Actually my outlook on the issue is due to the fact that numerous members of my family actually work with the government. FBI, CIA you name it. So I have access to information that most people don't. It makes interesting dinner conversation. All I can say is that there is more going on then you know about.
Comparing Vietnam and Iraq is completely the wrong way to go.
What are you smoking. If the iraqi people don't support you like the vietnam war you can't win. The only way this will be solved by the iraqi people after the soldiers leave.
They know that if Iraq becomes a democracy. The people in the other countries will want the same
You think that people would that easily rise up aginst thier leaders.
"You think that people would that easily rise up aginst thier leaders."
Their culture is ingrained with fear and servitude against the leaders as it has been for hundreds of years. Nothing has ever changed. Until now. Why do think Syria is surrendering so early? Because of Iraq. Believe it or not it's working.
"What are you smoking. If the iraqi people don't support you like the vietnam war you can't win. The only way this will be solved by the iraqi people after the soldiers leave."
I don't smoke. And the issue is bigger than just Iraq. Russia, China, France and even Italy are all involved. Vietnam was a result of poor planning and backstabbing politics. It's nowhere near the same.
Actually my outlook on the issue is due to the fact that numerous members of my family actually work with the government. FBI, CIA you name it. So I have access to information that most people don't. It makes interesting dinner conversation. All I can say is that there is more going on then you know about.
In that case your family should not be sgaring info with you and you and your family area national security risk.
My father worked in intelligence for the canadian navy during the cuban missle crisis and during the cold war. He spent alot of time up on the DEW line listening to the going's on of the world. For many years after he left the service he had to let the gov't know where he lived and when he left the country. He did not share the knowledge that he obtain with his family over dinner because that is INCREDIBLY UNETHICAL AND ILLEGAL!!!!!!
My family doesn't disclose everything. They just tell the information that is not common knowledge nor readily available to the press. We're not a national security risk lol. And no offense but a Canadian navy guy ain't much compared to my family's occupation. Sorry. It's not illegal (are you even aware of our laws) nor unethical (this coming from a country which allows pot smoking).
South Park said it best.
And no offense but a Canadian navy guy ain't much compared to my family's occupation. Sorry. It's not illegal (are you even aware of our laws) nor unethical (this coming from a country which allows pot smoking).
Yes, that's true, shame on our intelligence service for actually getting their facts straight. Being as you show a complete ignorance as to the importance of DEW line surveillance during the cold war and your casual dismissal regarding the sharing of security issues around the dinner table, not to mention the obvious lack of knowledge as to the level of communication that "used" to be prevalent between your mighty intelligence gathering nation and my puny backward country I really am questioning alot of what you have to say as truth.
Oh yes, just so you know, the reason why we don't waste time and money going after kids who smoke pot is because there are much more serious issues that take precedence. To waste time on little issues like that would be as foolish as government officials wasting time and money on investigating issues such as the sexual orientation of an animated sponge as opposed to paying attention to social security or the war in Iraq.
Actually my outlook on the issue is due to the fact that numerous members of my family actually work with the government. FBI, CIA you name it. So I have access to information that most people don't. It makes interesting dinner conversation. All I can say is that there is more going on then you know about.Thats a clever job done by intelligence works men, discuss work stuff with your family and let one of the family members brag on the net about it. Secret intelligence my ass, they should change it to common unintelligent agency. Their slogan is "you ever wonder about stuff the media dont tell you, just ask an agents family member and they fill you inn"
could congress actually prove useful?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 28th, 2005 2:45 am
Senators to Introduce 'Stop Government Propaganda Act'
By Brian Orloff / Editor & Publisher
In response to continued revelations of government-funded "journalism" -- ranging from the purported video news releases put out by the drug czar's office and the Department of Health and Human Services to the recently uncovered payments to columnists Armstrong Williams and Maggie Gallagher,who flacked administration programs -- Sens. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.) will introduce a bill, The Stop Government Propaganda Act, in the Senate next week.
"It's just not enough to say, 'Please don't do it anymore,'" Alex Formuzis, Lautenberg's spokesman, told E&P. "Legislation sometimes is required and we believe it is in this case."
The Stop Government Propaganda Act states, "Funds appropriated to an Executive branch agency may not be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States unless authorized by law."
"It's time for Congress to shut down the Administration's propaganda mill," Lautenberg said in a statement. "It has no place in the United States Government." The bill is co-sponsored by Sens. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Jon Corzine (D-N.J.).
Formuzis told E&P that while the bill is being introduced by Democrats, its message and intent is something endorsed by Republicans and Democrats alike.
"We only have a few senators on the bill so far, but we hope and expect that we'll get a number of others to sign on to the legislation once we introduce it," he said. "This is not a Republican or Democratic issue. This is an issue about an independent press, and I think that's something that will cross party lines."
The act would allow citizens to bring qui tam lawsuits on behalf of the United States government when the Department of Justice does not respond.
If the matter is taken to court, the bill proposes that the senior official responsible would be fined three times the amount of the "misspent taxpayer funds" plus an additional fine ranging from $5,000 to $10,000. And if a citizen's qui tam suit is accepted, the bill proposes that the plaintiff receives between 25 and 30% of the proceeds of the fine.
"The President said that his cabinet agencies made a mistake when they paid commentators to promote his agenda," Kennedy said in a statement. "It's more than just a mistake, it's an abuse of taxpayer funds and an abuse of the First Amendment and freedom of the press. ... If the President is serious about stopping these abuses, he will support this legislation."
According to a release, publicity or propaganda is defined in the bill as: news releases or publications that do not clearly identify the government agency responsible for the content; audio/visual or Internet presentations that do not identify the responsible government agency; any attempt to manipulate journalists or news organizations; messages created to aid a political party or candidate; messages with a "self-aggrandizing" purpose or "puffery of the Administration, agency, executive branch programs or policies or pending legislation"; and, finally, messages that are "so misleading or inaccurate that they constitute propaganda."