 |
|||||
|
September 26, 2003 |
|||||
Important Note: Because we can't always determine your intentions, we need to ask a favor of you when you send us email. If you DO NOT WANT YOUR EMAIL PUBLISHED in the Mailbag or in the Contributors section, please write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the Subject line or at the top of your email. That way we'll know it's just a comment to BuzzFlash. Additionally, if you submit a mailbag item and DO NOT WANT YOUR NAME associated with your submission, sign your email, "A BuzzFlash Reader." If you send email unsigned, we will post your name with your submission, or, if that's not available, your email name (not the full address, just what's on the left side of the email address). Please try and keep your word count under 400. We can only post a small percentage of what is sent to us. The opinions expressed in the Mailbag are not necessarily those of BuzzFlash. Thanks again for your email and your patience.
Dear BuzzFlash, Seems the best bush is going to be able to do is to claim that because Iraq had instructions telling how to make wmd, then that means they could use the instructions and produce the weapons. Well, I have a gourmet cookbook and I have food in my cupboard, but my friends can attest to the fact that I cannot prepare a gourmet meal. Nice try bush, but it doesn't fly with us! pissed off patricia Subj: Terminator 4? Buzz, Why has no one picked up on Arnie's reference to stuffing Arianna's head in a toilet during the debate last nite? We all know that he got his biggest kick out of the woman head in toilet incidence in Terminator 3. petec Subj: California Debate (debacle) Last night during the debate for the would-be governors, there were a few exchanges between Arnold and Arianna. At one point, Arianna made a remark about Arnold’s treatment of women. Arnold’s response was that he had a part for her in Terminator 4. I’m guessing that this was a reference to the disgusting scene in Terminator 3 where Arnold puts Linda Hamilton’s head into a dirty toilet. If I’m right, this was somewhat of a veiled threat and really proves Arianna’s point. So far, no one in the media seems to have picked up on this point. Turk Subj: OPEC Or should I say the Saudi's whom in reality rule OPEC are the reasons we're in IRAQ. The 'badboys' were starting to get to much traction on the streets of the House of Saud, and what better place to put a 200,000 man stop sign, is there, than right next door. Haven't heard one whimper from the Right about the usual "So this is how our "friends" treat us" over the OPEC price increase. I'm sure if the French increased the prices on truffles by 5%, every Fat Cat on the Right would be choking up a furball up over it. Anthony
Walfred Hi Buzz. Code Pink is trying to get the word out about a "Women Can Stop Schwarzenegger" Statewide Day of Protest across California. As you know, if Arnold gets in, it helps pave the way for Bush to get re-elected. Thanks for all you do. Carol Norris, Code Pink Bay Area organizer (I have one of your Save California: Recall Bush bumper stickers on my car!) * * * The following is an alert I just sent out to Code Pink's California listserve.
Subj: Tax Myth of GOP BuzzFlash, I think it will be important for someone to nationally dispel the myth that by not implementing the Bush tax cuts, you are raising taxes. The Media always let this false charge go unchallenged, in fact I just saw the CNBC guy say we could debate the issue. There is no debate and someone needs to dispel the myth. A good way to refute this would be to ask the following: If your boss tells you he will give you a raise in 6 months then can't afford to give it to you ------ DID YOU TAKE A PAY CUT? If you can please forward this to someone nationally -- I think refuting this myth will be very important because the GOP will be using the phony raising taxes charge a lot. thank you, stevie
gardiner Subj: This just in Bush is on TV now blathering about how uranium was found in Iran. He also said that before 9/11 we "used to think oceans could protect us from danger". How long before 9/11 -- In 1492? Just asking! Rosamond Subj: Bill Bennett Dear Buzz: I have to admit that I sometimes tune in to Faux News in order to see what the enemy is doing. I particularly enjoy watching them cover something (anything) else when the news is bad for their hero, George W. Bush. The other night I laughed out loud when I watched Bill Bennett talk about moral clarity with that right-wing buffoon Sean Hannity. I sent the network this e-mail: * * * Date: Thu,
25 Sep 2003 16:15:13 -0500 I rarely tune into your Ministry of Propaganda network, but the other night I briefly watched that noted hypocrite, Bill Bennett, pontificate about "moral clarity" -- one of his favorite subjects -- on the HANNITY and colmes reactionary hour. Of course, egged on by that breathless right-wing shill, Sean Hannity, Bennett was his usual sanctimonious self, all style and no substance. Then it dawned on me: it's really a satire. Now I tell my friends that Fox News really has a sense of humor. There seems no other earthly reason to ask an admitted compulsive gambler to discourse on morality. What, could you people get no convicted sex offenders or drug addicts to offer their insights on proper moral behavior? I'll look forward to more laughfests from your network in the future. Robert
E. Bionaz RE: Bush's "belligerent begging" at the UN... Buzz, Another way of putting it, which would have a lot of resonance in California and New York, would be "aggressive panhandling." Especially in San Francisco, this phrase was a right-wing mantra justifying the cutting of every social safety net in sight... Just a thought! A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Cost in Iraq Dear BuzzFlash, I just heard, on C-Span, Rep Curt Weldon (Pennsylvania) from the Committee to get Money for Iraq (my description) talk about how in 1999 France and Germany coerced the US to go into Bosnia, and the American people were not told how much it would cost. He said since 1999, the Bosnia imbroglio has cost $30 million. Rep Weldon was incensed about the cost in Bosnia and the lack of accountability to the American people and how the cost for Bosnia was advised after the fact. He proceeded to congratulate the current admin for its "honesty" in advising the American people of the cost for the Iraq war prior to the current request. But, correct me if I'm wrong, didn't some Pentagon adviser tell the Bush admin, pre-war, that the cost for Iraq would be $200 billion, and he was fired for this. This is more proof of the lies and obfuscation coming from the Grand Obfuscation Party. Marquerite Buzz, Re: Cal Thomas: The President and the dis-united nations http://www.townhall.com/columnists/calthomas/ct20030925.shtml Here's yet another neocon commentator with his head firmly lodged in his ass. Sincerely, Mark Subj: Panic on the Right BuzzFlash, I don't know how much you good people watch cable news or slide from internet site to site reading nothing but political news, but I do it for hours each day. I used to have a life, I was a union member and I love politics, but now I am disabled in the middle of life and I follow political news. I have done so now for ten years and I know when the Conservative pigs are squealing the loudest there is something really scaring them. I don't know if General Clark can win the party nomination or not, but he is getting more attention from Rush, Matt and the rest of the bundists than anyone I have ever seen. Negative isn't the word, they are talking about him as if he was Satan himself. They talk bad about Kerry, they talk bad about the good Doctor Dean, but nothing like the traffic General Clark is getting. Check out Hardball or Drudge if you can stomach it, if General Clark had turned water into wine at the debate he would be behind everyone. Drudge is running him down for any and every reason. I think that with the very nice meltdown Bush is having in the polls that the conservative are pissing in their pants that the Democrats might nominate General Clark and that he can beat Dubya. Clark will drain off votes from many who voted for Dubya the first time, even many southern white men will vote for a four star southern born General. Some of you might think that General Clark might be too far toward the middle or even the right for liberal consideration. I think that feeling is the remaining taste of the military that remains with him. I guess what I like best about him is that they fear him and they think he can win, I agree with them. Without a total Bush dive in the polls, Gen. Clark may be the only Democrat that can win. So whether he is my ideal candidate or not, he has my support. Steve Sorry folks- I remember what what happened 7 months ago. Clark was not speaking out. Clark was pansy assing it just like the other dems. Only Kucinich and Dean spoke out. I will not forget. Michael R. McNett Subj: Or what, Colin? Buzz, "Powell Gives Iraq 6 Months to Write New Constitution", or what? Or we will let Halliburton write it. Or we will bomb them into submission to the Bush Cartel, again. Or we will send GWB over to clean the mess up, since he is doing such a good job on our economy. Or we will then let the UN takeover the peace keeping and get a multi-national force to control the rebuilding of the oil industry and get Halliburton and Cheney out of there. My suggestion is, let's give them our corrupt regime since they wanted Iraq so bad anyway and we will elect a legitimate government of our own and then we can go over and clean up what the Bush bunch does to the Iraqi economy. If we chased Bush out of Iraq we would be able to find him because there is no way any Bush is going to live in a cave without golf clubs. Nah, the Iraqis have had enough of Bush already. He would probably do something like give the first trillion profits from the rebuilt oil industry to the wealthiest Iraqis or he might even give it to the wealthy ex-patriots like Chalabi. Karen Webb Subj: Hutton Report Lynching the Truth BuzzFlash, We now know that the statements made by Tony Blair were not only exaggerated, they were dead wrong. The only point the Hutton inquiry seems to be concerned about is what was the state of Blair's mind when he made the exaggerated comments. Were his lies deliberate ? Was he duped by his own intelligence agencies ? Was it just a coincidence that the lies turned out to support the very policy, invading Iraq, that he was so zealously promoting ? It as if you caught someone who had led a lynching mob and your only concern was whether in their mind they really believed that blacks were inferior. If so there was no crime committed. Am I missing some more profound philosophical points of law in this inquiry ? Larry, Maryland Subj: Bush has blood on his hands President Bush: With reports again today of another soldier being killed and others injured in an attack, it is YOU Georgie Walker Bush Commander In Chief and President of the United States who has their blood on your hands and all of the other brave men and women who have given their limbs, bodies and lives for this debacle in Iraq. How do you sleep at night? Knowing you rushed into this war just to cover the sinking economy that your ill fated policies have visited upon this great country? You send these troops over to a wasteland of a country with no plan on governing nor an exit strategy. Our brave men and women are being killed while you bully around our allies and the United Nations. How dare you take our most precious blood for granted and treat them like pawns in some sick power struggle? Why have you cut back on the troops in Iraq? When it makes sense to increase the troops to protect our forces that are already in place and in danger in Iraq. How dare you use the horrific events of 9/11/01 to explain all that you are doing. How dare you imply that people who disagree with your policies are less patriotic for doing so. President Bush your policies are costing our soldiers their lives. Those soldiers that are being killed almost daily in Iraq are human beings. They are someone's child, wife, husband, son, daughter, brother or sister those soldiers that are dying are loved by someone in this country. How in the world do you sleep at night knowing your lack of direction in Iraq is costing our country our young soldiers? Shaun O
Mac Subj: Who are the criminals? Dear BuzzFlash, We have now acknowledged that there was no connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda, there are no WMDs or even any evidence that they have existed since 1991. The UN had inspectors in Iraq from 1991 through 1997 (a fact conveniently forgotten by most neo-cons) which documented the progress of destruction of all WMD's and the manufacturing capability (see Scott Ritter's articles). UN resolution 1441 stated that Iraq must allow UN inspectors access to all suspect sites (which they did) and that Iraq must declare all weapons and manufacturing or storage locations (which they did). This declaration was submitted to the UN within the demanded time frame, however, the US discarded the document with the offhand comment that THIS WAS JUST ANOTHER DISTRACTION PLOY. Now Hans Blix has stated that the declaration submitted by Iraq was probably correct and complete. So...if this is all true, then the US is the country that is violating UN protocol and procedures as agreed to and the US was a signatory since about 1950 or so...Certainly Saddam Hussein is/was a nasty SOB, but we don't seem to have any problem with nasty dictators as long as they let us have access to the natural resources that we covet. After all, when he was attacking Iran, Dummy Rumsfeld was shaking hands with Saddam and giving him satellite intelligence on just where to release those chemical weapons that he sold them... The way I see it is that the US is in violation of 1441 and the UN charter and is responsible for the deaths of close to 40,000 Iraqi's this go round and the 107,000 from the last go round. One of these days, the world body, whether within the context of the UN or through a newly developed world body without the US having a veto, is going to hold the US accountable for what has happened in Iraq. Bush will NEVER be personally responsible, simply because he is unable to introspect beyond his false idealism and will never see the closely held lies and delusions of his personal reality, but make no mistake about it, the world will. Geoff H., Austin, TX. Subj: Undermining Wesley Clark Dear BuzzFlash, In film making 101, a student learns that when you do Person A's close-up during a conversation with Person B, you shoot over the shoulder of Person B. Therefore the focus is not on Person B but rather on Person A who is speaking. Right? So why, during the democratic debate last night was the camera so often focused over Wesley Clark's shoulder toward the interviewers while he was speaking? Uh, to put the focus elsewhere perhaps? MSNBC did not do this for ANY of the other candidates. They also did not do this for ANY of the interviewers. Also, the angle was from above pointing down over his right shoulder which created the impression that he was hunched over. It was not a flattering or respectful (of what he had to say) shot. I intend to write to MSNBC and call them on this because I think it was done intentionally. I hope others will, too. Nancy Cashman Subj: 86 Billion In Reconstruction For Iraq Buzz, All the members of the Senate and Congress who are chastising the Bush administrations request have simply to say NO! As an American citizen I would like to remind you that it is as Simple As That! What are you going to do now, Hillary, Kennedy, etc. etc.???????? Or is this to be another Dog and Pony show for the sake of the American people? After all we have heard (and agree with) regarding the stupidity of this amount of funds for Iraq how could you not vote NO?????? Is this to be like the last request that was approved on a voice vote????? This is your last chance to prove to the American people and the world that Democracy can work. What are you going to do???????????????????? Walter L. Olszewski Subj: Never Let a Good Lie Go BuzzFlash, Isn't this the week that the administration denied it ever connected Iraq with 9/11 ?
Larry, Maryland Subj: Copy of Letter to my US Representative, John R. Carter The Honorable John R. Carter: Concerning the $87 billion dollars president Bush has asked for to rebuild Iraq, which of these proposed projects do you support? Could any of these projects be scaled back and the funds routed to Williamson County, where home foreclosures have increased 72% this year due to unemployment or underemployment? Administration-proposed Iraq Projects (details from Washington Post):
Bremer cites the need to import cement as a major factor in some of these costs. So we are importing oil products to the country with the 2nd-highest reserves, and cement to a country where the primary building material is concrete. In addition, Could you send me a copy of your campaign disclosures? I plan to maintain a cross-reference of vendors to your contributors. Respectfully, Monte B. Price Subj: U.S.: Iraq May Have Helped '93 WTC Bomber Let' see - Iraq had the guy in Prison - so now Bush says Iraq "helped Him" - Get real! [LINK] Cynthia Subj: Arnie and other Annoyances Dear BuzzFlash When I watched Schwarzenegger debating with the other candidates, he reminded me very much of Dubya - just an empty suit. I hope the folks in California have the good sense not to be taken in by all that celebrity attraction, and will vote with common sense, or else they will be stuck with an incompetent governor, like we all are stuck with an incompetent (p)resident. Arnold should just stick to making movies, and leave politics to the big boys! I also have a strong feeling that Karl Rove is behind this recall nonsense as a large scale plan to "steal" California for Dumbya next year. As we all know GWB cannot win re-election on his accomplishments, he has been a total failure, I guess all they can now do is steal the elections, once again. This is one of the most corrupt administrations I have ever seen, and they even make Richard Nixon look good!!! A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: 87 Billion hearings Dear BuzzFlash, It is an insult to any intelligent American the way the Republican Congressmen and Senators have tried to use the hearings as if they were rallies for the Republicans, Bush, and the "yes, Mr. President Generals" that care more about presenting a rosy scenario to satisfy their Department of Defense bosses than their duty and obligation to protect and defend their troops. Bush has only visited our wounded for political gain since who believes that it was a coincidence that he decided to make his first and only visit to them on the anniversary of 9/11. Bush has never been to a military funeral, although he claims that he really "cares" for their sacrifice. Is Bush afraid of defiance by the relatives of those heroes that he lied to and our nation to take them to war? Those Senators and Congressmen that are representing "us" in the hearings should try to remember who "unwillingly" pays their salaries and outrageous benefits, just in case, I will like to remind them that is the USA taxpayer and not the Republican Party or Bush. It is time to remind those Senators and Congressmen that those who failed so miserably in intelligence should not be rewarded but held accountable for their failure to protect the American taxpayer. An Independent Outraged American |
|||||
 |
||||
| DAILY BUZZ | ||||
| INTERVIEWS | ||||
| ANALYSIS | ||||
| MEDIA LINKS | ||||
|
Unless
otherwise noted, all original |
 |
|||
