Let's stop for just a moment and define intelligence. Intelligence by definition that has made its way to the media is no longer intelligence. Communication about our intelligence can be strategic in nature or it can be just simply stuff that is declassified.

Since it has become increasingly difficult to trust the MSM about this and other stories (and how many times has their reporting ended up becoming something quite distant from what it ultimately was?), I have to think this story is somewhat indicative of the same.

Regardless, the real intelligence about what is going on with OBL is not known by anyone that can honestly speak from a voice of authority or fact on this or any other publicly viewed site. Great military leaders never reveal their strategy so the fact that we all know this probably means that this OBL "intelligence" is really nothing of significant substance and has as so easily predicted, become an opportunity for the MSM to twist it into something that is used against this administration.

Democrats can never claim the high ground when it comes fighting terror or wanting to catch bin Laden.

well matt, apparently, neither can bush. latest zogby poll shows his approval rating at a dismal 34 percent. so much for that terrorist bounce.

Released: August 16, 2006 Zogby: Bush Job Approval—34%

Rating down despite foiled terror plot and Lebanon cease fire; Democrats hold generic Congressional lead

President Bush’s job approval rating dipped two points in the last three weeks, despite the foiling of an airline terror plot and the adoption of a cease–fire deal between Israel and Hezbollah forces in Lebanon, a new Zogby International telephone poll shows.

The survey was conducted Aug. 11–15, 2006, included 1,018 respondents, and carries a margin of error of +/– 3.1 percentage points.

Give me a break. My husband recently returned from Afganistan where he can assure you, the search for Bin Laden is alive and ongoing. And I can gaurentee there are things going on that the MSM and the civilian world will NEVER know.

So any moron who believs that our Govt just doesnt care and has stopped searching is an idiot.

$10 bucks says he's dead.

Matt,

Not to change the subject but, I seen on Hannity and Colmes last night where Hillary Clinton opposed the wire taps!

I wonder what she was thinking?

I know what I think, I think they should have rejected her for senate!!

Jeremiah

Matt, on this forum I post on, we call it the "Queen Bee Theory."

To the Dems, the QBT means that you kill the queen, and the hive is no more. IE, kill OBL, or capture him and read him his Miranda Rights (which is what the Libs would want), and world wide terrorism is gone, bring the troops home, game, set match.

To the Conservatives, the QBT represents the knowledge that if you kill the queen, you might kill that hive, but, another queen might spring up and/or you will have to kill the queens in the other hives, as well as the soldiers.

Either way, the libs do not care whether Osama is caught/killed or not. Half of them think that Bush was behind 9/11, the other half just want to use OBL as a political tool.

Oh, BTW, that lib citing another poll is hilarious. What's next, exit polls?

"The war on terror is bigger than bin Laden."-Matt

Far bigger, and has deep historical roots, which include Hitler and Nazism.

*Mark, Matt, you've got to see this video from YouTube!*

"Hitler, the Mufti of Jerusalem, and Islamic Fascism"

LGF-"I’ve read about the alliance between Adolf Hitler and Muslim Arab leaders in World War II, and seen still photographs, but this is the first time I’ve seen actual video of Hitler meeting with the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Muhammed Amin al-Husseini—Yasser Arafat’s alleged uncle. From a German TV documentary, with English subtitles."
*********

Plus, FOXNews Video: (via LGF)-"Zombie’s pictures of thecollaboration between radical left and radical Islam in San Franciscomade it onto Brit Hume’s show yesterday"

"The war on terror is bigger than bin Laden."

What is the "war on terror" anyway? If terror is a synonym for fear, then the USA is obviously losing. We got sucker-punched on 9/11/01 and have been scared shitless ever since. How else can you explain our willingness to put up with letting the government read our mail and monitor our calls with no accountability whatsoever?

How about it, America? No more fear! The "war on terror" can't be a justification for anything and everything. Let's protect ourselves, but let's stop handing a win to those bastards. Let's get our courage back and get rid of the fearmongers.

What fearmongers? If the shoe fits......

So any moron who believs that our Govt just doesnt care and has stopped searching is an idiot.

Sort of like the moron who posted the latest poll, AFWIFE. You're absolutely correct; these morons who never served in the military, especially military intel, don't have a clue. I do, since I have. Don't waste your time with these hate-Bush, hate-America retards; it's all about power with them. They didn't care when we got Al Zarqawi, and they don't care about Bin Laden.

I know I'm not voting for Bush in '08; his poll numbers suck. War

My husband recently returned from Afganistan where he can assure you, the search for Bin Laden is alive and ongoing.

Well, considering bin Laden is in Pakistan, we know why we haven't caught him. We are not allowed in Pakistan and their government will never hand him over to us. I do wonder why we can't chase the chain of command back to him from all those "greatest hit" videos he's always releasing to al-Jazeera.

“…why did he repeatedly turn down offers to have bin Laden handed to him on a silver platter?”

Repeatedly? Can you prove one case where OBL was offered to the US, or are you referring to the Sudan case where there was never an official offer?

[deleted, offensive]

[deleted, offensive ]

maf53, I noticed that you did not refute.

Teach, maf will never refute, he will just try and deflect or make fun of a statement.

blohard, get real or better yet, take your offensive talk and go away. You add nothing to the discussion.

AFWIFE: "So any moron who believs that our Govt just doesnt care and has stopped searching is an idiot."

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." (G.W. Bush, 3/13/02)

"I am truly not that concerned about him [bin Laden]." (G.W. Bush, 3/13/02)

So I guess in order to avoid applying the "idiot" label to Bush, you'd have to stress the AND condition. In other words, although he made it clear on at least two occasions that he didn't care where OBL was, he never said he stopped looking for him. I guess in order to be an idiot you have to do both. I guess.

I guess in order to be an idiot you have to do both. I guess.

No, in order to be an idiot you have to totally misunderstand the context in which some statements are made...

Five years after 9/11, and LLL's are still asking the question-

What is the "war on terror" anyway? Posted by: larryk

Democrats should NEVER EVER be in control of the government. Democrats can't fight and win a war they can't understand. Unbelievable.

No Freedom, what is unbelievable is that they cannot understand what the War on Terror is. The idea of a people or religion that wants to destroy our way of life seems to be beyond them.

Democrats should NEVER EVER be allowed to control government!!!!!!!!

ABSOLUTELY, FREEDOM1.

THEY ARE EVIL!!

And to allow them back to power would be a mistake! It is too much of a risk!!

Communism would spread like the plague!

Please do not allow it to happen!!

Jeremiah

Democrats are wasting no effort to bring about another fiasco as they did for Viet Nam. Should they succeed in forcing us to flee Iraq, I would bet dollars to donuts that it wouldn't be long until they passed another Case-Church Amendment banning any help to Iraq should they fall short of bringing in Democracy, just as was doen in 1973 and when we were most needed, President Ford's hands were tied to help Viet Nam. All any of us could do was sit and watch as a mockery was made of the service of 2.5 million men and the sacrifices of 58,000 others.

If anyone ever wonders why America is no longer respected around the world, all they need do is look to Korea, where nothing has eve been settled, then to the bay of Pigs, Viet Nam, Lebanon, First Gulf War when they iraqis were encouraged to stand against Saddam and they faced him alone, no help from America. Look too at Somalia where a humanitarian effort was turned into a military action, under the UN and when our guys were slaughtered and drug through the streets, we tucked tail and ran, again.

It's no wonder were are looked upon as a Paper Tiger when such a long reputation of abandoning allies as fast as we do.

This is the legacy the Democrats with to continue, belieivng they are buying friends overseas. They have made us a laughing stock instead.

larryk says:

"We got sucker-punched on 9/11/01 and have been scared shitless ever since."

I have no doubt your scared shitless little man. Your side is out of power and republicans are running the show. However the rest of us, who arent cowards, are pissed and ready to fight.

"How else can you explain our willingness to put up with letting the government read our mail and monitor our calls with no accountability whatsoever?"

Let me give you a hint sparky...dont flatter yourself. They dont give a damn about your pathetic mail, calls or life.

"What fearmongers? If the shoe fits"

Were scared shitless, their reading our mail and listening to our calls according to you and we are the fearmongers...are you really that disconnected from reality.

Notwithstanding the mind boggleing ignorance that believes that its even possible to listen to all the calls and read all the mails why would "they" want to do it. What possible purpose would it serve.

Adjust your tinfoil hat I'll bet its too tight.

Can anyone honestly remember in their lifetime any one time that the media polls consistently showed a Republican win? No -- because it never happens. Then come November, the Republicans win, the liberals cry foul, and the new polls begin.

From what I know of the Senate, the only seat I truly believe will be lost is in PA -- and even that one will be pretty close. Everything else is the liberals' dreams. Every election year it is the same thing: the liberals fantasize, the conservatives fall apart and the medial polls go crazy.

I am frankly tired of it -- so I am cutting out until election day.

i found the following on a forum...im looking for the exact source of the transcript, but here is the transcript where the above quotes were TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT....i will keep searching for a link, unless someone else can come up with it....

Q Mr. President, in your speeches now you rarely talk or mention Osama bin Laden. Why is that? Also, can you tell the American people if you have any more information, if you know if he is dead or alive? Final part--deep in your heart, don't you truly believe that until you find out if he is dead or alive, you won't really eliminate the threat of--

THE PRESIDENT: Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he's alive at all. Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not; we haven't heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person i--really indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission.

Terror is bigger than one person. And he's just--he's a person who's now been marginalized. His network, his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match. He is--as I mentioned in my speech, I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death and he, himself, tries to hide--if, in fact, he's hiding at all.

So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you. I'm more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well-supplied; that the strategy is clear; that the coalition is strong; that when we find enemy bunched up like we did in Shahikot Mountains, that the military has all the support it needs to go in and do the job, which they did.

And there will be other battles in Afghanistan. There's going to be other struggles like Shahikot, and I'm just as confident about the outcome of those future battles as I was about Shahikot, where our soldiers are performing brilliantly. We're tough, we're strong, they're well-equipped. We have a good strategy. We are showing the world we know how to fight a guerrilla war with conventional means.

Q But don't you believe that the threat that bin Laden posed won't truly be eliminated until he is found either dead or alive?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is. I--I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him, when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.

But once we set out the policy and started executing the plan, he became--we shoved him out more and more on the margins. He has no place to train his al Qaeda killers anymore. And if we--excuse me for a minute--and if we find a training camp, we'll take care of it. Either we will or our friends will. That's one of the things--part of the new phase that's becoming apparent to the American people is that we're working closely with other governments to deny sanctuary, or training, or a place to hide, or a place to raise money. And we've got more work to do. See, that's the thing the American people have got to understand, that we've only been at this six months. This is going to be a long struggle. I keep saying that; I don't know whether you all believe me or not. But time will show you that it's going to take a long time to achieve this objective. And I can assure you, I am not going to blink. And I'm not going to get tired. Because I know what is at stake. And history has called us to action, and I am going to seize this moment for the good of the world, for peace in the world and for freedom.

AFWife, the entire transcript may be found at Whitehouse.gov

It's about half down the page.

Thanks AFWIFE, It's so much nicer to hear when it's in context. What say you Ricorun, your usually a reasonable fella.

I found the transcript of the news conference here at Whitehouse.gov

The following 2 quotes say it all. Bin laden will NEVER be caught so long as its Bush looking for him as he is much more valuable to the administration loose and creating fear then rotting in a prison cell.

Funny how Canada, Britain, as well as Pakistan and many other countries, yet the most powerful nation on the earth, under the leadership of a man supposedly "tough" on terror cannot catch but 1 terrorist such as Bin Laden or even the Anthrax killer.

Pretty pathetic

“So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him” … “And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run.”

— George W.Bush, responding to a reporter who asked why the President rarely spoke or mentioned Osama Bin Laden, in a press conference March 13, 2002, only 6 months after the 9/11 terrorist attack.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The goal has never been to get bin Laden"

— General Richard Myers, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, on 6 April 2002.

[deleted, banned]

"what is unbelievable is that they cannot understand what the War on Terror is. The idea of a people or religion that wants to destroy our way of life seems to be beyond them." (kjstrouble)

"I have no doubt your (sic) scared shitless little man. Your side is out of power and republicans are running the show. However the rest of us, who arent cowards, are pissed and ready to fight." (ZootAllure)

This is is is what I'm talking about. The terrorists are winning. They have created lasting terror in America, and these two quotes are good examples. It's true that somebody wants to destroy us, assuming that we can agree on who "they" are. But "they" can't possibly destroy us. Only we can do that, and the most efficient way to destroy America is to betray what America stands for. And aren't we making good progress?

Zoot, I can tell that you're pissed. You make that very clear. Fear usually leads to anger.

ahh but larryk - it is KEEFER who says the dems just don't care about bin laden. it's our fault he's still out is some cave directing his minions and scaring up the media with his betamax sermons...

it's the dems who got into bush's thick little head, who put voices in his ear:
"go to iraq..., go to iraq..., you won't find bin laden in afganistan...., war is good for the polls!"

bearman, I remember the quotes I indicated as being embedded in a news conference, but I couldn't find the transcript. I do remember listening to it, though.

The news conference was, as you recall, soon after it became apparent that bin Laden had escaped from Tora Bora, which many were saying was at least partly a result of the decision to pull many of the most elite US fighting forces from the area in preparation for the Iraq invasion, and to rely too heavily on Afghan warlords. And it wasn't just bin Laden that were allowed to escape, it was essentially the entire al Qaeda and Taliban leadership, not to mention a goodly portion of their troops. It was a fiasco. The Christian Science Monitor has one of the most seminal articles from that time still on their web site.

The news conference was also on the "eve" (figuratively speaking) of the Iraq invasion, which commenced days later. And at the time I thought we were being too hasty in that decision. While I viewed Saddam as a dangerous, on-going threat, I didn't view him as an immediate one. And given the way Saddam was acting, I thought there was a very good chance that within a few months of more intensive inspections, we would have had much more international support for invading Iraq. And I have to say that I honestly thought Bush understood that, too -- up until early March anyway. Up to then I thought he had done a masterful job of getting Congress in line, then the UN, then getting Saddam to accept inspections again (more intrusive ones than ever before, and which the UN was planning to make even more intrusive). But still Saddam was being a jerk, so it seemed to me only a matter of time before the international community came around -- or at least NATO. Had that happened then there was a good possibility that Turkey would have been available to us as a northern staging area (which meant that we may have been able to effectively secure the Syrian and perhaps the Jordanian borders), while more troops would have been available to the cause -- and, most crucially, its aftermath.

Those quotes I mentioned did very much stick in my head. I don't just remember Bush saying he didn't care about bin Laden, I remember the way he said it. And as one who had a friend die on 9/11, and feeling as I did about everything else I just outlined, I didn't appreciate it. It sounded like an excuse to me. It is also important to keep in mind that those remarks were a dramatic reversal from what Bush was saying up to that time (well, mid-December anyway) -- that capturing Bin Laden was a high-priority item.

So maybe I'm not being totally objective in my assessment. And I thank Lew and AFWIFE for finding the transcript to put them in more perspective. I hope what I have said here adds more.

"The terrorists are winning. They have created lasting terror in America, "

"Zoot, I can tell that you're pissed. You make that very clear. Fear usually leads to anger."

Look you pissant there is a big difference between fear and awareness. I like many, had for the most part, ignored the BS in the ME for years. After 9-11 I started reading and educated myself on their ideologies, methods and stated goals. What I found painted a crystal clear picture that only an ignorant defeatest sheeple like yourself could ignore.

What lasting terror are you refering to. I get up in the morning like I always did, kids go to school, I go to work, come home and make dinner. I, as most Americans, live better than Cleopatra did. The only real terror is in your little paranoid mind.

Of course I'm concerned about erosion of rights but just because I want an "open" society doesnt mean its pratical. There are certain comprimises that must be made with those values we wish for and the ones we can afford to have. They are difficult decisions and the left wants to put their fingers in their ears while yelling na na na and pretend they can be ignored. The paradigm has changed radically in the last 30 years because of technology and we better be prepared for what is necessary not what you or I "want". The sensible Americans are aware and preparing for the shit sandwich that no one wants to eat but the enemy isnt going to give us that choice. You on the other hand want to rectally insert your cranium and claim were living in terror and the threat is from within. Thats just not true as much as you may want it to be. Some of us are aware and preparing for what we know will be a long and difficult battle for us and probably our children. We are all victims of the times we live in. History doesnt give us the luxery of a choice.

This is what is known as a good old fashioned religious war. Pick up your first history book...there are many ideologic battles to be found. This is nothing new and folks like you seem incapable of accepting it. You seem to be so insulated from the reality of the world at large by living here that you evidently cant conceive it. The enemy is ISLAM...not radical islam but islam itself. No not all muslims are the enemy but they subscribe to a set of beliefs that is certain to create the situation we now confront....how could it not, given what is written in the (piss be on it) koran. Given the islamic doctrine and islam is incapable of a reformation, the conflict is inevitable.

Have no doubt, this is a long battle for ideological supremacy. Islamisists are ready to wear us down and clueless people like you are the enemy within. These a folks that are still pissed about being kicked out of Spain hundreds of years ago. A war of attrition taking 100 years is what they are cutually, socially and idelogically prepared for. Are you? Silly question as I know the answer.

So in conclusion take your condesending "your afraid" crap and shove it were the sun dont shine.

As Zappa said "Remember there's a big difference between kneeling down and bending over."

I knew you would be reasonable Rico! I did not lose a single friend in 9/11, BUT I cried! My countrymen were slaughtered right before my eyes. I knew right away even in the midst of my anger & frustration (NOT FEAR Larryk) that this would go alot deeper than one man (OBL). Even tho OBL's head on a silver platter would have been satisfying and a mental blow to the enemy, it is (from a military perspective) even more of a blow to the enemy to have this man either constantly on the run or to have his own wondering if he is even alive much less effective in any way. I challenge every single LIBERAL on this blog to come up with some way that OBL has been affective in the last 3 years. Rico, my brother was one of those chasing OBL & Al-quaeda in Tora Bora. Do you know what there story was? It wasn't the admin. fault we didn't get them, it was our cultures fault, I mean we might as well just slap the effin handcuffs on our boyz right now. We hinder them at every turn, yet we have the gall to listen to conspiracy theorist and blame it on the admin.!!! We have no one to blame but ourselves. If we wouldn't allow people like axis & Maf & blomelater(those who would crucify our soldiers ahead of a "poor little old freedom fighter/terrorist)have so much influence and power in this country, this conflict would have been ended long ago w/ hussein, bin laden, amadinijad, and a few other heads on the platter.
Sorry Rico, I don't by the conspiracy theories about the Bush admin. being behind all of this. Have there been admin. mis-handlings & screw-ups? Of course there have, just ask the boyz that were on the ground. I don't know an admin. that hasn't! Do the cowboy's in office have the security of the homeland in their hearts? Absolutely, unlike their counterparts and exact opposites " THE LIBERALS". God help us if they ever come into a place of power again. Like that's ever going to happen, lol!

[deleted, banned]

Blomelater, you can kiss my marine ...! You aren't fooling a damn person around here. Go ahead and get pissed, like usual your pissed at the wrong people. YES, I have got some nerve, unlike you and your pacifier friends. You have no loyalty to anyone or anything but a utopian failed ideology.

Ricorun,

Check your dates. The interview with the President was conducted on March 13, 2002, over a year from the commencement of hostilities in Iraq (March 20, 2003). So your claim that "The news conference was also on the "eve" (figuratively speaking) of the Iraq invasion, which commenced days later" is false. It commenced 372 days later.

Further, our "elite" forces are sill on the trail of OBL, they were not pulled out in advance of the Iraqi liberation.

Finally, your claim that "it wasn't just bin Laden that were allowed to escape, it was essentially the entire al Qaeda and Taliban leadership, not to mention a goodly portion of their troops" is also false. 75% of al Qaeda's leadership has been killed or captured, the same with the Taliban. Yes, some leaders have not been killed or captured, but they are still being hunted. As for "a goodly portion of their troops", they are also dead or imprisoned.

Democrats should NEVER EVER be allowed to control government!!!!!!!!

Get the message out, and get your asses out and vote, so they won't.

We can't allow the progress to be erased, and it will be, if the donks win. The liberal donks, that is...

A-10, I suppose I could try to gloss over it, or just ignore it, but that's not my way. And while it is very painful to say, I will say it: I stand corrected. Saying so is not just a little bit embarrasing, it is profoundly so. I stand corrected, and with a considerable amount of egg on my face. This gaffe of mine is made worse not only because I pride myself in being as honest as I can, and not only because I am a constant critic of other peoples' perception of chronology, but also because I linked all sorts of other things with my (mistaken) interpretation of the chronology. This is very painful.

Nonetheless, I will continue to try to be as honest as I can. I am wrong. I apologize to everyone profusely. This is very, very embarrasing for me. But I admit my error, and I can understand how anyone, subsequently, would not take anything I say seriously. In fact, I have to wonder myself, to be perfectly honest -- more so than you could possibly imagine. I promise that I will try to do better in the future, and I promise that I will try to examine within myself how I could have screwed up so badly.

And the first thing that has become apparent to me is how truly personally I took the 9/11 attacks. This present episode, more than any other, has uncovered that to me. I mentioned a couple of months ago that I decided I could not go to see the United 93 flick because it would be too painful. I still haven't seen it. But maybe I should, because obviously I'm still in a state of denial -- much deeper than I ever thought I was, in fact. In a way (and frankly, I have yet to think through exactly how), it may have given me a little insight into how truly hidden, yet intrusive PTSD can be. I'm not saying I suffer from PTSD (I would not be so presumptive), but I do definitely question my judgement -- in a big way. How could I be so off? This isn't like me, or at least I never thought it could be. Something is wrong.

Granted, it's very hard not to want to respond in kind when you or yours (especially the latter) are attacked. In that respect I already mentioned why I take OBL's continued freedom personally. But there was one other time in my life when I felt like I do about OBL. Back in college a girlfriend of mine was riding her bike to the store. It was about 2pm or so, and a drunk driver hit her. He was so drunk that he didn't realize what he had done right away. In consequence, he turned her into about 300 yards of ground chuck. That is not only figuratively true, it was literally true. He turned her into a big long smear in the street. The smudge was there for days. That happened a good 30 years ago. But even now, if given the opportunity, I would relish the chance to scrape every last ounce of flesh from his body and leave him to the flies. That might sound gruesome, but I'm being honest -- painfully, brutally, yet fully so.

I've been mugged a couple of times in the ensuing years -- once by a guy with a knife, and once by a guy with a sawed off shotgun. Neither of those attacks netted the perpetrators anything. The knife incident was a calculated risk -- the guy was obviously a drunk and smaller than me; and when I took my jacket off, wrapped it around my arm, and told him he'd have to fight me for my money, he ran away. The shotgun incident had more to do with the fact that I'm pretty close to legally blind: I thought he had a bat, not a gun (actually, there were two of them, but one was unarmed, as far as I know). Had I realized it was a gun, maybe things would have been different. But I honestly thought it was a case of mistaken identity because the guy with the gun looked (and acted -- body language is more what a person in my optically challenged condition pays attention to) so very angry. His partner, on the other hand, looked (and acted) so very terrified, like he realized it was a terrible mistake. His eyes were at least as big as the crater that was his mouth. Anyway, to make a long story short, I didn't die, and they didn't get anything. And most importantly... neither of those incidents had anywhere near the same the kind of impact on me as either the bicycle incident or al Qaeda's on 9/11. Or so I thought, up until now. Now I'm not so sure.

Somewhere along the line I became aware of a definition of "love" that was at the same time very poignant, very objective, and very true: "love is the state where you put someone else's welfare on the same plane, or an elevated plane, as your own." There are so many corollary concepts that could be included in that. For example this one: "if you love someone, set them free." Of course, many would suggest that a corollary to that corollary would be... "and if they don't come back, hunt them down and kill them." And while I agree with the former (that's promoting self-actualization) I vehemently disagree with the latter (that's just selfishness, and I would hope everyone would recognize as a joke). On the other hand, and in all truthfulness, it is hard for me to deny this statement: "do what you want to me, but if you come after my loved ones, I will hunt you down -- and I will keep hunting you until one of us is dead." Said in another way: in another place, time, and situation, I suppose I could be a terrorist. At least I can't rule it out in all good conscience (there goes my security clearance, lol!).

Anyway, if I were president, like Bush is, and if someone tried to kill my dad, like Saddam did, I would have a very hard time distinguishing the national interests from those of personal vengeance. And frankly, up to now, I have never fully appreciated how truly difficult it might be to distinguish one from the other. Maybe Bush hasn't either. I honestly don't know. But I guess that's why family members of victims of violent crimes are never allowed to sit on juries. Likewise, I would argue, that's one of the reasons (among many) why we should avoid electing to offices of prominence those whose progenitors have also similarly served. Suddenly now, more than ever before, neopotism seems like a bad idea to me.

Rico,
John Kerry “remembered” being in Cambodia while Nixon was President in December 1968. I believe this memory was forged by subsequent events, if it isn’t true; it ought to be. Many times in my life I believed I said, or did or felt a specific way at a time I later discovered couldn’t have been factual. But then, at my age I “remember” all kinds of things that in all probability didn’t occur, in fact there was this one time when my brothers, Hoss and Little Joe and I were hanging around the barn, and … never mind.
I “remember” thinking, when I heard about the Murrah Building that it was the anniversary of Ruby Ridge, or did someone mention that on the radio. I “remember” watching the space shuttle explode on live TV, when they tell me now it wasn’t televised live. I “remember” being at lunch when JFK was killed, but in my time zone it would have been before lunch when we heard the news. Yet all of these memories are firmly entrenched in my mind. Do these memories support my philosophy, or did my philosophy create these memories?
I think we’d all like to believe that our thought processes are formed by altruistic motives; and we’d all like to believe that we felt then as we feel now, everyone wants to believe that they were the first to point out the inconsistency in some historical event, when probably we heard or read someone else challenging the conventional wisdom and attributed the thought to ourselves. Did I really remember thinking “This guy’s lying” or did I hear someone say, “There’s something not-quite-right with this picture.”
To the point of your post; personal experience isn’t the only deciding factor in geopolitical decisions; the official policy of the US was to bring down Saddam and force regime change. I don’t think congress consulted the future president to see if the attempt on his father’s life would cloud his judgment regarding achieving that end. In any event, those counseled on the decision (with one notable exception) weren’t personally affected by Saddam’s bloodlust for the elder Bush.
Understand, I’m not mocking your point, mearly pointing out that this is not a dictatorial regime dedicated to personal vendettas of the party bosses, and any personal animus Mr. Bush may have toward Saddam, or bin Laden for that matter is a minor consideration in the big picture.
I once sat as jury foreman in a shoplifting case, despite the fact that I worked at the time as manager of a retail loss prevention (security) department. You’d think I’d be the first one bounced from the jury because of my personal experience with knucklehead shoplifters. Btw, in the jury room the vote was 10-2 to acquit; I convinced 10 jurors to hang the bastard.

Bane, thank you for your kind words. As far as the Challenger explosion though... if that wasn't on live TV I'm giving up! I remember it vividly.

But I suppose it could have been a tape delay that I saw soon after the incident. That's certainly possible -- I do remember seeing it over and over throughout the morning. And I do remember turning on the TV moments before it happened. So it's quite possible that it was already being replayed by then. I don't remember exactly what time I turned on the TV. It was relatively early though -- before 9 am PST anyway.

But that's a small detail. My Tora Bora issue is much bigger than that. I lost a whole freakin' year! And I spun all kinds of stuff into the story as if they all happened contemporaneously, when they obviously didn't. Nonetheless, that really is how I remembered it. That's never happened to me before, and I find it alarming. I don't mind being wrong, but wrong on this kind of level is unacceptable. I'd fire me if I could, lol!

But maybe you're right. Maybe I am reading too much into it. Maybe I should just let it go and just be more careful in the future. Anyway, I stand corrected, and I do appreciate being corrected, as painful as it is.

But maybe you're right. Maybe I am reading too much into it. Maybe I should just let it go and just be more careful in the future. Anyway, I stand corrected, and I do appreciate being corrected, as painful as it is.

Posted by: Ricorun at August 18, 2006 05:21 PM

Hey Rico, If you were never wrong, I'd bypass nominating you for president and go straight to nominating you GOD! Don't worry, we all get caught in a little bit of reality lapsation(whatever the heck that is, LOL)! Love your life bro, it's a gift!

But maybe you're right. Maybe I am reading too much into it.

Based on this thread of comments (and mostly based on yours) I have to say that I really like you. It takes a lot of courage to look at yourself so critically and admit you might be wrong about something. And to do it in front of everybody...well, that's definitely bravery of the first order. My hat's off to you, Rico, and my respect for you just rose by exponential values.

I was in OKC when McVeigh blew up the Murrah building. My office building shook from the blast and we went outside and saw the smoke rising into the morning sky. Hours later I found out a friend's husband died in the blast. For the longest time, I could think of nothing else but this evil act. My first impression was "Arab terrorists" and even after they caught McVeigh (only minutes after the explosion) I still refuse to think anything else. I lived in OKC from that time until 2001, when I retired and moved to Michigan. I never could bring myself to go to the site of the Murrah building and see the memorial - which I hear is beautiful. I just could not force myself to do it. Too much trauma there for me. So I understand your feelings and I understand what they can do to a person. It just goes to show you are human.

...