"Well that post [by JulieAnna] will get you tared and feathered here. The garden vegetable in question posts continual gibberish and you need to just ignore it or join in; your choice. There is no "off topic" or "fairness" involved; as the locals hereabouts think they have found a new Dalai Lama."

Bucky, this little piece of gratuitous truculence sounds like something that could've been written by UT's resident philistine.

Since when have you taken to emulating Bill O'Reilly and his alter ego?

How prosaic or pedestrian does language have to be for you to find it an acceptable means of expression?

Thanks for demonstrating her point, and mine as well. I think her point was that he posts continually and off topic as if we had a special needs child in the room. I added the well known fact that it is gibberish to me; now that is just fact.

The local greeting committee, according to her, met her with flames and pitchforks over pointing out the truth about how "on topic" he is. I told her that is just the way it is here, and to join in the childish game or ignore it. I choose to ignore it unless some newcomer seems confused over the deal.

I noticed a couple of others also told her similar things; one even went to the trouble to make up a new handle since it was the first post for that handle in these parts. I wonder who was so afraid of offending the locals that they needed a puppet to go semi-anonymous on us.

Oh Well, you enjoy the 'poetry' of Mr. James, especially the snide and aggressive little put-downs he mostly does; I'll stick to Rumi.

typically mindless irrationality, as thought is the first enemy of idiotology --

"Official 9/11 story is hogwash

"With that many lies it is hard to keep them straight so why don't we just let the people who did 9/11 and put the blame on "Al Qaeda" slide and let's forget about the whole thing and get back to fighting our made up and invented enemies."

It was sufficient to ALLOW the attacks to happen; there was no need for all the "inside job" conspirabunk nonsense.

"/who wanted the Sunnis and Shias at each others throats, Al Qaeda or the WARBUCKERS?"

Gee, are you ignorant also of the history? --

1. Osama bin SLadin was Shi'a.

2. Saddam Hussein was Sunni.

3. The only thing Osama and Saddam had in common was that they were MUTUAL ENEMIES.

Osama wanted the Shi'a at Saddam's throat in order that a theocracy along the lines of that in Iran would replace his gov't. Bushit accomplished that result for Osama -- which doesn't mean that Bushit "conspired" with Osama, or anyone else, to achieve that result, but rather that he's too damned ignorant, "incurious," and fundamentally stupid to look at the consequences of his psychobattle with his "wimp" daddy.

On any day here in America, under the control of the Bush/Cheney Crime Cartel, you can find any number of instances of outright, baldass lying, and the response of scumbags when confronted with them. The fact the new AG has taken up where the lying Gonzo left off, should garner no more than a yawn from those of us who begged for attention pre 2000 election.

Until the Democratic Controlled Congress, for which so many of us held undeserved hope, can muster some semblance of spine and sense of duty to Nation, Constitution, and Rule of Law, and start Impeachment and Crimes Trials against these most Treasonous of Government Officials, not only will nothing change, but they will continue to grow worse, under the guise of "change", that the Democrats hope we'll focus on.

The guilty here not only include perps like Bush and Cheney and their toadies, but cowards like Pelosi and Reed. I think maybe they are worse than the Criminals they refuse to prosecute.

On October 2, 2007 about 5:15 PM Wolf Blitzer broadcast a statement by Saudi Prince Bandar (a close personal friend of President Bush) that he (Bandar) had warned President Bush before 9/11 that there would be an attack. That spectacular news was never broadcast again by CNN or any other media company.

There is clear proof that before the 9/11 attack that experts had rigged thousands of explosives which were then detonated after the two jet liners hit the WTC towers. Not only the towers were brought down intentionally on orders by Bush & Cheney but the 47 story Building 7 too was demolished.

The 9/11 Commission Report purposely never mentioned the collapse of Building 7. When Philip Zelikow was confronted for a reason to omit the building 7 collapse, Zelikow refused to answer.

@bucky1,April 4, 2008 03:17 PM:

"Well that post [by JulieAnna] will get you tared (sic) and feathered here. The garden vegetable in question posts continual gibberish and you need to just ignore it or join in; your choice. There is no "off topic" or "fairness" involved; (sic) as the locals hereabouts think they have found a new Dalai Lama."

Bucky, this little piece of gratuitous truculence sounds like something that could've been written by UT's resident philistine.

Since when have you taken to emulating Bill O'Reilly and his alter ego?

How prosaic or pedestrian does language have to be for you to find it an acceptable means of expression?

KR

Here’s MY update from Mukaseyville

Mr. Greenwald's continued comments on Mukasey's testimony are penetrating and evocative. How many men and women with a record of noble purpose and forthright service have volunteered to stand on center stage touting loyalty to and the extra-constitutional powers of the Boy King and left that stage an embarrassment to themselves, our country and the world at large. The answer is ALL OF THEM, and Mukasey is well on the way. One might reflect on Colin Who, Scooter the Jailbird and What’s His Name that went to the World Bank with his girlfriend. Of course AG Mukasey can’t say waterboarding is torture! He, and the rest of them will be going to PRISON! FISA revelations will send them there sooner, just probably closer to home.

An earlier, fleeting reference to Hanna Arendt's seminal work on the "banality of evil" in efforts to grasp the horror of Nazism was not particularly helpful. Richard Rubenstein's essay, the Cunning of History has a longer lens and is disturbingly expository. His three most unsettling propositions are:

1. The Nazis broke no law - the untermenschen were initially rendered stateless and thus, had no rights to violate! Perhaps, like Alberto Gonzales, the Nazis perceived the Geneva Conventions as quaint and archaic.

2. The exercise of the practices of conversion, expulsion and extermination were well established in the Judaeo/Christian tradition and thus the Nazi's bureaucratic perfection of these elements was NOT an aberration, but simply another point on a long, cultural continuum;

3. Once the Nazis had establised complete domination over their enemies, they ESCALATED the violence -one can hearken back to Nixon’s 2nd term “enemies list”.

UPDATE

This is precisely the behavior of this administration, along with new, deplorable strategy revelations from Cheney’s and Addington’s gopher) John Yoo. Mr. Yoo is a bitter reminder of the NeoCon Acolytes who paraded through Congressional hearings during the US Attorney firings' scandal and So of course the Bush warriors were and remain ready to become local as well as international criminals, executing witless and warrantless domestic intrusions and dreading the moment when they might have to say ‘BUT I WAS JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS! That phrase never worked well at The Hague nor should it work well here at home if Congress could just resurrect a pulse. But if Bush’s obvious, however secretive cabal has sufficiently gutted the Constitution, created a citizenry dominated by fear, and routed a Congress already paralyzed with gluttony and self-interest, then so be it. Or one might become an informed and active citizen/voter.

Under the dark specter of The Cunning of History, the truth will out and this administration will be examined under the bright lights of war crimes and other crimes against humanity. Bush’s version of the 18½-minute gap (millions of missing emails) and the phoenix named ABU GHRAIB will rise up as the wheels of an international tribunal begin to grind. This time however, the Bush gang will not be the judges, only the judged! On that day, prior impeachment would have been nice, but not necessary.