Another closed thread.

[uprooted_kentuckian]

As usual Jere, I don't agree with your decision. This time it was "out of respect for Bhutto"? I'm pretty sure she was a brave woman willing to speak her mind to make change. I think she supported dialog, as open as possible. I'm not sure that closing the thread was respectful to her in any way.

[tughillcam]

Thanks, Jere !
I don't know WHAT Reagan had to do with Bhutto... 2 completely different people. I don't think Bhutto would have closed mental institutions, doing huge harm and making a bunch of homeless mental patients, plus all the other shenanigans that his administration pulled off. Some people have him up on a pedestal where he doesn't belong.

[uprooted_kentuckian]

And the beat goes on.

[HOD]

Threads drift, tug, threads drift. Sorry to get dirt all over your lollypop. you don't like Reagan, oh well.
I worked in the "evil world" of defense contracting back then, and saw things that still give me nightmares.

I just have to bite my tounge when those who only knew what was on the tv proceed to badmouth Reagan, the military, etc.... Closest analogy I can give, and this HAS to be an analogy, (catch a clue here) is that people were trying to sneak in and kill you while you were sound asleep... And there is a neighbor watching your house, sitting up late at night, and runs these people off, again and again... And he can't really say anything. . . and on top of this, has to endure your bad mouthing him. But, he just plugs on and keepsdoing what he does.

If you don't know what Reagan had to do with Bhutto.... Well, ummm... Well, I guess I will just have to overlook your ignorance. I guess one could always google for it, but her first parlament was formed after she won the popular election and the Reagan administration put a little heat on Khan.. That was about 88 or so, iirc. Later she met with Bush 1, after he took office in 89.

So, sleep well. Since that Traitor Willie has sold our national secrets to China, and more people than ever have Nuclear capability.. Yeah... All ya'll just lay your little heads down and dream your liberal dreams of bunnies and butterflies and candy. While those who Defend this nation have the nighmares becasue they KNOW what is going on out there.


Hod

[hikingonthru]

Well put, HOD. Well put.

[uprooted_kentuckian]

Very nice HOD, thanks.

[Jeana]

Yeah, we're all safe now. All praise our Glorious Leader for the benefits we are receiving.

[uprooted_kentuckian]

Drop the sarcasm and you just about have it right.

[HOD]

Yeah, we're all safe now. All praise our Glorious Leader for the benefits we are receiving.


ETERNAL VIGILANCE is the price of freedom. It's not a one shot deal and then everything is O.K.

Since you spiked in a little sarcasm in there, then an equal sarcastic analogy would be that because someone did a pre-flight inspection 3 years ago on a particuar A/C then it's still OK today. That's as bad of an idea with national defense as it is with flying...

We are in constant danger, and anyone who thinks the cold war is actually over has been beguiled.

Until I saw what I saw, I too had certain "ideas" about things. they changed the day I lost my "innocence" at that aforementioned contracting job.

I used to wonder why some of that was never made public, but after having seen how the public reacts, now I know that it would have caused a major panic, stock markets crashing, etc.... In order to "maintain" the so called "economy" the powers that be keep you mostly ignorant. Right or wrong, that's the way it is. ( What it SHOULD be or what I wish it was is another topic... But as my dear old grnadma used to say, wish in one hand and poop in the other, and see which one fills up the fastest. )

Let me repeat what I have said on these forums in the past.. I am not being sarcastic, or mean, or in any way smart mouth about what I am about to say here now. Be prepared, know what and how to protect yourself and family. If you never need that information and preparedness, then thank God.

Would you be dissapointed if you don't get to collect on your homeowners policy because your house DIDN'T burn down? No... You have it because you want to protect yourself "just in case". Same with being prepared for various disasters. The "cold war" is not over. We just do not have ANY civil defense anymore. knowing what to do should the worst happen might be very important then. http://www.ki4u.com has some good links.

Regards.


hod.

[tughillcam]

Threads drift, tug, threads drift. Sorry to get dirt all over your lollypop. you don't like Reagan, oh well.
I worked in the "evil world" of defense contracting back then, and saw things that still give me nightmares.

I just have to bite my tounge when those who only knew what was on the tv proceed to badmouth Reagan, the military, etc.... Closest analogy I can give, and this HAS to be an analogy, (catch a clue here) is that people were trying to sneak in and kill you while you were sound asleep... And there is a neighbor watching your house, sitting up late at night, and runs these people off, again and again... And he can't really say anything. . . and on top of this, has to endure your bad mouthing him. But, he just plugs on and keepsdoing what he does.

If you don't know what Reagan had to do with Bhutto.... Well, ummm... Well, I guess I will just have to overlook your ignorance. I guess one could always google for it, but her first parlament was formed after she won the popular election and the Reagan administration put a little heat on Khan.. That was about 88 or so, iirc. Later she met with Bush 1, after he took office in 89.

So, sleep well. Since that Traitor Willie has sold our national secrets to China, and more people than ever have Nuclear capability.. Yeah... All ya'll just lay your little heads down and dream your liberal dreams of bunnies and butterflies and candy. While those who Defend this nation have the nighmares becasue they KNOW what is going on out there.


Hod

I'm going by research, and I was talking ideologies. Last I heard, China hacked the defense department computers a month or so ago. Just what we need. Bush's computer don't have security software ? Maybe 'Traitor Willie' told them to do that.:eek:
dirt on my lollipop ? I would call that condescending. Bunnies, butterflies and candy ? Ummmm I don't think so. I was born during Eisenhower, and this is the most scared I've ever been... along with Reagan and Nixon.

[tughillcam]

hmmm look what I just read
{1} "A Pakistani diplomat I talked to at the time acknowledged that the situation was ‘explosive.’ Much of the concern stemmed from the Reagan Administration’s decision to finance many of today’s Taliban leaders in their successful war against the Soviet Union’s presence in Afghanistan. Pakistan was the main conduit for American support. ‘At one time, it was a three-way game,’ the diplomat said. ‘ The CIA, the ISI, and the mujahideen were creating these Frankensteins’ – the Taliban – ‘and now the CIA has pulled out, but you can’t totally destroy the Frankensteins’."
--Chain of Command; Seymour Hersch; page 288
so Reagan supported the taliban - contras... mmmmm what a guy.

[tughillcam]

more...

Let’s take a closer look at Pakistani politics, the ISI, and radical Islam.

{2} "In 1970 the first ever general election brought to power Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, leader of the Pakistani People’s Party, who introduced constitutional, social, and economic reforms. In 1977, he was deposed, and later executed. The regime of Zia ul-Haq (1977-88) committed Pakistan to an Islamic code of laws. With the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, over 3 million refugees entered Pakistan. Although martial law was lifted in 1986, with the promise of a return to democracy, Zia’s regime ended with his assassination. A general election in December 1988 brought back to power the Pakistan People’s Party, led by Bhutto’s daughter Benazir Bhutto, but her government was short-lived, collapsing in 1990 on charges of corruption. Bhutto’s successor Mian Mohammad Nawaz Sharif, leader of the Islamic Democratic Alliance, won an absolute majority in the Assembly. His government initiated a policy of further ;Islamization,’ but Sharif himself was criticized for his pro-Western position on the Gulf War. In 1993, Benazir Bhutto was returned to office to head a coalition government, which was again dismissed in 1996, on grounds of corruption. Sharif was re-elected President in 1997. In 1998 Pakistan carried out a series of underground nuclear tests in response to similar tests by India. The military overthrew Sharif’s government in 1999 and placed him under house arrest; General Pervez Musharraf became Chief Executive, then President in 2001."
--Oxford Encyclopedia of World History; 2006; page 482

In order to understand recent events in Pakistan, it is important to have at least a general knowledge of the relatively unstable back-and-forth efforts to grasp and then hold onto political power. It is equally important to recognize that, as noted on page 289 of Hersch’s book, the ISI has been "a parallel government of its own." It is very difficult to have a country with a bifurcated federal government, where there is a public branch that the public sees, and the privately run intelligence community, running a shadow government. In theory, those who advocate and attempt to institute democratic reforms in the public government run the risk of being "removed" from power by the shadow government. (Note: This phenomenon of political assassination is distinct from that of the "crazed lone gunman" – especially those who kept to themselves – who are, in fact, solid evidence of a healthy democracy.)

{3} "You are creating a Frankenstein" – Benazir Bhutto to George H. W. Bush in 1983; from "The Road to September 11"; Evan Thomas; Newsweek; 10-1-2001

It is widely known that the United States backed the Islamic resistance to the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan during the Reagan-Bush1 administration. A valuable resource for information on this is the Cooperative Research History Commons (a project of the Center for Grassroots Oversight). Let’s look at just a sampling of the documentation found at that valuable sight.

Early in the Afghan war, the US intelligence advocated that Arab fighters be brought in to provide leadership to the factions in Afghanistan. The CIA, the ISI, and M16 provided training for over 100,000 Islamic militants in madrassas, primarily in Peshawar. Some of the leaders were trained in Virginia.

The ISI was responsible for the recruitment and most of the training. They coordinated efforts with the intelligence community of Saudi Arabia.

CIA director William Casey made a surprise visit to the Pakistani camps in the early 1980s. There, he unveiled a plan to teach the Islamic warriors offensive tactics, for infiltrating the Soviet Union, and bringing the war to that country.

Sources include: (1) What Good Friends Left Behind; John Pilger; Guardian; 9-20-03. (2) Anatomy of a Victory: the CIA’s Covert Afghan War; Steve Coll; Washington Post; 7-19-92. (3) How a Holy War Against the Soviets Turned on Us; Ahmed Rashid; Pittsburgh Post - Gazette; 9-23-01. (4) Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil, and Fundamentalism in Central Asia; Ahmid Rashid; Yale University Press; 2001.

{4} "We did spawn a monster. Once the Soviets were gone, they were looking around for other targets, and Osama bin Laden settled on the United States as the source of all evil. Irony? Irony is all over the place." – Richard Murphy, assistant Secretary of State for Near East and South Asia; from "US Next Superpower Foe for Terrorist Leader"; AP; 8-23-98.

During the Clinton administration, US intelligence documented numerous on-going operational links between ISI and the Taliban and al Qaeda. One of the most significant, in terms of current events, is their support of the rebels/terrorists in Kashmir, as this is an area central to the dispute between Pakistan and India.

The Clinton administration had the CIA attempt to coordinate efforts to capture Usama bin Laden in the late 1990s. It is known that President Clinton felt that the ISI was not cooperating in a meaningful way.

Information on these events can be found in several sources, including: (1) Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, from the Soviet; Steve Coll; Penguin; 2004 (see pages 439-478); (2) US Foiled Multiple Times in Effort to Capture bin Laden or Have Him Killed; Barton Gellman; Washington Post; 10-3-01; and (3) Pakistani Intelligence Had Links to al Qaeda; James Risen & Judith Miller; NY Times; 10-29-01 (I recognize that Miller is a flawed source).

{5} "Bin Laden also might have used money to influence Pakistani politics. In this realm, former prime minister Benazir Bhutto – herself a reputed past master of corruption – has accused deposed Prime Minister Sharif of using funds from bin Laden to try to defeat her government. Bhutto claimed that bin Laden sent Sharif money in the 1980s ‘to buy parlimentary deputies for an unsuccessful no-confidence vote to oust her as Pakistani prime minister.’ This claim was amplified in July 1999 when Islamabad paper Al-Akhbar claimed, ‘before the elections in 1990, Osama bin Laden’s friends and relatives gave Nawaz Sharif one billion rupees.’ While there is no definitive proof for the claims by Bhutto and Al-Akhbar, they are interesting. And it is true, at least from bin Laden’s perspective, that Sharif ‘always played an exemplary role in the Afghan jihad,’ while Benazir trimmed and tacked as warrented by her political fortunes and the demands of her close American friends."
--Through Our Enemies’ Eyes; Michael Scheuer; page 176.

In his book "The Osama bin Laden I Know," Peter Bergen has a section where he quotes Jamal Ismail: "Abdullah Azzam was assassinated on the 24th November 1989. Osama was forced to leave Pakistan in the month before that. There was a no-confidence motion in the Pakistan National Assembly against the government of Benazir Bhutto …. to purchase the votes of some members of the National Assembly was given by Osama. Benazir came to know before the no-confidence motion that was raised in parliment that they were trying to purchase some votes from her party members. ….When she came to know about Osama’s role, she called King Fahd and told him that either you call your man from here or we have to arrest him and interrogate him. And we have free media. They will talk and speculate many things about Saudi interference in our internal affairs. Osama went back for some consultation. When he went back, his passport was snatched by Saudi officials and they banned him from traveling." (pages 97-98)

Yossef Bodansky’s 1999 book "Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America" has over a dozen pages about Benazir Bhutta. This includes a section about her attempt to purge the ISI of high-ranking officials who were closely connected to the radical Islamic forces that had been trained by ISI, the CIA, and M16.

In a May 1996 article in the Atlantic Monthly, ("Blowback …") Mary Anne Weaver wrote about how Bhutta had approached Egyptian President Mubarak in 1993. She told him that Pashawar was under the control of the militants, and requested military support to regain control of the city. He turned down the request.

{6} "Afghanistan is our tar baby and we are stuck fast. Too bad the policy-makers who put our soldiers at risk didn’t brush up on their Brit/Soviet/Afghan History 101 beforehand." – No Light in Afghan Tunnel; David H. Hackworth; DefenseWatch; 5-13-03.

Call it Frankenstein’s monster or a tar baby, the truth is that the United States is dealing with forces in Afghanistan and Pakistan that are well beyond our control. The Bush administration sent Benazir Bhutto to try to exert some influence. The forces in question killed her, and now the Pakistani government officials are saying it was al Qaeda. The Bush administration cannot tell the truth, though they know that the ISI/shadow government and the al Qaeda forces involved are a single entity.

President Bill Clinton made an effort to deal with this problem. His efforts were sidetracked when the republican congress was tasked with character assassination. As we approach 2008, our country’s best bet is to elect a democratic president, and a larger democratic majority in both houses of congress.

In order for us to do that, the democratic leadership will need to put their cards on the table, and tell the country what type of Frankenstein we face.

[uprooted_kentuckian]

Seymour Hersch? Thats funny. The man of many ghost sources. Tug, why argue with HOD on this, he is giving you first hand info and you rely on third party gossip. It doesn't really add up to well, but knock yourself out.

[HOD]

cut paste snip, cut pasty paste paste... All from good "authoritative" sources. What, trying to give me a history lesson from the "internet"? :)

Thank you, but this is stuff I know at a somewhat different level having been privy to things most will never get to read.

Was Reagan (and the United States Democratically Controlled Congress) funding the "freedom fighters in A-Stan" in the 80's. Darn Tootin we were. We were providing Aid to the Mujahadeen in Afghanastan (Which Bin Laden was a part of, but he was still a much youger pup at the time.) All to thwart Soviet Expansion into the Middle east. So we gave them arms, money, guns, training, and "other things".

And the booger-heads then repay us for our support them by attacking us. Nice guy's.

Not that our motives are all pure and altruistic. Nope. We wanted a stable Mid East, and stable oil supply, and the Saudi's also had a bit of a Role behind the scenes, because they were scared spitless that the ruskies were going to continue their domino effect expansion right up into their backyard gas pumps.. So, in that situation ( Soviet Expansion unchecked since WWII ) you better choose which "bully" of a nation you would rather be in bed with. Of those who had a choice, MOST of those chose the U.S.A. knowing full well they are gonna get a LOT better deal with us than with the soviets. Oh, we could have minded our own business, while the Soviet's rolled their tanks down every street in the mid east...

That was the state of things back then, And this stuff should be looked at from the THEN perspective, not the NOW perspective, becasue back THEN, it was NOW. :) Hindsight is always 20/20. Had we NOT given them financial aid and guns and other noisemakers, then, most likely Bin Laden would have been long dead... And Most of the Mid East would have been under the Paw of the Bear.

And you would be walking to work... and then working in the dark with hand tools. And maybe not even speaking english. Things were somewhat tense and serious. Thats why Mr. Reagan put a wazoo of money into a Miltary Buildup. We used our financial reserves to build a stronger military, and they were almost tapped out at that point. Then we backed resistance to get them even more mired down. Eventually, we broke them financially and stopped the expansion, then the wheels started coming off their wagon because of domestic unrest, low moral, and crumbling power that happens in EVERY empire based on hostile expansion.

Our turn to face similar problems is coming soon... And the old commies who have embraced the financial aspects of capitalism ( but are still communist control freaks ) have "helped" us by investing in dollars.. So they can use them as a finacial weapon. And things are gonna get ugly.

One might be better served by spending energy prepairing and helping strengthen relationships instead of arguing and bickering over ideals, which serve no positive purpose.

Of course you are fee to do what you will... But don't expect those that you have disagreements with to be of much help if your so disagreable.


Regards,

Hod.

[tughillcam]

"One might be better served by spending energy prepairing and helping strengthen relationships instead of arguing and bickering over ideals, which serve no positive purpose."

I don't think we disagree on the facts, just the perspectives- Have a happy New Year

[gridgardener]

you guys have completely forgotten one of the people most responsible and least known for the usa secret against the soviets in Afganistan. Charlie Wilson aka (good time charlie) liberal democrat from texas second congressional district.

[Jeana]

"ETERNAL VIGILANCE is the price of freedom. It's not a one shot deal and then everything is O.K."

That applies to our govt. as well.

[uprooted_kentuckian]

Now that I can agree with.

[Jeana]

Seymour Hersch? Thats funny. The man of many ghost sources. Tug, why argue with HOD on this, he is giving you first hand info and you rely on third party gossip. It doesn't really add up to well, but knock yourself out.

So, you were in college when Reagan was in office? On what continent? Last year of Reagan? You don't seem to have any of the knowledge of what was going on at the time. WE called it "The Evening News." You didn't even know Reagan was the Teflon President. Apparently, if you don't remember it, it's leftist.

I didn't have to google any of this. I lived it. I guess my knowledge and experience must be leftist, too. Open a book. Better yet, if you want to knock the source of info, why not cite something that disproves the point you don't like? Because you can't. Anymore than you can turn the world the other way.

[Jeana]

"Thank you, but this is stuff I know at a somewhat different level having been privy to things most will never get to read."

Yeah, you have super-secret info that no one else has. You must be an expert. Did Scooter "out" you, too?

[HOD]

"Thank you, but this is stuff I know at a somewhat different level having been privy to things most will never get to read."

Yeah, you have super-secret info that no one else has. You must be an expert. Did Scooter "out" you, too?

No. But thank you for your concern.


Hod.

[uprooted_kentuckian]

So, you were in college when Reagan was in office? On what continent? Last year of Reagan? You don't seem to have any of the knowledge of what was going on at the time. WE called it "The Evening News." You didn't even know Reagan was the Teflon President. Apparently, if you don't remember it, it's leftist.

I didn't have to google any of this. I lived it. I guess my knowledge and experience must be leftist, too. Open a book. Better yet, if you want to knock the source of info, why not cite something that disproves the point you don't like? Because you can't. Anymore than you can turn the world the other way.

You are one obnoxious poster Jeana. If you really want to play this game with me, thats fine, but we may have to move it to emails. Randel doesn't want it going on in this forum... Do I remember him being called the teflon Pres. Nope. Probably becaue I didn't like any of the people who said it, so I ignored them like children. Ok, Jeana, in all your worldly wisdom, what exactly do you want me to disprove? You come up with the debate questions and we can have at it tomorrow. Loser shuts up for a while. We'll let Randel judge.

[GreenZone]

You come up with the debate questions and we can have at it tomorrow. Loser shuts up for a while. We'll let Randel judge.

I get to judge who wins the debate? Or I get to judge who's an obnoxious poster?:D

In all frankness, UK, I don't see anything in the post of Jeana's (that you quote above) any worse than many of the statements that have issued from your keyboard. Moreover, I do remember Reagan being called the Teflon president. I may have to recuse myself and confine myself to being the arbiter of the Mayberry lexicon!:p

[tughillcam]

some people just can't be nice - Happy New Year people !

[HOD]

And a happy and prosperous one to you too, Tug & to all the members here.


Hod.

[bunkie]

a big Ditto!:O) HAPPY NEW YEAR ALL!!! :O)

"The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz noted today that when the media, back in the 1980s, dubbed Reagan the "Teflon" president "it was not meant as a compliment." Apparently, he is still the Teflon president, even in death."

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=reagan+the+teflon+president&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

[uprooted_kentuckian]

Happy New Year everyone.

[Jeana]

You are one obnoxious poster Jeana. If you really want to play this game with me, thats fine, but we may have to move it to emails. Randel doesn't want it going on in this forum... Do I remember him being called the teflon Pres. Nope. Probably becaue I didn't like any of the people who said it, so I ignored them like children. Ok, Jeana, in all your worldly wisdom, what exactly do you want me to disprove? You come up with the debate questions and we can have at it tomorrow. Loser shuts up for a while. We'll let Randel judge.

You're the one calling names now. Again, if you were there, why don't you remember it? If you paid that little attention to what was going on, why should we think you have any knowledge of what was going on at the time? You state everything as fact and the facts you don't like, you discount as leftist.

When you can't knock someone off a subject with misdirection, you attack them. A common tactic in our country now, when someone can't support their side or don't want to accept known facts.

[uprooted_kentuckian]

I said that because in the course of 1 day you called both myself and HOD liars. I don't appreciate it but you can be as arrogant as you wish. I discount many things, for many reasons. My morals and my beliefs won't change much. I don't believe in secular progressive ideology and I doubt that I will ever change at all in that area. I also discount some on the extreme right, as well as libertarians. I'm not limited to leftists, you just happen to be standing in that line of fire. You are the one with the misdirection. How about addressing some facts instead of your rhetoric and condescending posts. I gave you the opportunity already - what facts are you wanting to address? The fact that some called Reagan the teflon President? Who cares? How about we get back to real topics that matter. When we do, lets see if you can actually produce facts to support yourself. I doubt it.

[tughillcam]

arrogance is a double edge sword

[uprooted_kentuckian]

I can't deny that one. It is one of my biggest character flaws.

[tughillcam]

that's apparent :p

[uprooted_kentuckian]

that's apparent :p

I know, I know, I'm working on it.:rolleyes:

[tughillcam]

:)

[HOD]

Virtual drinks of choice all around... Hod's buying.

:D

[uprooted_kentuckian]

Made mine a double, hope you don't mind.

[tughillcam]

WOOHOO !
A toast ! *tink

[Cliff Timmons]

Hey!
UK's olive in the martini has a two edged sword!

[Jeana]

I said that because in the course of 1 day you called both myself and HOD liars. I don't appreciate it but you can be as arrogant as you wish. I discount many things, for many reasons. My morals and my beliefs won't change much. I don't believe in secular progressive ideology and I doubt that I will ever change at all in that area. I also discount some on the extreme right, as well as libertarians. I'm not limited to leftists, you just happen to be standing in that line of fire. You are the one with the misdirection. How about addressing some facts instead of your rhetoric and condescending posts. I gave you the opportunity already - what facts are you wanting to address? The fact that some called Reagan the teflon President? Who cares? How about we get back to real topics that matter. When we do, lets see if you can actually produce facts to support yourself. I doubt it.

Ok, show me where I called either one of you liars.

I'm working off of you pattern, certainly not a one day thing.

[Locavore]

Virtual drinks of choice all around... Hod's buying.

:D

Woo Hoo! Let's see.....a Mojito sounds good. ;)

I missed this controversy, as i stayed off the Internet all week. I was probably better off! :p

M

[Liberty_Man]

HMMM .. who's bluto? and where's my drink?

Threads drift, tug, threads drift. Sorry to get dirt all over your lollypop. you don't like Reagan, oh well.
I worked in the "evil world" of defense contracting back then, and saw things that still give me nightmares.

I just have to bite my tounge when those who only knew what was on the tv proceed to badmouth Reagan, the military, etc.... Closest analogy I can give, and this HAS to be an analogy, (catch a clue here) is that people were trying to sneak in and kill you while you were sound asleep... And there is a neighbor watching your house, sitting up late at night, and runs these people off, again and again... And he can't really say anything. . . and on top of this, has to endure your bad mouthing him. But, he just plugs on and keepsdoing what he does.

If you don't know what Reagan had to do with Bhutto.... Well, ummm... Well, I guess I will just have to overlook your ignorance. I guess one could always google for it, but her first parlament was formed after she won the popular election and the Reagan administration put a little heat on Khan.. That was about 88 or so, iirc. Later she met with Bush 1, after he took office in 89.

So, sleep well. Since that Traitor Willie has sold our national secrets to China, and more people than ever have Nuclear capability.. Yeah... All ya'll just lay your little heads down and dream your liberal dreams of bunnies and butterflies and candy. While those who Defend this nation have the nighmares becasue they KNOW what is going on out there.

Hod

And thank you for the explantions..