a
thousand years. we ain't gonna settle it for them.

it's interesting that we have been moving out of saudi and more into
iraq, with the us military headquarters for operations in that entire
theater moving to qatar out of saudi. qatar is more easily bought, fewer
ppl to payoff, less territory to defend, and it gets us out of the land
of mecca and medina. i fully expect iraq to be our new base and oil
supplier, replacing saudi which is becoming more unstable while we
placate iraq over the next few years. supporting iraqi "democracy"
versus saudi royalty looks better on the world stage too.

like everything else, follow the money and learn from history.
hussein now joins panamas noriega and liberias paul taylor as the latest
fallen thug doing the dirty work of american foreign policy and then
falling out of favor for getting to big for his britches. we keep
getting involved with these scumbags because it's just hard to find good
help these days.

(obligatory bike content)
i think obl is riding klr 650s in the pakistani mountains, when he can
get gasoline.
(/obligatory bike content)

--
jam

'73 R75/5 Toaster (not for sale)
'99 R1100RT (in use)
'00 FLHRCI (sold!)
Iron Butt Assoc, WATR 3X, EIEIO, AEIOU etc blah blah

 

Good bio and accurate as I recall it.. Your detail in dates, etc. is far
superior than my own.. Compliments..The ensuing open trial of the "Butcher"
should be interesting .. Not his own testimony, but testimony of the
witnesses called.. I fear Saddam will never come to trial.. It is not
entirely outside the realm to imagine his untimely death due to unexplained
illness or at the hands of an unknown assassin.. That would be the most
expedient disposal of the problem presented by his unexpected capture alive
and well.. and talking..BTW.. thanks for the response..

Your friend in Irving..

 

Many thanks.. LOL.. I have to admit, sometimes it does get lonely out here..
But, every time I have the privilege to address any gathering, large or
small, I am encouraged.. I will continue to post information on this group
and others as I learn about it.. You are certainly invited to be involved as
much as you can afford.. Thanks again.. I hope I can measure up and be the
advocate for us all, that we need...

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

I don't know what you call "quiet", but it was all over the TV.

As I recall, the "fall-guy" in the mess (Oliver North) was cheered by
many in this country as a "hero".

I fully expect Hussein to end up like Noriega.

And speaking of chemical weapons (aka "weapons of mass destruction"),
where are they? I don't give a rat's ass about Hussein....I want to
see the weapons that he supposedly had. Many people in this country
have been labled "unpatriotic" for speaking out against this action in
Iraq because of the lies told. As of today, they stand correct.

So, all you flag waving patriots, here's the record as of this date
for your ragged president:
1. Toppled one of the strongest economies
2. Allowed terrorists to fly hijacked planes into buildings
3. Over threw two lawful governments
4. Destroyed many of the rights we enjoyed as citizens
5. Busted his stupid ass learning to ride a Stegway

That's some record there. I'd have to say that he's managed to run
this country about the same as the many businesses he's run into the
ground. But, that's something else he promised this country when he
was running for the White House...he's gonna run it like a business.

I'm just waiting for someone to give something positive that he's done
for us, anyone?

 

they were quiet about it while it was going on, iran-contra broke pretty
much after the fact.

still is in some parts, check your AM radio.

he's made homer simpson's pronounciation of "newk-u-ler" generally
accepted?

--
jam

'73 R75/5 Toaster (not for sale)
'99 R1100RT (in use)
'00 FLHRCI (sold!)
Iron Butt Assoc, WATR 3X, EIEIO, AEIOU etc blah blah

 

Oh No.. the economy was in a downturn.. which it had done several times..
Unlike Clinton.. Bush had no clue what to do about it and we have had one of
the worst recessions since Hoover.. but.. by all means.. Let's not blame
Bush.. **** that .. I blame him ..

I .. for one am not suing Bush.. so all the freakin' proof is nonsense.. No
one has ever said the sleazy bastard can't cover his ass.. Someone has done
that for him, his whole life.. Still trying to do it.. The evidence to be
presented by the widow of one of the victims of 911 has filed suit and the
courts have agreed to hear the case, from what I can learn about it.. If he
didn't have advance knowledge that Al Queda was on the attack for the US..
It was because he had his head up his ass.. He was warned the day before, in
his briefing, according to some of the witnesses before the house
committee...

We should have left a gaping hole in the ground in Afghanistan.. Our people
wouldn't be getting ambushed and the Taliban would be looking for a home..

Better get to it before you wake up some morning and find out that we live
under an authoritative government of corporatism..

I've told you before and I'll tell you one more time.. The alternative
voters helped get this corrupt asshole elected president.. When one of the
independent parties can find some credible candidate with enough recognition
to win anything, even a local office, bring him on and I am willing to look
him over..Until then.. everyone better get busy and get behind whoever comes
out of this nomination process and get him elected..You ain't seen nothing
yet.. Another four years of George W.Bush is going to be a total disaster
and our way of life is finished... You got a beef with the democratic party
and the lesser of evil comment .. then .. when that man is elected .. stay
on his ass and when he fails to represent his constituents .. gittem.. I
know from personal experience it works.. Better forget all that
"independent" bullshit and alternative candidate crap and get someone
elected instead of Bush...

Bill Walker
Irving, Tx.

 

Stephan Rothstein wrote:
When are we (as a people) going to

Or look at it like I did: The evil of two lessers? You still get lesser.

 

Does "Conspiracy Theroy" ring a bell.
You are so bent on talking trash about a particular person "George Bush" that
you sound like you are suffering from paranoia.
Saddam was caught while Bush was president and instead of seeing that as being
good you chose to think that it will lead to door to door searches. I dont
follow your logic.
I dont always agree with Bill on many topics but when he does present one he
has some kind of defineing proof to go with it.
You sir just go into some kind of nutball rambling that failed to make sense
to me.
Please if you have some kind of tangible proof that cathing Saddam will lead
to some kind of government intrusion into our lives present it and back it up
with facts and I will listen.
but if you are just going to go on a tirade with no proof then dont expect me
to buy into the fertilzer you are selling

Thank You
Iceman

 

Bill,
I dont think for a minute that you understood what he said...
and now you are encouraging the peanut gallery

IceMan

 

Was ol' Jimmy riding a bicycle, Mike ?? LOL

 

Well dammit.. there I go again.. Just what I get for bein' out chasin' round
all day.. LOL.. S'cuse IceMan.. I was about to start politikin' again and
get a helluva storm goin on here.. Thanks , Pard...you probably saved my
bacon again... LMAO...

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

LOL.. I have always maintained that president's should beware of "attack
rabbits" when they are in a boat.. Damn.. I didn't realize how smart I
am.....

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

You saw it here first

http://www.newsoftheodd.com/article1021.html

IceMan

 

Enough is enough.. Where's IceGirl.. I'm tellin'...I'll have you to know.. I
don't need to come on here and be abused by my friends.. My little muchacha
does that well and good enough.. Let that be a lesson to all of ya'll...LOL

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

Here is an article today about these searches with no warrants...
http://msnbc.msn.com/Default.aspx?id=3700237&p1=0

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105698,00.html

The knocking on doors without search warrants just because someone you may
have known at sometime is a person of interest.

 

I blame him. That stock market went up and down all the time previous
administrations were in office. That's what it does. It has never went
up just all the time...no matter what these yuppies will have you
believe.

On the other hand, you have people out here blaming "9/11" for
everything that doesn't have anything to do with it. I was talking to
an ex-salesman from the car industry. He was telling me about how he
had to get out of the business because he couldn't make a living
anymore. He was telling me how people were no longer buying new cars
but rather buying used cars for cash or just fixing up what they have.
I thought "ok, I can relate". He continued telling me about all the
horrors he's had in that industry lately. I thought "ok, he's
converted...he'll vote for someone else in '04". He went on to tell me
how because of "9/11" the car sales have suffered. WHOA! Let's back
up! How does a several airplanes hitting buildings across the country
where not a single car is built or sold have ANYTHING to do with car
sales dropping? Oh, believe me...he had it ALL figured out. I gave him
the possibility of whether Bush taking office might've had something
to do with the economy...since it was also right in there with the
timing. "Oh no", he insisted. "It didn't have anything to do with Bush
taking office, the economy was on a downturn before he took
office...look at the stock market". Excuse me? Conveniently, people
look to either before or just after the one point where the economy
took it's sharpest hit and has yet to recover.

Proof? What do you call proof? CIA and FBI reports have already linked
that up until the very day of September 11, 2001 there were
communications about the very plan of hi-jacking commercial aircraft
and flying the planes into buildings. Rice has already said (openly
and in front of the press) that they knew, but didn't "connect the
dots". Connect the dots? What is this? And what was worse, the people
of this country bought into it. Not to mention Bush and his actions of
that day. What proof do you need?

I do have a problem with both of them. Why? Because people of a
civilized democratic society don't act like that. What we went into
Afghanistan for wasn't about terrorism. It wasn't about the Taliban.
It wasn't about women being beaten in the streets for having sex while
on their period. It wasn't to give the people in that country MTV. It
was about an oil pipeline deal that the Taliban wouldn't negotiate
about. Even if it were about the airplanes that were hi-jacked, why
didn't we invade and over-throw Saudi Arabia? That's where most of the
hi-jackers were from.

This makes no sense to me. If you have a problem with one because of
lies told to invade them, then how can you not have a problem with the
other.

I recall watching CNN the night after those planes hit the towers.
They were running these "specials" about Afghanistan and how we needed
to rid the world of the Taliban. They were showing women being beaten
in the streets for having sex on their periods. They were showing how
people were allowed no TV. They were showing how people had to conform
to their government. Keep in mind, this is less than a month after the
Taliban were invited to the White House and were paraded in front of
the cameras as important "VIPs". Everyone I was sitting with at that
time was "we need to over-throw them" and "those animals need to be
killed". Maybe I'm just clueless here, but when does someone go from
being an important member in the world and being invited to the White
House to someone of the "animal" and "thug" status?

That was actually a "positive" I had thrown in there...

Which opposition are you talking about? I hear this quite a bit, but
can't ever get it narrowed down.

If you're talking about Gore...we'll never know. And besides, the
argument for Gore is moot at this point anyway. If on the other hand
you're talking about one of the new candidates for '04, then you might
want to look over the field quite a bit. You're right for the most
part, most of them are the throw-backs we've seen run before and a
couple are the same whining "no take a stand for something" one's
who've got us where we are today. There are a few in the pack that are
new and bright faces that have done good long before and might be
better than you think when it comes to democratic candidates. Wesley
Clark is a good example of a new face in the pack. I'm just wanting to
see how the Bush team plans to "attack" him. They've already started
the corporate type attacks saying Clark was fired because of his
integrity. Bullshit! When someone takes a stand for humanity and then
the people he works for says he has no integrity...I look at the
people he works for first. The people he was working for are there
again doing the same things they did when Clark was there. Bush's team
has nothing to come at Clark with...and I think he might surprise us.