I have now allowed what I consider adequate time for the lurkers and posters here to deny that the SCOTUS decision in Bush v Gore and the actions of the White House Iraq Group in manipulating the public to accept the Iraq war were conspiracies of a sort.

Now given that we have already identified two neocon conspiracies, what is so utterly outrageous about the idea that there might be a third conspiracy?

There is a phrase in Latin which I believe is also sometimes used as a legal term, qui bono. Literally, who benefits.

Osama bin Laden aside, who has benefited more from the events of 9/11/2001 than the neocons?

To a considerable extent money equals power and power equals money. The phrase "follow the money" then can also be interpreted as "follow the power".

Follow the power, people.. 9/11 brought vast power to the neocons.. They have already shown that they are not reluctant to slaughter tens of thousands in order to attain their goals.

There are some ideas so horrendous that the mind rebels in disgust at the prospect of believing them. During WWII many people refused to believe that there were such things as death camps, simply because the idea was so appalling that they could not accept it.

Today, Holocaust deniers are considered scumvermin.

In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way. -Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Even bulletboy and pachydermperson don't want to touch this one.

As another poster noted, the Titanic is stern high and sinking fast, and y'all don't even want to acknowledge that the iceberg may have been hit on purpose.

This time the lifeboats will not be reserved for the women and children but for the rich and powerful.

Put on your life jackets and pray folks for the water is bottomless and bone chilling.

Nearer, my God, to thee, nearer to thee!

E'en though it be a cross that raiseth me,

still all my song shall be,

nearer, my God, to thee;

nearer, my God, to thee, nearer to thee!

2. Though like the wanderer, the sun gone down,

darkness be over me, my rest a stone;

yet in my dreams I'd be

nearer, my God, to thee;

nearer, my God, to thee, nearer to thee!

3. There let the way appear, steps unto heaven;

all that thou sendest me, in mercy given;

angels to beckon me

nearer, my God, to thee;

nearer, my God, to thee, nearer to thee!

4. Then, with my waking thoughts bright with thy praise,

out of my stony griefs Bethel I'll raise;

so by my woes to be

nearer, my God, to thee;

nearer, my God, to thee, nearer to thee!

5. Or if, on joyful wing cleaving the sky,

sun, moon, and stars forgot, upward I fly,

still all my song shall be,

nearer, my God, to thee;

nearer, my God, to thee, nearer to thee!

I find it most illuminating that, in this age of numberless strident theists, you could find only two atheists to label as strident.

Mostly we atheists fly "under the radar" in America, to do otherwise is to invite bigotry and persecution from those who, from our perspective, might as well be adults who still believe in the tooth fairy.

I put a Darwin fish on my car a few years ago. In the space of three months my car was keyed four times.. I took the symbol off and have had no such thing happen again.

It really wasn't all that long ago that the Southern Baptists apologized for using scripture to defend and support slavery. That they cannot perceive the same way they use scripture to support bigotry against homosexuals and others is one of the ironies of our time.

Does anyone seriously think this sort of thing will cease if and when they win the Presidency?

I believe that all government is evil, in that all government must necessarily make war upon liberty... -HL Mencken

Contrary to the author's contention, the 20th century is great evidence of advanced notions of separation of church and state and advancement of bloodshed: China, the Soviet Union, (North) Vietnam and North Korea are the four easiest examples.

Millions died in the name of atheism.

The regimes you mention did not practice separation of church and state but rather the elimination of church.

Two entirely different things.

That you fail to understand this point is most illuminating.

You know, I have never thought of the War On (some) Drugs as a state religion before..

But you are absolutely correct, thank you for a very illuminating post.

No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God. -George HW Bush

Not to mention that under Bill Clinton, what Silenced just brilliantly described as the US "state religion",that single most freedom destroying policy in the US, the War On (some) Drugs, greatly expanded.

I never inhaled indeed.

Romney sucks though. I wish people would realize that seperation of church and state actually protects BOTH from negatively influencing each other.

Those who live in glass houses, eh?

To Paraphrase Roseanne:

We are so far beyond screwed that the light from screwed won't reach us for ten billion years.

As for the legality of the destruction, it may or may not surpass the act of leaking such information, so unless I hear calls for the exposure and prosecution of the leakers as well, forget about it.

The fact of the destruction of the tapes was classified?

Cite please.

What else am I wrong about?

I'm going to keep asking until you either answer or go away.

Everyone is watching you squirm away from a simple question.

In the very first post on this thread..

Does anyone seriously think that if and when the Democrats win the Presidency these sorts of abuses will cease?

It's the simple questions which are often the most awkward and difficult to answer.

Apparently you are sarcasm impaired.