Support for WMD
Historic Hoax
A link worth consideration and a rerun worth seeing.
The irony that keeps the vicious cycle not winning, not losing.
Going after the WMD.
The smoking gun in the name of prevention now in corporate hands.
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query wMD. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query wMD. Sort by date Show all posts
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Tuesday, May 17, 2005
The Mother of All Flushes
Going back to my old style of writing I have a quick filter of the highly filtered news. On the recent scandal at Newsweek or rather “Setup”
or UN Like Rather setup: It reminds me of the old WMD falderal. How? Well it begins with what is the truth or where do we begin?. I take back my comment on old style since I seem to have evolved a bit if nothing much else has changed. But the truth about WMD as well as the facts or which came first their existence or removal? If the disrespect for the Koran exists and there has been more than one report of that occurring it is the administrations job to prove that these did not occur. The problem here is that the truth is not something that you can pick or choose nor kill the messenger for trying to get at. I certainly have no first hand knowledge, but it seems that facts are beside the issue of checking reports and proving the negative. It seems that there are many reports of the Koran landing somewhere no matter what you call it. It seems that Newsweek ran their piece by the Defense Department, with some changes made. So the farthest from this frame is to blame the messenger.
[I had to attach the link, to give some credit as it is still unread. But it is another irony or hypocrisy (depending if you or left or right brain thinking) in the UN Oil for Food scandal being a Weapon of Media Distraction from taking responsibility for our own actions.].
or UN Like Rather setup: It reminds me of the old WMD falderal. How? Well it begins with what is the truth or where do we begin?. I take back my comment on old style since I seem to have evolved a bit if nothing much else has changed. But the truth about WMD as well as the facts or which came first their existence or removal? If the disrespect for the Koran exists and there has been more than one report of that occurring it is the administrations job to prove that these did not occur. The problem here is that the truth is not something that you can pick or choose nor kill the messenger for trying to get at. I certainly have no first hand knowledge, but it seems that facts are beside the issue of checking reports and proving the negative. It seems that there are many reports of the Koran landing somewhere no matter what you call it. It seems that Newsweek ran their piece by the Defense Department, with some changes made. So the farthest from this frame is to blame the messenger.
[I had to attach the link, to give some credit as it is still unread. But it is another irony or hypocrisy (depending if you or left or right brain thinking) in the UN Oil for Food scandal being a Weapon of Media Distraction from taking responsibility for our own actions.].
Wednesday, October 01, 2003
(from an email of 9-25-03)
Move On and Look Back.
Dear Honorable Leaders:
Put simply, we need a nexus of words and actions. Before we declare what the world needs and give it to them, we should look at how we make our own nexus and that of those we employ and whom they employ.
My last post was immediately after hearing the speech the President gave at the U.N. and further thought does not change things, but only cries for further clarity.
After reading the President's speech more closely, I find it a beautiful and compelling argument for our goals and for cooperation in the world. For anybody but Bush.
Setting aside what could have been said, let us run with what we did get. The question is how to move-on. It does not involve looking only forward. The nexus of words and actions is crucial. On this we agree!
I almost overlooked the (his) most beautiful line: "Both (founding documents of the U.N. and America) assert that human beings should never be reduced to objects of power or commerce, because their dignity is inherent."
If only one could live on dignity alone. Nor would the absence of power and commerce be a suggested route.
The line is most interesting and a dilemma that goes beyond simple declarations. The world could likely unite under a cause but not necessarily the cure. That certainly requires more retrospection and discussion before more action is taken.
On more mundane yet crucial matters, THAT DEMONSTRATE the fallacy of acting preemptively, it was not only the existence of WMD but that they would be used. The charge that New York is the symbol of an "unfinished war" begs the question: when did it start? Do we now have any less to fear in that WMD have yet to be used or that we don’t even know whose hands they are in? What is the difference between preemptive plans and a preemptive strategy and how does that influence not only what we need to do but what others will do or even have already done?
Looking at causes and cures is a tricky business. If leaps can be taken, they should have been of faith in the process. If action before discussion is selected by the most civilized, how can we hope for different in those we chastise or fear and yet hope to civilize?
The cost of what we must now do is said to be worth it compared to failure. Failure to discuss the past and move-on is what it needs to be compared to. Comparisons are easy for those who won’t foot the bill or field questions.
Move On and Look Back.
Dear Honorable Leaders:
Put simply, we need a nexus of words and actions. Before we declare what the world needs and give it to them, we should look at how we make our own nexus and that of those we employ and whom they employ.
My last post was immediately after hearing the speech the President gave at the U.N. and further thought does not change things, but only cries for further clarity.
After reading the President's speech more closely, I find it a beautiful and compelling argument for our goals and for cooperation in the world. For anybody but Bush.
Setting aside what could have been said, let us run with what we did get. The question is how to move-on. It does not involve looking only forward. The nexus of words and actions is crucial. On this we agree!
I almost overlooked the (his) most beautiful line: "Both (founding documents of the U.N. and America) assert that human beings should never be reduced to objects of power or commerce, because their dignity is inherent."
If only one could live on dignity alone. Nor would the absence of power and commerce be a suggested route.
The line is most interesting and a dilemma that goes beyond simple declarations. The world could likely unite under a cause but not necessarily the cure. That certainly requires more retrospection and discussion before more action is taken.
On more mundane yet crucial matters, THAT DEMONSTRATE the fallacy of acting preemptively, it was not only the existence of WMD but that they would be used. The charge that New York is the symbol of an "unfinished war" begs the question: when did it start? Do we now have any less to fear in that WMD have yet to be used or that we don’t even know whose hands they are in? What is the difference between preemptive plans and a preemptive strategy and how does that influence not only what we need to do but what others will do or even have already done?
Looking at causes and cures is a tricky business. If leaps can be taken, they should have been of faith in the process. If action before discussion is selected by the most civilized, how can we hope for different in those we chastise or fear and yet hope to civilize?
The cost of what we must now do is said to be worth it compared to failure. Failure to discuss the past and move-on is what it needs to be compared to. Comparisons are easy for those who won’t foot the bill or field questions.
Tuesday, August 05, 2003
POLITICS: QCON It is what is Left, not just All Right.
“Pols" Over Polls Or No More WMD!
One of the most important things President Bush said in this war on terrorism, is that we must continue to stand up for our principles. Democrats must remember this too. If they don’t stand up for our principles, they may as well stand up for Bush’s. If they are not with us, they are not for us.
Granted others may view things as black and white and they are really more gray or oatmeal, grains and all, but when one insists on black and white, it must be worth debating, not just fighting for. In a debate every argument one presents must stand up to the questioning of opposition. One must be able to rely on only the arguments one presents and if one is not honest enough to present it, it won’t count. In politics like debate, one does not have the luxury of changing the game to boxing to settle the score. Though it appears they do.
“You can’t have your cake and eat it too." If things are black and white, why is evidence not?
The saying "All is fair in love and war" comes to mind. A google search brought up reference to Ty Cobb’s ability to stretch the rules and was used in reference to modern business tactics. Business aside, though that is the world he came from, it is interesting that some would make more rules (whether for couples or nations) when they in particular have trouble with following those that exist.
In his previous campaign the candidate Bush blamed his opponents for being too "elitist", behaving as if they knew better than the general public. Now he makes decisions solely on that basis, holding both evidence and reasons close to his puffed-up chest. That may be too much mush for polls to sort out, but it is the job of our leaders or "pols" to search out WMD: Waving Mis-Definitions.
[3-28-08: Updated Title (inserted) and minor editing, and all labeling inserted]
One of the most important things President Bush said in this war on terrorism, is that we must continue to stand up for our principles. Democrats must remember this too. If they don’t stand up for our principles, they may as well stand up for Bush’s. If they are not with us, they are not for us.
Granted others may view things as black and white and they are really more gray or oatmeal, grains and all, but when one insists on black and white, it must be worth debating, not just fighting for. In a debate every argument one presents must stand up to the questioning of opposition. One must be able to rely on only the arguments one presents and if one is not honest enough to present it, it won’t count. In politics like debate, one does not have the luxury of changing the game to boxing to settle the score. Though it appears they do.
“You can’t have your cake and eat it too." If things are black and white, why is evidence not?
The saying "All is fair in love and war" comes to mind. A google search brought up reference to Ty Cobb’s ability to stretch the rules and was used in reference to modern business tactics. Business aside, though that is the world he came from, it is interesting that some would make more rules (whether for couples or nations) when they in particular have trouble with following those that exist.
In his previous campaign the candidate Bush blamed his opponents for being too "elitist", behaving as if they knew better than the general public. Now he makes decisions solely on that basis, holding both evidence and reasons close to his puffed-up chest. That may be too much mush for polls to sort out, but it is the job of our leaders or "pols" to search out WMD: Waving Mis-Definitions.
[3-28-08: Updated Title (inserted) and minor editing, and all labeling inserted]
Monday, August 04, 2003
FADS away?
"Bad intelligence doesn’t die, it just fads away...otherwise known as privatization and globalization."
The previous post was sent to the local paper as well as the Senators Dorgan and Wyden and by late afternoon the project was killed. (Or at least some aspects of it.) Admiral Pointexter took credit that day for the controversy and reportedly offered to leave the administration, so they let him. Just as four other high figures in the administration took responsibility for erroneous WMD in the state of the union, they and the WMD (Weapon of Mass Distortion) Bush is still around.
Today Lou Dobbs in a column on the Economy in that same local paper writes a titled piece: "Left and right joined in attack on progressive thought" leads me to a mutation[*] of MacArthur’s going away. "Bad intelligence doesn’t die, it just fads away, otherwise known as privatization and globalization." But Dobbs is right, and correct too in that progressive thought is needed, but also thinkers that know the difference and don’t use the label liberal as their only argument. If someone believes in principles, they would discuss openly and have the courage to debate them rather that wander around between them and keep the dead wood that fuels his fire.
On a related matter, maybe. Secretary of State Powell is reported to be leaving at the start of the next administration. NOT? Do we have more strategy from the Office of Strategic Information (Slash) Influence? Here are some choices. Either he did or he didn’t let someone know that piece of information. Either it was clear or it was vague or something close to that or different. More choices are that the source made it up, or concluded from other information or was wrong.
Here is my choice. Powell is not being listened to, he wants to be listened to, the president can now claim to be listening. Powell will make his decision later, if he lasts that long.
[*] [3-28-08: Update- quotation mark is facetious as I am mangling MacArthur, but also meant fade not fad, but was it? I left it. The (Slash) was the link to the futures.(minor editing and link insertion)]
The previous post was sent to the local paper as well as the Senators Dorgan and Wyden and by late afternoon the project was killed. (Or at least some aspects of it.) Admiral Pointexter took credit that day for the controversy and reportedly offered to leave the administration, so they let him. Just as four other high figures in the administration took responsibility for erroneous WMD in the state of the union, they and the WMD (Weapon of Mass Distortion) Bush is still around.
Today Lou Dobbs in a column on the Economy in that same local paper writes a titled piece: "Left and right joined in attack on progressive thought" leads me to a mutation[*] of MacArthur’s going away. "Bad intelligence doesn’t die, it just fads away, otherwise known as privatization and globalization." But Dobbs is right, and correct too in that progressive thought is needed, but also thinkers that know the difference and don’t use the label liberal as their only argument. If someone believes in principles, they would discuss openly and have the courage to debate them rather that wander around between them and keep the dead wood that fuels his fire.
On a related matter, maybe. Secretary of State Powell is reported to be leaving at the start of the next administration. NOT? Do we have more strategy from the Office of Strategic Information (Slash) Influence? Here are some choices. Either he did or he didn’t let someone know that piece of information. Either it was clear or it was vague or something close to that or different. More choices are that the source made it up, or concluded from other information or was wrong.
Here is my choice. Powell is not being listened to, he wants to be listened to, the president can now claim to be listening. Powell will make his decision later, if he lasts that long.
[*] [3-28-08: Update- quotation mark is facetious as I am mangling MacArthur, but also meant fade not fad, but was it? I left it. The (Slash) was the link to the futures.(minor editing and link insertion)]
Friday, December 12, 2008
Blog-Oi-Ya-Bleep.
A lot of water is under the bridge over the last few days. What was a bridge to nowhere has become the bridge-loan to nowhere.
FROM THAT WATER:(reply to an email from an Existentialist) I am not saying Rush is wrong about Blog-Oi-Ya-Bleep, but absolutely about the (Democrats)circling the wagons. Otherwise the administration would be cleaned up by now. Absolutely no argument. P.S. you gotta luv this argument (wink) - Has "no argument" taken a spin?
But seriously the media has.(wink) I can see how you can see that Obama is just as Teflon as Bush. But given the Republicans have had the Justice Department and still do... it is more than a matter of statistics. Somehow even Illinois had reason to be displeased with their governor, but... Oops! I slipped into my bleepin blog.
(there I go again)
So, there is still hope for us.
RATHER THAN...clutter this with links and footnotes I will just put this in con text by describing my friend the apparent existentialist. He knows he exists and also knows others exist based on the non-existence of evidence they don't exist. Think**: WMD and corrupt politicians. Also think: Rush to Judgement vs. Voodoo Justice (and Economics)
** 1-15-09 spell check done but note the preceding sentence was double-checked and is as intended.
4-24-13 (spoiler alert?) update Not Exactly: I cannot explain the link or leap, but in blog searching (b.s.) spell+check(2) here(3) there is the (sc) anomaly (Blog-Oi-Ya-Bleep.) and to a dead link at that.
FROM THAT WATER:(reply to an email from an Existentialist) I am not saying Rush is wrong about Blog-Oi-Ya-Bleep, but absolutely about the (Democrats)circling the wagons. Otherwise the administration would be cleaned up by now. Absolutely no argument. P.S. you gotta luv this argument (wink) - Has "no argument" taken a spin?
But seriously the media has.(wink) I can see how you can see that Obama is just as Teflon as Bush. But given the Republicans have had the Justice Department and still do... it is more than a matter of statistics. Somehow even Illinois had reason to be displeased with their governor, but... Oops! I slipped into my bleepin blog.
(there I go again)
So, there is still hope for us.
RATHER THAN...clutter this with links and footnotes I will just put this in con text by describing my friend the apparent existentialist. He knows he exists and also knows others exist based on the non-existence of evidence they don't exist. Think**: WMD and corrupt politicians. Also think: Rush to Judgement vs. Voodoo Justice (and Economics)
** 1-15-09 spell check done but note the preceding sentence was double-checked and is as intended.
4-24-13 (spoiler alert?) update Not Exactly: I cannot explain the link or leap, but in blog searching (b.s.) spell+check(2) here(3) there is the (sc) anomaly (Blog-Oi-Ya-Bleep.) and to a dead link at that.
Sunday, October 02, 2011
Retro-Gate
Iran-Contra, WMD, October No-Surprise.
Not to preemptively prophet[!]
Not to bring back the draft,
but here are some posts held in draft.
Update: Muffin Gate: Miff In Gate
Pulled from draft today!
[Oops, a bit redundant]
Great Ledership
It's Mad[!]
[!] = sarcasm / spelling as intended = [sp!]
Close enough for journal work?
[10-3-11 Just to be clear, I believe in nuance and the law, but as different fields. What I can't say is that I am clearly satire, but the field might be mis-ledership***. But not to coin a new field, here are some other* perspectives, not to say they are the same field. (two video, two scroll overs)
*after the break: Stewart on NRA / teaching** to the test? NOT!]
** speaking of headings*** or retro
*** footnote to clarify later:
moral economics(INET/Robert Reich)& even later
BTW: sub-heading(Just to be clear...) I did not mean to wind-up a G'Ribble, but you can't judge a target by its aim, fear-mongers need a boogie-man. Aims are directions not bulls-eyes.
Definition: G'Ribble- grand ribbing and riddle
[*4] Ratigan and Perugia: processes
Not to preemptively prophet[!]
Not to bring back the draft,
but here are some posts held in draft.
Update: Muffin Gate: Miff In Gate
Pulled from draft today!
[Oops, a bit redundant]
Great Ledership
It's Mad[!]
[!] = sarcasm / spelling as intended = [sp!]
Close enough for journal work?
[10-3-11 Just to be clear, I believe in nuance and the law, but as different fields. What I can't say is that I am clearly satire, but the field might be mis-ledership***. But not to coin a new field, here are some other* perspectives, not to say they are the same field. (two video, two scroll overs)
*after the break: Stewart on NRA / teaching** to the test? NOT!]
** speaking of headings*** or retro
*** footnote to clarify later:
moral economics(INET/Robert Reich)& even later
BTW: sub-heading(Just to be clear...) I did not mean to wind-up a G'Ribble, but you can't judge a target by its aim, fear-mongers need a boogie-man. Aims are directions not bulls-eyes.
Definition: G'Ribble- grand ribbing and riddle
[*4] Ratigan and Perugia: processes
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
(WMD) Wisdom's Mass Deployment
Matthews finally gets there.
Previous Chatter.
Sophistry aside?*
Alexander Hamilton's Advice To The Obama Administration. by Thom Hartmann CommonDreams.org
* Matthew's and Hamilton's bad rap in their respective fields (Journalism and Finance)
Previous Chatter.
Sophistry aside?*
Alexander Hamilton's Advice To The Obama Administration. by Thom Hartmann CommonDreams.org
* Matthew's and Hamilton's bad rap in their respective fields (Journalism and Finance)
Friday, August 24, 2012
Guns, Gads and Google!
You can't handle the rove or son of... an Oldsmobile.
The last link was not where I was coming from, exactly.
Original heading or rather point of departure? Etch-a-Sketch 3.0
Romney, Ryan, Republican Con Vent Shun-all-ism from The Cycle*.
Reference Lede-or Ship: "Ironic Post Birtherism" or what I would call Charlie McCarthyism** to a new level.
* link to be inserted
(Actually NOW w/Alex Wagner)
[A bit on my own Mitt Flop.]
** no...thanks to the fates[!]
(Reference to Google/b.s. / scroll-over not RIP)
[roving on to WMD: Willard Mitt on Decon-structured]
[Not The Cycle either, but son of a gun.]
The last link was not where I was coming from, exactly.
Original heading or rather point of departure? Etch-a-Sketch 3.0
Romney, Ryan, Republican Con Vent Shun-all-ism from The Cycle*.
Reference Lede-or Ship: "Ironic Post Birtherism" or what I would call Charlie McCarthyism** to a new level.
* link to be inserted
(Actually NOW w/Alex Wagner)
[A bit on my own Mitt Flop.]
** no...thanks to the fates[!]
(Reference to Google/b.s. / scroll-over not RIP)
[roving on to WMD: Willard Mitt on Decon-structured]
[Not The Cycle either, but son of a gun.]
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
A Black and White Chat
Last evening, I had a chat(FP2) with a fellow, that began with the subject of the Kobayashi Maru, and the nature of "no-win" versus "game changing" situations.
He was cynical, to say the least* about politics. He was almost "fair and balanced"(to balance FOX with ideology**) in respect to his admiration for both Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul for their straightforwardness, while blaming both parties for their lack thereof and manipulation of the Overton Window.
Allow me to drop this with dissatisfaction @ how it was not really a debate and my not fulfilling a dream.***
* or to say inadequately characterize his view
** a spectrum [wMd?]
(***) or get to my work with metaphor (FP1)
Note: Italics signify prior posts. Bold(if links) signifies outside reads or to reads.
[Spoiler alert !!!!!]
He was cynical, to say the least* about politics. He was almost "fair and balanced"(to balance FOX with ideology**) in respect to his admiration for both Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul for their straightforwardness, while blaming both parties for their lack thereof and manipulation of the Overton Window.
Allow me to drop this with dissatisfaction @ how it was not really a debate and my not fulfilling a dream.***
* or to say inadequately characterize his view
** a spectrum [wMd?]
(***) or get to my work with metaphor (FP1)
Note: Italics signify prior posts. Bold(if links) signifies outside reads or to reads.
[Spoiler alert !!!!!]
Friday, September 17, 2010
Friday, April 25, 2008
Israel Attacks Syria?... Ho Hum.
September 9th, 2007 WMD/Nuclear Program (background read)*
IAEA chastises U.S., Israel over Syrian reactorLack of information sharing, unilateral attack anger nuclear watchdog-
IAEA chastises U.S., Israel over Syrian reactorLack of information sharing, unilateral attack anger nuclear watchdog-
"The director general deplores the fact that this information was not provided to the agency in a timely manner, in accordance with the agency's responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, to enable it to verify its veracity and establish the facts," the statement said.-
Additionally, "the director general views the unilateral use of force by Israel as undermining the due process of verification that is at the heart of the nonproliferation regime," it said.
A senior diplomat linked to the IAEA said ElBaradei had already let his displeasure be known to Rood during the U.S. official's phone call over the delay between the time the information became available to the United States and when he was informed of it.* I did read the background material and the link where I institute a new policy of noting in bold the links I have read, in contrast to those that I just visually or figuratively, cherry picked a reading from. In this case I have block quoted and will [bracket] in comments later. (square brackets indicate editing or additions) And as far as labels go, below, I will use them as categories or additional hints of commentary pun (Ex. Expelled) which in reality... Re: cycle in particular Hint: exemplified here
Friday, March 28, 2014
Sovereign or
sovereignTy are not in the constitution.
3-31-14 Monday morning
WMD. Word Magic Desomething.OK, I wove in the sovereignTea issue over the weekend, in reference to a Papal Fracas over markets and autonomy(FB). Night of the Living Dead was broadcast as well.
FNL:(Unacronimbole Player)
Keynesian Economics
Keynes...ianism
'n Theory
4th / Dimention[?] ? [!]
Speaking of Sham bling on. E(...)pic!
Ineffable.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Administration: FOX Dunn
Just a google: Not Exactly*
FOX Hunt. Not Exactly?
It seems that FOX was not excluded, but that the administration made an offer that was not to the White House press pool. Which calls into question the second link and what justifies the pool?
* Pool reports.(Now that's what I am talking about: not exactly.)
[UPDATE 10-28-09 Fair and Balanced attack. If the balance of unfairness is on FOX, it would be unbalanced to give equal shots at other networks. On the other hand MSNBC host is maybe trying out for the other network. Not so random...link**...here. ]
** Rand um? The Right might want to check out what the definition of "was" is. (C3 4 Anachronistic)(not to mention Apropos WMD)
[Now this is fair and balanced: ironically]
[Now that is "Fair and Balanced". NOT! - Ironically I must note (and explain) that this is not ironic. CNN was less so, MSNBC is[***] more or less. There is a difference between a personality having a perspective and programming having a bias. It cannot be said MSNBC or its hosts are not critical of the administration. There is also a difference in tone and humor, and who is the punchline or bottomline.]
[***] & last 2 links update 10-30-09: "fair and balanced", not ironic. (Except the Hope for America link as a source.)
FOX Hunt. Not Exactly?
It seems that FOX was not excluded, but that the administration made an offer that was not to the White House press pool. Which calls into question the second link and what justifies the pool?
* Pool reports.(Now that's what I am talking about: not exactly.)
[UPDATE 10-28-09 Fair and Balanced attack. If the balance of unfairness is on FOX, it would be unbalanced to give equal shots at other networks. On the other hand MSNBC host is maybe trying out for the other network. Not so random...link**...here. ]
** Rand um? The Right might want to check out what the definition of "was" is. (C3 4 Anachronistic)(not to mention Apropos WMD)
[Now this is fair and balanced: ironically]
[Now that is "Fair and Balanced". NOT! - Ironically I must note (and explain) that this is not ironic. CNN was less so, MSNBC is[***] more or less. There is a difference between a personality having a perspective and programming having a bias. It cannot be said MSNBC or its hosts are not critical of the administration. There is also a difference in tone and humor, and who is the punchline or bottomline.]
[***] & last 2 links update 10-30-09: "fair and balanced", not ironic. (Except the Hope for America link as a source.)
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Cultural Terrorist Elite Jab
FOX Snipers Suffer Collateral Damage
Just a Tease?
WMD Virus Spreads.
Nation Rocked By Terrorist Youth
and their "New Fangled" Communications.
Meanwhile an economic fist bump and change?.
Just a Tease?
WMD Virus Spreads.
Nation Rocked By Terrorist Youth
and their "New Fangled" Communications.
Meanwhile an economic fist bump and change?.
Thursday, March 27, 2014
Not to be full of it...
or demonstrate I Ron Knee...
but everything must be taken in context.
In fact, WMD is an example and Weapon of Mass Distraction, Akin to E.D (entitlement distraction).
Hume or ... is an example of empiricism, and empire is not so in context.
Pardon my tan gent, but not my French* or Cheney, let alone Rumsfeld.
*link inserted 3-28-14 and is technically an anti-thesis.
but everything must be taken in context.
In fact, WMD is an example and Weapon of Mass Distraction, Akin to E.D (entitlement distraction).
Hume or ... is an example of empiricism, and empire is not so in context.
Pardon my tan gent, but not my French* or Cheney, let alone Rumsfeld.
*link inserted 3-28-14 and is technically an anti-thesis.
Friday, May 07, 2010
Hierarchy of Hypocrisy
Hating to generalize I note my potential logical fallacy in the following. Nevertheless, between the 2nd amendment and the 14th amendment, there seems a hierarchy for some. From Right to Bear Arms to Citizenship Rights where does the 1st amendment fit in? (*)
A. There is no hierarchy in constitutional amendments.
B. There are Supreme Court rulings that influence their dynamics.
C. So many blogs are moot points. (GOTO 1st sentence)
Of course maybe my posts are just moot or problematic. Problematic in generalizing and leaping. Unfortunately you must read, to decide. In generalizing there may be some association between the authors of certain events but not necessarily relevant. In the above case I simply point to fact that removal of citizenship is being considered for some but not their guns, while free speech is an element that might be fringe but relative. Meanwhile in an earlier and adjacent thought, some of this new found legislative fury seem like WMD.** Weapons of Mass Distraction. It would seem that all this populist rancor is really keeping Homeland Securiy busy. And while I support all rights reasonably used, I cannot help but feel that it really is a burden on our security. A bit more responsible reporting and responsible associating might help, but then how one goes about that...almost makes me long for a unitary executive. BTW: the dot, dot, dot was a rhetorical segue or moot question.
My potential obtuseness was not an attempt to be excedingly careful***, yet the cause and effect might be anachronistic(i.e. flip-flopped). The links to previous word choices were not intentionally designed to be more than a search for my previous usage, but they do seem to bring up some previous associations which show the importance of the process and progress, not to mention providing hope.
(*) an alternative link.
(**) not that early: My first referencing of Weapon of Mass Distraction.
(***) but maybe an antidote to some talk show hosts that muddle the search for terrorist
[Oh, and I do not vouch for the legal analysis or terminology in my ABC's. And had not intended to close with the SCOTUS link when I set out. Let alone the less than inflammable association with security. But it does seem that it is wierd that flammable and moot have similar usage issues as does the roots or branches of Faust, let alone Devil's Advocates. But no, that is the legal process, not to mention political, and word and world modifying dynamics, or as I have stumbled out(or coined) "dymanics". I will conclude with the issue that there was some Beckian confusion in the topic of a National Prayer Day in regard to what was canceled and what is being fought and by whom. But the ideas which Thom Hartmann yesterday contrasted was a National Day of Reason to share and balance the National Day of Prayer. While I suggested a National Day of Faith. But would that be legal? Not without debate, moot and inflammable or not.]
A. There is no hierarchy in constitutional amendments.
B. There are Supreme Court rulings that influence their dynamics.
C. So many blogs are moot points. (GOTO 1st sentence)
Of course maybe my posts are just moot or problematic. Problematic in generalizing and leaping. Unfortunately you must read, to decide. In generalizing there may be some association between the authors of certain events but not necessarily relevant. In the above case I simply point to fact that removal of citizenship is being considered for some but not their guns, while free speech is an element that might be fringe but relative. Meanwhile in an earlier and adjacent thought, some of this new found legislative fury seem like WMD.** Weapons of Mass Distraction. It would seem that all this populist rancor is really keeping Homeland Securiy busy. And while I support all rights reasonably used, I cannot help but feel that it really is a burden on our security. A bit more responsible reporting and responsible associating might help, but then how one goes about that...almost makes me long for a unitary executive. BTW: the dot, dot, dot was a rhetorical segue or moot question.
My potential obtuseness was not an attempt to be excedingly careful***, yet the cause and effect might be anachronistic(i.e. flip-flopped). The links to previous word choices were not intentionally designed to be more than a search for my previous usage, but they do seem to bring up some previous associations which show the importance of the process and progress, not to mention providing hope.
(*) an alternative link.
(**) not that early: My first referencing of Weapon of Mass Distraction.
(***) but maybe an antidote to some talk show hosts that muddle the search for terrorist
[Oh, and I do not vouch for the legal analysis or terminology in my ABC's. And had not intended to close with the SCOTUS link when I set out. Let alone the less than inflammable association with security. But it does seem that it is wierd that flammable and moot have similar usage issues as does the roots or branches of Faust, let alone Devil's Advocates. But no, that is the legal process, not to mention political, and word and world modifying dynamics, or as I have stumbled out(or coined) "dymanics". I will conclude with the issue that there was some Beckian confusion in the topic of a National Prayer Day in regard to what was canceled and what is being fought and by whom. But the ideas which Thom Hartmann yesterday contrasted was a National Day of Reason to share and balance the National Day of Prayer. While I suggested a National Day of Faith. But would that be legal? Not without debate, moot and inflammable or not.]
Sunday, September 01, 2013
Leveling the World Stage?
And restoring some floors @ the U.N.
Ultimately it is not about [No Bama O Drama.] (*)
[David Gregory "he wants the debate".]
(*) NBOD coined 8-30-13 as QCON(re-links)
[Quick Comment on News, or might be QuipCON?]
[Foibles of punctuation and excuse m-beds.]
(Spoiler alert: Try Lemmings, Kidding Goats, and Votes)
9-2-13
Proposed resolution to congress.
9-3-13
Congress World Reaction(ABC)
It is not just about Obama's "Red Line", it is about the world having Red Lines or not. It is truly about the use of WMD, as well as a nation that is falling apart (Syrian civil war) needing to have an urgency of the negotiating table.
Alternatively or simultaneously, Syria's partners on the U.N. Security council as well as other opposition partners (Arab League, Pakistan, Iran,)should have a stake in getting things to the table or world court.
[Pre-Post-Or-US ? The Leverage of NOW**?]
** anachronism of opinion (by Ghosh)
(*)segue[be-date?/timing]
[9-4-13 inserted NOW link]
9-27-13 M-bedded in the FP (freak n' pounding) i.e. capitol ization of font. Note situation of September's FP and their headings. And the 5th of sorts. / A. Inconvenient , B. , C. The Real B. S. of the F. C. , D. Nail Meet F--C---[!] , E. Irony versus Hypocrisy [!]
Ultimately it is not about [No Bama O Drama.] (*)
[David Gregory "he wants the debate".]
(*) NBOD coined 8-30-13 as QCON(re-links)
[Quick Comment on News, or might be QuipCON?]
[Foibles of punctuation and excuse m-beds.]
(Spoiler alert: Try Lemmings, Kidding Goats, and Votes)
9-2-13
Proposed resolution to congress.
9-3-13
Congress World Reaction(ABC)
It is not just about Obama's "Red Line", it is about the world having Red Lines or not. It is truly about the use of WMD, as well as a nation that is falling apart (Syrian civil war) needing to have an urgency of the negotiating table.
Alternatively or simultaneously, Syria's partners on the U.N. Security council as well as other opposition partners (Arab League, Pakistan, Iran,)should have a stake in getting things to the table or world court.
[Pre-Post-Or-US ? The Leverage of NOW**?]
** anachronism of opinion (by Ghosh)
(*)segue[be-date?/timing]
[9-4-13 inserted NOW link]
9-27-13 M-bedded in the FP (freak n' pounding) i.e. capitol ization of font. Note situation of September's FP and their headings. And the 5th of sorts. / A. Inconvenient , B. , C. The Real B. S. of the F. C. , D. Nail Meet F--C---[!] , E. Irony versus Hypocrisy [!]
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Clean Bill or Clean Getaway?
$700 Billion Bail Out?
Get out of Jail Free.
But we foot the bail.
And I don't mean a bucket for the trickledown.
Stop WMD for Main Street.
Note: References to so-called progressive economists at the table or not are embedded here.
[Action items added: ourfuture.org
and Congressman Bernie Sanders Independent ]
Urge them to act, but don't blame them if they bend a bit. Already the original plan is no longer on the table. At least according to it's so-called author even though he has trouble reading it: The so-called clean one, that is. We still must be careful of any unattached strings.
Get out of Jail Free.
But we foot the bail.
And I don't mean a bucket for the trickledown.
Stop WMD for Main Street.
Note: References to so-called progressive economists at the table or not are embedded here.
[Action items added: ourfuture.org
and Congressman Bernie Sanders Independent ]
Urge them to act, but don't blame them if they bend a bit. Already the original plan is no longer on the table. At least according to it's so-called author even though he has trouble reading it: The so-called clean one, that is. We still must be careful of any unattached strings.
Thursday, June 21, 2012
Smirking Gun[!]
OK, I won't overuse the term smoking gun, but when I heard Senator McCain's leak theory, I knew something was up. "The only conceivable" reason that McCain knows the "motive for such damaging and compromising leaks" is that it is something he could conceive of doing. The Issa cover-up committee is along the same track. Worse than Watergate, less than WMD***.
September 11th occurred because the Bush administration had contempt for the Clinton administration and refused to carry on in the case against terrorism. Fast and Furious is still under investigation, but it seems that the political case is of the opposite extreme. The Obama administration not changing more from the previous administration.
I have a feeling that the Issa Committee investigation is actually an attempt to interfere with the Obama administration* of justice and foreign policy. Or retribution for Watergate, Iran Contra and Plame combined, or Republican power** as usual.
* Ctrl F "obstructionism"
** now that is the ticket or subpoena(Thom Hartmann)
*** 6-22-12 Pre-Post-or-us?
(I was reticent to use 9/11, especially with the smoking[!] gun lede-in. While Representative Mica is really stretching things, two things are certain. September 11th or even a dead ATF agent are nothing to smirk about, and Representative Issa hides his smirk with a snear.)
[Related posts: Re:investigation, Re:dribble, Re-course, Re:turn(Ctrl F "sabotage" "pate")]
[GPS for MSNBC labels?]
[!] really sic, i.e. no typo, nor disrespect for the departed intended
[A caller to the Ed Schultz show noted a similar theme. Republicans are more about obstruction politics than finding the facts. They must have something to hide. Obama's success and their incompetence. But then there followed**2 on Thom Hartmann the PE/FDR/BS [!]]
[It is on !]
[A friend asked my opinion on the wikileaks deal. Well more specifically the personalities involved. Bottomline, I don't feel that military personel should take it on themselve to leak top secret information without considering the consequences, nor should they have been distributed without the same considerations. Unfortunately there may not be enough law on the books to prosecute the latter although there certainly is for the former. Who do we have to blame for the laws on the books? Congress. Who do we have for not enough laws on the books? Republicans. Well, it is not the quantity but the quality. But the answer is the same. Talk is cheap, but actions*2 cost.]
*2 accidental link
[Weird link of the day.]
**2 with all due respect for B.S. it was the PE crack by FDR (Privileged Enterprise)
[Not so weird link of day.]
September 11th occurred because the Bush administration had contempt for the Clinton administration and refused to carry on in the case against terrorism. Fast and Furious is still under investigation, but it seems that the political case is of the opposite extreme. The Obama administration not changing more from the previous administration.
I have a feeling that the Issa Committee investigation is actually an attempt to interfere with the Obama administration* of justice and foreign policy. Or retribution for Watergate, Iran Contra and Plame combined, or Republican power** as usual.
* Ctrl F "obstructionism"
** now that is the ticket or subpoena(Thom Hartmann)
*** 6-22-12 Pre-Post-or-us?
(I was reticent to use 9/11, especially with the smoking[!] gun lede-in. While Representative Mica is really stretching things, two things are certain. September 11th or even a dead ATF agent are nothing to smirk about, and Representative Issa hides his smirk with a snear.)
[Related posts: Re:investigation, Re:dribble, Re-course, Re:turn(Ctrl F "sabotage" "pate")]
[GPS for MSNBC labels?]
[!] really sic, i.e. no typo, nor disrespect for the departed intended
[A caller to the Ed Schultz show noted a similar theme. Republicans are more about obstruction politics than finding the facts. They must have something to hide. Obama's success and their incompetence. But then there followed**2 on Thom Hartmann the PE/FDR/BS [!]]
[It is on !]
[A friend asked my opinion on the wikileaks deal. Well more specifically the personalities involved. Bottomline, I don't feel that military personel should take it on themselve to leak top secret information without considering the consequences, nor should they have been distributed without the same considerations. Unfortunately there may not be enough law on the books to prosecute the latter although there certainly is for the former. Who do we have to blame for the laws on the books? Congress. Who do we have for not enough laws on the books? Republicans. Well, it is not the quantity but the quality. But the answer is the same. Talk is cheap, but actions*2 cost.]
*2 accidental link
[Weird link of the day.]
**2 with all due respect for B.S. it was the PE crack by FDR (Privileged Enterprise)
[Not so weird link of day.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)