CIA and Emails

[Thomas H. Purvis]

The United Kingdom has much to thank that many of you were not around during the "ultra secret" days.

No doubt, you would have filed suit against your own intelligence system's monitering of German & Japanese transmissions.

And in that regards, please attempt to fight some war,at some point in time, with only the most basic and limited intelligence available.

See what language you get to finally speak (provided you are still living) at the end of the war.

In the event that monitoring my personal email; telephone conversations; private mail; personal conversations; etc; etc; etc, and/or any other form of correspondence prevents:

1. Another "home grown" idiot such as Mr. McVey from the murder of innocent persons.

2. Prevents another 9/11.

3. Decreases the Iraqi casualties by ONE SINGLE person

Then the U.S. Government is free to entirely monitor anything I do and/or say.

As an American citizen who enjoys the rights and priviledges which this system has afforded, that is the least that I can do to assure the same system for my children and my grandchildren.

Why don't you ask a few of the survivors as well as the surviving dependents of some of the above, there response's to your claims.

Each and every item makes an attempt to blame a "breakdown" in the intelligence community.

This "breakdown" is directly related to the same type of legal system which provides the criminal element the necessary cover in which to operate behind.

Lastly, might I recommend that those of you in these various foreign lands, get your own houses in order before you make an attempt to tell the American public how to manage their own household.

That you fully appear to have a high degree of dissatisfaction with your own house (government), and would, it appears, like nothing better than to blame your problems on the mean ole US/CIA; etc;,

then might I recommend that you straighten your own linen prior to attempting to straighten ours.

Your "systems" have failed!

And in so doing, it has taken the American System, as well as many american lives to bail you and your countries out and provided you with the luxeries and time to sit around and complain about the system which gave you these freedoms.

In event you wish to change the system, then do so.

However, you will not change it by sitting around and crying and whining on the internet about the injustices in the world.

Be a soldier; a statesman; an attorney with a consience; whatever.

However, might I recommend that you cease being a hypocrite, who has taken full advantage of the opportunities which these systems have provided to you, your forefathers; and ultimately your children and grandchildren, yet you do little other than to cry and complain about the injusticies and inequities of the system off which you sponge your existence.

It is referred to as a Parasite over here in this part of the ocean.

There is and can never be any form of "perfect" government.

So long as we continue as a world of completely separate ideals; religious concepts; and humans with completely different variations of movitational goals, then the government which controls must do so for the general betterment of ALL.

No where does it say the betterment of "EACH AND EVERY SINGLE PERSON", which it could not achieve.

So, as soon as some undiscovered terrorist activity (home grown or otherwise) murders a few of your own children; direct relatives; friends; etc;., then come back and visit and discuss the real world situation as it currecntly exists, and what is required to counter these "REAL WORLD" threats.

Otherwise, go down to Orlando, FL and take up residence in the "Magic Tunnel" and/or be like the ostrich and stick your head in the sand and continue to remain obviously ignorant as to what the REAL WORLD situation currently is.

I am Irish and my country has never been 'bailed out' by the united States.

My point is that it is all well and good to monitor the correspondence of a suspected terror target (as long as there is sufficient evidence to make one suspicious), but that it is not in the interest of the general populace to have their rights eroded. I can quite confidently assume Thomas that you are definitely not a security threat to the United States government so they should have no reason to read your emails or any other communications you might make.

John suspected that it was possible that some of his emails wer intercepted, he is not a united States citizen, nor is he a threat to that government or its people, that is a major violation of his rights to freedom of speech.

John

The President and the Congress of the United States are entrusted with the "right", as well as the "responsibility" of insuring the safety of American citizens who are abroad, or located on our own soil.

When either "home grown" threats (aka citizens) within a host country, or immigrated elements within these countries pose any threat to American citizens located anywhere in the world, then our Government has the right and responsibility to take whatever actions it deems legal and necessary to protect those citizens.

We do not, and will not respect the soverignty of either a nation, or of the rights of individuals, who by virtue of their activities, pose a threat to US citizens, whether located at home or abroad.

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

I can quite confidently assume Thomas that you are definitely not a security threat to the United States government so they should have no reason to read your emails or any other communications you might make.

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

To the government as it currently exists, you are of course quite correct.

However, to crooked governments such as that of LBJ, RMN, Gerald Ford, etc; then americans such as myself pose the greatest threat of all.

And, with a new generation of combatants who are truly civillians but now have the experience of foreign service under their belt, the government of the US will be far more reluctant to continue along the various pathways in which it has gone astray.

We are a "civillian" army, and we will not tolerate a government that stands by with blinders on while other governments and/or persons plot and carry out their activities which randomly kill american citizens.

And, if at any time the Government of the United States allows such to happen, then it is time for the "civillian army" to exercise those rights as given to us within the constitution of the United States.

In event that this government ceases to represent the "will of the people", then it is time for a new direction and new government.

Thankfully, our nation has recognized that the sensible and peaceful means to such change lies in the electoral process.

Nevertheless, we, as american citizens, have the constitutional right to dispose of this government, by whatever means necessary, if and when it ever ceases to look after the will and interests of the people.

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

they should have no reason to read your emails or any other communications you might make.

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

Direct and/or indirect contact with and/or through any element which is deemed a threat to national security is adequate reason for monitoring.

Kind of like following that "family tree" of certain individuals. One never knows exactly what will be found until all of the branches and leaves have been inspected.

Then, if "barking up the wrong tree", one has many other trees in the forest which need to be checked.

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

Violation of my personal "civil liberties" is completely irrelevant to me, and if the government of this country feels that such actions are necessary to bring home alive even one more of those young men and/or women who are currently serving in the armed forces, then I am willing to sign a notarized waiver of any and/or all of these rights if necessary.

In the event a complete violation of my personal civil liberties, to include incarceration without due process, would have brought home the young Sean Cooley from my old MS National Guard unit, then lock me up, as I am too old to count, and those like Sean are the future of this nation.

Honor the fallen: Army Sgt. 1st Class Sean M. Cooley

Sean Cooley is the fifth Mississippi National Guard soldier to die in Iraq. ... KALSU, IRAQ — Sgt. 1st Class Sean Cooley was remembered as a hero this week ...

http://www.militarycity.com/valor/643612.html

Personally, I have absolutely no rights to whine and cry about potential and/or supposedly "violations" of my civil liberties, so long as persons such as Sean are still out there.

They will insure that this country and it's government do not abuse the rights of it's "people".

[Mark Knight]

Without a formal declaration of war by the Congress, or a declaration of martial law by the President, the powers of both the Congress and the President are limited, as specified in the Constitution; THEY ARE NOT ABSOLUTE, as Mr. Purvis implies in his post.

While some may argue that the President has the power to do as he pleases, one must also understand that the Founding Fathers of the United States, still smarting from being under the thumb of King George, wanted anything BUT an imperial presidency. THAT is why the Constitution was written as it was, with checks and balances on authority. The president does not have the power to make law; that power is reserved to the Congress. If the president wants a particular law passed, he mus first find a member of congress to introduce it as a bill before Congress. And while the president has the right to veto a law passed by Congress, the Congress, as the representatives of the people [in theory, anyway; lobbyists notwithstanding] have the right to override a presidential veto. And the judiciary has the authority to declare a law passed by the Congress to be contrary to the Consititution, or unconstitutional.

But the President cannot declare a law unconstitutional, nor can he MAKE the laws; the concept of separation of powers was devised to insure that. Under Nixon, and now under GWB, the president tries to overstep his constitutionally-determined boundaries. It is the duty of the Congress, and the judiciary, to reign in such an assault on the Constitution; for an assault on the Constitution is an assault on the citizenry, as much so as any armed attack on our home soil would be.

So Mr. Purvis' definition of preserving freedom is to take it away from the citizens? Perhaps he believes that freedom can be "preserved" in a jar, or on a shelf, like jams and jellies and corn and beans. If that is his stand, then he has no idea what freedom is. You can no more preserve freedom by putting it away in the pantry than you can preserve the a butterfly or a flower by pressing it into a book. Oh, you may well preserve the IMAGE of the flower or the butterfly, but you have lost its ESSENCE. Once you have lost the ESSENCE of freedom, it is as worthless as the pressed rose or the monarch butterfly under glass; pretty to look at, but devoid of its very substance.

And life no longer comes forth from any of them.

[Thomas Graves]

Without a formal declaration of war by the Congress, or a declaration of martial law by the President, the powers of both the Congress and the President are limited, as specified in the Constitution; THEY ARE NOT ABSOLUTE, as Mr. Purvis implies in his post.

While some may argue that the President has the power to do as he pleases, one must also understand that the Founding Fathers of the United States, still smarting from being under the thumb of King George, wanted anything BUT an imperial presidency. THAT is why the Constitution was written as it was, with checks and balances on authority. The president does not have the power to make law; that power is reserved to the Congress. If the president wants a particular law passed, he mus first find a member of congress to introduce it as a bill before Congress. And while the president has the right to veto a law passed by Congress, the Congress, as the representatives of the people [in theory, anyway; lobbyists notwithstanding] have the right to override a presidential veto. And the judiciary has the authority to declare a law passed by the Congress to be contrary to the Consititution, or unconstitutional.

But the President cannot declare a law unconstitutional, nor can he MAKE the laws; the concept of separation of powers was devised to insure that. Under Nixon, and now under GWB, the president tries to overstep his constitutionally-determined boundaries. It is the duty of the Congress, and the judiciary, to reign in such an assault on the Constitution; for an assault on the Constitution is an assault on the citizenry, as much so as any armed attack on our home soil would be.

So Mr. Purvis' definition of preserving freedom is to take it away from the citizens? Perhaps he believes that freedom can be "preserved" in a jar, or on a shelf, like jams and jellies and corn and beans. If that is his stand, then he has no idea what freedom is. You can no more preserve freedom by putting it away in the pantry than you can preserve the a butterfly or a flower by pressing it into a book. Oh, you may well preserve the IMAGE of the flower or the butterfly, but you have lost its ESSENCE. Once you have lost the ESSENCE of freedom, it is as worthless as the pressed rose or the monarch butterfly under glass; pretty to look at, but devoid of its very substance.

And life no longer comes forth from any of them.

________________________________________

This may be of help: http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:xC1KJHV...l=en&lr=lang_en

________________________________________

Edited January 21, 2006 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Without a formal declaration of war by the Congress, or a declaration of martial law by the President, the powers of both the Congress and the President are limited, as specified in the Constitution; THEY ARE NOT ABSOLUTE, as Mr. Purvis implies in his post.

While some may argue that the President has the power to do as he pleases, one must also understand that the Founding Fathers of the United States, still smarting from being under the thumb of King George, wanted anything BUT an imperial presidency. THAT is why the Constitution was written as it was, with checks and balances on authority. The president does not have the power to make law; that power is reserved to the Congress. If the president wants a particular law passed, he mus first find a member of congress to introduce it as a bill before Congress. And while the president has the right to veto a law passed by Congress, the Congress, as the representatives of the people [in theory, anyway; lobbyists notwithstanding] have the right to override a presidential veto. And the judiciary has the authority to declare a law passed by the Congress to be contrary to the Consititution, or unconstitutional.

But the President cannot declare a law unconstitutional, nor can he MAKE the laws; the concept of separation of powers was devised to insure that. Under Nixon, and now under GWB, the president tries to overstep his constitutionally-determined boundaries. It is the duty of the Congress, and the judiciary, to reign in such an assault on the Constitution; for an assault on the Constitution is an assault on the citizenry, as much so as any armed attack on our home soil would be.

So Mr. Purvis' definition of preserving freedom is to take it away from the citizens? Perhaps he believes that freedom can be "preserved" in a jar, or on a shelf, like jams and jellies and corn and beans. If that is his stand, then he has no idea what freedom is. You can no more preserve freedom by putting it away in the pantry than you can preserve the a butterfly or a flower by pressing it into a book. Oh, you may well preserve the IMAGE of the flower or the butterfly, but you have lost its ESSENCE. Once you have lost the ESSENCE of freedom, it is as worthless as the pressed rose or the monarch butterfly under glass; pretty to look at, but devoid of its very substance.

And life no longer comes forth from any of them.

Mark!

You seem to have neglected to mention the fact that we have a Congress as well as a Supreme Court, which are there to insure that whatever liberties; freedoms; civil rights; etc; are either temporarily suspended and/or permanently taken away, fall within the constitutional powers of that branch of government which does so.

And until such time as either the Congress of the US and/or the US Supreme Court decides otherwise, the President of the US is obligated, by law and the constitution, to protect the interest and welfare of US citizens at home and abroad.

Congress and/or the US Supreme Court will decide if the President has exceeded his constitutional powers in regards to any potential abuses.

It is the "checks and balances", and although all sides have at one time or another abused the system, it nevertheless continues to function for the betterment of all.

The "War" on Terrorism has far more meaning than mere rhetoric.

And I, as an american citizen, who has reaped the benefits of the society in which the US Government has insured for me, have no problems whatsoever about being "spied" upon if it will continue to provide the same benefits and opportunities for your children and my children.

Therefore, the US Government is "taking" nothing from me, if by virtue of my concern for the future welfare of your and my children, I state that they can monitor whatever they want of my personal and/or private correspondences.

The "Scales of Justice" will equally balance out any potential injustice to the individual which are a result of betterment for the society.

[Terry Mauro]

The United Kingdom has much to thank that many of you were not around during the "ultra secret" days.

No doubt, you would have filed suit against your own intelligence system's monitering of German & Japanese transmissions.

My family have a long tradition of fighting for freedom. My grandfather was killed in France in 1916. My father was badly wounded in the Second World War fighting for freedom. My mother enduring several years of constant bombardment from the skies while working in an armaments factory during the war. What were they fighting for? The freedom to vote. The freedom to organize. The freedom to express their opinions. What was the point of fighting against other countries for these freedoms if you allow them to be taken away by your own government. The CIA may or may not be reading my emails sent to friends in America. What I do know is that they have no right to do so? It will not stop me saying what I think about the world. However, my fear is that it might frighten some individuals to do as they think our masters want us to think. The worse form of censorship is always self-censorship. That is what this issue is really about.

********************************************************

"However, my fear is that it might frighten some individuals to do as they think our masters want us to think. The worse form of censorship is always self-censorship. That is what this issue is really about."

And, while I'm in total agreement with you, I'm probably one of the most out-spoken, rage-invecting, devil-may-care perpetrators of these exact same crimes(?). What, with my murderous schemes that leave my brother speechless on his cellphone at least once every Saturday during our transcontinental phone chats. Yet so far, the only repercussions I've experienced are from my Norton corrupting my Outlook Express mail server. This will not curtail the verbal abuse I'll inevitably hurl at the Bush fascists, and their NSA rabid pit bulls. I'll continue to be as vocal about their moronic ineptitude as always, especially to my senators and representatives.

As far as frightening some individuals? If they've got that much to lose then maybe they should remain as ostriches with their heads in the sand, because they'll never be of any use to the cause. Let's face it, there are too many creature comforts afforded to those who've never known anything else. And, I seriously doubt they'll ever be capable of risking the familiar for what they'll certainly perceive to be the unknown. They're the ones who'll always run and cower the minute they hear the barbarians are at the gates. What we need are true leaders who'll stand by their right to voice their opinions, and possibly with our own sets of verbal billy clubs and tear gas. Especially, if we ever expect to incite a peaceful riot again, at least during this hostile regime. But, I'm not counting on anyone but myself when the going really gets rough. Just MHO.

[Tim Carroll]

Without a formal declaration of war by the Congress, or a declaration of martial law by the President, the powers of both the Congress and the President are limited, as specified in the Constitution; THEY ARE NOT ABSOLUTE, as Mr. Purvis implies in his post.... Once you have lost the ESSENCE of freedom, it is as worthless as the pressed rose or the monarch butterfly under glass; pretty to look at, but devoid of its very substance.

The "Scales of Justice" will equally balance out any potential injustice to the individual which are a result of betterment for the society.

There can be no checks and balances when the executive cedes itself unlimited secret war powers. The Rovian line is that Americans prefer security to liberty, given the hyped threat. Not this American. Mention of the values for which many have fought and died should include that it is these same values that are under attack from American protectors. Even Lincoln's suspension of habeus corpus is now recognized as having been illegal, even in the context of a real war on American soil.

If the constitution is to be rendered null and void, we should recognize that for what it is. If this not to be a nation of laws, then we shouldn't have impeached a president for lying about a BJ. The bottom-line: we are not at war. The framers were very specific about what constituted a "war," and this doesn't qualify. There hasn't been a declaration of war since December 8, 1941. This is directly attributable to the skirting of the law and promotion of unconstitutional aggression.

Now the feds are squeezing Google to give up all of its records on people who access sexually-explicit websites so it can prosecute its war on smut. With wars on drugs, poverty, perversion, etc., how long before even discussions such as this will attract the prying eyes of the government? It's called a slippery slope, and the Founding Fathers wrote extensively and eloquently about it. Any reading of Thomas Jefferson clearly demonstrates that the threat comes from the government, not the piddling idiosyncracies of the country's inhabitants.

T.C.

[Thomas Graves]

[...] while I'm in total agreement with you, I'm probably one of the most out-spoken, rage-invecting, devil-may-care perpetrators of these exact same crimes(?). What, with my murderous schemes that leave my brother speechless on his cellphone at least once every Saturday during our transcontinental phone chats. Yet so far, the only repercussions I've experienced are from my Norton corrupting my Outlook Express mail server. This will not curtail the verbal abuse I'll inevitably hurl at the Bush fascists, and their NSA rabid pit bulls. I'll continue to be as vocal about their moronic ineptitude as always, especially to my senators and representatives.

As far as frightening some individuals? If they've got that much to lose then maybe they should remain as ostriches with their heads in the sand, because they'll never be of any use to the cause. Let's face it, there are too many creature comforts afforded to those who've never known anything else. And, I seriously doubt they'll ever be capable of risking the familiar for what they'll certainly perceive to be the unknown. They're the ones who'll always run and cower the minute they hear the barbarians are at the gates. What we need are true leaders who'll stand by their right to voice their opinions, and possibly with our own sets of verbal billy clubs and tear gas. Especially, if we ever expect to incite a peaceful riot again, at least during this hostile regime. But, I'm not counting on anyone but myself when the going really gets rough. Just MHO.

_____________________________________

Right Arm, Sister!! Uh, I mean Right On!!!

_____________________________________

[Thomas H. Purvis]

The United Kingdom has much to thank that many of you were not around during the "ultra secret" days.

No doubt, you would have filed suit against your own intelligence system's monitering of German & Japanese transmissions.

My family have a long tradition of fighting for freedom. My grandfather was killed in France in 1916. My father was badly wounded in the Second World War fighting for freedom. My mother enduring several years of constant bombardment from the skies while working in an armaments factory during the war. What were they fighting for? The freedom to vote. The freedom to organize. The freedom to express their opinions. What was the point of fighting against other countries for these freedoms if you allow them to be taken away by your own government. The CIA may or may not be reading my emails sent to friends in America. What I do know is that they have no right to do so? It will not stop me saying what I think about the world. However, my fear is that it might frighten some individuals to do as they think our masters want us to think. The worse form of censorship is always self-censorship. That is what this issue is really about.

********************************************************

"However, my fear is that it might frighten some individuals to do as they think our masters want us to think. The worse form of censorship is always self-censorship. That is what this issue is really about."

And, while I'm in total agreement with you, I'm probably one of the most out-spoken, rage-invecting, devil-may-care perpetrators of these exact same crimes(?). What, with my murderous schemes that leave my brother speechless on his cellphone at least once every Saturday during our transcontinental phone chats. Yet so far, the only repercussions I've experienced are from my Norton corrupting my Outlook Express mail server. This will not curtail the verbal abuse I'll inevitably hurl at the Bush fascists, and their NSA rabid pit bulls. I'll continue to be as vocal about their moronic ineptitude as always, especially to my senators and representatives.

As far as frightening some individuals? If they've got that much to lose then maybe they should remain as ostriches with their heads in the sand, because they'll never be of any use to the cause. Let's face it, there are too many creature comforts afforded to those who've never known anything else. And, I seriously doubt they'll ever be capable of risking the familiar for what they'll certainly perceive to be the unknown. They're the ones who'll always run and cower the minute they hear the barbarians are at the gates. What we need are true leaders who'll stand by their right to voice their opinions, and possibly with our own sets of verbal billy clubs and tear gas. Especially, if we ever expect to incite a peaceful riot again, at least during this hostile regime. But, I'm not counting on anyone but myself when the going really gets rough. Just MHO.

Thanks Terry!

Your comments fully demonstrate why, as frequently "rabid" americans, we will tolerate for short periods of time, government intrusion into our rights and freedoms.

Yet, if an when any of those in power think that this will be the "status quo", they will be among the "ex" politicians.

Just as those of us here can not fully understand or appreciate the views of those who live in other countries under different realms of government, those who have not lived and travelled throughout this country can not appreciate or understand the "backbone" of the general american public.

The Japanese did not understand this, and although told by one of their own to let a "sleeping dog lie", they nevertheless proceeded under the misconception that although at times lax and lackadasical, we would not come together and "bite" anyone who takes it upon themselves to attack our society.

Thereafter, as always, we will return to fighting among ourselves, sometimes over important issues, and sometimes over absolutely trivial items.

When the Iraq situation is ended, the long term advantages to the general american public will have many far reaching implications.

Of those will be the first "true" and completely qualified "Civillian Militia".

As a result of usage of our National Guard and Reserve Forces, we are now in the position that we have trained and experienced militia forces which are made up of civillians, and which will insure that our, as well as their rights are not abridged except as dictated necessary.

Think about that one!

[Tim Carroll]

What was the point of fighting against other countries for these freedoms if you allow them to be taken away by your own government.

When the Iraq situation is ended, the long term advantages to the general american public will have many far reaching implications. Of those will be the first "true" and completely qualified "Civillian Militia". As a result of usage of our National Guard and Reserve Forces, we are now in the position that we have trained and experienced militia forces which are made up of civillians, and which will insure that our, as well as their rights are not abridged except as dictated necessary. Think about that one!

Yuk Yuk Yuk, mmmm boy and howie! This Middle East training exercise sure will be a great thing in the "long term," preparing a "qualified 'Civillian [sic] Militia'" (assumedly full of half-literates who can't spell what they advocate). This argument sickens me! The Purv's fascistic warmongering nonsense demeans the value of life and liberty. We're back to the military training exercise argument for advocating the attrocities of Vietnam and Iraq. Some of us aren't so cavalier about the memories of those who've been lost. This guy's disgusting yammering has crossed the line, and at the very least, is distinctly un-American. Mussolini would have loved him.

T.C.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

What was the point of fighting against other countries for these freedoms if you allow them to be taken away by your own government.

When the Iraq situation is ended, the long term advantages to the general american public will have many far reaching implications. Of those will be the first "true" and completely qualified "Civillian Militia". As a result of usage of our National Guard and Reserve Forces, we are now in the position that we have trained and experienced militia forces which are made up of civillians, and which will insure that our, as well as their rights are not abridged except as dictated necessary. Think about that one!

Yuk Yuk Yuk, mmmm boy and howie! This Middle East training exercise sure will be a great thing in the "long term," preparing a "qualified 'Civillian [sic] Militia'" (assumedly full of half-literates who can't spell what they advocate). This argument sickens me! The Purv's fascistic warmongering nonsense demeans the value of life and liberty. We're back to the military training exercise argument for advocating the attrocities of Vietnam and Iraq. Some of us aren't so cavalier about the memories of those who've been lost. This guy's disgusting yammering has crossed the line, and at the very least, is distinctly un-American. Mussolini would have loved him.

T.C.

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

assumedly full of half-literates who can't spell what they advocate).

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

If, as assumed, this references me, there are some of us who are too old and also could give a xxxx less as to proofreading and/or spellcheck to worry with what the likes of you think.

On the other hand, to your enduring benefit, there will certainly no longer be an Army who accepts blindly the old "fix bayonets and charge" concept of the past.

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

demeans the value of life and liberty

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

Your resume on all that you have done to secure the "life and liberty" of the US would be appreciated.

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

The Purv's fascistic warmongering nonsense demeans the value of life and liberty.

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

Please state for the enjoyment of the reading public, all of those extended periods of times since WWII in which the United States has not been involved in some form of military engagements with forces of a foreign power and/or government.

Untried military forces are about like doctors who have not completed their residency, and "International Relations Specialists" who have not participated in the "real life" arena.

Theory and education are great, in theory!

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

Some of us aren't so cavalier about the memories of those who've been lost

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

Perhaps so, exactly when was it that you volunteered to get shot at?

For someone who claims to have some form of "poli-science" degree, you truly are at a complete loss as to what the world situation is and what it therefore dictates the US Government must respond to.

Perhaps you should volunteer to travel to Iraq and make an attempt at "International Relations" in describing to those who continue to plant bombs aka "IED's" along the roads, killing more of their own populace than US forces, the errors of their way.

I am certain that they would appreciate the "enlightened" input from one such as you who is so qualified.

No doubt they would even change their religions, etc; after you have fully explained the error of their way.

Or better yet, and even much closer to home, why not take some night off and stroll around in your local and explain the principals of "International Relations" to some of the "Crips" and/or "Bloods".

I am certain that they, being completely rational thinking american citizens, would also appreciate the enlightened learning from one such as you with so much experience.

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

That you either do not accept or understand that a principal aspect of international relations is the backing of a highly trained; experienced; and equipped military force, is indicative that you took far to many electives and should have concentrated more on the "core" subjects.

[Tim Carroll]

If, as assumed, this references me, there are some of us who are too old and also could give a xxxx less as to proofreading and/or spellcheck to worry with what the likes of you think.

This isn't a matter of spellcheck, it's a matter of the valuation of education, which is regularly demeaned by this warmonger who right here admits that his photo is cowardly and falsely youthful. Let's have some authenticity from this person who celebrates atop the graves of those who've been lost, dismisses those who have done the losing, and gleefully relishes killing as a precursor to the development of a well-trained civilian militia.

Your resume on all that you have done to secure the "life and liberty" of the US would be appreciated.

Clearly there would be nothing on my resume that would be "appreciated" by Purv. He certainly wouldn't admit that any anti-war activities contributed to hastening the end of the Vietnam War. But educationally, something of which he is proudly not appreciative, my resume might include the book dedicated to me: "What If They Gave A Crisis And Nobody Came." For the purpose of this forum, someone who doesn't dismiss the value of education and the pursuit of knowledge might consider that my seminar on this very forum had almost twice the posts of any other.

Untried military forces are about like doctors who have not completed their residency, and "International Relations Specialists" who have not participated in the "real life" arena. Theory and education are great, in theory!

When I get into heated debate with my brother-in-law, currently a Colonel, about matters of international relations, he doesn't need to resort to the typical and unmanly questioning of one's service to deal with the matter at hand. He actually attends numerous academic seminars and wouldn't think to question the constitutional precept that war-making be a civilian decision.

Perhaps you should volunteer to travel to Iraq and make an attempt at "International Relations" in describing to those who continue to plant bombs aka "IED's" along the roads, killing more of their own populace than US forces, the errors of their way. I am certain that they would appreciate the "enlightened" input from one such as you who is so qualified.... Or better yet, and even much closer to home, why not take some night off and stroll around in your local and explain the principals of "International Relations" to some of the "Crips" and/or "Bloods". I am certain that they, being completely rational thinking american citizens, would also appreciate the enlightened learning from one such as you with so much experience.

When I entered a private high school in 1968, I had to take a long bus ride past Black Panther headquarters in Oakland during the trial of Huey Newton. I found that even under circumstances most would enthusiastically avoid, civility and respectfulness was the best possible approach. The Purv wouldn't have lasted one day in that environment.

Back to the giddy excitement about the wonderful training the U.S. National Guard is now being provided in Iraq that will staff some future civilian militia, the development of a force designed for the control of a civilian population was more of the My Lai type action. Calley's boys got great training. That is why the Founding Fathers explicitly forbade the use of the military domestically.

But the true goal of the Neo-Confederates isn't a well-trained military. Otherwise they'd abide by the military guidelines of a 50:1 ratio for occupation forces and not be so irresponsibly endangering American boys in violation of standard military precepts. Their goal is a missile defense system, and lacking a viable superpower opponent, have begun a perpetual war against an amorphous concept of terrorism.

T.C.

Edited January 21, 2006 by Tim Carroll

[Thomas H. Purvis]

If, as assumed, this references me, there are some of us who are too old and also could give a xxxx less as to proofreading and/or spellcheck to worry with what the likes of you think.

This isn't a matter of spellcheck, it's a matter of the valuation of education, which is regularly demeaned by this warmonger who right here admits that his photo is cowardly and falsely youthful. Let's have some authenticity fromthis person who celebrates atop the graves of those who've been lost, dismisses those who have done the losing, and gleefully relishes killing as a precursor to the development of a well-trained civilian militia.

T.C.

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

admits that his photo is cowardly and falsely youthful

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

First off, despite what many may or may not think, I did not chose the particular photo to post.

Secondly, in event it has taken you this long to come to the realization that as a veteran of Vietnam, that I must be somewhat old, it demonstrates the lack of your understandings of time and space.

Lastly, I am still waiting enthusiastically for your to post all about the heroics of your "International Relations" conflicts and accomplishments in order to complete a comparative analysis of "cowards".

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

this person who celebrates atop the graves of those who've been lost, dismisses those who have done the losing,

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

In event that I do take the time to participate in celebration of the death, then it is with those who asked that their death be so remembered. Which unique personal characteristics you have obviously not been endowed with.

One can sit around and weep and/or cry about the deceased (for whatever reason) for the remainder of their days. It is not likely to win the next engagement and/or prepare one for the remainder of life, whatever the cause of death.

It is those such as yourself who degrade the sacrifice that these servicemen & women died for, or even merely served for.

It is those such as yourself who sit behind the security of your "International Relations" expertise and expouse that they either died for no reason or else they died because our government was wrong to have sent them to their death.

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

http://www.fallenheroesmemorial.com/oif/pr...ooleyseanm.html

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

Having attended the Church portion of Sean's funeral, some of us who did survive "our war", recognize what a loss to this country the death of those such as Sean are.

1. A Registered Nurse at Singing River Hospital, Pascagoula, MS

2. An individual with family and one who knew where he was going in life.

3. An individual who was offered the opportunity to transfer into a medical unit and utilize his RN experience in a "rear echelon" area as opposed to the Combat Engineer assignment which he had with his unit.

4. An individual who declined the "safe" route and chose his fellow unit members and assignment rather than to elect the safe RN/medical slot.

An individual who never asked, and wanted none to cry and weep over his decisions.

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

You, and those such as you degrade the honor of Sean Cooley, all the while attempting to convince that you know more about what is right for this country than the entire US Government and the President of the US, not to include many other foreign nations.

So, continue to sit safely behind whatever it is that you hide, and wave your flag! You certainly have earned the right to do so.

[Tim Carroll]

Having attended the Church portion of Sean's funeral, some of us who did survive "our war", recognize what a loss to this country the death of those such as Sean are. You, and those such as you degrade the honor of Sean Cooley, all the while attempting to convince that you know more about what is right for this country than the entire US Government and the President of the US, not to include many other foreign nations.

There are plenty of us who have other names that could be used to promote some antecdote-based argument. The idiotic argument that we have to continue to pursue an irrational policy so that those who've died won't have done so in vain is a formula for more useless death - but more training. Cindy Sheehan's qualifications to speak were well-established, right? I know of no reputable publication, think tank or politician, liberal or conservative, that would agree with Purvis' glee over the excellent training being obtained, despite the cost.

T.C.

Edited January 21, 2006 by Tim Carroll

[Gerry Hemming]

If, as assumed, this references me, there are some of us who are too old and also could give a xxxx less as to proofreading and/or spellcheck to worry with what the likes of you think.

This isn't a matter of spellcheck, it's a matter of the valuation of education, which is regularly demeaned by this warmonger who right here admits that his photo is cowardly and falsely youthful. Let's have some authenticity from this person who celebrates atop the graves of those who've been lost, dismisses those who have done the losing, and gleefully relishes killing as a precursor to the development of a well-trained civilian militia.

T.C.

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

Tom:

You are wasting your time "educating" this self-styled "paralegal/treehugger" with his "oh-so-important" and vaunted "Master Degree".

What this "draft dodger" (synonymous with failure to serve voluntarily) fails to grasp is that: You are saying that, Bush's alleged "errors/schemes" with regard to Afghanistan & Iraq (and soon to be Iran & Syria) will have SECONDARY consequences --which will no doubt enurr to the advantage of our national defense requirements.

The Soviets LOST in Afghanistan because they had absolutely no "Company, Field, nor Genaral grade" officers with actual combat experience -- other than persecuting their own slave subjects in the USSR Asiatic Republic & the Oblasts. Worse still, the most critical element of a fielded armed force, combat veteran non-commissioned officers, didn't exist. Coupled with the forced drafting of the Asiatic recruits, especially those of the Islamic faith (& the "Umma") opted to exercise restraint with their 'boots on the ground" !!

This forced Moscow to rely solely upon their aviation and armor assets. This strategy was demolished by the importation of MANPADS (SA-7 "Strellas", U.S. "Stingers") to take out the Mi-24 "Hind-D" attack choppers, Mi-8 "Hound", transport choppers, etc.!! Once the U.S. provided large quantities of RPG-7s (Rocket Propelled Grenades - purchased from Egypt) -- it was all over for the "Motorized Infantry" units. They were then forced back into their enclaves, where they were soon targeted by mortars and B-70 rockets. Had the Soviets not surrendered, the Mujahideen would have next employed IEDs & VBIEDS against the "Infidels".

How many junior & amateur -- U.S. & foreign officers have we suffered during numerous campaigns?? They and their "college degrees" meant diddly-xxxx in the field. Those that didn't get themselves (and their troops) killed, were the "quick & alert" who paid attention to (and learned from) the combat veteran NCOs !!

My goodness gracious, this hero is a "guy with a beard" photo, and that is coupled with a "Heroic?" water rafting picture. Such a tough guy. Get your ass out to a skydiver dropzone, then send us your first photo of YOUR first "novice" 60 second delay (from 12,500 ft. above ground)!! And ONLY THEN will we be impressed with at least "ONE CREDENTIAL". One which demonstrates your having just a limited risk-taking Bio. 80+ granparents, including G.H.W. Bush have done it, where are your "legendary?" balls?

As for warmongering, we who have faced years of being "in harm's way" -- are the most reluctant to become involved in foolish "politico/draft-dodger" or "John Kerry-band-aid-Purple-heart" expeditionary exploits.

Get your ass down to help support "Sub-Comandante" Marcos and his Zapatistas. Some of my associates have already been there, and done that !!

Try some refugee relief work in the foreign arena. A few hundred of my associates continue with those operations, which we started back during our Biafra & Congo operations of the 1960s -- and they are still at it every year since !!

Or better yet, sit at your Chico "Bunker" keyboard, and continue to exhibit your literary skills, and continuing cowardly comments.

Tom, as always -- these "wimp/symps" gotta lotta nerve, but are always short in the gonads department, or to be PC -- many are lacking in the Ovary et/sans testosterone department. NO real legal education (just a certificate, degree, license, etc.) -- but none of street or courtroom bona fides. Just a bunch of "go-along-get-along-plea bargaining" quitters, who continue to litter the judicial landscape.

Take a look at the biographies of these clowns. "They saw a movie(s), read a book(s), touristed around a few places, rubbed elbows with other learned? folks". Moreover, they ignore their already published deficiencies, and quickly spew their pseudo-intellectual bile against REAL people. Especially against deceased VIPs, who wouldn't have given them an autograph, much less exchanged ideas or pleasantries with their wannabe asses !!

And their "BOOKS" ??!! Library loads of re-run speculation, rumor, anonymous sources, and regurgitated "quotes?". ALL taken out of context and time-frame. And yet, they have the "Nads" to cite it all as scripture. What a gang of gullible squatters we are forced to endure on this Internet !!

GPH

____________________________

[Tim Carroll]

You are wasting your time "educating" this self-styled "paralegal/treehugger" with his "oh-so-important" and vaunted "Master Degree". What this "draft dodger" (synonymous with failure to serve voluntarily) fails to grasp is that: You are saying that, Bush's alleged "errors/schemes" with regard to Afghanistan & Iraq (and soon to be Iran & Syria) will have SECONDARY consequences --which will no doubt enurr to the advantage of our national defense requirements.... As for warmongering, we who have faced years of being "in harm's way" -- are the most reluctant to become involved in foolish "politico/draft-dodger" or "John Kerry-band-aid-Purple-heart" expeditionary exploits. Get your ass down to help support "Sub-Comandante" Marcos and his Zapatistas. Some of my associates have already been there, and done that !!

Gerry! My old buddy! Great to hear from you! "'John Kerry-band-aid-Purple-heart' expeditionary exploits" What does that mean? John Kerry's service wasn't honorable? Those "associates" to whom Gerry refers waged war against a peasant insurgency, leaving the bodies of nuns by the side of the road. One doesn't have to be a murdering swine to know that it's not a preferred course.

As for Gerry stepping up to clarify his brother-in-arms' ridiculous statements about the primary benefit (not "secondary," as the new spinning would have it) of the current military conflicts (better trained civilian militias), this goes back to the Purv's explanation for why the Soviets lost in Afghanistan and why Gerry's associates lost in Central America. The bottom-line is that the fight for freedom and against external aggression will always prevail. Occupation forces, by definition, eventually lose. Mercenary occupation forces, such as Gerry's, are like old whores harkening back to the good old days.

T.C.