0
   

The UN, US and Iraq IV

 
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 12:47 pm
On one of the spam email I get, a headline say:
AMBIEN: Sleep like Rumplestiltskin!

(I don't open those emails :wink: - and you can't get stuff like that without prescription here.)
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 01:31 pm
We'd likely be shocked to know how many of our legislators and others in government are on mood elevators, tranquilizers and the wonderful Ambien. They need an exagerrated feeling of well being considering what they're embroiled in.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 01:50 pm
Blatham, your Vidal excerpt and link to the article should be smeared in the face of all the Constitutional purists who keep misquoting what the authors of the Constitution knew about the document. It's the "well it's all we've got" attitude that has kept this country politically frozen in the 18th Century.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 01:59 pm
LW

I know. Elsewhere, I've seen Setanta bring quotation upon quotation to bear (from the writings of the founders) and to no effect. Fixed ideas are truly fixed in some noggins, and the emotional need for them is palpable.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 02:06 pm
Hard to penetrate solid concrete.
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 02:11 pm
Man, I've been using my dentist's drill on that concrete in another thread to no avail. Back soon with jackhammer.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 02:17 pm
An H bomb couldn't penetrate it.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 02:36 pm
Ya gotta use "shock and awe" weapons.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 05:45 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
When Bush visits the UK next week, he obviously will visit/meet some families of British servicemen killed in Iraq. [..]

Some families will be among the protesters against Bush.

Since I couldn't find anything online, how's the reaction of the families of US-victims (and the public), when they are visted by the president (or his representatives)? Overwhelmingly patriotic?


They aren't! I'm serious. There was an article about that in the newspaper last week: President Bush hasn't visited a single family of any soldier who died in Iraq.

I was trying to find the article back, but I cant find it anymore, so I have to go by what I remember. Apparently, the President is so concerned not to draw any extra attention to any US victim, that he has refrained from publicly referring to any specific casualty - no commiserations, nothing.

It is said he wrote a private letter to each family, and of course he has spoken in general terms about the sacrifice of the victims, collectively, but personal stories are kept out of the limelight as much as possible.

There was something in the item about there being no ceremonial tributes upon arrival home of those who fell, either - no shots fired in military salute over coffins with the American flag - no, the dead are discretely delivered back to the family, with minimized public attention.

So its actually a bit of an oddity, that Bush won't be seen with the families of his own soldiers who died for his own country on his own orders - wont be seen with their coffins or graves - but will now be meeting the families of British servicemen who died. Must make quite a strange impression back home, me thinks, if it gets through in the media ...
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 05:52 pm
Hypocritical is the precise word.
Quote:
So its actually a bit of an oddity, that Bush won't be seen with the families of his own soldiers who died for his own country on his own orders - wont be seen with their coffins or graves - but will now be meeting the families of British servicemen who died.


This is as repugnant as it is obviously phoney.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 05:54 pm
it was nimh, I think, who wrote:
if it gets through in the media ...

Oh, it'll get US media play ... they love that sort of thing. I'm sure the NYT will lead the parade.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 05:55 pm
I heard a rumour that the "families of dead British military" were actually going to be actors reading scripted parts. Any truth to this? Shocked
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 06:01 pm
nimh

I think that was either Dowd or Krugman.

It is no surprise. Recall the DiIulio letter to Esquire and his revelations regarding how this administration is concerned above all with presentation and not substance...
http://www.esquire.com/features/articles/2002/021202_mfe_diiulio_1.html
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 06:03 pm
hobitbob wrote:
I heard a rumour that the "families of dead British military" were actually going to be actors reading scripted parts. Any truth to this? Shocked


I would hesitate to assume even the looniest of lefties would be that stupid. That would be akin to discharging a howitzer into their own foot.
0 Replies
 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 08:05 pm
Blatham, it was way back (like 24 hours ago Laughing ) and I think I asked how you were defining venal. My understanding of the word had always been "corrupt," or "seeking payment for favors," etc. It sounded to me as if you were using it to mean "inherently evil" or a similar definition.

In order to understand what you wrote, I needed to know how you were using the word.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 08:34 pm
What does it say for Bush that he should need such a large security force to visit his closest ally? Could it be possible that he might be wrong and everyone else is right?


Quote:

Police begin to build 'security bubble' for Bush
By Chris Gray

17 November 2003

The unprecedented security operation to protect George Bush during this week's state visit starts today after the Home Office said Britain was at a heightened state of terror alert, although there was no specific threat.

Up to 4,000 officers will be policing demonstrations by some 60,000 protesters who are demanding the right to march down Whitehall on Thursday, when Mr Bush is to hold talks with Tony Blair in Downing Street.

Extra police will be visible in central London this morning, when protesters will meet police for final negotiations over the route of the march. Defensive barriers at locations on the President's itinerary will start appearing tomorrow evening, when Mr Bush arrives.

All police leave has been cancelled for the duration of his visit, and more than 400 US agents and security advisers will work alongside Scotland Yard's £1m operation. The US Secret Service will be checking all sewers, and will seal manholes and service covers, which will be reopened after the three-day visit.

The American security demands reportedly included draconian measures such as the closure of parts of the London Underground and the use of US Air Force helicopters above the capital. These demands were turned down by the Home Office. But road closures are expected to create a "sterile zone" around the President, who will be shielded by a security cordon.

One issue is whether Whitehall will remain open to a march led by the Stop the War coalition on Thursday, that will culminate with the toppling of a statue of Mr Bush in Trafalgar Square. Mr Bush is to have a working lunch with Mr Blair at No 10 that day, followed by a joint press conference at the Foreign Office. Stop the War Coalition leaders will meet senior Metropolitan Police officers today to hear if they will be allowed access to Whitehall.

Andrew Burgin, of the coalition, said last night that the indications were that Scotland Yard was prepared to be more flexible in return for assurances about stewarding of the march. "We do not want the march confined to a small area north of Trafalgar Square so we have to come to an agreement that means it goes through the heart of the political decision making of the country," he said.

PROTECTING THE PRESIDENT

President George was never going to ride down the Mall in London in an open-topped landau. Security takes priority and it shows in the vehicles he will use: the presidential airplane, Air Force One, his heavily-armoured car and a Black Hawk helicopter on stand-by.

Security on Air Force One is the responsibility of the Secret Service, which sends out teams to test the modified 747's fuel and then seal the tanks. They check runways for debris and can issue orders to shoot if they believe there is a threat to the President. "The security is pretty ferocious on Air Force One," says Peter Schnall, who produced and directed the documentary Air Force One for the Discovery Channel. "It doesn't matter where he flies. The transporting of the President from one place to another is a military operation." The custom-built aircraft, which is protected by anti-missile devices, can fly at 630mph and weighs more than 400 tons. The President is able to have securely encrypted communications with anyone.

The President's limousine, a Lincoln Cadillac DeVille, seats seven and has titanium-ceramic reinforcing able to withstand a rocket-propelled grenade, a 155mm shell, or a 5lb bomb under the car. The windows are splinter-proof glass with polycarbonate laminate up to 2.5 ins thick, resistant against a .50 military calibre bullet. If the tyres are hit, the car can travel at up to 60mph on its steel wheel rims. The radiator is also armoured, and an infrared Night Vision system can be used to "see" people and hot objects in darkness or smoke. It is believed the car also has a radar system.

In the event of a biological attack, the car can be sealed, switching to an onboard air supply. A communications switchboard (linked to five external aerials) is able to connect the President to the White House, Air Force One, or numbers programmed in for his visit, such as Tony Blair or the Queen.

Marine One, a variation on the standard Sikorsky Black Hawk helicopter, is able to cruise at 150mph and travel 580 miles. One of a five-strong squadron, it is "battle-hardened", with duplicate electric and hydraulic systems, and armouring to withstand small arms and explosive fire. The President may travel by this method to Sedgefield, Tony Blair's constituency. If he does fly, his motorcade will travel on the ground. Motorways will be cleared of traffic, and no aircraft will be allowed within 10 miles of the helicopter.

Certainly, it seems a long way away from the visit by John F Kennedy in 1961, when he rode up the Mall in an open-topped Bentley.


16 November 2003 21:20
Search this site:

Printable Story




SOURCE
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 08:38 pm
Gelisgesti wrote:
What does it say for Bush that he should need such a large security force to visit his closest ally? Could it be possible that he might be wrong and everyone else is right?

I still think that in his addled little fundy brain he thinks that because so many people all over the world despise him it means he is right. Sad
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 08:46 pm
kara

Yes, that was it. Thank you.
Quote:
1. Capable of betraying honor, duty, or scruples for a price; corruptible
2. understood descriptor of any Republican of Irish descent
0 Replies
 
Italgato
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Nov, 2003 03:36 am
With the utmost of respectfulness.

I strive to keep up with the comments made by the well informed participants.

Mr. Hobitbob has commented that President Bush "thinks in his addled little fundy brain".

I most repectfully must inform Mr. Hobitbob that I have searched the OED and cannot find the word - "fundy" that would fit in the context.

I respectfully inquire whether it is a neologism or a word that has not quite reached the OED?

I am interested in Mr. Hobitbob's description of President Bush's brain as "addled".

I believe that "Addle-brained" means a confused mind.

Since I am giving a speech to the local Kiwanis Club this weekend on the Republicans in Illinois and must include comments about President Bush, I most respectfully ask Mr. Hobitbob to help me by giving me sources which prove the fact that President Bush is addle-brained. Since my audience will be mainly composed of Republican sympathizers, I beg Mr. Hobitbob to give me definitive sources.

Most respectfully.
0 Replies
 
Italgato
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Nov, 2003 03:44 am
I most respectfully must point out that it is possible that President Bush is wasting American money and British money by utilizing such a large force for security.

If he were sure of his mesage, he would need only a skeleton force to provide security.

It would seem to me that the larger a security force, the more intellectually and morally bankrupt the messenger.

I think President Bush should review the small retinues utilized by President Clinton, who, obviously, did not need so many guards.

Clinton was secure in his personal morality so he needed few shields.

A new paradigm--The more guards a person has, the more his message is dishonest.

It's a logical progression. As a person becomes less truthful, his security must increase.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/16/2025 at 09:37:43