Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Your name wasn't mentioned

Posted By: another observer on 2005-11-29
In Reply to: Oh please - gt

I never saw the name gt mentioned in the post referred to.


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

McCain wasn't desperate and wasn't behind in the polls
In fact, they have been neck and and neck, and McCain has been gaining in the polls while Obama has been slipping. McCain could have taken the easy way and kept the stable course and picked safer, sure. Instead, he picked a maverick leader like himself, who isn't afraid to get in there and make changes even if it goes against their own party. I believe he wanted to say that the Republicans are the party for change, and wanted to make a bold statement. I've seen statements at "other sites" as well where people are absolutely joyous at this pick.
i mentioned it before

and there was an outcry that I made it up.  I have no investment in it at all -- true or untrue.  I do enjoy novelty information, though, and thought others might enjoy it also.


 


Consider them mentioned
They're as blad as the Black Power people.  Not all blacks or all whites are lumped into the same mold donchaknow so don't be so defensive.
I have never mentioned anyone's looks!!! RU serious? never nm
some people are confused here
If you do all that you mentioned...........sm
such as paying your bills and providing for your family, then you wouldn't have to worry about the government telling you what you can or can't buy, etc. Only those who refuse to work and draw government assistance in the form of commodities would be told, in a sense, what they could eat. I look at it as an incentive to get folks to get jobs and provide for their families. In my opinion, if the government provides one's housing, medical care, food and other essentials of life, then the government has every right to dictate where one lives, etc.
CNN mentioned what?
?
Obama DID say what Sam mentioned!
nm
Thanks for sharing. All of this has been mentioned
before.  When one actually looks at the facts, it is hard to believe that there are still people who believe in Barry's false hope and empty promises.  So much for that change he keeps preaching about when him and his advisors are a big part of the current problems we have now.
I saw that mentioned last night

on TV.  I didn't see the whole video clip of them singing but the little bit I did see was enough to show me how eerie and just messed up that is.  This whole thing is just creepy. 


well you mentioned those countries
in reference to our new socialist societies and you brought up the revolution, so ...
They mentioned this story
on The O'Reilly Factor last night.  I saw the picture of her.  She says that she was at an ATM and was attacked by someone when they saw a McCain sticker on her car.  Bill O'Reilly mentioned that ATMs have cameras and they said the camera didn't pick up anything.  The B on her cheek was supposedly done by a knife.  Bill O'Reilly said that it didn't look like a knife wound to him and I must agree.  I'm a republican and I know that there are some wacko Obama supporters out there, but I just don't think this story is true.  We will see though.
I mentioned nothing of Obama--I said that anyone
who thinks that socialized medicine is a good idea...
You mentioned Wal-Mart....
Unionize Wal-Mart and there goes your low prices. You can't have it both ways. Why do you think cars cost so much? You really think it costs that much to build them? The costs for those contracts is passed right on down to us, the consumers.

As to the teamsters union...can you say organized crime? Jimmy Hoffa sound familiar? The only rich people in unions are the people in the hierarchy of the union, and how many times have we heard about them stealing pension money?

And Barack Obama wants to do away with secret ballot voting in unions. You know why there is a secret ballot? So the union organizers won't be able to intimidate people. I worked at a hospital that a union was trying to organize. I have experienced first-hand how union organizers work, and it ain't pretty.

That being said, labor unions in their beginnings were needed and were a wonderful thing. But like many other good things, they have become about money and power and the rank and file are WAY down on the totem pole.

Problem is, all those good programs, pensions and health care are paid for by we the people. That is why plants close. That is why businesses go overseas, because there is only so much we the people are willing to pay. Wal-Mart knows that, that is why they don't want to unionize.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out.
Yes, why hasn't anything been mentioned about that?
She had the meeting yesterday with them. I didn't hear a thing about it.
Okay, some of things mentioned is, nm
x
Yeah. Once he mentioned it.

But read the rest and tell me how many times he mentions Islam, Muslins, and the rest:


 


"As the Holy Quran tells us: "Be conscious of God and speak always the truth." That is what I will try to do, to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart.


 


Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.


 


As a student of history, I also know civilization's debt to Islam. It was Islam at places like Al-Azhar University that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed.
 
Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.


 


I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America's story. The first nation to recognise my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote: "The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims."
 
And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Quran that one of our Founding Fathers Thomas Jefferson kept in his personal library.
 
So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't. And I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.


 


But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: Epluribus unum: "Out of many, one."
 
Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected president. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores - that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average.


 


Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one's religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the US government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it.
 
So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity.


 


 


 


Same here, but the poster mentioned Republicans so that's why I
I just don't get what the big deal is.  I'm not shoving my views down Democrats throats, I'm just commenting and for that matter, the Democrats could always participate in posts on the Conservatives board.
I mentioned something about an athiest board and
she emailed me back and gave me websites of other places to go to for that. IMO you should not have one w/o ther other..After all there are conservative/liberal boards. I will stay here too and not be a part of her new website.
McCain mentioned the 800 thousand, but O
nm
It also mentioned a birth announcement
"Further, a birth announcement in the Aug. 13, 1961, Honolulu Advertiser listed Obama's birth there on Aug. 4."

Now, while that may not be a legal document, I highly doubt that way back on August 4, 1961, Obama's mother decided to state that he was born in Hawaii because some day he might grow up to be president.

There was no legal reason why she would have done that. He would have been considered a citizen, even if he had been born in Kenya. Maybe not natural born, but legal, and she would have had no reason to lie ... way, way, way back then.

Either way, what you're stating is that several INDEPENDENT organizations, including a legal court of America, are lying or covering up the truth FOR Obama.

It's a paranoid accusation to a very high degree, and I think, if nothing else, the campaigns this year have done nothing but heighten these delusions.

On both sides, even.

The Obama birth question may forever live in the annals of conspiracy theory - along with the U.S. moon landing "hoax" and the presence of reptilians who can shapeshift at will - but it would behoove our country to recognize it as an unproductive, divisive conspiracy theory that deserves much less attention than, say, a strong, compassionate, united nation.
how many times was tea party mentioned? once?
much ado about nothing..............
Glenn Beck mentioned this
last week on his show. He is having a special show in New York this Friday. He is wanting all the people who care for their country to come together. We are to look at his website and join in on "We Surround Them".

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/21018/?ck=1

It was the other way around: It is mentioned right here, in this article, that you quote
who were the aggressors and who the victims, in both wars, 1948 and 1967:

'Palestine became "the occupied territory" from which Palestinians were ejected and Israeli settlements built for "settlers." Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are full of refugee camps in which Palestinians driven off their lands by Israeli force have been living for decades.'

Everybody, by now, knows this or should know this!







It was mentioned that he was separated at the time
so I don't really know if I count that as an affair...

The woman he had the affair with was married...but wouldn't that be her bad?
You ascribe me feelings about people whose name I have never mentioned here.
His book is a bestseller.  Evidently, many many people think he is credible.  The world of credibility does not revolve around you, gt.
I should have mentioned I was a loyal Ron Paul supporter.
If that makes any difference.
Yep, the above-mentioned was just put on MSNBC. Hardly digging deep for
exist, as you said, and I was hoping to alert someone to that with my post. Thanks for the support.
I repeat...she mentioned upholding the Alaskan...
constitution twice. If she was one of "them" that is NOT what she would have said. Dailykos is a swamp with no bottom. They broke the nastiness about Palin's youngest child actually being the daughter's and ran with it, and the stuff there was vile. If that is "liberal opinion," and that is what you want to identify with, fine by me. Obama repudiated it...but he took their money.

Oh my, their leader was MURDERED. How many unexplained deaths surround the Clintons? Do we really want to go there?

Obama consorted with a known unapologetic anarchist/terrorist, William Ayers. And took money from him at a fundraiser at Ayer's house. So if you are going to blame Palin for making a video speech to this group, and not blame Obama for going to the house and taking the money of a man who bombed the Pentagon and police stations and caused deaths...does the term double standard ring any bells here?
Well, then aren't you sick and tired of the above-mentioned
Even those that in essence respresent ALL Americans, and not a particular party?
I know I sure am. I think it would be nice if we could all speak our minds on this board, without worrying about what little sammie is going to say about it.
The talking points must have mentioned using the word *impeach* as often as possible, too. NM

Another post below mentioned Hardball. This is an interview with parents

of a Marine who was killed this week in Iraq.  Here is the transcript of the show.  I think it's very compelling.  These people certainly gave the ultimate sacrifice, and to me, their views are very important. 


The interview with Ken Allard is also very interesting. This can all be found at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8838904/


MATTHEWS: Tonight, we begin with the parents of Lance Corporal Edward Schroeder, who was among the 14 Marines who lost their lives in yesterday's attack in Iraq. His parents, Rosemary Palmer and Paul Schroeder, join me now from their home outside Cleveland.

Well, it's a terrible thing to do, but I want to talk to you both about the war in Iraq and the loss of your son.

Ms. Palmer, did you sense that this war was very dangerous for your son, even before yesterday?


ROSEMARY PALMER, MOTHER OF KILLED U.S. MARINE: Well, war is always dangerous. And there were so many deaths that it was starting to mount to the point where I was actually thinking yesterday that if Auggie (ph) were not among the 14 killed, I was almost to the point of calling the Department of Defense and just saying, for mental health reasons, he had to come home, that I couldn't handle it anymore. It was just too much.


MATTHEWS: What made you feel that the danger was growing?


PALMER: Well, it's the old game of the fewer. And the 325 unit that he's in has been having more and more casualties. And if you have fewer guys and the same number of people, well, then, the other—the chances are growing that your person is going to be the one that's hit.


MATTHEWS: Let me ask you, Mr. Schroeder, why do you think we're in this war? What do you think is the real reason for this war in Iraq?


PAUL SCHROEDER, FATHER OF KILLED U.S. MARINE: Well, I really don't know why. I could guess, which might be unfair. But I would guess it has to do with oil. It has to do with deposing a dictator that we used to love and came to hate.


MATTHEWS: Yes.


SCHROEDER: That goes on repeatedly.


MATTHEWS: What did your son say was his motivation for fighting? Was it just patriotism to our country or a belief in the mission?


SCHROEDER: He did not have a motivation to fight. He had a motivation to do his duty to the Marine Corps and to be part of the Marines. His entire life was devoted to doing what he promised he would do.


MATTHEWS: What did he tell you...


(CROSSTALK)


MATTHEWS: What did he say about how the war was going?


SCHROEDER: Well, early on, when his unit arrived there in March, he was talking about the friendly Iraqi people. After May and June, he stopped talking about the friendly people, not that they weren't friendly. But he stopped talking about it.
Two weeks ago, in the last conversation I had with him, he simply said, the closer we get to coming home, the less worth it this is.


MATTHEWS: How did you interpret that?


SCHROEDER: I took that to mean that his participation in Operation Matador, Operation New Market, Operation Sword, Operation Spear, and a couple others that I don't know the names of were failing. And that's, basically, the operations were intended to go into these towns, kick out the insurgents, take their weapons, arrest whoever they could, and then they would withdraw.

They only had to go back and find more insurgents in the same places. The fact that these 14 fellows were blown up indicates to me, logic would say, that this policy, this strategy, this tactic has failed.


MATTHEWS: Let me go to Rosemary...


SCHROEDER: If it was successful, if it was successful, then he would still be alive, as would all those other kids.


(CROSSTALK)


MATTHEWS: Rosemary, let me ask you about the—what is your feeling about this war and the goal of trying to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people? And do you think that was a smart thing for us to try to do?


PALMER: It was a very naive thing for us to do.

You don't go to another culture and try to impose yours and expect it to work. We're not Iraqis. We don't have the same culture. And while I understand that we're a multicultural nation, we don't act like it sometimes. We act like the whole world thinks exactly the way we do.


MATTHEWS: Do you think that the war is going to get any better now that your son—I mean, you have paid the ultimate price? And, by the way, thank you. I don't know what it means to say thank you for your service, except I mean it. The courage of these young guys and some women over there is unbelievable. And I guess everybody wonders about the conduct of the war, whether they're being—these lives are being wasted or these lives are being put to good purpose.
What is your feeling about that now?

PALMER: Well, I personally believe that, since it is not working, then we have to make a change, that it is not worth the sacrifice if it is just more bodies on to the heap.

Like President Bush said, he wanted to stay the course and honor the memory of the ones who died by continuing to fight. If it didn't work before, why does fighting more—you know, you do the same thing over and over, that's—expecting a different result is, I think, the explanation of insanity.

MATTHEWS: Yes.

Well, the way you describe it, it is like pouring water into a sand hole on the beach and having it drain right through and start over again. It seems like a repetitive process that doesn't seem to be getting anywhere.

PALMER: Exactly.

SCHROEDER: Well, the repetitive process has been going on for 27 months, since the active invasion phase ended, 27 months of doing the same thing over and over and over again, with no evidence that it is getting better.

If there were evidence it was getting better—and I have yet to see it—and I—frankly, if it was getting better, these fellows would still be alive after all of this strenuous effort. Then it is time to make a change. Either put the number of troops on the ground that you need to really do the job or get the heck out.

MATTHEWS: Do you have a sense...

SCHROEDER: We have a saying—we have a saying in the Midwest, piss or get off the pot.

MATTHEWS: Do you have a sense, because of your son's tremendous, permanent, total sacrifice of his life and his experience in these months fighting this war, that the middle-level officers, the majors, the captains, do they have a sense of a clear vision of what they're getting done over there?

SCHROEDER: I can't speak to those fellows. I have great respect for the Marine officers at that level and the sergeants who made these troops, great respect.
I would tell you that they probably are frustrated, just like a lot of the ground troops, the lance corporals and the privates are. I would say that one thing that we have to make crystal clear, which is why we agreed to talk today, is that there is a—you cannot equate. There is a clear difference between supporting the troops on the ground and supporting the policies that put them there.

The president likes to make those—to equate those two things. If you don't support the war, you don't support the troops. And too many American people are buying into that. I don't buy into that. Rosemary doesn't buy into that. It is time that we say, look, we can support the troops all until the cows come home.

(CROSSTALK)

SCHROEDER: We don't support the policies that put them there.

MATTHEWS: You two have more right to answer this question than anybody else in the country today. After reading those headline—and to most of us, they're just headlines. They're American G.I.s, Marines in this case, giving their lives for their country, 20-some this week, in that one part of the country in Iraq.

What should be the reaction of the American people who pick up their newspapers, watch television, and learn of these horrors? What should they do as a result of seeing that news, Mr. Schroeder?

SCHROEDER: They should stand up and tell President Bush, enough is enough. You've had your chance. Now let somebody else come up with a different plan. If you can't come up with a different plan that is going to work, in my view, that is more troops, then get out.

MATTHEWS: Rosemary, is that your view? Is that how we, all of us, not in the news business, regular Americans from your part of the country, across the country, getting this horrible news, how should they react to it?

PALMER: Well, I think most people are just saying, you know, the latter, just get out, because it is clearly—well, it is obvious that the politicians are not going to institute a draft. And with the number of deaths and the dangers being what they are, they are not going to get the recruits.

So, therefore, if you can't—you can't get enough guys to do the fighting, well, then you have to get out. Do it or get out of the game.

MATTHEWS: I got you. I heard your views and they sound similar.
Thank you very much for this hour of—this time of anguish, to be giving this information. I think the public needs to hear from folks like you.
Thank you very much, Rosemary Palmer and Paul Schroeder, who lost their son, Lance Corporal Edward Schroeder, just today, last 24 hours.
We'll be right back with HARDBALL.


You guys say mentioned this oil domination thing constantly, but
nobody explains exactly what the details of this oil domination are?  Please, do explain.  I'd love to know the details, not just the sound bite.
And yet when Christianity is mentioned, many on the left promptly point to the right.
Why is that?
Just as the other NEVER mentioned conservatives, this one doesn't mention liberals... at all. nm
nm
Do you automatically think all white Christians follow these evangelists you mentioned? nm
x
I heard work requirement mentioned a long time ago - nm
x
I know about this, it wasn't what I was asking for. SM
I was asking for a credible story that showed Laura Bush was drunk when the accident occurred, as gt stated above.  I am aware of this story. 
No, actually I wasn't. nm

That's wasn't me.
x
It wasn't a lie. sm

Saddam's son-in-law, who defected, said that the WMD were moved to Syria.  Several of Saddam's officers said the same.  This is an article I saved from some time ago.  Some interesting information. I do not doubt for a moment that there were WMD. He used them on his own people.  I am not sure how anyone can deny that he had them knowing that he killed thousands of Kurds with biological weapons.  


Iraqi WMD Mystery Solved
By Jamie Glazov
FrontPageMagazine.com | March 2, 2006



Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Ryan Mauro, who spoke at the recent 2006 International Intelligence Summit on Iraq. He is the 19-year old author of  Death to America: The Unreported Battle of Iraq and founder of WorldThreats.com. He was originally hired at age 16 as a geopolitical analyst for Tactical Defense Concepts. He is also a volunteer analyst and researcher for the Northeast Intelligence Network and the Reform Party of Syria and believed to be the youngest hired geopolitical analyst in the country.


Preview



Glazov: Mr. Mauro, nice to have you here again.


 


Mauro: Thank you. It's always great working with you.


 


Glazov: The recent Intelligence Summit released 12 hours of audiotapes of Saddam Hussein and his key officials discussing their WMD programs from the mid-1990s onwards. What do you make of the significance of these tapes? How do they square with your claim in your book that Russia helped move Iraqi WMD into Syria?


 


Mauro: The tapes are extremely significant in that they prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that as of the year 2000, Saddam Hussein had a secret plasma program to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons, or special bombs as he calls them. The Duelfer Report previously concluded that this type of enrichment program ended in the 1980s, but here we have Saddam and his top advisors discussing using a power plant in the area of Basra for the program.  The scientists involved in the program are not known to the UN, leaving Western intelligence clueless.


 


On the tapes, you hear Saddam discussing the assistance of Russia and Brazil in dealing with the United Nations. He laughs off inspections, as his son-in-law who later defects, Hussein Kamil, reports how as late as 1995 their chemical and biological programs were being hidden from the world. They also discuss keeping the ingredients for these weapons separate, so that should they be found, they will be looked at as innocent dual-use items. They were not destroyed in 1991 as the Duelfer Report concludes. There are even indications on the tapes that Iraq may have had a role in the 2001 anthrax attacks.


 


My book was the first to make the claim that Russia was involved in moving Iraq's WMDs to Syria. After all the nay saying and criticizing I received for it, testimony at the Summit confirmed that this was true.


 


Glazov: What exactly is the evidence that Iraq moved its WMD into Syria?


 


Mauro: It has been confirmed across the board that 18-wheelers were seen going into Syria before the war, crossing the border soon after Iraqi intelligence replaced the border guards and cleared nearby areas for their passage. There are also eyewitness reports of the trucks going into Syria, and eyewitness reports of their burial in Lebanon.


 


The trucks with the weapons were tracked to three locations in Syria and Lebanon's Bekaa Valley, currently controlled by the Syrians, Iranians and Hezbollah. Sources I've spoken with that have seen satellite photos of the movements confirm that the WMD in Syria are at military bases, while the ones in Lebanon are buried. A fourth site in Syria, the al-Safir WMD and missile site, should also be looked at. From spring to summer 2002, there was a lot of construction here involving the expansion of underground complexes.


 


We have tremendous testimony as well, by General Georges Sada, the former second-in-command of Saddam's Air Force that 56 flights took place on converted Iraqi Airways planes in the summer of 2002 to transport weapons, along with a ground shipment. He claims to know the pilots involved. A second Iraqi general, Ali Ibrahim al-Tikriti, in an interview I published, confirmed in detail the movement of WMD into Syria saying that discussion on such a move went back to the 1980s. He claims his sources for this include Iraqi scientists and others in the regime that were very close to him even after he defected. He confirmed to me that Russian vehicles, including ones equipped to handle hazardous materials, were used. Reports of WMD being moved out of Iraq to Syria go back to 1997, and it is believed by many that weapons were moved in and out of Iraq using Syria routinely since the mid-1990s.


 


The Italian media also reported that their intelligence services had information indicating that in January and February of 2003, Iraqi CDs full of formulas and research work along with tubes of anthrax and botulinum toxin were sent off to Syria. By the end of February, Iraqi WMD expertise was already in Syria including a top nuclear physicist.


 


An Iraqi scientist also led Coalition forces to hidden stockpiles of precursor chemicals that could be used to make chemical and biological weapons. The scientist said some facilities and weapons were destroyed, and the rest were sent to Syria. Syrian defectors are also claiming that Syria is where the weapons are, along with Representative Curt Weldon's source in his new book. The Prime Minister of Albania even stated that based on information he has which is not available to the media, he cannot rule out such a transfer.


 


There is also a report that an Iraqi medium-range al-Hussein missile on a truck moved into Syria, and in the early stages of the war, was spotted briefly coming into Iraq, operating its radar overnight, and returning to Syria. Most reports about the transfer indicate missiles were included in the transfers.


 


Glazov: Why do you think Russia was involved?


 


Mauro: In my book, “Death to America: The Unreported Battle of Iraq,” I detail Russian involvement in Iraq’s WMD programs and intelligence services. Inspectors have described the Russians employed on UN inspection teams as being very paranoid, with some even suspecting the Russians helped the Iraqis thwart inspections. I believe that as more documents are translated we will find this to be true.


 


My immediate suspicions that the Russians were involved in cleansing operations began back in early 2003, after I learned about how two Soviet generals had arrived in Iraq and been awarded with medals. Igor Maltsev, known as a leading expert in air-defense, and Vladislav Achalov, an expert in rapid-reaction forces, were accompanied by Yevgeny Primakov, a long-time friend of Saddam Hussein from his days as the head of the Soviet foreign intelligence service and later, prime minister. This occurred as I simultaneously received the first reports of WMD going to Syria, leading me to speculate on such a connection. I became convinced when Ion Mihai Pacepa, the former chief of Communist Romania’s intelligence service, and highest ranking Communist intelligence officer to ever defect, wrote about a plan the Soviet Union had entitled “Sarindar,” or “Operation Emergency Exit.”


 


The plan was drawn up after the Soviet Union decided to use its rogue state allies, specifically Libya and Iraq, to sponsor terrorism. The Soviets would help them make WMD in return, believing that would prevent Western retaliation. The head of the KGB, Yuri Andropov, told Pacepa that Russian advisors ran these countries intelligence services. Primakov was the central figure in dealing with Iraq, Pacepa said, and pointed to his presence in Iraq in the months before the war.


 


“Sarindar” was drawn up first for Libya, and then expanded to include Iraq, with the aim of stripping the rogue state of evidence of WMD activity and especially Russian involvement in illegal programs. The operation also “would frustrate the West by not giving them anything they could make propaganda with,” said Pacepa. The plan went so far as to involve an offensive propaganda campaign aimed at discrediting politicians making the accusations against Russia’s allies.


 


From that, I became convinced. Then later on, John Shaw, the former deputy undersecretary for defense for international technology, reported to the media that Russian Spetsnaz units moved Iraqi WMD into Syria and Lebanon. He said that U.S. intelligence knew the names of the units involved. The Washington Times had other Pentagon officials report that Russian Special Forces helped Iraq perform counter-intelligence operations to thwart the West from knowing what was going on.


 


We must also consider the huge Russian involvement in the Oil-For-Food Scandal. So Russia’s relationship with Iraq was beneficial for them on multiple levels, including financially.


 


Glazov: Do we have the details of the Russian involvement?


 


Mauro: At the Intelligence Summit, Shaw revealed even more detail I was unaware of. Shaw discussed how two Russian ships left the Umm Qasr port in the months before the war and went to the Indian Ocean, carrying materials that he believes included WMD from southern Iraq. He also said his contacts told him of barrels containing hazardous materials being moved to a hospital basement in Beirut, Lebanon.


 


Shaw discussed that Achalov and Maltsev had visited Baghdad at least twenty times in the previous six years. The final planning meeting before their last trip to Baghdad took place in Baku and was chaired by the Russian Minister of Emergency Situations.


 


Shaw said that much of the information came from a source close to the head of Ukraine’s intelligence service, who was thankful to the United States for securing the country’s independence from the Soviet Union.


 


Glazov:  What has been the intelligence community's reaction to the allegation of Russian involvement?


 


Mauro: Shaw said that often this information was dismissed as Israeli disinformation. Although I’m sure it happened to him on a much larger scale, I can confirm this happened. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve brought this up with experts in the field who dismissed it as Israeli garbage, or a fantasy of “Russophobes” and conspiracy theorists. “The Cold War is over” was said to me on several occasions, bringing the debate to a close. I can only hope that deep inside the community they know about all this and are acting upon it in a secretive way.


 


Glazov: So if all this evidence is credible, why wouldn't the Bush Administration take advantage of this information?


 


Mauro: There are multiple ideas out there. I tend to believe that the foreign policy implications of these revelations explain the Administration’s silence. The politicians don’t want to feel obliged to take strong action against Syria, and certainly don’t want to offend Russia. On several issues, Russian cooperation is a great asset if it can be achieved. There’s a debate as to whether Russia ever really helps us. Every country we seem to have problems with has close ties to Russia. It’s likely part of their strategic plan to counter American dominance. Yes, they’re pressuring Iran through negotiations, but Russia is closely tied to the Iranian regime, so one must ask in light of these revelations, is Russia simply “cooperating” as part of a game to buy time for her allies? Or does Russia genuinely want Iran to end its nuclear program?


 


Glazov:  Why do you think Duelfer missed all this?


 


Mauro:  In my speech, I said that Duelfer’s conclusion that Iraq disarmed in 1991 as based on:


 


A) The failure to find WMD stockpiles. This is easily explained by their movement to Syria. I should also mention that there are Pentagon reports and testimony of several people that point to numerous problems in how the ISG operated and was put together, thus hampering the search.


 


B) The lack of documentation on the programs after 1991. Yet, in the same report, Duelfer says that much of the widespread looting was a cover for Iraqi intelligence to destroy documentation and loot weapons sites. Even the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission told the Security Council in the summer of 2004 that satellite imagery showed the Iraqis dismantling suspected weapons sites before, during and after Operation Iraqi Freedom began. Destroyed material and metal was then shipped throughout Europe and the Middle East at a rate of 1,000 tons of metal per month. Dismantled missiles and related components, they said, had already been discovered in several countries—some with UN inspection tags still on them.


 


It is also likely documents were moved outside of Iraq. The Russian ambassador to Baghdad, Vladimir Titorenko, got together a convoy carrying Russian staff from the embassy and headed to Syria, and suddenly got fired upon by American forces. Titorenko and his three closest intelligence officers flew directly to Moscow after escaping, and used the same flight to return immediately to Damascus.  There are widespread reports, even in the Russian press, that sensitive intelligence documents were in the convoy.


 


C) The lack of testimony from detainees. Duelfer relies upon the interviewing process—the same process he harshly criticizes as deeply flawed—to reach his conclusion. The detainees are afraid to talk out of fear for retribution, their testimony being used against them in war crimes trials, and simply because there’s no incentive. I could go into deeper detail as to some of the criticisms of the process. We also know many, many regime figures and scientists are in Syria and to a lesser degree, Iran.


 


It was easy for Iraq to move people around. Most of the regime figures were in Syria, including Saddam’s sons, until American pressure hit a breaking point and they were expelled in the later part of spring 2003. As the war commenced, 23 of Iraq’s 60 diplomatic posts were still operating, including in Amman, Moscow, Damascus, Beirut, Minsk and Tehran. It is possible that personnel are in Belarus as well. Many Iraqi regime figures that were captured [had] Syrian and Belarusian (and often, Libyan) passports. There were reports that people escaped from Syria to Belarus and Libya. Limousines usually used by the Baath Party were seen entering Syria, and then flew aboard a military transport to Libya.


Regarding Belarus, another very close ally of Russia, there was an incident on March 29, 2003. A chartered cargo flight took off from Saddam International Airport when the air space was closed and flew to Minsk. Originally, some suspected it [was] Saddam or his sons were aboard as only the highest officials could get clearance.


Glazov: Mr. Mauro thank you for joining us again.


 


Mauro: Thank you for having me.


 


It wasn't really a war. sm
It was ethnic cleansing.  And it should disturb Clinton.  Despite pleas, he didn't do anything.  Neither did the UN.  100 days is probably not that short a time when you and your family are being hacked to death.  I bet it felt like forever to them.  Hard to imagine that the greater part of the world has forgotten 800,000 people that quickly.  It's amazing the people I have talked to that never heard of what happened there. 
wasn't me
Well, that wasn't me asking you the miscarriage question. I have been out of town for a few days.

But, honestly, I don't know what G-d believes, and I don't think anyone else really knows either. We can guess, imagine, tell ourselves we know, but unless G-d is personally speaking to us, we don't really know what he/she believes.

As for your dramatic description, it is a tad overused and is not very effective (for me anyway). Seems like you must be a fan of horror movies or graphic novels; someone who really enjoys that kind of drama and the attention it can bring you, but it is a little too melodramatic for my taste.

The medical term for miscarriage is abortion. The medical community makes either calls them spontaneous AB or elective AB, but AB all the same.

Again, if you find abortions so distasteful, by all means, please don't have one.
okay I wasn't done yet...
The more I think about it the more it upsets me! He is claiming that it's better for our economy for jobs to be sent overseas, meanwhile we here in the US can go back to school to get better jobs. In this little not-so-great scenario, we will all go to school for great jobs like engineering. Then what will we do with tons of engineers? Or, we all go to school to be doctors and then we'll have all these doctors with no jobs. Seems kinda silly. It would make more sense to be diverse - with some people doing un-skilled jobs (which is a st*pid term because every job requires skill, even cleaning houses) and some going to school to be lawyers, doctors, etc.

Not to mention that not everyone wants to go to school and not everyone does well in school. You would think that keeping some un-skilled jobs in the US would help keep at least some people off of welfare and working. It just doesn't make sense to me.
He wasn't doing this just out of the
goodness of his heart, it was a job, just like MTing.
Wasn't the war about getting...
bin Laden? Ahem. Pubs COMPLETELY failed in that task, didn't they?
That wasn't me. I am the OP
"My post was replying to yours that you said most of the democrats got bored and left" That wasn't me.




Once again....you are the one that saw something that wasn't there.

if it wasn't so sad........
because if you had a 401K a couple of weeks ago, you don't have much of it anymore anyway. I have lost greater than 33% of mine in a matter of months - and I don't see much hope of getting it back, either. And I can't take it out because I would have to quit my job to get it. I will have to work at least 8 additional years to make up for that loss, which essentially means no retirement years for me, and I am betting many, many people will be in that same boat. And that Social Security I have been paying for 40+ years, well, doubt think we are going too far on that - if we see any of it at all. We have worked hard all of our lives, and it has been wiped out. Darn, I should have just spent it on a bigger house, newer car, and world travel. At least I would have memories to show for all those hours!
That wasn't McC with that ad

There are other so-called backers that have started to put ads on TV and radio that McC did not authorize.


There are others that the O did not authorize that are airing too. You have to look at the fine print as to who are putting out these ads. They jump out of the woodwork near the end of elections every 4 years.


but that wasn't me...
like I said, I am sure that I made a mistake, but I just couldn't find that particular one. I did find others, though. LOL. Whatever

there wasn't anything when....(sm)

Clinton was in office.  Even the liberal shows had a field day with him, but no republican response.


Another thing:  O'Reilly from Fox and Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert from Comedy Central all show up on each other's shows, which is usually hilarious.  I really don't like O'Reilly, but at least he has the ding-dings to go on there.  However, when the comedians go on news shows like Bill O'Reilly, they get grilled like they are actually a news station, and they are comedians.  ROFL...