Friday, February 09, 2007

One Nation Under God ...

When will our elected officials and their constituents agree? Most people react emotionally rather than intellectually on issues. In today's mass communication, there are many "spins" placed on issues. To me an issue is as simple as a word problem. Break it down to its various components and work the problem. Issues are slanted either way by the parties (not Republican , Democrat or Independant folks) wanting to push their point of view. It is up to us as the public, to intelligently make the "correct" decision. In stating "correct", I say for the greater good. To many work only one side ... theirs. There must be balance to everything.

Now to start a new battle royale. Iraq. In looking at the problem as a whole, what is diseminated is that this is a worldwide issue. I have had many "disopinions" on this statement. We are not at war in Iraq. We are at war across the globe. The radical Muslim movement is not solely against the U.S., the are against our society. Proof? Everywhere their is trouble in the world, the radical Muslim movement is the "opposing" side. It is not Iraq, nor is it Afghanistan. It is Spain, France, Enlgland, the African continent, Malaysia, Jakarta, everywhere their is a cell. Trust me cells are everywhere, most importantly and of some concern is here in the United States.

There are those that wish to turn a blind eye to this, pacifism and igorance have caused us great loss in the past. Address the issue now. A splinter pulled immediately will cause discomfort temporarily, left to become infected takes longer to recover. If left unattended ....

Cenla Antics

247 comments:

1 – 200 of 247   Newer›   Newest»
Joe Ray Bob, Jr. said...

Thanks for the new thread. Hopefully, it will also mean an end to comments by Aymond and his detractors.
Iraq is a quadmire. I vividly remember the Viet Nam War and how the politicians would not let our military handle it the way it should have been, and the resulting early pull-out. I am afraid this will happen again. Our national politicians are so partisian in their views that they only care about their respective party. The vast majority of citizens, that I talk to, favor our continued presence there. News commentators put an entirely different spin on it. They show only the vocal minority who are against our policy there. Also, the vast majority of the suvivors of service people who have lost their lives there, still believe it is a worthwhile cause. Ask Robert Sweeney of Pineville, who lost his only son there in January of 2005. He will tell you that we are right in fighting for freedom there now.

I could go on and on, but I hope other bloggers here will pick up the discussion from here. Thanks for the thought provoking statements, Quint.

Anonymous said...

All of the reputable poll numbers contradict joe ray bob's conclusion reached by talking his republican neighbors. The concensus of military and political informed people is that it is an ill-conceived plan, poorly executed, and without any chance of meaningful success, only a possiblity of graceful exit. While you may remember Viet Nam, you obviously learned little from it. Don't ask Robert Sweeney about the prudence of our military strategy or political objective, ask John McCain or Colin Powell. I am very sorry for Mr. Sweeney's loss but it didn't have to happen and, I bet if given the choice, he would rather have his son home safe in his living room.

Greg Aymond said...

Joe Ray Bob, Jr., do I have your permission to join in the Iraq discussion? Let me know who you will allow to post on on what subjects, and I will comply.
Just in case I am allowed, the vast majority of the people I speak to are against our continued present role in Iraq. Although they support our troops, and believe that we have the most powerful military in the World, many of us see Iraq and a mere repeat of the failure of Vietnam.
History has shown that wars or won by military leaders, not politicians. Wars should be entered into by politicians, and only after much thought. However, one military action has begun, it's course should be decided by the military, which is trained to do the job.
History has also shown that imposing Western Democracy upon people, who have no experience with such, and revert to religious and tribal warfare without a strong man in power to control it, usually fails.
I am afraid that nothing will be accomplished in Iraq but the removal of Saddam, and further uniting Arabs against us. You can tell that you won a war when the other side looses its will to shoot at you. This clearly has not happened in Iraq.

Cenla Antics said...

The presumed failure in Iraq is the media's "spin". They fail at every turn to show the good.

Vietman is a good example, rather than state the objective and let the military carry it out, politicians where too busy following the media vs poll results.

Where there. Tell the miliary the objective. Give them the tools to accomplish this goal. Keep everything else OUT. To the detractors of this statement. I have had this discussion with troops coming home. The ones that I have spoken with echo my statement.

We DO NOT play Neilsen ratings or election politics with our troops lives.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the fact that failure in Iraq is media spin. First, Saddam is gone. That was prime objective #1. Second, terrorism has not reached our shores since 9/11. That was prime directive #1 for Americans immediately after 9/11.

The distractions over WMD, Iran, Israel, Syria, etc. are just that, distractions. Most Americans do not know enough about their own religion to make any comments about what is occurring in the Middle East. The USA is the face of evil to the Muslim world. Our might and power are in Iraq. That is where they will fight us. If we leave they will come looking for us. They did on 9/11. What is it that you think has changed to stop them from doing that again?

Americans are weak and desensitized to the realities of the real world. We do not have the courage for a sustained fight ala WWII. We have been wrongly taught in our academic ivory towers that the world is really a peaceful, and it is our govt. policies and global corporations that are responsible for the world’s strife.

If you are one that believes that, please NEVER vote again. And objectively study history.

Every society has fought with itself or its neighbors. It was the winners who told the story of those battles. Right now in almost every world conflict, Muslims are part of the battle. It does not matter which religious, economic, or political system is in opposition, in every situation it is fighting Muslim influence. The Muslims have to win so that they can tell the story of victory for Allah! So if you think that getting out of Iraq is the best option, then you are SERIOUSLY misinformed.

The removing of religion from America's public square has deluded our generation into thinking that all societies are secular. What is not being taught is that millions of people are looking for direction in their lives and a standard to live by. Many of these people are choosing the Muslim faith (by choice or by sword). This growth in turn, is used to call for world salvation (aka domination).

If you thought the Catholic Church and its missionaries oppressed the world, you ain't seen nothing yet.

Greg Aymond said...

A comparison of l=similar incidents in Iraq and World War II comes to mind, which I think tells a lot.
During World War II, German troops were using the old and famous religious structure known as Monte Casino. In attempts to get the enemy out, and end their directing fire upon and killin allied troops, Monte Casino was bombed and shelled to rubble.
In Iraq, I recall snipers killing our troops from their positions in an historic mosque. Theat mosque was not bombed to hell and back, due to worries of upsetting Moslems.
We are at war with them, how more upset could they get? Peraphs this compairison shows why we won World War II and are not winning in Iraq. Our dead would be best honored now by supplying the military properly and allowing them to end the enemy's will to fight. Bush, and all the politicians in Washington D.C., should take the gloves off of our military, or, if they refuse to do so, bring them home.

Joe Ray Bob, Jr. said...

I am really enjoying the discussion, by both pro and con, on this subject.

To Anonymous 10:15am, I don't ask the people I have conversations with, about Iraq or any other subject,what political party they belong to. And, I know for a fact that the majority of my neighbors are democrats. Therefore, your statement about my "republican neighbors" is false.

Secondly, I have asked Mr. Sweeney what his feelings on this subject are. Yes, he loved his son and wished he had him at home in his living room. However, he also FIRMLY supports the need for continuing military action in Iraq. He said his son died doing what he thought was right.His son chose to join the guard. He joined because he believed in freedom for all peoples and he wanted to protect America from future terroists.

Mr. Aymond, you were correct to "dress me down" for my comment concerning you. I was wrong to have said, "..end of comments by Aymond and his detractors.". I should have choosen my words more carefully. What I meant to say was that, hopefully, the new thread will mean an end to comments by bloggers who keep repeating the same thing over, and over, and over, again. It is like beating a dead horse. It isn't going to bring the horse back to life, and those who see or hear of it don't form a favorable opinion of the one who does it. You have just as much right to post here as anyone else. But, PLEASE, in the future, don't reprint the same long "facts" so many times. It really does get old whether we believe in what you are doing or not.

Cenla Antics said...

In posting earlier today, I was surprised to hear on Neil Cavuto shortly thereafter, the same take on the media's showing of only the bad. Apparently, even viewers are beginning to see through the thin veiled attempt at "un-biased" coverage. I'd "Rather" not have their vision of "Couriced" news.

Spanky said...

Ponder for a moment the involvement of Russia in Africa, Cuba, Nicaragua,and Grenada to mention a few of the most notable. The reason for the failure of their exploits in all of these instances have been a dependence on native resources a lack of ability to support their personell in all seasons with a robust navy. I make the distinction of all-seasons as that is the reason for our involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq and soon to be Iran.
Why do you suppose the Russians were in Afghanistan? How about for the same reason we are. Flank Iran with Afghanistan and Iraq with the control of Iran being the end goal so as to control access to the Persian Gulf and you will also realize why we cannot fail in our control of the region. Cesar Chavez is waiting for the day he can aid the Nicaraguans and Zapatistas in Mexico to prevail upon our southern border to make an incursion to disrupt us internally and Russia waits for the day it can support its troops with a warm water naval port in the Persian Gulf. May that day never come because it will be lights out for America. This is not my analysis, but is the analysis of our government after many years of observation and interaction with all parties concerned. While President Bush offers no details, he does admonish us to realize that our withdrawal from the region would lead to our fighting an enemy here instead of over there. Who is willing to gamble that they know better? If it is you, realize that it may be a gamble with your life and your children's life. You should also be concerned with our porous borders and the roughly 20 million illegal aliens in our midst. Whose side do you think they will be on when the bell rings here? While this is a scant outline, you should have general idea by now that the United States could be in real peril if we do not prevail in Iraq. As Rodney Alexander told me when I mentioned my concern, "we make up 5% of the world's population and the other 95% don't like us very much." You may want to really think about the price of walking away.

Joe Ray Bob, Jr. said...

I found what Aymond said about our bombing a religious building in Germany during WWII but not bombing a mosque in Iraq today to be very interesting. The thing that struck me was why the difference now?


I believe it is the fault of the news media.We did not have the media looking over our shoulder then. We did not have every TV reporter imaginable telling us what they think we need to know. Reporters then reported facts and did not try to inflame their readers/viewers with intentionally inflammatory content. The exact opposite is true today. The more sensational the better. Our enemies know this and, they too, play to the media. We are being defeated, not by the enemy, but by our own "need to know". I am a news hound, but I don't need to know every action our military leaders take.

Barry Goldwater said...

The problems we face are much larger than Iraq. I fear that at some time in the future, we will look back and say the war in Iraq was a small problem. I say this because the fundamentalist Muslim movement is so widespread and growing daily.

In the Viet Nam war our "fighting" enemy was fairly localized. Once out of Viet Man our enemy quit fighting us. By comparison, our Muslim enemies are all over the world. They know no boundaries and spread terror on anyone....even their own people.

I'm not a doom and gloom individual but the reality is that we will be faced with an increasingly nasty situation as time goes by. Our enemy does not value life and knows no boundaries. Things are sure to get nasty with this type of adversary. Negotiations mean nothing to them. Frankly, it's kill or be killed when dealing with our Muslim adversaries.

Spanky said...

I am encouraged to hear that some folks think their personal safety is in danger. It is easy to talk about a war and whether you agree or disagree on some abstract principle but nothing clears the thinking better than actually knowing that your blood may be spilled. It is a reality folks. The mexicans are not among us by mistake.

Anonymous said...

cenLamar is about as controversial, informative, and insightful as last month's church bullitin. He is apparently now paid NOT to talk or think - a good investment.

Clear Creek said...

Samuel Adams
American Patriot & Politician
1722 - 1803

If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us
in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down
and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon
you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
—Samuel Adams

Anonymous said...

Does the present conversation on the blog indicate that controversy does not exist at city hall?

Anonymous said...

This post may be off the on-going subject, but I need to vent just a bit. Satueday morning, February 10, 2007, KALB-TV sent a film crew to the Alexandria Mall to film a MDA fund raiser. Guess where the crew parked it's van? IN A HANDICAPPED SPOT! How ironic is that? When a mall-walker asked the female member of the film crew about it, she got a rather lame excuse about it. Ten feet from where the crew parked were numerous regular parking spots. KALB_TV should be ashamed to have such inconsiderate people on it's staff. Too bad KLAX-TV wasn't there filming. Perhaps they could have shown it on their news show.

we saw that... said...

too bad no one had a camera fone. you could have emailed us the foto or posted it yourself.

Gena Gore said...

We Saw That. I want to go on record to say your picture of George W. Bush dwarfing into a picture of Hitler is totally disgusting.

we saw that... said...

so?

Spanky said...

Gena, I would add that the prosecution of any war is an odious proposition that no president would seek and I am sure that President Bush would have preferred to be Santa Claus. Fate did not deal him or us that hand and I am proud that he, for the person that he is, holds the reins of power. Woe be unto us as a nation if we elect one of the spineless wonders that appear to seek the presidency now. Hitler would have seeking all of us out for his next barbeque.

Gena Gore said...

Spanky - I agree with everything you just said. I also feel that We Saw That has every right to disagree and to voice his opinion. However, to compare G.W.B to Hitler is beyond the pale. It shows total disrespect for the office of the Presidency. I would disagree with his actions no matter who held the office.

Greg Aymond said...

KALB_TV should be ashamed to have such inconsiderate people on it's staff.


Several years ago I saw a KALB van parked in a No Parking space at the courthouse. I called 5 on your side and reported it (I think Jack Frost back then) and he hung up on me lol.

Greg Aymond said...

It shows total disrespect for the office of the Presidency. I would disagree with his actions no matter who held the office.


Richard Nixon used the same reasoning in attempts to discover his Watergate era crimes, as did Bill Clinton in his lies about Monica. This nation was founded upon disrespect for the head of government, ask King George.
The President works for us. Although I do not agree that George Bush is Hitler, I totally support We Saw That's right to say so. That, my fellow countrymen, is the American way.

Anonymous said...

ZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Anonymous said...

Gena, I think the term is "morphing" and your record of recognizing statesmanship, honesty, and leadership potential is pretty bad. Were you in favor of the Pig commercial?

Spanky said...

I would fight for the right for him to say so also, but Hitler might not have seen it that way. I don't think the comparison is accurate and would hope folks find a more measured approach to the circumstances America finds itself in. One day soon, if we are not successful over there, we may have a fight on our hands here. For folks that may have thought I was offbase with my Russia comments previously, did anyone see Vladamir Putin's comments? Today's NY Times " Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday blamed U.S. policy for inciting other countries to seek nuclear weapons to defend themselves from an ''almost uncontained use of military force'' -- a stinging attack that underscored growing tensions between Washington and Moscow.

''Unilateral, illegitimate actions have not solved a single problem, they have become a hotbed of further conflicts,'' Putin said at a security forum attracting senior officials from around the world.

''One state, the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way.''


Them might be fightin words especially after we whack Iran.

Anonymous said...

Original thinking Spanky. Lets call it the DOMINO THEORY. Iraq is to Bush as the monster is to Dr. Frankenstein: he created a monster and it killed him. Does "Afghanistan" ring a bell? Osama who? The was has cost us $360 billion. And we ain't near finished. I wish you guys would quit blindly following Rush and just THINK!

Spanky said...

So what is your take? Is there no danger?

Anonymous said...

Of course there is danger. There is potential lethality in every freighter and airplane and parcel post or UPS package or mail envelope entering this country but it ain't coming from Iraq. It never was. And we appear to be doing damn little in this country or abroad to address these dangers. Meanwhile, $360 billion could hire and train and pay millions of teachers, build 3000 grammar schools in each state, etc. And the American lives lost or decimated for no explainable reason - and nuts like we saw that spreading hatred to any weak mind that will listen - lots of danger, just not from Iraq.

Spanky said...

I would ask that you review Russian history and their desire to have a warm water port and begin to look at the Middle East, South America, and Mexico through that filter. Russian goals have not changed during the period of detente and subsequent years - only their strategy has. One of the most important components of war is the psychological battle that any force wages and our penchant for the truth does little to be effective in twisting the truth to suit our needs. The Russians on the other hand have been. Call it crazy talk at your own peril, but at least do the research.

Anonymous said...

We have more to fear from bird flu than Russia at this point in time but the point is, we are exhausting all of our economic and military resources refereeing a civil war between factions that have mortally hated each other for 7500 years. Don't you think it would somehow be a little better if the solution addressed the problem. I don't understand your thought process.

Spanky said...

You may not understand the thought process because you may not have the same information that I have had for the last 40 years. This proves nothing but every time you see a newsclip from an underdeveloped country and the kids are waiving around their AK-47's, who do you think gave them the toys, Santa Claus? How come they are not waving around a laptop or a garden hoe, you know something that could help feed them? The fact is that conflict and propaganda are the Russian stock in trade and unrest and an armed populace are evidence of their presence. That is why you should ask yourself how the Zapatistas in the state of Zapata, Mexico became so well armed and what they are carrying. Yep, they are packin Russky heat and you know, they are about 24-hour's drive from here. You might want to do yourself a favor and get educated.

site #1

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Security-Conference.html?n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fPeople%2fP%2fPutin%2c%20Vladimir%20V%2e

site #2

www.globalsecurity.org

This should whet your appetite for more information. Tell me what you think after you have done some research.

Spanky said...

You may not understand the thought process because you may not have the same information that I have had for the last 40 years. This proves nothing but every time you see a newsclip from an underdeveloped country and the kids are waiving around their AK-47's, who do you think gave them the toys, Santa Claus? How come they are not waving around a laptop or a garden hoe, you know something that could help feed them? The fact is that conflict and propaganda are the Russian stock in trade and unrest and an armed populace are evidence of their presence. That is why you should ask yourself how the Zapatistas in the state of Zapata, Mexico became so well armed and what they are carrying. Yep, they are packin Russky heat and you know, they are about 24-hour's drive from here. You might want to do yourself a favor and get educated.

site #1

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Security-Conference.html?n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fPeople%2fP%2fPutin%2c%20Vladimir%20V%2e

site #2

www.globalsecurity.org

This should whet your appetite for more information. Tell me what you think after you have done some research.

Greg Aymond said...

To understand our Arab problems today requires an understanding of history. After the death of Mohamed , the Sunni branch believes that the first four caliphs--Mohammed's successors--rightfully took his place as the leaders of Muslims. They recognize the heirs of the four caliphs as legitimate religious leaders. These heirs ruled continuously in the Arab world until the break-up of the Ottoman Empire following the end of the First World War. Shiites, in contrast, believe that only the heirs of the fourth caliph, Ali, are the legitimate successors of Mohammed. In 931 the Twelfth Imam disappeared. Shiite Muslims, who are concentrated in Iran, Iraq, and Lebanon, [believe they] had suffered the loss of divinely guided political leadership" at the time of the Imam's disappearance. Not "until the ascendancy of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1978" did they believe that they had once again begun to live under the authority of a legitimate religious figure. http://hnn.us/articles/934.html.
In 1099, in a “Holy War” declared by the then Pope, the Cities of Antioch and Jerusalem were taken by the Christians, and not one Arab man woman or child was left alive. Later, in 1947, the United Nations divided the British
In 1941, the Soviets and British invaded Iran, and replaced the Shah, due to his pro-Axis tendencies, with his son, who was the last shah of Iran. In the 1950's the C.I.A. and British Intelligence overthrew the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran, in response to his nationalization of the oil industry. “The Shah also authorized the creation of the secret police force, SAVAK (National Organization for Information and Security, which was organized with the help of the CIA.).This infamous agency operated its own secret prison, used torture extensively, assassinated dissidents, and kept the CIA informed..” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi’
Prior to the United Nations partition of Palestine, into a Jewish and an Arab state, much violence was carried out by both sides. One of the most successful Jewish terrorists was future Israeli Prime Minister Begin, who led the bombing of the King David Hotel, in Jerusalem. Later, although the U.S. refused to meet with Arab terrorist leaders, it had no problems meeting with Begin. The Arab state in Palestine was never created, and over one half of the indigent arab population of Palestine were forced to leave by Israel and their property confiscated. The United States, although it gives Israel annual payments and tremendous military aid, has never forced Israel to follow United Nations resolutions, including illegal West-bank settlements or not making Jerusalem its capitol.
Arabs must learn that none of these facts can justify terrorist attacks against innocent civilians. However, I feel, not until the United States and Europe admit these past wrongs, and begin forcing Israel to follow international law, can we ever hoped to be respected in the Arab World.

Spanky said...

Therein lies the conflict, a Middle East that used to be the rope in a Sino-US tug-of-war is now a party to the game and a force to be reckoned with. An acknowledgment of the wrongs that have been perpetrated against Arabs & Persians does little to alleviate the tension between the United States and Russia in the United States quest to keep Russia minimized as a global power. I suppose the question that would make things more clear to Americans if the question could posed of Putin as to whether he is a good witch or a bad witch. (Hint: Former KGB - supports reformulation of USSR) As to the Middle East, our currency is the ability to provide military security and when that currency is devalued, the only option left is absolute military control - abandonment is not an option because the Iranians will swing into full cooperation with the Russians, providing them with the port they desire in exchange for nuclear power the Iranians desire and it is off to the races as far a South and Central American destabilization. Think about it the next time you join chorus with Hanoi Jane and mock President Bush and how that may clash with your personal interest.

You disappoint said...

So Spanky, we essentially disarm and then attack Iraq, then occupy Iraq, a sovereign nation, and attempt to install a puppet government and "democracy" for the strategic purpose of denying the now totally emasculated and disassembled russia a warm water port? Forget about the many thousands of Iraqi children slaughtered in the street by our military action and now, a civil war that we facilitated, and the thousands of American lives lost or ruined from this cluster fuck, and consider the fundemental morality of that policy.

I have nothing for jane fonda but her position at least has a moral component - yours does not. We were not established as a christian nation but we established as a moral and fair nation and dispite what we did to the American Indian and Japanese, and all the other bad stuff, we must still stive for moral decency.

Anonymous said...

Hmmmmmm I wonder why NOBODY is posting on this blog anymore?

Could it be?

1)Aymond gets his tail continusly spanked here…

2)Aymond whines like a girl and complains to Quint, also threatens legal action.

3)Aymond cries that he will sue anybody that has said mean things about him and stomps his foot, demanding IP addresses.

4)Aymond and Quint meet and the blog takes on a new look.

5)Word verification stuff appears.

6)Posters scatter and Aymond, his playmate Spanky, and other boring types begin to pontificate on the most boring subjects you could possibly imagine.

Could it be that Quint caved into Aymond’s blustering BS? Since Aymond can’t get anyone to read his blog, has he squatted here? Is this blog dead?

Tune in for the next 30 days folks…time will tell.

Anonymous said...

Anon why don't you carry your anti-Aymond hate to a blog that you open. Aymond was not bringing up the old crap and simply joined in an Iraq discussion started by the owner. Your baiting him reflects poorly on you.
This is not YOUR personal blog. And what an un-American you are to even say that our troops getting killed in Iraq is "the most boring subjects you could possibly imagine." Do you have a life, or do you live Aymond's?

we saw that... said...

actually, you disappont the united states supreme court in a 9-0 decision handed down on 29 february 1892 did declare america to be a christian nation. see RECTOR, ETC, OF HOLY TRINITY CHURCH v. U S, 143 U.S. 457 (1892)

Anonymous said...

the Supreme Court also declared slavery legal, permits abortion, authorized racial segregation, elected George Bush, and permits criminal state executions. The Supreme Court has decreed about 3 dozen times that the Constitution prohibits an official religion and virtually all people learned in the constitution (which would exclude the religious hacks that you esteem) affirm that this of a government of, by, and for all people. But you are so consumed with feeding your fear and hatred that you will never comprehend, much less embrace the truth. And if America falls, which history suggests happens to all great nations, it will be at the hands and direction of nuts like you.

Anonymous said...

The 1892 case is full of dicta concerning the social and religious history and developement of America as it was in the 19th century but the holding of the court is not that this is a christian nation but that a certain contract of employment was not prohibited by a law. Dicta is not law and not of any jurisprudential value in authority for subsequent cases. It points to the edicts of King James and William Penn and their feelings on the colonization of the new world but King James and Willie Penn don't make the rules around here. Perhaps it would be helpful to you legal scholars to read some of the Church/State separation cases decided in 20th and 21st century.

we saw that... said...

we never suggested that america should have or has had a state religion. we're saying that the truth as you call it is, that america was founded on christian values. america has already fallen and will continue to fall into utter desolation and the reason is because 'we the people' have turned our backs on god. the same god from whom our founding fathers said that our freedoms come from. if you go back and look at all the founding documents relative to america back even to the mayflower compact you will note that our progenitors made a covenant with god. god upheld his end of the deal. however, we havent. we see from the history of the israelites what happens when a people who have a covenant with god turn their backs on him. god will send pagans to conquer and enslave and carry away into captivity those people. america is in the beginning stages of this now. america wont fall because of "nuts like us" or the "religious hacks we esteem" america has fallen because people like you prefer to believe a lie.

Spanky said...

You Disappoint, the part you have wrong is assuming that Russia is emasculated and dismembered. Their nuclear force is still robust and their European theater armor was mothballed to the Ural Mountains, not dissasembled. Putin is rallying for re-assembly and purging his enemies. The scenario, while not chiseled in stone, is viable and poses great danger to us as citizens. Failure to realize the possibilities could make it so. I personally don't care to die for your sense of morality as it is direct opposition of the fundamental law of nature of self-preservation, so please keep me off your martyr list. You should also ask yourself who builds the car bombs - I don't think it is our side.

Anonymous said...

Happy Days! Mayor Famous Amos from across the river has come up with a solution to intice the Nunnly brothers off the bars and restraunts of Alexandria and into the bars and restraunts of Pineville. Great idea. We have enough drunks over here already.

Anonymous said...

Fields must think the people are just stupid. Selling mixed drinks will not grow his little city. Lying to people about an Outback or Applebees to get a bar built is just dishonest.

you disappoint said...

Spanky, I think you are either making stuff up or just plain wrong but, nevertheless, I think you have defined the fundemental ethical and philosophical differences between us. That is a gulf we cannot bridge.

Anonymous said...

I think our noncontroversial brother across the river is about to kick open a hornets nest. His political career has been all about avoiding any controversial issues. Well, he is about to split his fare city wide open. Just watch.

Spanky said...

You Dissapoint, I can assure you of this, the gulf you allude to is between reality and fantasyland and you will figure out which one you are in when a wetback sticks you in the ass with a bayonet.

you really disappoint! said...

Thanks for the warning Spanky. I didn't even know about the 'wetbacks' from Iraq. Maybe that's what Bush was looking for: "WEAPONS OF MEXICAN DISTRUCTION".

Clear Creek said...

The radical Muslim movement is not solely against the U.S., the are against our society. Proof? Everywhere their is trouble in the world, the radical Muslim movement is the "opposing" side. It is not Iraq, nor is it Afghanistan. It is Spain, France, Enlgland, the African continent, Malaysia, Jakarta, everywhere their is a cell. Trust me cells are everywhere, most importantly and of some concern is here in the United States.
-----------------------------During the golden age of Islam, in most cases Islamic regimes treated Christians and Jews with tolerance for being monotheists like themselves. They were considered ahl al-dhimma, non-Muslim monotheistic believers who had the privilege to be under the protection of Islamic rule, although some humiliating laws were imposed on them (payment of a head tax; synagogues and churches had to be built lower than mosques, etc.). The destiny of infidels and polytheists (those who attribute associates to God) under Islamic rule, however, was either conversion to Islam or execution.

In today's world, radical Islamic scholars have renounced the privileges that Christians and Jews had enjoyed under Islamic rule and denied their status as ahl al-dhimma, accusing them of crimes against Islam and deviation of faith in God by attributing associates to God. This opened the way to justifying mass killing of Christians and Jews under the flag of jihad for the sake of Allah. Their call for the complete extermination of peoples means they have moved ideologically toward the justification of genocide. And as an added bonus-Democracy is a prohibited innovation that contradicts Islamic values and embodies a new heretical religion.

Regardless if you have supported or opposed the war in Iraq one fact remains clear. Radical Islamist are on the move and growing in numbers. They have defined their objective for all the world to see. They are pursuing their goal fervently and in their mind there can be no peace & no compromise until they have accomplished everything they believe in. They are not going to simply go away or leave us alone.

Anonymous said...

this war is not and has never been merely about two opposing religious ideologies. sure, it may be easy to understand everything through the lens of religion, and even though spanky's political science textbook is outmoded, he's onto something-- the war, like all wars, is about resources.

bin laden doesn't care about our freedoms. he cares about our presence in the middle east.

it's hard to know where to start because though some of you have an elementary understanding of this conflict, your penchant for comparing this to other wars and conflicts demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the current situation.

but let us try

-- the owner of this blog sounds like the pundits of the far right when claiming that the media's presentation of this war has led a lack of national support and public morale. get real. despite the evidence, the un inspectors, the kay report, and a multiplicity of experts claiming iraq did not have the capability to produce wmds, president bush convinced the american public that iraq posed an imminent threat and attempted to confuse the american public into believing that the attacks of 9/11 had something to do with our former ally, saddam hussein. now we know that there were no weapons of mass destruction and that the war was built on false pretenses. this fact has nothing to do with political parties. i hope that the owner of this blog realizes that the media has not lost this war and that it's doing a great service by accurately reporting the facts on the ground.

-- russia has very little to do with our strategy.

-- religious ideology is a smokescreen used to distract the masses. remember, saddam was actually a secularist. the religious component works both ways. it emboldens islamofacists and christian zealots into believing they're fighting for a way of life... when they're actually fighting over resources.

Anonymous said...

To this poorly read simpleton: February 11, 2007 9:18:00 AM.

First, read before you display your inability to comprehend. I don't hate Aymond, to me his posts are inaccurate and unimportant. I have heard he is a accomplished attorney...fine. He is NOT a military historian, and should refrain from speaking on things he knows nothing about.

However, his ability to squelch free speech with the threat un-enforcable legal action seems to have sent a chilling message to the spineless owner of this blog.

51 comments since the new thread was posted is evidence of this.

As to support of the troops and a discussion of Iraq...they are unrelated. I came back from my tour over a year ago, and will go back if needed. Can you say that you have risked as much as I have for the concept of freedom?

I doubt it.

I do, however, hold to my assessment. The subjects discussed here by those blathering on about things they know nothing about is BORING.

And so are you.....

Greg Aymond said...

I have heard he is a accomplished attorney...fine. He is NOT a military historian, and should refrain from speaking on things he knows nothing about.


Well, as a matter of fact, my major in college was in history. I also have some post-graduate work in History. Until recently, I belonged to the State Historical Society, and am a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. So your statement that I do not know what I am talking about is not true. Yours was simply another unfounded attack on me. God knows I, like all others, have plenty of faults. Few of them are discussed on this blog however.
Thank you, however, for acknowledging that I am an accomplished attorney.

Anonymous said...

Anon 4:48:00 AM. Perhaps it is the institution of the word verification that has cut out some our posters of lesser intelligence? The discussion of Iraq was one of the best on this blog in a long time. No attacks on posters or their families, and little to no vulgarity, has been a refreshing change. Feel free to join in the discussion, if you have the ability.

Clear Creek said...

Anonymous said...
-- religious ideology is a smokescreen used to distract the masses. remember, saddam was actually a secularist. the religious component works both ways. it emboldens islamofacists and christian zealots into believing they're fighting for a way of life... when they're actually fighting over resources.
-----------------------------------
Saddam may have lived the majority of his time on earth as a secularist, but according to press reports, in the last moments of his time he was asking for forgiveness and mercy from "Allah". Doesn't sound like a very secularist way to spend his last moments on earth to me. And if he was a secularist as you say he was then surely that foundation was not a very strong one at all. He abandoned it for a spiritual plea for mercy.

The "religious smokescreen ideology” you speak of is a testament to your inability to comprehend spiritual matters. I can assure you that the deception is entirely yours sir.

To believe that radical Islamist place resources over their beliefs, as the force that propels them is to willfully choose to remain in the dark. The core of this conflict is a spiritual one, which is deeply imbedded in the written history of mankind. Anyone's inability to see this does not and will not ever negate that fact.

me said...

Quint and Joe Ray and Spanky like to talk about Osama and 911 as justification for our Iraq actions and, if fact, they are unrelated and probably reflect why we should have paid far more attention to Afghanistan and Syria and Saudi Arabia than we do or have. Then the justification becomes "OK maybe it was a fuckup but now we gotta stay and whip them heathens" as if two or seven wrongs will make it right. Spanky is still fighting the cold war.

And everybody is jumping on Greg Aymond like this Pineville thing was a popularity contest. Aymond (who I dislike but happen to think is 150% correct in his quest and his position) has taken his case to court to secure a rational legal enforceable conclusion to his questions. What more civilized, responsible, and open approach could we ask for? We will soon know who is right or wrong on the public records issue and it will guide all of us in the future. The real "quagmire" is the political situation that Aymond as engineered for his targets - a masterful stroke if ever there was one.

Meanwhile, Spanky can chase his Iraqi and Russian "wetbacks" back across the Tigris.

Spanky said...

The conflict is over resources. Current models have China and Russia in conflict over the Siberian area where they share a common border due to newly discovered offshore oil and gas. (I used to wake up to the sight of Sahkalin when I lived in Wakkanai, Japan, the place where KAL Flight 007 washed ashore) Russia is still in play, they have been minimized by their ability to extend their navy. Hopefully China and Russia will stay busy with each other and not expand globally in a military fashion. I guess the main point that I am trying to make is that we cannot withdraw and all of the bad people will go away. They will come here. Rusia has had a successful history of using surrogates to further their aims, hence the involvement of Argentina or Mexico as possible future allies. If we can perceive it, it is a possibility. All I am saying is that is time to wake up and take a sober look at the circumstances.

come on Spanky - said...

"I guess the main point that I am trying to make is that we cannot withdraw and all of the bad people will go away. They will come here."

Spanky, nobody has suggested that withdrawal was a panacea. You are doing that old republican "cut & run" chant and that is neither accurate nor fair. My point is that some problems simply don't have a military solution and I suggest that religious differences that have existed in the extreme for thousands of years is a likely example. Try this question: do you want to stay in Iraq and waste American and Iraqi lives and billions of dollars every day if it does no good and moves us no closer to a resolution in that region, and in fact, exhausts our financial and military resources to that we are susceptable to other more severe and immediate international problems. Do you really think that a surge of 20 troops to quiet certain neigborhoods and factions is going to have any sort of lasting or curative effect on the causes and issues that are maintaining this civil war? Maybe Balkanization is a solution, maybe withdrawal to a safe zone until the civil war subsides is a solution but the Bush approach clearly, and according to informed members of congress, the intelligence community, and the military leaders that Bush had confidence in until a month ago, the "surge" won't accomplish anything of lasting value.

I agree with your analysis of the geopolitical situation (I am less concerned about Russia than you are) and all responsible people always recognized that this conflict was about resources, ours and theirs, but what, in God's name, do you hope to accomplish by continuing to do the wrong thing? You republicans loved Colin Powell until he told you the truth. And how could you ever ever ever trust Cheney?

So lets don't cut and run, lets don't continue to do the wrong thing, lets try to pursue some 3rd choice with a possiblity of a less tragic outcome than the one toward which we are racing.

Greg Aymond said...

A third choice is to fight an all out war and achieve a military victory. Unfortunately, even more so with the evidence that Iran is supplying explosives to the Iraqi insurgents, means taking Iran out of the terrorist picture. Iran should have been attacked almost 30 years ago, when they seized our embassy.
Unfortunately, by staging a non-productive sideshow in Iraq, a real promoter of terrorism remains, and America's will to fight another war and pay for it will make it difficult to take action against Iran.

Anonymous said...

Greg, don't forget Syria.

Anonymous said...

Let's consider this:
1) The war is a war for oil -
6 of the top 10 oil reserves lie within the middle east: Saudia Arabia (264.3 BB), Iran (132.5), Iraq (115), Kuwait(101.5), UAE (97.8), and Libya (39.1).

2) This is a war on terrorism. Most of the violence in the world has stemmed from radical groups in the name of religion from the earliest days of history from this area of the world and will continue until the end of time - especially if you believe the writings of John in the Book of The Revelation.

3) We have found no weapons of mass destruction. Why? Well they could have been removed to another "friendly" country prior to our arrival, or perhaps there weren't any to start with. Is it possible we were duped and brought into this theater of war so that our troops could be subjected to extreme humiliation and attack by guerrilla like warfare with simple devices such as molatoffs (pardon the spelling) and grenades? Remember Hussein's own army was out teaching his civilian supporters how to conduct sabotage missions with crude weaponry. Something that is now being used against us.

We were arrogant in Vietnam, thinking our military power, weaponry, machinery and technology would easily allow us to slay the North Vietnamese, something no other country who had been at war with them were able to do (granted one of the countries was France). We had our asses kicked by "little men running around in black pajamas" mostly because our politicians would not allow our soldiers to do what was needed - bomb the hell out of North Vietnam.

I have no solution for Iraq, nor Afghanistan for that matter, I do know we're spending billions of dollars and are achieving nothing. People are dying and we are achieving nothing. Is it possible to ever achieve a consolidated government in Iraq? Probably not. Each group wants its piece of the country and equal representation. You can't just divide it into 3 pieces and give each group land and create three separate countries because of where the oil reserves are. One group would be "more powerful" than the others.

Our leadership has gotten us into something with no easy end in sight while our own domestic policy is failing. We have become a nation of importers of goods and are slowly becoming an exporter of services. What does that say for our next generation?

Greg Aymond said...

The U.S. State Dept. has the following list of States which officially support terrorism:

Cuba
March 1, 1982

Iran
January 19, 1984

North Korea
January 20, 1988

Sudan
August 12, 1993

Syria
December 29, 1979

Anonymous said...

Greg would include "Pineville" - 2006

Greg Aymond said...

Greg would include "Pineville" - 2006

No, I, unlike many, realize that Pineville is not an independent state with its own laws. Do you have an opinion to share on the Middle-East?

Cenla Antics said...

Interesting ...

However let me address the following:

1) Word verification -- the blog company recently asked everyone to upgrade to the newer version ... I did. I included the word verification to give the poster time to change their minds if they acted in the heat of the moment. This hopefully would exclude a lot of the stupidity and personal insults.

2) War in Iraq/WMD's ... Is the war for oil? This can be argued till the cows come home ... some yes, ultimately no ... you however seem to enjoy the use of modern convienences ...perhaps the loss of a few might revamp your views. WMD's ... they were "identified" under the Clinton Administration. I am sure that Saddam left them lying around as things escalated so that he would have to give us the proof for the invasion ...

3) Pineville's Alcohol issue ... it's called progress ... Outback and Applebee's WILL NOT build anywhere that they can not serve alcohol. The bar is a nice size portion of their profitability. Why don't you call them yourself and answer the question.

4) IS this blog dying? Not for the intelligent input, just for the stupid.

Anonymous said...

Wow Cenla Antics:
You must be one of the few folks left who is steadfastly maintaining the WMD justification for the Iraq attack. As I understand your circuititous reasoning, the fact that we found no WMD's is the proof that they were there. That explaination is also valid for space invaders and ghosts and just as pursuasive. If we had found the WMDs would that have meant that they were NOT there? I think we bolster our credibility when we admit our errors. I know I would if I ever made one.

Spanky said...

Come on Spanky,
I am reminded of a poem when thinking of the current situation in Iraq;

A yellow bird
With a yellow bill
Was perched upon
My window sill.
I lured him in
With crumbs of bread
And then I smashed
His f***ing head.

#1. Time and Timing are critical components of any military conflict and we have used time to allow a large number of players to get to the party.

#2. We have drawn down troops to the level necessary to keep the battle area defined while allowing the players to infiltrate and congregate in urban areas while identifying factions by their actions.

#3. We have allowed the players to antagonize the civilian populace which has placed pressure on the elected government to mobilize native forces and test alliances.

#4. We are in the phase to galvanize the borders to prevent players from fleeing the operation while the final hammer blow is delivered.

#5. Recent remarks from Russia's Putin indicate his frustration at our ability to thwart Iran's effort to destabilize and posess Iraq's port region thus stymying Iran's ability to lease those ports in exchange for nuclear technology and fuel.

And as a direct answer to your question, No, Iran can take the inducements offered by the US or be a test case for neutron weapons. They are quite neat now with no residual radioactive material and can be used close to population centers with no ill effects except to the intended target. No people, No problem. Do I face a moral dilemna you ask? I would treat them as neighborly as they would treat me and we all know the measure of their brotherly love. Thus is mine.

One further question, do the nerve agents used to dispatch 25,000 Kurds count as WMD?

outahere said...

Spanky, quite simply, you are a fool, and a dishonest fool at that. No need for me to reiterate all of the facts and reason that has already been posted in response to your last 72 hours of aimless wandering.

You and Quint would like to count the WMD that we coudn't find. That is just plain dishonest. In Quint's defense, he didn't know that we were looking for your Weapons of Mexican Distruction.

By the way, knowing who you are makes this much easier for me to say.

Anonymous said...

outahere said...
Spanky, quite simply, you are a fool, and a dishonest fool at that.


Outahere, is you vacabulary and ability to structure sentences so limited that you have to resort to name calling to argue your point? I tend to think Spanky is more credible that you. Not for what he says, but for the way he says it.

Spanky said...

Time will tell and for your sake hope I am foolish.

Spanky said...

Outa here, feel free to address me by my name. I am who I am.

keep it honest said...

Spanky, how noble of you. But the conversation is and always has been the justification and wisdom of our attack upon and occupation of Iraq. We really don't have to wait to see the score there, do we? We know that the entire premise for the war was a lie. Maybe we didn't know that then (but probably we did) but everybody but you and Quint knows that now. And everybody but you and Quint and the PM of Australia agree on the probability of any meaningful long lasting US military solution to the problems we have either created or aggravated. And as to your identity, I don't dislike Spanky-the-person, but knowing your identity puts your thought process in some context and suggests some intellectual dishonesty on your part because you are far too intelligent to have made that statement of about Sadam's slaughter of the Kurds supporting the stated purpose of our invasion.

And before some Mexican sticks me in the ass with a bayonet, he will have to remove George Bush's hand from my back pocket.

Spanky said...

The Kurd incident was not a pretext for an invasion, it only demonstrates, on film, that aerial nerve agents dispersed by fighter aircraft and artillery were used to kill a large number on Saddam's fellow countryment, prima facia evidence of posession of WMD's.

The goal is an outcome in Iran that is suitable to US interests. After 2 world wars and numerous smaller conflicts, we will not be deterred from influencing that outcome despite all of the wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Anonymous said...

Why all this anger towards Mexicans? Have they taken your job? Are they robbing you of some freedom? Yes, we have an illegal alien problem. Let me say that again, YES WE HAVE AN ILLEGAL ALIEN PROBLEM.

Here's what you apparently don't get. NOT ALL HISPANICS ARE MEXICAN! NOT ALL HISPANICS IN THIS COUNTRY ARE HERE ILLEGALLY!

First, many of the illegals come into this country through Mexico. Why? It's easy. Second, Hispanics from South and Central American make their way through Mexico into the US. This does not make them Mexican. Los Angeles and other parts of South California, along with other bordering states have seen a rise in Columbian gangs and other guerilla gangs in their areas. All of these illegals came through our border with Mexico.

Many Mexicans and other hispanics have entered the US legally, they do so on work visas and through the citizenship process.

The simple fact that many illegals are in this country earning money to send back to their families in their homeland should speak volumes about the deplorable economic and social conditions in their home country. Is this our problem? Yes and No.

No it isn't our problem they have corrupt governments who oppress their people, unless of course they have huge oil reserves - which btw Mexico does. Yes it is our problem because since they are our neighbor it makes it easier for them to come across our border both legally and illegally to take part in our social systems. It also makes it easier for our own companies to send labor intensive jobs across the border and cut costs.

Please explain your hatred towards these people. Have they attacked your way of life, prohibited you from enjoy the pursuit of happiness? What exactly have they destroyed of yours?

Anonymous said...

WMD - I don't know if we'll ever find them.

Axis of evils or as stated here the top countries for terrorism - I find it interesting Afgahanistan and Iraq, along with Libya are not on the list. Afterall, are we not fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq because the "cells" which attacked on 9/11 were trained and from this region? We all know Libya has had it in for the US at least since the Carter administration.

Do we not now list Venezuela since Chavez has aligned himself with Castro and others who seek to bring the US down?

War for oil - I still see this as a way to protect our freedom to consume and enjoy the benefits of using another country's resources. The top consumers of imported oil are the US and China. China will surpass the US this year in both oil and coal consumption. That should tell us something.

Russia - is there not something in their political philosophy which says they will put the bear in the west at ease and rise up and kill him? Most have interpretted that to mean they will make the US believe they are partners and they turn on them in the end and destroy us. It might be difficult to achieve now that the former Soviet Union has been broken up into separate countries, but let's not forget they are still very dependent on each other for survival.

Spanky said...

What is MECHA?

back@cha said...

What is "prima facia"? Perhaps you mean "prima facie". Leave the Mrs. law books alone. Yuk yuk.

Spanky said...

Thanks for the correction. I do hate to dwell in ignorance.

Anonymous said...

"What is "prima facia"?"


Not sure exactly, but they serve it at Bellino's and it is AWSOME!!!

Yvette said...

Do I recall a chorus of Democrats that were emphatic that 6-party talks would yield no fruit on the North Korean matter? Hmmmmmmmmm What happened? Is it possible that they are all wet on the troop increase predictions also? What has happened to the Democratic Party? Are they all in the methadone program? Who can stop the madness? And so it goes, one question leads to another, does that make it a circle jerk?

Anonymous said...

Yvette,

Regarding North Korea, Bush is essentially agreeing to the same deal he rejected in 2002. WOW!

REAL PROGRESS! He's such a skilled diplomat!

Yvette said...

Anon, I am assuming that you are a Democrat because an American would be happy for such an accomplishment. It even goes along with your ideology vulnerable disarmament - no fighting at any cost. Why is there no joy in your reply?

Peacenik said...

Yvettte,

Please don't rile those folks, they are a bit unbalanced from being power-drunk and thinking their decrees somehow change reality.
Why come we aren't talkin bout local stuff?

Anonymous said...

What is "prima facia"? Perhaps you mean "prima facie".

If you Google the term "prima facia" you will find that many sources use it interchangeably with the term "prima facie". Ok who haws the law citation that legally rules which is correct?

word power said...

M. Webster says: ain't no such thing as "prima facia"

The word you've entered isn't in the dictionary. Click on a spelling suggestion below or try again using the search bar above.
Suggestions for prima facia:
1. prima facie
2. paramecia
3. primavera
4. premature
5. perithecia
6. primateship
7. prematures
8. perimeter
9. parenchyma
10. peripheral


It's kind of troublsome when you get all your info from Google. But you set your own limits.

Anonymous said...

It was never suggested that the spelling "prima facia" was correct. It was simply pointed out that it is a very common misspelling. However we are glad you got A's in typing and spelling. Sorry about your reading comprehension scores. Many who post here are not typist. One need not be typo free in order to be intelligent. Not does spell checking or typo spotting prove intelligence. Wordperfect spell checks, but it cannot post its opinion here. Can you?

Spanky said...

www.reference.com denotes "facia" as correct spelling but I acknowledge "prima facie" being the correct term. General meaning is "on it's face - at first appearance" Therefore, a prima facie case is one that is proved by initial evidence. In the context that I used the term, the usage is correct as I was referring to video of fighter bomb and artillery rounds seen to be emitting gaseous clouds that enveloped Kurdish villages. Subsequent photos show people that dropped where they stood, even to a mother with a baby in her arms that appeared to have been killed instantly. Prima facie evidence (video) that was presented of the event leads one to the conclusion of posession and employment by Iraqi forces of chemical weapons commonly referred to as WMD. With my simple mind I cannot grasp the concept of how chemical weapons were used to kill Kurdish people that were Iraqi citizens by the Iraqi armed forces translate to the Iraqi forces not posessing WMD's . In my quest for enlightenment, please explain this to me.

Anonymous said...

Spanky, I hope you voted for the library tax. Maybe this will help. If you recall, the premise for our attacking, slaughtering, and occupying Iraq was the presence of WMD that necessitated our intervention and disarming Sadam. This was not to punish Sadam for prior bad acts. According to all of our reliable intelligence and diplomatic information, at the time that Bush decided to wage war and waged war, there were no WMDs in Iraq. A historical perspective shows that we either knew or should have known that and the government manipulated the info to present a patently false picture which was conveyed to the congress to garner support. Perhaps you agree with Quint who declares the fact that we found no WMD's as proof that they were there. I really can't address that breed of "logic". So this would be my question: if they had them, where were they, and how do you know that?

Perhaps this Webster's definition will be of some help:
Main Entry: pos·ses·sion
Pronunciation: -'ze-sh&n also -'se-
Function: noun
1 a : the act of having or taking into control b : control or occupancy of property without regard to ownership c : OWNERSHIP d : control of the ball or puck; also : an instance of having such control (as in football) scored on their first two possessions
2 : something owned, occupied, or controlled : PROPERTY


So, if I used to possess something but no longer possess it, do I still possess it? You republicans make Clinton's discussion of the word "is" sound reasonable.

And in legal terms, the case against Sadam's gassing of the Kurds from the sighting of a spraying plane is not prima facie proof of anything. Not in a real testing of evidence.

Spanky said...

Prima facie refers to evidence presented, not necessarily tested, but that appears on its face, hence, even to your protest is still the correct usage both in context and accuracy. I am still puzzled by the mechanism by which evidence showed and acknowledge by President Clinton's administration to be in posession of WMD's as well as President Bush is negated for the predicate action when the possibility exists that WMD's were moved or secreted within the country still. Have they been found to date in large quantities, not that we know of. Were they present prior to commencement of military operations? According to intelligence and news reports spanning the Clinton and Bush administration, their presence was generally accepted. My question is, what magic do you use to change reality to fantasy? I want some.

Anonymous said...

I give up. Where are the WMDs that weren't/aren't there?

Anonymous said...

Did I miss it or did the administration fail to produce the information they promised on city care use. The fact that is appears to be taking months to compile a list of city cars and drivers should give us an idea of the level of attention that our tax dollars use previously received. How about this. Everybody bring their cars to the city compound and then give them to those who present a reasonable justification. And maybe somebody could right down who gets one??? I mean, the padlock the snacks and keep no control over a multi-million dollar vehicle inventory.

Spanky said...

Hey there on the car thing - that's - umm - well uh - That is just too sensible and it won't work because - umm- it makes too much sense - and beside that , it is simple - too simple.

On the WMD issue, I really don't care. Saddam has been hanged and we are dealing with what is today. Whatever it takes to prevail in the middle east so that the next time folks have an impulse to do harm to US citizens, they might think the sky will fall in on them and their families, that is what I support to the nth degree. Beyond that, opposers need to decide where their allegiance lies - US or them.

Anonymous said...

Spanky, I agree with you on the city cars. You should know that not everyone agrees that we should be focused only on our self-interest. I think that America is about doing the right thing and I think you can embrace a moral approach without puting your "allegiance" at issue. That's the Rove doctrine about calling everyone who questions the prudence of America's policy and strategy a traitor and a turncoat. The future of our republic relies on citizens that question the government and government that tells the truth. Where to you think our weak link is?

I might also add that you are the typical republican decider: you harp on the necessity of our conduct due to the WMDs and 011 and then when somebody shoves the WMD and Ben Ladin connection and argument up your ass you maintain that WMDs don't really matter. I assume that you encourage your children to exercise more ethical conduct that you personally espouse.

Despino, return that care immediately.

Anonymous said...

1) Discoveries of Iraqi nuclear programs shortly after the end of the Gulf War, to data on the use of WMD against Kurds and Iranians in the 1980s, to the reams of material produced by the UN inspection regime over the years was part of the evidence used to document Iraqs desire to stock WMD. Saddam's continuing desire to possess WMD was never in doubt, and who could say (without good HUMINT sources) that his capabilities were adequately blunted?

2) Analysts made extensive use of negative inference - i.e., when Saddam refused to prove something was not the case, the inference was drawn that it possibly (sometimes probably) was the case. And there was a lot of this kind of information. Many times Baghdad refused to account for gaps and inconsistencies in its WMD declarations, or never provided proof that it completely destroyed the weapons and production infrastructure it said it had. The Iraqis withheld important details on their nuclear program, never documented the 6,000 missing CW bombs from the Iran/Iraq war, never explained what happened to thousands of tons of chemical precursors, and much more. If all was actually as Baghdad claimed, why then the refusal to prove it? To this day, the most plausible explanation for this ultimately self-destructive behavior remains that the Iraqis were lying.

3) Finally, analysts drew on national technical means (NTM), such as satellite photographs. They looked at rocket test facilities where buildings were going up, chemical plants with suspicious new additions, etc. Although overhead photographs tell analysts nothing about plans and intentions, they provide incontrovertible evidence that something is going on. And when that 'something' involves a dual-use chemical production facility in a rogue state like Iraq, it is warranted to suspect the worst.

Spanky said...

It depends on what you call ethical. When I am threatened, I eliminate the threat and have taught my children accordingly. If that is unethical, so be it. My Choctaw blood has not quite bought into turning the other cheek.

Anonymous said...

Spanky said Beyond that, opposers need to decide where their allegiance lies - US or them.

I feel that I am patriotic, but I also oppose the war in Iraq. We should decide to either kick ass and win a military victory there or get out. We clearly are not achieving a victory, and our troops are simply being used for target practice. Do it right or get the Hell out. It is not being done right at the present time. Americans will support a war that we are winning, they don't support one we are loosing. You can get a clue that we are winning, when the shooting and bombing drastically decreased from the enemy.

Spanky said...

Reserve your judgement for 60 days before deciding whether we are winning or losing. What you have witnessed is a tactical lull over several years to shape the battlefield and quantify factions and allegiances. Just because it appears to be a stalemate to the un-trained eye does not mean that is what it is. I think it is amazing that we are occupying (if you choose that word) a country of 25 million people with 120,000 troops. I suppose the definition of victory should be defined and agreed upon to reduce the division among Americans.

Greg Aymond said...

“The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.”
General George S. Patton

“The purpose of all wars...is peace.”
Saint Augustine

Former US Gulf War commander Norman Schwartzkopf has said a new war with Iraq has not yet been justified. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2705275.stm

General Petraeus has told Congress, means essentially decentralizing operations in Iraq. It's a plan that aims to place bands of US soldiers with Iraqi forces in Baghdad, a high-risk strategy that will put more Americans in daily contact with Iraqis, providing both opportunities to win hearts and minds and more occasions for casualties.

Petraeus says he's optimistic, but he'll have fewer troops to do the job than recommended by the US military's new counterinsurgency manual, which he spent most of the past year helping to rewrite, calls for in these situations.

US General Petraeus takes his post Saturday, bringing with him a plan to spread troops across Baghdad. The problem is it doesn't matter how good a campaign you run if you're not given the resources you need," says Thomas Hammes, a retired Marine Corps colonel who is a counterinsurgency expert who served in Iraq. His counterinsurgency book, "The Sling and the Stone: On War in the 21st Century," is considered required reading for commanders in Iraq.

Mr. Hammes, in concert with the counterinsurgency manual that Petraeus helped to write, says the general doesn't have enough manpower for the job that he has been sent to do.

By Dan Murphy | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor


...bothers Schwarzkopf because he thinks Rumsfeld and the people around him lack the background to make sound military judgments by themselves. He prefers the way Cheney operated during the Gulf War. "He didn't put himself in the position of being the decision-maker as far as tactics were concerned, as far as troop deployments, as far as missions were concerned."

Desert Caution
Once 'Stormin' Norman,' Gen. Schwarzkopf Is Skeptical About U.S. Action in Iraq

By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, January 28, 2003;

Spanky, I agree with you that it is a commendable effort that we have occupied Iraq with so few troops. But was our goal to occupy. As seen above military experts have felt that we had no clear mission nor sufficent force do do the job properly. This must change. If it doesn't,judlvy count me as one of those that does not support the war, the way it is currently going. Also, shame on our leaders for not quantifying, as you stated "factions and allegiances" before we sent our troops over there? Are we fighting a war or acting as a Vietnam era police force again. The US military, as a whole, is not a police force.

Spanky said...

Again, when you view our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan through the prism of the outcome of the nuclear disagreement in Iran, a Russian surrogate and are currently abrogating international treaties, our military progression appears to be focused on the outcome of the nuclear issue. It is much easier to move from adjacent Iraq and Afghanistan directly into Iran than to depend on the cooperation of allied neighbors - a lesson we learned the hard way with Turkey who refused even overflight requests. From this point forward, I feel we will witness a much faster tempo in our military operations that will lead to an outcome that is satisfactory to our citizens as time grows short. During the height of the cold war, we were prepared to battle two superpowers and a regional conflict, that was the standard of our defense posture. Surely we can prevail in our current involvement.

Anonymous said...

These, like Viet Nam, are not traditional military confrontations and, like the Ranussians learned in Afghanistan and we learned in VN, Afghanistan, and Iraq, the same rules and principals do not apply. A shock and awe approach suggested by Colin Powell, may have created enough military pressure to affect a political outcome. But they didn't listen.

Spanky said...

There are a lot of folks that throw around the phrase about "the lessons of Viet Nam". How about this for a lesson, Once heavily invested with blood and treasury, do not leave until the job is done. I would bet you could get 3 million testimonials if only the abandoned souls could speak in Cambodia and South Viet Nam.

Anonymous said...

Anon 10:48. We might as well give up on the City automobile deal. You made the point in your post that only those who can provide justification will get a City vehicle and I assume be able to drive it home each day. So....who is going to determine if each of these justifications is valid? Does the Mayor, the Division Directors, Department Heads, Purchasing Director, or Motor Pool Superintendent do that? What if your justification changes? Will those making the decisions get to decide if they themselves get a car? What about those who have at no fault of their own been provided with a car over the years. Do they have to give them up? What if I can provide justification but the person who decides whether my justification is legitamate or not doesn't like me for some reason? Do I have some sort of recourse? So....you got answers to all these questions? It's not as simple as some would have you believe. And in all truth, its probably not even an issue except for a few who have some sort of grudge against specific City employees.

Anonymous said...

City car use appears to be an issue to the council and mayor and particulary important to the bill-paying public. The criteria for car usage will obviously be subjective but I think the public and the government is tired of the waste. It's not an issue of fault but one of economics, conservation, and public perception.

Anonymous said...

Who are these people pulling down the big bucks for workforce development and economic development in Roy's administration? I've never heard of the economic development guy -- why hasn't the clown talk reported on his background, his resume, etc. Same with the other developer guy. And I could not believe I saw that professional leech Ken Juneau in a photo apparently still working for the city. Does he have pictures on somebody? What was he doing? Holding the hand of the new city PR person while they handled that highly controversial parade barricade issue? Come on, Jacques, you were supposed to rock our world. Turns out you're more like Lawrence Welk.

Anonymous said...

One thing is clear. Mayor across the river is gutless. The only thing worse than bad leadership is no leadership at all. These guys are just along for the ride. Gutless

Anonymous said...

YAWN......how boring this blog has become!

Ever since Quint caved in and bent over to Aymond's demand to track IP addresses, this blog has become the "Spanky and Greg" show.

Anybody else notice that posts are down by 56 percent????

Spanky said...

Quitcherbitchin and throw in your 2 cent for spice - if you have it.

Spanky said...

Well it is Thursday and it looks like the bad guys are on the run and moves are being made to seal the borders in Iraq as we speak so the players cannot flee the party. I think I mentioned that might happen. Anyone want to place a bet on our failure in Iraq?

Greg Aymnd said...

I count about 11 posts, counting this one, were made by me, approximately 23 were made by Spanky. So your statement is in error, as the majority of posts were made by by other persons.
There was no deal or agreement between Quint and myself. Perhaps what you possibly mean is that you don't like logical discussions of opinions without the vulgarity, personal insults, and ill mannered attacks on relatives of posters? The more brainy tone this blog has recently experienced, is perhaps not for the tastes of the Jerry Springer crowd. I for one welcome it. And if you do not wish to discuss the middle east, post something worthwhile on a different topic.

Spanky said...

You get an amen from me Mr. Aymond

Anonymous said...

That's really not fair, Greg. You turned smart and reasonable and caught me off-guard.

Greg Aymond said...

That's really not fair, Greg. You turned smart and reasonable and caught me off-guard.


LOL. See I also have a sense of humor !!!

Anonymous said...

You gotta have a pretty good sense of humour if you used to dance around in one of them pointy hoods. That takes a sport.

Spanky said...

Things that make you go Hmmmm?


http://www2.irna.com/en/news/view/menu-237/0702131783190411.htm

Tehran, Feb 13, IRNA
Iran-Visit-Russia
A high-ranking Russian delegation representing Ministry of Transport is expected to arrive in Iran on Wednesday for a three-day tour to Iranian ports of Shahid Rajaei in Bandar Abbas, Bandar Anzali and Bandar Amirabad.

A report released by the Public Relations Department of Iran's Ports and Shipping Organization on Tuesday said that the Russian delegation will include the country's deputy minister of transport, head of Russia's Federal Marine and River Transport Agency as well as the managing director of Astrakhan Port.

The Russian delegation and representative of Iran's Foreign Ministry are expected to inspect the port facilities in northern and southern Iran.

Meanwhile, the visiting delegation will confer with the managing director of Iran's Ports and Shipping Organization on expansion of mutual relations in the field.

According to marine transport and shipping officials, the visit will greatly contribute to bolstering cooperation between the two countries in the field of marine transport.

Now does the Russian strategic scenario sound so far-fetched?

I would like to know who is paying the Democrats leading the efforts to thwart our military efforts because it is my assertion they are not doing it out of a sense of patriotism. As a matter of fact, all of you true believers and your children are being sold out as we speak.

Anonymous said...

Any comments on Glen Beard for State Rep?

Anonymous said...

Glen Beard??? You must be kidding.

Anonymous said...

Looks like Michelle Goddard crawled out from under her rock and threw Beard a bone. An internet announcement...how original.

Anonymous said...

Too OLD!!!

69 and wanting a shot at term-limited 12 years?

Anonymous said...

He will be 4 years younger than Harry Silver was when elected to the council.

Anonymous said...

And that's supposed to change my opinion?

Anonymous said...

Assuming that you won't get to decide this election by yourself, it will tell you exactly how much the voters care about real considerations and issues. The Alexandria City Council elections taught me that, if nothing else.

Anonymous said...

What is the word on KALB firing Roosevelt?

Anonymous said...

What happened on Billy Allen's felony theft arrest?

Anonymous said...

KALB has been slowly moving a lot of the "behind the scenes" jobs out of Alexandria and back to their home office. Almost all of their master switching takes place at the home controls now. With them doing little local reporting they need fewer camera people. It's the nature of the industry as a whole.

You saw consolidation with radio first, large groups like Clear Channel being able to take a couple of jocks and have them handle morning drives on five, ten, fifteen cities at a time and "appear" to be local. Computers allowed for local voices to cover under numerous names on multiple stations and not even be in the station at the time. Record the liners, drop in the commercials and let the computer run. Now it's starting to happen in television.

Anonymous said...

You'll have to ask Judge Swent what happened. Somehow though guilty as hell for theft, which may have included federal funds, his day in court was kept very quiet.

Anonymous said...

Maybe Johnson's dismissal is Roy's first re-election event.

Anonymous said...

What did Mr. Allen do? Enlighten those of us yet to learn about it?

Anonymous said...

12 February 2007
boozin it up in pineville
the sunday 11 february 2007 town talk brought us news (see link) [our clipping] of the city of pineville, louisiana plan to allow the sale of hi-alcohol contented booze in...restaurants.

now this plan flies in the face of all common sense because for one thing when people sit in restaurants and drink cocktails etc then what do they have to do? they have to get in their cars and drive home thus increasing the likelihood of drunk (or as the europeans say "drink drivers" remember princess diana?) drivers. if we lived in a world ruled by common sense and politicians that were actually trying to do good by their constituents and citizens they would ban the sale of alcohol in restaurants and allow the sale of alcohol in all convenience stores. why convenience stores? well if you only have to drive or walk to the nearest convenience store the chances are that you wont be drunk driving by the time you arrive back home. you follow?

pineville's mayor clarence fields says that the purpose of allowing booze sales in pineville is to attract more restaurants. to that the citizens of pineville should ask themselves why is the mayor and city government trying to dumb down or should we say more accurately further dumb down the population by shifting the economy from manufacturing to these low paying service sector jobs? no economy can be strong and vibrant without a healthy manufacturing sector. pineville and the north side of the red river already has many, many manufacturing plants. a few that we can think of off-hand are: procter & gamble, international paper, colfax cresoting, dresser inc., baker manufacturing and so forth. why isnt pineville working with these corporations in trying to produce better educated and trained workers? in other words we need more people working in high paying manufacturing jobs not as bartenders and servers.

this is a patently disingenuous plan and the citizens of pineville really need to reassess the direction their government is taking them

Anonymous said...

Jews don't recognize Jesus, Protestants don't recognize the Pope. Citizens of Pineville don't recognize each other in the liquor store.

Anonymous said...

OK, i'll bite. who is billy allen and why is judge swent covering something up?

Anonymous said...

Mr. Aymond, tell us, what's the status of your writ to the3rd circuit on the Pineville e-mail case. Did you ever file it? Have any idea when it will be heard?

Anonymous said...

What a joke. Yesterdays Clown Talk carried a front page story on how Lowes might NOT be coming to Pineville. That young reporterette needs to be pimp slapped. Since when is it news that a store might be thinking about locating in pineville if they can buy the land at the right loaction for the right price and then if the corporate guys decide they like the community they maybe will drop by for a look....

Greg Aymond said...

Mr. Aymond, tell us, what's the status of your writ to the 3rd circuit on the Pineville e-mail case. Did you ever file it? Have any idea when it will be heard?


The writ will not be filed. We had a telephone conference with Judge Swent, wherein she clarified that she WILL review those e-mails which Pineville considers NOT public. Therefore, we will proceed to trial on the merits on May 11th.
So, Pineville will simply go through the e-mails first, and give Judge Swent those it feels are not public. On May 11th, we she will hear the case in chief as to whether Pineville can charge to sort the e-mails, if so, how much, did Pineville respond to the request on time, and does it owe penalties and attorney fees.

Anonymous said...

A couple of interesting things about that story on a Lowes in Pineville. Rod Noles spoke about that a few weeks ago in his radio show. Why is the TT so slow?
Also, many weeks ago, a post was on here about Pineville not wanting Aymond to see Dupree's e-mails because they contained secret economic development information they didn't wasn't public. Then why did Dupree tell Rod Noles of the Lowes deal, as Noles said he did in his radio show? Putting that information on the radio doesn't seem a good way to keep a secret.

Anonymous said...

Did you hear Dupree tell Noles about the Lowes rumor? Are you ASSuming that's how Mr. Real Estate heard about it. Did you really read the article about Lowes and Pineville in the Town Talk. Dupree was the only one who didn't confirm in the article that they were coming to Pineville, even though everyone else did. Maybe this can all be settled over a couple of drinks and a steak dinner in Alexandria.

Anonymous said...

Not assuming anything. In his newslettersent out on January 31, 2007, Rod Noles wrote:
"Kudos Rich Dupuy available for Saturday call: Out of State Public company looking to buy land in Pineville needed answer on Saturday at 4:30 call Rich on cell and he answered our question. Kudos is for knowing it is ok to call him on Saturday for Pineville Information." Also Rod stated so on his radion show, and I think he mentioned it being Lowes.
How did you ASSume that it wasn't true?

Anonymous said...

You ASSumed wrong again in your quest to make Dupree look bad. If you read the Town Talk article, you would see that the rep of the property the old Wal-mart is on, stated that they had been negotiating with Lowes for over six weeks...well beyond the January 31, 2007 newsletter of Rod Noles. I listen to Noles' show and the speculation about the Lowes deal has come from callers and church members, who have called into his show. That's not an ASSumption, but a fact.

Anonymous said...

Apparently your ASSumption comes from your inability to read Rod Noles' own words. He clearly stated that he called Dupree. The point being made is, why is Pineville economic development necessary to be kept a secret from the public but not to Rod Noles? ASSume what you wish, but that is a valid question.

Anonymous said...

The REAL story on Lowe's is they have been looking for the past 3 years. They have looked at property from King's Country as far north as Ball. They were coming close to narrowing in on some property near Red River Bank at one time.

Since they haven't made a decision in the past 3 years, we can ONLY hope they make one soon.

As for what Rod shares on his show - he doesn't have to get this story from Dupree - almost every Realtor in town has been contacted by the consultant working on the project. Rod happens to be close to Stirling.

Anonymous said...

Billy Allen took money from a church in New Orleans post Katrina to replace broken windows from the storm. He negotiated on behalf of the glass shop his family owned. He never placed the order. The story goes that the glass shop tried to make things right with the church once they found out what happened with the taking of the full amount of the order and no order being placed. FEMA is involved because they provided funds to the church for restoration.

I don't know if the church ever got their windows or not. We were not talking about a small amount of change here either.

Why does anyone care? He's an attorney and heavily supported our new mayor in his campaign.

Anonymous said...

he doesn't have to get this story from Dupree ...

But the fact is that he did. So why can't Aymond and the public?

Anonymous said...

Personally, I think it would be great to have a nice place on this side of the river to go to dinner and be able to have a glass of wine or a beer or a mixed drink before or with dinner without having to drive back over that bridge. I would much rather see people drive just a mile or two after doing so than having to drive 7-10 miles. If it's a private club, people would be carded in order to get the membership and normally carded if you don't look 30 or so.

Anonymous said...

To Greg Aymond

"The writ will not be filed. We had a telephone conference with Judge Swent, wherein she clarified that she WILL review those e-mails which Pineville considers NOT public. Therefore, we will proceed to trial on the merits on May 11th.
So, Pineville will simply go through the e-mails first, and give Judge Swent those it feels are not public. On May 11th, we she will hear the case in chief as to whether Pineville can charge to sort the e-mails, if so, how much, did Pineville respond to the request on time, and does it owe penalties and attorney fees."

So Greg, are you saying that you will be given what Pineville considers to be PUBLIC e-mails BEFORE May 11? If so, when is Pineville required to give them to you? Is Judge Swent to receive the NON-Public e-mails before May 11 also so that she can review them before trial?

One other thing...Why the long delay in trial date? May 11 seems an awful long way off.

Greg Aymond said...

No e-mails will be obtained before May 11th. This is due to the fact that one of the issues at trial is whether Pineville can charge a fee for searching through the e-mails, and, if so, how much. There are outstanding interrogatories to Pineville, which has 30 days to answer, so May 11th was the first available date for all parties,and the court, after that time.

observer said...

I am always amazed at the courtesy, dignity, and professionalism with which Aymond, the victim of ruthless personal attacks on this site, always answers substantive questions. It looks like he ended up with all of the esteem that Lamar lost.

Anonymous said...

Lamar didn't lose any esteem. A few scummy jealous jerks made fun of his disability and he simply ignored them.

Anonymous said...

Lamar lost esteem if he ever had any) and credibility when he and his family revealed the true reasons for backing Roy. Lamar is feeding at the public trough, Von Jennings, aid de camp to Grandmother at WIB is feeding at the public trough.

Only curious question is when will Felix Mouton get on board.

Anonymous said...

Just absolutely ridiculous.

It's ashame that some of you bloggers turned on Lamar, b/c he championed you people and helped make this relevant. He wasn't the only person but he definitely made people pay attention.

I know Lamar well, and I know he didn't get a job or get anyone else a job because of his grandmother. (Those statements really reveal how little you actually know about who he is and what he brings to the city).

Anonymous said...

Of course you are right. Lamar got the job as payback for helping Roy get elected. The problem is that that goes against all he declared.

Anonymous said...

Well hush my mouth, little did I know Lamar was a Cahmpion. Wonder if he changes into wa costume into a phone booth?

Anonymous said...

He never declared he wasn't interested in a job with Roy. Get your story straight. During the campaign he said that Roy hadn't promised anyone anything and that he didn't expect anything from him, which to me is a sign that both of them had the right priorities.

Anonymous said...

You seen a sign? Lordy Was this a sign from above? Lamar and Roy are a sign!!!!!! Once the word gets out people will be making pilgramages to Alexandria to see the sign.

Anonymous said...

hahaha.... hopefully people will begin making pilgrimages to alexandria to stay at the bentley!!!!!!!!!!

I heard it myself! said...

Wrong. I heard him say to several of us at House of Java and post on his blog that he would not be working for the city in any "official" capacity, which we took to mean that he woud voluntarily counsel with the Mayor when "axed". This only becomes interesting if you recall how he chided Scarlett for not being truthful. The difference, of course, is that Lamar did it for money and power and Scarlett did it to belong.

Anonymous said...

Lamar traded his fucking soul for that job. Look at his blog - it is nothing more than a "Now Playing at Finnigans" and a social calendar of sorts. And I do know what Lamar brings to this city: Lamar's needs.

UR a bunch of Homos said...

It is about time you anonymous guys got back on the Lamar haters bandwagon. Where have you been?

Richard J. Heath, A.R.I. said...

Mr. Roy is supposedly going to change the method of doing business with the City of Alexandria. It is regretful that he hasn't conveyed that information to Mr. Michael Marcotte of the City's Electrical Department.

A.R.I. Cable & Wiring, a holder of a State of Louisiana Outside Plant Telecommunication contract, was installing a fiber loop around the City for the Information Systems Department under the provisions of the statewide contract.

Mr. Marcotte has interjected himself into this project, produced a Request for Proposal which was sent to Electrical Contractors (presumably long time feeder's at the trough) and has not allowed A.R.I. to participate.

Long range plkans, if funds were available, was for A.R.I. and the Information Systems Department to eventually complete this loop. Mr. Marcotte's underhanded dealings has denied a local qualified contractor and local suppliers an opportunity to participate. In order to make his actions appear cost saving measures Mr. Marcotte has changed the original specifications to that of, possibly a lessor grade, in order to insure savings.

Thank you Mr. Roy for allowing the sunshine in and changing the way the City does business.

Richard J Heath, A.R.I. said...

I ommitted to say that one of the Contractor's receing an opportunity to respond to Mr. Marcotte's Request for Proposal has requested fiber pricing from a Baton Rouge firm called Priority Wire.

If the fiber is purchased from this firm Alexandria tax dollars are spent in and Sales Tax collected by Baton Rouge when local businesses have been furnishing the material and tax dollars collected loocally.

It would appear a long hard look at procurement procedures is needed.

Anonymous said...

Ok - dumbass question - but why is the electrical department involved in bidding something related to IT? Fiber optics has nothing to do with the electrical department, it should fall under the IT department and they are the ones who should develop the specifications and requests for proposals. A lesser quality wire may mean more maintenance in the long run and less reliability period.

Richard J Heath, a.r.i. said...

Supposedly the fiber is a portion of a much larger request - supposedly. Mr. Marcotte feels the City can buy the fiber cheaper by buying it from a supplier rather than paying a mark up and just hire necessary labor for termination, hanging, etc. No kidding. I imagine the City can buy it at greatly discounted prices when eliminating the middleman and when bundling it as part of a million dollar price request.

Old story of the customer wants to buy his own bacon, eggs and grits at the A&P store, bring them to the restaurant and just be charged for cooking them. Then bitch because they are not cooked right.

I fail to believe a Governmental agency Electrical Department can do anything cheaper than hiring it done. A Governmental Agency is not a for profit business and only has two solutions for a problem - spend more money or hire more people.

However, I have highly pissed off Mr. Marcotte and had it explained to me that what I was told was not what i WAS TOLD. Reminds me of an old country song about eyes and what I am telling you. Confusion asn't on my part.

Anonymous said...

The question should not be about city take home cars, it should be about the car allowance money that several employees get. at least the take home cars are monitored by the public, and must cost less than the extra money some employees are getting.

Anonymous said...

I see the idiot section has returned, with all of their vulgarity. I am not sure if is due to a small brain, small penis size, or what, but these morons seem to desire this blog to return to the insults, personal attacks and lack of intelligent postings that they were so fond of. Go play in your sand box, or post somewhere else, but do not bore us with your childish remarks. Wait until you have learned how to develop of civilized rational thought before posting here please.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Heath,

If in fact your statements are true and and RFP was advertised then, correct me if I am wrong, but couldn't you have bid on it??

Secondly, do you have the documents to back up your claims?

Richard J Heath, a.r.i. said...

Mr. Marcotte stated that the fiber portion of the RFP would be valued at less than $50,000.00 and is contained in an RFP that was asking for responses on material in the plus or minus 1 million dollar range.

Apparently, and understandably so, each item was not identified in the legal notice and one would only be aware of the requirement if one received the RFP. Who gets an RFP - I don't know. I didn't and I am a fiber vendor to the State and the City. If the RFP was asking for electrical and communication cable I might not get it but seems like Mid-State, Southern, Elliott Electric, SESCO and other vendors with point of presence in Alexandria would have. Did they? Not that I have been able to determine. I know a Baton Rouge firm is pricing for a response.

The beautiful part is that the RFP calls for, in just one instance, over 5 miles of 144 strand SM fiber that, at present, accoding to Mr. Marcotte, is just being bought for inventory. Mr. Marcotte believes he can buy this fiber for approximately $3.000 a foot which is cheaper than the City is paying me. Even if that would be remotely true that would approximately $84,000.00 There are many more types and footage of fiber in the RFP but we have already exceeded his hypothetical $50,000.00 for fiber.

The City is going to have miles upon miles of various count fiber just laying around? The City thinks the future need for 144 strand fiber for inventory purpose is 28,000 feet. Yea, sure. Funny the fiber loop consists of many many miles of 144 strand SM fiber.

Do I have written proof. No - one City employee tells one story and another City employee tells another. One says I was not told all the story and the other says this is entirely the doing of the other. Do I know which one is telling the truth - no. Do I know which one I believe - YES.

I do know that Mr. Marcotte's reasoning as to saving the City money is a pipe dream and typical governmental fluff. I wonder where he thinks contractors find the funds to purchase the necessary equipment to install, terminate and test fiber, purchase the myriad types of insurance required, warranty reserve or pay all those things called overhead? He must believe funds for things of this nature fall out of the sky. It comes from markup.

If the old adage about needing 7 dollars of sales for every 1 dollar of expense is so an OTDR (fiber tester) costing $20,00.00 requires $140,000.00 of sales just to purchase it.

Well I have vented. I truly believe nothing changes except the names. I truly hoped we would see a change but the only results will be more of the same and A.R.I. being blacklisted because of this.

Just think -28,00 feet of 144 strand and I am expected to believe there are no plans, at present, for installation. I did come in on a turnip truck from East Texas but I was driving.

Anonymous said...

from 2:12 pm "Ok - dumbass question - but why is the electrical department involved in bidding something related to IT? Fiber optics has nothing to do with the electrical department, it should fall under the IT department and they are the ones who should develop the specifications and requests for proposals. "

How could the electric department NOT be involved?? The fiber optic is on their poles.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Heath,

I am familiar with the project you are talking about. I also know Mr. Marcotte and have found him to be an honest guy who is just trying to do the job he was hired to do. Were there some issues with your installation of the fiber cable? Did you use materials and methods that are industry standard? Is there more to this story than what you are sharing with us? Perhaps Mr. Marcotte is excluding you for a reason. I am sure he has more pressing things to do than just sit around and think of ways to aggravate you.

Anonymous said...

I also know Mr. Marcotte, and I know that most of his days are spent thinking of ways to annoy people. I think that is what he was hired to do. I am sure plenty of people can give examples of things he does that are aggravating.

Anonymous said...

R.I.P.

It's amazing the chilling effect censorship has on the health of local blogs.

Lamar takes a job with the city and has to refrain from comment. Result...Cenlamar is fading fast.

Quint folds in the face of empty threats from Greg Aymond and begins tracing IP addresses.
Result....CenlaAntics is also fading fast.

Pity...I thought this country was founded on free speech.

Richard J. Heath, A.R.I. said...

Gee silly me I thought the poles were the property of the City (i.e., taxpayers) not a particular department. Insuring compliance with code as far as what is hung on the poles, pole maintenance, etc, is the job of the Electrical Department. Are telephone cable and CATV cable the property of the Electrical Department?

This reasoning could be applied to City vehicles. Are they the prpoerty of the individual Departments. City assets are assets of the citizens even though at times it seems as though some City employees don't realize this.

As far as being excluded do to "inferior work." First thing that would have to be done is the City would have to document this. If A.R.I. has not complied with code it must first be brought to our attention and A.R.I. be given an opportunity to correct deficiencies. If deficiencies are not corrected then the process of barring someone can begin. Mr. Marcotte, though he may not realize it, cannot of his own decision, prevent A.r.I. are any qualified vendor from responding to City request for proposals.

I am glad though you opened up the possibility, as one knowledgeable of Mr. Marcotte, that he is capable of excluding someone from bidding without going through necessary procedures.

It will be interesting to see who received the RFP and which one of these Companies was Mr. marcotte a previous employee. I would think local wiring suppliers would be interested in seeing who received the RFP.

Now let us leave this matter in the capable hands of the Mayor and his procurement staff. I am sure there is a valid reason for this situation.

Anonymous said...

Next dumbass question - if you're going to install fiber, why do it on poles? We all know electrical lines are subject to storm damage, do you want the City's communication system to go down when the electrical lines come down? MOST intelligent people bury fiber for a reason - RELIABILITY. Maybe they should have consulted an actual communications company before coming up with their plan.

I do realize placing the wire in the ground is more expensive, but in the long run we're better off.

Richard J. Heath said...

Only technical reason I could think of would be cost. The Poles are by and large already paid for or included in a joint use rental agreement. However, pole installation gets very involved with NEC codes relative to clearance from other, most especially hig voltage, wiring, clearance above street crossings, etc. Pole installation is extremely involved but represents job security for those responsible for the pole line. This allows for empire building.

Now installing the fiber by direct bury or installing duct, subducting the duct with inner duct and pulling the fiber in is typically the way fiber is installed which allows for future growth. However this method would eliminate the involvement of the Electrical Department pole management activities. No benefit to that Department.

Give the Information Management folks credit for designing a redudant, efficient fiber loop with provibions for future needs. The city's data folks have done an outstanding job and seem well talented in networking and networking design.

With the redundant loop light (data) will be able to travel in either direction so a total service interruption, unless both paths go down, is highly unlikely. The redundant loop does not travel the same pole line.

One thing I might add is the material used was the material specified by the project specifications. Just because someone is not knowledgeable enough to realize that the manufacturer has more than one item meeting specifications is not my problem. A little education is a dangerous thing.

The project specifications restrict the fiber to one manufacturer the RFP allows for "or equal."

Anonymous said...

I, as a resident of Alexandria, would rather the city try and save money by using other vendors in the state, than use local vendors that cost more, and apparently seem really hard to work with. No wonder they tried to get bids. Did you get your work with a city bid??

Anonymous said...

Are you saying that the City has violated some law in this matter?

Anonymous said...

Cost more? Hard to work with? Bids? Anon 7:35 where did you get this information? I have not seen anything posted about bids, costs more or hard to work with. Have you assumed this or is this an insider responding with inside information? Now who at the City would have a reason to "spin" this story.

One would think Mr. Heath obtained the work legally.

Anonymous said...

"Mr. Marcotte believes he can buy this fiber for approximately $3.000 a foot which is cheaper than the City is paying me. "

Quote from Mr. Heath

Anonymous said...

If the city purchases anything directly, they do not have to pay a middleman, or pay sales tax. That sounds like a savings to me. Why should the city buy anything from this guy?? Is it so they say it is buying locally? he can buy from the guy in Baton Rouge, then sell it to the city for more, so we all feel good about buying locally. WOW. I would feel better if he were a black woman. Then I could buy locally from a minority women owned business. That would make everyone feel warm inside. Screw the cost.

Anonymous said...

"I, as a resident of Alexandria, would rather the city try and save money by using other vendors in the state, than use local vendors that cost more, and apparently seem really hard to work with."

STATEMENT OF FACT

"Mr. Marcotte believes he can buy this fiber for approximately $3.000 a foot which is cheaper than the City is paying me. "

STATEMENT OF EXPECTATION AND JUSTIFICATION TO JUSTIFY AN ACTION.

Greg Aymond said...

For those that didn't know, the law firm of Stafford, Stewart & Potter has contracted to provide legal work for the City of Alexandria. Russel Potter, of that firm, is also the chairman of the Alexandria Municipal Fire and Police Civil Service Board. Mr. Potter sought an ethical opinion on this relationship, and the Ethics Board held that such was permitted.

we saw that... said...

dont you mean the state heh heh heh ethics board?

Anonymous said...

Damn, We. No matter how many times you repeat the heh heh thing, (gotta be approaching 3 dozen times) it's always just as funny and witty is the first time. You are quite a card.

we saw that... said...

lol awww thanx but the credit goes entirely to c.b. forgotston. we merely follow his lead concerning the heh heh heh state ethics board.

Greg Aymond said...

Having dealt with both of those offices, I can assure you that the biggest joke and waste of funds is the Legislative Auditor's Office. All that office is is a C.P.A. club that does very little to actually audit the funds of public bodies. Having the public body's own C.P.A. auditing the public body which pays him year round as it's own accountant, makes as much sense as having the lawyer you hire to defend you in a criminal case also prosecuting you. Reminds one of the old maxim "don't bite the hand that feeds you". Hard to imagine a greater conflict of interest.

Anonymous said...

We didn't get it. Seems to not know when others are making fun of him. Pity.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, We got it, He just didn't sink to your level! Meantime you exposed your own ignorance by explaining the insult. C.B Forgotston, you rock!

Anonymous said...

sounds like another Moon bottom feeder. Nasty bunch.

Anonymous said...

what no comments on the Roy admin being accused of getting a media personality fired for his comments??

What is this city coming to?

Heil Jacques! Heil Jacques! Heil Jacques! (and Lamar)

Anonymous said...

Whom did Mr. Roy have fired?

Anonymous said...

Now that's real power. Sounds like a segment of the Sopranos. Oh well. in this era of new openess and transparency, that's the way the blossom crumbles.

Anonymous said...

Why speak in riddles? Who is the "media personality" you are speaking of?

Anonymous said...

Read the TT online

Anonymous said...

Ron Roberts, the morning host and program director for Alexandria radio station KQID, is no longer employed by the Cenla Broadcasting station, and all references to him have been removed from the station’s Web site.

The former DJ says he was fired today for comments he made on the air about the demise of the annual RiverFest celebration in Alexandria and Pineville.

He said Lisa Harris, who oversees community events for the city, met with officials of Cenla Broadcasting at 9:30 a.m. today and contended that Roberts’ comments had angered city officials.

Harris rebutted Roberts’ allegations.

“Oh my God,” she said. “Actually, I have talked to Cenla Broadcasting about sponsorship for Que’in on the Red. I don’t know anything about that (firing). Ron Roberts doesn’t work for me.”

Anonymous said...

Wow, today is an exciting day for news

To be eligible to run for a statewide elected office, the Louisiana Constitution requires that a person be a "citizen" of the state for "at least the preceding five years."

John Breaux's Louisiana voter registration was canceled in December 2005 because he registered elsewhere, said Jacques Berry, a spokesman for the Louisiana Secretary of State's Office.

"He is not a registered voter in Louisiana as far as we can tell," Berry said.

The Talbot County Election Board confirmed Breaux was registered to vote in Maryland. He was required to have a Maryland driver's license and to maintain a primary residence in the county to register there.

Spanky said...

Hey Guys,
Orlando is nice this time of year but I really miss Peyton Place. Hope to be home soon.

Anonymous said...

21 February 2007
The UN Security Council's 60-day deadline for Iran to suspend uranium enrichment runs out on 21 February 2007, paving the way for further sanctions in addition to those imposed by a resolution in December 2006.

21 February 2007
Stennis arrived in the Gulf of Oman, after a voyage of about 30 days. (that makes 2- and the ability to run 24-hour airstrike cycles)

March 2007
On 26 September 2006 Iran and Russia signed an agreement under which Russia will ship fuel to a nuclear power plant it is building in Iran by March 2007. The agreement was signed by Sergei Shmatko, head of Russia’s state-run company Atomstroiexport, and Mahmoud Hanatian, vice president of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization. The document provides for supplying Russian fuel for the atomic energy plant in March, physical start-up in September 2007 and electric generation by November 2007. About 80 tons of fuel would be supplied by Russia for Iran. This transfer is on hold, as a result of the 23 December 2006 Security Council resolution on Iran.

On 12 November 2006 Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini said Iran intended to install 3,000 uranium enrichment centrifuges by March 2007. Hosseini said Iran was doing all the work to install the centrifuges under control of the UN nuclear watchdog, adding that two cascades of 164 centrifuges were already in operation in the country. The 3,000 uranium enrichment centrifuges would give Iran the capability of producing enough Highly Enriched Uranium for about one atomic bomb annually.

Either one of these events might be regarded as a "Red Line" by either Israel and/or the United States. That both would take place nearly simultaneously would seem to significantly raise the probability of strkes against Iran's WMD facilities in this timeframe.

Anonymous said...

Who is WE and why do we care?

Anonymous said...

Who is WE and why do we care?

Ok, let's start with you. Tell us why you posted that. Obviously you care for some reason.

Anonymous said...

I tend to disagree with the criticizm of the Roy Administration for the DJ firing. If Roy feels like the media is portraying a city issue unfairly or untruthfully, he is bound to let his concerns be heard. I think the problem is with that bastion of courage and principal, Taylor Thompson. He is the one who fired the DJ at the first whisp of controversy. It would appear that everything that I have heard about Thompson is at least true and perhaps an understatement.

Anonymous said...

Don't you know? Freedom of speech only applies when libs speak out.

For instance: NYU students and their immigrant game.

Anonymous said...

Let's look at the beginning of this - what exactly prompted Mr. Roberts to lash out at Mrs. Harris and GAEDA in particular? Seems like he has some grudge. Judging by his on air comments, he was upset because his opinion was not asked about certain aspects of the entertainment for Grilling on the Red - boohoo, get a life Mr. Roberts. In fact, another victim of his verbal assaults was one of the volunteers for the BBQ fest that was not up to Mr. Roberts standard of musical expertise. It makes you wonder what the underlying cause could be - is he just so full of himself that he can't stand the thought of having a successful event without his valued input?
As far as RiverFest, which he must have some vested interest in, I think RiverFest killed RiverFest, plain and simple. If they can not find sponsors, maybe said sponsors are tired of shelling out money for little return. If RiverFest was such a raving success, they would have no problems finding sponsors. Sorry kids, money talks. Same with his job, if I was an advertiser on QID I would not want to be affiliated with Mr. Roberts. His kind of talk may work for kids, but being controversial and abrasive stops being all that cool once you are through puberty. So if the City complained or not, maybe some of the advertisers did. Ultimately, I think it is a gross overestimation of power to ascribe Mr. Roberts getting fired to the mayor or anybody else at the city - the radio station probably got tired of people complaining. Good riddance Mr. Roberts, I shall not miss you one bit.

Paul Harvey said...

You guys do realize that you are talking a whole lot about a DJ. Tell me again what his job duties entail. Oh, thats right, playing songs on the radio.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 247   Newer› Newest»