Wednesday, August 31, 2005

Another 'Pet Goat' Moment. Nation in Crisis Bush play guitar while Rome Burns

http://americablog.blogspot.com/uploaded_images/guitar-710427.jpg
 
If people only knew the facts, they would not be fighting for the 'RIGHT' to be screwed over.

+ $1,751,132,130,359 Social Security Trust Fund

– $7,805,708,317,936 The Gross National Debt

Time will tell all the Truth.
VT

Sean Lewis/VirtualTruth/VT

Founder
OpenDebateForum
http://VTSL.blogspot.com


clock


Monday, August 29, 2005

IRONY 'Pro Bush, Pro Iraq Crowd' vs the 'Support the Troops Not Bush Crowd'

IRONY 'Pro Bush, Pro Iraq Crowd' vs the 'Support the Troops Not Bush Crowd'
 
Today the Pro Bush, Pro Iraq crowd showed up in Texas. They yelled and scream their support for Bush. Insulted Sheehan and caused controlled mayhem. The exact opposite of the Sheehan peaceful protest.
 
One interesting aspect, the Pro bush Crowd, Pro Iraq Crowd ridiculed the left for not supporting the troops. Yet when asked if they would join the military to fight the Iraq war, all said no.
 
The Pro Bush Crowd, Pro Iraq Crowd all felt they could better serve the war movement at home, not actually fighting it. Just like Bush their did in Vietnam. However all said that if they were Drafted, they would serve. Convenient since there is no draft.
 
On the other side of the Aisle is the Support the Troops not Bush Crowd. They are calling for a plan to have Iraq Autonomous in the very near future. This was Bush's 'ultimate' reason for the preemptive invasion against WMDs. They want Bush to support the troops by keeping them alive. By not wasting their lives in a war without honor because it was based on lies.
 
If people only knew the facts, they would not be fighting for the 'RIGHT' to be screwed over.

+ $1,751,132,130,359 Social Security Trust Fund

– $7,805,708,317,936 The Gross National Debt

Time will tell all the Truth.
VT

Sean Lewis/VirtualTruth/VT

Founder
OpenDebateForum
http://VTSL.blogspot.com


clock


Sunday, August 28, 2005

1800 Dead Americans for THIS!!!

Secular Iraqis Say New Charter May Curb Rights

BAGHDAD -- Some secular Iraqi leaders complained that the country's nearly finished constitution lays the groundwork for the possible domination of the country by Shiite Islamic clerics, and that it contains specific provisions that could sharply curtail the rights of women.

The secular leaders said the draft, which was presented to the National Assembly on Monday, contains language that not only establishes the primacy of Islam as the country's official religion, but appears to grant judges wide latitude to strike down legislation that may contravene the faith. To interpret such legislation, the constitution calls for the appointment of experts in Shariah, or Islamic law, to preside on the Supreme Federal Court.

The draft constitution, these secular Iraqis say, clears the way for religious authorities to adjudicate personal disputes like divorce and inheritance matters by allowing the establishment of religious courts, raising fears that a popularly elected Islamist-minded government could enact legislation and appoint judges who could turn the country into a theocracy.

The courts would rely on Shariah, which under most interpretations grants women substantially fewer rights than men. Language reserving a quarter of the Assembly's seats for women has been relegated to a section of the constitution labeled transitional, which is of uncertain legal force and duration. Another phrase declares that education is mandatory only through elementary school. Women's rights groups, which expressed concern about lower levels of literacy among women here, wanted middle school to be declared mandatory as well, but were defeated.

President Bush, in an appearance in Idaho on Tuesday, asserted that the Iraqi document guaranteed women's rights and the freedom of religion in a country that in recent decades had only known dictatorship. Labeling the Iraqi constitution an "amazing event," he said, "We had a little trouble with our own conventions writing a constitution." The Iraqi constitution, several weeks in the making, is still not in its final form. After weeks of deliberations and an extension of its deadline, a group of Iraqi leaders submitted an incomplete draft to the Assembly on Monday night. The leaders gave themselves until Thursday to work out the remaining disputes. According to Shiite and Kurdish leaders, who wrote most of the document, none of those differences involved questions of Islam or women's rights.

Many Iraqis say they are already concerned at the strengthening grip of political Islam in many areas of southern Iraq, where alcohol is banned in many places, women are forced to dress conservatively and religious minorities often feel compelled to mimic those in the majority.

Most of the cities of southern Iraq have fallen under the sway of the same Shiite political parties that make up the ruling coalition in Baghdad, one that many people believe has a good chance at capturing a majority of Assembly seats in the elections scheduled for December.

"This is the future of the new Iraqi government - it will be in the hands of the clerics," said Dr. Raja Kuzai, a secular Shiite member of the Assembly. "I wanted Iraqi women to be free, to be able to talk freely and to able to move around."

"I am not going to stay here," said Dr. Kuzai, an obstetrician and women's leader who met President Bush in the White House in November 2003.

Other Iraqi leaders who helped draft the constitution say the fears of nascent theocracy are unfounded. The new draft constitution, they point out, contains language guaranteeing equal rights for all Iraqis, as well as freedom of expression and religion. And it contains important safeguards, such as, in some cases, the requirement of super-majorities to approve laws.

Ahmad Chalabi, the deputy prime minister, said the Iraqi draft constitution erected a more stringent separation of state and religion than any such document in the Middle East. Mr. Chalabi said the new language allowing a clerical role in family disputes was inserted by popular demand, and that, in any case, any Iraqi would be free to reject it and opt for a secular court.

"There is no compulsion; they are free to do whatever they want," said Mr. Chalabi, the former White House favorite who has recently moved closer to Islamist politicians like Moktada al-Sadr. "There was much discontent among people because they were forced to follow laws they didn't believe in."

Asked about the possibility of a theocratic government in Iraq, the American ambassador here, Zalmay Khalilzad, argued that the document strives for a balance of authority among Islam, human rights and democracy. "The draft contains far-reaching democratic and human rights commitments," he said during a news conference. "It's a synthesis between Islamic traditions of the country with the universal principles of democracy and human rights, and in that sense, it sets a new path for the future."

The Shiite and Kurdish leaders who bear primary responsibility for drafting the document have given public assurances that the new constitution would protect individual rights, and that they have built safeguards into the draft to ensure that Iraq will not become theocracy.

Mr. Khalilzad acknowledged the limits of American influence here, saying it was not the intention of the Bush administration to impose what would amount to a Western constitution on a country with a different history and tradition.

"These are decisions that Iraqis have made for themselves," he said. "We don't want to impose on Iraq a cookie-cutter approach. That's not American foreign policy."

But some secular-minded Iraqis criticized American diplomats for not working harder to block efforts by Shiite politicians, many of whom are clerics, to expand the reach of Islam.

Mahmood Othman, a Kurdish legislator, said Kurdish leaders did not vigorously oppose Islamist language in part because American diplomats often did not object either. For instance, Mr. Othman said, American diplomats had acquiesced to the language that would clear the way for clerical adjudication of family and personal disputes.

"The Kurds thought, as long as the Americans don't object, why should we object?" Mr. Othman said. "It's American policy to show that it is not opposed to Islam." In his Idaho appearance, Mr. Bush said he was optimistic despite a prediction by the negotiator for the Sunni Muslim minority that the country would "rise in the streets" if the constitution, as currently written, is approved.

"You know, you're speaking about one voice," the president told a small group of reporters at the Tamarack resort near Donnelly, Idaho. "There is more than one Sunni involved in the process. Reaching an accord on a constitution, after years of dictatorship, is not easy. And so you're seeing people express their opinion. "

The Sunnis, Mr. Bush added, "have got to make a choice: do they want to live in a society that's free, or do they want to live in violence?" Shiite and Kurdish leaders who drafted most of the document say they will try to find an agreement on language with the Sunnis, whose main objection is the demand by Shiite leaders for a large autonomous region in the south. Secular Iraqi leaders say there are three areas in the constitution that worry them. While they say the constitution would change nothing by itself, they worry about the language establishing Islam as the official religion of the state and as "a primary source of legislation." The constitution then says there can be no law that contradicts the "basic beliefs of Islam."

Some Iraqis fear that the phrase is so broad as to allow Iraqi judges wide latitude in striking down secular legislation. Some said they had preferred a phrase saying that no law could contradict the "agreed upon" principles of Islam, which they say would have substantially narrowed the sort of legislation that could be struck down.

In addition, some Iraqis are concerned about language that would allow experts in "Shariah law" to sit on the Iraqi Supreme Federal Court. Some worried that such experts would inevitably be clerics. The clause does not answer such crucial questions as how many such experts would sit on the court or how they would be appointed. Instead, it calls for a law to be written by a future elected body.

As a safeguard against a possibly overweening majority, the constitution states that the law must be approved by a two-thirds majority.

"What this means is that, before we pass a law, we're going to have to run it past a Shariah law expert," said Wael Abdul Latif, a Shiite judge and member of the constitutional drafting committee. "I'm upset. Very."

The other section prompting worry is one that deals with "personal law," governing affairs like marriage, divorce and inheritance. The new constitution declares that "Iraqis are free to abide in their personal lives according to their religions, sects or beliefs." And it calls for a law to set up a system to deal with such matters.

Many Iraqi leaders, including those who took part in the negotiations over that phrase, said the language would clear the way for the Assembly to set up religious courts to regulate such matters. Secular Iraqi leaders fear that the Iraqi law governing family relations that is currently on the books, passed in 1959, will be abolished, and that Shariah law will dominate the lives of ordinary Iraqis. "It sounds like the civil law will be canceled," Dr. Kuzai said. "We had the best family law in the Middle East. And we'll go back to the clerics."

Some secular-minded Iraqis believe the constitution is less important than political battles to come. Adnan Pachachi, a former foreign minister, said that if secular Sunni and Shiite leaders bind together with the Kurds, they might, after the next election, constitute a majority of the Assembly. As such, they could successfully block the imposition of an Islamic state.

New York Times

 
If people only knew the facts, they would not be fighting for the 'RIGHT' to be screwed over.

+ $1,751,132,130,359 Social Security Trust Fund

– $7,805,708,317,936 The Gross National Debt

Time will tell all the Truth.
VT

Sean Lewis/VirtualTruth/VT

Founder
OpenDebateForum
http://VTSL.blogspot.com


clock


The Truth about Liberals, The Iraq 'cut and run' and the Useful Bush Idiot lies.

Sheehan speaks the truth when she says her son died in a war based on lies. That Bush has no honor sending our troops to die based on his lies. No one is saying that the troops dying are dying without honor. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Al qaida Attacked the US. NO one is calling for the immediate withdrawal of troops out of Iraq. We invaded and caused the chaos in Iraq because of the poor planning of the Bush Administration. We broke, we own it. 
 
To win this war Two things need to happen. Things that would back fire on the Republicans and the Bush Administration. Two things that would save American and Iraqis lives. We need more troops in Iraq and to supply these troops Bush needs to reinstate the draft.
 
Why do we need more troops? To keep the peace in areas AFTER the Marines stomp out the Insurgents in a hot zone. If we do not send in more troops to keep the peace the insurgents merely return once the Marines leave and kill any Iraqis who helped the US. This is not rocket science, but apparently beyond Bush's comprehension. You actually have to be in the military to understand this rational.
 
Even with the reinstatement of the draft US troops will remain in force for another Two years in Iraq. It will take that long for the draftees to make a difference, and for the newly trained Iraqis to replace American troops in pacified areas.
 
This will only work if the Iraqis KNOW the US plans to withdrawal as Iraqis troops replace them and the time table for this is FIRM.
 
This will not happen though, for to do this Bush would have to admit he was wrong in underestimating troop strength in the first place and secondly because a Draft would cause massive protests on US campuses. It will make the Sheehan protest look like a non event. It would also mean the death knell of the Republican's power hold in DC and the epithet to Bush's Administration.
 
OK Bush Believers and Useful bush Idiots, now that you know what the LIBERALS REALLY think, what have you to say?
 
If people only knew the facts, they would not be fighting for the 'RIGHT' to be screwed over.

+ $1,751,132,130,359 Social Security Trust Fund

– $7,805,708,317,936 The Gross National Debt

Time will tell all the Truth.
VT

Sean Lewis/VirtualTruth/VT

Founder
OpenDebateForum
http://VTSL.blogspot.com


clock


Saturday, August 20, 2005

The War on Terror, How Bush got it wrong.

The War on Terror, How Bush got it wrong.
 
I am going to focus on al qaida because this is the terrorists group that attacked the US on 9/11.
 
The Al qaida network was a terrorists network that had terror cells in many countries throughout the world. Some countries had higher concentrations on terror cells than others.
 
Some countries turned a blind eye on the active terror cells and activities within their countries. In doing so, these Administrations did not become targets of Al qaida. Pakistan is an example of such an arrangement before 9/11.
 
Afghanistan under the Taliban gave sanctuary to Al qaida and it's main leaders. Thousands of Al qaida members were known to be in Afghanistan.
 
This is the quick background sketch of Al qaida operations worldwide.
 
After 9/11 Bush declared war on Terrorism and those who supported terrorist. The world rallied around Bush and this noble cause.
 
The first target was Afghanistan. The Taliban refused to no longer harbor Al qaida. This wasn't about a few dozen terror cells, this was about recruiting, training, propaganda and a base of sanctuary to launch attacks.
 
The world launched an attack against Afghanistan with the help of afghans who were anti Taliban and anti Al qaida. With the help of the Afghans as guides translators and troops the war went extremely well and both the Taliban and Al qaida were dealt significantly destructive blows.
 
As the noose was closing on the remnants of Al qaida and the Taliban, Bush made his first major mistake, he didn't focus on the final kill but diverted attention to a secondary target.
 
In doing this major components of Al qaida and the Taliban were allowed to slip away to reconstitute themselves.
 
Bush diverted troops material and funds to a secondary front. That front was Iraq.
 
Bush's reasoning for invading Iraq was about Iraq's ability to supply WMD's to terrorists.
 
Earlier in 2001, Bush's Administration had declared Iraq no longer a military threat.
 
Bush told of Iraq's connection with al qaida, a connection that could be said to be true of most regimes in the middle east. Most countries had a tacit agreement with Al qaida which was 'we will leave you alone if you leave us alone.' It was debatable but certain members of terrorists groups claim sanctuary in Iraq, but these individuals were not organizing terror cells or terror attacks from within Iraq. In remote areas of Iraq it was believed that terror training camps were in operation. These were conducted with the knowledge of Saddam but not with his support.
 
Saddam knew he was ultimately a target of Al qaida being a Secular Regime. Al qaida was more concerned with Israel and foreign intrusion into the Holy land. Iraq was low down on the list.
 
Bush's second mistake was launching a conventional war at an unconventional target in Iraq. There was no significant presence of Al qaida membership in Iraq and AFTER the Mission Accomplished celebration.
 
In destabilizing Iraq, Bush gave Al qaida a NEW safe haven in which to launch, recruit and organize terror campaigns. Unlike Afghanistan there was no internal support from the Iraqis for the invasion or Al qaida. For the most part the Iraqis were a population waiting to see what the outcome would be.
 
Saddam maintain national rule through terror. Decades earlier, with the support of the US he engaged in a war against Iran, America's enemy. After the first Gulf War Iraq was left in the control of Saddam, and the military watched and did nothing as Saddam ruthlessly put down an internal revolt after the conclusion of the Gulf war. The US unintentionally gave Saddam permission to use Gun Ships to put down the uprising.
 
Based on these past events, the Iraqis population kept a neutral stance for the most part.
 
Bush should never have invaded Iraq. Iraq had no WMD's, Iraq by the Bush's own Administration was not a military threat. Iraq was not an active supporter of Al qaida.
 
Any terror cells within Iraq before the invasion could have been dealt with the same way terror cells are being dealt with in other Arab countries. Police actions, surgical strikes or pressure of the administration to deal internally with the threat.
 
Bush's third mistake was releasing the name of the captured al qaida operative in Pakistan before on the Al qaida cells in England could be rolled up. This shows Bush's fundamental fault in fighting the terror war.
 
Bush's war on terror is being fought as a conventional war when in fact it is a war of unconventional means. The Terror War is a war similar to the war fought in Algiers. One of capture, interrogation, information, coordination, observation, capture, interrogation, information......
 
This type of war is not about flash and awe, which is how Bush is fighting the war, but about quiet relentless pursuit. A war Bush has no political need for, but one America needs to have to stay safe.
 
If people only knew the facts, they would not be fighting for the 'RIGHT' to be screwed over.

+ $1,751,132,130,359 Social Security Trust Fund

– $7,805,708,317,936 The Gross National Debt

Time will tell all the Truth.
VT

Sean Lewis/VirtualTruth/VT

Founder
OpenDebateForum
http://VTSL.blogspot.com


clock


Monday, August 08, 2005

Blood on our hands

Enough  already.

Americans need to  find their once proud sense of right and wrong and admit
that it is wrong to  have a man leading the nation that orchestrated a war
based on lies and caused  the death of 10's of thousands based on a twisted belief
that God has chosen him  to wage war against the infidels of the world.

Has anyone  considered the Iraqis people and what they are being subjected to
based on  Bush's war of lies? We lose 1800 troops and 10 times the number in
horrible  disabling injuries and the pain is almost unbearable. Think of the
Iraqis  who did not ask for this war, are not in any real power to control the
daily  military assaults against their people and are suffering 50 times the
casualty  numbers.

Saddam was a bad  man, but under Saddam the entire population was not subject
to arbitrary death  on the scale this war is subjecting every Iraqis to.

It is time Americans  take off the false blinders of Patriotism and fear of
being viewed as  un-American and face the truth that in Iraq, the war against
Al qaida only began  after Bush flew on board a US carrier and dressed like a
puppet Dictator in army  uniform and declared mission accomplished.

Bush has harm this  country greater than the attack on 9/11. Bush used the
blood of Americans killed  that horrific day and used their pain and suffering
to cause even greater death  and suffering for both Iraqis and Americans dying
in Iraq.

I suggest Americans  travel abroad, listen to what the 'friendly' nations
will say to you unfiltered  by the sycophant US media. Your eyes will be opened. 
These Countries sent troops to Iraq because an American President said  it
was the right thing to do. That Bush had undeniable proof that Saddam was 
making WMDs and had the potential to make nukes within months if not weeks. So 
these countries sent troops simply on the word of Bush, because previous 
Presidents, men of integrity had proved that America was a super power  that was not about abusing it's power or acting irrationally and waging war  without first
exhausting all possible solutions and then only with great  restraint engaging in war. If America knowing the cost of war and the death and destruction  it causes still
felt it was in the best interest of the world to engage in such  an action then
no one questioned America's motives, many nations answered the call to war. Because of Bush this will  never happen again.

Bush has none of these traits of these former great Presidents. He is rash  reckless and incompetent. From 'Bring it On' to 'you are either with us or  against us' and including his irrational belief that governing this country  based on theological beliefs rather than facts and sound reason is a good thing  Bush is clearly showing he is NOT a man to be trusted with making decisions  about steroid use in baseball let alone run this Great Nation.

So Again I say  enough.

Enough with wasting  our brave heroes on a lie.
The Blood of these  true patriotic troops and the poor unwilling victims in
Iraq is blood on the  hands of America.

 
Time will tell all the truth.

VT

Thursday, August 04, 2005

View From Australia

View From Australia
Friday, August 5, 2005
 
I am in Australia. One of the allies in the War against Terror.

It is interesting. In social settings eventually the  discussion gets around
to politics. In every situation from farmers to Solicitors the same questions always come up. 'Why did Americans elect Bush for a second term?'. 'Why are you allowing the Religious extremist run your country?'

No one is for the war and all think it was a mistake to invade Iraq. All are
stating that the sooner the Australian army is out of Iraq the better. All
however feel that the invasion into Afghanistan was just.

I try to explain that not everyone believes in the war in Iraq. That we are a Democracy and that the Majority of the people voted based on misplaced Patriotism rather than common sense. I tell them that anyone who questioned the invasion was called un-American and a traitor to the country so few opposed the invasion. That Bush won on one of the slimmest percentage margins in history and that is why it went down to just the votes in one state Ohio.

Still they look at me and ask 'Why aren't Americans aware of the facts?'
'Saddam wasn't the enemy, the enemy was in Afghanistan, not Iraq.' 'America is killing innocent Iraqis by having the war in Iraq rather than Afghanistan.'

Then some say this, as a reason for the war. 'You know  it is all about the
oil. Look at the Sudan, they have no oil so America does not help them.'

All I can say is that I am an American. That I believe  in my Country and
what it stands for. That we have a leader who has led us astray and we have people who follow him because they are misguided by his use of religion and Patriotism.

To this they respond if Americans are not careful we could see the beginning of another dark age if a war is begun between the Christians and the Muslims. They say that our religious zealots are as bad if not worst than the Taliban and al qaida. That America is becoming it's own worst enemy.

I sit and I listen. The news here is of a different view. I listen to Muslim
leaders talk about how the Koran is a book a peace.  That a fringe group of Muslims are using the Koran wrongly to inspire war and hatred. I listen as the Muslim leaders repeat over and over how they condemn the violence, and that it is important NOT to blame Muslims for the war.

Then I listen to the Religious based hate from Bush supporters and I see the true danger to this country. I just hope others see it also before it is too late.

Sean Lewis
VirtualTruth
OpenDebateForum

Malanda Australia

 
Time will tell all the truth.

VT

View From Australia repost

Friday, August 5, 2005
 
I am in Australia. One of the allies in the War against Terror.

It is interesting. In social settings eventually the  discussion gets around
to politics. In every situation from farmers to  Solicitors the same questions
always come up. 'Why did Americans elect Bush for a second term?'. 'Why are
you allowing the Religious extremist run your country?'

No one is for the war and all think it was a mistake to invade Iraq. All are
stating that the sooner the Australian army is out of Iraq the better. All
however feel that the invasion into Afghanistan was just.

I try to explain that not everyone believes in the war in Iraq. That we are a
Democracy and that the Majority of the people voted based  on misplaced
Patriotism rather than common sense. I tell them that anyone  who questioned the
invasion was called un-American and a traitor to the country  so few opposed the
invasion. That Bush won on one of the slimmest percentage  margins in history
and that is why it went down to just the votes in one state Ohio.

Still they look at me and ask 'Why aren't Americans aware of the facts?'
'Saddam wasn't the enemy, the enemy was in Afghanistan, not Iraq.' 'America is
killing innocent Iraqis by having the war in Iraq rather than Afghanistan.'

Then some say this, as a reason for the war. 'You know  it is all about the
oil. Look at the Sudan, they have no oil so America does not help them.'

All I can say is that I am an American. That I believe  in my Country and
what it stands for. That we have a leader who has led us  astray and we have
people who follow him because they are misguided by his use  of religion and
Patriotism.

To this they respond if Americans are not careful we  could see the beginning
of another dark age if a war is begun between the  Christians and the
Muslims. They say that our religious zealots are as bad if  not worst than the
Taliban and al qaida. That America is becoming it's own worst enemy.

I sit and I listen. The news here is of a different view. I listen to Muslim
leaders talk about how the Koran is a book a peace.  That a fringe group of
Muslims are using the Koran wrongly to inspire war and hatred. I listen as the
Muslim leaders repeat over and over how they condemn the  violence, and that
it is important NOT to blame Muslims for the war.

Then I listen to the Religious based hate from Bush  supporters and I see the
true danger to this country. I just hope others see it also before it is too late.

Sean Lewis
VirtualTruth
OpenDebateForum

Malanda Australia

 
Time will tell all the truth.

VT

View from Australia

I am in Australia. One of the allies in the War against Terror.
 
It is interesting. In social settings eventually the discussion gets around to politics. In every situation from farmers to Solicitors the same questions always comes up. 'Why did Americans elect Bush for a second term?'. 'Why are you allowing the Religious extremist run your country?'
 
No one is for the war and all thing it was a mistake to invade Iraq. All are stating that the sooner the Australian army is out of Iraq the better. All however feel that the invasion into Afghanistan was just.
 
I try to explain that not everyone believes in the war in Iraq that we are a Democracy and that the Majority of the people voted based on misplaced Patriotism rather than common sense. I tell them that anyone who questioned the invasion was called un-American and a traitor to the country so few opposed the invasion. That Bush won on one of the slimmest percentage margins in history and that is why it went down to just the votes in one state Ohio.
 
Still they look at me and ask 'Why aren't Americans aware of the facts?' 'Saddam wasn't the enemy, the enemy was in Afghanistan, not Iraq.' 'America is killing innocent Iraqis by having the war in Afghanistan rather than Iraq.'
 
Then some say this as a reason for the war. 'You know it is all about the oil. Look at the Sudan, they have no oil so America does not help them.'
 
All I can say is that I am an American. That I believe in my Country and what it stands for. That we have a leader who has led us astray and we have people who follow him because they are misguided by his use of religion and Patriotism.
 
To this they respond if Americans are not careful we could see the beginning of another dark age if a war is begun between the Christians and the Muslims. They say that our religious zealots are as bad if not worst than the Taliban and al qaida. That America is becoming it's own worst enemy.
 
I sit and I listen. The news here is of a different view. I listen to Muslim leaders talk about how the Koran is a book a peace. That a fringe group of Muslims are using the Koran wrongly to inspire war and hatred. I listen as the Muslim leaders repeat over and over how they condemn the violence, and that it is important NOT to blame Muslims for the war.
 
Then I listen to the Religious based hate from Bush supporters and I see the true danger to this country. I just hope others see it before it is too late.
 
Sean Lewis
VirtualTruth
OpenDebateForum
 
Malanda Australia
 
 
 
Time will tell all the truth.

VT