Rampant Moosery
Merry Christmas, Mooj!
Click here to open your present.
--------
The BullMoose Nation has never advocated a military attack on Iran.
But we've never advocated releasing Iran from it's "threat" status either.
No matter. Anti-Americans everywhere are celebrating the news about Iran nukes because it helps them Hate Bush just that much more. It's their lifelong dream, it seems, to find some ways to establish that the U.S. is the aggressor and Iran is not.
Here's the latest.
So I propose a deal.
We go ahead and pretend Iran is not a threat, just like so many want us to. We then all go back to bed and sleep.
If Iran ends up killing masses of Americans or our allies with a nuke, we get to hang you in Times Square. K?
------------------------
Hey Ron.
Meet Ron.
Click Here.
-----
Wow. Great victory for freedom!
Christians don't get a public place in prisons. HERE'S THE STORY.
Thank God God has been expelled.
What prisons really need are more weight rooms, TVs, Black Muslims, and social workers banging inmates in visitation rooms.
Did Reagan hit a home run with that speech or what? Great sound from a great President. Yeah, he had his flaws when it came to dealing with Islamists and the like, but during his time in office, the still greater threat was the spread of global communism. And I think he pretty much put that cow out to pasture didn't he. Looking back, I think our politicians today can take a page from his playbook and learn that "peace through strength" is the only way to approach the threats we face today.
Reply to this
Let me try to get this straight, the intelligence agencies from around the world, said that Saddam had WMD. After giving him a year before we went in to depose him, gee, we couldn't find them, which to libs meant that Bush lied along with the howlings that the intelligence was wrong.
Now this report comes out by 'intelligence' and says Iran stopped their nuke program 3-4 years ago. Though, don't worry your pretty little heads about them still enriching uranium. Move along.
Explain to me how the first was wrong and the second is so right other than what the lefties want them to say.
As far as the prison where they say the government has no business paying for religious indoctrination....the government has no business paying for sex change operations either or halaal food.
Reply to this
Addendum to above, the entrenched libs and Clinton holdovers in the State Department have been leaking and undermining Bush since day one. I am very suspicious of this circle jerk.
Reply to this
As regards to the intelligence reports of Saddam's WMD and the recent excursion into Syria by the Israelis that took out a site the Syrians want to keep mum about...
http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=F715A709-2614-4EA5-967C-F6151F94A364
Finally, there are some definitive answers to the mystery of the missing WMD. Civilian volunteers, mostly retired intelligence officers belonging to the non-partisan IntelligenceSummit.org, have been poring over the secret archives captured from Saddam Hussein. The inescapable conclusion is this: Saddam really did have WMD after all, but not in the way the Bush administration believed. A 9,000 word research paper with citations to each captured document has been posted online at LoftusReport.com, along with translations of the captured Iraqi documents, courtesy of Mr. Ryan Mauro and his friends.
This Iraqi document research has been supplemented with satellite photographs and dozens of interviews, among them David Gaubatz who risked radiation exposure to locate Saddam’s underwater WMD warehouses , and John Shaw, whose brilliant detective work solved the puzzle of where the WMD went. Both have contributed substantially to solving one of the most difficult mysteries of our decade.
The absolutists on either side of the WMD debate will be more than a bit chagrinned at these disclosures. The documents show a much more complex history than previously suspected. The "Bush lied, people died" chorus has insisted that Saddam had no WMD whatsoever after 1991 - and thus that WMD was no good reason for the war. The Neocon diehards insist that, as in Raiders of the Lost Ark, the treasure-trove is still out there somewhere, buried under the sand dunes of Iraq. Each side is more than a little bit wrong about Saddam's WMD, and each side is only a little bit right about what happened to it.
The gist of the new evidence is this: roughly one quarter of Saddam's WMD was destroyed under UN pressure during the early to mid 1990's. Saddam sold approximately another quarter of his weapons stockpile to his Arab neighbors during the mid to late 1990's. The Russians insisted on removing another quarter in the last few months before the war. The last remaining WMD, the contents of Saddam's nuclear weapons labs, were still inside Iraq on the day when the coalition forces arrived in 2003. His nuclear weapons equipment was hidden in enormous underwater warehouses beneath the Euphrates River. Saddam’s entire nuclear inventory was later stolen from these warehouses right out from under the Americans’ noses. The theft of the unguarded Iraqi nuclear stockpile is perhaps, the worst scandal of the war, suggesting a level of extreme incompetence and gross dereliction of duty that makes the Hurricane Katrina debacle look like a model of efficiency.
Reply to this
In lieu of this new report and the fact that the democrat leadership is still saying the Iraq war is lost and the surge is not working (Murtha was skinned for coming back last week from Iraq and saying it was working.), they are purposefully, as always, undermining the President, the military, and our country for their ideological goals.
The left, the democrats, and the dem party sock puppets called the media, have a history of pacifism, defeatism, sedition, and treasonous acts. Let's skip past their vaporous rage over Reagan's staff privately supporting anti-communists in the Iran-Contra affair because the dems refused to aid them.
Let's check out what General Giap of N. Vietnam had to say in his memoirs.
http://www.newsmax.com/metcalf/iraq_war/2007/10/03/37840.html
Despite the hope that we can learn from past mistakes and not repeat them, history suggests it is counterintuitive to actually believe it could be so.
We won every military engagement of the Vietnam War yet Walter Cronkite and the American media conspired with the enemy to do what the North Vietnamese could not do on the battlefield.
General Võ Nguyên Giáp, who was the commander of the North Vietnamese army, has published his memoirs. He has confirmed what most Americans either knew or suspected. The war in southeast Asia was not lost in Vietnam. It was lost here at home. The American media, enabling and functioning as symbiots for the John Kerry anti-war gaggle accomplished in a few short years what Giap could not do in three decades of fighting.
Giap was an immensely accomplished general, highly respected (some say brilliant). Before, during and after his martial career, he was a scholar, journalist, historian, and philosopher.
The following quote is from his memoirs currently found in the Vietnam War memorial in Hanoi:
"What we still don't understand is why you Americans stopped the bombing of Hanoi. You had us on the ropes. If you had pressed us a little harder, just for another day or two, we were ready to surrender! It was the same at the battles of TET. You defeated us! We knew it, and we thought you knew it.
But we were elated to notice your media was definitely helping us. They were causing more disruption in America than we could in the battlefields. We were ready to surrender. You had won!"
Their actions or lack thereof, and the results, speak for themselves. They have a lot to answer for and a lot of blood on their hands.
Reply to this
Jamie,
Your hissy fit over the good news about Iran's nuclear program is puzzling.
And such hatred for your fellow citizens.... It seems that you are wishing for a nuclear attack to justify your anti-Muslim fervor, and so you can hang good patriotic Americans in Times Square.
Shouldn't we ALL be celebrating the news that the Iran nuclear threat may be less than we thought? Isn't that good news?
So I propose a counter-deal.
We go ahead and assess the reality of the Iran threat, just like so many of us want, and then act appropriately. We then all go back to bed and sleep, as I do every night.
If Iran ends up NOT killing masses of Americans or our allies with a nuke, you stop terrorizing fellow citizens with your hysteria. K?
Also, in a previous post, did you really call artists who criticized the government fascists?? YOU, Jamie, advocate burning down the New York City library for displaying constitutionally protected speech and THEY'RE fascists?? That was a gag, right, that I didn't get? If you were serious, as I've implored before, please, please look up the meaning of fascist. And then look up irony.
jeff in NY
Reply to this
Jeff, I'm not sure by your comments what it is you suggest we do regarding Iran? Do we just let it go, bury our heads in the sand and hope nothing bad happens? There IS a problem with Iran, just listen to their leader's rhetoric every time he opens his mouth. You have to be on the guard against these people, take preventative measures against them. Jeff, when you do go to sleep at night, do you at least lock your doors or do you let them remain unlocked and HOPE nothing bad happens? Don't take any action and let the chips fall where they may.
Do you actually believe that this latest assessment is infalable? I'm assuming that if the Gov'ment was wrong before, they could be wrong this time around and be way off again in their assessments of Iran's capability. Just not something you want to mess around with.
But go ahead, snap your heals together, and dream of the good old days....can't we all just get along.
Reply to this
What did Ronald Reagan say about Ron Paul?....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyXW1hb-JQg...or maybe Barry Goldwater Jr....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7r27Az_Mns
Reply to this
Oooops I messed that link up(Ronald Reagan on Ron Paul)..........http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=YyXW1hb-JQg&feature=related
Reply to this
Jeff in NY,
Do you even listen to Jamie's show??? If you do? Do you just hear only what you want to hear??? Jamie terrorizing people??? (Wuh????!!!)
How about Death to America chants?? How about the enriching of uranium that this whole argument is about??? Is that terrorizing?
How about "wiping Israel of the map"? How about support of Hamas and Al Qaeda who consistently terrorize and murder our own?
What about officers from the Revolutionary Guard being captured in Iraq? What about Iranian built weapons being found in caches in Iraq???
Should I go on???
This is just a tip of the ice berg with these retards. All this and you think Jamie Allman terrorizes people???
No one in this forum or of his show have been terrorized by Jamie...and in no way shape or fashion has Jamie suggested we were going to be nuked or that we should nuke Iran, or bomb them for that matter. YOUR hysteria has taken over your rationale....
What you call Anti-Muslim Fervor is in two parts a ridiculous cheap shot. First of all it's not "Anti-Muslim" it's Anti-Radical Muslims...Remember those guys? The ones that cut off our American's heads with a dull knife??? Remember those guys?
As for "Fervor" or "Hysteria" I find it hard to beleive that anyone would down play a genuine concern for American safety after 9/11 and use these words as a jab...
It's not fervor or hysteria Jeff, it's being pissed and wide eyed over the obvious threat that is radical Muslims, who have no qualms about killing us and telling you about it before they do. Do you really need an intel report to see that? With all that has come available about Iran in the last 30yrs?
The news is most certainly good Jeff. But I would hope you won't nestle back into blind slumber.
I would rather be overly cautious and moving forward with protecting America and staying one step ahead of the retards than to fall back in denial into post 9/11 blindness.
There is no "assessing the reality" of the Iranian threat Jeff, that is a fore gone conclusion... We don't need a nuclear weapon in Iran to be threatened. They have already been killing Americans for years.
Thx LTL
Reply to this
On the NIE from the WSJ -
http://www.opinionjournal.com/forms/printThis.html?id=110010946
We wish we could be as sanguine, both about the quality of U.S. intelligence and its implications for U.S. diplomacy. For years, senior Administration officials, including Condoleezza Rice, have stressed to us how little the government knows about what goes on inside Iran. In 2005, the bipartisan Robb-Silberman report underscored that "Across the board, the Intelligence Community knows disturbingly little about the nuclear programs of many of the world's most dangerous actors." And as our liberal friends used to remind us, you can never trust the CIA. (Only later did they figure out the agency was usually on their side.)
As recently as 2005, the consensus estimate of our spooks was that "Iran currently is determined to develop nuclear weapons" and do so "despite its international obligations and international pressure." This was a "high confidence" judgment. The new NIE says Iran abandoned its nuclear program in 2003 "in response to increasing international scrutiny." This too is a "high confidence" conclusion. One of the two conclusions is wrong, and casts considerable doubt on the entire process by which these "estimates"--the consensus of 16 intelligence bureaucracies--are conducted and accorded gospel status.
Our own "confidence" is not heightened by the fact that the NIE's main authors include three former State Department officials with previous reputations as "hyper-partisan anti-Bush officials," according to an intelligence source. They are Tom Fingar, formerly of the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research; Vann Van Diepen, the National Intelligence Officer for WMD; and Kenneth Brill, the former U.S. Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
For a flavor of their political outlook, former Bush Administration antiproliferation official John Bolton recalls in his recent memoir that then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage "described Brill's efforts in Vienna, or lack thereof, as 'bull--.'" Mr. Brill was "retired" from the State Department by Colin Powell before being rehired, over considerable internal and public protest, as head of the National Counter-Proliferation Center by then-National Intelligence Director John Negroponte.
No less odd is the NIE's conclusion that Iran abandoned its nuclear weapons program in 2003 in response to "international pressure." The only serious pressure we can recall from that year was the U.S. invasion of Iraq..........
............
Our intelligence services are supposed to inform the policies of elected officials, but increasingly their judgments seem to be setting policy. This is dangerous.
Reply to this
Don't forget that the SNIE is an ESTIMATE only, not a concrete conclusion.
The sheep out there can believe Achmed Dinnerjacket when he says Iran isn't building Nukes all they want. They obviously believe everything they hear no matter what the source. They also probably believe that terrorist when he says that Iran has NO homosexuals in his country. Yep, Iran is the only Gay-Free zone in the world. Sheep - You gotta laugh at them.
Reply to this
Back atcha Conserva-Giant. Yes I lock my doors at night, but I do not circle the neighborhood pre-emptively attacking those I imagine may harm me. See the difference?
I think we agree more than not on protecting the US. My point is that invading other countries pre-emptively may not be the best approach. Many of us, although bitterly angry after 9/11, still opposed the invasion of Iraq as a distraction from pursuing the murderous thugs (militant Muslims) who attacked us. I think history will judge that the invasion and occupation of Iraq, which will eventually be resolved, was not wise.
I would never defend Ahmadinejad or any radical Muslim. He's a petty tyrant not to be trusted. If Iran demonstrably is developing nuclear weapons the US and the rest of the world has a right, has a duty to act decisively to stop the process. Period.
Lt: I consider anyone who hypes the threat to the US for personal gain to be practicing terrorism. The goal of terrorism is to frighten to the point of changing behavior. Radical Muslims are not going to overrun the US. Ever. They will not be chopping off heads in Affton, Arnold or U City. Please don't mistake opposition to invading Iraq and Iran as opposition to battling terrorism. The invasion of Iraq is not the same as fighting terrorists.
Lt: What do you propose we do about Iran?
Reply to this
"They will not be chopping off heads in Affton, Arnold or U City."
Jeff, can you check to make sure St. Louis Hills is on that list. That's where I live and I'm kinda scared.
Reply to this
Lt:
Let me add, regarding my original post: Jamie suggested that we start hanging people in Times Square. In a previous post (which I also referenced) he advocated burning the NYC library to the ground. Would these acts qualify as terrorism or hysteria in your universe?
Reply to this
Frank:
lol... I have it on good authority that St Louis Hills will also be spared!
Reply to this
Hmmm sadly amazing what you and Frank find so amusing. Ya know I am sure that the folks clocking into work at the World Trade Center and starting there day didn't beleive that terrorists would kill them that day.
I bet the poor people on those planes had know idea that terrorists would kill them also.
Different scenario now in a post 9/11 world. Things have changed. We all knew it had. The President vowed to defend the country and he has. Nevermind all the thwarted terrorist attempts and Al-Qaeda cells that have been broken up right Jeff?
Do you think that the reason we haven't been attacked since, is because the terrorists have had a change of heart?? I would hope not.
I am not sure who your were talking about Jamie Allman or The President with your " Anyone who HYPES the threat on the US for personal gain to be practicing terrorism" Whom ever you were speaking of I am sure in your mind that the President is "hyping" terrorism along side of Jamie?
Since you've made that ridiculous and adolescent statement? Can you tell me how they are HYPING terrorism and what "personal gains" as you call them..would they obtain????
Please spare me the high and mighty lib garbage ...I am well aware of the defintion of terrorism, I witnessed 9/11 and the beheadings like we all did...The difference there is that I am not in a state of denial and ignorant bliss like you are.Your whole make up is hatred for Bush Jeff...It's clear as can be.
Your accusing Jamie of being a terrorist is transparent and ignorant.
No one beleives that terrorists are going to over run the country. But let's hearken back to the affects of 9/11 on our economy and our psyche... it was profound. We came together as a country and our leaders said that we need to have resolve...that this battle against terrorism would last years.
Everything Bush said he would do in regards to protecting this country he has done. What does he get from the left and the divisive media??? Bush lied Bush, Bush lied...Again that's all they got???
More adolescent comments?? No proof...NOTHING! This is the credit the man gets for keeping us and our families safe??
Jeff, you say that the war in Iraq is not equivalent to fighting terror???
Who the hell do you think we are fighting over there ???? The Baghdad Lions Club???
Did you not hear the report of Al-Qaeda being close to defeat??? How could that be unless we were killing them in Iraq??? Or were they watching us fight Sunnis and Shiites and they got scared from the comforts of their cave??
Why do you think we have had two tapes of Bin Laden come out in such a short time span??? He knows we are whipping his ass!
There are terror cells in the US right now...So you keep thinking that all is safe in the hood... laugh it up.
Now Jeff do you seriously think Jamie is a terrorist? The President???
Kinda sounds stupid.I mean really??
What would he gain?? Heard of the word "facetious"?
LTL
Reply to this
In a previous post (which I also referenced) he advocated burning the NYC library to the ground. Would these acts qualify as terrorism or hysteria in your universe?
Sarcasm. Look it up.
The goal of terrorism is to frighten to the point of changing behavior. Radical Muslims are not going to overrun the US. Ever. They will not be chopping off heads in Affton, Arnold or U City.
You are correct on the first point, but not the second (9/11). And they are doing a good job of it. Notice how the media censors itself so as not to offend them. Notice how they intimidate via the courts to silence the critics -- the flying imams is one example. Intimidating advertisers to silence free speech.
They not only use terrorism, but they also use infiltration. Notice the $$$ flowing from arab nations to Ivy League institutions and political coffers (i.e. Dubai ports - Clinton, Albright, Dole, are foreign agents for Dubai. Clinton making millions giving speeches in the ME ragging on Bush and Iraq.), not just librarys, for something in return. Moles in the CIA are just shrugged at.
Honor killings, female genital mutilations, polygamy and gaming the welfare system (look up Your Black Muslim Bakery). The bottom feeders are here.
And the media has been covering up stories the past few years so as not to make anyone think islam is associated with terror or that Bush is right to be concerned. Remember the muslim going in to a Jewish Center and shooting at women and children, killing one. The DC snipers. The new muslim recruit who blew the top part of his body off prematurely outside a filled stadium in OK. The muslim who rented the biggest SUV he could find before plowing into the kafir on another college campus...etc...
Start paying attention to what is taking place around the world. Every country is dealing by denial with it. Behead those who insult islam. Behead those who let little kids name a teddy bear 'mohammed'. Another story from the UK reports that hospital staff must turn muslim patient beds to mecca 5 times a day. Western civ and the holocaust is not taught so as not to offend muslims....same sort of crap happening in our schools.
But they won't rush our borders waving their swords. They are going to do it bit by bit along with the help of the lefties, who are doing their damnedest to destroy the very foundation of our republic.
Death by a thousand cuts - and some well-paid PC poisoned dhimmis in congress. (White House is guilty of this too.)
Don't think it can't happen here.
Look at Lebanon. In the 70's they were about a 75% Christian nation, 25-30% muslim/other. A prospering democratic gem of the ME. Until radical islam got a bug up their butts. It has since turned into a shithole and the demographics reversed. 70% muslim, 30% Christian.
Wake up.
Reply to this
first things first , Iran is not and has not been a threat to us ... Look at ole George W Bush , once again , his professional advisors telling him this and he's still gunnin for war ... and somehow there is still a "30%" possibility people like this guy , haha - mindblowing .
Ameenininiajad has no power that's right NONE -- he is not the president of Iran and does not wield the power to declare war , he is just stirring up shit - all bark and no bite . He is a talking head for Iran and that's it , period .
Secondly , I'm very glad to see some new Ron Paul backers who actually get the message of peace .... Hats off .
LTL - It is proven that more than half of the 9/11 "hi-jackers" are still alive bro , they gave a freakin press conference , and not a single one of them had crap to do with al-qaeda --- kinda like the U.S. put a blindfold on and picked a few names from the afghanny phone book .... but that's irrelevant .
The war in Iraq is not saving American's shit ... We are paying for it in lives and the economy .... enough is enough .
Noone is appeasing the "terrorists" by leaving and ending it , they are just being sensible to the livelihood of America's future .
Reply to this
Theins,
Ahmedinajad? Your right. He is a figure head...he is the mouth piece of the clerics...Maybe you should pull up some of the cleric's fine speeches???
They make Mahmoud sound like Mr Rogers...
Defeating Al-Qaeda in Iraq is giving America plenty in Iraq Theins.
Please tell the next soldier you see that the war in Iraq is "not saving America shit" ?
Yes I agree enough is enough... Denial and a refusal to see accomplishment in the war on terror...yeah enough is enough.
We will never agree in this area Theins... not on the war..not on terror.
Thx LTL
Reply to this
The NIE report was apparently written by a mole:
http://newsmax.com/timmerman/iran_nukes/2007/12/04/54359.html
Reply to this
T Heins, wow, wake up from your haze man. "It is proven that more than half of the 9/11 "hi-jackers" are still alive bro.." Where in the hell do you get you information? Just your typical bleeding heart bull-shit pal. Go watch another Michael Moore movie, holy shit, do people like you really exist?
Our buddy Mahmoud may OR may not just be a mouth piece for the Muslim clerics in Iran, but when a dog barks at me, you know what I do.......I beat the shit out of it pal. Pretty much eliminates any chance of me getting bitten.
You need to wake the f**k up buddy. "Terrorists"....in quotation marks, I'm assuming by that you do not believe they are in fact terrorists? Like Rosie O, they're just moms and dads like you and I just trying to live in peace and create a better place. Yeah, a better place for them is in the f***ing ground buddy.
Reply to this
Right on CG I dont know where you guys get the strength to deal with these knot heads. I cant do it any more.
Reply to this
Gawd ... I love those who slept through history and when they suddenly find it a relevant topic, they either skim Google and quote things out of context or simply make things up.
Invading Iraq was not "preemptive." Anyone who believes so was not paying attention when Iraq broke a litany of (worthless) U.N. resolutions which said "hey, stop committing genocide against your own people and stop flouting international law." The best Bill Clinton could do was to admonish them via a couple missiles directed at a medicine factory on the days he was to take the stand during Sex-gate.
Iraq's time was up before Bush entered office. To deny such is either exhibiting a sad ignorance of current affairs and foreign policy, or someone is being deliberately obtuse. Liberals love to sweep the facts under the rug and say that it was all Bush, Bush had a vendetta. And people wonder why the United States is failing miserably in academics compared to the rest of the world. When our adults demonstrate this same line of prepubescent reasoning, it should surprise no one that this intellectual deficiency would afflict the next generation.
Reply to this
"Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country."
- Ronald Reagan
You shoukd know, Ron Paul was one of only four Congressmen who first endorsed Ronald Reagan for president.
Check this out!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRcXfDt3ByI
Reply to this