Semi-Daily Journal

Mahmoud Abbas to Palestinian factions during the cease-fire negotiations -

"Despite our reservations we
decided not to make them an obstacle, believing
that the road map was a life saver for a tiger
whose head was caught in the neck of the
bottle."

Allah akbahr! And his chosen instrument rocks too.

So Karl Rove is God?

"A senior aide to Prime Minister Tony Blair acknowledged Wednesday that the British government made a mistake by including material from a graduate thesis posted on the Internet in a government dossier on Iraq's weapons capability." - Associated Press 6/25/03

In other words, the voices in his head told him to make war.

I'm always surprised at the number of people who think it perfectly normal to have conversations with spirits and ghosts, and to make life and death decisions based upon what they imagine the spirits tell them to do.

What next, burnt offerings? It's already a crusade.

M E M O R A N D U M

To: The Master of the Universe, the Great, Mighty, and Awesome God, etc., etc.

From: Your (somewhat) humble and (occasionally) obedient servant, Abraham Seth son of Abraham

Re: George W. Bush, President (by the grace of God and the Supreme Court) of the United States of America

Sir:

President Bush alleges that You told him to strike at al Qaida and at Saddam Hussein. He also alleges that if progress is not made in Middle East peace talks, he will have to focus on the elections.

Did You tell him that he should try to get re-elected? If so, please reconsider your opinion. If not, please make Yourself manifest to him in all of Your glory and advise him to throw the election.

If the President's current domestic policy initiatives are part of Your ineffable Plan to prevent the American people from electing another Republican president for the next 20 years, please disregard this memo.

I don't see how this is unflattering to Bush. All it says to me is that he feels guided in his actions by God. This is the sort of thing any believing Christian would say, hardly a sign of lunacy, except among the militantly secular.

What is more interesting is the following:

"If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them."

By "them", I assume that Bush means the Israelis. This suggests that he is a lot more dispassionate in his attitude towards Sharon's government than a lot of conspiracy-mongers and Israel-backers seem to think he is. One would imagine this to be a good thing.

"Them" refers to "the elections."

"A lot of people have been puzzling over why the Bush Administation attacked Iraq given the dangers that such an attack might...disperse weapons of mass destruction into terrorist hands."

Well, I can address that.

Let's assume that, at the time of the attack on Iraq in March 2003, Saddam Hussein had 50 weapons of mass destruction...consisting of 10 weapons per year, for each of the 5 years since he kicked inspectors out in 1998.

So it's possible that 50 weapons could come into terrorists' hands.

Now, let's say that regular inspections would have found 30 weapons (leaving 20 in Iraq), and slowed down his weapons making to one a year.

Now, let's assume that Saddam had kicked out the inspectors after 5 years, and built another 50 weapons in the 5 years until the next set of inspections.

Now, he'd have 75 weapons (the 20 left after inspections, the 5 he built while inspections were going on, and the 50 he built in the 5 years until inspectors got back into Iraq).

Now, assume that Saddam is replaced by Uday, or Qusay...or whatever other monster he had in mind.

They do the same thing for the next 30 years.

Now, when THAT regime collapses--which is unlikely to be in a neat and tidy transition to democracy, all the while protecting weapons--the number of WMD is more like 240, instead of 50.

THAT'S why the Bush Administration may have found it logical to take out Saddam Hussein now...so that Saddam Hussein and his sons couldn't create a whole lot more WMD.

P.S. I also think a large part of it had to do with Saddam Hussein trying to kill G.H.W. Bush...but that's just my opinion.

""Them" refers to "the elections.""

You're right! How did I manage to misread it so badly? My brain needs a rest ...

I assume Mark Bahner has enough fingers to count how many levels of assumption he has to go through before he comes out with what he considers may be a logical result.

It is not necessarily so that Christians believe God tells them to do things. They may describe themselves as "open to God's guidance," which has the same logical problems as describing oneself as pious or devout: if you really were either of those things, your own behavior would seem to fall short of what was God's due. Similarly, if you said you *were* guided by God, and that certain actions--actions which you could specify--were divinely guided--then you would be arrogating infallibility to yourself.

Christians, especially Baptists, are not supposed to claim that they know when God is guiding them and when they are acting under the influence of their sinful nature. For Bush to claim he is, is to pretend to be a prophet.

Here is a Bible reference which may be of help:
[Hebrews 1:1-2]
God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things...

God is supposed to provide inspiration through the Holy Spirit (e.g., John 14:16-17)

The claim that God is telling one to do something specific typically causes alarm bells to sound in the minds of most people--including Muslim friends with whom I've discussed the matter, to say nothing of people in my church or my parents and their church. And my parents are bona fide fundamentalists.

"I assume Mark Bahner has enough fingers to count how many levels of assumption he has to go through before he comes out with what he considers may be a logical result."

It is no assumption at all that Saddam Hussein was absolutely committed to obtaining weapons of mass destruction, or that he repeatedly--and at least temporarily, successfully--hid those weapons from inspectors. (All in complete violation of U.N. resolutions that Saddam Hussein agreed to, as part of the cease fire at the end of his occupation of Kuwait.)

It is no assumption that Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons to kill thousands of civilians in his war with Iran.

It is no secret that Saddam Hussein's regime was a totalitarian regime, with one of the worst human rights records in the world. His regime murdered, including civilians deliberately target during wars, literally hundreds of thousands of people.

It is no assumption that none of these things had anything to do with the Administration's plans to invade Iraq. It is no secret that a previous administration abetted these murders knowingly when they served certain sectional interests.

It is a stunningly dangerous assumption that this invasion for false motives (i.e., motives which the WH lied about copiously) will somehow render America more safe.

It is an extremely stunning assumption that when head of state tells you he is following the orders of God Almighty, that he is telling the truth. To plead hard-nosed realpolitik and pragmatism on behalf of divinely inspired crusades is... well, I'll let someone finish the sentence for me.

But this would be a cue for the prophet Isaiah (5:20):
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!

Eh? Mark Bahner should go and look at that post of his, and see how many times he uses the word "assume" or something similar, and trace out how many stages of his logic rest on previous ones.

In this new post, he's just assigning his own estimates (and changing the subject), not even assuming - but imputing one's own beliefs isn't a method of reasoning, so logic has little to do with it.

It seems to me that the rest of the world is at far more risk of being mistaken for a threat by the USA and experiencing the material consequences than we ever were of experiencing any material consequences of Saddam Hussein's directed malice. And that's even without considering the same consequences that the USA faces, of wider spread of whatever Saddam Hussein may have had before.

Abiola, there is a difference between being religious and believing that God actually speaks to you. If Bush had said, "I did this because I think God probably wanted me to", that isn't crazy. But if he says, "God told me to. I heard his voice.", then Bush is either crazy or a prophet. I very much doubt he's a prophet, so that would make him crazy.

But I don't believe Abbas anyway. Besides, is there any reliable evidence Abbas even said that? Did someone get that on tape? Or did some anonymous transcriber just write it down?

"Let's assume that..."

"So it's possible that..."

"Now, let's say that..."

"Now, let's assume that..."

"Now assume that..."

"THAT'S why the Bush Administration may have found it logical to take out Saddam Hussein now..."

Now, what's the difference between this and what Bin "Who?" Laden thinks he is doing? Please enlighten me. I thought we were after religious fundamentalism...

Now, what's the difference between this and what Bin "Who?" Laden thinks he is doing? Please enlighten me. I thought we were after religious fundamentalism...

It's nice to see that George Bush's god is different than the god that speaks to Bin Laden and the Muslim extremists, and different from the god that the radical rightwing likudniks believe is talking to them. Maybe what we need is an ultimate fighting championship among the different gods that are instructing our world leaders, a kind of knockdown, drag out free for all type of 'divine demolition derby', the last one standing gets to lead his chosen people to the holy land and becomes the 'real' god. Will the real god please stand up (and duke it out with his or her rivals like a real deity)? A kind of Harry Potter-esque wizard battle maybe in the heavens? It certainly would be a lot more honest than having half wits and cokeheads do their dirty work here on the earth.

Jesus is just allright with me
Jesus said go start World War Three

"It is an extremely stunning assumption that when head of state tells you he is following the orders of God Almighty, that he is telling the truth."

It's a stunning assumption that you *believe* that Mahmoud Abbas not only heard President Bush correctly, but relayed what he heard correctly.

"God told me to strike at Al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did,..."

Yeah, right. President Bush hears voices from God, and tells his friend Mahmoud about them. (And tells Mahmoud first...because if Bush had told ANYONE in his Adminstration that little ditty first, they'd advise him not to repeat it!)

Got a tip, for you, if you're a reporter: get a second source...and preferably a clear audiotape or videotape.

Or stay at your post on the National Enquirer. ;-)

Mitch writes:

"Did someone get that on tape? Or did some anonymous transcriber just write it down?"

On behalf of anonymous transcriptionists everywhere, I object to being made the conduit of politicians' fooleries. They are more than capable of sticking their own feet in their own mouths without any help from us.

You're absolutely right, it is a stunning assumption that I believe Mahmoud Abbas not only heard President Bush correctly, but relayed what he heard correctly.

Some of the information I have been working from is as authentic as you can get (which is itself unclear), but I am presenting it as anonymously sourced (and I am carefully sanitising it) because I got it under Chatham House rules.

I agree that Abbas' claim is too indirect to mean much. And even if it's true that Bush says things like "God said to me...," it doesn't mean much---it's just a turn of phrase.

What I find much more disturbing are quotes from Bush that indicate he makes foreign policy considerations based on his visceral impressions of other leaders. One example was Arafat--IIRC Bush felt that he couldn't be trusted because "he lied to me," or words to that effect. (Not that I think much of Arafat.) As if Bush hasn't done his share of fibbing.

What did Bush supposedly say about Putin? 'I looked into his soul' or something like that? Any career politician in any country should be able to give a good first impression. And Putin was a career KGB man (IIRC), who survived a regime breakdown to come out on top. That's an indication that he's not just any politician.

Another side to "the problem in the Middle East":

Jerusalem Post

Jun. 25, 2003

Jews expelled from Arab countries accuse Arab regimes of ethnic cleansing

By JENNY HAZAN AND GREER FAY CASHMAN

Linda Menuchum was born in Iraq in 1950. Her father, a prominent Jewish lawyer, was abducted and executed by the Iraqi government in 1972.

"After 1963, Jews were forbidden to leave the country," recalled Menuchum, who told her tearful story for the first time on Wednesday morning at Jerusalem's David Citadel Hotel, where Justice for Jews from Arab Countries (JJAC) which was founded only 18 months ago - presented their case for the rights and redress of Jewish refugees from Arab States, based on evidence pointing to collusion against Jews by Arab governments, compiled by 22 leading international law and human rights experts.

"It was in 1968 when the radio reports started to be very harsh on Jews. They were really inciting people against us," said Menuchum, whose father stayed in Iraq after she fled with her mother, brother and sister to Iran in 1970, wherefrom the family eventually made its way to Israel.

"At that time, Jews who were living in houses were given one month to leave. It was not permitted to travel more than 100 kilometers from the place where we lived. Those who worked in the private sector found themselves out of a job. Jews were not permitted to enter university. Several were taken in for interrogation. Phone lines were cut."

Menuchum is one of over 850,000 Jews who have been displaced from Arab countries since 1948, according to the JJAC report which states that 97% of Jews from Arab lands have left their countries of origin, leaving a mere 8,000-member population behind.

"This report presents a damning indictment of the Arab world for the mass violations of human rights and for the coordinated, repressive measures to drive out their Jewish populations or to hold them as political hostages," said Executive Director of JJAC, Stanley Urman, who listed intimidation, beating, persecution, pogroms and the enactment of Nuremberg-type laws among the State-sanctioned tactics perpetrated by the governments of Iraq, Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Yemen, Aden, Syria and Lebanon.

"It presents a damning indictment of the international community, for its disproportionate and favorable treatment towards Palestinian refugees and their failure to respond to the plight of Jewish refugees," he said, referring to the fact that Israel has become a safe-haven for over 600,000 Jewish refugees.

"The time has come to restore the plight and the truth and the justice of Jewish refugees from Arab lands to the Middle East narrative from which they have been expunged and eclipsed," added Member of Parliament of Canada and Honorary JJAC Chairman, Professor Irwin Cotler, who charged that Arab regimes were guilty of "a pattern of ethnic cleansing" and "criminal conspiracy in dealing with their native Jewish populations.

"Any narrative of the Middle East including the Roadmap that does not include justice for Jewish refugees from Arab lands, is a case study in Middle East revisionism. It's an assault on truth and memory and justice," said Cotler, who accused the United Nations of singling out Israel for differential and discriminatory treatment in the international arena.

"Since 1947, there have been some 687 resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly, which have dealt with the Arab-Israeli conflict," explained Cotler. "101 of those resolutions dealt with the question of refugees. All 101 dealt with Palestinian refugees only. Not one resolution dealt with the issue of Jewish refugees from Arab lands."

There would not be an Arab refugee problem if the Arabs had not rejected the UN partition plan, he said.

"The biggest mistake we made," said Former Speaker of the Knesset and member of the JJAC's Advisory Legal Committee Shlomo Hillel, at the organization's presentation to President Katsav on Wednesday, "was that we allowed the development of the concept that the Palestinian refugee problem is the consequence of the establishment of Israel."

Those who waged war in the aftermath of the UN Resolution of the partition of Palestine are the ones responsible for the refugee problem, he said.

While the UN has spent billions on the Palestinian refugees, it has not allocated a single cent for Jewish refugees from Arab lands. "We had refugees in transit camps that were not funded by the UN," said Hillel.

"This raises serious questions of the appropriateness of the United Nations having a role in the quartet," said Cotler. "Until the UN assumes its responsibility for the pursuit of justice in the proper duty of remembrance, in the right of redress, we are speaking of an issue of misrepresentation."

The JJAC will in the coming week distribute its findings to the governments of the United States, Canada and England in the hopes of raising awareness and motivating them to apply diplomatic pressure on Arab states to acknowledge the legitimacy of their Jewish refugees and to supply them with adequate compensation.

"I assume Mark Bahner has enough fingers to count how many levels of assumption he has to go through before he comes out with what he considers may be a logical result."

Not unless he's a mutant . . .

"Yeah, right. President Bush hears voices from God, and tells his friend Mahmoud about them."

First of all, the quote just sounds right. Bush is an official bigot. He's said stuff like that to world leaders again and again (I wonder why he just can't seem to get anything done on the diplomatic stage...)

But most importantly, I really don't see why Mahmoud would decide to create a diplomatic incident of religious nature at this stage of the game. Think whatever you want of the man but he is not dumb. I wouldn't necessarily bet my hand on Palestinian rationality but this sounds like a reasonable and incentive compatible presumption.

If you don't want a bigot as President, just don't elect one. But don't get mad at the rest of us for just noticing that he is one.

"Brother Paul" isn't exactly on a roll lately. Two days after he wrote (in his NY Times column):

" There is no longer any serious doubt that Bush administration officials deceived us into war. ....

" Supposed evidence of an active Iraqi nuclear program was thoroughly debunked by the administration's own experts; yet administration officials continued to cite that evidence and warn of Iraq's nuclear threat."

We learn:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/06/25/sprj.irq.centrifuge/index.html

----------------quote------------------
The CIA has in its hands the critical parts of a key piece of Iraqi nuclear
technology -- parts needed to develop a bomb program -- that were dug up in
a back yard in Baghdad, CNN has learned.

The parts, with accompanying plans, were unearthed by Iraqi scientist Mahdi
Obeidi who had hidden them under a rose bush in his garden 12 years ago
under orders from Qusay Hussein and Saddam Hussein's then son-in-law,
Hussein Kamel.

U.S. officials emphasized this was not evidence Iraq had a nuclear weapon --
but it was evidence the Iraqis concealed plans to reconstitute their nuclear
program as soon as the world was no longer looking.

The parts and documents Obeidi gave the CIA were shown exclusively to CNN at
CIA headquarters in Virginia.

Obeidi told CNN the parts of a gas centrifuge system for enriching uranium
were part of a highly sophisticated system he was ordered to hide to be
ready to rebuild the bomb program.

[snip]

Obeidi also said he was not the only scientist ordered to hide that type of
equipment.

[snip]

David Kay, who led three U.N. arms inspection missions in Iraq in 1991-92
and now heads the CIA's search for unconventional weapons, started work two
days ago in Baghdad. CNN spoke to him about the case over a secure
teleconferencing line.

"It begins to tell us how huge our job is," Kay said. "Remember, his
material was buried in a barrel behind his house in a rose garden.

"There's no way that that would have been discovered by normal international
inspections. I couldn't have done it. My successors couldn't have done it."

Kay said he had mixed emotions when he saw the centrifuge components: "It
was a realization that I hadn't gotten all the parts [of Iraq's nuclear
program]. So there was a moment of regret, but there was also an
exhilaration that now maybe we have a chance to take this to the very
bottom."

[snip]

"In a sense, the program was in hibernation.
-----------------endquote--------------

Didn't someone once say, "When you talk to God, you're praying. When God talks to you, you're crazy."?

Pattee

You as as radical and as nutty as a fruitcake.

Iraq was a problem for the US since Saddam came to power originally. In the 1980s the US tried to game him into creating problems for the Iranians the same way the Afghanis were proxies for causing the Soviets problems.

After 1991, the problem became more acute. For the next 10 years, the US and Britain bombed Iraq frequently carrying on a low grade war and imposing sanctions that hurt the average Iraqi. By 2000 it was clear that the sanctions/no fly/ bombing were not sustainable in the long run and something more permanent would eventually have to be done with Iraq. Even Clinton admitted that the next administration would need to find a new way to handle Iraq.

Unfortunately, Mr Bush and his administration lacked the diplomatic skills and the patience necessary to affect a change in Iraq in a more nuanced way. Mr. Bush is the proverbial bull in the china shop. Now that the china is broken, it is necessary to start over.

Mr. Bush is not at fault for addressing the Iraq situation. it is that he substituted one short term solution for a long term non-solution. What we really needed was the patience and diplomacy to produce a long term solution and a better transition. Unfortunately, the CEO president does not understand grass roots organizing and why it is necessary to the future of Iraq.

Mr. Bush did not consult fully with allies that could have helped greatly in stabilizing post Saddam Iraq. His unilateralism has ensured that the US is stuck with the entire burden of post Saddam Iraq with little help from potential allies. The US has the wrong force structure in place. Troops trained for combat are being used as peace keepers. This is a misuse of man power and training that is a recipe for disaster. The two missions are not compatible. Because of the US unilateralist position, our potential allies that could help provide a more appropriate force structure are on the sidelines. The personal pettiness, egotism and vindictiveness of Mr. Bush is costing the US.

The administration thought they could decapitate the Iraqi leadership and take over the reigns of the government and run things smoothly. They did not realize that they could not decapitate the Iraqi leadership without collapsing the government down to its roots.

Mr Rumsfeld was correct in his assessment of the number of combat troops needed to take Iraq. He grossly underestimated the size and structure of the peacekeeping force necessary in the aftermath. Senator Lugar has been saying 5 years minimum. At $3 billion per month, that is a huge fiscal commitment.

The administration was probably not far off in its assessment of the overall long term threat of Saddam, but instead of making a case based on the facts, they exaggerated and cooked a fake short term threat that was used to justify acting now. In doing so, the administration has eroded international trust of the US and its intentions to new lows. Mr. Bush bypassed opportunities for a multilateral solution and a negotiated transfer of power in Iraq. The administration moved quickly before opposition could build, but moved so quickly that they did not adequately assess the post Saddam needs or recruit the appropriate force structure. The result is a sticky quagmire that is harsh on the Iraqi people and more difficult for the US military and diplomats.

A president with better patience and diplomatic skills could have achieved the same result with much less cost to the US and better results for the Iraqi people.

Is there no limit to the religous bigotry the bush haters can emanate?

"If you don't want a bigot as President, just don't elect one."

First, I completely reject that G.W. Bush is a bigot. He has plenty of failings, but I haven't seen bigotry as being one of them.

Second, I didn't vote for him, and in fact gave money to, and vigorously advocated for, Harry Browne's campaign.

So stick it, Jean-Philippe.

Hibernation. Yep. For *12 years straight*. In a scientist's backyard.

This is no smoking gun...this is equipment and material that was probably paid for by the US way back when we were siccing Saddam on Iran.

James R MacLean

Your information is incorrect.

First Baptist, indeed all Protestant denominations, recognize God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit as the same Being. This is known as the Trinity.

Secondly, a prophet of God is someone who tells the future by saying that God told them it was going to happen. This is completely different than claiming to be guided by God.

You are correct that Baptist do not believe God ever directs someone to an evil action. You, James R MacLean, are making the judgment that the action in question was evil. If you are wrong in this regards, it would be allowed under Baptist teachings, to attribute the direction as being from God.

In General

As to whether Bush actually said he was directed by God. No idea.

Please keep in mind that many fine, noble and sane people have claimed to be directed by God. Martin Luther King Jr., Mother Teresa, founding fathers of the US, etc. Just because someone claims to have been directed by God doesn't mean they have to be Osama Bin Laden or a serial killer.

Though Hussein was a monster, he was a weakening and controlled monster. Now, we are charged with nation building in Iraq and we have no idea of the cost in lives and funds. Daily, American or British lives are threatened and lost in Iraq and I do not know why.

Warning, Jewish references ahead. Goyim may not understand:

Mark Bahner's post would fit very well into the Haggaddah. God's outstretched hand represents 5 WMD's, each of God's outstretched fingers represents 5 WMD's, God's wrath represents 5 WMD's, so we are up to 5*5*5=75 WMD's.

Keep going and we're talking about something!

Elisabeth makes a fine point. Why are we not more concerned that American and British lives are lost almost each day in Iraq? Is the lack of evident concern due to the fact that we are not soldiers in Iraq? We won the war, but what was really won?

In regards to the CNN article, IIRC, it was the iminent threat of Saddam's WMD that were the impetus for the US led invasion of Iraq.

A 12 year old centrifuge, while proof of a previously existing nuclear program (never disputed), and a certainly a strong indicator of intending to start a WMD program again, is not proof of an immenent threat, and the US Gov't agrees, according to the article.

GWB, at best, mislead us into this war. At worst, he out right lied.

Imagine Prime Minister Tony Blair citing "intelligence data" copied from an American doctoral thesis posted on the internet as a compelling reason for going to war, and imagine the same "data" repeated by the American Secretary of State as a reason for going to war.

I am so glad that GW deceived us into invading Iraq to save us from the imminent horrors that would have been unleashed by that 12 year old centrifuge rusting in somebody's backyard.

Just who was deceiving whom?

Secretary of State Colin Powell at the United nations on 5 Febuary: "I would call my colleagues attention to the fine paper that United Kingdom distributed yesterday, which describes in exquisite detail Iraqi deception activities." - transcript at:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/05/sprj.irq.powell.transcript.03/

[UK] Foreign Secretary Jack Straw says he never saw the controversial "dodgy dossier" about Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction before it was published in February. Mr Straw said the dossier was an "embarrassment" for the government and was commissioned by Downing Street communications director Alastair Campbell. He apologised to the student whose thesis was used as the basis of the "dodgy dossier", during questions from the Commons foreign affairs select committee. And he defended the way the reports were made public, amid claims that Number 10 hyped up intelligence about Iraqi weapons. He admitted the whole "dodgy dossier" affair was "a complete Horlicks". - from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3015272.stm

Anybody catch the thing on FARK from the 700 Club, which said that all this bad weather is God's judgement on us for promoting the Israel-Palestinian Peace Framework. Aye-yay-yay. Monsoons in the eastern US, drought in the center and west. Got a link on my blog if your interested.

I'm sticking to my original position. A person may ask for God's guidance, and obtain it. But I humbly submit that if a person says, "God told me to do thus-and-such," that person is claiming to be infallible at that time. I pray for guidance too, and hope I get it; but I'd be the first to admit I often proceed to do stupid things because my sinful nature got in the way. (One day I'll post about sin and stupidity, but IMO they're related).

I'm not exactly sure how I displayed ignorance of the Trinity. As for what Bush thinks--in view of his constant trumpeting of his religion (yes, yes, I know, Lieberman did that too--and so did W.J. Bryan, another famous Democrat)--and in view of statements by spokepersons that he "feels called" (and then lies and manipulates to get a war he wanted all along?) to be president--why, yes, I feel very comfortable with my assessment that he is either a sanctimonious hypocrite or a fanatic, and quite possibly both.

Remember the tendency to allegorical phrasing in Arabic and similar languages. What was said may be no more contentious than "great Satan" (a no doubt deliberately ambiguous phrase that might mean what it seems to, or might only mean "big enemy").

Patrick, the discovery of the buried centrifuge parts proves just exactly the opposite of what you claim. It was buried in 1991 to hide it from inspectors. The inspectors left in 1998. In 2003, the centrifuge parts were still buried.

"I am so glad that GW deceived us into invading Iraq to save us from the imminent horrors that would have been unleashed by that 12 year old centrifuge rusting in somebody's backyard."

Superb comment.