IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Admitting a mistake
"Last November I broke the unwritten rule that requires journalists to be
neutral political observers when I got embroiled in the controversy over
the presidential election and publicly supported Al Gore. It was not just
with friends that I passionately argued the election had been stolen and
that Mr. Gore would be the better president. I was one of the signatories
to the pompously titled 'Emergency Committee of Concerned Citizens 2000,'
which took full-page ads in the New York Times demanding a revote in Palm
Beach county. I wrote op-eds for Salon.com and the New York Daily News. On
television talk shows ... I made the case for Mr. Gore. In thousands of
e-mails, I urged voters to deluge Clay Roberts, director of Florida's
Division of Elections, with appeals for a recount. Of course, I did not
know whether the election had gone for Mr. Gore or George W. Bush. As a
partisan, I did not care. I was convinced that Mr. Gore was by far the
best-qualified candidate and the man most fit to lead the U.S. Mr. Bush
was not only untested nationally, but he seemed to me bereft of the
character or intellect to become a real leader, and I feared that four
years, and possibly eight, under Mr. Bush would set the country back. How
wrong I was. ... Sometimes historians wonder whether great leaders are
made by the crises they confront, or whether they would be great leaders
even in untroubled times. More often than not, real leadership flourishes
when faced with imminent threats and dangers. That is what America faces
at the start of the 21st century from a radical perversion of Islam. And
President Bush showed all of us who doubted him, and voted against him,
that he is indeed a leader. ... My late father used to tell me that one of
the hallmarks of good character is the courage to admit mistakes. ...
Well, I was vocal last year in stating my firm belief that the wrong man
was elected president. Now I am compelled to admit I was mistaken. The
best man for this incredibly hard campaign is now president. I suspect
many of my fellow Democrats feel exactly the same way." --Gerald Posner
Jay O'Connor

"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
New Re: Admitting a mistake
I don't think Gore could have/would have handled this any better than Bush. I think he would have dithered and blithered and gotten focus groups together and in general botched it.

That said, I would still rather have the Reagan who invaded Granada and bombed Quadaffy at the helm. There wouldn't have been anything like the Bush/Powell weirdities.
Who knows how empty the sky is
In the place of a fallen tower.
Who knows how quiet it is in the home
Where a son has not returned.

-- Anna Akhmatova (1889-1966)
New dunno
The occasion makes the man. Many people thought Truman wouldnt be able to do the job.
thanx,
bill
why did god give us a talleywhacker and a trigger finger if he didnt want us to use them?
Randy Wayne White
New Oh Sure. Sure. Keep telling yourself that.
This self-generated crisis (it's our own damn fault for being so abysmally stupid) really brings out the equally appalling stupidity of some of you.
New self-generated crisis?
Once every two or three weeks, I think you make sense, then you go and show how abysmally stupid you are.
Who knows how empty the sky is
In the place of a fallen tower.
Who knows how quiet it is in the home
Where a son has not returned.

-- Anna Akhmatova (1889-1966)
New YOU IDIOT! PRAISING REAGAN???
Like Jay "my head in the sand" O'Conner, praising the jackass of all time. Utter stupidity.
New Self generated crisis?
Care to explain?

We've covered alot of this already.

Say what you want about Ronnie Rayguns...but our enemies were afraid when he was at the controls.Agree or disagree if you want...

And boy wouldn't Ralph Nader been great to have in charge...he would have sent Osama a care package of Corvairs.Special forces comprised of crash test dummies...and all weapons would be U/L.

we did not put the Taliban in power. We did not fund or assist Bin Laden. We opposed the same enemy at one time...and possibly through inaction allowed the Taliban to take power...but that would be a damned if you do damned if you don't argument.

So...did Uncle Sam buy these guys their airline tickets or what...inquiring minds want to know.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New Re: Self generated crisis?
"Say what you want about Ronnie Rayguns...but our enemies were afraid when he was at the controls."

Dude, your *friends* were afraid when he was at the controls...


Peter
Shill For Hire
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
New Some sources disagree...

We did not fund or assist Bin Laden.

In fact, some cite that we assisted bin Ladin specificially because of the proposed "Communistic threat" that Reagan fought against.

New Haven't seen them...
All I've seen is that there were weapons commitments made to the Afghan fighters. Most notably Stingers. These weapons did, in fact, turn the tide in the war against the USSR.

That does NOT constitute direct assistance to Bin Laden...and the CIA operatives that I've seen say that while they were running in the same circles...Bin Laden was giving more money to them than we were....and we were definitely not giving any money or support to him directly.

This is why the Taliban support him so...he was more directly involved than the US was in the war against the USSR. They owe him. But Bin Laden turned on the US when we did not leave Saudi after Desert Storm.

You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New See if I can find it but....
We were supporting some of the rebels in Afghanistan but not bin Laden or the Taliban. The Taliban was created by the Pakistanis and Saudis, unknown to us, as a way of keeping a certain amount of instability in Afghanistan to prevent a pipeline from Uzbeckistan to the coast because Uzb. has a *lot* of oil.

After the USSR was out, *the* the Taliban moved into the power vacuum
Jay O'Connor

"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
New According to the sources I read (I'm looking for them...)
We tried to train the Afgan fighters. But they were...um..difficult to work with.

So we worked with the Muslim that moved into the area (and which were easier to train).

I doubt we ever expected them to take over the country, much less attack us. These were Saudias, (according to some sources) our best allies over there bar none. Hell, we sell the Saudias some of our better defense equipment. They were fighting Communism. Why WOULDN'T we train them?

(I'm looking for my sources now though.)
New Source I was thinking of...
[link|http://msnbc.com/news/190144.asp?cp1=1| Source ]
New Still...
...it was on CNN, IIRC...an interview that touched upon these issues...with a member of the CIA team...basically said that the CIA and Osama's organizations were both interested in the same objectives...there wasn't any financial support and very little military support provided directly to his organization. It was more of a "hey, Osama...find out where these Stingers are supposed to go" than a "here's a bunch of Stingers for you to distribute" kind of assistance.

But in order to know for sure...we'll have to wait for those documents to be de-classified...and I've a feeling that may take a really long time.

You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New Here's one supporting this...
From Frontline [link|http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/interviews/bearden.html|Interview with Milton Bearden].

Cheers,
Scott.
New Good one...
...cause thats the interview I saw...so it was PBS...not CNN.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New A very long time....

But in order to know for sure...we'll have to wait for those documents to be de-classified...and I've a feeling that may take a really long time.

if ever. Probably doesn't really matter anyway.

New Not a bad plan...
And boy wouldn't Ralph Nader been great to have in charge...he would have sent Osama a care package of Corvairs.Special forces comprised of crash test dummies...and all weapons would be U/L.


Good plan...Guaranteed win for US!
jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
New Re: YOU IDIOT! PRAISING REAGAN???
(shrug) Next to your revocation of Christianity on 9/12, this just goes to prove you're too stupid to breathe.
Who knows how empty the sky is
In the place of a fallen tower.
Who knows how quiet it is in the home
Where a son has not returned.

-- Anna Akhmatova (1889-1966)
New ?
I would have thought you supported Reagan. After all, with Reagan you could be sure that our military policy was being determined by astrologers.

I'm now running for cover.

Jay
New Earnest, perhaps a tad premature.
That is.. if the world is non-radioactive in about another year: his instinct might be right.

Competent is how I'd describe Mr. Bush's actions thus far - and I admit, surprisingly so. But I think the present enigma demands more than competence; requires both great skill with language, great perceptiveness of world history and yes, actual wisdom on many scales.

(Nor do I assume Gore possessed of such - but we will never know how he also, might have risen to the occasion. Or not.)



A.
New Bush's greatest asset
Bush's greatest asset is to get out of the way and let those who know how to run the store actually run the store.
jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
Expand Edited by jb4 Oct. 2, 2001, 08:57:44 AM EDT
New Thank God
..that Washington, Jackson, Polk, Lincoln, Roosevelt 1, Wilson, and Roosevelt 2 had better virtues. Only Nixon and Johnson can claim cretin-league-ship with the Bushes.
New Wilson - The president who brought Segregation to
DC and the Federal Government.

[link|http://www.dol.gov/asp/programs/history/shfgpr00.htm|Here].

The Labor Department's engagement with the nation's Negroes developed in the context of an Administration that was at best unsympathetic to their rights and needs. The White House of Woodrow Wilson and the Executive branch were filled with conservative Southern Democrats, a group that also dominated Congress. Washington was resistant to meeting the rising expectations of the Negro community and workforce.

During the 1912 presidential campaign Wilson, a progressive Southern Democrat, had encouraged Negro support with vague promises to be "President of the whole nation" and to provide Negroes with "absolute fair dealing." He specifically promised that he would at least match past Republican appointments of Negroes to patronage positions. The NAACP endorsed Wilson and Negro groups worked vigorously for his election. Wilson's victory was mainly attributable to the Taft-Roosevelt split and the Negro vote was not decisive. Yet Negroes were proud of their involvement in the campaign and, heartened by the idealism of Wilson's inaugural address, looked forward to turning vague campaign promises into concrete advances for working Negroes and the whole race.

Hard political, social and racial realities lurked to counter this hopefulness once the inaugural euphoria dissipated. Wilson, despite his campaign promises of racial fairness, remained a man of the South and shared the paternalistic if benevolent racism of the men and women of his patrician class. Wilson also needed the support of Southern Democrats with strongly anti-Negro views if his ambitious program of progressive economic reform was to be enacted. This was his over-riding goal and, as historian Kendrick Clements wrote, "Wilson's attitude was always that there were more important issues to be pursued than racial justice."

Anti-Negro forces soon held the upper hand in Washington and Jim Crow began to hold sway. Negro patronage declined markedly from the low, token levels of previous Administrations. Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan broke a precedent of many years by appointing a white as ambassador to Haiti. Wilson himself appointed only two Negroes in his first two years in office while allowing a total of 12 positions filled by Negroes appointed by President Taft to lapse into white hands.

Patronage had an important but largely symbolic value to the Negro community, whereas the government's treatment of its own Negro workers had a direct impact. At a Cabinet meeting early in the Administration, Southern members expressed disingenuous concern over alleged friction between Negro and white government employees. Postmaster General Albert S. Burleson, a Texan, proposed segregating the races to eliminate the supposed problem. Secretary of the Treasury William Gibbs McAdoo supported him. Burleson also claimed support for the idea from moderate Negro leaders such as Bishop Alexander Walters, president of the National Colored Democratic League. The rest of the Cabinet, along with the President, while not explicitly endorsing segregation, did not oppose it.

Some departments adopted the policy with a vengeance. Burleson immediately set out on a program to segregate, downgrade and, in some cases, discharge Negro workers. All of them but one were transferred to the dead letter office, and the Negro who remained had the humiliating experience of being surrounded by screens so that white workers would not have to look at him. Burleson also ordered segregated window service to the public. Fortunately segregation was not widely adopted elsewhere in the federal government. Many departments either failed to institute the practice or actively resisted it. Assistant Secretary of Labor Louis F. Post was a founder of the NAACP and his department was another that remained relatively free of the taint of Jim Crow.


People are often products of their time. And one's view is often tainted by what one views as important - "Where you stand depends on where you sit."

Cheers,
Scott.
New Idiotic Polemics. The man wanted world gov't.
Of course, you can't understand.
New You're pretty predictable yourself....
New Nit re: 'great skill with language'
I know those of us who believe ourselves to have a way with the language tend to see it as a prerequisite for any number of things. But when it comes to international relations, we're dealing with people who don't even speak the same language. I think in general the specific words we chose will be lost in the translation as often as not.

The big exception, of course, being the use of the word "crusade." Easy to jump on with 20/20/ hindsight, but in the heat of the moment, under the glare of spotlights and cameras, isn't it possible any one of us might have temporarily forgotten the etymology of the word?
We have to fight the terrorists as if there were no rules and preserve our open society as if there were no terrorists. -- [link|http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/05/opinion/BIO-FRIEDMAN.html|Thomas Friedman]
New There's a distinction.
Of the Jacob Brownowski kind.. skill within any language is at least ~ translatable, just as translations of great works manage to capture the essence. (Occasionally works with poetry even..)

Ineptness in language - is never improved except by intentional mistranslation. (I suspect that a fair amount of this 'editing' occurs re Dubya's off-the-TelePrompter remarks, anyway -- for overseas consumption).

'Crusade' was a major major gaffe - and almost certainly due to both lingual AND historical ignorance on the part of our Harvard Daddy's-son MBA C-student. I hope he learned a lot from the power of just One word ill-used, to cancel out thousands of better ones.

A.
New Idiocy
New I'm really, really, really sick of this.
Four airliners get hijacked and kill 6,000 Americans and Dubya gets a walk. I don't get it.

Exactly WTF has he done that has demonstrated such great leadership? Launch a few cruise missles? Draw a line in the sand? Come up with clever old western cliches? What is so freaking great about all this shit?

It may well be argued that he has done nothing more than Daddy did with Saddam. I see nothing (and its very early yet, I know) that indicates we're going to be more secure thanks to the outstanding leadership from our first USSC appointed president. Honestly, what is it that Dubya has done that no one else would have? NOTHING. That's leadership?

"There is no opposition party," according to that collosus of assholes Trent Lott. WTFIT? This is still America, right? The fact that Herr Ari Fleischer has admonished us Americans that "Americans have to watch what they say now" notwithstanding.

Dubya a great leader? Bullshit.
New Umm.. He didn't end the planet...yet anyway.
It seems pretty obvious that the WTC attack was designed to make us so angry that we throw our head at them in retaliation. He's had the reputation that would lead one to believe such an attack should work.
He hasn't fucked up seriously yet, AFAIC. Everyone, including me, expected him to do so. Don't know that he's a great leader just yet. He's doing better than expected, and that's good news.
Given what he's inherited WRT security, mid east history, and hostile fuckwits already in-country, I can't think that anyone else would do better. Resurrecting Saint JFK would not have saved the towers.
He's enjoyed the reputation that he can't piss in the woods and hit a tree, but he hasn't fucked up seriously yet. He still requires serious watching, but for the moment, he's doing adaquately. That's not precisely a walk, but he should get some slack.
When he starts using the slack to implement (more of) a police society to protect freedom, *THEN* we sic a crunch-bird on his ass...

my .02,
Hugh
New Just wondering...
Is it just a coincidence that Duhbayew is parked in front of a glass window through which you can see the street, while Cheney is sequestered away at an "undisclosed location", "for security reasons"?

Don't get too far away, Dick. It's hard to control the puppet if the strings are too long
jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
New Sad commentary is: he's given credit for Not
doing what - evidently - many expected "he would likely do"!

Maybe that restraint IS enough to credit him. For a while, and depending upon such things as follow from..

Clarence Thomas swearing in the new Minister of Homeland Security (today).


{sigh}


A.
New You think that credit is owed to him?
Remember his rhetoric at first? IMO he wanted to do the worst, but those really in power convinced him otherwise. He was his old hot-headed redneck self initially. But I've got to believe cooler heads prevailed. His tone quickly changed, and I don't think that was of his own will.
New Our hope lies in a Fact:
(Well - as much a Fact as any hearsay from corroborating witnesses, I guess)

When Nixon was suicidal, Kissinger 'arranged' that any "use of the Football" would not happen unless _____ (a lot more than Nixon's wish was involved).

We may suppose that any Texas-style barbeque ordered by Dubya in his cups - might be short-circuited.. Can't go so far as to suggest *will be*, o'course..

That's the breaks - when 5 Repos select a CIEIO, so they can retire with country in "hands just like ours".
New And what the fuck do/did you expect him to do?
Seriously. Other than getting rid of the asinine "can't recruit dubious CIA sources" rules, I don't see a lot he could have done to prevent the attacks. In retrospect, hijacking policy was screwed up but you can't blame him for that; blame the entire series of administrations (and the FAA) since the wave of hijackings in the 70's.

Since the attacks, militarily and politically what else would you have suggested he do?

The major disappointment I've had has been his soft-shoe treatment of the CIA - and the FBI and the border patrol and every other federal agency that might have been involved.

There should have been dozens of agency heads and subheads chopped, rolling on the ground, piled in heaps, and set on fire. Everyone in the FAA and the CIA (amoungst other agencies) should have been doing some serious underwear laundry if they were still employed. Instead, in an act of moronic imbecility, Bush visits the (almost universally condemned) CIA and engages in an orgy of butt-kissing, telling them what a great job they're doing.
Who knows how empty the sky is
In the place of a fallen tower.
Who knows how quiet it is in the home
Where a son has not returned.

-- Anna Akhmatova (1889-1966)
New FAA especially
Recall story on tube a few nights ago. Mercifully I forgot (or they didn't mention) the city involved. Local police chief had ~ taken over airport security as a 'courtesy' and, for finding too many plant, procedural holes on even his inspection.

Did FAA want to hear? Nahhh. He was quite expicit about it and he spoke English well - either he lied about the whole thing (!) or FAA attitude STILL sucks.

Not very good stats, this one detailed report but - even one this bad, is too many. Hell, I plan to do the train when I visit friend in NC later on; I'm in no hurry - but the seats aren't my idea of a good place to sleep for That many nights.

(Not worried about some psycho with a box cutter - just want to support an alt. to all those unnecessary bizness flights to show each other Power Punt slides -- at 20x the fuel cost per mile VS rail.)

Ah well - Hobbit adventure..


A.
New STATE DEPARTMENT
I have heard the FAA criticized ad nauseum. I have heard Flight Schools criticized ad nauseum. Make all new and existing Student and Private Pilots PAY for FBI/CIA background checks, yes, I've heard that too.

What I have not heard is any criticism of the real problem here: the US Dept. of State. Those morons let known terrorists receive student visas (apparently one even used his real name). Where is the criticism of the State Department? Oh, I forgot, Colin Powell is in charge of that. No, no, we can't ask Colin about that, nor his involvement in atrocities committed in Viet Nam, no, no. He's a Murican hero.

New Re: STATE DEPARTMENT
My statement about agency heads rolling would apply to the state department, too - especially the specific assholes in the embassies who issued the visas. And anyone involved in setting policy that *allowed* someone to not make background checks. All the way up to the top, although you do realize that the terrorists entered on Clinton-policy visas?

But no, I won't neglect Colin Powell. He's been a naysayer from the word go, going off on a tangent from whatever Bush has said. The first time he opened his mouth after the bombing, he should have been summarily dismissed.

I guess I add him to the CIA recruitment policies as one of the two things Bush could/should have done differently prior to the plane bombing.
Who knows how empty the sky is
In the place of a fallen tower.
Who knows how quiet it is in the home
Where a son has not returned.

-- Anna Akhmatova (1889-1966)
New My point.
He hasn't, no, can't do anything except bomb 'em, send covert nasties over to kill a few, etc, all the same old, same old. My complaint is that the asshole is getting a lot of credit for "leadership" and we are ignoring the mass exodus of our civil rights. Dubya's just going by the numbers already laid out to him, and imo that is not leadership.
New You don't win a war by bombing
Oh fine we got rid of some Taleban assets. How many, well, we're told our bombing was a complete success. Then, Mr. Government Spokesperson, tell me again why we are then still running missions at 60,000 feet rather than ground hugging strafing runs.

In World War 2, we bombed Dresden to hell and back and they kept turning out munitions. It takes drastic measures (eg, the firebombing of Tokyo) to *really* take out the enemy, and our year-2000 delicate sensibilities won't permit that.

The only way to win a war, short of nuking them ala Japan in 1945, is to have people occupying the area. (But even then we had troops occupying Japan for a number of years.) If allies (such as the Northern Alliance) can't do it, we're going to have to send people there to break things and kill people.
Who knows how empty the sky is
In the place of a fallen tower.
Who knows how quiet it is in the home
Where a son has not returned.

-- Anna Akhmatova (1889-1966)
New Firebombing Kabul
From photos, indiginous construction is largely brick and stone.

Stone doesn't burn at anything near attainable temperatures.

Note too: Dreseden was firebombed. For a US perspective, see Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse Five.

My read is that the air assaults are paving the way for ground war. We've knocked out enough defenses to fly day raids now. The NA report having severed the Taliban's northerthern forces' supply route, and Taliban airborne resupply is preempted by US air superiority.

I expect land actions to commence within the week.
--
Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com]
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?
     Admitting a mistake - (Fearless Freep) - (41)
         Re: Admitting a mistake - (wharris2) - (18)
             dunno - (boxley)
             Oh Sure. Sure. Keep telling yourself that. - (deSitter) - (16)
                 self-generated crisis? - (wharris2) - (15)
                     YOU IDIOT! PRAISING REAGAN??? - (deSitter) - (14)
                         Self generated crisis? - (bepatient) - (11)
                             Re: Self generated crisis? - (pwhysall)
                             Some sources disagree... - (Simon_Jester) - (8)
                                 Haven't seen them... - (bepatient) - (7)
                                     See if I can find it but.... - (Fearless Freep)
                                     According to the sources I read (I'm looking for them...) - (Simon_Jester) - (5)
                                         Source I was thinking of... - (Simon_Jester) - (4)
                                             Still... - (bepatient) - (3)
                                                 Here's one supporting this... - (Another Scott) - (1)
                                                     Good one... - (bepatient)
                                                 A very long time.... - (Simon_Jester)
                             Not a bad plan... - (jb4)
                         Re: YOU IDIOT! PRAISING REAGAN??? - (wharris2)
                         ? - (JayMehaffey)
         Earnest, perhaps a tad premature. - (Ashton) - (7)
             Bush's greatest asset - (jb4) - (4)
                 Thank God - (deSitter) - (3)
                     Wilson - The president who brought Segregation to - (Another Scott) - (2)
                         Idiotic Polemics. The man wanted world gov't. - (deSitter) - (1)
                             You're pretty predictable yourself.... -NT - (Another Scott)
             Nit re: 'great skill with language' - (drewk) - (1)
                 There's a distinction. - (Ashton)
         Idiocy -NT - (deSitter)
         I'm really, really, really sick of this. - (mmoffitt) - (12)
             Umm.. He didn't end the planet...yet anyway. - (hnick) - (4)
                 Just wondering... - (jb4)
                 Sad commentary is: he's given credit for Not - (Ashton) - (2)
                     You think that credit is owed to him? - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                         Our hope lies in a Fact: - (Ashton)
             And what the fuck do/did you expect him to do? - (wharris2) - (6)
                 FAA especially - (Ashton) - (2)
                     STATE DEPARTMENT - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                         Re: STATE DEPARTMENT - (wharris2)
                 My point. - (mmoffitt) - (2)
                     You don't win a war by bombing - (wharris2) - (1)
                         Firebombing Kabul - (kmself)

And from the spring collection, tablizer is wearing a simple three-table combination here, which offsets the index tables beautifully, whilst still preserving the relationships.
120 ms