Hey, "Stuff Happens". Ol' Rumsie hit the nail on the head there. I'd remember that remark when the team he's on tries for re-election.
Rumsfeld's only problem is that he takes too much evident pleasure in so deftly deflating the often pompous declarations and accusations of his usually confused and always indignant detractors.
Rumsfeld could not deflate a tire.
george old bean
You do take leader-worship for illuminative guidance into the very darkest of caves.
the darkest hour is just before it turns completely black.
Wouldn't that then be the darkest hour?
I think George needs one of those people who rushes in and saves others from a cult.
Quote:pompous declarations and accusations
if the shoe fits.............
au1929 wrote:""You've got to remember that if Washington, D.C., were the size of Baghdad, we would be having something like 215 murders a month.''
Hardly a convincing argument in the case for American rule, that ...
Sca-ry. Perhaps Washington DC should be patrolled by an occupying army, huh?
I've thought that for years, NIMH. UN monitoring of Washington and US elections. That would satisfy this doubter!!
blatham wrote:george old bean
You do take leader-worship for illuminative guidance into the very darkest of caves.
That was good Blatham !
However, I didn't exhibit that much obsessive leader worship during the last administration.
Rumsfeld, you know, was also a Naval Aviator. You can tell from the steady eyes, the firm set of his jaw, and the overall good looks!
I'm glad he's attractive to men. To women? Not! (George, you sound a little in love with that "firm set of the jaw" stuff!!)
a
George says that as soon as he occupies Iran he will take care of Usama.
David Carr (London) Middle East & Islamic
Permalink TrackBack [0] Comments [9]
By the pricking of his thumbs...
I suppose one of the chief attractions of being in the apocolypse business is that nobody can ever prove you wrong. If the catastrophe you have predicted doesn't happen this year, well, there's always next year. Point in case being this starkly gloomy article in The Spectator from a certain Sanjay Anand:
No one in any Western intelligence service knows how or when it will come, but they are all agreed on one thing: al-Qa'eda will attack using chemical, biological and nuclear weapons the moment it can acquire them. And that moment is not far off. As Eliza Manningham-Buller, the head of MI5, said on Tuesday, ?'It is only a matter of time before a Western city is hit by a chemical, biological or radiological attack.' She added that renegade scientists, probably from Pakistan, were already thought to have given al-Qa'eda most of the technology it needs for ?'dirty bombs'.
Certainly this is not the first time that such melancholy warnings have been issued but the broad scope of these ones make me wonder if the 'Western Intelligence Services' are engaging in a bit of back-covering here. Not Mr.Anand though. He is very adamant:
We don't know when the next attack will happen, or what horrors it will involve. We can depend on one thing, however: the moment we relax our guard, we will be hit.
That certainly fits Al-Qaeda's modus. They do like popping up with an attack whenever and wherever they are least expected and, hence, prepared for. From a strategic point of view they do need to do something big and spectacular and reasonably soon. It should be borne in mind that Al-Qaeda's attacks are not a message to the West, they are designed to boost the moral of the wider Muslim world (the 'Umma') by reassuring them that the 'infidel' is vulnerable and can be beaten. Following the pants-down rout of the Iraqi regime, Al-Qaeda are under pressure to respond in style, lest their legend being to fade and the support that they count on among the people they consider to be their constituents begin to trickle away.
But, perhaps, they are no longer able to function at that level. Who can say what damage the work of Western security forces has done? Mr.Anand is rather dismissive but, then, he needs to be in order for his article to retain any punch. Clearly the editors of The Spectator felt it important enough to give it front-page prominence.
Even pre-supposing I had a back garden (which I do not) I am not about to begin digging it up in order to construct a concrete bunker. But neither can I entirely dismiss Mr.Anand's dire warnings with anything like the necessary degree of confidence.
Tartarin
You've just made me laugh as hard as I've laughed in a while...George does seem taken with the set of a firm jaw, the steadfast ramrod cut of a real man's jib...it's true.
BLATHAM! I come from a nautical family and I tell ya, that "ramrod jib" puts you in the prairie...! (Well, I'm in the prairie too and enjoy your company!)
I just came across this; alittle out of present context, but, I think, worth reading:
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030505&c=1&s=robbins
Tartarin, Blatham,
You've found me out ! I was describing a common background and common characteristics, and I do rather like them. Does this touch a sensitive nerve?
Blatham's metaphor was effective, if not technically accurate. Why do I have such trouble with the notion that Tartarin could speak for women generally?
Don't know why some physical features seem indicative of personality traits. Love a strong jawline and prominent chin. When my grandmother related someone had made a final decision, she said, "He's set his jaw." It is an old adage about resoluteness.
And, what's the alternative? A slack-jawed individual? What do these poor people do to signify their decisions?
My wife can't stand to look at George. Her assessment is that he is as ugly outside as he is inside.
