Letter to the Editor
It's amusing seeing the press go after Kerry about the details of his
many Vietnam combat medals. At least Kerry had medals for serving. Bush
on the other hand got a pass on Vietnam. He was in the national guard -
he was AWOL - and he spent the Vietnam era drunk and high on cocaine.
But - you don't see that in the Republican owned press. Kerry is a hero
- Bush is a zero.
I've been seeing a lot of E-Load commercials lately and it's rather disturbing. In 2000 I got a loan through E-Loan and it was not a pretty process. It started out fairly well, except that they offered me one rate - but approved me at a signicantly higher rather than advertised. They said it was due to my credit - but my credit was perfect at that point having finally scraped my ex-wife off my credit report.
I agreed to the higher rate and got a "check" for the new Honda CR-V I was buying. I went to the dealer and he sold me the car. So far - so good.
Then - I started getting calls from E-Loan to get more information to qualify me for the loan. I pointed out that I was already qualified and that they had send me a check and that the car was bought 3 weeks prior. It was a done deal - so what's the qualifying about?
They tried to tell me that the check they sent me wasn't a final approval - even though the paperwork they send claimed otherwise and the auto dealer had already cashed the check.
I forget all the details - but the check bounced - then very soon after that they made it clear somehow.
The loan wasn't through E-Laon - it was through Bank of America. So E-Loan wasn't the actual lender - they brokered it.
Even though everything came out OK in the end - the process was very spooky and dishonest on the part of E-Loan. The bottom line is - I'll never do business with them again - and I would advise my friends to avoid them as well. The idea that they write checks that are convincing enough for auto dealers to take and then claim that the loan wasn't yet approved is what I would call fraud.
You heard it here first. Having realized that Saddam - a fierce oppressor of his people - created stability and kept the terrorists at bay. So Bush has decided to put Saddam back in power. Saddam will resume shipping oil and contract with Halliburton to manage reconstruction.
Letter to the Editor
Most people believe that there will be some sort of terrorist attack against the United States before the election. And there probably will be because Bush wasted all our resources going after Iraq when he should have gone after Osama bin Laden. Now the real terrorists are not only free but stronger than ever. If we are attacked it will be a result of another failure of leadership of the Bush administration. This is the sort of thing that happens when we have a president who just isn't smart enough to do the job.
------------------
Osama bin Laden is stronger than ever. We are the most feared and hated nation on the planet right now. Even our alies like France, Germany, Russia, and even Canada think we've gone mad.
Letter to the Editor
It's no surprise that there is a Saudi plan to reduce gas prices to help Bush get elected. After all - they owe Bush big time. 15 of the 19 9-11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia and they were funding Osama bin Laden. Bush and the Sandi's are so close that the Saudi ambassador knew Bush was going to war with Iraq before Secretary of State Colin Powell was told. Saudi Arabia is getting quite rich this summer at the expense of the American people.
Letter to the Editor
War is easy. Anyone can go to war. People have been slaughtering each other for thousands of years. There is no honor in war as it represents the failure of peace. Peace is hard. Peace take intelligence and courage. Peace requires the discipline to move beyond the hate. Peace takes more courage than war does. The truly brave are not those who give in to war - but those who make the peace.
Letter to the Editor
Bush wants the Patriot Acts renewed because of the "war on terror". But why should we surrender our freedom when Bush sacrifices the war on terror to go after Iraq instead? What's the point of having more government spying when the FBI comes to the president and tells him that bin Laden is about to attack and he doesn't act on it? America doesn't need more spies - it needs a leader. The first step in the war on terror will be when we get rid of Bush and take our freedom back.
Letter to the Editor
The Bush administration complains that Spain is giving into terrorism because Spain is pulling out of Iraq. But this is not the case. When Spain was attacked by Bin Laden they realized that they were making an error supporting Bush's phony war in Iraq. That they could no longer waste their resources on Iraq and that they should go after the real terrorists instead. I just hope that someday we in America figure out that it's more effective to go after the real enemy - Bin Laden - rather than fake enemies like Iraq.
This is that day we celebrate because Jesus proved he was God by turning rabbits into chocolate.
I'm building a new web site bushreelected.com. I use that name for rearch engine purposes only and its about what will happen in the future if Bush is reelected or reselected - or just steals another election.
I'm looking for some authors to write verious sections of this and create a fairly massive amount of dire predictions and hope to draw some attention to it.
Whistleblower the White House wants to silence speaks to The Independent
By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
A former translator for the FBI with top-secret security clearance says she has provided information to the panel investigating the 11 September attacks which proves senior officials knew of al-Qa'ida's plans to attack the US with aircraft months before the strikes happened.
She said the claim by the National Security Adviser, Condoleezza Rice, that there was no such information was "an outrageous lie".
Sibel Edmonds said she spent more than three hours in a closed session with the commission's investigators providing information that was circulating within the FBI in the spring and summer of 2001 suggesting that an attack using aircraft was just months away and the terrorists were in place. The Bush administration, meanwhile, has sought to silence her and has obtained a gagging order from a court by citing the rarely used "state secrets privilege".
She told The Independent yesterday: "I gave [the commission] details of specific investigation files, the specific dates, specific target information, specific managers in charge of the investigation. I gave them everything so that they could go back and follow up. This is not hearsay. These are things that are documented. These things can be established very easily."
She added: "There was general information about the time-frame, about methods to be used but not specifically about how they would be used and about people being in place and who was ordering these sorts of terror attacks. There were other cities that were mentioned. Major cities with skyscrapers."
The accusations from Mrs Edmonds, 33, a Turkish-American who speaks Azerbaijani, Farsi, Turkish and English, will reignite the controversy over whether the administration ignored warnings about al-Qa'ida. That controversy was sparked most recently by Richard Clarke, a former counter-terrorism official, who has accused the administration of ignoring his warnings.
The issue what the administration knew and when is central to the investigation by the 9/11 Commission, which has been hearing testimony in public and private from government officials, intelligence officials and secret sources. Earlier this week, the White House made a U-turn when it said that Ms Rice would appear in public before the commission to answer questions. Mr Bush and his deputy, Dick Cheney, will also be questioned in a closed-door session.
Mrs Edmonds, 33, says she gave her evidence to the commission in a specially constructed "secure" room at its offices in Washington on 11 February. She was hired as a translator for the FBI's Washington field office on 13 September 2001, just two days after the al-Qa'ida attacks. Her job was to translate documents and recordings from FBI wire-taps.
She said said it was clear there was sufficient information during the spring and summer of 2001 to indicate terrorists were planning an attack. "Most of what I told the commission 90 per cent of it related to the investigations that I was involved in or just from working in the department. Two hundred translators side by side, you get to see and hear a lot of other things as well."
"President Bush said they had no specific information about 11 September and that is accurate but only because he said 11 September," she said. There was, however, general information about the use of airplanes and that an attack was just months away.
To try to refute Mr Clarke's accusations, Ms Rice said the administration did take steps to counter al-Qa'ida. But in an opinion piece in The Washington Post on 22 March, Ms Rice wrote: "Despite what some have suggested, we received no intelligence that terrorists were preparing to attack the homeland using airplanes as missiles, though some analysts speculated that terrorists might hijack planes to try and free US-held terrorists."
Mrs Edmonds said that by using the word "we", Ms Rice told an "outrageous lie". She said: "Rice says 'we' not 'I'. That would include all people from the FBI, the CIA and DIA [Defence Intelligence Agency]. I am saying that is impossible."
It is impossible at this stage to verify Mrs Edmonds' claims. However, some senior US senators testified to her credibility in 2002 when she went public with separate allegations relating to alleged incompetence and corruption within the FBI's translation department.
White House Goes On Offensive Against Jesus
Satire by Daniel Welch
Washington, DC. - The White House, still reeling from this week's surprise return of Jesus Christ and His condemnation of the Bush administration's war in Iraq, has gone on the offensive.
An administration aide admitted to growing White House frustration that staffers had been "caught napping," not only by Mr. Christ's unexpected return, which the aide likened to "a thief in the night," but especially by His strongly worded condemnation of Bush's foreign policy. "After all," stated the staff member on condition of anonymity, "we've been working since day one to bring about Armageddon specifically to hasten the Lord's return. Then He does this. I've got to question both His loyalty and His timing."
In a blitz of morning show appearances yesterday, administration officials sought to cast doubt on the savior's credibility, as well as His motivations.
National security advisor Condoleezza Rice stated on NBC's Today Show that the King of Kings "Never gave us a plan to follow, really. We would have welcomed his input, but He was apparently too busy converting water into wine."
Rice's statements appeared to contradict those of Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. Appearing on CNN, Armitage stated that "The Redeemer had presented the administration with a lengthy plan, titled 'Revelations,' that "President Bush has endeavored mightily to follow. The President has been diligent about this, despite the fact that Yahweh doesn't exactly write the most clear or concise memo I've ever seen."
Appearing on conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh's program, Vice President Dick Cheney questioned the Everlasting Light's credibility in His scathing critique of the Iraq war. "Frankly, He was out of the loop. I mean, where's He been for the past 2,000 years?" Cheney asked. "And now He suddenly makes Himself manifest in an election year?"
Fox News released a transcript purporting to show four different versions of the Messiah's story. Former Republican governor James Thompson referred to Fox's story stating, "Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. At least three of these are lies." Thompson added, "I'm from the Midwest."
In a hastily called press briefing, White House press secretary Scott McClellan sought to reassure the GOP's large Christian constituency that Bush still revered the Son of God. "The President knows Him on a first name basis," McClellan said. "He considers the day that he met Christ to be the most memorable event of his life."
When asked by Helen Thomas as to exactly when and where Bush met Christ, McClellan stated "The President doesn't remember such a meeting taking place. But it wasn't in the situation room, I can tell you that. Despite what He said, Jehovah has no witnesses." Thomas appeared doubtful.
Perhaps the harshest words were reserved for The Lamb Of God by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN.) Taking the Senate floor, Frist waved about a copy of the Bible, accusing The Way, The Truth, & The Light of perjury. "First He says He's the Son of God! Then He says he's not only God's son, He's also God Himself! Then he brings up this Holy Ghost business. It's weird outer space stuff."
Frist also questioned Christ's motivation for returning to Earth to criticize the Iraq war. "First you have this "Passion" movie. Now the book. It's shameful and Self serving."
Christ was later questioned about the film by reporters as He stood outside Pat Robertson's Virginia Beach studios in an ultimately futile attempt to appear on The 700 Club. "I've never met with Mel Gibson, nor do I ever intend to," sayeth the Lord. "I don't appreciate his anti-semitism."