Lookout Mountain becomes a billboard

My fiance just called me and said that someone had spray painted something about the DNC on North Table Mountain. She said she heard it on the radio, but wasn't sure exactly what had been written.

http://14ers.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=15564

Its not spray paint.

Thanks for the info

anytime, and sorry for the pasted link, I just didn't feel like typing all that information lol.

thanks for cleaning up the sign once whoever got their message out.

Can't the Jesus freaks just stay in Colorado Springs.

It is weird that many of these people are pro-war and anti-abortion...

Tevis Blom wrote:It is weird that many of these people are pro-war and anti-abortion...

A bit facile Tevis. If someone advocated confronting Hitler before he sewed as much horror as he did, would that have been a pro-death position or a pro-life position? Yeah, Hitler's a cheap choice of example. But the valid point is, declaring "no war" doesn't always prove to be the most peaceful or life-saving position.

Those conclusions will be long debated, Bob. I won't try to prove or disprove them. Here are a few considerations I suggest are relevant:

We'll never know how many Iraqis--or neighboring populations--Saddam Hussein might have killed if he were left undisturbed.

The sanctions on Iraq were fast-eroding and actively undermined by various nations. We now know Hussein had financial relations with a number of European business and political leaders. We don't know what WMD or violent operations his skyrocketing petro-wealth would have bought over the last 5 or 6 years, or what aggressive patterns he would have returned to.

EDIT: Oil wealth has certainly made Hugo Chavez and Vladimir Putin more formidable and adventurous, and they hadn't swallowed a neighboring country, pursued a 10-yr war with another neighbor, or gassed their own population in the preceding decade. END EDIT.

Do recall that Hussein was an international outlaw, in violation of numerous UN resolutions, and the invasion was authorized by Congress, acquiesced to by the UN, and had the consent and (token) participation of numerous countries.

Did we go to grab the oil for the US? Then why are Democrats now criticizing the Administration for letting Iraq realize huge oil revenues while we pay for the conflict? We didn't grab very much.

Do we know Iraqi opinion right now--do the Iraqi people believe they have a better society and future hope now, or before the invasion with the Hussein family still in power? Would they wish it undone? I've seen polls that suggest not.

Bob D'Antonio wrote:The invasion was authorized under false information provide by Bush.

There are lots of complicated issues. I won't pretend the arguments all favor the invasion; that's obviously bunk. But the claim above is just wrong for too many reasons to type here. Maybe another thread.

No let me just say it was provided by intel services to Bush, much of the same info Clinton cited and relied on, and viewed and accepted by Dem opposition in Congress...until the war became unpopular. Also virtually all other major nation intel services reached the same conclusion.

On a different subject, and I'm not trying to be a smart*ss here...it's not hard to do multiple quote boxes in the same post. You just have to open two redundant windows showing the same thread. Click "quote." Grab the snippet you want. The go to the other window and do it again, but cut the quote snippets *with* the little quote codes in the excerpt, and paste them into the other reply box. Do as many times as you want. You can even grab quotes from other threads if you're a chatty cathy like me, who gets into that sort of thing.

Gotta go. Joe Biden is talking.

Shawn Mitchell wrote: Gotta go. Joe Biden is talking.

and talking, and talking, and talking, and...............................

Shawn Mitchell wrote:Do recall that Hussein was an international outlaw, in violation of numerous UN resolutions, and the invasion was authorized by Congress, acquiesced to by the UN, and had the consent and (token) participation of numerous countries.

I'm not one to get involved in these political discussions, but this statement about the UN is just ridiculous. Colin Powell took a bunch of fake intelligence to the UN to convince them that Iraq had WMDs and we needed to invade. I lost any respect I had for that man after this event. Here's an interesting article on the matter:

cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08…

Adam Berger wrote: I'm not one to get involved in these political discussions, but this statement about the UN is just ridiculous. Colin Powell took a bunch of fake intelligence to the UN to convince them that Iraq had WMDs and we needed to invade. I lost any respect I had for that man after this event. Here's an interesting article on the matter: cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08…

I,like you, dont usually get involved in these, but:
How many other nations denied the validity of the evidence? Intel is not something that the US has a lock on. Russia, China and France all have large bodies of people who dig up info, yet none of these nations disputed the evidence presented.

Bob, sorry for the sorry analogy here, but if I give my kid a bb gun, and he runs around shooting it at windows and people... Sorry man, but I'm whipping his ass and taking it away. The point is, yeah we sold weapons to Hussain. So what, does that mean we allow him to do as he pleases with them?

My 2cents

Has anyone stopped to consider the people in the US who need seeing to? I would like to thinnk that there is some serious attention needed in our own streets, and to drop large amounts of resources into fixing a problem overseas??? We need to re-examine the problems facing the US, pull our troops out of our "war on an idea/religion", and fix the crap that is wrong with this country before meddling with others. What ever happened to the law of the jungle? The Iraqis are humans just like us, and I assume have brains of their own. If they choose to blow themselves up, then so be it! Billions of dollars per month to what end? Have we really made a difference that will endure, or is this just one huge piece of $#*%

Bush is the WORST President this country has had during my lifetime!!

-Lies and misinformation to take us and ONLY 2 allies into Iraq
-Poor planning for the war and the aftermath of the invasion
-Extremely poor accountability for the hundreds of billions of dollars we have poured into Iraq
-Fear mongering at a level not seen since the McCarthyism of the 40's and 50's.
-No willingness (or so slow, babies figure it out first) to change direction or tactic based on new information
-Spending trivial amounts of money and resources on alternate energy
-No regard for PUBLIC lands - to Bush, OUR lands belong to energy and mining companies
-An apparent personal agenda, the importance of which overrides the needs and concerns of our country.

Boy, that feels good to get off my chest...

EDIT: By the way, I was a lifelong Republican until Bush took office 8 years ago.

I think that anyone who supports what we've done to those poor Iraqi people obviously isn't aware of exactly what we're doing over there. In Iraq, the Americans have become Hitler. We've invaded, set up concentration camps (or 'detainment facilities' as we've euphemistically called them), and tortured and murdered (or 'conducted harsh interrogations') on tens of thousands of innocent people as young as 10 years old. Our 'clear and contain' strategy is nothing short of ethnic cleansing.

Unfortunately, a lot of America still buys this administration's ever-changing arguments for why we went in there in the first place. Perhaps they should spend more time on buzzflash.com and less time on Fox News.

Deaun Schovajsa wrote:Bush is the WORST President this country has had during my lifetime!!

Wait until Obama gets elected!!

Darn it, Tevis:

Look what you started!

JohnJ80302 wrote:I think that anyone who supports what we've done to those poor Iraqi people obviously isn't aware of exactly what we're doing over there. In Iraq, the Americans have become Hitler. We've invaded, set up concentration camps (or 'detainment facilities' as we've euphemistically called them), and tortured and murdered (or 'conducted harsh interrogations') on tens of thousands of innocent people as young as 10 years old. Our 'clear and contain' strategy is nothing short of ethnic cleansing. Unfortunately, a lot of America still buys this administration's ever-changing arguments for why we went in there in the first place. Perhaps they should spend more time on buzzflash.com and less time on Fox News.

Damning charges, but you ignored an important factor, so I repeat the Q: Do we know Iraqi opinion right now--do the Iraqi people believe they have a better society and future hope now, or before the invasion with the Hussein family still in power? Would they wish it undone? I've seen polls that suggest not.

Did we go to grab the oil for the US? Then why are Democrats now criticizing the Administration for letting Iraq realize huge oil revenues while we pay for the conflict? We didn't grab very much.

Deaun Schovajsa wrote:Bush is the WORST President this country has had during my lifetime!!

Actually, Deaun, I'll put up less resistance than you might think on this one. I'm unthrilled with Bush for several reasons, some overlapping yours, some different. [EDIT-deleted one argument.]

I do resist the charge that Bush lied us into war. His CIA director, George Tenet, who also was Clinton's CIA director, famously told him it was a slam dunk Hussein had WMD. We all know Hussein had used them before, and that he played cat and mouse with the weapon inspectors before he kicked them out of Iraq. There is no credible version of events that Bush had independent knowledge informing him virtually every major world intel agency was wrong.

Besides, what could possibly be his motive to knowingly lie himself into the global humiliation of coming up empty-handed? If he was evil enough to fabricate the cause of war, he would be clever and self-preserving enough to plant the fakes necessary to cover his lies. But again, why? For the oil that we're not currently plundering from the Iraqi people, while they gather a gusher of oil revenue?

Right or wrong, Bush thought he was protecting US interests.

doug rouse wrote:Has anyone stopped to consider the people in the US who need seeing to? I would like to thinnk that there is some serious attention needed in our own streets, and to drop large amounts of resources into fixing a problem overseas??? We need to re-examine the problems facing the US, pull our troops out of our "war on an idea/religion", and fix the crap that is wrong with this country before meddling with others. What ever happened to the law of the jungle? The Iraqis are humans just like us, and I assume have brains of their own. If they choose to blow themselves up, then so be it! Billions of dollars per month to what end? Have we really made a difference that will endure, or is this just one huge piece of $#*%

Yeah, important questions, Doug. We don't know what the enduring effects will be and it may well have been horribly ill-advised.

But we can't just shift dollars and say it would have made "X" improvement in American life. The US has spent untold billions of dollars on welfare programs that haven't solved the problems and, because of the way they were administered, have often done much harm with the good. On a revenue per capita basis, we could have lifted the poor to middle class status or better just by writing checks to households. But we've fallen far short of that. I'm not arguing against welfare; I'm a conservative who believes in a safety net, not a libertarian who doesn't. I'm saying it's not necessarily useful or informative to say: Dollars spent there should have been spent here and the improvement would be X, Y, or Z.

Robert 560 wrote: Wait until Obama gets elected!!

Ha! Nice one, Robert.

Shawn Mitchell wrote:Tevis: Darn it! Look what you started. To be fair though, we should acknowledge it took Lincoln a bunch of tries to get a team that could win the Civil War, and there were prolonged, ugly mistakes on the road to winning WWII, as well. I feel a bit stronger about the charge that Bush lied us into war. His CIA director, George Tenet, who also was Clinton's CIA director, famously told him it was a slam dunk Hussein had WMD. We all know Hussein had used them before, and that he played cat and mouse with the weapon inspectors before he kicked them out of Iraq. There is no credible version of events that Bush had independent knowledge informing him virtually every major world intel agency was wrong. Besides, what could possibly be his motive to knowingly lie himself into the global humiliation of coming up empty-handed? If he was evil enough to fabricate the cause of war, he would be clever and self-preserving enough to plant the fakes necessary to cover his lies. But again, why? For the oil that we're not currently plundering from the Iraqi people, while they gather a gusher of oil revenue? Right or wrong, Bush thought he was protecting US interests.

Good morning Shawn. Sometime we'll have to get out for some climbing and talk about politics at the end of the day over a cold beverage. Id like that. For now...

We may never know what the intelligence reports looked like right before Bush made the decision to go. As high ranking officials leave the administration and discuss the time period of the decision, we are getting indications that Bush and the gang knew that WMD's were not likely. You ask what could possibly motivate him to risk global humiliation? I don't know, except to say that he has repeatedly ignored fact during his presidency and has repeatedly made decisions based on something else - his gut feel? I don't know.

As far as the oil revenue that the US is seeing so little of, I don't think the administration ever thought that the US would benefit, but I have no doubt that they knew for a fact that their cronies in the energy sector would benefit in a major way, i.e., Haliburton, et al.
Those companies have benefited from both Iraqi oil production and US reconstruction funds. Double whammy!

Robert 560 wrote: Wait until Obama gets elected!!

Robert, Robert, Robert...unless Obama has an aneurysm and slips into a vegetative state, completely brain dead, he can't be worse than Bush. Even then, he might make better decisions and speak more clearly than GW!