THERE IS NO SECOND PLACE

Sunday Funnies Chris Mathews

Chris Mathews isn't bais he just calls V.P. Chenney  V.P. Cheating
I guess that was just a Fruedian slip.Chris Mathews thinks that
Republicans play the race card.  But the Democrats still don't have
an agenda that even the pundits that study these things can sight. 
How can the Dems take the House or Senate with no agenda and
are cut and run on the war.

Sunday Funnies 8-27-06

This Week with George
Katrina one year later
New Orleans  This city should not be rebuilt any more than it already has
been.   To move any people into this flood plain is crazy and a waste
of resources.  Wherever the people that lived there are now they better
get on with their lives.  It's tough and sad but life is tough and sad. 
For Mary Landreu to be crying over rebuilding the lower ninth and
Bernard Parish Is unrealistic.  Get over it.  New Orleans can rebuild it's
docks and oil industry but the people will have to commute to get to work.

The round table
Leave it to George to set the talking points for the Democrats. 
Incompetence.  No matter what the Administration does INCOMPETENT.
Donna Brazil  names a bunch of RINO''s, Chris Shays Chuck Hagel, who
want to cut and run. Then says that most of the Republicans agree, we
need to leave and the Iraq is not part of the war on terror.  She is living in
a parallel reality.

MEET THE PRESS

Ray Nagin  Wants to rebuild.  Why?  If we are in global warming,  then
it seems we will get a category five hurricane which will flood New Orleans
again.  I can not be the only person in the world that sees this.

Ray Nagin can sure tap dance now I don't mean to say that race has
anything to do with this, he's just a politician.

The federal government is the last responder not the first.  Cities and
states need to get ready for any emergency.  The federal government only
does the military well.  Everyone doesn't agree with that.

THE ROUND TABLE

Al Hunt-Iraq hurts the Republicans but terrorism might help.  ??
They are the same thing.

Novak- Republicans might stay home.

Eugene Robinson - Iraq is a mess and always will be.  ??

Kate O'Brien-Conservative think we are losing and don't believe the
administration that things are getting better.

They all agree that Republicans need to, or are, distance themselves from the
administration.  They are all wrong. 

What about Hilary?  They agree she may be in trouble.

House and Senate - They all agree Republicans could loose majority in one or both.

Sunday funnies 8-27-06

Chris Mathews

This is a news show?  I guess not it's just people expressing their opinion. 
They are not reporters because they have Dan Rather on.  This is funny.

Chris Mathews blew his credibility when he had Brian Williams on and
didn't challenge him when he said our soldiers were the same as homicide
bombers.  But he is funny.  If the Democrats believe him, Chris Mathews,
Republicans can not loss in November.

Andrea Mitchel thinks that the Democrats moving to the left will help
them in November. 

Chris Mathews just thinks that people will want to vote the Republicans
out!  He's not bias.

Hows the war going 8-20-06

It's hard to say if we, the free world, won or lost the battle in Lebanon. 
Lebanon took the worst of it but we survived so they think they won.
This is a battle of world opinion as shown on the TV and that is going
to be hard to win in this PC world.

Egypt arrests Brotherhood members

Police have arrested 17 members of the outlawed Muslim
Brotherhood group for allegedly holding a meeting aimed at
reviving the banned group's activities, according to a security
official.

Somali activists face Islamists' ire
 
Officials with the Supreme Islamic Council of Somalia (SICS) 
said the conference of scholars and peace activists from
al-Islah group in a Mogadishu hotel was illegal as it had not
been approved.

Speaking after heavily armed men broke up the meeting on
Thursday, a SICS spokesman said the meeting was not licensed
and the organisers did not have permission to hold it.

Abdul Karim Ali Muddey said: "We have to be a community
ruled by laws. People must seek permission to have a meeting,
and we will licence it as long as the forum is not a threat to
public safety or Islamic teachings."

The Muslim fundamentalist are winning here.

Sri Lanka -
this is a civil war the Tamil Tigers have been battling the
government for more than two decades for a separate homeland for
the country's 3.2 million ethnic Tamils in the north and east, where
they already control wide swaths of territory.

Venezuela-
Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan president, found himself at the centre
of Middle Eastern politics when he announced that he was
withdrawing his most senior diplomat from Israel, the Venezuelan
charge d'affaires in Tel Aviv. Not for something Israel did to his
country, but for what it does to Palestinians and Lebanese
thousands of miles away. 

We need to watch this guy.

Germany-

The authorities in Germany have warned the country is facing
the threat of terror attack after an arrest over an alleged plot
to blow up two trains.

Pakistani -

officials have arrested six people in connection with a suicide
car bombing that killed a US diplomat in Karachi in March.

British airline bombing threat Pakistan says it is working
closely with Britain to determine links between those
arrested in the two countries.

East Timor -
Calm has largely returned to the country after a wave of
violence, arson and looting from April to June killed at least
20 people.  Most of the chaos occurred in and around Dili,
the capital of the former Portuguese colony half the size of
Belgium.

Sudan-

PRESIDENT Omar al-Beshir warned that Sudan will
confront any UN-sponsored forces sent to tar torn Darfur
and would fight them "as Hezbollah beat Israeli forced in
Lebanon" media reports said.

Delegates for the Justice and Equality Movement warned the
it could push to resume full fledged fighting.

Continuing conversation with Deb 8/14/06

This is a continuing exchange with Deb.  I think it is useful
to continue this exchange to show the differences in points of 
view.

You may have read some of this before, but I don't know how else 
to post this to keep things in context.

My comments will be in blue Debs will be in black.  Her reply to 
my comments will be in green.


How do you win a war on terror? Wouldn't it be like trying to 
win a war on murder, or a war on domestic violence? How can 
you war on an aspect of human nature that is intricately and 
essentially tied to the reality of free will?

We are not in a war on terror.  We are in World War IV against
Islamic Nazis!  As humans we have free will but suicide murder 
against innocent civilians is wrong and should be condemned.

[Come on Andy, did you think that I wouldn't notice that you 
did not answer my question? And by the way, what happened 
to WW III?]

>I did answer your question.  You can not win the war on terror.
Terror is a tactic.  We are at War with Islamic Fascist or 
more descriptive Islamic Nazis. The way you win a war is to kill 
the enemy until they stop trying to kill you.  I believe that is 
the answer to your question.  If you had read my blog you would 
find that I consider the Cold War, which lasted 50 years, WWIII.<

How long will you tolerate our money being thrown around in 
Iraq without proper over-site?

The oversight of money is the Congresses and the spending greatly 
disturbs me.

[And right now it is a REPUBLICAN Congress, which should imply 
fiscal responsibility, but does not.]

>I see we have found a point of agreement.  Read my New contract
with America. Number 5. Vote for real cuts in spending, 
eliminate corporate welfare, be fiscally conservative.<

How long will you tolerate a media that has corporate interests 
and corporate board members signing the checks and reigning in 
the voices and challenging questions of the reporters?

You are using talking point again. [Andy,though I am informed 
to some extent by progressive news, I have never sought out 
"liberal talking points" and if I do happen to espouse the
same principles of my party--oh well--great minds think 
alike! ;^)]Major news organization are corporations we are a 
capitalist society. That doesn't mean anything. Give me Three 
examples of corporate board members reigning in the voices and 
challenging questions of the reporters? 

"In 1983, 50 corporations controlled the vast majority of all 
news media in the U.S. Now, it's 6 corporations" (media matters.
org). I was talking about who SIGNED the checks and if you do 
not believe me than just read the PBS transcripts from KCTS' 
"NOW" interview with Orville Schell.  Here's a quote by him, 
a who is, by the way, a dean of the Graduate School of 
Journalism at the University of California, Berkeley:

"[Reporters] know if they just come up with bad news, they're 
going to be pilloried.  They know their news outlets will be 
criticized. Advertisers will abandon," he says. This, he says, 
has made journalists more timid, cautious, and incapable of 
standing up to criticisms. Information is being kept from 
Americans, resulting in a democratic deficit, he says" 
(From KCTS' NOW website). Here is a transcript link: 
http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/231.html

>I took the time to read the interview with Orvill Schell.
I don't know who this BRANCACCIO is but this is how he opened
the interview: "There was a time when being a reporter could 
be seen as heroic: I walked in on my kids watching "All 
the President's Men" the other day and there it was: intrepid 
journalists and editors working tirelessly in pursuit of the 
truth of Watergate. That was the seventies. Now we're bums: 
criticized for what did not get reported, such as doubts about
the official line in the run-up to the Iraq war or criticized 
for what did get reported including details on the government 
tracking of bank data as part of the war on terror."

>This guy wants to be seen as a hero not a journalist.  
Journalism is writing characterized by a direct presentation 
of facts or description of events without an attempt at 
interpretation.

>In Shells opening statement he says,  SCHELL: "In my 
experience—most journalists are—are very patriotic people. 
They are citizens, too. And, I think editors and publishers
in—in my experience go to great lengths to consider whether 
something is actually harmful to national security or not."

>It is not their job to decide what is national security or 
not.  They are to report the facts.  He goes on to say  
"On the one had I think the Bush Administration and to a 
certain degree—Republicans come out of a tradition more of 
public relations in which communications tries to attain a 
goal. But, in actuality, we as reports and the press, come 
out of an entirely different tradition, which is to follow 
things wherever they go and try to say things—explain 
things as we see them."  No your job is to report the facts.

>Then a little later BRANCACCIO: "Well, you're not kidding 
lost sight of it. You've seen the poll research from just 
this year that says when—the American public is told that 
journalists do what we do in the public interest to make 
the country, or the world, a better place, they completely 
don't buy that. They say that we reporters, when we say 
that, are either being delusional or are just—lying."  Their 
job is tell the fact without an attempt at interpretation, 
not to make the country, or the world, a better place.
For this guy Shell to compare our press to the Chines press, 
which is just propaganda, is preposterous.  Once again I ask 
you give me three examples of corporate board members 
reigning in the voices and challenging questions of
the reporters?<

The news rooms of the major media outlets are run by 
liberals. Recent polls show most editors and reporters 
vote Democrat. The colleges that graduate the reporters 
are populated with liberal professors. This give the
media a liberal bias. [Again,Andy, I was talking about 
the people who sign the checks, and though it could be 
argued that they went to a college with liberal professors,
the media-puppet-masters are decidedly conservative.

>I think you are confused, the corporate heads who sign 
checks may be conservative but they only sign checks they 
don't write the news.  Again I ask you give me three 
examples of corporate board members reigning in the 
voices and challenging questions of the reporters?<

>When Shell says "...what's the business model that 
actually allows reporters and editors and producers,
to do a good job and to be as independent as possible?"
IT'S THE CONSTITUTION WHICH GUARANTEES A FREE PRESS.<

SCHELL: "I think we're in a very grave crisis where 
the credibility of the press is at stake, where—people 
perceive journalists as being somehow disingenuous 
or having some private interests, or being biased.
> They perceive that because its true.< 
And, I think it—it gets back to the fact that, you 
know, we—we do now in—in America live in the most 
market driven society that human history has ever 
witnessed, and it's affected every aspect of our 
lives. And, it makes notions of independence quite 
quaint and quite difficult to.>Schell does not 
understand markets.  Markets produce from the
entrepreneurial spirit which is the most independent 
form of expression.  For Shell to blame the market 
place for the presses failure is nuts.  Just tell 
the truth and everyone wins.<


How can you possibly argue that we are the liberators of 
Iraq, when we claim that we're "fighting the terrorists 
over there!?!"  Doesn't that imply that we don't give a 
damn about the Iraqi citizens, the Iraqi environment, 
and the Iraqi children?

No.  It means we are going to defend America and take the 
fight to the Islamic Nazis.  War is hell innocent civilians 
will die.  We did not start this war as a matter of fact we 
were late coming to the war.  But now we are at war and in 
this War THERE IS NO SECOND PLACE!

You're ducking and hiding here Andy. You have not addressed 
the inherent conflict between these two claims. You cannot 
have it both ways.

>You have created a straw dog.   Do you disagree with the 
claim that we're "fighting the terrorists over there!?!" 
We are fighting the Islamic Nazis over there.  This 
statement does not imply that we don't give a damn about 
the Iraqi citizens, the Iraqi environment, and the Iraqi 
children?<

What is the long term objective in Iraq? If they stand up 
and we stand down, isn't that contrary to our "fight them 
over there" policy? Or will we just start up another war, 
perhaps with Iran, or maybe North Korea?

The long term objective in Iraq is to put a moderate 
government in place that believes in basic freedoms.  
That is opposed to Islamic Nazis.  In this war THERE 
IS NO SECOND PLACE!  The Islamic Nazis want to kill all 
the infidels.  This is not acceptable. I want to kill 
them before they kill us.  Once the Islamic Nazis are 
defeated in Iraq we must help Israel to defeat Hamas 
and Hezbollah. Then we must pursue them wherever they 
go next until they are not a threat to our way of life.

[You sound overly emotional here. True we want to 
protect American interests; however we have to be cogent 
about it. We cannot flail bullets and bombs at every 
shadow that incites fear, for if we do then we create 
more hatred, and more justification for more murderous
miscreants.]

>I am emotional we are in a war that may last 100 years.
What do you suggest we do?  In this war THERE IS NO SECOND 
PLACE.<

Just how high do you think our national debt can go before we 
are owned by China, or isn't that a concern of yours?

This is a concern I don't know the answer but China needs us  
right now more than we need China.

[And your evidence of this knowledge?]

>We are Chinese consumers they need us to buy their goods.<


What do you think would have been the result of spending the 
money we have wasted in Iraq on domestic needs such as health 
care for all children or early childhood education?

The money spent on Iraq has not been wasted.  We are fighting 
a war against Islamic Nazis.

[You didn't answer the question]

>I believe that if we would have spent the money on domestic 
needs most of it would have been wasted in the bureaucracy.
Throwing more money at domestic needs will not solve those 
problems.  Just give me one example where throwing money 
at a problem works.  DC has the most money spent on education
and the worst test results.<

Do you believe that it is in the best interest of the United 
States citizenry to align ourselves with Israel regardless of 
their behavior?

Yes.  We must support democracies in the world.  What behavior
are you referring to?  Surely not defending itself against 
Hamas and Hezbollah?

[Their "defense" is over-kill, both literally and 
figuratively.  >This is a war.  To win a war you must 
defeat the enemy.  There is no over kill.  Israel did not 
go far enough or fast enough.<  Also, you say we support 
democracies--well why then do we not support Hammas?
>Hamas is a terrorist organization whether they are 
elected or not.  If Hamas allows their citizens to 
target innocent people to kill, we can not support them.<
They were democratically elected. You must 
admit that even supporting "democracies" can be a slippery 
slope for our interests if those elected are extremest and 
prop-up policies that are contrary to ours?  >Their policy 
is to kill us.  That is not acceptable.< In addition, 
I would argue that Israel's hyperbolic response is not in
the best interest of our country and this administration was 
dilatory in their so called diplomatic response.  >Israels 
response was not excessive.  They did not go far enough.  Our
best interest would be for Hesbolla to be destroyed.  They
have killed more Americans and innocent citizens of the 
world than any other terrorist organization except Al 
Quida.< I believe Rice must go. She is an unctuous 
smooth talker that has the blood of many children on 
her hands due to her dispassionate tenacity propping 
up a incompetent response to horrific bloodshed.]
> The blood of those children is on Hesbolla and 
Hamas not Rice.<

Do you think that the 60 women and children of Qana would be 
alive today had our administration's foreign policy been the 
insistence of an immediate cease-fire during the first round 
of diplomacy? And if that had not worked, don't you think 
that we would have been of firmer moral ground, in that we 
fervently argued for and sought out a cease-fire--even if we 
had failed? From my perspective the blood of those children 
are not only on Hezbollah and Israel, but on both Bush and 
Rice for their failed ability to see the urgency and the 
potential human cost of hesitating, while tacitly approving 
of Isreal's brutal bombing campaign.

Hezbolla started this conflict.  We are at war, there will
be civilians killed.  There needs to be two people to 
negotiate a cease fire. Who are we going to negotiate with?
ISRAEL uses guided missiles to limit civilian deaths.  
Hezbolla uses indiscriminate weapons that they fire at
civilians.  Who has the brutal bombing campaign?

This is a simplistic and shortsighted response. 
Hezbolla certainly has allowed hubris to dictate policy.
Their decisions are reprehensible and I hope that they will 
be judged in history for their selfish assertion of force 
in a volatile and explosive Middle East. They should be
condemned. However, just like a miscreant son, one does not 
choose to become their enemy--they teach by example, 
restraint, and sagacious maneuvering. This "my guns bigger
than your gun b.s. has got to stop.  >What is your 
alternative?  The enemy is out to kill you. You would use 
restraint and farsighted judgment to maneuver the outcome 
you want?< This world does not belong to hot-headed men 
and this cycle of violence must stop. >We did not start 
this war, but we must win it.<  We are not apes, lizards, 
snakes--we are, at least we should be, dignified, thinking 
human beings. The soldiers that were captured were just 
that, soldiers. They signed up for the risks that are
inherent in being a soldier. Just like you said Andy, 
when you addressed my question about "terrorist attacks" 
agianst our soldiers.  You said that that was different. 
Well, those men who somehow got in harms way were wearing 
a uniform. Their capture does not justify the maiming of 
children. BOTH SIDES ARE HORRIFICALLY WRONG AND I'M SICK AND
TIRED OF CHILDREN AND INNOCENTS PAYING THE PRICE FOR HOT-HEADED,
FOOLISH, FOOLISH MEN!  I'm sick of it, and I'm sick to death 
of you rationalizing crimes against children. >We are not
committing crimes against children and innocents.  We are at
war and we target combatants.  The Islamic Nazis are homicide 
bombers who target innocents and children.<  I believe that 
as a human being I must voice my contempt of these actions. 
EVERY CHILD IS A SACRED TRUST AND THESE SO CALLED
LEADERS ARE ALL PATHETIC. You may say, "Gee Deb, you sound 
so angry."  You're right I am. I'm angry with these 
corporately owned leaders who could give a damn if our earth 
is poisoned, our children are killed, and our democracy is 
evaporating under the pretentious, cowardly magnifying glass
of fear. "Give me liberty or give me death," were the
words of our forefather Patrick Henry. Have we forgotton 
Andy? It takes far more courage to sacrifice to save 
lives, rather than to "prove" you are a bigger man with 
a bigger gun. >Focus your anger on the enemy, the Islamic 
Nazis, that want to kill you, not on your government that 
is trying, although maybe not as efficient as I would like,
that is trying to protect you.<

Don't you think emoting 911 emotions and claiming the world's 
a better place because Saddam Hussein is removed is wearing a 
bit thin?

NO! We can never forget 911.  We are at war against an enemy 
that wants to destroy our way of life and kill us.  The world 
is a better place for the 300,000 that Saddam would have 
killed if he had not been removed.
 
[So now you claim to know what would have happened if Saddam 
was still in power? Oh please! This is not an argument or an 
answer. This is trickery for your gullable fish bite!]

>This is from Bakhtiar Amin Executive Director, Alliance 
Internationale pour la Justice
"For three decades Saddam Hussein and the Ba’th Party 
have been ruling Iraq with an iron hand.  The Iraqi 
regime is responsible for two devastating wars with its
neighbors and 34 years of brutality and terror against 
the Iraqi people. The Iraqi regime’s aggressive internal 
and external policies have led to the direct killing of 
More than one million Iraqis. The list of the Iraqi 
government’s crimes is long, well documented and
known to everyone. "  You can read the full letter at
http://www.kurdmedia.com/articles.asp?id=3229<

How can Republicans claim that we have not suffered another 
terrorist attack when over 2,500 of our service men and women 
have lost their lives? Are not they victims of this war on 
terror? And isn't the loss of any American citizen due to 
terrorist attacks, a terrorist attack--no matter where on the 
globe?

A terrorist attack kills civilians.  The loss of our service
personnel is terrible but they fighting an enemy.

[According to your definition, Israel is a terrorist.]

>Let me be more precise terrorist target civilians by 
becoming a homicide bomber or firing indiscriminate 
rockets.<

What has George W. Bush done for this country aside 
from lining the pockets of the corporate energy Moguls?

[I'm assuming that you were a bit insulted by this 
statement, and I understand that; however, I do 
believe that it's all about money. > I just couldn't 
believe you wanted an answer.  Goerge  Bush defended 
our freedom from an external foe  that is intent to
killing us, you and I.<  My only hope is that they 
will all go down in history as maligning the peace 
of our world. Yes Andy, I understand that you do 
not know what a world citizen is, and though I am 
deeply rooted in this country, as I am half Native 
American, I know that the people that thrive--hence, 
the country that thrives--are those that can treat 
others the way they would want to be treated. > I 
agree.  And we will thrive because we believe in 
freedom, and we want to spread freedom and 
democracy to all.<  That means being a good neighbor.
>Most democracies don't attack their neighbors and 
the United States does not.<  That means listening, 
arguing, pounding the table for diplomacy's sake. 
You say I'm all about talking points. True, I 
listen to what my party has to say, but if I 
can leave you with anything, I want to leave you 
with the knowledge that I am passionate about my 
beliefs and I will not be led by the nose to an 
autocratic society that measures worth by the size of
one's weaponry.>I don't see a society or government
being led by one person who possesses unlimited 
powers.< I am a woman of faith, family, and community 
and I see my responsibility as cascading out in 
concentric circles into the realm of world citizenship. 
I would not poison your land, do not poison mine.
I would not shoot blindly into your yard, do not shoot 
blindly into mine. I would argue, get pissed, and 
sometimes behave rather badly; but I would never, 
ever harm your child. I believe we were justified to 
go to Afghanistan, for we were defending our people. 
But we are not capable of ridding the world of bad 
guys, and the fact of the matter is that we often 
manufacture bad guys in order to get someone in power
that with bend to our interests. Bin Ladin and Saddam 
were both just such men. There is a price that we pay 
for supporting treacherous men. 

Andy, I believe that our country would thrive if 
we would only be honest with ourselves and staunchly 
prioritize being good neighbors, while protecting 
our citizens. I believe that it can be done, though 
it is clearly not the wide path.

Deb.

Contract with America

Americans  need to find candidates to sign on to these basic principles.

1.  Will aggressively pursue the war on terrorism.

2.  Nominate and confirm judges that will follow the constitution.

3.  Close the borders and enforce the immigration laws.

4.  Repeal Article XVI of the Constitution and implement the Fair Tax.

5.   Vote for real cuts in spending, eliminate corporate welfare, be fiscally conservative.

6.  Reform Social Security.  Privatize

7.  Reform medicare and medicaid.

8.  Reform the education system with vouchers.

9. Continue to reform the welfare system to really help.

10. Reform the drug laws.  By legalizing, taxing and regulating we will take revenue out of the hands of terrorist.

We have a majority in both houses of Congress.   We have the Presidency.  We don't need the Democrats.  If they (the democrats) will not participate go on without them.  No excuses.  JUST DO IT!!!!

Joe Lieberman

I was wrong.  Joe lost but not by much.  Unfortunately, for the
Democrats, this means the Democrats are headed over the
cliff.  I personally could not be happier.  Joe will probably
win in November.  To bad the Republicans couldn't get a
strong candidate.  At least that is what the press tells us
but I don't believe the press much.  The polls were wrong.

Sunday Funnies 8/6/06

Face the Nation

Chuck Hagel is not only a RINO, has gone the way of Al Gore,
he is losing his mind.  He wants to negotiate in Lebanon.  With
who?  He calls the killing a slaughter.  By who?  The Hezbollah who
caused this conflict?  Israel trying to defend itself?  I think he
means the later. Words mean something , slaughter is the wrong
word.  Diplomacy and engagement is what got us to this point.
Condallesa Rice is right from Meet the Press we need a new paradime.

When Chuch Hagel and Chirs Dodd agree that tells you where Hagel
has gone wrong.  Chuck Hagel believes the army is demoralized.  He
has lost his mind.

Meet the Press

We will see Tuesday.   I only hope and I believe that the Democrats
in Connecticut are for freedom and know that the fight against Islamic
Nazis must be pursued vigorously or we, the United states will be lost.

This Week with George Stephanopoulos

The title breaks me up.  George as an independent or objective
journalist is an alternate reality.

Security and Prossperity Partnership for North America

The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP)
was launched in March of 2005 as a trilateral effort to increase
security and enhance prosperity among the United States,
Canada and Mexico through greater cooperation and information
sharing.

This trilateral initiative is premised on our security and our
economic prosperity being mutually reinforcing. The SPP
recognizes that our three great nations are bound by a shared
belief in freedom, economic opportunity, and strong democratic
institutions.

The SPP provides the framework to ensure that North America
is the safest and best place to live and do business. It includes
ambitious security and prosperity programs to keep our borders
closed to terrorism yet open to trade.

The SPP builds upon, but is separate from, our long-standing
trade and economic relationships. It energizes other aspects
of our cooperative relations, such as the protection of our
environment, our food supply, and our public health.

Looking forward, President Bush, Prime Minister Harper and
President Fox have identified emergency management;
influenza pandemics, including avian influenza; energy security;
and safe and secure gateways (border security and facilitation)
as key priorities for the SPP. The Leaders also announced the
creation of North American Competitiveness Council to fully
incorporate the private sector into the SPP process.

For more information see spp.gov

I think this means any hope of closing our boarders is stupid.

The truth about 9-11

I just watched 9-11 Eyewitness.  It's free and on the net. Look it up.  It looks like the building 1, 2 and
7 were pulled.  The question is by who?  The search for the truth will continue.  It never stops here and the blog-o-sphere is the worlds truth detector.