One more suggestion from Baker-Hamilton Bush is finally getting around to.

Of course, he refused until Congress changed hands, to do anything differently than what hadn't worked the previous 6 years.

Wait, wasn't the ban on for 27 years? That kind of game can be played both ways. Maybe if Clinton had talked with them they would not be doing what they are doing.

In any case, I am not sure what this will accomplish. The Iranian government has only done what it pleases, the EU, China and Russia have not made any difference I am not sure what we hope to accomplish.

Hey, speaking of talking... Did anyone see where some woman from Syria said that things have gotten worse since Pelosi went over there. In her mind the gov of Syria feels emboldened by knowing that our gov is divided.

"where some woman from Syria said..."

Jeebus, this shit just writes itself.

Dusty, got a link to that?

Hey Doc, you know, I'm feeling a little...what's that word?...Oh yeah...emboldened today. How about you?

"Did anyone see where some woman from Syria said"

Translation: Rush said it on his radio program.

""Did anyone see where some woman from Syria said that things have gotten worse since Pelosi went over there.""

"Some woman" is really an important source.

""The terrorists started this war""

Which war, the one in Afghanistan...ok....the one in Iraq...no, you started it George.

Fact of the matter is Bush was negotiating with Iran pre-afghanistan invasion and pre-Iraq invasion. (Both adventures were very welcome in Tehran, where they saw two enemies erased without Iran breaking into a sweat)
Of course, being a tough talkin' rootin' tootin' cowboy, he couldn't admit he was negotiating with two members of the axil ( NK and Iran)of evil.

"I'm feeling a little..."

Indubitably.

""Did anyone see where some woman from Syria said that things have gotten worse since Pelosi went over there.""

You sure Deamascene date vendor didn't say this happened after Condi met with her Syrian counterpart? Or was that the rune caster in Aleppo, who warned about what would happen whenthe Moon was in the Seventh House and Jupiter aligned with Mars?

Washington condemned the Syrian government for what State Department spokesman Sean McCormack called its "harsh and unjust sentencing" of Labwani.

McCormack said it reflected the Syrian regime's "contempt for human rights and a legal system devoid of legitimate legal standards." He also expressed concern over reports that Labwani had been subjected to "inhumane treatment."


Well, yes. I mean if they didn't torture people why would Bush be sending them suspects to question?
But I'm sure it's only panties on their heads or other fratboy hijinks, cause Bush says we don't do torture.
And he'd never lie.

Bush is railing against Syria more these days. Apparently the Pentagon has convinced him that, unable to defeat the taliban or a few deadenders in Iraq, he's not the Commander-in-Chief to go after Iran militarily. Something about the ayatollahs would be marching down Broadway in a couple of weeks. Maybe Syrai or Sudan are countries he can at least fight to a draw with. And I wouldn't buy any property in Lichtenstein, either.

There is no sense in speaking to people who believe their own bullshit. The people running Iran fall into that category.

""Included in this report are eight countries judged to have the worst records:
Burma, Cuba, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Sudan, Turkmenistan, and
Uzbekistan. Also included are two territories, Chechnya and Tibet, whose
inhabitants suffer intense repression. These states and regions received the
Freedom House survey's lowest rating: 7 for political rights and 7 for civil
liberties. Within these entities, state control over daily life is pervasive and
wide-ranging, independent organizations and political opposition are banned or
suppressed, and fear of retribution for independent thought and action is part of
daily life. In the case of Chechnya, the rating in large measure reflects the fallout
of a vicious conflict that in the last 12 years has disrupted normal life and
resulted in some 200,000 deaths.
The report also includes nine further countries near the bottom of Freedom
House's list of the most repressive: Belarus, China, Cote d'Ivoire, Equatorial
Guinea, Eritrea, Laos, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Zimbabwe. The territory of
Western Sahara is also included in this group. While these states scored slightly
better than the "worst of the worst," they offer very limited scope for private
discussion while severely suppressing opposition political activity, impeding
independent organizing, and censoring or punishing criticism of the state.""

Here comes Bush on his hands and knees, trying to turn a pile of shit into an oil revenue stream, while raising prices. Since he can't stabilize Iraq, the Iranians must be scared shitless by the two battleship groups he's sticking in their face.

Some morons never learn. Can you imagine the national and internation damage more reckless occupation would bring us?

"Which war, the one in Afghanistan...ok....the one in Iraq...no, you started it George."Posted by DANNI

Uh, DANNI, there aren't two wars, Sweetie. It's all the same war against the same enemy. It started several decades ago. Iraq and Afghanistan are allies in that war.

"Since he can't stabilize Iraq, the Iranians must be scared shitless by the two battleship groups he's sticking in their face."

Hey, NUTCASE, news flash. All our battleships were decommissioned years ago. If you'll read up on it, they were carrier battle groups sent there. There's ALWAYS one group in the Med, sometimes two.

Thanks CHAIR.. Pretty sure I had not heard about it on Rush. To be honest I just do not remember where I heard it. That is why I asked you guys if you had heard anything.

I am not sure where this story goes, but it is important to understand that there are often un-intended consequences to our actions. I am sure Bush would agree. As I am sure we all have said at one point in our lives, "If I only knew then, what I know now..."

It's all the same war against the same enemy. It started several decades ago. Iraq and Afghanistan are allies in that war.

Only on Planet Bush. Unless you mean it's a war against muslims.

Or you are from Iran.

Iraq and afghanistan were never allies. Al queda hated Saddam and wanted to kill him. Now Bush's allies pakistan and saudistan were allies and bankers of the taliban.
Perhaps you just have your friends and enemies lists mixed up.

""Uh, DANNI, there aren't two wars, Sweetie. It's all the same war against the same enemy.""

Riiight.
There should be a minimum amount of intelligence required for posting on this site. Just Getting doesn't quite make the cut off.

JGalong,

Iraq ia about oil, not alQaida, at least until the moron enticed them there to fight there. They will leave if we leave. If they don't you can be sure the Iraqis will drive them out. Extremist Sunnis (alQaida) are far outnumbered by Shiites. The Iraq majority Baathist Sunnis never had anything to do with al Qaida.

Battleship or Carrier, whatever you want to call it, the Iranians have never been in a better position in the Middle East and they aim to take full advantage of it. Thank the Moron for that.

Labwani, a 50-year-old physician, was arrested in 2005 after returning from a two-month trip to the U.S. and Europe where he met with government officials, journalists and other human rights activists. . .

Yet many Western diplomats, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, now appear to be softening towards the Syrian leadership.

Rice met with her Syrian counterpart Walid Muallem last week on the sidelines of a conference in Egypt dealing with the problems in Iraq.

Linking this to Pelosi is quite a stretch IMHO. It would seem logical to attribute to Rice as the official representing the WH's "softening" position.

"Riiight.
There should be a minimum amount of intelligence required for posting on this site. Just Getting doesn't quite make the cut off."Posted by DANNI

Aww, now DANNI...just because some folks don't agree with you doesn't mean they're stupid. When you resort to gettin' your panties in a knot and resorting to comments like this, it makes YOU appear stupid. In fact, if "stupid" was a snowflake, I'm starting to think you'd be a walking blizzard. Tell me, is it true you're going to replace Cindy Sheehan? That tent in Crawfrd is gonna be real hot in the Summer, you know.

""Sweetie. It's all the same war against the same enemy.""

Uh-huh.
Nuf said.
I think you and Britney Spears probably have similar views.

"I think you and Britney Spears probably have similar views."Posted by DANNI

You didn't THINK that, hon, it was some sort of spurious brain fart. How did your cunning little mind get from Bush to Britney Spears? I hope you're not developing optiorectumitis.

There is no sense in speaking to people who believe their own bullshit. The people running Iran fall into that category

Well, it is the Republic of Iran, so they ARE Republicans.
Sad isn't it, two countries negotiating and both their leaders are whackjobs?

boy, mr. carter really screwed up the middle east, didn't he?

*ducks incoming fruit*

"where some woman from Syria said..."

Thanks CHAIR.. Pretty sure I had not heard about it on Rush...'

Is it me, am the only one noticing that only the dumb ones are left on chimp's 'ship of fools?

Bush and spears. nothing there, they both lip-synch

just getting. 2 wars. You have already decided to rewrite history.

"It's all the same war against the same enemy"

Wow, that's dumb.

Jest sees it as a fight against radical Islam in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Actually it's a fight to ensure the continuance of radical Islam in order to give the west a "legitimate" reason to have to stay and "protect" the oil fields.

Working pretty good too when viewed from that perspective.

"We can't leave YET!" (TM)

Be Well.

"Bush and spears. nothing there, they both lip-synch"

Plus they got the same theme song...

"Oops, I did it again"

Only in Britanny's case she's talking about getting drunk and knocked up with some morons kid. Bush's many "Oops moments" are far more serious and deadly.

Be Well.

Games within games within games.

In the parlance of international relations, note that these are the first "official" talks in 27 years. In fact, we have been unofficially talking to them for decades, but neither side could admit that.

Now that we have officially broken the ice, look for more official talks that bring Iran in to a more inclusive role in Southwest Asian region. This is what Iran has been striving towards for 27 years, and from a diplomatic standpoint is a defeat for the US in that we blinked first.

By fall, there will be a meeting between Rice and Mottaki which will probably reduce some of the violence in Iraq, which Iran will take credit for thereby cementing thier role as a powerbroker in the region.

You can bet that the Saudi's are none too happy about this.

""CARLSON: A lot of entertainers have come out against the war in Iraq. Have you?

SPEARS: Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision that he makes and we should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens.

CARLSON: Do you trust this president?

SPEARS: Yes, I do.

CARLSON: Excellent. ""


Yes, I do see a similarity in your posts and her comments.

""This is what Iran has been striving towards for 27 years, and from a diplomatic standpoint is a defeat for the US in that we blinked first.""

And, you can thank George Bush's disastrous invasion of Iraq for the weak position we find ourselves now in. Many, many people, including me, predicted that Iran would end up strengthened by our Iraq adventure. Sorry to say, we were right.

Is it me, am the only one noticing that only the dumb ones are left on chimp's 'ship of fools?

Posted by Pacifica at 2007-05-29 01:18 PM | Reply



Perhaps you're dumb, but I'll reserve judgement until somebody translates what it was you were attempting to say.

Iran was a member of the evil empire club.
(that would be in drunk Georges dreams) We are not allowed to talk to evil empire members. That was one of Herr Bush's rules. Someone, somewhere told Herr Bush to cut out the bullshit. It has been another failed foreign policy. What does that token ride do for a living anyway?

Just before 10:30 a.m., al-Maliki greeted the two ambassadors and led them into a conference room, where they sat across a long, glistening wood table from each other. Al-Maliki then made a brief statement before leaving.

Sad, ain't it? Two countries planning your country's future and you can't be there.
Must suck to be a colony.

On the bright side, now that Bush has moved along the learning curve (albeit slippery with blood) maybe we can negotiate a deal on Iraq and then move on to Palestine. The Jerusalem Post (bastion of librul thought that it is) had an editorial outlining possible positive outcomes re: Iranian nukes, Palestine and hezbollah coming out of a ratchetted down Iran-USA climate.

Bush is like a bratty little kid cleaning his room as slow as he can.
It would be nice to have a Pres. that would man up
Instead we have a foot dragging little brat.
Oh well I'm thankful we are move toward diplomacy. now

Sad, ain't it? Two countries planning your country's future and you can't be there.

Posted by northguy3 at 2007-05-29 01:48 PM

Generally, in diplomacy, you only meet with people at your same level, to do otherwise is to make a concession to the other side. Here, two deputies of the SecState and Iranian Foreign Minister and their delegations met with the Iraqi Foreign Minister and his delegation, who set up the meeting.

All Al-Maliki did was thank the delegates and then left, which was within protocol. If he had stayed, then that would have been news.

Perhaps you're dumb, but I'll reserve judgement until somebody translates what it was you were attempting to say.

Thanks '101, you confirmed my suspicions; only the idiots are still on Bush's bandwagon, everyone else left that ship long ago!

boy, mr. carter really screwed up the middle east, didn't he?

*ducks incoming fruit*

BLT's got wings?

The United States and Iran broke a 27-year diplomatic freeze Monday

Ummm...seems to me that they never stopped talking to one another. I recall....ooo like it was only yesterday ....yesssss...Iran Contra...selling them weapons to shoot at Iraq. Selling Iraq weapons to shoot at Iran.

Uh huh. Those bastards to took Americans hostage and then played poker with the Repubican candidate over them.

Yeah. That dialogue, 27 years long now. Well even longer given the Shah came before that.

They sure do Lie allot don't they those rotten scummmmmmmmmmmm bags.( I love SOn in Law) Hell the United States unofficialy was talking to Iran not 8 Years ago through Halliburton. Funny dat be huh.

Larry

""Did anyone see where some woman from Syria said that things have gotten worse since Pelosi went over there.""


look you uppity pricks.......the statement made is not giving this woman credibility, but asking a question attempting to coroborate what he had heard. has it ever crossed any of your pin headed elitist minds that you might just say....no I didnt hear that or maybe yes I heard that but I can't tell you if its true or not...
but no, you have to get on some dumbshit high horse and showcase your total lack of interest in all sides of an argument.
this person and I in some cases of using this are not giving it out as gospel but to bring up something that maybe someone else had heard too or maybe that someone else can prove.......
it may just be a price we pay to read a blog from the smartest people on the planet........or not.

Iraq and afghanistan were never allies. Al queda hated Saddam and wanted to kill him. Now Bush's allies pakistan and saudistan were allies and bankers of the taliban.
Perhaps you just have your friends and enemies lists mixed up.

Posted by northguy3 at 2007-05-29 12:05 PM | Reply


and yet its a FACT that cannot be disputed........zarkowi(sp) was in bagdad before,during, and after the invasion and the only question is to what level were they 'in cahoots' with each other.

Is it me, am the only one noticing that only the dumb ones are left on chimp's 'ship of fools?

Posted by Pacifica at 2007-05-29 01:18 PM | Reply


just love it when democunts underestimate us.

BLT's got wings?

Posted by northguy3 at 2007


nah...I must have been excited and standing sideways when you were peaking at me........its big enough to be mistaken as a wing........

and yet its a FACT that cannot be disputed........zarkowi(sp) was in bagdad before,during, and after the invasion and the only question is to what level were they 'in cahoots' with each other.

Posted by bushlovertwo at 2007-05-30 07:58 AM | Reply


Funny Saddam nor His Sons knew about it now what say YOU now BLT> They were NOT in Cahoots with each other. Please do so ever try yet again.

Larry

and I could have won a ton by betting the farm on this one......even with odds as low as they would have been.......to think that there are people here who attack bush because he is now talking to iran......the enemy.......my my.....what is he thinking, doing exactly what the left has screamed that he should be doing, all this time and now they are going after him because he is......
I just cant believe it.........uh well maybe I can,........

so he is talking to iran....if thats okay with us on the right, whats the problem...you have said he should, we have said he should let the armada that should be in the gulf do the talking....and you win,........so why are you still on his ass........as if I dont know,.........

larry.........I cant help it if you arent up with the information on this subject. even chris hitchens who is loved by the left when he disputes God says it...
but lets ask some of your liberal 'cahooters'.......(what?)
and again.....according to more than just hitchens.....the only question is to what extent were they 'talking'......up to operational stuff....probably not..

larry.........I cant help it if you arent up with the information on this subject. even chris hitchens who is loved by the left when he disputes God says it...
but lets ask some of your liberal 'cahooters'.......(what?)
and again.....according to more than just hitchens.....the only question is to what extent were they 'talking'......up to operational stuff....probably not..

Posted by bushlovertwo at 2007-05-30 08:10 AM | Reply


SOrry the CIA disagrees with You. Nice try yet again BLT When are You ever correct BLT??

Larry

okay so can you tell me when the cia said that zarqari wasnt in bagdad....c hitchens in his book and on interviews as said that this is where he was found and he was there before the invasion....so where can I read from the cia that he WASNT There?????????