I guess why others (myself included) are writing to you on this matter is that there was a concerted effort by President Bush and major Republicans to try andMessage 1 of 12 , Nov 8, 2006View SourceI guess why others (myself included) are writing to you on this
matter is that there was a concerted effort by President Bush and
major Republicans to try and convince Americans that there was a link
from 9/11 to Iraq. This was done in the lead up to the Iraq war and
beyond. The fact that there was no link makes the actions by the
Bush White House unforgivable. Many of those who lied about the link
are now backtracking and admitting that there was no link.
Not only have we lost almost 3,000 soldiers, with many tens of
thousands injured or disabled, but also we have killed tens of
thousands of Iraqis. A firm number will never be kwon, as Americans
seem not to care. In addition, our nation is far less secure as the
result of our invasion of Iraq and the turmoil it has created. Our
foreign policy is in total disarray. It will be decades before we
can recover from the disastrous course that Bush has set our nation
So it IS important to understand that 9/11 and Iraq were not
connected, so as to force home the issue that this President lied to
the American public and led our nation into a war that never had to
be fought. To fudge the facts is not fair to those who died for a
lie, both here and around the globe.
--- In email@example.com, Randal Brown <as_is_35@...>
>I just believe what I believe in. I will admit I could be wrong, and
> Well sure I'm not wanting to start an argument or make anyone mad.
I will be the first to admit it. With all do respect to the
President, I just simply disagree. I do believe Saddam was involved.
It just would might near take God to come down here and tell me other
wise to change my mind. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But the true
matter of the fact is, the world is safer without Saddam in rule. I
don't know anyone who would argue that.
>good for America. I don't see it happening, but I hope for our
> I truly hope that the new Democratic controlled Congress will be
country, that they will be.
>Rumsfeld for a while, but I personally haven't seen any evidence
> I am glad however, to see Donald Rumsfeld leaving. I liked
lately that he knows what he is doing. So I'm glad to see him
going. I don't know much about the possible replacement. Mr. Gates
I believe served in the Bush 41 administration.
>from my President's group, I don't and won't argue with a person. I
> I'm not a close minded person per sei. And as you may remember
don't believe in it. But I love a good old fashioned calm discussion.
> THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@...> wrote:
> In the interests of keeping this an attempt at a
> dialogue and not an argument, I would like to point
> out that Democrats are very capable of being poorly
> informed too.
> The country is broken.... the way to heal it is for
> us to ditch this red state/blue state crap and start
> to listen to each other.
> Randal, you are a gentleman and a fair guy and I'd
> like to try and make a deal with you. If you would be
> willing to continue this discussion with a open mind
> that you may be wrong about that, I'll do the same in
> any issue that you care to discuss.
> It's my hope that the Dems will govern from the center
> and not from the fringes. The next party that does
> that will not only garner this nation's gratitude, but
> it's votes, as well.
> --- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:
> > "Well the short answer Thomas is yes I do. I do
> > believe that Saddam
> > played a role in 9/11."
> > This simply shows us how ill-informed a Republican
> > can be. It's quite
> > scary to me to be frank. Alexis deTocqueville once
> > said:
> > "This delicate experiment called 'democracy' is
> > doomed to failure
> > without an educated electorate."
> > Education is the only way to save us from ourselves.
> > Ram
> Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited.
Yes,I gained my respect for you in the Presidents group, which is why I m even discussing it. I know you can be open-minded. Don t take our word for it, butMessage 1 of 12 , Nov 8, 2006View SourceYes,I gained my respect for you in the Presidents
group, which is why I'm even discussing it. I know you
can be open-minded. Don't take our word for it, but
maybe do a little research. Check out the 9/11
commission report, and of the Republican led House or
Senate reports, any of the intelligence reports, any
major news outlet besides Fox News. In fact any
credible source except for Dick Cheney or Fox. The
evidence is overwhelming.
--- Randal Brown <as_is_35@...> wrote:
> Well the short answer Thomas is yes I do. I do=== message truncated ===
> believe that Saddam played a role in 9/11.
> THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@...> wrote:
> Randal.. I have a lot of respect for you, and as
> I ask you this respectfully. Do you believe that
> Saddam Hussein was responsible or played any role in
> the 9/11 attacks?
> --- Randal Brown <as_is_35@...> wrote:
> > I would like to correct that comment. I was in the
> > process of saying something else when I wrote that
> > and got interrupted. What I meant to write was
> > Democrats want control of Congress to do away with
> > the Bush agenda on the war on Iraq." I do
> > for that comment.
> > But Gregory I must say as someone who has served
> > in the military, that war is hell. I know that is
> > harsh statement, but its the truth. Iraq is the
> > center of the terrorists hub in the Middle East. I
> > don't know how many times that has to be proven
> > before people get that. Just stop to think about
> > this. If we hadn't invaded Iraq, it would still be
> > ruled by a hearltess, cruel dictator. It would not
> > be on its way to being a "free country." And I
> > would personally wager that if Saddam hadn't been
> > captured, there WOULD have been more attacks on
> > America. I don't care what anyone says, Iraq
> > did/does have WMD'S. Its just a matter of finding
> > them.
> > Gregory I hope this doesn't intefere with the
> > cordial friendship we've had over the years. I did
> > mess up what I said earlier and I truly do regret
> > that comment. And to everyone else I do not say
> > these things to upset anyone, but I believe in my
> > ideas just as much as you do.
> > Randal
> > Gregory <greggolopry@...> wrote:
> > Dear Randal,
> > You write, "The Democrats want control of Congress
> > because they don't
> > believe in protecting America or Americans. And
> > their record shows
> > that."
> > I think that is shameful statement!
> > A friend sent me a political cartoon recently
> > showing how many
> > American troops have been killed in our efforts to
> > avenge the
> > terrorist attacks on 9/11 in New York and
> > Washington, D.C. In a
> > simple drawing the madness of our foreign policy
> > most visible.
> > The fact that we invaded a country in the Middle
> > East that was not
> > involved with 9/11, and have suffered thousands of
> > deaths as a
> > result, while Afghanistan, a true player in the
> > terrorist attacks, is
> > being lost militarily due to a lack of manpower or
> > well thought out
> > strategy, should enrage everyone.
> > But I guess you see those actions as being
> > patriotic. I guess you
> > see those failed actions as protecting our
> > The public is tired of being lied to, and spied
> > They are tired of
> > those who never truly served in the military in
> > their youth, now
> > starting wars while in public office, and as a
> > result making the
> > world a much more unsafe place. They are tired of
> > being led to
> > believe there ever was a war on terror being
> > conducted in Iraq, but
> > instead now know it was a political decision by
> > President Bush and
> > Dick Cheney that had nothing to do with our
> > security.
> > The American public knows what is going on, and
> > latest polling
> > not only shows what the issues are that need
> > changing, but which
> > political party they best trust to get the job
> > The political
> > chaos of the Republican campaign shows they have
> > nothing left to
> > offer except mean-spiritedness and bankrupt ideas.
> > This year the
> > public is listening, watching, and is now voting
> > Gregory
> > --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Randal
> > <as_is_35@...>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I would like to take the opportunity to urge
> > of you to go vote
> > today. I did first thing this morning.
> > >
> > > I don't normally write messages like this, but I
> > am only because
> > I feel so very strongly about it.
> > >
> > > If you are a ardent Democrat and are going to
> > Democratic
> > irregardless of what anyone says, then you might
> > well stop reading
> > this email and delete it, because you are not
> > to like this
> > email.
> > >
> > > I know that here in the USA we have the inherit
> > right to vote how
> > we want. But I personally am tired of only ever
> > really hearing half
> > the story. I don't pay attention to national
> > I think they are
> > just propaganda. If we had listened to the "exit
> > polls" in 2000 and
> > 2004 then Al Gore and/or John Kerry would have
> > elected
> > President.
> > >
> > > If Democrats gain control of Congress, then that
> > will mean that
> > Nancy Polowski (D) California will become the
> > Speaker of the House.
> > Third in line for the Presidency. I cannot express
> > my true concern
> > about this. It has nothing to do with the fact
> > she is a woman.
> > It has to do that this woman is just absolutely
> > horrible.
> > >
> > > Ms. Polowski has voted for EVERY tax hike that
> > come before
> > the Congress. She voted AGAINST the Bush tax cuts.
> > She voted
> > AGAINST the development of the Homeland Security
> > Department. She
> > voted AGAINST the NSA wire taps. I know that is
> > issue, but the
> > way I look at it is, if you don't have anything to
> > hide, then what is
> > the harm.
> > >
> > > The Democrats want control of Congress because
> > they don't believe
> > in protecting America or Americans. And their
> > shows that.
> > >
> > > However, not all Democrats are bad. I'm not
> > completely knocking
> > the Democratic party. I know there are honest,
> > caring Democratic
> > leaders. There are just a few like Nancy Polowski,
> > Hillary Clinton
> > and Ted Kennedy to name a few that are just plain
> > dangerous.
> > >