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

I find it far more hypocritical that Islam preaches as the religion of peace. sm

Posted By: sm on 2006-06-12
In Reply to: For liberals only. - Lurker

But then, that's just me.  


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

Radical Islam is not a religion......
--
True freedom of religion if you are Christian, or freedom to Islam,Buddhist, Hindu, Jew, agnostic, a
all are religious beliefs, and if you are looking for true FREEDOM, all must be tolerated, understood, and welcomed. cannot put parameters on FREEDOM
For someone who preaches to us
about how we want revenge against terrorists and how horrible we are.....it seems to me like you will do anything to get revenge against Bush and Cheney no matter whether or not that puts our military in more danger.  What you liberals refuse to see is that no matter what we apologize for and no matter whether or not the witch hunts against Bush and Cheney continue.......extremists are still going to hate us.  Terrorists are still going to want us dead and bringing that stuff out in the public will just put our troops in even more danger. It is sad that you are willing to risk our troops lives in order to continue these witch hunts on Bush and Cheney.
This is where I don't understand Palin at all...she preaches about preserving human life but ....
when it comes to innocent wildlife, innocent soldiers and civilians in Iraq being killed it's okay.

I think her doctrine is shoot first, ask questions later.

I really truly believe she is as they say a *cocky wacko*.
Islam. sm
There is no stopping Sharia.  It has been started and we won't stop it, no matter what we do.  Even if it dies down, it will still exist and wait for another day.  It's my belief that the first extremely bad misstep was not with Clinton but with Carter. 
I don't believe Islam is being persecuted. nm
.
Another point on Islam. sm
The Qur'an very clearly obligates all Muslims to bring the entire world under subjugation to their Allah and to force all nations to accept Islamic law (sharia). If nations will not accept sharia voluntarily they are to be conquered and forced to submit.  The Qur'an, of course, has been around for centuries, since 500 years after the death of Christ.  An attempt was made to bring nations under subjugation in the time of the Crusades.  It was only through a massive war and crusade by Christians that the takeover was stopped.  What happened leading up to 9/11, i.e., the multiple terrorist attacks on military installations, ships, compounds, the first WTC, etc., has nothing to do with politics at all.  Once people stop relating all this to economics and politics, they might actually get the real picture.  Unfortunately, I don't see that happening. There are just too many conspiracy theories out there that are way more entertaining and, of course, the horror of actually realizing the enemy we face is pretty daunting.  At any rate, the horror exists and has existed all along.  We did not provoke 9/11 or any of the other terrorist acts. I wonder, just how many 9/11s were we supposed to sit through.

Yep, it is Islam doing the persecuting
You don't have to read very much to realize that.
that is so hypocritical!
Do you not think that everyone who voted for McCain got sick and tired of hearing negative posts?  I mean come on already, get over it!  The thing that gets me is that anytime someone says ANYTHING they get slammed by O supporters.  O supporters cannot handle controversy at all.  I mean, look above for example.  I said I did not like O stating that he would REQUIRE community service.  Now all of a sudden people feel sorry for me and my kids because we hate community service.  HAHAHAHAHHA.  Talk about stretching what someone posted.  You guys totally took one issue and turned it into another, one that I wasnt even talking about.  Crack me up!  No one wants to address the fact that his website said it would be REQUIRED, they just want to talk about how I hate community service.  Talk about deflecting the issue. 
Actually, I don't see it as hypocritical
The majority of those in favor of gay marriage are more likely the children of the free-love era (mid 30s and under). Although, surprisingly, the over 60s with a college education are also among the highest proponents of gay marriage, who may actually be the hippies on college campuses of yesteryear.

Taking it at face value, I don't really see that it is hypocritical. The 'hippies' wanted the right to determine their own relationship and felt that marriage was unnecessary. If you were to poll them, I wager their feelings have not changed on that...to them, to marry or not to marry was and is a matter of choice, which is a choice they feel should also be extended to gay couples.
He's won the Islam population......whoop de doo
nm
It's all so much hypocritical whining.
Gee, how much did we wish that people would just lay off a little and let Clinton's private matters stay private for the sake of his family and the nation as a whole.

But NOOOOO, that wouldn't do, would it? The avid glee in exposing his most painful and regrettable bad judgment was the talk of Bushtown, they just HAD to smear it in all our faces and stuff it down our throats ad nauseum - no mercy there, no letting up, no quarter. Vultures.

Now look how they act when people speculate about a former alcoholic and coke blower possibly returning to the habit/s during a time of extreme stress - which is not even a ridculous thing to contemplate, God knows we all know someone who has been caught in this trap. If this is the case it's unfortunate for him, but the point is, it really DOES vitally affect our nation if it's true.

I'm afraid the right handed away its right to credibility on calling for compassion for the personal dignity of the chief executive. You had a chance to show some when the matter DIDN'T affect our nation's security, and you simply blew it big time.

In any case I think it's safe to say that should Bush be tipping a few, he's going to get far better treatment from sympathetic Americans both Republican AND Democrat than his predecessor did for his particular indulgences.
Doesn't seem hypocritical to me. s/m

I SAID I believe abortion equals murder.  I believe murder in any form is wrong but I would say that many people don't agree with me or there wouldn't be so many murders.  There was a murder on a college campus in Conway, AR yesterday.  Obviously if the perps thought it was "wrong" they wouldn't have done it.  I also believe that if a person lies, they will also steal and if they will steal they would commit murder.  I try not to be judgmental of others.  Abortion is, I believe, something that is between the woman and God and I would not presume to speak for God.  I figure I've done enough wrong in my own life that I don't need to be passing judgment on ANYONE for ANYTHING.  Sort of like taking the log out of my own eye so I can see clearly to remove the speck of dust from my brother's/sister's eye.


 As Kendra and I both admitted, we like to argue so hop on in here and argue with us. LOL  Sometimes arguing causes people to actually think, something all of us need to be do.  It just gets so old with all of the old Obama trash being repeated over and over and over.  Something new or proof of all the old stuff I would like to see. 


You have a good day too, Sam.


Pretty hypocritical
that you can't thank one without smearing the other.
Okay, fine. That is hypocritical
nm
Hypocritical, aren't you? Because you would
nm
HYPOCRITICAL is what I meant.
nm
What a hypocritical tyrade....
On one hand you yammer on abuot how no one has to "associate" with homosexuals if they don't want to but on other posts about schools wanting to push the homosexual agenda down the throats of students in school, you didn't seem to have a problem with that.

Like many of us know, you just want you cake and eat it too and this has nothing to do with "rights" but just getting your way.

Why aren't you as concerned about the rights of a child and leaving it up to their parents to teach them what they believe to be right? What a hypocrit!!
what is your IQ, I guess 79 I am in now way hypocritical, THINK, if you can
I am much too blunt and impulsive to be hypocritical, my answers come fast.

Do you even know what 'hypocritical' means, or are you just repeating and throwing words around you hear?

If you do not have anything intelligent to contribute to a post, just 'skip' it and move on, best to the Comedy board.
LOL. *Liberal Religion* = ANY religion that isn't YOURS.

You don't want EQUALITY in religion.  You want yours to be SUPERIOR to all others.  You want to force your narrow and specific religious beliefs down the throats of every single American.  You can't get them into your religion willingly so you'll FORCE them to fall in step with you via government if you have to.


You couldn't stop abortion by killing abortion doctors, so now you'll do it through the Supreme Court.  And your God on earth just happens to be a president who wants the same things that you do, and so he's willing to throw the Constitution out the window (in violation of his Presidential oath) in order to replace it, not just with the Christian Bible, but with his own personal clone who will legislate her own narrow evangelical Christian views that don't even agree with the less radical, quieter forms of the Christian religion.


Government, schools and universities don't fall into the same categories.


There already ARE religous schools and universities.  Isn't THAT enough for you?


And what about all those many, MANY buildings with crosses and other religious symbols on them throughout this nation where people of like-minded beliefs congregate to worship the God of their CHOICE?  I believe they're called CHURCHES.  Isn't THAT enough for you, either?


Nope.  You're not going to be happy until you can be *superior.*


The sad fact is that in a country with freedom of religion, you never WILL BE, whether you like it or not. You can put 9 THOUSAND justices on the Supreme Court, you still won't be SUPERIOR, and I believe God, who is all knowing, knows that as well!


Because the Muslim religion is the only religion that says.....
Convert or die.
Right, there are ඁ" nations of Islam. Guess
nm
This is an ignorant statement. Islam is a monotheist
There is one God, and he is known to us under many different names...Allah is one of those names. "False religion" Puleeze. Who put you in charge? There are different versions of the Holy Book just as there are different versions of the Bible. Some among us DO understand the difference between religion as a statement of faith and the ugly underside of relgion in it politicized form. Politicized Christianity is every bit as ugly as politicized Islam.
Your post was well written but hypocritical.
You admonish us to come together while in the same paragraph stating Republicans are to blame for everything gone wrong in the last 8 years. You speak of cluelessness, simplemindedness, backwardness, etc. etc. etc., insulting the past administration and anyone supportive of it while proclaiming the virtues of a man whose potential and abilities have not yet been proven. Your post is insulting, opinionated and presumptious, yet you are bewildered and dismayed by those not joining you on the Obama-idolizing bandwagon.

How dare you reduce this to an accusation of racial prejudice? How is such an assumption not hateful in itself?

It is precisely this kind of holier-than-thou attitude that creates and perpetuates devisivenss in the world!
SINCE WHEN DOES THE KORAN FORCE PEOPLE TO CONVERT TO ISLAM?..
Are you still living in the stone ages?
You have the nerve to talk label Islam. Look at the so-called Christian

Robertson suggests God smote Sharon


Evangelist links Israeli leader's stroke to 'dividing God's land'


(CNN) -- Television evangelist Pat Robertson suggested Thursday that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's stroke was divine retribution for the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, which Robertson opposed.


He was dividing God's land, and I would say, 'Woe unto any prime minister of Israel who takes a similar course to appease the [European Union], the United Nations or the United States of America,' Robertson told viewers of his long-running television show, The 700 Club.


God says, 'This land belongs to me, and you'd better leave it alone,' he said.


Robertson's show airs on the ABC Family cable network and claims about 1 million viewers daily.


Sharon, 77, clung to life in a Jerusalem hospital Thursday after surgery to treat a severe stroke, his doctors said.


The prime minister, who withdrew Israeli settlers and troops from Gaza and parts of the West Bank last summer over heated objections from his own Likud Party, was breathing with the aid of a ventilator after doctors operated to stop the bleeding in his brain.


In Washington, President Bush offered praise for Sharon in a speech on Thursday.


We pray for his recovery, Bush said. He's a good man, a strong man. A man who cared deeply about the security of the Israeli people, and a man who had a vision for peace. May God bless him.


Daniel Ayalon, Israel's ambassador to the United States, compared Robertson's remarks to the overheated rhetoric of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. (Full story)


He called the comments outrageous and said they were not something to expect from any of our friends.


He is a great friend of Israel and a great friend of Prime Minister Sharon himself, so I am very surprised, Ayalon told CNN.


Robertson, 75, founded the Christian Coalition and in 1988 failed in a bid for the Republican presidential nomination. He last stirred controversy in August, when he called for the assassination of Venezuela's president, Hugo Chavez. (Full story)


Robertson later apologized, but still compared Chavez to Hitler and former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein in the process.


The same month, the Anti-Defamation League criticized Robertson for warning that God would bring judgment against Israel for its withdrawal from Gaza, which it had occupied since the 1967 Mideast war.


Robertson said Thursday that Sharon was a very likable person, and I am sad to see him in this condition.


He linked Sharon's health problems to the 1995 assassination of Israeli leader Yitzhak Rabin, who signed the Oslo peace accords that granted limited self-rule to Palestinians.


It was a terrible thing that happened, but nevertheless, now he's dead, Robertson said.


Rabin was gunned down by a religious student opposed to the Oslo accords. The killer, Yigal Amir, admitted to the crime and was sentenced to life in prison.


Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, criticized Robertson's comments Thursday, saying the televangelist has a political agenda for the entire world.


He seems to think God is ready to take out any world leader who stands in the way of that agenda, Lynn said in a written statement.


A religious leader should not be making callous political points while a man is struggling for his life, he said. I'm appalled.


Ralph Neas, president of liberal advocacy group People for the American Way, said it is astonishing that Pat Robertson still wields substantial influence in the Republican Party.


Once again, Pat Robertson leaves us speechless with his insensitivity and arrogance, Neas said in a written statement.


According to The Associated Press, Robertson spokeswoman Angell Watts said of people who criticized the comments: What they're basically saying is, 'How dare Pat Robertson quote the Bible?'


This is what the word of God says, Watts told the AP. This is nothing new to the Christian community.


What about the life of the raped woman,,,you are hypocritical freaks!...nm
nm
Fortunately, Lurker, many on the left realize the threat from radical Islam. sm
It isn't political, but it has been made that way.  That's why a lot of you have been lulled into being apologist for murdering Islamofascists. 
Stop you evil propaganda, you're just lowering yourself to all those hypocritical evangelicals!

It's obvious your mind is already made up, so please do not force yours on us who do not agree with you one bit. If you're trying to make the rest of us swing in your direction by writing this litany of pettyness and sillyness, you're wrong. John McCain is passé...gone, okay? If I hear him talk about his military service and his tortures one more time, I'm going to puke! This is 2008, the war in Vietnam is long over and the U.S. had to get out. The Russians were in Aghanistan for ten years and had to get out with millions of their soldiers dead. This is an unwinnable war, why smarty pants can't you understand that? And Palin....oh please! She's a controller freak, she'll be running McCain if he's elected! We don't want neither one of them and you will see why come November 4th. We will not put up with four more years of aq Bush.......he's screwed up the country so bad in every way possible! Now everyone hates americans thanks to your current president. He's a Clint Eastwood in disguise. The axis of evil is America, and not the countries Bush loves to denigrade. So stop your propaganda against Barack, he's a breath of fresh air which we all long for. Biden did a lot more than McCain did in Congress. We don't need a novice from Alaska that's for sure. I'm Canadian and up here, it's democrat all the way. I suppose Palin can see the Yukon from her bedroom now? Bush will go down as the worst President the U.S. has ever had. No wonder you're all so scared and nervous about terrorists....he dared them and challendged and now they hate his guts. Let's get Barack in there and start negotiating, communicating and get the world on you side once again, like it used to be. So don't give me your crap about Barack or Joe. Bet you don't even know where Khandahar is! So stop your propaganda and keep your hateful thoughts to yourself!


Monique


ABC: Obama Is Hypocritical For Limiting Wall Street Pay While Having A ‘Lavish Lifest
Yesterday, President Obama instituted a pay cap on bailed out businesses after it was revealed that Wall Street doled out an estimated $18.4 billion in bonuses last year. “If the taxpayers are helping you, then you’ve got certain responsibilities to not be living high on the hog,” he explained.

In what appears to be an attempt to call Obama a hypocrite, ABC’s Scott Mayerowitz “reports” today that the President also has a “lavish lifestyle.” Under the title: “Obama’s Perks: Private Jet, Chef Tax-Free,” ABC notes that Obama earns $400,000 dollars a year and even has a private jet:



The president makes $400,000 a year, but hasn’t received a raise from Congress since 2001. He also gets a $50,000 annual entertainment expense account (any unused money at the end of the year must go back to the Treasury.)


Then there is the use of two private jets, Boeing 747s better known as Air Force One. And of course the constant security details, drivers, a private chef, a country vacation estate and the rent-free use of a well-known, 132-room mansion called the White House. The president also used to have a yacht, until Jimmy Carter sold it.


As its evidence that “corporate America” is upset, ABC said that “some Wall Street bloggers” are angry with the compensation cap. But the article cited only one blogger, Dealbreaker.com, who — apparently poking fun at Sen. Claire McCaskill’s statement — remarked, “Some accountability needs to be put in place. We won’t have them kicking sand in the face of taxpayers any longer.” Dealbreaker.com also suggests charging rent for White House tenants.


Comparing the President to Wall Street CEOs is absurd. The “private jet” that Obama uses is Air Force One, which is used as a security precaution and necessary for the dozens of staff and press that accompany the President on every trip. Each use of the jet by the President is regarded as a “classified military operation” in order to ensure the President’s safety.


Furthermore, Obama’s salary is set by Congress (whose members are elected by the public). CEO compensation is decided internally within the company, usually by its board of directors. The problem with recent excessive CEO compensation was that executives receiving federal funds were still rewarded for failure with tens of millions of dollars from their companies.


The President, on the other hand, does not get a bonus for his performance, good or bad. Indeed, Presidents Bush and Obama earn the same salary. County Fair at Media Matters has more.


find out. I find sam's posts to the point
nm
Peace
Several people have told me I am wrong?  About what?  Jews and socialism/communism?  Guess those posts didnt come through on my computer.  Other things?  If you mean disagreeing, we all do on this board, so what.  I didnt think you kept track of who agrees with who.  That is what is meant by debate, disagreeing and agreeing and getting heated up and calming down and, shock..ending the debate with a hand shake and maybe a cup of coffee or cola afterwards.  Peace!
Not only will we not leave them with peace,

deficit in American history, caused by WHAT?


And I just love how anyone who doesn't agree with them is labeled as having no values.


What kind of values does someone have to take a healthy surplus upon entering office and not only SQUANDERING it but then going on to create the biggest deficit in American history?


What kind of values does someone have to send our children to an unnecessary war to die and/or be injured while neglecting to give them inadequate supplies?


What kind of values does someone have to send our children off to a foreign land to die for his own personal bogus war, when he was too much of a coward to serve in combat duty himself?


What kind of values does someone have to take the blood of 9/11 victims and the fear of all other Americans and USE it to wage a bogus war against Iraq when that was his goal before he was even elected President?


What kind of values does someone have to not care enough about securing or borders or our ports or protecting our airspace and chemical/nuclear plants and decreases the budget for rail and subway security?


What kind of values does someone have to have to neglect to develop enough smallpox vaccines FOUR YEARS after the worst attack in American history, when bio attacks using smallpox was felt to be a threat?


What kind of values does someone have to have to make sure that his huge war budget includes FREE comprehensive medical benefits for all Iraqi citizens while he presides over a country where many of his own citizens who work 40 hours or more a week can't even afford health insurance?


What kind of values does someone have to have to deny American scientists the opportunity to study stem cell research, using the argument that he wants to "protect life" when he presides over a country where our children are being routinely molested and MURDERED by animals who the government refuses to keep in jail? 


Out of all the talk on these boards about life being "precious" as it regards stem cell research, I have yet to see ONE SINGLE POST about the multitude of children that have been abducted, sexually abused and murdered in this country in the last six months.  What kind of values does someone have to have to care more about cells in a petrie dish than the children who are already here?


Those examples aren't values. Those examples do nothing but reflect the values that are ABSENT in an egotistical moron of a president who, at his very BEST, is nothing but DANGEROUS.


No problem. Peace to you. NM
...
I hope for peace
Well, Im gonna post more than I would normally about myself..sigh..Im Jewish (though not practicing)..so that kind of makes my heart, mind and soul a bit concerned and tied up with all this, however, I am an American first and foremost and what happens in Israel and Palestine, that is their concern.  I do not live there.  I see what is happening and frankly I agree with Sharon's decision.  It pains me cause I cannot believe how it would feel giving up a home after 30+ years or so..where are these people going to relocate..My heart truly is heavy for them.  I dont like Sharon, never have and I think his political life is quite over.  I think the land has to be shared by both Palestine and Israel.  Whatever decisions their leaders make, I as an American truly have no say.  Quite a few in Israel are fanatics, totally Orthodox.  My family, my friends, my ex, my boyfriend, we all look upon the Orthodox as kind of radical as can be.  If you dont agree, I invite you to visit New City in upstate NY or Borough Park in Brooklyn (many other areas too, of course, but these two areas are my *home areas*).  You will find extremely fanatical Jews who if you are not Orthodox Jew wouldnt even look your way or give you the time of day.  I think the situation between Israel and Palestine is quite complex, longstanding, for sure, and something we as Americans really dont understand.  A childhood friend of mine went to Israel after high school to join the Army.  She was an American citizen and did not have to.  She and I have had long discussions, believe me.  This is too complex a situation that has been going on for eons. When Sadat and Begin signed a peace accord, my heart was full of joy, I cried my eyes out.  My father was more leery.  The Middle East is a complex land and we as Americans really cannot understand all the turmoil, passion, pain, etc., that has occurred and is still occurring.  Sure, to debate it is fine but to make an absolute decision about how you feel.  Please keep an open mind.  All I hope for is peace in the Middle East and peace in America.
Can we keep the peace and also debate, please?
Here we go..how many days was there peace over here on the liberal board..three?  Five?  Oh geez..I did not generalize..I most certainly have seen many anti choice people screaming out against a womans right to choose about her body..all I was stating is I sure hope they are screaming also for the children who are lost in the system, living in horrible homes or group homes.  From what I can see, there are so many children waiting for adoption, in foster care. Lets help them FIRST..
I am sad you feel that way. Peace will sm
only come with justice. This is still very much an open wound for America, half of us that is.

It amazes me that Americans were gung-ho to spend 30 million investigating Clinton's famous BJ, yet do not question why only 1/4 of that amount was spent investigating 911 - a blow job was more important to America than 3,000 of its citizens murdered.

In the long run it has everything to do with peace
As it disrupts the global economy and the ability of this planet to feed its population it will have very much to do with peace.  Power struggles, especially over oil/food/usable land = wars, historically. 
The peace party......
and what ultimately might get us into a nuclear confrontation.
Peace offering up above.

We all love our country.  Let's focus on that.  No matter who wins, there is a lot of work to be done.


G'night.


Peace back at ya.

Peace? And Unity?
If peace and unity is what obama supporters are touting, well then heaven forbid anyone disagree or have different opinions.  That has been shown on these very boards today.  Peace and unity indeed.
and you can smoke your reefer in peace

Bush peace prize, LOL
I dont think any leader would try to invade America..unless, like what they are trying to do in Europe..create a European Union, band together as one.  Then one day..probably many years off, they just might be stronger than America or equal to America's strength.  I think things in the world would be much more stable with a fairer playing field..you know, countries just as strong as America who could keep a watch on our administrations who are too over-zealous.  Kind of makes me a little ashamed that our president was not nominated, that a *dictator revoluntary* got nominated..not that I would ever think Bush or his ilk would be nominated..The Noble Peace Prize does not nominate warmonger/chickenhawks..and I question the brainwashing of Americans that Chavez is so bad, such a *dictator, revoluntary*.  Maybe America needs a *revoluntary*, in ideology, of course (I am not suggesting strong arm tactics)  to get this country turned around on the right track.  However, the way America describes Chavez, I wonder if it is true..Gotta do some checking.  I know one of my *heros* was Che Guevara (even named one of my cats after him..smile)..and when you read the history of Che Guevara..He was a privileged person who became a doctor, saw the poverty and injustice and inequality in the world and became a revoluntary..and, of course, America had a hand in his assassination. 
Ann Wright, a Felon for Peace
Ann Wright: A Felon for Peace
    Tomdispatch Interview with Ann Wright

    Friday 11 November 2005

    She's just off the plane from Tulsa, Oklahoma, the cheapest route back from a reunion in the little Arkansas town where she grew up in the 1950s. For thirty years, she and her childhood friends have climbed to the top of Penitentiary Mountain, where the local persimmon trees grow, for a persimmon-spitting contest. (All in the great spirit of just having fun and being crazy.) She holds out her hands and says, I probably still have persimmon goop on me!

    We seat ourselves at a table in my dining room, two small tape recorders between us. She's dressed all in black with a bright green over-shirt, a middle-aged blond woman wearing gold earrings and a thin gold necklace. As she settles in, her sleeves pull back, revealing the jewelry she'd rather talk about. On her right wrist is a pink, plastic band. This one was to be a volunteer in the Astrodome for Hurricane Katrina. I did two days work there, then three days in Covington, Louisiana, the first week after. On her left wrist, next to a watch from another age, are two blue plastic bands: And this one, she says with growing animation, fingering the nearest of them, was my very first arrest of my whole life on September 26th in front of the White House with 400 of my closest friends. This is the bus number I was on and this is the arrest number they gave me and then, later on, I had to date it because now I have two. She fingers the second band. Last week 26 of us were arrested after a die-in right in front of the White House in commemoration of the two thousandth American and maybe one hundred thousandth Iraqi who died in this war. So now, she announces, chuckling heartily, I'm a felon for peace.

    When she speaks - and in the final g's she drops from words (It's freezin' in Mongolia!) - you can catch just a hint of the drawl of that long-gone child from Bentonville, Arkansas. In her blunt, straightforward manner, you can catch something of her 29 years in the Army; and in her ease perhaps, the 16 years she spent as a State Department diplomat. Animated, amused by her foibles (and those of her interviewer), articulate and thoughtful, she's just the sort of person you would want to defend - and then represent - your country, a task she continues to perform, after her own fashion, as one of the more out-of-the-ordinary antiwar activists of our moment.

    Last August, she had a large hand in running Camp Casey for Cindy Sheehan at the President's doorstep in Crawford, Texas; then again, that wasn't such a feat, given that in 1997 she had overseen the evacuation of 2,500 foreigners from the war zone that was then Sierra Leone, a harrowing experience for which she was given the State Department's Award for Heroism. That's why I joined the Foreign Service, she comments, her voice still filled with some residual excitement from those years. I wanted to go to places you wouldn't visit on vacation. In fact, the retired colonel opened and closed embassies from Africa to Uzbekistan and took some of the roughest diplomatic assignments on Earth, including the reopening of the American embassy in Kabul in December 2001.

    On March 19, 2003, the day before the first Cruise missiles were launched against Baghdad, she resigned from the Foreign Service in an open letter sent from the U.S. embassy in Mongolia (where she was then Deputy Chief of Mission) to Secretary of State Colin Powell. In it she wrote, in part:

    This is the only time in my many years serving America that I have felt I cannot represent the policies of an Administration of the United States. I disagree with the Administration's policies on Iraq, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, North Korea and curtailment of civil liberties in the U.S. itself. I believe the Administration's policies are making the world a more dangerous, not a safer, place. I feel obligated morally and professionally to set out my very deep and firm concerns on these policies and to resign from government service as I cannot defend or implement them.

    Once used to delivering official U.S. statements to other governments, she now says things like: Everyone should have to be handcuffed with the flexi-cuffs they use now and feel just how unflexible they are, just how they cut, and then imagine Iraqis, Afghans, and other people we pick up in them 24 hours a day. She relaxes, sits back, awaits the first question, and responds with gusto.

    Tomdispatch: I thought we'd start by talking about two important but quite different moments in your life. The first was not so long ago. Let me quote from a New York Times article on a recent Condoleezza Rice appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. It was a day that echoed the anguish, anger and skepticism that opinion polls show have begun to dominate the thinking of Americans. The hearing was punctuated by a heckler who called for an end to the war, only to be hustled out. Now, I believe this was you.

    Ann Wright: [She chuckles.] Yes! Not a heckler, I was a protester.

    TD: Tell me about it.

    AW: It was as much a protest against the Senators as against Condoleezza Rice, because they were not holding our Secretary of State responsible. I picked up the Washington Post that morning and noticed that Condoleezza was going to testify on Iraq, and I thought, well, I'm free until noon. When I walked in, I was not planning on doing anything.

    But I sat there for two hours and Senators were saying: We've heard the administration is discussing a military option in Syria and perhaps Iran. The committee needs to be brought in on this, because we've only given you authorization for military action in Iraq. In an almost rude, dismissive tone, the Secretary of State essentially replied: We'll talk to you when we want to; all options are on the table; and thank you very much. Then the senators just kind of sat there. It was like: Come on, guys talk! Pin that woman down! We, the people, want to know. I want to know. And then they just started off on something else. It was like: No! Come back to this question. We don't want to go to war in Syria or Iran...

    TD: And did you stand up?

    AW: So I stood up. I was back in the peanut gallery. I've never done anything like it before in my whole life. I took a deep breath and went, Stop the killing! Stop the war! Hold this woman accountable! You, the Senate, were bamboozled by the administration on Iraq and you cannot be bamboozled again! Stop this woman from killing!

    At that point, I ran out of things to say because I hadn't really planned it. [She laughs.] I was looking around. There was only one police officer and he was just ambling toward me. It was like he enjoyed what I was saying. I thought, until he gets here I've got to say something more, so I went: You failed us in Iraq, you can't fail us on Syria! The police office finally said, Uh, ma'am, you've got to come with me. This is the first time - somebody told me later - anyone's ever seen a protester put her arm around a police officer. [She laughs.]

    TD: So you weren't hustled out?

    AW: Noooooo. It was a slow walk and there was silence in the room, so I thought: Well, I can't let this go by and I started another little rant on the way out. That part wasn't mentioned in the news reports.

    TD: At least some papers like the Washington Post mentioned you by name. The Times merely called you a heckler.

    AW: Well, how rude! I wasn't heckling anyway. I was speaking on behalf of the people of America.

    TD: This obviously takes you a long way from your professional life, because you were in the Foreign Service for...

    AW: Sixteen years...

    TD: ... and in all those years this would have been rather inconceivable.

    AW: Having testified at congressional hearings as a Foreign Service officer, particularly on Somalia issues back in '93 and '94, I was always humbled to go into those rooms as a government employee. I always found it interesting when people in the audience stood up to say something. You know, I learned later that most protestors do it in the first ten minutes because that's when the cameras and all the reporters are sure to be there.

    As it happened, the chairman of the committee declined to have me arrested. The police officer said, Well, if you're disappointed, I can arrest you. I replied, If you don't mind, I'll just run on over to my lunch appointment. I was actually on my way to a presentation by Larry Wilkerson, Colin Powell's former chief of staff, where he would describe the secrecy of the administration and the way the State Department was isolated by the White House and the National Security Council.

    TD: Another moment of protest, one I'm sure you thought about very carefully, took place the day before the shock-and-awe campaign against Iraq began. That day you sent a letter of public resignation to Colin Powell which began - and not many people could have written such a sentence - When I last saw you in Kabul in 2002...

    AW: Indeed I had volunteered to go to Kabul, Afghanistan in December 2001 to be part of a small team that reopened the U.S. embassy. It had been closed for twelve years. I have a background in opening and closing embassies. I helped open an embassy in Uzbekistan, closed and reopened an embassy in Sierra Leone. I've been evacuated from Somalia and Sierra Leone. And with my military background, I've worked in a lot in combat environments.

    I volunteered because I felt the United States needed to respond to the events of 9/11, and the logical place to go after al-Qaeda was where they trained, knowing full well that you probably weren't going to get a lot of people. The al-Qaeda group is very smart and few of them, in my estimation, would have been hanging out where we were most likely to go after them in Afghanistan. Actually, I was amazed the administration went in physically. I thought, like the Clinton administration, they would send in cruise missiles. Considering the severity of September 11, I guess the military finally said: Well, it looks like we're going into that hell-hole where the Russians got their butts whipped. Everybody knew it was going to be tough.

    TD: You've commented elsewhere that a crucial moment for you was watching the President's Axis of Evil State of the Union address from a bunker in Kabul.

    AW: A bunker outside the chancellery building meant to protect against the rockets the mujahedeen were sending against each other after they defeated the Soviets. We had taken [then interim leader] Hamid Karzai, who had been invited to the State of the Union, to Bagram Air Base and sent him off three days before. We told him, You've got to start getting together some detailed plans for economic development funds because the attention of the United States doesn't stay on any country for long; so, get your little fledgling cabinet moving fast. Well, the President started talking about other interests that the United States had after 9/11 and these interests were Iran, Iraq, and North Korea. Just as he said that, the cameras focused on Karzai and you could almost see him going: Hmmmm [she mugs a wince], now I know what they were telling me at the embassy. And we were sitting there thinking, Oh my God...

    TD: You had a functioning TV?

    AW: Barely. We had a satellite dish made of pounded-out coke cans - these were being sold down in Kabul - and a computer chip sent in from Islamabad, because we wanted to hear from Washington what was going to happen with Afghanistan. When, instead of talking much about Afghanistan, the President started in on this axis-of-evil stuff we were stunned. We were thinking: Hell's bells, we're here in a very dangerous place without enough military. So for the President to start talking about this axis of evil... everyone in the bunker just went: Oh Christ, here we go! No wonder we're not getting the economic development specialists in here yet. If the American government was going after al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, and clearing out the Taliban and preparing to help the people of Afghanistan, why the hell was it taking so long? Well, that statement said it all.

    TD: Did you at that moment suspect a future invasion of Iraq?

    AW: I'm a little naïve sometimes. I really never, ever suspected we would go to war in Iraq. There was no attempt at that moment to tie 9/11 to Iraq, so it didn't even dawn on me.

    Anyway, that was the preface to my letter of resignation. I wanted to emphasize that I had seen Colin Powell on his first trip to Kabul. I wanted to show that this was a person who had lots of experience.

    TD: In the whole Vietnam era, few, if any, government officials offered public resignations of protest, but before the invasion of Iraq even began, three diplomats - Brady Kiesling, John Brown, and yourself - resigned in a most public fashion. It must have been a wrenching decision.

    AW: I had been concerned since September 2002 when I read in the papers that we had something like 100,000 troops already in the Middle East, many left behind after the Bright Star [military] exercise we have every two years in Egypt. I thought: Uh-oh, the administration is doing some sneaky-Pete stuff on us. They were claiming they wanted UN inspectors to go back into Iraq, when a military build-up was already underway. It's one thing to put troops in the region for pressure, but if you're leaving that many behind, you're going to be using them. Then, as the mushroom-cloud rhetoric started getting stronger, it was like: Good God! These guys mean to go to war, no matter what the evidence is.

    By November, I was having trouble sleeping. I would wake up at three, four in the morning - this was in Mongolia where it was freezing cold - wrap up in blankets, go to the kitchen table, and just start pouring my soul out. By the time I finally sent that resignation letter in, I had a stack of drafts like this. [She lifts her hand a couple of feet off the table.] I did know two others had resigned, but quite honestly I hadn't read their letters and I didn't know them.

    TD: You were ending your life in a way, life as you had known it...

    AW: Thirty-five years in the government between my military service and the State Department, under seven administrations. It was hard. I liked representing America.

    TD: Was there a moment when you knew you couldn't represent this government anymore?

    AW: I kept hoping the administration would go back to the Security Council for its authorization to go to war. That's why I held off until virtually the bombs were being dropped. I was hoping against hope that our government would not go into what really is an illegal war of aggression that meets no criteria of international law. When it was finally evident we were going to do so, I said to myself: It ain't going to be on my watch.

    TD: Was it like crossing a border into a different world?

    AW: It was a great relief. During the lead-up to war, I had begun showing symptoms of an impending heart attack. The State Department put me on a medivac flight to Singapore for heart tests. The doctors said, Lady, you're as strong as a horse. Are you just under some kind of stress? Yes, I am! The moment I sent in that letter, it was like a great burden had been lifted from my shoulders. At least I had made my stand and joined the other two who had resigned.

    TD: And what of those you left behind?

    AW: In the first couple of days, while I was still in Mongolia, I received over 400 emails from colleagues in the State Department saying: We're so sad you're not going to be with us, but we're so proud of the three of you who resigned because we think this going-to-war is just so horrible; then each one would describe how anti-American feeling was growing in the country where they were serving. It was so poignant, all those emails.

    TD: Why don't you think more people in the government - and in the military where there's clearly been opposition to Iraq at a very high level - quit and speak out?

    AW: There were a few. [General] Eric Shinseki talked about the shortchanging of the [Iraq] operations plan by a couple of hundred thousand people. He was forced out. But see, in the military, in the Foreign Service, you're not supposed to be speaking your own mind. Your job is to implement the policies of an administration elected by the people of America. If you don't want to, your only option is to resign. I understood that and that's one of the reasons I resigned - to give myself the freedom to talk out.

    There are a lot of people still in government service speaking out, but you've got to read between the lines. The senior military leaders in Iraq, what they've been saying is very different from what Donald Rumsfeld and the gang in Washington say. These guys are being honest and truthful about the lack of Iraqi battalions really ready for military work, the dangers the troops are under, the days when the military doesn't go out on the streets. They're signaling to America: We're up a creek on this one, guys, and you, the people of America, are going to have to help us out.

    TD: ...Let's talk about [Colin Powell's chief of staff] Larry Wilkerson as an example. He assumedly left after the election when Colin Powell did, so almost a year has passed. He saw what he believed was a secret cabal running the government and it took him that long after he was gone to tell us about it. I'm glad he spoke out. But I wonder why there isn't a more urgent impulse to do so?

    AW: If you look at Dick Clarke [the President's former chief adviser on terrorism on the National Security Council], he had all the secrets from the very beginning and he retired in January 2003. Yet he didn't say anything for over a year and a half, until he published that book [Against All Enemies] in 2004. If he had gone public before the war started, that man could have told us those same secrets right then. So could [the National Security Council's senior director for combating terrorism] Randy Beers. I worked with both of them on Somalia, on Sierra Leone. I know these guys personally and it's like: Guys, why didn't you come forward then?

    As you probably know, on the key issues of the first four years of the Bush administration, the State Department was essentially iced out. I mean, look at the Iraq War. Colin Powell and the State Department were just shoved aside and all State's functions put into the Department of Defense. Tragically, Colin Powell, who was trying to counsel Donald Rumsfeld behind the scenes that there weren't enough troops in Iraq, never stood up to say, Hold it, guys, I'll resign if we don't get this under control so that logical functions go in logical organizations and you, the Defense Department, don't do post-combat civil reconstruction stuff. That's ours. He just didn't do it. To me, he was more loyal to the Bush family than he was to the country. His resignation was possibly the one thing that could have deterred the war. Then the people of America would really have looked closely at what was going on. But tragically he decided loyalty to the administration was more valuable than loyalty to the country. I mean, it breaks my heart to say that, but it's what really happened.

    TD: So what is it that actually holds people back?

    AW: I think the higher up you go, the more common it is for people to retire, or maybe even resign, and not say what the reasons are, because they may hope to get back into government in a different administration. Dick Clarke had served every administration since George Washington and maybe he was looking toward being called back as a political appointee again. Sometimes such people don't speak out because they feel loyalty to the person who appointed them. Nobody appointed me to nothin', except the American people. I'm a career foreign service officer and I serve the American people. When an administration wasn't serving the best interests of the American people, I felt I had to stand up.

    TD: And are you now pretty much a full-time antiwar activist?

    AW: [She laughs.] That's the way it's turned out.

    TD: What, if anything, do you think your military career, your State Department career, and this... well, I can't call it a career... have in common?

    AW: Service to America. It's all just a continuation of a real concern I have about my country.

    TD: And what would you say to your former compatriots still in the military and the State Department?

    AW: Many of the emails I received from Foreign Service officers said, I wish I could resign right now, but I've got kids in college, I've got mortgages, and I'm going to try really hard, by staying, to ameliorate the intensity of these policies. All I can say is that they must be in agony about not being able to affect policy. There have been plenty of early retirements by people who finally realized they couldn't moderate the policies of the Bush administration.

    TD: What message would you send to the person you once were from the person you are now?

    AW: You trained me well.

    TD: If in this room you had the thirty-five year-old woman about to go into Grenada, as you did back in 1983, what would you want her to mull over.

    AW: I would say: You were a good Army officer and Foreign Service officer. You weren't blind to the faults of America. In many jobs, you tried to rectify things that were going badly and you succeeded a couple of times. My resignation wasn't the first time I spoke out. For instance, I was loaned, or seconded, from the State Department to the staff of the United Nations operation in Somalia and ended up writing a memo concerning the military operations the UN was conducting to kill a warlord named Addid. They started taking helicopters, standing off, and just blowing up buildings where they had intelligence indicating perhaps he was there. Well, tragically he never was, and here we were blowing up all these Somali families. Of course the Somalis were outraged and that outrage ultimately led to Blackhawk Down.

    I wrote a legal opinion to the special representative of the Secretary General, saying the UN operations were illegal and had to stop. It was leaked to the Washington Post and I got in a bit of hot water initially, but ultimately my analysis proved correct. I was also a bit of a rabble-rouser on the utilization of women in the military back in the eighties, part of a small group of women who took on the Army when it was trying to reduce the career potentials of women. I ended up getting right in the thick of some major problems which ultimately cost the Army millions of dollars in the reassessment of units that had been given incorrect direct-combat probability codings. I was also part of a team which discovered that some of our troops had been looting private homes in Grenada. The Army court-martialed a lot of our soldiers for this violation of the law of land warfare. We used their example in rewriting how you teach the code of conduct and, actually, the Geneva Convention on the responsibility of occupiers.

    TD: You know a good deal about the obligations of an occupying power to protect public and private property, partially because in the 1980s you were doing planning on the Middle East, right?

    AW: Yes, from 1982 to 1984, I was at Fort Bragg, North Carolina when the Army was planning for potential operations using the Rapid Deployment Force - what ultimately became the Central Command. One of the first forces used in rapid deployment operations was the 82 Airborne at Fort Bragg. I was in the special operations end of it with civil affairs. Those are the people who write up the annexes to operations plans about how you interact with the civilian population, how you protect the facilities - sewage, water, electrical grids, libraries. We were doing it for the whole Middle East. I mean, we have operations plans on the shelf for every country in the world, or virtually. So we did one on Iraq; we did one on Syria; on Jordan, Egypt. All of them.

    We would, for instance, take the UNESCO list of treasures of the world and go through it. Okay, any in Iraq? Yep. Okay, mark 'em, circle 'em on a map, put 'em in the op-plan. Whatever you do, don't bomb this. Make sure we've got enough troops to protect this. It's our obligation under the law of land warfare. We'd be circling all the electrical grids, all the oil grids, all the museums. So for us to go into Iraq and let all that looting happen. Well, Rumsfeld wanted a light, mobile force, and screw the obligations of treaties. Typical of this administration on any treaty thing. Forget 'em.

    So everything was Katy-bar-the-door. Anybody could go in and rip up anything. Many of the explosives now being used to kill our troops come from the ammo dumps we did not secure. It was a total violation of every principle we had for planning military operations and their aftermath. People in the civil affairs units, they were just shaking their heads, wondering how in the hell this could have happened. We've been doing these operations plans forever, so I can only imagine the bitchin' and moanin' about - how come we don't have this civilian/military annex? It's in every other op-plan. And where are the troops, where are the MPs?

    TD: If back in the early eighties you were planning to save the antiquities of every country in the Middle East, then obviously the Pentagon was also planning for a range of possible invasions in the region. Do you look back now and ask: What kind of a country has contingency plans to invade any country you can imagine?

    AW: One of the things you are likely to do at a certain point in your military career is operations plans. It did not then seem abnormal to me at all that we had contingency plans for the Middle East, or for countries in the Caribbean or South America. At that stage, I was not looking at the imperialism of the United States. I just didn't equate those contingency plans with empire-building goals. However, depending on how those plans are used, they certainly can be just that. Remember as well that this was in the days of the Cold War and, by God, that camouflaged a lot of stuff. You could always say: You never can tell what those Soviets are going to do, so you better be prepared anywhere in the world to defeat them.

    TD: And we're still prepared anywhere in the world...

    AW: Well, we are and now, let's see, where are the Russians? [She laughs heartily.]

    TD: Tell me briefly the story of your life.

    AW: I grew up in Arkansas, just a normal childhood. I think the Girl Scouts was a formative organization for me. It had a plan to it, opportunity to travel outside Arkansas, good goals - working on those little badges. Early State Department. Early military too. It's kind of interesting, the militarization of our society, how we don't really think of some things, and yet when I look back, there I was a little Girl Scout in my green uniform, and so putting on an Army uniform after college wasn't that big a deal. I'd been in a uniform before and I knew how to salute, three fingers. [She demonstrates.]

    If you look, we now have junior ROTC in the high schools. We have child soldiers in America. We're good at getting kids used to those uniforms. And then there's the militarization of industries and corporations, the necessity every ten years to have a war because we need a new generation of weaponry. Corporations in the military-industrial complex are making lots of money off of new types of weaponry and vehicles.

    TD: While you were in the military, did you have any sense that these wars were actually living weapons labs?

    AW: Particularly seeing the privatization after Gulf War I, going into Somalia. All of a sudden, as fast as military troops were arriving, you had Halliburton and Kellogg, Brown, and Root in Somalia. They started saying, You need mess halls, oh, we'll do the mess halls for you. And it turned out they had staged a lot of their equipment in the Middle East after the Gulf War. So it was in Somalia lickety-split. The privatization of military functions is now so pervasive that the military can no longer function by itself, without the contractors and corporations. These contractors, these mercenaries really, are now fundamentally critical to the operations of the U.S. military.

    TD: So a Girl Scout and...

    AW: In my junior year at the University of Arkansas, a recruiter came through town with the film, Join the Army, See the World. I had been an education major for three years. Nurse, teacher, those were the careers for women. I didn't want any of it. So, in the middle of the Vietnam War, I signed up to go to a three-week Army training program, just to see if I liked it. And I found it challenging. Even though there were protests going on all over America, I divorced myself from what the military actually did versus what opportunities it offered me. I hated all these people getting killed in Vietnam, but I said to myself: I'm not going to kill anyone and I'm taking the place of somebody who will be able to go do something else. All these arguments that... now you look at it and go: Oh my God, what did you do?

    TD: Don't you think this happens now?

    AW: Absolutely! I sympathize with the people in the military right now. The majority didn't sign up to kill anybody. You always prayed that, whatever administration it was, it didn't go off on some wild goose chase that got you into a war you personally thought was really stupid.

    TD: Would you counsel a young woman now to go into the military?

    AW: I think we will always have a military and I think the military is honorable service as long as the civilian leadership uses it in appropriate ways and is very cautious about sending us to war. And yes, I would encourage people to look at a military career, but I would also tell them that, if they're sent to do something they think is wrong, they don't have to stay in, though they may have to take some consequences for saying, Thank you very much but I'm not going to kill anybody.

    In fact, if I were recalled to active duty, which is possible... I put myself purposely at the Retired Ready Reserve so that, if there was ever an emergency and my country needed me, I could be recalled, and in fact there are people my age, 59, who are agreeing to be recalled. The ultimate irony would be resigning from my career in the diplomatic corps and then having the Bush administration recall me, because my specialty, civil affairs, reconstruction, is in really short supply. I'm a colonel. I know how to run battalions and brigades. I can do this stuff. But I would have to tell them, sorry, I refuse to be placed on active duty. And if they push hard enough, then I'd just have to be court-martialed and I'd go to Leavenworth. I will not serve this administration in the Iraq war which I firmly believe is an illegal war of aggression.

    TD: You know, if someone had said to me back in the 1960s that a Vice President of the United States might go to Congress to lobby for a torture exemption for the CIA the way Dick Cheney has done, I would have said: This couldn't happen. Never in American history. I'm staggered by this.

    AW: Me, too. The other thing that's quite interesting is the number of women who are involved in it. There were something like eighty women I've identified, ranging from high officers to CIA contractors being used as interrogators in Guantanamo. Talking about things that will come back to bite us big time, this is it. And we are complicit, all of us, because, quite honestly, we're not standing out in front of the White House every single day, and every time that Vice President leaves throwing our bodies in front of his car, throwing blood on it. We need to get tough with these guys. They're not listening to us. They think we're a bunch of wimps. We've got to get tougher and tougher with them to show them we're not going to put up with this stuff.

    TD: You've quoted Teddy Roosevelt as saying: To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. I was particularly struck by that word servile. Do you want to talk about dissent for a moment?

    AW: Well, we shouldn't be hesitant about voicing our opinions, even in the most difficult of times which generally is when your nation is going to war and you're standing up to say, this isn't right. That's tough and, in fact, the first couple of months after I resigned, oh man, all that TV and nothing on but the war, and very few people wanted to hear me. It probably was a good four months before anybody even asked me to come speak about why I had dissented, and that was a little lonely. [She chuckles.]

    TD: Any final thoughts?

    AW: We now have a two-and-a-half-year track record of being a very brutal country. We are the cause of the violence in Iraq. That violence will continue as long as we're there, and the administration maintains that we will be there until we win. That means to me that this administration is planning for a long-term siege in Iraq. It means that young men and women in America should be prepared for the draft because the military right now cannot support what this administration wants. In fact, yesterday I was talking to about ninety high school seniors in Fayetteville, Arkansas, a very Republican part of the United States. I said: Your parents may support this war, but how strongly do you feel about it? If it drags on for years and there's a draft, how many of you will willingly go? Only three put up their hands.

    We are continuing down a very dangerous road. The United States and its citizenry are held in disdain in world opinion for not being able to stop this war machine. So one of the things I'm doing is ratcheting up my own level of response. A dear friend, Joe Palambo, a Vietnam veteran in Veterans for Peace who went to hear the President in Norfolk when he talked about terrorism, was recently cited in the newspapers this way: There was one protestor in the second row of the audience who stood up and railed against the President, saying: You're the terrorist! This war is a war of terrorism! Joe called me right after that happened and said, Hey, Ann, I heard what you did in the Senate and I thought, I'm going to go do the same thing to the President.

    I mean, we're going to dog these guys all over the country. Our Secretary of State, our Secretary of Defense, our Vice President, our President, our National Security Adviser, the head of the CIA, any of these people who are the warmongers, who are the murderers in the name of our country, wherever they go, the people of America need to stand up to them to say, No! Stop! Stop this war. Stop this killing. Get us out of this mess. Because that's the only time they hear it, when we stand up in these venues. They don't come out to the street in front of the White House to see the hundreds of thousands of people who are protesting. They ignore that. But for those fifteen seconds, if you can stand up so that everybody in that audience sees that there's one person, or maybe even two or three... Who knows?


  -------


Jewish Voices For Peace
Not all jews agree with this latest Israeli/Bush aggression, myself included.  Check out the web site Jewish Voices For Peace.Org.
Jewish Voice For Peace
It is Jewish Voice For Peace.Org, not Jewish Voices For Peace as I previously posted.  Sorry.
history of peace symbol

http://www.nonukesnorth.net/peacesymbol.shtml 


Someone asked me awhile back about the peace symbol and where it came from. In the event that you do not know this story, it is quite interesting especially in light of the **nuclear** problems we are having 49 years after the symbol's creation. Altho there are those who swear it is the reincarnation of some ancient rune of an evil, Anton LeBay, devil-worsipping, anti-Christ **secret** society, they are referring to the V (for victory sign) that Churchill and Nixon and others have used over the years. The V being evil has something to do with Masons and **secrets** the rest of us are not privy to. Anyway, when Gerald Holtom designed the peace sign as we know it some far-far-far right and fundamental religious groups spread the notion that the symbol was an outgrowth of the **V** and a Satanic Communist symbol.


The real story, especially the semaphores, which I did not know much about before researching this a few years ago, is pretty cool.


Nobel peace price
Is not a popularity contest.  It is a privately funded award bestowed by the esteemed leaders in the field.  To question their choice based on brain-washing political propaganda is ridiculous. Their choice does not need to be defended.  Attacks are s-o-o-o-o transparent.
So no opinion on war and peace, HL security
nm
Here's one. Palins' stance on war and peace.
nm