To the extent that there is any Muslim threat, it is one created by the US and Israel. Israel has no diplomacy toward Muslims and relies on violence and coercion. The US has interfered in the internal affairs of Muslim countries during the entire post World War II period. The US overthrew an elected government in Iran and installed the Shah. The US backed Saddam Hussein in his aggression against Iran. The US has kept in power rulers it could control and has pandered to the desires of Israeli governments. If America is hated, America created the hate by its arrogant and dismissive treatment of the Muslim Middle East.

There is no such thing as Islamofascism. There are Islamic fascists and terrrrists, but they are a very small minority, just like abortion clinic bombers are a small minority even among evangelical christians. This is a coined propaganda word used to inflame the ignorant. There is no factual basis for the hatred that neoconservative Islamophobes instill in Americans. God did not tell America to destroy the Muslims for the Israelis.

In America today blind ignorant hate against Muslims has been brought to a boiling point. The fear and loathing is so great that the American public and its elected representatives in Congress offer scant opposition to the Bush administration's plan to make Iran the third Middle East victim of American aggression in the 21st century.

Most Americans could not care less that one million Iraqis have lost their lives during the American occupation and that an estimated four million Iraqis have been displaced. The total of dead and displaced comes to 20 percent of the Iraqi population. If this is not fanaticism on the part of the Bush administration, what is it? Certainly it is not reason, tolerance, and deliberation.

The Bush supporter will ask, "What about 9/11?" Even those who believe the fraudulent 9/11 Commission Report should understand that in the official account the attack was the work of individuals, none of whom were acting in behalf of Muslim governments and none of whom were Iraqi, Afghan, or Iranian. 9/11 provides no justification for attacking Muslim countries.

There is a term for the medical condition of people who believe that the only super-power in the world, with a huge arsenal of nuclear and conventional weapons, is existentially threatened by a country like Iran:'extreme paranoid delusions'. I'm told that shock therapy occassionally helps mitigate this condition. Others lables this condition as 'extreme delussional stupidity'.

1800 Iraqi civilians were killed in August, more than were killed in July. If this is a "dramatic" reduction in sectarian violence, I'm the phantom of the opera. My guess is that when Davey "testifies" in a few days, he'll burst into flames when he tells us how "dramatically" the violence has been reduced. It's obvious that the two only talents a person has to posses in order to provide a service for Bush/Cheney is to be 1.highly incompetent and 2. a pathological liar.

Chickenhawks rock:Nerdy Right winger's favorite boast:'I spat on Saddam's grave'.

This great macho-hero of the Right wing had sexual affairs with Tony Perkins, Cary Grant and who knows how many more men. Not that there's anything wrong with it, but you know that if he had been alive today he would be speaking against the "sodomite lifestyle", the "assault on the traditional American family" and tell us that "fagots are not real men".

The reluctant Right wing heroes:Real men let others die for them.

Tough men of the Right:only the brave let others fight for them.

When the Cole was attacked, no one knew at the time who the attackers had been, nor had there been intelligence warnings that an attack was forthcoming. By contrast, Richard Clark tried repeatedly to warn Bush, Rice and Cheney about an imminent al qaeda attack on US soil, and no one wanted to listen. Clark has said numerous times that Clinton was very concerned and attentive to warnings about al qaeda, while Bush showed no interest, and was willing to discuss only Star Wars. Clinton's record on every single aspect of national security is overwhelmingly superior to that of the dunce-in-chief.

The neocons had had plans to invade and occupy Iraq since 1991. Their problem was that they needed a willing administration to execute their plans. It was Carl Rove who convinced Bush, suffering from low approval ratings and facing the prospect of becoming another one-term-Bush-President, to start pushing for an invasion. This invasion was for reelection in 2004. Once the decision was made, the neocons went to work and the rest of the tragedy, including the forging of intelligence, CIA intimidation by Cheney, etc, unfolded.

General Davey is like the trial witness who everybody in the courtroom except the jury, knows will lie through his teeth. In this case, the jury is the MSM, who are starting to go into a stupor while breathlessly counting downthe days left for his contrived "report", drafted by the white house.

Bush/Cheney invaded Iraq with the clear intention of creating a huge and permanent military/corporate presence there. They never had any plan to withdraw our military and paramilitary from Iraq. They are making it near impossible for the next few administrations to terminate US presence there. If the next president is a corporate Democrat like Hillary or most of the other Democratic candidates, they wouldn't dare pulling out, because the Right will blame them for "losing Iraq". A Republican president will of course just "stay the course". US corporate business presence in Iraq is so huge and the Iraqis so splintered and incompetent, no president will dare defy the defense contractors, oil companies, mercenaries, etc. The US occupation of Iraq wll turn out to be similar to the occupation of Tibet by the Chinese, permanent and irreversible.