The Weiner Waggers, Palin's Revere and More

This week the mainstream news media is at it again, dominating the airwaves with sensationalized news stories, and propaganda geared more toward ratings, than anything that truly might interest the American public, in this writer's opinion.

First there are what I like to call the "Weiner Waggers" and their subversive journalism.

I'm sure this week's "Saturday Night Live" will be a hoot, and have a field day with this one.

Mr. Weiner is a American of the Jewish faith, married to a Middle Eastern young woman that just so happens to also work for Hillary Clinton, Bill's wife.

I'm sure there is some real bonding going on there between those two women on those taxpayer paid trips to all those foreign ports of call on behalf of the State Department.

Mr. Weiner was, of course, recently married.

I find it strange that this brouhaha occurred just as the public was in the midst of continuing to question and address the bin Laden "burial at sea" and details surrounding that heroic event.

In fact, seems almost to have been concocted so fast - this "news breaking story."

And the pronunciation of Mr. Weiner's name certainly seems to be either intentionally mispronounced also to flesh out this story, since I've yet to meet another whose name is spelled in such a way, especially of the Jewish faith, and pronounced "Weiner" (as in Oscar Mayer) rather than "Whiner" (as in childrens' tales of woe, or rhyming with beer stein-er).

The fact that it seems politician's infidelity is become the norm and seems to be used as a segway after or during horrific Constitutional violations, press reports out of Washington, or whatever to an increasingly outraged public with the goings on in Washington lo these many years also seems rather odd.

Maybe he just simply irritated the Jewish population with the selection of his bride, who is not Jewish from all reports and is of a different religious and ethnic persuasion.

Or maybe he is in on this latest hoax and diversion.

I mean, also from all reports he has sponsored bills for increasing visas also for foreign models to this country (as if we don't have enough American models, most on Fox it seems promoted to "political analysts" or "lawyer"), although who knows if that one is true, either.

And then there was Ms. Palin's version of the Paul Revere tale, with a lot of "shucks" and "by gollies" thrown in for good measure.

Darn those British for even thinking about "takin' away our guns," hence Mr. Revere's warning.

Nothing about that Declaration of Independence and just what the true "grievances" of those patriots were, or the fact that America had already pretty much declared their intent to break free of Britain due to also its history of governmental abuse, increasing taxation, and its partnering with its "favored subjects" in order to rob from the poor, and give to the rich to make them much, much richer with titles and baronies, giving away or demanding both their homes and land, and then even the fruits of their own labors as that 16th Amendment and the increasing eminent domain abuses for purely increased tax revenues demonstrate now in this country.

Not that simple little "indirect" tea tax.

Mimicing the Britain of the 18th century once again.

But, gosh, America it was simply those guns and arms the British wished to confiscate.

Thrown in to all of this was also the release of a report that indicated that Americans at the present time have the lowest taxes since the 1950's.

Federal, state, local or statutory?

No breakdown was provided.

I guess we are forgetting all the literally tens of thousands of laws that have been implemented since the 1950's that now mandate (such as ObamaCare intends to do) the purchase of its "favored subjects" products BY LAW OR ELSE you can simply pay a fine to the government, or be arrested if you do not now also budget whatever income you have left according to the U.S. Congress's will and edicts (or your own state, who gave the federal government back in 1913 power it was never, ever intended to have - at least without the consent of the governed in those "passed" amendments).

Those, by any stretch of the imagination, also count as "taxes" too.

But Ms. Palin's version is more exploitive, and inflammatory (and incorrect).

Gotta love the Washington press corp, cable news and those other "waggers."

Obama Hawks British War Strategy

It appears the hawk has replaced the dove during Mr. Obama's less than three year run as our nation's president.

During the British tour announced and undertaken post the "capture" and "death" of Osama bin Laden, Mr. Obama has been meeting with the British leaders and hawking his new conversion from his election positions and statements in 2008. Remember, at that time he was challenged as "soft" on war with his stances to end the War in Iraq as soon as "safely" possible, and get our troops back home and end this unconstitutional Middle East takeover in the name of fighting "terrorism" and also tracking down bin Laden.

The "new" British initiative which America and American troops are also expected to support?

Establishing "democracies" throughout the Middle East. Of course, the United States is not a democracy, nor was ever intended to be, but a Constitutional Republic honoring freedom of religion most of all, although with Christian-Judeo roots in its original intent and form. Not extremism in either of those two faiths either in supporting interventionist or even precipitated wars in order to "take over" other countries and their established forms of government, whatever they may be, but affording those people living within those sovereign countries to also stage their own revolutionary wars if "change" is truly needed there, with U.S. diplomatic and arms support if need be, of course if absolutely needed or necessary.

Not direct troop involvement, at any rate.

But no matter, it is clear that the "change" which occurs under a change in leadership in this country has no effect, and instead of abiding by the Constitution it appears a race to see which party can desecrate it even faster.

While all this was being announced, of course, the U.S. Congress and House of "Misrepresentatives" again passed the extension of the Patriot Act, that Act of Congress that was passed post 9-11 in order to fight "terrorism," once again ten long years after 9-11, and also after this recent "capture" and "death at sea" of the purported mastermind.

Where is the outraged citizenry who continue to be marginalized also under this unconstitutional provision and "in your face" violation of America's Bill of Rights?

Most likely on the unemployment line, or now without television sets in order to continue keeping tabs and watching the destruction of the late, great U.S. those founders fought so hard and shed their blood to watch our modern day political machines in bed with the unconstitutional agendas of World War II allies destroy.

Hail, Britainnia. Britainnia rules the Hill.

Obama Defends Ground Zero Mosque on Religious Grounds?

It was reported in the mainstream media that Barack Obama has come out of the closet with respect to the ongoing controversy over the building of a Muslim mosque near the Ground Zero site of the 9-11 attacks on this nation nine years ago.

While we are still in an expanded war under Mr. Obama in Afghanistan and Iraq purported still seeking those directly responsible for those planned attacks, with no end really in sight after pledging to end this war as "responsibly" and quickly as possible.

It does appear that if any true movement in this direction will occur, it will occur next year during the uptick for the presidential run for the roses once again either toward the end of this year or beginning of 2011.

What has been lost in this debate is the fact that we ARE still in this war, and in using the "freedom of religion" provisions of our Constitution, it appears that Mr. Obama is tone deaf to the objections of the general citizenry who just might feel that such an enterprise so near the site of the death of over 2,000 American civilians whose religious beliefs might also be violated by such a venture are being ignored for what can only be characterized as a "political" move not a "religious" one.

This is a prime piece of real estate, and in the financial district in New York, so just why would this site be chosen by those in the Muslim community to begin with rather than a site nearer to their flock in a residential or less commercial area?

To those who lost relatives or close family members with religious beliefs, that site has created controversy ever since the debris from Ground Zero was eventually cleared away. Most would like a memorial to the victims constructed there permanently, and it would not appear that any Muslims were killed in that disaster other than the perpetrators, although still rather unclear to the general public just who was ultimately involved, and just who was truly behind that vicious attack on primarily the civilian population, after all.

The bulk of those lost lives were those working within the financial industry, and not government or public sector employees.

Mr. Obama's stance is quite incredible given the fact that this site does have religious meaning to many across the nation and the actual "zoning" that was in effect for this particular site as a commercial district, without asking the fundamental question.

Of all the sites in New York that might be available for such a venture, in areas in which there are far more Muslims residing in residential communities rather than the business district, just what is the ultimate aim here?

Creating a house of worship for the Muslim community, or making a "political" statement?

And just who in the New York state government is also so totally wacked to entertain such an idea while this war is continuing?

To me and most other Americans, a Muslim mosque would be blasphemy on all those lives lost at the hands of Middle Easterners, Muslim or not, since it is quite possible that unnaturalized Middle Easterner's without any fealty or loyalty to this country just might be worshipping there.

Mayor Bloomberg, Mr. Obama, just what ARE you thinking?

A memorial, or another commercial building in a commercial area is what is called for here.

No Christian, Jewish or Muslim church if freedom of religion is the basic precept behind our First Amendment, since this was an attack that involved the loss of life of believers and non-believers alike, and also was directed at our economy most of all.

No Christian Church or Jewish Synagogue were the targets, so it wasn't religion based fundamentally as has continued to be portrayed by the mainstream media.

It was the financial industry and our economy and apparently those working within the global banking industries who were targeted, and our military secondarily.

Maybe reviewing just how and why those particular buildings were targeted for those attacks is what is called for here and what the ultimate agenda actually was an just who would benefit from such an attack since it does appear even with the 9-11 report much has been kept from the general public surrounding what led to those attacks, and it is not simply "conspiracy theorists" that are speaking up in light of this ongoing war - and the detrimental effects of merging our economies with the rest of the world that has placed the lives of the general citizenry and civilians in peril PROGRESSIVELY, while giving away through "free trade" agreements our own oil reserves to the British also PROGRESSIVELY.

And this support in this name of "freedom of religion" is not PROGRESSIVE, nor is it an act that would facilitate greater healing of the wounds of this nation post 9-11.

This is rather "in your face," not a healing gesture at all - nor in any manner with any basis in "freedom of religion" in a country that already has many, many Mosques built in far more suitable residential communities in New York and elsewhere.

Not in a lower Manhattan financial and business district, which makes the true intent of such a proposal abundantly clear.

Politicos and their financial "global" backers love war, whether civil, commercial or foreign. It makes no difference ultimately.

Maybe what is truly called for here is a monument and memorial to Wall Street, the true profiteers post 9-11 that are still cleaning up post 9-11 over the bodies of those innocent victims who it appears clear now nine long years after 9-11 were sacrificed ultimately for the "greater global good," of the "global economy" since our presence in that region and focus has fundamentally changed since that tragic day those many years ago.

While the foreign bankers more so than even the domestic ones continue to profit PROGRESSIVELY.

Correction: Of the over 3,000 lives lost in the 9-11 attacks not counting those which have been publicly announced as the perpetrators and members of the Taliban (since bin Laden as the "mastermind" was portrayed as a Taliban leader, not al Qaida), according to published but unconfirmed sources, approximately 60 people were identified as followers of the Muslim faith which were killed - most of which were either on the planes, or working as police cadets or in the hospitality fields, so less than 2% of the total victims.

http://islam.about.com/blvictims.htm

Troop Surge In Afghanistan: More War, More Debt, Less Accountability

It was announced by Barack Obama that in accordance with his campaign statements that he is deploying 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Iraq in order to seek out Osama bin Laden and the members of al Qaeda per the original Resolution passed by Congress in the wake of 9-11 (after, of course, at first promising to end the engagement in the Middle East altogether after so many lives, and so many American dollars have been lost in the over eight years since 9-11).

The question is, with the guarantee of support from the Afghan government with respect to this redress for the deaths and lives lost on that fateful September day, why the need for 30,000 troops rather than a limited deployment of intelligence and career military officers?

Not to second guess the commanders on the ground as a mere citizen, but is it really necessary to risk an additional 30,000 U.S. lives in order to capture one leader and those that were DIRECTLY responsible for giving those that participated "aid and comfort" in the planning of 9-11 which is the exact wording of the original Resolution?

The original pilots, after all, were Saudi citizens. It was only days after the attacks that it was revealed that bin Laden had claimed reponsibility for the attacks - and with the assistance of the Taliban, as I recall, not al Qaeda, although the two have been merged now in this loosely defined "War on Terror" which evolved under the Bush Administration.

So far, the body count in Iraq is minimal compared to prior full scale declared wars but still staggering for the U.S. given that these individuals are actually using rudimentary weapons most of all, including themselves.

And the amount of money now which has been poured into the rebuilding efforts actually has resulted in the U.S. deficit soaring to unprecedented levels even before all the other "funny money" was printed in order to then "salvage" the U.S. economy in the domestic loss of jobs and the foreclosure mess which occurred in large part due to the inflationary costs and those taxes for the war itself, actually in conjunction with some rather questionably legal loans sold throughout the West and Southwest based on the "global" London bank rates, and not U.S. rates at all and then repackaged and resold to foreign investors who were protected, not the U.S. homeowners even to date that were in essence defrauded or forced into some of those loans due to rising costs and refinances.

As funds were appropriated for the war, less funds were appropriated for domestic needs and costs and the budget for an entire new Department (DHS) and its expensive toys burst the "true" inflation (not the published spin) in rising costs for fuel, groceries and local taxes now for eight years - and then even with the stimulus, states are announcing college tuition cost increases, added taxes and a host of other new ways to bankrupt Americans, of course, after Washington then went so far as to tax the air Americans now breathe, for the "global good" at that, and bail out a London based global insurer on the backs of Americans.

It was interesting and outrageous to note that one of the Congressional members is proposing a new "tax" on Americans labeled the SOS tax (Congress and the media whom it appears they consult more and more for PR purposes love the acronyms for new legislation, unlike days gone by with bills less than 50 pages tops. The size of the average mortgage loan these days, which has also increased from less than five pages to 50 or more, with all the riders and caveats).

I wonder how much destruction we can now wreck in Afghanistan in order to bulk up the revenue, jobs and coffers of the U.S. military contractors once again in order to further plunge this country into a full out depression, since the global economy may be seeing signs of improving, but thus far the U.S. economy continues to tank in order to feed all those other nations and European investors.

By the time this war ends, it appears that what will truly have transpired is that there will eventually have been a leveraged buyout of most of America's infrastructure and assets by foreigner investors.

We will lose our country to foreigners while fighting a foreign enemy and without a shot fired on domestic soil.

In order to capture simply one man who has somehow alluded capture now for over eight years by the finest military in the entire world.

Just when are some of those other promises going to be kept, Mr. Obama, such as making Iraq start picking up the tab actually for this rebuilding effort in which it seems the U.S. funds and builds government buildings only to then have them blown up once again?

While Ms. Clinton then attempts to switch hats, as it were, as ambassador for Iraq and urge what is left of corporate America unrelated to those military contractors to invest in Iraq?

It appears maybe that it would be only the global insurance companies that would profit on businesses that wish to now outsource American production to that country post the rebuilding effort, in hiring then cheaper Iraqi labor in order to then pay those stratospheric insurance rates.

Just how, again, can Congress and the President justify risking 30,000 additional U.S. lives in order to supposedly redress the loss of 2,500 - after, of course, having lost at least three times that many to date?

Is this now the mentality of those on the Hill in defending America, while of course leaving our borders open and affording foreign investors in our nuclear reactors throughout the country for those global markets?

Isn't it the U.S. economy, security and safety and not the global one, that is supposed to be the focus of our elected representatives, since it would appear that fighting a foreign enemy on their own home turf gives us a one down no matter what the engagement, and we've got plenty of risk now due to continued negligence and promoting "foreign investment" in American assets on our own shores at this point?

Isn't the risk of attack by foreign terrorists much greater from within at this point, than without with such skewered logic?

Just how many more lives will be risked in order to secure the Middle East as a permanent source of income for War, Inc. in the name of "jobs and the economy" for the telecom, networks, media, and thousands of military contractors?

Are these again some of the "new jobs" created in addition to those which were primarily taxpayer paid additional government jobs under the non-stimulus (rather than the red-lining promised)?

Do you think after these past two administrations particularly, the American public trusts either the Republicans or Democratic Globalists in any manner whatsoever, except to keep the balls spinning and give public appearances that belie the collusion now involved between both parties in continuing this fiasco?

Is this a war in providing for the common defense of America? Or expansion of a global agenda and result of pemanent alliances with differing interests at the cost of America and Americans?

The proposed timeline and ending of this war really says it all. 2011. Coincidentally, just prior to the next presidential campaign election cycle in order to be rehashed for the consumption of America and spun and spun some more by the Global Socialist Party now residing on the Hill. It will, of course, end as "politically" as it appears that it began.

And an enemy for which this country would never, ever have if it had practiced the "defensive war" measures provided in America's founding documents per the "intent" of the founders.

These were trained terrorists, trained by the U.S. government in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets, from all reports. So trying these individuals in America's federal courts once again also seems to be a political move in order to again rachet up the temperature in America for the continuing war when the details are rehashed on CNN and FOX of the "evidence" for the accused for all America.

Of course, since it will be a world audience involved the Middle Eastern countries will get the impression that the United States citizens are still out for revenge and blood after eight years since actual combat footage of what truly is occurring in Iraq has been suspiciously absent, unlike Viet Nam, so the blood lust will be reignited for the New York trial and the American people the convictors hearing the "evidence," from foreigners that speak little, if any, English at all.

A military target was involved, and these were "soldiers" trained in covert activities. And the mastermind still remains at large, so once captured what type of "plea bargain" will be available for any of these now to be tried, one of whom at least it is claimed was an active participant, in order to convict Mr. bin Laden?

And since our military did train them initially, would they also not be more familiar with their history and an "open" military trial, per the Nuremburg Trials, more along the lines of what is called for here?

The timing of these trials, and now announcement of the surge in conjunction, seems War, Inc. is not about to end before this country is brought to its knees both economically, and in the theft of thousands more of America's youth.

Fort Hood Spins Saturate Media

For Any And All American Conserve-atives (not the British variety ala Fox News):

In light of the upcoming funerals and media coverage of the loss of additional American lives in the wake of the Fort Hood incident in Texas this week, it appears now the media spins are getting wider, deeper and more and more furious by the day.

Since America's presence in the Middle East in some form or another has been a fact since that British "taking" of the land now comprising Israel prior to World War I in an agreement entered into between a British Lord of the Realm and a British banker zionist, America's continued loss of life on behalf of this foreign non-U.S. based accord is becoming greater and greater by the year.

And what has been interesting has been one fundamental question which the media has not in any significant manner raised during the past several days of the "analysis" that are being made on both liberally based and focused mainstream sources - funded by either the Republican Globalists or Democratic Globalists ala FOX and CNN.

Just why would an avowed pacifist and war protestor enlisted or continued serving in the U.S. military during the continuation of this war, which has now gone on for more than eight years after the attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001.

Most enlistees, or even those career military officers - which is more likely since the accused is or was the base psychiatrist apparently - tours of duties come up for renewal in two to four year increments.

The outrage of the American people, and the clearly questionable now basis for our continued presence in that region has been a well known fact as based upon false intelligence for over five years at this point. And was, after all, the major focus of most of the liberals in their other extra-Constitutional positions who, however, were the major supporters of Mr. Obama in his run for the roses as the "change" candidate, after all. Although disagreement with the continuation of this war as not in any way at all based upon Constitutional provision, or the intent of the founders with respect to defensive wars as hoping this country would remain as neutral as possible in such events as the continued Middle East situation, is not a liberal position at all, but actually a conservative one.

Most of these so called "progressives" and "liberals" of course now have continued to be suspiciously silent, although Mr. Obama is clearly following the Bush agendas and agreements which were reached with the "new" Iraqi government in his last 100 days in office calling for the withdrawal of all American troops by 2011, coincidentally just prior to the new U.S. presidential election cycle.

So it will end just as politically as it began apparenlty - and not legally or Constitutionally brought or now ended in any manner whatsoever.

Now it is being reported the suspect will be tried in a military court, as deemed not an overt act of terrorism. And, of course, terrorism itself is a practice used by many in our media and also those now serving on the Hill against the American people now more so than even most of these branded extremist Iraqi groups - whose very existence and training were, after all, at the hands of the U.S. military to begin with.

The suspects now behavior prior to the incident is now uncovering some connections to spiritual leaders in this country and the Middle East.

But just how did most of these individuals, after all, be approved for immigration to this country I haven't a clue, although the suspect appears to be an American citizen by birth and not an immigrant or naturalized citizen.

And at last count, over 80% of the American people are dissatisfied with our continued presence in this war now that the focus has shifted from the events surrounding what occurred those many years ago, to building up a U.S force and presence now in that region on behalf of Israel most of all once again.

And, of course, to fatten the bank books of the Wall Street financiers and those invested in the military industrial and manufacturing areas in this country. All those "science based" technology firms which this Administration and the last were feeding at the cost of American soldiers and families. Silicon Valley is bursting at the seams at this point, although California's governor whining about a shortfall.

Unbeliveable.

My heart goes out to the families of those affected, but it would appear that the perpetrators and blame that is shifting is being shifted from the true source of the cause of their actual losses.

And that is, once again, a foreign and military policy in this country that is centered not on national security whatsoever, but nation building and agressive and pre-emptive wars.

At the cost of the families of many Americans, not simply those that were and have been lost now in the past eight years - and a domestic security problem that has not been solved at all by the creation of that massive Department of Homeland Security.

Since that Department has decreased, rather than increased, its budgeting and funding for the measures needed to truly secure this country rather than giving monies to Mexico and Israel in the form of foreign aid for the Silcon Valley venture capitalists profits, many of whose investors are foreigners also, after all, with British and Middle Eastern investors.

Funds were once again cut for the needed border fencing and security, and instead this and the last Administration also expanded its Visa waiver and immigration policies ten fold since 9/11 occurred.

In fact, a better name for this agency at this point is the Department of Homeland Insecurity. With the running of their paid ads warning Americans to "have a plan" appearing to be the only real attempts to actually address the true defensive measures that would fundamentally secure this country from any such future incidents.

Such as reducing the number of airports and such available for those traveling to this country. As Ellis Island was in the past maybe having three or four points of entry, rather than affording foreign based and owned airlines, ships and other modes of travel access to the interior airports and such would and could reduce the threat of any further attacks.

British Airways was given a contract for service to Phoenix years ago, and there are many foreign owned airlines with such contracts throughout the nation at the present time.

It does appear that break downs in communications and also the shear number now of agencies involved in these domestic and foreign surveillance departments are having an adverse affect and not the solution, but part of the problem.

As it appears is becoming now clear in this incident, as it was in the original loss of lives on September 11th - since that also as blamed on a breakdown of communications between the FBI and DoD. Now we have the FBI, DoD and Homeland Security pointing fingers.

So just where is the change, except more of the same, and around another 50 more dead or wounded Americans?

America's Economy Continues To Tank While Wall Street and Global Socialists Prosper

While Mr. Obama and his appointed financial czar, Timothy Geithner, continue to rally round the stock ticker proclaiming that the Bush/Obama agendas of stimulating the global economy at the expense of America's own is "working", there are quite a few signs now that things are getting far, far worse than most Americans have yet to realize.

As one who has much experience in what is occurring in the border states as a former 45 year resident of Arizona with the increases in crime and drug trafficking which have been the result of the last Reagan amnesty yet even eight years now after 9/11 continuing in its failure to adequately secure over 500 miles of open desert between the U.S. and Mexico especially, it appears that even though the American people - primarily those on the front lines living in the border states and who have been progressively affected by this agenda and now losing their homes right and left due to increases in insurance and the fraudulent and usurous loans and lending practices promoted by the Fed and global bankers for their socialism agendas and profits most of all, and who were scammed due to lack of regulation of those underwritten by California lenders, are blatantly and clearly being sacrificed by the Global Socialist Party.

And apparently haven't sacrificed enough according to Washington and the merged Democratic and Republican parties per Mr. Obama's and the Fortune 500 media reps "we all must sacrifice" continued pulls at Americans heartstrings.

Just where is that sacrifice coming from with respect to those for which the American people are paying six figure salaries, for the most part, in either wages or benefits, since it does appear the only ones economies who are improving are those holding public office at this point, at also the continuing bankruptcy of the citizenry at large.

The buzz is out once again that Mr. Obama intends to again bring up an "amnesty" for those foreigners now living in this country.

Without, of course, at all addressing the open borders once again.

In fact, the sums for the monies under the Secure Fence Act instead apparently went to buy Blackberries for most of the state legislators throughout the country, and upgrade their personal websites.

While in Lousiana due to a family member's illness, headlines proclaimed that there is a move on to increase the state gasoline taxes now in order to repair a good deal of the roadways that were affected by both Katrina and Gustav.

However, nothing was mentioned about the fact that the entire focuse of that "stimulus" was also promoted and defended over the American people's objections at the amounts as being necessary for infrastructure needs such as the repair work in Louisiana.

I received an interesting response from one of their legislators there on an unrelated issue prior to this announcement over the listings now of the historic homes in the French Quarter which are being handled and brokered by Sotheby's, a British property and investment company - mostly marketing those homes to Canadians and the British.

As an American, I did have a problem with the fact that some of America's foremost historic buildings and more valuable real estate is being sold right and left to foreign interests such as is occurring with those homes.

The legislator who did respond sent me his response via text messaging with a note that the message was being provided by AT&T.

Now it appears, our state and federal legislators are actually unabashedly publicizing their "sponsors" via their email responses.

I wonder if during the next meeting of Congress or on the floor of the state legislature soon we will be seeing our "misrepresentatives" with patches sort of like the drivers in the Indy 500 wear in exchange for the funding they receive for their careers.

While Mr. Obama meets with the Iraqi leaders one week in order to reaffirm his commitment to the Bush agenda for withdrawal of troops prior to the next American presidential election cycle, one week later another attack is made on a Iraqi government building (one in which U.S. contractors were making repairs apparently, and in which in the accord and agreement Mr. Bush agreed and stated that U.S. contractors would not be under U.S. directives, but those of the Iraqi government interestingly enough, thus the political ramifications of this attack also neglected by the U.S. global socialist owned media and press corp).

In essence, Washington not only went into a joint venture in that GM deal, but is now subcontracting and/or "leasing" out American contractors to the Iraqi government in the terms of the accord such as the one executed by Mr. Bush his last 100 days in office.

In which our Constitution provides that such treaties and agreements are the actual duties of Congress, not the president, at all - nor can that power be "shifted" to the executive branch without an actual amendment to the U.S. Constitution actually itself. So much for the Bush/Obama understandings of our actual intended form of government as legally provided in that torn and tattered document residing under glass less than two miles from the hallowed halls of Congress itself.

I wonder if some of those men who were working for those contractors had any idea of their chain of command prior to the bombing?

I don't believe that this is quite what the Americans had in mind when voting last election, and it appears that more and more civilians are instead being offered up as sacrifices for the Global Socialists now agendas, in addition to those living in the border states and those lives lost on September 11, 2001.

I'm wondering also when shares of the Grand Canyon will be listed on the NYSE for foreign ownership and investment.