[Dialogue] Emailing: Treaty Tensions Mount as Iraq Tells the US It Wants All Troops Back in Barracks - CommonDreams.org.htm
Harry Wainwright
h-wainwright at charter.net
Tue Jun 10 14:22:13 EDT 2008
<http://www.commondreams.org/> Common Dreams NewsCenter
<http://www.freepress.net/conference> National Conference for Media Reform
Home <http://www.commondreams.org/> | Newswire
<http://www.commondreams.org/newswire.htm> | Contacting Us
<http://www.commondreams.org/contactingus.htm> | About Us
<http://www.commondreams.org/about.htm> | Donate
<https://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/1493/t/105/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_K
EY=1869> | Sign-Up
<http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/1493/t/24/signUp.jsp?key=1439> |
Archives <http://www.commondreams.org/archives.htm>
Discuss this story
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-content/themes/common-dreams/images/
icon_comment.gif> Discuss this story <> Print This Post
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-content/plugins/print/images/print.g
if> Print This Post
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/06/09/9498/print/>
<http://www.referralblast.com/cs/com/co1.asp>
<http://www.referralblast.com/cs/com/co1.asp> E-Mail This Article
Published on Monday, June 9, 2008 by The Times/UK
<http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article4092919.ece>
Treaty Tensions Mount as Iraq Tells the US It Wants All Troops Back in
Barracks
by Deborah Haynes
BAGHDAD - American troops in Iraq would be confined to their bases and
private security guards subject to local law if Iraq gets its way in
negotiations with the US over the future status of American forces.
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-content/photos/0609_02_1.jpg> 0609
02 1
According to a senior Iraqi official, the negotiations between the two
allies became so fraught recently that President Bush intervened personally
to defuse the situation. On Thursday he telephoned Nouri al-Maliki, the
Iraqi Prime Minister, to assure him that Washington was not seeking to
undermine Iraq's sovereignty and that America would reconsider any
contentious part of the agreement.
The current United Nations mandate for US troops expires at the end of this
year and Washington wants to conclude a bilateral agreement with Baghdad for
the future deployment of US forces. There are just over 150,000 US troops in
Iraq living on scores of bases across the country, from little 30-men
outposts to sprawling camps often built around old Iraqi army barracks.
Construction work over the past five years has turned these bases into small
towns of trailers, hangars and blast walls, equipped with a Pizza Hut,
Starbucks-style coffee shops, cinemas and swimming pools.
Among a litany of sticking-points surrounding the status of forces agreement
(SOFA) between the two countries are Iraqi concerns over how many US bases
will remain in the country and who will be in control of Iraqi air space.
Other flashpoints include whether private security companies working for US
forces will continue to enjoy immunity from Iraqi law and whether US
soldiers will maintain the freedom to travel where they want, arrest people
and conduct raids without first gaining approval from the Iraqi Government.
Ali al-Dabbagh, the Iraqi government spokesman, said that under the new deal
US soldiers should be confined to the larger bases. "We do need the
Americans to leave the cities and the streets," he said. "They have to be
there in the back and . . . in their camps. Whenever we ask them they will
be ready to support and help."
As for private security companies, "they should be subject to Iraqi law", Mr
al-Dabbagh said. The immunity of such firms that work for the military or
the British or American embassies triggered outrage last year after security
guards employed by Blackwater, the largest private security company in Iraq,
were involved in a confrontation that left 17 Iraqi civilians dead.
A status of forces agreement takes on average more than a year to conclude,
but Washington hopes to seal the deal with Iraq by the end of July - a
time-frame that the Iraqi side views with less importance than the content
of the accord.
Sanctioning the continuing presence of US troops is hugely sensitive, with
many Iraqis opposed to such a move. Iran has also voiced concern that the
deal will enable Washington to use Iraq as a launch pad to conduct attacks
in the region. Mr al-Maliki used a weekend trip to Tehran to try to calm the
tensions. "We will not allow Iraq to become a platform for harming the
security of Iran and [other] neighbours," he said.
The Iraqi Prime Minister will need to tread carefully to win the backing of
his parliament for the pact and also ensure that the US side is satisfied.
Britain, which will have to sign its own bilateral accord with Iraq to
legalise the presence of British troops in the country post2008, is watching
the discussions with interest. London will use the US-Iraq arrangements for
its own agreement.
The senior Iraqi official, who asked to remain anonymous, said that the
chief concern is that Iraq's sovereignty is protected.
"President [Bush] has been in touch with the Prime Minister of Iraq and has
said that the issues which are rejected or not approved by the Government of
Iraq will be reconsidered and the future American presence will be for
assisting and coordinating with the Iraqi Government," he told The Times
about the conversation, which took place last Thursday.
A senior US official in Baghdad said that such conferences between the two
leaders were fairly frequent. "[Mr Bush] has assured Prime Minister
al-Maliki consistently we respect Iraq's sovereignty. The content, the
positions we take in the negotiations, will reflect that," the official
said.
US diplomats have been meeting their Iraqi counterparts for the past two
months to draw up the status of forces document as well as a strategic
framework, which sketches out every aspect of the two countries'
relationship from security, politics and the economy to culture, science and
education.
As part of the process, several Iraqi delegates are due to return this week
from a fact-finding trip to some of more than 80 countries, including Japan,
Turkey and Singapore, with which the United States already has a status of
forces accord.
The Iraq-US pact, while based on the same principles of two sovereign
nations, will differ slightly because of the need for US forces to be able
to fight.
"The general premise though is that they operate in a manner which reflects
respect for, acknowledgement of Iraqi sovereignty and ultimately an Iraqi
decision," the US official said.
C 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and
discover new web pages.
*
<http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.org%2Farch
ive%2F2008%2F06%2F09%2F9498%2F&title=Treaty+Tensions+Mount+as+Iraq+Tells+the
+US+It+Wants+All+Troops+Back+in+Barracks> Digg
*
<http://del.icio.us/post?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.org%2Farchive%2F2
008%2F06%2F09%2F9498%2F&title=Treaty+Tensions+Mount+as+Iraq+Tells+the+US+It+
Wants+All+Troops+Back+in+Barracks> del.icio.us
*
<http://www.newsvine.com/_tools/seed&save?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.or
g%2Farchive%2F2008%2F06%2F09%2F9498%2F&h=Treaty+Tensions+Mount+as+Iraq+Tells
+the+US+It+Wants+All+Troops+Back+in+Barracks> NewsVine
*
<http://www.stumbleupon.com/url/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.org%2Farchive%
2F2008%2F06%2F09%2F9498%2F> StumbleUpon
*
<http://myweb2.search.yahoo.com/myresults/bookmarklet?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.com
mondreams.org%2Farchive%2F2008%2F06%2F09%2F9498%2F&=Treaty+Tensions+Mount+as
+Iraq+Tells+the+US+It+Wants+All+Troops+Back+in+Barracks> YahooMyWeb
*
<http://technorati.com/faves?add=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.org%2Farchive
%2F2008%2F06%2F09%2F9498%2F> Technorati
Discuss this story
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-content/themes/common-dreams/images/
icon_comment.gif> Discuss this story <> Print This Post
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-content/plugins/print/images/print.g
if> Print This Post
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/06/09/9498/print/>
<http://www.referralblast.com/cs/com/co1.asp>
<http://www.referralblast.com/cs/com/co1.asp> E-Mail This Article
35 Comments so far
1.
corvo June 9th, 2008 12:30 pm
Again, what's the fuss? al-Maliki will cave on this just like he's
caved on everything else (remember his order for Blackwater to leave the
country?), and I'm sure some phony legalism will be applied to get
parliamentary approval for writing away whatever theoretical sovereignty
Iraq "enjoys." If nothing else, al-Maliki can always dissolve parliament and
call a new round of phony elections.
2.
satr9prodxns June 9th, 2008 12:34 pm
"Iraq Tells the US It Wants All Troops Back in Barracks" as a sign
of the successful occupation of american forces in Iraq.
.which is why we must remain there for the next hundred years.
3.
KEM PATRICK June 9th, 2008 12:47 pm
This Iraq occupation becomes more insane by the day. Does any of
this make a lick of sense? ___ Not to me it doesn't.
("You're troops have to stay in their barracks.") _____ My God, they
can stay in barracks in the United States.
Halliburton, KBR, and other contractors with Pentagon contracts are
pocketing BILLIONS of our tax dollars. POCKETING is the proper word. That is
what it is all about, that and the oil. ___ And the price of oil has gone up
a tad over the past seven years.
This has to stop. Someone in DC must have the brains to see it, to
realize we just cannot offord any more of this insane bullshit.
The first problem is, if anyone wants to be a congress person or a
U.S. senator, they have to sell their soul to big business in order to get
elected. Once they have sold their soul, big business owns them. That's the
problem and that goes all the way to the "buck stops here" seat.
4.
fpal June 9th, 2008 12:52 pm
The U.S. will not leave Iraq no matter what you hear politicians
say. The U.S. military planners see this region as too strategic to leave;
they were always planning to stay that's why they built all those bases.
It amazes me that Americans buy the bull shit about "bring democracy
to the middle east" or "ridding the world of an evil tyrant."
5.
baruch June 9th, 2008 1:01 pm
"American troops in Iraq would be confined to their bases and
private security guards subject to local law if Iraq gets its way in
negotiations with the US over the future status of American forces."
That'd be something to see.
6.
KEM PATRICK June 9th, 2008 1:01 pm
An American soldier attends a tech school for 18 weeks and learns
how to repair communicantion equipment. He becomes an epxert radio
repairman. Two years later, he gets sent to iraq for 15 months. There in
Iraq, for four weeks he teaches a civilian from another country how to
repair radios and that person works for Halliburton and is a lousy, poorly
trained radio repairman and he only cares about his pay check, he don't even
like America or Americans.
Halliburton recieves millions to repair radios and the soldier we
trained is now performing guard duty at his barrackes in Iraq and "enjoying"
the comforts of home and now he hates the Army.
And this crazy insanity goes on, it's not a secret, that is exactly
what is taking place as we sit here typing stupid commments and no one who
could stop it does anything about it. AHHHHhhhhhhhh. SHIT, SHIT!!!!! It's
gotta stop.
7.
Surrender June 9th, 2008 1:05 pm
KEM PATRICK: "This Iraq occupation becomes more insane by the day.
Does any of this make a lick of sense? ___ Not to me it doesn't."
I'm thinkin', Kem, that's because you ain't an oil exec or a
politico with ties to same.
8.
KEM PATRICK June 9th, 2008 1:27 pm
Yeah, I'm not ~Surrender~ and that's what I noted in paragraph
three. It's Halliburton, KBR, etc, and oil. Oh yeah, Cheney has stock in
Halliburton, I just remembered.
9.
annabelle June 9th, 2008 1:40 pm
I would like to know if the kind of Democracy we are shoving on
other countries is the kind of democracy that our forefathers envisioned or
the kind of democracy we have under this administration? Because if it is
the kind of democracy the neocons have initiated it is quite a different one
than the one we all studied in school. If desecrating a country, provoking
civil wars, killing and mainimg thousands, leaving untold numbers refugees,
setting up a kangaroo government, building many bases as well as the largest
embassy in the world, failing to repair or rebuild much of the damage to
their infrastructure, and still hold out for victory under the guise of
democracy what is left for us to accomplish? Oh, yeah, the oil, how could I
forget the oil?
10.
TheLorax June 9th, 2008 3:08 pm
If we really want the Iraqi people to take care of themselves and
self-govern, we need to leave. Why is that a complicated formula? The truth
is that we want Iraq to self-govern as long as it's OUR way. They can freely
elect any leader they want and select any form of government we choose.
11.
overkill June 9th, 2008 3:45 pm
.they can stay in barracks in the United States? After what they
have done they should be confined somewhere and never allowed to 'Rove' at
large.
12.
metanoia June 9th, 2008 3:53 pm
annabelle-
The thing is, the democracy that they teach about in American
schools has never existed in this country. The Federal Government of the
United States has been perfecting genocide in the name of democracy since
the country was founded. It started with the indigenous people of this
country (aka Native Americans) and has continued unabated here and abroad
ever since. If you insert any number of countries into this sentence, you
will get the Federal Govt's form of democracy:
Bringing democracy to ________ by "desecrating a country, killing
and maiming thousands, leaving untold numbers refugees, building military
bases, failing to repair or rebuild much of the damage to their
infrastructure, all under the guise of democracy."
You accurately described the glaring hypocrisy, but the only mistake
is making a distinction between Bush's form of democracy and the founding
father's. There are one in the same in rhetoric and in action, it just took
a little while for N. America's natives to be subdued.so that the U.S. could
move on to the rest of the world.
13.
KEM PATRICK June 9th, 2008 4:50 pm
We were fishing from a dock at a lake three weeks ago. Another
family came to fish and the father could not get his fishing reel to work
and he started to cry before he went half beserk and finally just stood
there moaning with his head down on the railing for several minutes.
He was with his wife and a young child. ___ He was a soldier, home
on leave from Iraq, second tour of Iraqi duty. I fixed his reel and we
talked about Iraq for a few minutes and then they all left the area. A tough
lookin young guy, lots of tatoos, shaved head and stockily built.
Hope he never has a jammed gun. ____PTSD???? Whatever, it was very
strange and it left us with bad feelings.
14.
blessthebeasts June 9th, 2008 4:50 pm
metanoia-good observation.
I just received a letter from my congressman, Jeff Flake (yes that's really
his name). He thanked me for contacting him, but said "Victory in Iraq will
only be achieved if our commanders on the ground are given the tools
necessary to succeed." Obviously, they're planning to drag this out over at
least 100 years, until we have total control and submission in Iraq.
Who cares what the Iraqis want?
15.
WmC June 9th, 2008 5:28 pm
Someone should warn the Iraqis of Junior's penchant for signing
statements. Bush probably doesn't care what the final treaty says. He'll
simply add a signing statement that invalidates any of the provisions he
does not favor.
16.
sakhan June 9th, 2008 5:36 pm
Here's what happened - lest we forget:
A United States Blitz on Iraqis
followed by a successful military invasion
followed by an occupation
followed by a Reign of Terror.
17.
writer2 June 9th, 2008 5:58 pm
"became so fraught recently that President Bush intervened
personally to defuse the situation. On Thursday he telephoned Nouri
al-Maliki, the Iraqi Prime Minister, to assure him that Washington was not
seeking to undermine Iraq's sovereignty and that America would reconsider
any contentious part of the agreement."
yes, what the liar in chief says must be very reassuring to iraqis
18.
ruiz562h June 9th, 2008 6:45 pm
"[Mr Bush] has assured Prime Minister al-Maliki consistently we
respect Iraq's sovereignty."
Isn't this a dilly. Since when does anybody in the world believe
that Bush tells the truth?
Does anyone think al-Maliki believes Bush's assurances?
19.
Lucitanian June 9th, 2008 7:01 pm
What many Americans don't seem to count on is the other way to end
US occupation of Iraq; by the Iraqis sending many more Americans home in
parts and in boxes.
Despite the delusions of Washington, it is obvious that the US
cannot occupy and maintain bases in a country where the vast majority of the
population consider them as a barbarous enemy invader, irrespective of any
agreements made with a weak and divided puppet government which can hardly
be called representative or even is in control of the country, under
occupation.
So far the Iraqis have yet to unite to expel the invader, sooner or
later they will. They have expelled foreigners many times since the Mongol
hordes, and when they do, many American families will have serious cause to
morn.
20.
jamadison4 June 9th, 2008 8:38 pm
.
The United States illegally invaded Iraq. Now at the end of the U.N.
Mandate, the U.S. wants a legitimate Treaty to continue its domination of
the Middle East.
The NeoCons have had this secret agenda for an American Empire thru
military expansion. Israel has manuvered the U.S. into the Middle East.
Bush and his 2nd rate generals have been tricked into a bloody trap;
and don't have a clue to turning this military disaster around.....
.
21.
JohnFox1 June 9th, 2008 8:54 pm
This 'agreement' is obviously a TREATY, and as such needs the
Senate's approval. Economy, culture, economics, agriculture, education, etc
are not about status of forces, but about what the country is to be -
coditions that are theirs to decide, not a treaty with the U.S. Remember the
100 laws that Paul Bremer left with the Iraqis when he was rotated out -
even concerning that the Iraqis could not save their own farm seed - had to
buy if from an American conglomerate each year and be totally dependent even
in food on the U.S. Now this is NOT what I(or nearly anyone elso) would call
a sovereign nation by any stretch.
The U.S. should get out, "leave no soldier behind", and let the Iraqis do
their own thing. We take their raw materials and sell them finished goods at
great cost to them. That is how we try too make all countries dependent on
us, and we become the EMPIRE, and the poor people become poorer and never
can take care of their own needs. Wbat a country we are!
22.
papercut June 9th, 2008 9:15 pm
you amerikans know something is happening but you don't know what it
is! here is what happened; you gave up your rights and commonwealth(money)
because you are childish and ignorant and think your vote makes a
difference.
it is too late now to do anything about it. you wont go yourself and arrest
the bush/cheney gang or pelosi or any of them and they are real criminals.
you live in fear because you think if you speak out you will be punished and
like children you let your fear guide your life(pathetic cowards). you
amerikans are a real disapointment to humanity(and to yourselves.)
the really sad part is that you wont even fight for the future of your own
children. what a pathetic bunch you are. and please don't ask me where i am
from.
23.
corvo June 9th, 2008 9:18 pm
JohnFox1: A treaty? really? How sweet.
How many votes do you think a treaty would get like that in the
Senate? 65? 70? 75?
24.
WTF June 9th, 2008 9:31 pm
The Iraqis have read Scott McClellan's memoir; they know who they
are dealing with. I would not be surprised if most Iraqis consider al-Maliki
to be the Supreme Boot Licker.
25.
Mike Corbeil June 9th, 2008 10:07 pm
"metanoia June 9th, 2008 3:53 pm
annabelle-
The thing is, the democracy that they teach about in American
schools has never existed in this country."
SURE IT DID; on paper. And that of course is to say, "nothing more
real" and, therefore, "nothing more significant". Well, toilet paper is not
entirely insignificant; and even Bush Jr agrees on that. He said so about
the U.S. Constitution, f.e., that it's "just a piece of paper", nothing
significant for the . anyone, in his view.
Otherwise, I agree with both of your posts and was wondering how
annabelle was giving a real description of the real U.S. history as metanoia
explained.
It definitely applies and very much in Canada today. There are
enough other related websites, but the following two I've used the most.
www.hiddenFromHistory.org
www.MohawkNationNews.com
26.
Mike Corbeil June 9th, 2008 11:05 pm
JohnFox1 ,
Good post; I fully agree with you, only it's apparently idealism,
also. The reason for saying that are, f.e., that the Senate authorizes major
funding for continuing the war; the Senate's approval for treaties is the
reason why the Bush-Cheney cabal refuses to make this "agreement" a treaty;
and remember Bush's words about the U.S. Constitution, that it, and having
said this with flagrant disrespect, despotism, and so on, that it is "just a
piece of paper", clearly saying it had no significance for him. That's how
they've been treating the Constitution over all of these years, including
with respect to the hijacking of the presidency in 2000. And neither the
Congress nor the Senate nor the Justice Dept, State Dept, FBI, and so on
have done anything significant about this, so far.
So I agree that you're right, only we sadly are in a situation
making your correct assessment and call one of ideal. And that of course
means we've all been in Big Trouble over all of these years.
Oh, shit, and how many treaties has the U.S. broken and with serious
dishonourability over U.S. history? MANY. The U.S. also disregards the NPT,
minimally with respect to the U.S. criminally protecting its selected allies
from being required to ratify the NPT; although also disrespecting it in
terms of being a direct breaker of the NPT. Or did the U.S. not ratify it?
Let's hope that they really are out of office next January; instead
of another false-flag incident being committed and to install martial law,
etc. Everything's already in place for doing that, only needing to commit a
false-flag . [again].
Nauseating!
27.
KEM PATRICK June 9th, 2008 11:15 pm
Where you from ~Papercut~?
28.
middlec June 10th, 2008 12:03 am
Impeach.
29.
Mike Corbeil June 10th, 2008 1:06 am
Another reality that can be referred to for this is how and why
Economic Hit Men are used and . like according to what John Perkins, author
of 'Confessions of an Economic Hit Man', exposed about this. Paul Bremmer,
his "work" in Iraq, can be thought of very much in this respect; varying in
some ways from what John Perkins described, but still being about 'EH'. We
can add this present treaty, and the oil laws the Bush-Cheney cabal have
been wanting to have established in Iraq and over the past (I think) two
years or so, and which I believe the Iraqi govt hasn't yet agreed on enough
to establish these additional and stronger oil-racket laws.
From what I recall having read about the U.S. seeing to Saddam
Hussein being made the president of Iraq to begin with had much, if not
entirely, to do with grabbing Iraq's oil; only Saddam, lacking critical
thinking or realisation about the former president having been very good,
well, dummy Saddam went for the presidency grab, but excellently didn't
de-nationalise what the prior president had nationalised, so the U.S. elites
ended up not getting what their whole purpose was to achieve. Saddam made
sure to not "play along" for more than grabbing the presidency, which should
have been left to the president dummy Saddam partook in outing.
The U.S. elites have been after Iraq's resources for a LONG TIME,
though not for as long as Britain's also been after these. I think these are
or can surely be called 'Economic Hit' operations, "trick-or-treats" or
"tricks-and-rotten-treats"; and while not only this, it still and very much
is, obviously too. If Iraq didn't have these highly profitable resources,
then the U.S. "involvement" with Iraq would have been very little; instead
of feverishly strong, or strongly feverish, and unrelenting.
A lot of the people who say that this war is not for Big Oil,
meaning (sometimes explicitly stated, but not always) that it's not U.S. Big
Oil that wanted this war and that the industry would've preferred that the
war not be launched; well, maybe these people are right about this, in this
specific sense. But like I said, I don't recall Big Oil reps opposing the
launching of the war and the BO industry has plenty of influence with the
Congress and the Senate; but if these other people are right, then it
doesn't mean that Iraq's oil resources aren't among the key or principal
reasons for launching this war, for it surely was in serious part for Big
Oil service cies like Halliburton, f.e.
It's all geopolitical like Michel Chossudovsky of
www.globalresearch.ca wrote during the run-up politics, but it's more, for
politics much is about or for RACKETEERING in the imperialist, . West.
Racketeers define and employ or apply their politics, but they're not the
purpose, only being means and reins. It's all about geopolitics for geo- or
global-racket "economics", and racketeering often utilizes very serious and
criminal violence, but also non-violent "politics".
And using disguises is another "trick" that's employed; seeing this
very clearly with the totally bogus and criminal U.S. drug war, among many
other examples. The U.S. State Dept seems to be mostly about disguisement.
"Humanitarian" agencies and some NGOs of govts are sometimes employed for
disguises and bs or fiendish propaganda, while some "humanitarian"
organisations often contribute, but unwittingly and through negligence based
on ignorance and/or inadequate [thinking]. The UNSC is a regular contributor
to all of this evil; its regularly wrongly ineffectiveness, its
authorisations of matters that are actually criminal, such as criminal
sanctions against Iraq, 1991-2003, and Cuba, f.e., its authorisations of
what critically are criminal vetoes placed against UNSC resolutions to
demand that Israel cease its extreme and hellish criminality, the Israeli
govt and military, that is, being [some] of the too many real examples of
the UN's or UNSC's "generous" contributions.
Some of the actors are witting while others are not, and some are
not, but inexcusably so (UNSC allowing blatantly and obviously criminal
vetoes of the U.S. being an example, again). Either way, whichever of these
cases applies, these many actors on the stage of planet Earth still
contribute to the overall and globally-scoped schemes, scams, . RACKET.
'Economic Hit', 'racket', . operations through geo-politics, and
there's really no other way that such huge, vast, . criminality can happen;
except through the use of criminal states.
This sort of shit has long history. It is found in MUCH of all of
U.S. history and much of all of the history of all of the Americas for
around 500 years so far. It is also found in not the History Channel
docu-drama propaganda version of the story of Joan of Arc, but in what's
learned of her real purpose, far more realistic and surely true story, we
can learn about from the historical documentation from courts of that time,
among possibly other historical documentation from that time; available to
learn about online, for anyone capable of simple Web searches.
Those are only a few examples, but with respect to what Joan's real
purpose was for, it is seriously similar to the purporse of the real Iraqi
Resistance today; the continuing struggling of the indigenous peoples all
over Earth; and . MORE.
Natural resources were always an involved motive throughout these
500 or more years of the histories of all of the Americas; or MUCH of all of
them. LAND is a natural resource, and if that was the first of these to be a
motive, others became quickly added motives.
Sometimes power, kingdom, empire is the sole motive, but only of
some of the leading people interested in supporting this and for their gain,
not for the purpose of pleasing sick queens or kings who might only be
seeking to expand the reign of his or her permitted power. Such purpose
won't remain the leading, main one for long, for the 'EH' people have
greater ability to see to their motives. They're always corrupting states or
state leaderships.
I realise this and didn't even become a historian. Preferring maths
and physical sciences, as well as logic in terms of philosophy, morality,
law, socio-psychological understanding, and commonsense, I realise that we
don't need to be historians; but also realise that knowing some key parts of
history(ies) is also and very helpful. I like history, among many other
topic areas, but not to memorize details; instead, only to [understand], so
in the form of logic and social understanding and awareness.
I don't give a turd about what the precise date of SCMUCK jack-ass
Chris. Columbus came to the Americas; I don't care if it was 1492, 1500,
1460. Knowing what he did and what it was about, and evolved, is what I want
to know; damn schmuck the shit was. Some jack-ass faggot (not meaning
homo-sexual, who are people I don't even ever think of as 'faggot', except
for those who are really 'faggot' in their ways, like too many hetero-sexual
jack-asses are, and which is about the best that I can give for my
definition of 'faggot'); well, that jack-ass faggotly chose to work for some
sick queen with serious ego problems, some pointy- or pin-headed queen boss.
Damn brown-noser and ego-tripper that he was.
That's what I want to know when it comes to history of . the damn
kind; while I look at good history in terms of what it offers and lightens
my heart with. The latter is good, healthy, helping to keep me from losing
all hope, and I like to maintain to some of that. It too often . disappears
though, but it eventually returns. When the Angels of Hope come knocking at
my door, then I always want to be ready to promptly reply, open the door,
and welcome this . "visitation": "Come on in, feel at home here, and stick
around for as long as you like; you Angels of Hope. To you, this door shall
always open!".
:)
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.g
if>
But then the stage lights dim again, for those Angels can't stick
around all of the time; having other people who also need some refreshening
hope to visit.
May they visit us all, all peoples, often enough to keep us alive
and doing what each of us can, and while also helping us to be able to
endure our various limitations.
They also help with regards to understanding a (simple, but) special
parable of Jesus of Nazareth and which is when he asked apostles when they
could know or realise that they're exercising real [discernment], and the
first two were mistaken, but understandably, while the third realised this,
didn't also want to be told that he was mistaken and therefore figured,
"Heh, Jesus, you are the teacher and know the answer, so why don't you just
tell us" (a little paraphrased, but retaining the essence of the response
question). Then Jesus said that you know you excercise real discernment when
you SEE the presence of God in your neighbour. There wasno religious
qualification with respect to the neighbour, just being 'universal' in
scope, holistic, .; like we find with many true indigenous peoples, but also
some of the rest of us.
The imperialist, . church subtracted, struck out that parable LONG
ago, and understandably so; for it became imperialist and so on as of
marriage with Rome under "emperor" Constantine, who wanted only the
Christian religion to be permitted in the empire and of course for greater
assurance of being able to gain more CONTROL over the peoples within this
vast empire's reign. But sane people can go without knowing about the
parable all while sanely recognising that [all] peoples, as well as all
LIFE, need to be [respected] and should be [loved]; as, if a true God really
exists, He loves [all] of humanity, only being against Evil.
That latter sanity about human rights and dignity of [everyone],
regardless of whether we know of that parable of Jesus or not, is like an
example of a [loving] and [just] God's presence in us all. But I also see
His presence in wildlife, fauna, and flora, the stars, "heavens", and so on;
kind of being an abstract sort of thinker and "artist", say.
Is that a little poetry, or like, and at all? Not quite, heh. Oh
well, I'll treat it minimally as, "I'm a poet and you just don't know it; ha
ha". :)
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.g
if>
May the "Angels of Hope" keep us all . going. They're related to the
"Angels of Peace-and-Justice", "Respect of the Dignity of all . LIFE", .,
and so on.
I wonder if this could help to wake up the Western "Establishment"
elites at all. What about church elites? Neither, you say? Oh . crappola;
I'm feeling nausea coming on again, thanks (please excuse me while I go to
the toilet; I have a little vomiting to do, understand).
30.
puck twain June 10th, 2008 1:32 am
middlec - well said.
31.
Mike Corbeil June 10th, 2008 1:52 am
Heh, just think of me as "Little "chief" LONG wind". Oops.
32.
Mike Corbeil June 10th, 2008 2:25 am
"puck twain June 10th, 2008 1:32 am
middlec - well said."
Really? I wondered.
So, I checked what middlec said, given nothing intelligent,
lamplighting, . was stated by so-called puck twain. And what did I find? A
sole [simpleton] word, 'impeach'.
I disagree with that, but not as most people would interpret without
knowing more in terms of the reason. MUCH MORE than that is needed, but
instead of explaining, I'll just make or state a reference people can easily
find with a simple Web search.
Scott Ritter wrote an article of qualitative kind on this very topic
and it was posted at ICH, InternationalClearingHouse.info , back in (I
believe) June of either 2006 or else 2007, and while he might be possibly
mistaken about some things in that article, though I can't say that he is or
was at all, I agree with the essence of what he overall said.
The U.S. requires FAR MORE than your simpleton impeachment!
Impeachment is deserved, but to solely do that is only going to be inviting
of MORE HELL. MUCH MORE needs to be done.
It's more than long past due time to work on being more than
simpleton idiots who pretend to be adults. Iow, GROW UP.
People continuing to REFUSE to do that "play right into the hands"
of the elites of the Western "Establishment"! So it's just more pretentious
BS!
33.
jerbo June 10th, 2008 8:41 am
I still cannot understand why the Iraqi parliament has a say so
about this treaty and the U.S. Congress does not. It's our money isn't it?
>From this article it seems though that the Iraqis do not want us there, so
why are we staying in an ungrateful country? Why are we spending even
another billion in Iraq, when they have over 50 billion in the bank?
34.
Shiva June 10th, 2008 11:49 am
"According to a senior Iraqi official, the negotiations between the
two allies became so fraught recently that President Bush intervened
personally to defuse the situation. On Thursday he telephoned Nouri
al-Maliki, the Iraqi Prime Minister, to assure him that Washington was not
seeking to undermine Iraq's sovereignty and that America would reconsider
any contentious part of the agreement."
But Bush has never been known for being able to tell the truth about
anything! - and the rest of the planet has it figured out
35.
pontificatinpapa June 10th, 2008 12:10 pm
I got distracted with other things yesterday and did not have
occasion to read much less comment on any Common Dreams articles.
Let me first say that I am pleased to see Kem Patrick back on the
scene. Honestly missed your comments over the past several days. We usually
find interest in much the same articles and failing to see any contributions
on your behalf, I was honestly starting to become quite concerned; health
problems maybe?
In scrolling down through the comments that have preceded me both
yesterday and early this morning, I would have to say that collectively they
represent a fine representation of how this situation should be looked upon.
To borrow a phrase from an old salesman friend, who years ago
traveled the bible belt (picture Ryan O'Neal's Moses Pray in "Paper Moon").
It really tells you where the bear shit in the buckwheat.
I guess it has now been two weeks since the startling revelations by
Scott McClellan in his new book, followed last week by that committee headed
by Jay Rockefeller saying pretty much the same as to Bush's underhanded
manner in convincing us that the attack on Iraq was justified.
But if you've been reading here long enough to catch the preamble to
Vincent Bugliosi's book on the subject, nothing brought to the surface in
the last two weeks is actually that startling, at best a new spin on things.
I myself have been lax in posting my "old faithful' which I have
been doing so at least weekly, so it is once again time to remind you all;
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1028-01.html
Read it and weep.
Join the discussion:
You must be
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-login.php?redirect_to=http://www.com
mondreams.org/archive/2008/06/09/9498/> logged in to post a comment. If you
haven't registered yet, click
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-register.php> here to register.
(It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not
always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making
such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of
environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and
social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any
such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this
site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and educational
purposes. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use
copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond
'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Common Dreams NewsCenter <http://www.commondreams.org/>
A non-profit news service providing breaking news & views for the
progressive community.
Home <http://www.commondreams.org/> | Newswire
<http://www.commondreams.org/newswire.htm> | Contacting Us
<http://www.commondreams.org/contactingus.htm> | About Us
<http://www.commondreams.org/about.htm> | Donate
<https://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/1493/t/105/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_K
EY=1869> | Sign-Up
<http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/1493/t/24/signUp.jsp?key=1439> |
Archives <http://www.commondreams.org/archives.htm>
C Copyrighted 1997-2008 <http://www.commondreams.org/>
www.commondreams.org
Podcast Powered by <http://www.mightyseek.com/podpress/> podPress (v8.2)
<http://www.quantcast.com/p-9bNnJVyoTrfhk> Quantcast
_____
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080610/ab9680fe/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 7711 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080610/ab9680fe/attachment-0007.gif
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 5611 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080610/ab9680fe/attachment-0008.gif
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 173 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080610/ab9680fe/attachment-0009.gif
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 1039 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080610/ab9680fe/attachment-0010.gif
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 352 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080610/ab9680fe/attachment-0011.gif
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 21114 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080610/ab9680fe/attachment-0001.jpe
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 276 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080610/ab9680fe/attachment-0006.png
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 160 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080610/ab9680fe/attachment-0007.png
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 219 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080610/ab9680fe/attachment-0008.png
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 998 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080610/ab9680fe/attachment-0009.png
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 671 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080610/ab9680fe/attachment-0010.png
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 478 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080610/ab9680fe/attachment-0011.png
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 174 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080610/ab9680fe/attachment-0012.gif
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 35 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080610/ab9680fe/attachment-0013.gif
More information about the Dialogue
mailing list