My last post wouldn't allow comments, not sure why. I tried republishing and checked the settings and it seems to be fine. Hopefully this post will allow comments. Sorry about the inconvenience. :)
posted by Ellie @ 10:41 PM
30 Comments:
At 8/16/2006 01:33:00 AM,
Anonymous said…
You are very correct. What I saw in the articles was the media pointing out the students ethnicity. It really should not have made the news.
Simply put, they entered this country legally, but most failed to report for their stated business - their reasons for having the visas in the first place. This tripped an automated alert system that would, I hope, trip no matter what a persons nationality was.
It's unfortunate our country views almost anyone of Islamic faith, or middle eastern appearance as the bad guy, and Bush does not help matters any with his recent statements regarding war with Islamic Fascist. But, it is a natural knee-jerk reaction to think like that by many, especially since our stated enemy hails from the middle east. And, let's face it - every enemy needs a face.
During the course of my work week, I see a dozen different people, who resemble a dozen different people, and they all match a similar description. It's just a reality that we have to go with, and hope we clear or hold the right person in the end.
I constantly operate in the grey, and I loath it. On one end I'm bound to protect and the other I'm bound to preserve. It's rare for either to be found on the same page.
In the end I hate what the media has done, but I want to know about it at the same time.
At 8/16/2006 03:07:00 AM,
The Future Was Yesterday said…
I tried commenting on your last post; no go. Google's got a tummy ache again.:)
Re the racial profiling. It should be pointed out that your credit cards do it, banks do it, mortgage lenders do it, on and on. Just because some one else does it, doesn't make anything "right." But: If you're bit by a dog ten days in a row while crossing the same street, are you going to be watching out for the cats?
Profiling as such isn't bad, and can even be good. It can define who or where needs more help, for example. It's what's done with the profile information that's bad. The baby shouldn't have to go out with the bath water.
At 8/16/2006 02:54:00 PM,
Anonymous said…
There is a huge difference between "criminal profiling" and "racial profiling". This is unfortunately los in today's liberal lexicon.
Racial profiling is assuming that the black guy in the Benz in a white meighborhood must be casing houses, and conducting a traffic stop on him.
Criminal profiling is when two white guys in a new mustang from the other side of the county are riding around in a 100% black, 100% poverty neighborhood, and when the police get behind them suddenly stuff things under the seats. (REAL STORY FROM MY POLICE DAYS)
There is a difference between denying civil rights because of race, and considering race in conducting investigations or security operations. No one is suggesting to ignore everyone who isn't Muslim, or from the region, simply giving them more attention that my blonde wife from south Alabama, who used to be a cop.
For those who really believe that we shouldn't profile Muslims, I challenege you to find a single terrorist incident since 1980 (other than the OKC bombing) conducted against Americans or American interests, that didn't involve Muslim offenders.
Then, find me a case where there was terrorism conducted against a Muslim country by a western government or group.
I can list more than two dozen Muslim attacks against America in the same period.
At 8/16/2006 04:14:00 PM,
Cranky Daze said…
Blogger is having some problems, I think. On my own blogs, suddenly, instead of presenting me with a small window with the names of the blogs which allow a click to transfer the one I want to work with to the "Login" feature, I'm getting the Login window with my email address in it, which does not work.
On the topic of this post, last week the Ostroy Report posted an article that raised a firestorm of protest, suggesting that profiling is the only reasonable way to get this under control. Since terror attacks have been (with the exception of the Oklahoma City bombing) perpetrated by persons from the Mid-east, this does make some sense. On the other hand, little old ladies can be enlisted to the terrorist cause, and in the Mid-east, bombs have been strapped to children, so the profile of a terrorist is worth little.
My own position is, without question, that we do need to focus on people who are most likely to engage in terrorist plots, and like it or not, those are people (young men) from the Middle-east. But it would be foolhardy to ignore Anglos, whatever their age or gender, on the assumption that "real" Americans would never attack their own country.
Unfortunately, we're probably stuck with the current system, at least for now. If George Bush had focused on the security of this country in ways that would have actually worked, such as strengthening our southern and northern borders, tracking all visitors and students from other countries to be certain that their purpose for being here was not related to terrorism, taking our ports out of the hands of Dubai Ports and putting Americans in charge, employing enough inspectors to check more than 6% of the containers coming into the U.S. through shipping lanes, increasing the number of border guards, police forces and other investigative agencies instead of cutting funding for those critical services, and making sure that information regarding potential dangers is shared between the FBI and CIA instead of this childish "dog-in-the-manger" practice that has existed for years, I think we would be a lot safer than we are now. Instead of a common sense approach to the problem, what we got was lies about an imminent attack by a country that wasn't even able to defend itself, much less launch a pre-emptive strike on a country thousands of miles away, and we spent millions on a color-coded warning system which has most recently been raised because of a British investigation and the arrests of some men in London who were advertised to have a viable plan to bomb airplanes en-route from England to the U.S. And as it is turning out, this group had very little actual ability to set their plan in motion. I don't question the notion that their plan could have developed into a real danger, but the timing of the arrests is suspect, and reportedly was made at the insistence of Dear Leader. Once again, the Republicans have attempted to use fear to neutralize the impact of a pseudo-Democrat's loss in the Connecticut primaries. One might wonder if there's been a new run on duct tape and plastic wrap, the Republican plan for protecting Americans?
Are Americans finally catching on? The polls would seem to indicate they are, and I hope the voters will focus on how little this Republican Congress has actually done in recent years and give them the boot.
At 8/16/2006 05:04:00 PM,
Anonymous said…
Daze, you have some erroneous information there. There was significant capability to carry out the attack. One of the women was goinf to use explosives in her 1 year old infants baby bottle, and board with her child and her husband. She was going to kill her 1 year old along with herself. In addition, during the raids they had possession of peroxide bottles, not currently prohibited from aircraft, with false bottoms. Peroxide is a compnent of TATP (Triacetone Triperoxide) that is currently the terrorists bomb of choice. So with one bottle they could mix this on the plane. Of course, it should be mixed at cold temps to get the most horsepower, or pardon the expression, bang for the buck, but in this case who cares? An aircraft flying at 400 mph can be brought down by a 12 inch penetration of the fuselage. Physics takes care of the rest. The Lockerbie flight (Pan Am 103) was brought down with SIX OUNCES of Semtex.
There is more than 6% of cargo that is inspected. Cargo is profiled, just like people. It might only be that 6% is inspected by people, but even those inspections do not involve looking at individual boxes. The ability to do that would require the employment of a hundred thousand new workers. Not going to, nor should it, happen.
Bush had nothing to do with the lack of communication between FBI/CIA. It has existed for years because of laws created primarily after Watergate. It has been a Constitutional issue. It is always funny that libs complain about the NSA spying program in attempts to make Bush look bad, but also try to make him look bad because they FBI doesn't give the CIA information on Americans. Can't have it both ways.
Reported by who? The arrests were made dsays before the day of the plot...TODAY, by the way. Would you prefer that they tried to arrest them at the boarding gate at Heathrow? The British have different laws....they can act in ways that we can't. They can hold suspects 28 days without charges, we only get 48 hours. It was easier for them to investigate this plot that the FBI could have in the US.
The borders? We can agree about them, but we don't agree about it being Bush's fault. This didn't start in 2001. Another thing, on one hand libs want Bush to spend trillions on borders, trillions of cartgo inspectors, trillions on universal healthcare, and complain when he doesn't. But you also complain because the budget isn't balance.
This is why the GOP largely ignores this anti-Bush stuff. People would pay more attnetion if the arguments were grounded in consistency.
You do have valid points about profiling. We shouldn't ignore anyone, and the terrorists will use Granny or a 1 year old child. At the same time, this "equality" stuff risks lives just to make liberals feel better, and not "hurt anyone's feelings". After all, the feelings of someone is far more important than the 8 million lives in NYC. Also, I do have plastic and duct tape (staples of my garage and painting my house). I have been through chem and bio training in the military. If you live near a large metro city, what can it hurt to spend a few bucks and seal off your basement?
At 8/18/2006 12:31:00 AM,
The Future Was Yesterday said…
Robert wrote, re profiling, ".......This is unfortunately lost in today's liberal lexicon.
Meaning:
Right Wingers don't have a "lexicon" or;
Right Wingers somehow have the "perfect understanding" of any given situation?
Why is "it only lost" to Liberals?
Perhaps if you had another track installed in that one track mind.....
At 8/18/2006 02:09:00 PM,
Anonymous said…
There are plenty of tracks in my mind, thanks. It is the left wing in this country who refuse to admit that there is ANY manner in which someone's skin color, religion, ethnicity, etc can be considered for any purpose other than quotas. It isn't conservatives who would prefer that we preserve feelings by neglecting perfectly effective and efficient methods of determining who the bad guys are when they but an airline ticket.
At 8/19/2006 01:07:00 AM,
steven rix said…
Hi Ellie.
I own you an apology. I get kind of drunk sometimes. And after reading my post again, i blushed.
BUT ... I won't blush compared to other cultures. DO YOU KNOW WHY AT LEAST? And I was waiting eveybody on this subject:
Do the cultural differences between the West and the Islamic world really
matter? Public figures on either side of this so-called "clash of
civilizations" have embraced these differences. In contrast, Jordan's Queen
Noor argues that the real clash, pitting the forces of understanding against
those of intolerance, exists not between civilizations - but within each
civilization.
To deny a cultural aspect to the differences between the Middle East and
America, of course, would be plainly wrong.
Coming from both sides
To reduce the clash to simplistic formulations is to miss an important
opportunity for the kind of deep understanding that would invite the first
steps to rapprochement.
As someone with roots in both East and West, who has spent most of her adult
life trying to build bridges between Arab and American culture, I have come
to phrase the debate differently.
Not as a clash between Islam and Christianity, or between East and West, but
between the forces of intolerance and the forces of understanding.
No clear dichotomy
In my work with the United Nations and human rights groups, I have time and
again seen that the clashes that impede progress begin with individuals,
political blocs and even countries who insist that their way is the only way
- who paint the world in black and white.
No one culture has a monopoly on either virtue or intolerance - such
qualities are not apportioned geographically, or by religion. Advocates of
compassion and peace can be found in all houses of worship.
Forceful ideologies
But a great gulf exists between those who are genuinely willing to listen to
and empathize with others and those who are not.
The greatest oppressors are those who feel entitled to impose by force their
idea of what is right. The greatest injustices in human history occur when
people believe so strongly in their own ideology that they are willing to
hurt others in its name.
The ideology can be one of self-preservation and lust for power, as with
dictators. It can be paternalistic, viewing the oppression of women,
emigrants and the otherwise disenfranchised as "for their own good." Or it
can be a so-called defensive policy that targets all dissent as a threat
that must be dealt with preemptively.
Faiths too strong
All of these arguments have been used in one way or another to justify
injustice and conflict.
Because faith remains one of the most compelling wellsprings of human
action, the justification for anarchy and nihilism is often cloaked in the
language of religion.
Extremists and executions
Today we have seen how the perverted actions of a violent fringe have
hijacked the great faith of the prophet Muhammad for its own ends. Yet Islam
has no monopoly on radical fundamentalism.
Christianity has carried the banner of "Holy War" - not only at the time of
the Crusades, but in recent years, in the bloody execution of "ethnic
cleansing" in the Balkans.
Tragically there are also Jewish extremists who are willing to use violence
to further their vision of a religious utopia - one of them killed Itzhak
Rabin for daring to contemplate peace.
Reasons to single out
Terrorist threats in America come far more frequently from Aryan rights
fanatics spouting twisted Christian dogma than from Arabs or Muslims.
But to single out a religion because it is used as a cover for evil is
exactly the kind of black-and-white thinking that gives rein to the abuse in
the first place.
Religious minorities threatened
To be sure, threats to all three Abrahamic religions, and others as well,
are very real. Anti-Semitism is once more on the rise in Europe.
Christians are subject to persecution in countries where they are in the
minority, among them China, North Korea, Sudan and Pakistan.
And Muslims feel that their culture and faith are under attack in many
places, especially in the current climate of fear and mistrust of Islam in
the West in the aftermath of 9/11.
Moderates get together
It is convenient for many pundits to describe these affronts as a "clash of
civilizations" and promulgate the view that nothing can be changed; that
cultural differences are hard-wired; that no amount of dialogue will change
the dynamic of conflict; and that geopolitical power politics, bolstered by
the threat of force, is the only way to manage these crises.
My approach is quite another. Moderates of all creeds must embrace their
shared, universal values and defy those who cloak hatred in religious
rhetoric.
Fundamental and fundamentalist
We must not let the idea of "a clash of civilization" become a
self-fulfilling prophecy, heightening the fears of people who think in black
and white.
Unfortunately, news reporting that unfairly emphasizes Muslim violence feeds
the human desire for simple explanations and even encourages pernicious
conspiracy theories and the naming of scapegoats.
Let us not confuse fundamental with fundamentalist. The test comes when
one's principles appear to conflict with the rights and needs of others.
Extremists who have nothing to lose
It is one thing to be willing to die for one's beliefs, but quite another to
be willing to kill for them.
Extremism also grows from frustration, anger and despair. People who feel
they have nothing left to lose can resort to desperate acts.
Education, dialogue and action
From long experience, I know that the majority in our region long for
freedom and control over their own destinies.
Two and a quarter centuries ago, a group of freedom fighters waged a war for
"life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
The people of the Middle East want and deserve no less. For them, as for
people everywhere, true security derives from a sense of freedom, hope and
opportunity. That security is the ultimate source of peace.
Such security can be achieved, I believe, through three interrelated
solutions: education, dialogue and action.
Dialogue, not debate
This kind of education for peace and indeed peace itself, is impossible
without respectful dialogue based on genuine listening.
Dialogue, rather than a debate that one must win, or an inflexible exchange
of entrenched positions, allows the voices of tolerance to be heard above
the rhetoric of a "clash." We are not facing a new clash of civilizations.
By humankind's side
We are seeing civilization in its age-old struggle against inhumanity.
Fanaticism has always bedeviled mankind, but we cannot abandon humankind
because of it. Neither can we wrap ourselves in a comforting blanket of
dogma, to keep us from facing the hard questions.
Through education, communication and action, those who believe in tolerance,
compassion and the rights of others can join forces to reinforce the global
community of shared benefits, responsibilities and values.
It has been said that there are two kinds of people in the world: those who
divide people into two types and those who don't.
This aphorism has more than a grain of truth. It is so much easier to divide
the world into us versus them than to praise the richness of its diversity.
But it is in the glory of diversity that true dialogue among civilizations
is forged.
At 8/19/2006 01:09:00 AM,
steven rix said…
Forgive me, or do not forgive me. It does not matter. We are just characters caught into these differences. NATIONS will do our job very fine without us anyway eh!
Anyway, I don't have to defend myself. This is how it is. I kind of like you as a friend.
At 8/20/2006 04:55:00 PM,
Anonymous said…
And so the French, the epitome of world leadership, say the following, according to Politiques USA:
"Through education, communication and action, those who believe in tolerance,
compassion and the rights of others can join forces to reinforce the global
community of shared benefits, responsibilities and values."
Unfortunately, the rest of the world does not value democracy, are tolerant of everything except the USA, believe in all rights except the right to defend oneself, and forgets the GLOBAL RESPONSIBILITIES part of the whole dope smoking, feel good, give peace a chance, Bob Dylan chanting rhetoric.
Evil refuses to "communicate" and does not share your values. in less than 20 years France will be a Muslim country, because of the "tolerance" that you show to extremists. I look forward to seeing what type of tolerance is alive in France when it happens.
At 8/21/2006 02:25:00 AM,
Laurie said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
At 8/21/2006 02:26:00 AM,
Laurie said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
At 8/21/2006 02:29:00 AM,
Laurie said…
Fuck. One more time.
Regarding your last post, I was reminded of this picture.
At 8/21/2006 10:09:00 PM,
Obob said…
that's funny
At 8/21/2006 10:28:00 PM,
billie said…
i have said this before- america needs to take a good hard look at herself and decide whether to be governed by a police state or continue to be an open and free society. open and free comes with personal responsibility and risk. police state comes with limited freedoms and closed society. we are at a crossroads. no- i really believe it is an all or nothing thing. it is ridiculous to profile arabs when there are millions of other muslim countries around the world who are sympathetic to the al quaeda cause. screen all people the right way- and don't skimp funding where it is supposed to go- and it isn't an issue.
At 8/22/2006 12:20:00 AM,
Ellie said…
beltway - totally agree. there with you in that gray area.
future was yesterday - sorry about that commenting thing. not sure what was up with that. I agree. I think you're with me and beltway in the gray area.
robert - second what future was yesterday said...liberal lexicon? you have a lexicon too ya know.
terrorist acts committed against muslims? I think I smell another post coming. well, first off, how about what happened in lebanon? I think it all depends on your definition of terrorism.
cranky daze - yes blogger has been annoying as of late.
One might wonder if there's been a new run on duct tape and plastic wrap, the Republican plan for protecting Americans?
and I bet you they gave halliburton a five billion dollar no-bid contract for that duct tape and plastic wrap. :)
I swear that whole threat was a political stunt in respose to lamont's victory. the repubs really disgust me sometimes. they are making innocent people scared to death for their own political gain. have they ever heard of freedom from fear? oh right, they hate fdr.
robert, as one of those 8 million lives in nyc I feel its pretty important to save all the nyers. however, we can't step over people's rights in doing so.
future, I'm with you on the lexicon idea. however, you will find that robert is an intelligent republican with reasons to back up what he believes. I don't agree with them but he is gracious and the debate is good. you should go check out his site.
politiques USA - thanks for apologizing. i was kinda worried there for a sec if you were okay. apology accepted, call it friends. you know, i'd like to think that nations actually care about us and that we matter to them, but that's not true. Israel going on and on about two soldiers kidnapped wouldn't have happened if they didn't want to start a war in the first place. countries don't care about their people. kinda sad.
interesting article.
robert, I'm not sure that france will become a muslim country. maybe in the very distant future... and shouldn't you be happy with france right now??
laurie - I second what obob said. great pic!!
betmo - totally agree. they should stop funding protection for a cornfield in nebraska and focus on nyc, dc and other areas that are REAL targets.
At 8/22/2006 08:10:00 AM,
Anonymous said…
Ellie, you really have to visit your own site more often....those around the blog in 80 seconds posts make my head spin....lol.
Thank you for the compliment. We rarely agree, but the respect for the other side is appreciated, and extended (in most cases-sometimes people are just nutty)
What I meant by the "liberal lexicon" is lumping all types of profiling together to a) make republicans seem racist, and 2) appeal to the minority voting block in the dem party. I am opposed, as is basically anyone in America in the 21st century, to using race exclusively to do anything. But race is an important component of both crime and security issues. I simply decry the refusal to analyze the issue objectively, and with varying degrees of appropriateness.
France is becoming Muslim. The demographic analysis shows something lke 20% of the population is Muslim, and it is growing faster than the Hispanic population of the US. Why in the world would I be happy with France? Once again they have backed out on a commitment.
Israel commited terrorist acts last month? Give me a break, and a real example.
At 8/22/2006 10:35:00 AM,
Ellie said…
yea, you're right I should definately visit my site more often. I try to answer everyone but didn't have that much time last night. sorry guys I really didn't do any of you justice.
I find respect to be important in debate. I'm not going to discuss something with you if you're not going to be respectful, it just ruins the whole idea.
I don't like the generalizing either. (we actually somewhat agree). however, I do find that most repubs are racist. most, yes generalization, but at least I didn't say all. and the democrats playing to the minorities really hurts them in some ways. I have a cousin who's 86 or so and so she's pre civil rights and still calls everyone who disagrees with her politics (including me) a communist. she sees minorities screaming at the dnc and thinks the world is coming to an end. she sees rich white people talking at the gop convention and votes that way. now i'm definately not racist but that's somewhat of a fact. people who aren't used to seeing different groups of people are frightened of them. now I'm not only talking about old people, but also people who live in desolate areas and don't get out much.
as for the terrorist attacks, that's going to be my next post. for now i'm throwing the idea around in my head thinking of what to emphasize. it shall be out soon. and I mean soon, I shall get on this one and not take forever. :)
At 8/22/2006 11:25:00 AM,
Anonymous said…
I was kidding about the posts. I try to answer things, but really, we all have lives outside of this. Take your time, do what you want...isn't that the liberal agenda anyway? ;)
I can't let you get away with the statement that most republicans are racist. It is just pure horsehockey. I am calling you out to justify that remark!
Take your time on the terrorist examples I asked for in my post here. You can't come up with one anyway, which was my whole point.
I don't usually plug my blog on any sites, but there is an intersting post on mine that has generated discussion. It is about heroes, and I am interested in knowing who considers whom a hero, and why. Check it out, and I hope everyone gives me an example.
Until next time, have a great day!
At 8/24/2006 10:24:00 AM,
Ellie said…
it depends what you mean by "have lives outside of this". I don't consider working 24/7 to be a life. but i guess it is in some form...
i so can come up with examples. coming out soon. :)
your a click away. and you too have a very nice day. :)
At 8/24/2006 10:52:00 AM,
Human said…
Passenger screening and out on the street Policing are 2 different worlds.
The TSA system is a joke. The last time I flew I saw so many weaknesses that I have no doubt a person(s) with skill and fortitude can penetrate the security defenses. Racial profiling is just another way to say they have techniques to keep us secure. It's as big a sham as our Democracy.
Peace. It's possible.
At 8/24/2006 12:54:00 PM,
Ellie said…
human, definately agree. the last time I flew was a while ago but it was post-9/11 and i did see many weaknesses. and JFK should have the best of the best, but no. I think you're right about racial profiling. it's a somewhat fancy name to make us think that they're doing their job. to me, I think most of these recent threats were bullshit. like hitting the holland tunnel and flooding all of lower Manhattan. wake up, that wouldn't flood all of lower manhattan. I think it's merely a scare tactic. and I wouldn't be surprised if this latest one (although scarier than usual) is also a sham. after all, dick cheney basically said, see you elect lamont, now you're going to die by the evil fascist terrorists. so, finally arriving at my point, the threats are bull so why should they bother protecting us. after all, it's not like our government cares about us.
I hope you're right about peace. war gets things done, but peace is important. no violence and less death is what our country and our globe needs more of right now.
At 8/24/2006 11:08:00 PM,
Obob said…
glad to see you back ellie, I understand about being busy, on Mondays I teach 8 different subjects with 10 minutes for lunch. Then the the rest of the week is a blur. So I post and visit when I can. This is going to be a fun few months for my Social Studies classes.
At 8/25/2006 01:58:00 PM,
Ellie said…
wow that sounds hard. ten minutes for lunch? that's just cruel. you should sue someone! school starts in september in ny when does it start over there?
take it easy, drink lots of coffee and you'll be fine. of course your nervous system won't be very happy, but ah well we can't make everyone happy at once. :)
At 8/25/2006 10:45:00 PM,
Obob said…
I tend to pray to the blessed lady of caffine on a regular basis. Plus I'm boderline ADHD, so it keeps me occupied
At 8/27/2006 03:02:00 PM,
Ellie said…
If I had time I would be praying to the lady of caffeine every minute of the day. I'm somewhat narcoleptic so it keeps me pretty busy. I tell myself that's the reason for all the caffeine, but I just do too much. :)
At 8/28/2006 12:57:00 AM,
The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said…
ellie, I certainly have to agree with your statement, "I do find that most repubs are racist"... with the following caveat: I wouldn't use the word "most". I do think a LOT of them are, though. It can't be denied that racism and bigotry are tools used by the Republican party to garner votes (witness the recent sideshow in Congress where they AGAIN tried to amend the Constitution to outlaw gay marriage). They're doing the same thing when they use fear -- a perfect example of that would be the comments Cheney made about Lamont that you mentioned earlier.
Personally I find their "win at any cost" tatics (which began with Lee Atwater and continues today with his protege, Karl Rove) vile and despicible. I think that REAL conservatives should kick these bottom feeders out of the party -- but I really don't think that is likely, as the Republican party has been a bastion for racism ever since Nixon employed his "Southern Strategy" -- which was later adopted by Ronald Reagan.
The "Southern Strategy" is a key part of the post I'm writing on the subject -- and I don't give you permission to steal it. Unless you had already planned on making it a part of your post. Anyway, I'm still working on it, and have a way to go. (This is the one titled "Racism, Bigotry and the Republican Party", which I mentioned in the previous thread.)
I started a section detailing all the various groups that Republicans hate -- and was going to give examples for each -- but I think I'll have to cut it short (or divide it into multiple parts), because it is threatening to get EXTREMELY long.
Anyway, I took a break from that post to work on something else: A post dealing with Saddam Hussein's second trial. Please check it out and leave some feedback if you're interested. The title is, "Justice for the Kurds in bush's Kangaroo Court?"
At 8/28/2006 10:09:00 PM,
Obob said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
At 8/29/2006 07:32:00 AM,
Anonymous said…
There is a pretty good post over at Ole Blue's on racism.
Ole Blue the Heretic
At 8/29/2006 04:27:00 PM,
Ellie said…
w-dervish - actually I did have a post coming on that. j/k. all yours. can't wait to read it.
I shall check that out later, i'm a work right now. :) as to all you said, AMEN! totally agree. 100%. i have cheney and rove and the whole bunch of them. and i'm embarassed to think that they call themselves americans.
beltway - thanks for the link, shall go check it out later.
Post a Comment
<< Home