I have told you before that the US was a terrorist nation, but you don"t like to hear it because you, and I have allowed this to happen, how could we?

The Bush Administration's search for partners to promote "peace" and "democracy" within the Palestinian Authority (PA) resembles Lord Charles Bowen's "blind man in a dark room looking for a black hat -- which isn't there."

For the first time, the Bush Administration plans to give $150 million in cash directly to the Palestinian Authority (PA) Treasury, as part of a $496.5 million "aid" package, including $410 million for development programs. This added to the $86.5 million for CIA "security training," which Congress authorized in April 2007.
(Ed. - Right thinking Israelis - which does not include its government - can rightly remark: "With friends like the US and Bush, who needs enemies?" Bush's "War against terror" clearly does not apply when Israel's interest and security is at stake, or when the lives of Jews are the target of the terrorists)

The CIA has apparently assumed the Palestinian terrorist-training role previously held by the former Soviet Union. Since 1994, the CIA armed and trained thousands of Palestinian "security forces," who subsequently joined every Palestinian terrorist organization.

CIA Palestinian training success is best described by a member of the PA's Chairman own security unit, - Force 17, officer Abu Yusef: "The operations of the Palestinian resistance would [not] have been so successful and "would not have killed more than 1,000 Israelis since 2000, and defeated the Israelis in Gaza without [American military] trainings," he boasted in August 2007.

Since the Oslo Accords, the PA received some $14 billion to $20 billion in international aid, according to a 2007 Funding for Peace Coalition (FPC) report to the British Parliament. Each Palestinian received $4,000 to $8,000 per year. In comparison, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), provided $1 billion in humanitarian aid for 2.5 million Darfur refugees from 2003 to 2006 --only $100 per person annually. Moreover, of the $7 billion pledged international aid, only $5 billion were spent to assist more than 5 million Tsunami victims in more than 15 countries on two continents.

The PA received "the highest per capita aid transfer in the history of foreign aid anywhere," according to former World Bank country director for Gaza and the West Bank, Nigel Roberts. Not surprisingly, hundreds of thousands of Gazans spent more than $300 million in less than two week shopping spree, after Hamas blew up the border with Egypt. Yet, the Palestinian economy is in ruins, Why?

In March 2007, PA Prime Minister and former World Bank official Salam Fayyad, told London's Daily Telegraph: "No one can give donors that assurance" that funds reach their designated destinations. "Where is all of the transparency in all of this? It's gone." Controlling Palestinian finances, Fayyad concluded, is "virtually impossible."

Palestinian violence has escalated since the 1994 PA establishment and PA officials have produced an unbroken record of unfulfilled promises and outright deception. Yet President George W. Bush in his January 28 State of the Union Address, reassured the Palestinians that "America will do, and I will do, everything we can to help them achieve…a Palestinian state by the end of this year."

Nevertheless, U.S.-favored PA President Mahmoud Abbas, who in 1957 with Yasser Arafat co-founded the al Fattah terrorist group, assumed the role of his predecessor. Like Muslim Brotherhood, Marxist–trained Jihadist Arafat, neither does Abbas "recognize that confronting terror is essential to achieving a state where his people can live in dignity and at peace with Israel," as President Bush declared.

Abbas remains committed to the organization's reason d'etre--destroying Israel and expelling the Jewish people from the region. Despite public Fattah-Hamas leadership disagreements, branding one another "murderers and thieves," Abbas arranged on Jan. 30 to give Hamas $3.1 billion of $7.7 billion that international donor community pledged last December in Paris.

Abbas' support for Hamas is not new. In Feb. 2007, He announced, "We must unite the Hamas and Fattah blood in the struggle against Israel as we did at the beginning of the intifada." He stated this en route to Mecca to meet with the Saudi King, and Hamas terror chiefs Khaled Mashaal and Ismail Haniyeh. The Saudis pledged hundreds of millions of dollars in "humanitarian aid" --which, like previous pledges, they failed to deliver.

Rather than $660 million in annual aid the Saudis promised in 2002, the kingdom donated only $84 million since then, according to World Bank reports. Other Arab League members, who in 2002 promised $55 million monthly to foster PA economic development, gave even less.

Meanwhile, however, the Saudis and the Gulf states funneled hundreds of millions of petrodollars--some raised in government-sponsored telethons --to reward Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, Hamas and Palestinian Jihad suicide bombers and fuel the anti-Israel Jihad. Indeed, "Saudi Arabia remains a source of recruits and finances for …Levant-based militants," said National Intelligence Director J. Michael McConnell, before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, on 5 February 2008.

McConnell should have included USAID on his terror-funding list. A Dec. 2007 USAID audit reported that the mission administering its funds gave money to groups and institutions affiliated with U.S. designated terrorist organizations, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad. It warned: "Without additional controls, the mission could inadvertently provide support to entities or individuals associated with terrorism."

USAID "failure" to prevent funds from reaching Palestinian terrorist is not surprising given U.S. previous Administrations support for Arafat, and now for Abbas, who repeatedly claims: "We have a legitimate right to direct our guns against Israeli occupation," while reiterating his desire for "a political partnership with Hamas."

It is time for President Bush to remove his blinders and stop donating U.S.-taxpayer funds to this murderous partnership. It is also time for Congress to demand a proper monitoring program to oversee the legitimate use of U.S. aid to the Palestinians.

Do you think that Nader could throw A wrench into Democratic party's party?
But you know when look at the two canidates that they have to choose from (Osama Obama, and over the Hillary) they aren't losing much. now ask me again why I didn't vote in the 2006 election, there wasn't anyone to vote for!
But I may vote in the upcoming election, and my vote would go to Nader, afterall the whole damn election thing is a joke!
Conservative criminals or Liberal liars, (whatever)!

In 2000, he entered presidential politics as the candidate of the Green Party, a left-of-center political organization that shunned the policies of both the Democrat and Republican parties. Nader won nearly 3 percent of the popular vote. His campaign angered many Democrats, who blamed Nader for Vice President Al Gore's narrow loss to Republican George W. Bush. Undeterred, he announced his bid for the White House again in 2004 as an independent, saying that his focus would be on the necessities of the American people. He said the two political parties were broken. "They need a wake-up call. They need somebody to hold their feet to the fire inside the electoral arena.

Speaking to a crowd of Democratic Party supporters in 2004, former President Jimmy Carter told Nader to "go back to examining the rear end of automobiles" -- a reference to his legendary auto-safety campaigns. "Don't risk costing the Democrats the White House this year, as you did four years ago," Carter said.

President George W. Bush won re-election in 2004. Many Democrats dubbed Nader a spoiler for his refusal, once again, to get out of the race. And they are criticizing his newly launched candidacy as a move that could hurt the party's efforts to win the White House back from Republicans this November.

Speaking on Meet the Press to announce his decision to run again this year, Nader rejected that description of his role, saying he wants to bring issues to the campaign that he says the Republicans and Democrats are ignoring. "You go from Iraq to Palestine to Israel, from Enron to Wall Street, from Katrina to the bungling of the Bush administration, to the complicity of the Democrats to not stopping him on the war, [not] stopping him on the tax cuts, getting a decent energy bill through," Nader said. "You have to ask yourself as a citizen, should we elaborate the issues that the two [parties] are not talking about?"

Lets All Turn GREEN!

Yesterday Nancy Pelosi made this statement!

Today we recognize the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade -- a cornerstone of the womens reproductive rights.
On this day in 1973, the Supreme Court recognized that a woman has the power and fundamental right to choose what happens to her body and, by extension, her future.
I will continue to fight for the right to choose, for safe and quality reproductive health care, comprehensive and medically sound reproductive education, and access to contraception in the United States and abroad.

SOURCE Office of the Speaker of the House

Today I answer this statement!

The reproductive system is designed so that a female produces an egg which has half of the chromosomes of a complete cell. The male produces a sperm cell, which also has half the chromosomes of a normal cell. When the sperm and egg cells combine that makes a complete cell, like other cells. This new cell is UNIQUE and will become a unique human being, never to be duplicated. It grows to become an offspring of it's parents. A human cell, does NOT become a dog, a rat or an elephant. A chicken cell does not become an eagle. muskrat or chimpanzee. Parents produce offspring of themselves.

An egg or sperm might be considered just a part of their originator, but when they combine, they become a totally, completely new being, with half of their chromosomes coming from their mother and half coming from their father. To destroy this is to destroy a totally UNIQUE INDIVIDUAL. A COMPLETELY INNOCENT INDIVIDUAL. This is the definition of murder.

To argue that "life is in the blood" and that, a single cell has no blood and therefore has no life is disingenuous. The cell uses the mother's blood to sustain it's life, until that cell can divide and produce blood of it's own. Clearly, no single celled organism has blood and yet they exist and reproduce. Are they saying that all the microbes and bacteria are not alive? If they admit that microbes and bacteria are alive and are uniquely different from each other, then how can they deny that a fetus is alive? And a fetus is undeniably UNIQUE! This argument is spurious and vacuous. The statement that the life is in the blood, is a simple reference to the fact that a multicelled being would die if his/her blood were removed.

A human egg, fertilized by a human sperm, becomes a human being! To say that it is not human simply because of the state of it's development is absurd. Will we soon say that people over fifty are not human, simply because of their state of age and development? Some might even dare to do that, but they are probably not over fifty!

What of a woman's rights? First, a woman has an absolute right and an absolute moral obligation to say NO, to anyone except her husband! Second, half or more of aborted babies are women, female, what of their woman's rights to even exist? To argue that abortion is a woman's right when it is being used to select gender by destroying women seems to indicate a major defect in logic. And what of the child's rights? Do any of us have the right to kill an innocent person just because it suits our convenience? Then, why is this "right" given to women? The right to LIVE is a fundamental RIGHT, GIVEN BY GOD! NO ONE has the right to destroy an innocent, unique and human life! NO ONE! The right to life transends all other rights for without life, THERE ARE NO OTHER RIGHTS!

What of the mother's health? This is a matter that can and should be taken into consideration before pregnancy. If it is determined that a pregnancy poses a serious risk, steps can be taken to avoid pregnancy. Further, this is very often a false excuse. Rarely is the mother's life in such serious danger that steps like c section before full term could not resolve the matter. All possible steps should be made to save both mother and child.

A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks.


The study concluded that the statements "were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses."

The study was posted Tuesday on the Web site of the Center for Public Integrity, which worked with the Fund for Independence in Journalism.

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel did not comment on the merits of the study Tuesday night but reiterated the administration's position that the world community viewed Iraq's leader, Saddam Hussein, as a threat.

"The actions taken in 2003 were based on the collective judgment of intelligence agencies around the world," Stanzel said.

The study counted 935 false statements in the two-year period. It found that in speeches, briefings, interviews and other venues, Bush and administration officials stated unequivocally on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them or had links to al-Qaida or both.

"It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to al-Qaida," according to Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith of the Fund for Independence in Journalism staff members, writing an overview of the study. "In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003."

Named in the study along with Bush were top officials of the administration during the period studied: Vice President Dick Cheney, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan.

Bush led with 259 false statements, 231 about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 28 about Iraq's links to al-Qaida, the study found. That was second only to Powell's 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq and al-Qaida.

The center said the study was based on a database created with public statements over the two years beginning on Sept. 11, 2001, and information from more than 25 government reports, books, articles, speeches and interviews.

"The cumulative effect of these false statements — amplified by thousands of news stories and broadcasts — was massive, with the media coverage creating an almost impenetrable din for several critical months in the run-up to war," the study concluded.

"Some journalists — indeed, even some entire news organizations — have since acknowledged that their coverage during those prewar months was far too deferential and uncritical. These mea culpas notwithstanding, much of the wall-to-wall media coverage provided additional, 'independent' validation of the Bush administration's false statements about Iraq," it said.