[marden]

Why Bush Should Spill The Beans

With all of the conspiracies about 9/11 and everything else going on in todays world the American people and our allies are starting to sound like the people from the Middle East who are constantly being lied to by their press and their governments.

They believe everything and nothing.

Anything that sounds plausible, or makes sense on a non-intellectual level is subject to being believed. But there is nothing upon which the American people can rely to serve as a foundation for their trust, no matter what their religious convictions might be.

America has never been a Christian nation but using Christian ideals our government operated as a belief system that everyone could use as a foundation for their faith in America.

Now, after so much has happened in America to shake the whole foundation of the belief we Americans as well as our allies had in the entity called AMERICA, people are left to believe not what the government tells them, not what the media tells them, not what makes intellectual sense, but what makes emotional sense.

This has reduced us to operating at the same level as the people of the Middle East who relaize that in a world of change and confusion and turmoil there is one thing that remains steadfast and unchanging. Islam. And those who are it's fundamentalists, like Osama bin Laden, are the ones who are increasingly appreciated because they stand for traditional values.

Jihadists are "Old School."

An increasing number of Americans believe that the attacks of 9/11 were the result of a government conspiracy. This is a troubling state of affairs. When the American people will believe anything that makes 'gut-sense' then traditional loyalty can no longer be counted on. The people will be susceptible to any emotionally convincing story and the government will eventually be seen as the enemy of the people.

Look around you. It is happening and has been happening for a number of years.

The only way to return the hearts of the people to the government is to come clean. Come hurtfully clean. Spill the beans about everything so that the effort is transparently sincere to the American people that they should cleave to the government and prevent the wedge that the Muslim fundies are using to further alienate our trust in the government.

The further we go with people becoming more and more distrusting the easier it will become for a bloodless coup to eliminate the bright city on the hill.

Bush should spill the beans.

[Dork.]

Bush's Beans are too yummy to spill.

[Spliffdaddy]

The world has been changing all my life - and for every generation before.

There is always a new doomsday scenario. The world has been in its last days since the first day humans walked the Earth.

Everybody has a need to feel like their life is special - like their lifetime is the only one that ever mattered - that was ever significant.

There has always been an enemy of America for as long as I've been alive. There seems to be a neverending stream of enemies. I believe we *need* things to be that way. For the same reason we need competitors in sporting events. Uncertainty and challenge is what drives humans to excel, what gives us a reverence for life, what prevents mental stagnation, what makes life interesting.

To be safe and satisfied with your way of life is akin to a living hell. There would be no purpose to life other than to live and then die.

While many folks extoll the virtues of peace, freedom, and prosperity - I see it as a highway of complacency and utter boredom, ending with an off-ramp of disinterest and lack of self-worth.

If Tiger Woods had no competitors and no opportunities to be defeated I doubt he'd pursue the game of golf.

If Americans had no competitors and no opportunities to be defeated I doubt they'd pursue the ideals of American life.

Some say we need to change.

I say we need to do whatever we've been doing. It's hard to argue with the results.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Dork.

Bush's Beans are too yummy to spill.

George should be like Duke.

[ironknee]

the new soviet union is osama. as long as he is not found (or gone after), bush can keep scaring us

it's a policy of fear and not much more

[marden]

Originally Posted by ironknee

the new soviet union is osama. as long as he is not found (or gone after), bush can keep scaring us

it's a policy of fear and not much more

If Bush came clean you'd have to believe him.

[D. S. Troyer]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

The world has been changing all my life - and for every generation before.

There is always a new doomsday scenario. The world has been in its last days since the first day humans walked the Earth.

Everybody has a need to feel like their life is special - like their lifetime is the only one that ever mattered - that was ever significant.

There has always been an enemy of America for as long as I've been alive. There seems to be a neverending stream of enemies. I believe we *need* things to be that way. For the same reason we need competitors in sporting events. Uncertainty and challenge is what drives humans to excel, what gives us a reverence for life, what prevents mental stagnation, what makes life interesting.

To be safe and satisfied with your way of life is akin to a living hell. There would be no purpose to life other than to live and then die.

While many folks extoll the virtues of peace, freedom, and prosperity - I see it as a highway of complacency and utter boredom, ending with an off-ramp of disinterest and lack of self-worth.

If Tiger Woods had no competitors and no opportunities to be defeated I doubt he'd pursue the game of golf.

If Americans had no competitors and no opportunities to be defeated I doubt they'd pursue the ideals of American life.

Some say we need to change.

I say we need to do whatever we've been doing. It's hard to argue with the results.

Like sand in a hour glass, these are the days of our lives.

[Spliffdaddy]

If the war against Islamic fundamentalist terrorists is one that will last for generations - then our generation is making a contribution. I mean, somebody has to figure out which tactics work and which do not.

Right now, failure is always an option. Tomorrow, less so.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

The world...

Nodded off during "Pride" and "Gluttony" in Sunday School I see.

Don't get me wrong, so did I, but since you were obviously still asleep when they got to "Wrath" I'm worried you may have missed the hot parts.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by subego

Nodded off during "Pride" and "Gluttony" in Sunday School I see.

Why gluttony?

[Millennium]

In other words, Bush should make the WoT a completely transparent operation, ditching all of the secrecy?

OK. I can get behind that. I've always thought that a government dedicated to freedom needs to operate transparently, and "security" be damned: if a government can't keep power through transparent and ethical means then it doesn't deserve the power it has.

[marden]

If representative or benign governing is always with the consent of the governed what would the first signs be that the governed was seriously withdrawing their consent?

I say it wouldn't be a conscious withdrawal as is exercised during a referendum. Instead it would be a wave that would spread over the people that they'd be unable to recognize or control but it would be a force that would be undeniable and irresistible.

Think about the signs that you noticed (or didn't notice) which led to your divorce or a breakup with your significant other.

After they no longer believed anything you said, no matter what you said after that was as if it no longer mattered.

And isn't that where a great many people have now gotten with the government?

I believe the Administration has not lied inordinately. Not to the degree that the opponents mistrust them and accuse them of deceit. But whatever the level of deception the only thing that can turn things around for this country is an act of genuine disclosure about something important.

And I must say that it would be a painful and a very costly decision. Lives might be placed in jeopardy. Our future aims and goals could become known to our enemies and potential enemies. We could see repeated attempts by friends and foes alike to take advantage of our openness and honesty with the American people.

But that would be necessary to close the rift and heal the wounds that exist in America.

And I say we do it now and not later. The stuff hasn't hit the fan and we still have time.

I don't think it should be total openness because that would be suicidal and the nation really would be imperiled. But I think we should spill the beans about SOMETHING important which has been a question mark to the people and a source of discontent and we should let out more and more secrets until the dissenters said, "Enough! We can't allow you to continue disclosing America's secrets to our enemies. We love America and for you to continue making it vulnerable is not going to serve any greater purpose than it already has. Enough! We believe you and we will try to trust once again."

When they began to understand how important it was to the government to have their support and loyalty -- to the point where the government would allow us all to be vulnerable -- it would be a powerful statement. When you have been caught cheating and lying to your wife and you want to regain her trust you must be willing to accept that she needs to know you are paying for your misdeeds and are willing to debase yourself if that's what it takes.

The left are not completely correct in their opposition but the government needs their support and we all need each other's trust to face the challenges that are looming in the near distance. When the dissenters say that we have suffered enough from the government being open and honest then that part of our population might one day be able to trust the government once again and when there will be a tremendous need for the people to trust the government I hope it will be forthcoming. The way it looks now, there is no trust. And if al Qaeda or Hezbollah or Iran came along with a really good lie they could split us in two and create a civil war here just as they have helped create a civil war in Iraq.

There is a significant number of people who believe the government was involved in the attacks of 9/11.

That is a symptom of a serious lack of faith and trust.

[vmarks]

Didn't that lack of faith start with the murder of JFK?

Or did it start with the results of the Warren Commission?

Or did it start with the resignation of Nixon?

Or did it start with the packing of the Supreme Court, ridding of the Gold Standard, confiscating gold, and the New Deal?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dork.

Bush's Beans are too yummy to spill.

I like these kind of beans.

[marden]

Originally Posted by vmarks

Didn't that lack of faith start with the murder of JFK?

Or did it start with the results of the Warren Commission?

Or did it start with the resignation of Nixon?

Or did it start with the packing of the Supreme Court, ridding of the Gold Standard, confiscating gold, and the New Deal?

When you put it that way I can see where it's simply another rising and falling tidal cycle.

Or it could be that a fuse was lit long ago and has burned steadily since then, but the signs are different now than ever before.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Why gluttony?

The "need" to consume enemies merely for purposes of self-worth.

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by subego

Nodded off during "Pride" and "Gluttony" in Sunday School I see.

Don't get me wrong, so did I, but since you were obviously still asleep when they got to "Wrath" I'm worried you may have missed the hot parts.

Haven't a clue what you're talking about.

Never attended Sunday school.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Haven't a clue what you're talking about.

Is it that complicated?

Focus on the words in quotes.

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Never attended Sunday school.

Neither did I.

[invisibleX]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

If the war against Islamic fundamentalist terrorists is one that will last for generations - then our generation is making a contribution. I mean, somebody has to figure out which tactics work and which do not.

Right now, failure is always an option. Tomorrow, less so.

The more you kill them, the more flock to their cause and the worse you look. Essentially you're fighting a war of attrition. When "defense" and "security" mean destroying anyone who could possibly harm you there is a pretty high price.

Lord help us if muslims within the country begin to sympathize and act out. Heck, school kids have been doing it for years. Really isn't going to be pretty if things go south.

In some ways I think you're ahead of most Spliff. You've realized what everyone else is slowly coming to realize: we're not at war with extremists, or terrorists, we're at war with Islam. Hey, if a religion or ideology threatens your way of life and you react violently who can blame you?

[Spliffdaddy]

I think we can kill them all.

It's either that or become another France.

We didn't have to kill all the Nazis to win the war. And the ones we killed didn't spawn others.

I know there are plenty of Americans that could terrorize the terrorists - and have good fun doing it. Look to the south for salvation.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I think we can kill them all.

It's either that or become another France.

We didn't have to kill all the Nazis to win the war. And the ones we killed didn't spawn others.

I know there are plenty of Americans that could terrorize the terrorists - and have good fun doing it. Look to the south for salvation.

Great! Who is "them" and how do we target "them"? Do we call up random people and ask them if they'd like to take a questionnaire?


Thank you, drive though...

[Spliffdaddy]

I'll decide who gets killed.

My determination will be final and absolute.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I'll decide who gets killed.

Oh, crap.

You're gonna kill that joint without passing it to me first. I just know it.

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I'll decide who gets killed.

My determination will be final and absolute.

If your determination is absolute, does that make you the Determinater?

They should make a comic book: Dubya as the Decider and you as the Determinater.

The moral of your story could be "with great power comes great smackdownage"....

[Spliffdaddy]

Well if I leave it up to you dolts, some innocent mofos might get killed.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I'll decide who gets killed.

My determination will be final and absolute.

Hey Spliffdaddy, we need a secret signal. Don't worry, I won't tell anybody about our signal, it will be cool and covert, just like a terrorist hating church going Republican version of James Bond.


When you have actually thought through what you are about to say, at the end of your post, write this:

/&

If you are just doing your stream of consciousness thing, write this:

*...b


Cool! Okay, good...

[marden]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I think we can kill them all.

It's either that or become another France.

We didn't have to kill all the Nazis to win the war. And the ones we killed didn't spawn others.

I know there are plenty of Americans that could terrorize the terrorists - and have good fun doing it. Look to the south for salvation.

I know you aren't saying to kill all Muslims. But to Invisible X, we don't have to kill all the Muslims. If we had total unity and the support of all Americans the Democrats and liberals could join the Republicans and conservatives and be as we all were on 9/11/01.

Americans.

And efforts to drive a wedge between us would stand out to all. InvisibleX. And be resisted in any way convenient.

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Well if I leave it up to you dolts, some innocent mofos might get killed.

Are there really any innocent mofos? We're all guilty of something. And you get to determine it, because you're the Determinater!

You're one bad mutha- shut yo mouth!

[Spliffdaddy]

Compromise is another word for defeat.

When ideological differences require one side to surrender their core values and beliefs in an effort to "find common ground" - the resulting solution is often worthless.

I'd rather win or lose than compromise.

Side A: "I'm against murder"

Side B: "I'm in support of murder"


So should we compromise and only murder a little?

[subego]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Well if I leave it up to you dolts, some innocent mofos might get killed.

No mofos are innocent...

Unless you're talking about someone's father, in which case I should tell you he expects more polite language.

[invisibleX]

Originally Posted by marden

I know you aren't saying to kill all Muslims. But to Invisible X, we don't have to kill all the Muslims. If we had total unity and the support of all Americans the Democrats and liberals could join the Republicans and conservatives and be as we all were on 9/11/01.

Americans.

And efforts to drive a wedge between us would stand out to all. InvisibleX. And be resisted in any way convenient.

If you haven't noticed around here we much prefer picking at our differences than sharing our similarities.

We don't need to kill all muslims. We don't need to fold on a stiff stance on terrorism. We don't need to be fighting the Islamic Ideology.

[invisibleX]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I think we can kill them all.

It's either that or become another France.

We didn't have to kill all the Nazis to win the war. And the ones we killed didn't spawn others.

I know there are plenty of Americans that could terrorize the terrorists - and have good fun doing it. Look to the south for salvation.

I think you're a few cards short of a full deck.

We're not fighting Nazis. In fact we're not even fighting the war you think we are. We will be if things don't change but we certainly aren't there yet. Its hard to argue that terrorism hasn't grown since 9/11.

So you suggest americans blow themselves up at mosques? Sorry sir but the south doesn't exist anymore in my mind. One country, united, not little countries.

[voodoo]

Good post marden.

First, they should tell us about the controlled demolishions of the WTC. That was impressive, while un-imaginative. WTC 7 was too much.

V

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

There has always been an enemy of America for as long as I've been alive. There seems to be a neverending stream of enemies. I believe we *need* things to be that way. For the same reason we need competitors in sporting events. Uncertainty and challenge is what drives humans to excel, what gives us a reverence for life, what prevents mental stagnation, what makes life interesting.

People don't die in sporting events. It's kind of weird you're implying 9/11 was good because it made life interesting.

Also, in the case of Iraq, we made enemies for the sake of making enemies. In fact, we helped out Al Qaeda.

[marden]

Originally Posted by voodoo

Good post marden.

First, they should tell us about the controlled demolishions of the WTC. That was impressive, while un-imaginative. WTC 7 was too much.

V

Thank you, voodoo.

As for WTC 7, I hope it does not become another John Mark Carr. Much ado about nothing.

Seven World Trade Center

The WTC complex had seven buildings. The third building to collapse was 7 WTC, which fell at 5:20 pm, as seen live on television. 7 WTC was a 47-story steel-frame skyscraper across the street from the rest of the complex.

The 2 million-square-foot building, 7 World Trade Center, had suffered mightily from the fire, and had been wounded by beams falling off the towers. But experts said no building like it, a modern, steel-reinforced high-rise, had ever collapsed because of an uncontrolled fire. They have been trying to figure out exactly what occurred, and whether they should be worried about other buildings like it around the country.[34]

As part of the electrical backup system, there may have been up to 160,000 l (42,000 gallons) of diesel fuel stored in five tanks within the building on several floors, as well as pumps to distribute it. It has been claimed that the diesel fuel and emergency generators spilled and ignited inside building 7. Another speculation is that the building's unusual architecture may have contributed to its collapse. Theoretically, cantilevers and structural members, required to transfer building weight off of the pre-existing Con Ed electrical substation that 7 WTC was built over, may have failed in the fire leading to the internal mechanism of collapse.
An article in the Journal of Metallurgy discussed microstructural changes that resulted in the erosion of a piece of a steel beam collected from 7 WTC:

Rapid deterioration of the steel was a result of heating with oxidation in combination with intergranular melting due to the presence of sulfur. The formation of the eutectic mixture of iron oxide and iron sulfide lowers the temperature at which liquid can form in this steel. This strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached ~1000°C by a process similar to making a 'blacksmith's weld' in a hand forge.[35]

The FEMA report on the disaster states that "Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue".[36] NIST continued this work and released a progress report in June 2004 in which they outlined the working hypothesis of the collapse of 7 WTC:[37][38]

An initial local failure at the floors below floor 13 due to fire and/or debris induced structural damage of a critical column (the initiating event), which supported a large span floor bay with an area of about 2,000 square feet (190 m²).

Vertical progression of the initial local failure up to the east penthouse, as large floor bays were unable to redistribute the loads, bringing down the interior structure below it.
Collapse of the interior structure first, pulling the outer structure down and inward.
Horizontal progression of the failure across the floors in the region of floors 5 and 7, much thicker than the rest of the floors, triggered by damage due to the vertical failure, resulting in the disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.

The final report from NIST regarding the collapse of 7 WTC was due in July 2005, but is still ongoing.[25]

In "WTC part IIC - WTC7 Collapse Final", released in April 2005, NIST concludes about the fuel: "This finding allows for the possibility, though not conclusively, that the fuel may have contributed to a fire on Floor 5."[25]

[subego]

As part of the electrical backup system, there may have been up to 160,000 l (42,000 gallons) of diesel fuel stored in five tanks within the building on several floors, as well as pumps to distribute it. It has been claimed that the diesel fuel and emergency generators spilled and ignited inside building 7.

I thought one of the benefits of diesel is that it won't ignite unless atomized.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by subego

I thought one of the benefits of diesel is that it won't ignite unless atomized.

Well, yes.. but as they say:

The FEMA report on the disaster states that "Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue".

..and when they say low probability, they mean lower than winning the national lottery.

V

[DLQ2006]

Originally Posted by vmarks

Didn't that lack of faith start with the murder of JFK?

Or did it start with the results of the Warren Commission?

Or did it start with the resignation of Nixon?

Or did it start with the packing of the Supreme Court, ridding of the Gold Standard, confiscating gold, and the New Deal?

Didn't the gold standard become obsolete once the value of our economy outgrew the value of all the gold at Fort Knox? Wouldn't going back to the Gold standard greatly shrink our economy? My God, Bill Gates by now probably has more money than the total value of all the gold at Fort Knox.

At any rate, I don't believe in giving a govt total power and blind trust. That's why we have separation of powers and checks and balances. However, I have to believe that any govt that is as sinister as what this administration is being accused of, that things like the Patriot act would be irrelevant anyways. We are having this national debate about elements of the Patriot act, domestic spying laws, ect and there would not even need to be a debate if the govt was as diabolic and power hungry as they are accused of being.

If anything, our govt is mostly paralyzed by beauracracy. It's fine to have separations of powers and all but when agents working with the Able Danger program identify those on a terrorist watch list and lawyers don't allow them to communicate that to the FBI because domestic spying laws prevent agencies from communicating with each other to thwart attacks that can kill thousands of people in one day, we have govt paralysis. We have tremendous freedom in this country but we do not have the freedom to whatever we want.

911 wasn't a success for the terrorists because those that plotted it and carried it out were smart people. It was a success for the terrorists because they were allowed to come here without valid and authenticated identification and were allowed to move freely about our country doing whatever they wanted to include one of them taking flying lessons that didn't include learning how to take off and land.

How does giving the various agencies of our government the authority to prevent future 911's, impose such an infringement on the rights of us law-abiding citizens? I have not once heard a salient answer to that question. Furthermore, a govt so bent on taking the rights away from its citizens is not going to wait for the consent of those citizens.

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by DLQ2006

Didn't the gold standard become obsolete once the value of our economy outgrew the value of all the gold at Fort Knox? Wouldn't going back to the Gold standard greatly shrink our economy? My God, Bill Gates by now probably has more money than the total value of all the gold at Fort Knox.

Perhaps you don't know this: The elimination of the gold standard wasn't only about having the money backed up by something that could be liquidated. The economy HADN'T outstripped the value of gold, the economy was crashing. People started to withdraw their money's worth in gold, both foreign and domestically, and Roosevelt basically outlawed this and made it illegal to own more than $100 worth of gold. People were compelled to surrender their gold. It was theirs, but he forced them to turn it in.

You don't think that contributed to a lack of trust in government? You don't think that it and packing the Supreme Court were evidence of a closed government?

How does giving the various agencies of our government the authority to prevent future 911's, impose such an infringement on the rights of us law-abiding citizens? I have not once heard a salient answer to that question. Furthermore, a govt so bent on taking the rights away from its citizens is not going to wait for the consent of those citizens.

The balance of power shifted with the Marshall court and Marbury v Madison. Since that time, the checks and balances have been unbalanced.

Furthermore, your question is a great one, but you must remember that there are plenty of people who fully believe that Bush (king George as they call him) intends to violate the 22nd Amendment and serve indefinitely. For those people, they already believe that Bush's government is not waiting for consent to take away rights.

[marden]

After reading this I take back everything I suggested. President Bush should NOT spill the beans because this is what would happen except that here it would be even worse. I'm not saying Bush lied, just that he has held back info from us by necessity.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...-8-PICTURE.XML

Defiant Hungary PM refuses to quit after riots
By Balazs Koranyi

BUDAPEST, Sept 19 (Reuters) - Hungarian Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsany rejected opposition calls to quit on Tuesday after anti-government riots he called the country's "longest and darkest night" since the end of communism.

The riots, in which 150 people were hurt, followed the leak of a tape on Sunday in which Gyurcsany said he and his Socialist party had lied for four years about Hungary's budget in order to win a general election in April.

Thousands of people took to the streets of Budapest late on Monday, occupying and setting fire to the state television building and fighting with riot police in the first such violence since communism collapsed at the end of the 1980s.

Higher taxes and fees for healthcare and university tuition had prompted protests before the release of the tape sparked the violent backlash, which weakened the Hungarian forint and other currencies across central Europe.

The soaring deficit has forced European Union member Hungary to abandon plans to join the euro single currency in 2010, with analysts now saying 2014 was more realistic.

On Tuesday, about 500 anti-government demonstrators had gathered outside parliament by midday. Police presence was light and a Reuters correspondent at the scene said the gathering was peaceful.

A defiant Gyurcsany, facing the biggest challenge in his two-year premiership, told Reuters that resigning was out of the question and he would continue with the tough reforms.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by marden

After reading this I take back everything I suggested. President Bush should NOT spill the beans because this is what would happen except that here it would be even worse. I'm not saying Bush lied, just that he has held back info from us by necessity.

Oh.. hello aberdeenwriter!

V