Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiIraqis March For Freedom From US
Moqtada al-Sadr, the anti-American Shia cleric, called on Iraqi politicians today to reject an accord to allow US troops to stay in the country beyond 2008, as tens of thousands of his followers protested against the pact in the streets of Baghdad.
![[Followers of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr take part in a rally in Baghdad, Iraq, on Saturday, Oct. 18,2008, to protest a draft U.S.-Iraqi security agreement. The mass show of opposition comes as the United States and Iraqi leaders try to build support for the accord that would extend the presence of American forces in Iraq beyond the end of this year. (AP Photo/Hadi Mizban)]](http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/sadrprotest1018.jpg "sadrprotest1018.jpg")
In a display of anger at one point, members of the crowd set fire to effigies of George Bush and Condoleezza Rice as well as an American and an Israeli flag.
"Yes, yes Iraq! No, no to the occupation!" the protestors chanted as they marched, peacefully, from the Shia slum of Sadr City in east Baghdad to a public square a couple of miles away. Many waved the Iraqi flag or flags in the green of Shia Islam.
Hojatoleslam al-Sadr, who lives in Iran, conveyed his message to lawmakers through an aide, Sheikh Abdul-Hadi al-Mohammadawi, who spoke at the rally.
"The Iraqi Government has abandoned its duty before God and its people and referred the agreement to you knowing that ratifying it will stigmatise Iraq and its government for years to come," the Sheikh said.
The radical cleric, who commands the al-Mehdi Army militia and is rarely seen in public, also challenged a belief that Baghdad will move closer to ending the US presence in Iraq by signing a status of forces agreement with Washington.
"Whoever tells you that it gives us sovereignty is a liar. I am confident that you brothers in Parliament will champion the will of the people over that of the occupier ... Do not betray the people," his message said.
The comments come as the United States and Iraq move to finalise the status of forces accord.
The document must be signed by December 31 when a United Nations Security Council mandate authorising the presence of foreign troops in Iraq expires. Failure to do so will require Baghdad to ask for an extension of the UN mandate.
Britain must also sign an agreement to enable its small contingent in the south of Iraq to stay into 2009. London has said it will use the US-Iraq pact as a blueprint for its accord but time is fast running out for all sides.
Emotions against foreign forces in Iraq ran high among the protestors.
Many arrived in Sadr City last night, travelling by bus from towns and cities in the south, including one Sheikh who came from Nassiriyah.
"Our country is occupied. We call for the occupiers to be driven out yesterday and not tomorrow," said Sheikh Khalid Ahmed, dressed in a blue gown, a black robe and a white turban.
"The occupiers and the Government that cooperates with them have brought disgrace to the country and caused destruction and hatred among the people who used to live together as one," said the man, in his 40s.
Um Fatima, a woman taking part in the rally, accused US-led forces of stealing Iraq's riches.
"I refuse any status of forces agreement with those who slaughtered my people and allowed ethnic cleansing and sectarian killings," said the 38-year-old, a teacher in Sadr City.
Security was tight surrounding the demonstration, with roads leading to the area in the east of Baghdad sealed off by police and army.
Followers of Hojatoleslam al-Sadr described the event as a rescheduled "million man march" initially called in April when the al-Mehdi Army was fighting US and Iraqi forces in Basra, southern Iraq, and Baghdad.
But today's turnout, while in the tens of thousands, was well shy of 1 million, perhaps a reflection of the power shift that has taken place in the past six months, with Iraqi forces largely in control of the capital and down to the south.
56 Comments so far
Show AllJust listen to how loud the Iraqi protesters are, and rightfully so. A clarion call for an end to this horrid and illegal US occupation of their country.
What are the chances of getting ten times the amount of Americans to put down their remotes and out into the streets to protest the unbridled treason and tyranny which is devouring this country?
It is astounding how loud they are. The innocent Iraqi people want their country back.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7677551.stm
The really absurd part of this is the illusion that any of this has been legal from the beginning, and even with all the bullying and cheating and illegality- it still falls apart. let your scales be even first.
"No gods no kings October 18th, 2008 12:29 pm
"Moqtada al-Sadr, the anti-American Shia cleric,"
Anti-American or Anti-occupation? Seriously, this is an important distinction. I don't think most people in Iraq or even in the Mid-East in general give a tick's shit about the USA or its people beyond wanting us to leave them the hell alone."
This is the most sensible thing thats been said.
And its evident that our occupation should end and our troops should be withdrawn...asap...and if you listen closely and carefully, you'll hear us preparing to pull out of Afganistan.
skidog
WOW!The Iraqis don't want to be OCCUPIED.Predictably,the MSM will spin this ,that the Iraqis aren't CAPABLE of democracy or some similar rubbish.End the occupation and prosecute the WAR CRIMINALS.
The 3rd Party Presidential Campaign scheduled for tonight, Sunday Oct. 19th has been CANCELLED.
Damn!
From McClatchy:
The troubled presidential debate for third party candidates scheduled for Sunday at Columbia University in New York was canceled Friday after none of the four candidates had committed to the event.
"Due to circumstances beyond our control, several of the candidates decided not to participate in the debate at the last minute," said Lauren Salz, a student with the Columbia Political Union, which was hosting the debate.
Independent Ralph Nader, Libertarian Party nominee Bob Barr, Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney and Constitution Party nominee Chuck Baldwin were expected to participate in what was billed as a "historic" event.
Barr claimed a conflict while McKinney opted for an online debate originally scheduled for that evening. Baldwin was reluctant to travel to New York. Nader was willing to participate, say aides, but, seeing the debate falling apart all week, held back.
McKinney, it turns out, also had another reason for staying in her hometown of Atlanta, said her running mate, Rosa Clemente. McKinney is attending the Black Panther Party annual reunion.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/54383.html
A REFERENDUM IN IRAQ
After our election, the only way to speed up a withdrawal from Iraq will be to form a movement for a REFERENDUM IN IRAQ for withdrawal. If Obama wins, a referendum in Iraq will allow him to withdraw much faster than he otherwise would (16 months is much too long), without having to be accused of surrender to terrorists. Much better to be seen acceding to the will of the overwhelming majority of Iraqis, who will certainly vote for withdrawal, according to all polls.
If (Allah and God forbid) McCain wins, and there is a strengthened Democratic majority in Congress, a movement for an Iraqi referendum will be the only way to apply pressure. If there is a Republican exec and Congress, we all need to move to Canada or New Zealand and let them have their pathetic excuse for a country.
We will see in November. After that we will need a strategy.
The "16 month withdrawal plan" is not fixed. Obama has said it depends on what Bush's generals recommend, which we know, will be to stay the course. Even if some troops were withdrawn eventually, many, many, 10s of thousands will remain behind to protect our interests, which is the precious oil. As long as we have large numbers of troops in Iraq the war has not ended.
Obama: “And so my job as the next commander in chief is going to be to make a decision what is the right war to fight, and, and how do we fight it?”
Obama: “We’re going to have to provide them with logistical support, intelligence support,” Obama continued. “We’re going to have to have a very capable counterterrorism strike force. We’re going to have to continue to train their Army and police to make them more effective.”
Obama:”Expand the Military: We have learned from Iraq that our military needs more men and women in uniform to reduce the strain on our active force. Obama will increase the size of ground forces, adding 65,000 soldiers to the Army and 27,000 Marines.”
Obama: “We need more troops, more helicopters, more satellites, more Predator in the Afghan border region…etc.
Those believing that by voting for Obama they are voting for an antiwar canidate have been seriously duped.
The US and Israel know better than anybody else that the Arabs only understand force. This principle is enshrined in all the official US occupation orders.
That is an extremely racist statement.
Maybe if Israel didnt bomb first and ask questions later (they have killed US journalists) there could be peace there.
I am not an anti-semite. I am anti-zionist.
It's the "Battle Of Algiers", Baghdad style, in which a supposedly conquered people suddenly rise up and take back their country. Yesterday's march was just the beginning and, since a people united can never be defeated, the outcome is inevitable. Proof, too, that nonviolent revolution is the way to go.
The US claims to believe in democracy. However, if democracy fails, as in the people make the wrong choice, say by evicting Uncle Sam instead of giving him ridiculously lucrative oil contracts, then the "democracy" becomes null and void and a new set of leaders will be installed and the new "democracy" will get another chance to get it right.
For a democracy to be officially recognized it must meet the test of having "leaders" that pass US muster. The actual will of the people is irrelevant.
Venezuela's Hugo Chavez is another case in point.
In the US we have added safeguards to ensure the people make the "correct" choices and "democracy" is ensured.
If the people make the wrong choice, we have another branch of the White House called the Supreme Court that comes to the rescue of the "democracy" and overturns the election to make sure the "right" candidate wins.
If anyone disagrees with the process they are told that the Supreme Court has the final say in these matters even though it isn't stated in the Constitution. Professors of constitutional law like Sen. Obama concur with decision and have not challenged it. To challenge the notion would render one unfit to be a "leader".
The process ensures that we have the best democracy and candidates money can buy and that the people always make the "right" choices. Indeed, it is virtually impossible for the people to make the wrong choice because only the "right" candidates are taken seriously.
And lastly, if for some fluke a "wrong" candidate were to sneak in under the radar, that can be dealt with in the very democratic electoral college, which is the last bastion of protection for "democracy" to keep it pure.
How is Hugo Chavez a case in point?
Despite having won numerous free electons--what is argued to be the defining aspect of democracy--Chavez is repeatedly called a dictator, despot, authoritarian, etc., by the Propaganda Systems of the Imperialist countries. Indeed, Venezuela is pointed out as a country with far more progressive democratic institutions and greater opportunities for citizen particpation is self-government--what is deemed the hallmark of freedom--which constitute the threat Imperialists loath the most--The Threat of a GOOD example. Thus the great volume of lies and vilifying propagande directed at Venezuela and its leader.
Some folk are never satisfied. Americans bring them the delights of democracy and are they happy, do they appreciate the wonderful gift bestowed upon them? Of course not.
I means, sure we caused a bit of damage, killed a few innocent people, set up the Abu Graib Re-education Centre, but what the hell! That's progress. That's the benefit of Democratic, Faith-based Capitalism (DFC)!
If you want to read more about the inspiration of DFC and understand its great wonders, check out:
www.dangerouscreation.com
Strange how the Times 's writer says "Failure to do so {sign and ratify} will require Baghdad to ask for an extension of the UN mandate." This is totally incorrect as noted by Maliki: "the American forces will lose their legal cover on Dec. 31. If that happens, according to international law, Iraqi law and American law, the U.S. forces will be confined to their bases and have to withdraw from Iraq." As I've noted several times at Juan Cole's blog about this subject, I strongly believe Maliki is running out the clock--74 days to go--and thus the fait accompli will begin the next phase, which could consist of several scenarios. But with the US behavior toward Russia over Georgia, the US has absolutely no ground to stand on when the clock runs out. The UK realizes this and has not even attempted to reach an agreement with Maliki.
Does anyone in their right mind expect the Iraqi Parliament to ratify a treaty allowing the occupiers to stay when they are so close to being forced to leave? Of course not. And as the new year comes ever closer, expect the protests to grow in size, with a climax come New Years Day.
Paul Siemering
Keep on marching Iraq- the whole world is with you throw those oily invaders out!
When young we mourn for one woman
As we grow old
For women in general
The tragedy in life
Is that man is never free
Yet strives for what can never be
The thing most feared in secret
Always happens
My life, my love, what are they now
But the more the pain grows
The more this instinct for life somehow asserts itself
The necessary beauty in life
Is in giving yourself to it
Completely
Only later will it clarify itself
And become coherent
Unknown source
wake up America
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the Illegal Foreign Military Occupation which has connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, even Arabs, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness, also protection from abitary assasination or arrest by the US Military. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any illegal Foreign Military Occupation becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute netheir own Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Illegal Foreign Military Occupations long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, murder and mayhem, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Illegal Foriegn Military Occupation, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Such has been the patient sufferance of Iraq; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former servitude. The history of the present Emperor of the USA is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over the Planet.
Thats a Document that I would be happy to follow
Moqtada al-Sadr, the pro-Iraqi Shia cleric, called on Iraqi politicians today to reject an accord to allow US troops to stay
People protecting their plunder will always rationalize "solutions" that are extremely anti-intuitive. Iraq screams for us to get out and we let it pass as children whining for something they don't know anything about. They want us out. Why not give it a try? Everybody wins. Bushco plays on the notion prevalent in American society that "we are the greatest." Of course, we only always want what's best for the world, that old, tired notion goes. Don't expect a Republican to believe in withdrawal, not when he has himself believing in our ethical superiority. Iraq was not liberated as much as victimized and the sneering monster that did it is still in control, still the puppet of his handlers, and still resolved not to exit until the plunder is over.
To understand how we became occupiers of a sovereign country that posed no physical threat to us in the 21st century one should consider that this administration (and the one before it) have become richly saturated with Israeli and American Zionists.
The encouragement for occupying Iraq, just like the encouragement to bomb Iran, comes from the narrow zionist circle that is virtually indistinguishable from the "neo-cons." After all, it is relatively new for this American government to openly talk about "taking out" an enemy, rather than bringing them to an international court of justice. The use of drones to bomb civilian populations without remorse is classically demonstrated in Israeli occupation and treatment of the Palestinian people.
Without Israeli hawks in this admiminstration, we would never have done what we did to Iraq. Never.
I see it differently. Iraq is just one more notch on our belt. Zionists didn't tell us to occupy Haiti, Cuba, or the Phillipines or invade and conquer half of Mexico, and Hawaii. And those are just the outright occupations. I'm not counting the dozens of "mere" interventions.
The Zionists in our government are certainly ONE force for evil. But, they've simply lucked out with a born-again Xian president who's agenda coincides with theirs.
H.R. 362 has been shelved and Condi is pushing for negotiations with Iran. Bush seems to be resisting the AIPAC crowd's as well as the Israeli admin's push for an Iran attack. This tells me it was a marriage of convenience more than the power and influence of Zionists overriding our government's better judgment. Still, their power is significant and not to be underestimated. They've obviously got both candidates on a leash, pledging undying fealty to Israel for some strange reason. We don't do that with any other nation, not even Mexico or Canada our neighbors and biggest trading partners.
No gods, no kings
And if Obama can't or won't withdraw everyone ... what then?
.
VOTE NADER 2008 !!!!!!
End the wars
Bring the troops home
http://www.votenader.org/index.html
.
I'm sorry to say, Nannie, that neither Nader nor Cynthia McKinney (whom I was inclined to vote for) will be on the Georgia ballot; just McCain, Obama, and Bob Barr (who's a LINO -- Libertarian In Name Only), with no provision for write-ins. But we do have a voting category called "No preference", so that's how I'm going to vote.
Then we're fucked.
So are our soldiers. So are alot of Iraqis (who bush has already fucked)
Maybe the "financial false flag crisis" will force us out.
I wish that the media would cover the Iraq Freedom Congress:
The Iraq Freedom Congress (http://tinyurl.com/26yzpd )
is a libertarian, secularist, non-violent, democratic, and
progressive group that opposes Ba'athism, Islamism, and
nationalism -- as well as the US invasion/occupation.
The Iraq Freedom Congress has organized a self-defense
Safety Force that patrols neighborhoods in Iraq (population:
5,000) and has reduced sectarian violence there to zero.
However, far from supporting their efforts, US forces have
repeatedly raided the IFC's headquarters and have
assassinated the head of the Safety Forces
(http://tinyurl.com/25yknr ).
*****
News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo/
--
Dan Clore
My collected fiction: _The Unspeakable and Others_
http://tinyurl.com/2gcoqt
Lord Weÿrdgliffe & Necronomicon Page:
http://tinyurl.com/292yz9
News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo
Cool links.
Don't worry, if McCain wins the election, he'll just keep our forces there a while longer, say a mere 100 years, until we "win". And in the meantime, he's going to let some of our soldiers come home and go directly into teaching, without being bothered with those pesky "qualifications" (as heard in the last debate).
"I am confident that you brothers in Parliament will champion the will of the people over that of the occupier ... Do not betray the people"
This kind of message resonates with the majority of people worldwide today, including in the USA, far more than it did five or ten years ago, as the empire's influence rapidly diminishes. Small wonder US progressives are abandoning the lesser evil faction of the empire elites and are "voting third party" in all of our exchange/association. Not only are the empire elites greatly weakened at this point by their series of mega-catastrophes, not only is their ideology ethically bankrupt at its foundation, but we progressives see a much better way by adopting the more universal view shared among the people of the world, and institutionalized in social democracies worldwide.
"The occupiers and the Government that cooperates with them have brought disgrace to the country and caused destruction and hatred among the people who used to live together as one"
The voice of the people deserves to be heard again and again. The voice of the empire elite is now fully discredited.
free2bee
For the love of Allah, don't Iraqui's appreciate that we have done for them? We only invaded to dethrone Saddam, but while we were there we allowed their Museums to be sacked, destroyed, artifacts that were centuries old melted down, etc., Many, many thousands killed and crippled leaving the country in shambles.
How about over 400 Americans dead, hundreds legless, armless and countless mentally disturbed? Where is their compassion?
But, your oil got you into all this trouble. Aside from the billions of dollars we have unloaded on this catastrophy, we'll have our compassionate oil companies take you oil. So there wasn't it worth it?
THIS WAS PRESENTED TO THE U.S.CONGRESS JUNE 4, 2008 FROM THE IRAQI PARLIAMENT.
We, the undersigned members of the council, wish to confirm your concerns that any international agreement that is not ratified by the Iraqi legislative power is considered unconstitutional and illegal, in accordance with the current rulings and laws of the Iraqi Republic. Furthermore, any treaty, agreement or "executive agreement" that is signed between Iraq and the United States will not be legal and will not enter the stage of implementation without first being ratified by the Council of Representatives, which gives the Iraqi government's legislative power, represented by the Council of Representatives, the exclusive right to ratify international treaties and agreements.
Likewise, we wish to inform you that the majority of Iraqi representatives strongly reject any military-security, economic, commercial, agricultural , investment or political agreement with the United States that is not linked to clear mechanisms that obligate the occupying American military forces to fully withdraw from Iraq, in accordance with a declared timetable and without leaving behind any military bases, soldiers or hired fighters.
The Iraqi Council of Representatives is looking to ratify agreements that end every form of American intervention in Iraq's internal affairs and restore Iraq's Independence and sovereignty over its land. ---signed by more than 30 members, speaking on behalf of the majority of the 275 member Parliament, representing most of the major parties which include Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish factions .
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
EARLIER THIS WEEK PRIME MINISTER MALIKI SAID THAT WITHOUT IRAQI PARLIAMENT APPROVAL " the American forces will lose their legal cover on Dec. 31" and "If that happens, according to international law, Iraqi law and American law, the U.S. forces will be confined to their bases and have to withdraw from Iraq,".
OUR LEASE IS UP, WE HAVE BEEN GIVEN OUR 6 MONTHS NOTICE AND WE CAN NO LONGER AFFORD THE RENT.
Could you PLEASE tel me where you got this, so that I can email it to people? I would really apprecaite it.
Couldnt resist--so we're being "foreclosed on"?
This is good news. no?
Do you think that Obama wil be forced to enforce it?
According to someone in "our" administration, Iraq invited us over there. I guess they're inviting us to leave now. Will we listen? I kinda doubt it.
Dave
http://daveeriqat.wordpress.com/
A lot of Americans want freedom from the U.S. occupation as well.
BULLSEYE!
Iraqis seem to know what most clueless Americans have not learned. Operation Iraqi Freedom is not about Iraqi freedom.
http://davedubya.com
Operation Iraqi Liberation; O.I.L. That is all it has ever been and only a complete MORON (or an unelected White House _Resident)would say it wasn't so, Joe. ;)
Mr. & Mrs. Iraqi,
Don't you know? We're gonna be there forever. You're just the newest Japan and Korea. Washington and the American capitalists on Wall Street are now your bosses--forever.
Sorry, but there's nothing we can do about it.
Regards,
The American Citizen
.
http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2008/10/17-0
WASHINGTON - October 17
President Bush Asserts Right to Control Iraqi Oil
Before signing a military funding bill earlier this week, the president issued a "signing statement", ......
President Bush apparently believes that as commander in chief he is entitled to seize Iraq's oil fields and control Iraqi oil if he should deem it necessary to protect U.S. national security," said Jim Fine, a lobbyist for the Friends Committee on National Legislation. "It's hard to see any other logic behind his signing statement. He has, in effect, declared himself --and any future U.S. presidents who fail to repudiate his outlandish claims--emperors of Iraq."
President Bush has signed the restriction against controlling Iraqi oil into law five times since 2006, but has issued 2 signing statements this year asserting that banning U.S. control over Iraqi oil would violate the constitutional powers of the executive. He argues that his administration is not legally bound to abide by those provisions.
.
this article appears on the right side of Common Dreams home page. It has only been posted to 3 times.Under the radar? this should have been up front and down the middle. look for it and see for yourself.It's been there two days.
I just dont think that that is going to happen this time.
We are as weak as we have been since our inception. Our military is worn to the bone. We have no money.
I think that they wil tell us not to let the door hit us in the ass. And rightly so.
.We absolutely cannot afford to remain there, perhaps the only bnenefit to our increasing financial crisis. "Apres Moi, le deluge"
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
And the commanders on the ground have nothing to gain - and lots to lose - by a protracted occupation. If we're so fortunate that nothing interrupts the election and inauguration of Obama, watch. He will work with the Iraqis, both government and citizenry, and the U.S. military, and work out an expeditious exit of American military forces. He's not a primary beneficiary of the oil industry and has a very different agenda.
I hate to burst your bubble, but...
he got just as much money from them as McCain. Just smaller donations.
http://www.politickerme.com/jessicaalaimo/2174/parties-exchange-jabs-over-oil-company-contributions
This article (Center for Responsive Politics) actually says he got MORE.
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/08/both_mccain_oba.html
And, here is what Obama got from nuclear supporters right before he annopunced his supoprt of them
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/national/stories/DN-nukes_27bus.ART.State.Ed...
That being said, I think Obama is slightly less "sold out" on energy issues than McCain. I guess that is the best we can do, eh?
"Moqtada al-Sadr, the anti-American Shia cleric,"
Anti-American or Anti-occupation? Seriously, this is an important distinction. I don't think most people in Iraq or even in the Mid-East in general give a tick's shit about the USA or its people beyond wanting us to leave them the hell alone.
No gods, no kings
.A very perceptive remark, thanks for it. It was the first line in that article and set up the bias immediately. One who wishes a foreign occupier gone from his nation can rightly said to be a patriot, and not some remark inspired by propaganda.
Does anyone still believe that Bush has brought democracy to the middle east, or simply created chaos in the name of trying to outdo his father?
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Good luck with that, Iraqis.
Obama will listen to 'the commanders on the ground", so up yours.
"Up yours" ??! Iraq should never have been attacked and therefore occupied in the first place! The U.S. imperialists have gotten away with a tremendous wrong, a huge war crime.
The U.S. imperialists have gotten away with *many* huge war crimes, for 50 years now. Korea was the first, 1958. THat's just in the last 50 years.
How would you feel, if our country had been occupied and our leader killed illegally?
Scratch that.
How would you feel if we had a decent govt and another country occupied us...
But , seriously. This invasion was illegal as al hell.
And I want to get out as bad as they want us to get out.
How would you feel, if our country had been occupied and our leader killed illegally?
You are kidding. Right?
-I was only "kidding" , in as much that, if someone invaded and killed Bush, I dont think peopel would be as upset , as if we had a decent govt.
What occupier can you think of (within the "free" world) that would do worse than Bush?
+
Agreed!