Arab world also in shock

Let's compare and contrast.

One man rounds up some schoolchildren and adults, threatens to kill them, then kills them, and dies there.

Another man sends his air force to kill thousands of civilians as collateral damage in an illegal and immoral war, and smirks.

You're right, there is a difference. One man is deranged, if brave, and the other is a smirking chimp, a coward, and a war criminal.

The original vote, you will recall, was for the power to invade Afghanistan, where the perpetrators of 9/11 were believed to be based. That's what Congress, God help them, thought they were voting for. (I wonder how that vote would go today, now that most of the facts are out?)

Then, the "axis of evil" and "war on terror" rhetoric, and the application of the oft-quoted Hermann Goering principle.
Anyone who did not support our boys was a traitor, criticism of the administration was tantamount to treason, the Europeans were appeasers, etc etc. Authorative voices who would speak up against this while the troops were in action, were few, lamentably so: and right-wing control of the mass media ensures that informed dissent is stifled.

Whip up a lot of fear, feed the xenophobia, tell the waverers that you are bringing democracy and apple pie to the middle east, and there you have it: 50% of the population duped into supporting a criminal. Simple.

"right-wing control of the mass media"

They wish they did!!

Here's one for the bean counters, sent me by a friend in the USA:

Something that bushites are ignorant of, is that the middle class will have a tax increase under the bush plan. Conveniently this will happen in 2005, yes the year after the election. The following changes are scheduled to take effect for the 2005 tax filing year:

1)The 10% tax bracket will end at a lower income amount, therefore taxing some income @ 15% rather than the current 10%. The lower tax rate on dividends and capital gains will stay the same, taxing these items lower than your wages, interest, pensions, retirement plan distributions, and even the taxable portion of social security.

2)The standard deduction for married couples will decline. This will increase income subject to tax.

3)Child tax credit will drop to $700 from $1000.

4)The first-year bonus depreciation rules for businesses will expire at the end of 2004.

5)The Alternative Minimum Tax exemption amount will decline to pre 2001 amounts. Don't know what the AMT is? The AMT will force you to calculate your taxes twice, and then pay the higher amount. Don't worry if you miss this when you file, the IRS will gladly bill you later and tack on interest and penalty charges. Are you middle class with kids? Bush doesn't want you to know about it, but you better find out about the AMT fast. The number of taxpayers subject to this tax is projected to jump from 2.4 million in 2003 to 12.7 million in 2005 and 33 million in 2010. CNN MONEY reported that 85% of taxpayers with 2 or more children will be forced off the regular income tax onto the Alternative Minimum Tax. And while the reduced tax rates on dividends and capital gains will not push a taxpayer into the AMT, the deduction for a dependent can.

How much will these tax increases affect taxpayers:

Example: married couple, 2 kids, $60,000 wages (only income) - tax will increase approx. $900 to $3920. They will also pay another $4,590 in payroll taxes for a total of over $8,500. (Increase is approximate due to inflation adjustments of standard deduction and exemptions, so tax increase will be $900 plus or minus a few dollars.)

BTW - this same couple, if they didn't have to work for a living and instead the $60,000 income was dividends, their total tax will be $600 plus or minus a few dollars.

Hey bushites, before you make even bigger fools of yourselves check these numbers out with your accountant. These numbers are absolutely accurate plus or minus a few dollars due to inflation adjustments noted above.

IN ADDITION:

Now that the 2005 bush tax increase is finally getting a little press (very little, so where is the so called "liberal" press?), bush suddenly (and conveniently a few months before the election) is apparently showing concern over this tax increase. Evidently we are supposed to believe that the bush gang just found out about it. Gee, nobody noticed how these items having a much larger effect on the middle class than on the wealthy were going to expire 12/31/04. Maybe they were too busy drooling over the dividend & capital gains tax rates reductions, and the upper tax bracket reductions - all of which merrily continue into 2005 and beyond.

But wait - does bush really want to stop the 2005 bush tax increase, or is he just playing politics? According to today's paper "President Bush on Wednesday scuttled a Republican agreement to extend three expiring middle-class tax cuts for two years, deciding instead to push for a more costly five year tax cut extension when Congress returns in September. Republicans in Congress, who had agreed to a deal, say they're puzzled by Bush's stand." Yet just earlier this month bush called Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R- Iowa, to the White House demanding action before Congress recessed for the political conventions this summer while he expressed fear that September's short session will be so politicized that nothing will get done. If this was Kerry the brain-deads would be screaming "flip-flop".

Since many Republicans are more fiscally responsible than bush, Congress had agreed to this shorter extension offset by changes to reduce it's impact on the budget deficit so that more of bush?'s crap isn?'t thrown onto the laps of future generations. Rather than eliminating the 2005 bush tax increase now, bush claims to want a 5 year extension instead. One catch, he wants it without offsets. Of course the votes won't be there because some of the Republicans with brains about fiscal responsibility won't vote to throw more bush crap on future generations.

So 1 of 2 things will play out - either the 5 year extension will be voted down and bush will BS that Democrats are against the middle class (again hoping that more then just the brain-deads will conveniently forget that he had no problem not making the dividend tax cut expire on 12/31/04 or that he turned down a 2 year extension), or (in bush's words) nothing will get done - which again somehow he'll blame the Democrats for and the bushites will ignorantly agree.

Bottom line - get ready for the 2005 bush tax increase!

McT wrote


What are you talking about? The sanction to Invade Afghanistan and the congressional vote giving Bush the authority to attack Iraq if need be were two separate and distinct actions. I would add that the action against Afghanistan was completely justified. Unfortunately, it was as all things done by our present regime not carried through to a successful conclusion. And it is now coming back, as the saying goes, to bite us in the A$$.

Mct
Your last post is out in left field somewhere. What in heavens name has it to do with the ongoing discussion?

Buggerall, you are right, I posted it in the wrong forum. Apologies. Interesting, though.

Mine Question
It is my understanding that the mines, actually nail bombs (8'' long pieces of C4 explosive filled with nails, screws, bolts, ect.) were connected to pressure switches. When the tangos stepped off the pads to fire at the russian hostage rescue troops, the bombs went off. It is interesting to note that in this incident, explosives were set to collapse the roof of the gym, just as there were two huge bombs set to collapse the roof of the theatre in moscow. Same MO. Also, it has become clear that the tangos opened fire on a Russian BTR-80 armored personell carrier converted to an ambulance WITH a red cross on the roof. The only reason the Russians returned fire was that the BTR was under fire from a 12.7mm DHsK heavy machine gun that -might- have penetrated the armor. Also, a russian sniper thought he saw a tango aim an RPG-18 anti tank rocket at the APC. THAT is what started the whole mess. period