Stop the U.S.A bullying

Looks like the dollar is on its way to collapse with countries like Kuwait abandoning the dinar's peg against the dollar in favor of a basket of currencies to help minimize economic harm after the dollar declined. Last year the dollar fell against the Euro in fact it fell against most currencies.
The U.S. has promised to spend another 10.6 billion on top of the 14.6 it has already "given" in "aid" not including cost of the war this does not include 360 billion on the Iraq war. Check out the link http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

The U.S. needs to attract about $2.5 billion a day from foreign investors to keep the dollar steady and fund a current- account deficit that widened to a record $225.6 billion in the third quarter of last year.

So If the world stops investing in the United States, stops trading in the dollar and stops buying American products then The U.S.A would not have the money to be so aggressive to other countries that don't do as they say.

So do yourselves a favour stop using Microsoft windows ( which intelligence agencies can Hack at the drop of a hat and switch to Linux!

How to cut U.S.A fuel consumption

George Bush in his speech to the union said he wanted to cut petrol consumption by 20%. There is an easy 3 point plan which will reduce consumption by 30%

1. Stop your spoilt ugly twin daughters going off to Argentina to party every 5 minutes. There's 10%

2. Stop secret agents making wasted journeys to harass people for not doing what you want and travelling abroad to make up stories about weapons of mass destruction. There's another 10%

http://willdo.philadelphiaweekly.com/archives/2007/01/81yearold_liber.html great story and a warning for anyone who thinks Bush should be hanged LOL

3. Stop sending the fleet to threaten Iran because they don't agree with you. there's another 10%

See how easy it is for anyone with more than 5 brain cells.

Americas dependence on foreign oil

Quote from Congressman Jerry McNerney

"Tonight, President Bush began his State of the Union address by calling for a new era of cooperation in addressing issues of great importance to the American people. If the president is serious about matching his words with deeds, I am ready to work with him on so many critical issues.

"I am optimistic about the lofty cooperative goals the president laid out. Yet, at the same time, I know that the best predictor of the future is the past — and that gives me pause.

"In his last six State of the Union addresses, President Bush has addressed the need for a rational, comprehensive energy policy and the need to move toward greater energy independence. Yet America is now more dependent on foreign oil than when President Bush took office."

U.S tourism

On Tuesday the Travel Industry Association released it's survey conducted on travellers from 16 countries who ranked The U.S the most unfriendly country in the world to visit! Darn I was planning a trip now I will have to cancel and book a holidayl instead in the "hotel Paradisio" in Iraq. It has to be the friendlier than the U.S!

Hot Air Bush

Today I was all geared up to pull apart Bush's state of the union address, but it said very little. It looks like he has woken up to the fact that pollution does cause global warming ( with a 20% cut in petrol consumption by 2017) although there is an ulterior motive.
Quote
"For too long our nation has been dependent on foreign oil, and this dependence leaves us more vulnerable to hostile regimes, and to terrorists - who could cause huge disruptions of oil shipments... raise the price of oil... and do great harm to our economy."

The previous quote shows that the U.S.A. realises it can not just invade a country for oil supplies or to turn around the currency in which oil is traded, using some made up story about weapons of mass destruction
I loved the way he opened the speech with how he was the first to say "madam speaker" there's that got to be first, strongest or best mentality again.

Oh yes Iran and Syria should keep on their toes with Bush's ominous words "as we enter 2007 with large endeavours under way and other that are ours to begin"

In the U.K. it looks like Tony Blair is feeling uncomfortable about his misjudgement to invade Iraq. He's not even turning up to a high profile debate in the house of commons choosing to go to a business conference instead. Seeing as we live in a democracy, MPs will not be able to vote on a change of policy in Iraq.
Here's another quote showing what a democracy the U.K. is:
"Mr Blair has promised to make a statement to the Commons on the situation in Iraq once he has assessed the success of the Army's Operation Sinbad in Basra."
I would like to know what qualifications Blair has to make such a far reaching decision. Oh yes I remember, he has an "ology" in American president butt licking!

BBC joins America's propaganda train

Yesterday a video was "intercepted" by the website siteinstitute.org claiming to be from the deputy of Al Qaeda. The website in question is backed by loyal (or should that be mental) Bush supporters and one of the partners of the site was picked by Bush to post articles on Homeland security! It is as pro-Bush as I am anti-Bush
I thought today I would just provide the sites for you to look and make you own assessment rather than repeat what has been said before.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/3/13/155010/007 The daily Kos has already written a piece on the Siteinstitute when the caught out C.B.S "60 minutes" program when they alleged that some farmers in Georgia were terrorists.

http://www.siteinstitute.org/index.html This is the site that claims to have intercepted the video. By the way S.I.T.E stands for Search for International Terrorist Entities Which stinks of Whitehouse influence.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6289195.stm BBC page where you can read about the story.

Please feel free to leave comments letting me know what you think.

Bush Vs Hitler

Here is a quote from George Bush "the best way to convince them [Congress] that this makes sense is to implement it and show them that it works." and Bush likes the world to believe America is a democracy. In fact it has more in common with Hitler's Germany than a democratic nation. Instead of Jews it is Muslims that are being persecuted and in years to come we will look back and and wince at the Muslim genocide that Bush has created.

He will argue in his State of the Union speech that "what happens in Iraq matters to your security here at home." I would like to ask how someone who has psychiatric problems I.e. delusional paranoia can run a country...oh yes Hitler and Pol Pot got away with it.

Now he is going to start an arms race with Russia or at the very least raise tensions in Europe by planning to expand its missile "shield" in Czech Republic and Poland. Washington says it needs interceptor missiles in Europe to stop attacks by states like Iran or North Korea. If either of these countries attacked Europe - not that they have ever shown aggression to Europe- what has it got to do with the U.S.A. well if the U.K. is anything to go by it needs to protect its spy network listening in on phone conversations.
Quote from the guardian (Link Here)
"There is plenty of evidence showing that in recent years the NSA and GCHQ have listened to enemies, European allies and neutral countries. A leaked NSA memo shows they targeted six swing countries on the UN security council in the run up to the Iraq war last year. At least two of those countries have confirmed they were bugged"

Here in the U.K. the U.S.A. (National Security Agency) monitors 100,000's of phone calls ,emails and faxes a minute. See we do live in a nanny state and the government has a baby monitor. Try an experiment when on the phone to your friends or family say words like terrorist, bomb, c4, tnt, al-Qaeda and see if you hear a click or the line goes echoey .Their listening stations pick up certain words that they think terrorist groups would use. Have fun!

Please feel free to comment or if you work for NSA and GCHQ and want to send me stuff to publish please do.

Kick the bully

The more and more you read the news you realize that there is only one main aggressor on this planet and that is ....yup you guessed it.. America. They talk about peace and stability with one hand and with the other (which is under the table) they are trying or if the truth is known pressurizing Poland and the Czech republic to host Radar and missile sites ( I hope they refuse). Yet it threatens Iran for testing its own missiles, But you notice it will not use those same threats against China. The reason is obvious Bullies can't and won't stand up to something their own size.
The Syrian president met with the Iraqi President this week to condemn the attacks on the U.S. backed Iraqi army and offer assistance, but will the U.S. let this happen I doubt it! 3 years ago Iran also offered help but was ignored by the U.S.

The trouble with the U.S. it has to be the biggest, fastest or first. It can not take a back seat without interfering or bullying other countries. America sulks if countries refuse to buy their products and then add huge import taxes to items from those countries as petty revenge and if it's not careful Britain will go down the same road.

I for one have become a Yankaphobe ( ooh is that a new word I made up!) and will not buy anything American or associated with it and i call everyone to do the same.

The death squad manual

Military Commissions Manual

The American defence department sent to its Military Commissions Manual to the congress it makes interesting reading (238 pages). It has a 7 pages of definitions so George can read it and understand words like Shall, pay, supplies and vehicle to name but a few. What strikes me as weird is how comes America can be the accuser and the judge and try the accused (probably some Iraqi defending his country form invasion), shouldn't they be tried through the U.N .
The manual is absolutely biased as you can see from the excerpt from page 35.


(d) When charges may be referred. If the convening authority finds, or is advised by a legal
advisor that there are reasonable grounds to believe that an offense triable by a military
commission has been committed and that the accused committed it, and that the specification alleges
an offense, the convening authority may refer it. The finding may be based on hearsay in
whole or in part. The convening authority or legal advisor may consider information from any
source and shall not be limited to the information reviewed by any previous authority, but a case
may not be referred to a military commission except in compliance with R.M.C. 406. The
convening authority or legal advisor shall not be required before charges are referred to resolve
legal issues, including objections to evidence, which may arise at trial.

This means you can be tried on hearsay.....CRAZY I heard George bush ordered the deaths of 10,000's of Iraqi's will he be tried ...No
This next extract from page 219 should cover American defence department officials as well

(1) MURDER OF PROTECTED PERSONS.
a. Text. “Any person subject to this chapter who intentionally kills one or more protected
persons shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a military commission under this
chapter may direct.”
b. Elements.
(1) The accused without justification or excuse, intentionally and unlawfully kills a
protected person;
(2) The accused knew or should have known of the factual circumstances that
established that person’s protected status; and
(3) The killing took place in the context of and was associated with armed conflict.
c. Comment. The intent required for this offense precludes its applicability with regard to
collateral damage or death, damage, or injury incident to a lawful attack.
d. Maximum punishment. Death.

If a document is fair it should balance out on the scales, but unfortunately it does not its like having a Sherman tank on one side of the scales and a revolver on the other.

Water Companies trash the enviornment

Yesterday hose pipe bans were lifted in many areas of the South East of the U.K, Which reminded me of piece of information I found on a laptop I was lent from the East Sussex county council. It was from the then N.R.A (National Rivers Association - now the environment agency) It concluded that the the water supply would not be sustainable with the rate of new houses being built, as the reservoirs could not cope. It is now nearly 15 years later and still the building goes on..... I expect the S.E is only a few of years away from a perpetual ban. This is not the water companies fault but the council who have the power to stop developments

The following is an excerpt form South East Water drought info page.


"This will set out what the company needs to do, and by when, to ensure both water supplies and the environment are safeguarded during extended periods of dry weather. This could include:

* Restricting the use of sprinklers and hosepipes
* Activating dormant water sources or developing new ones to increase the amount of water available
* Transferring water from nearby areas where it is more plentiful
* Applying for drought permits to allow more water to be temporarily abstracted from the environment
* Applying for drought orders to restrict non-essential use of water"

And as you see plenty of things to harm the environment and nothing about building developments

The most involvement the government wants is to draw up a 10 point plan passing the responsibility to the water companies. It does raise the question as to whether anyone actually reads them. When I read one .They seemed more worried about shareholders than the environment.

It seems no-one in power in this country has the balls to stand up and say "no more non-essential development in the South East".

Quotes from S.E water management plan.

"In times of drought, there may be occasion for measures to be put in place to
maintain supplies that could be to the detriment of the environment."

"It is impractical for an ecological assessment to consider every individual species and
habitat that may potentially be affected by a development. Rather it should focus on
‘valued ecological resources' and legally protected species."

"There is also a need to identify all legally protected species and designated habitats
that could be affected by the proposed drought permit and to devise mitigation
strategies that will avoid significant effects and contravention of the relevant
legislation."

I highly recommend downloading it yourself at http://www.southeastwater.co.uk/pdfs/draft_drought2006.pdf and check out table 14 page 72 for a list of detrimental wildlife issues. Or just download the management plan for your water authority to see what they are up to.

Bush declared mad

Bush's detachment form the real world was confirmed when he announced 4,000 troops will be sent to the Anbar province. What was once one of the most prosperous provinces It is now the most violent region in Iraq. Covering an area of 140,000 square kilometres and a population of of 1.2 million. America has left it with no infrastructure and displaced and killed 10,000's of civilians. It has blown up shops and nearly 40% of schools are "out of order" so exactly what are 4,00 troops going to do?

Bush's war on terror

Here is the full text of US President George Bush's
televised address outlining a new strategy for dealing with the conflict in
Iraq.

" Good evening. Tonight in Iraq, the armed forces of the
United States are engaged in a struggle (bloodbath)
that will determine the direction of the global war on terror
and just how does invading another country determine that?
- and our safety here at home. This sentence is just here
to create fear in U.S. citizens, a well documented technique used throughout the
western world to better control the voting public

The new strategy Was the old one not any
good then? Oh i'm soooo surprised I outline tonight will change America's
course in Iraq, and help us succeed in the fight against terror.
If America invaded my country I'd be pretty pissed off too

When I addressed you just over a year ago, nearly 12 million
Iraqis had cast their ballots for a unified and democratic nation.
Did all 12 million vote in favour? I think not, those who
are against U.S. occupation stayed away. That's quite a few in a country of
26,783,383 (July 2006 est.)

The elections of 2005 were a stunning achievement.
yes they did improve America's appearance to the outside
world

We thought that these elections would bring the Iraqis
together  how naive can you get? and that as
we trained Iraqi security forces, we could accomplish our mission with fewer
American troops. It's called pass the buck

But in 2006, the opposite happened. The violence in Iraq -
particularly in Baghdad - overwhelmed the political gains the Iraqis had made.
Yes not everyone is as transparent as you!

Al-Qaeda terrorists and Sunni insurgents recognized the mortal danger that
Iraq's elections posed for their cause. And they responded with outrageous acts
of murder aimed at innocent Iraqis. Lets blame everything
on the Al-Qaeda terrorists and Sunni, as obviously  no-one else could possibly be corrupt

They blew up one of the holiest shrines in Shia Islam - the
Golden Mosque of Samarra - in a calculated effort to provoke Iraq's Shia
population to retaliate. Well yes that was naughty

Their strategy worked. Radical Shia elements, some supported
by Iran, formed death squads.

And the result was a vicious cycle of sectarian violence that
continues today. And none of this even crossed your mind
when you attacked a country because they left a few nuts and bolts out of a
10,000 page inventory??

The situation in Iraq is unacceptable to the American people
Well yes....It's their kids dying after all! - and it is
unacceptable to me. Well you caused it!

Our troops in Iraq have fought bravely. They have done
everything we have asked them to do.

Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with
me. Well do the decent thing then and step down

Need for change

It is clear that we need to change our strategy in Iraq.
Well maybe this time you'll have a little think before
blazing in

So my national security team, military commanders, and
diplomats conducted a comprehensive review. And then
ignored what they told you

We consulted Members of Congress from both parties, allies
abroad, not many of them any more and distinguished
but were they intelligent outside experts.

We benefited from the thoughtful recommendations of the Iraq
Study Group - a bipartisan panel led by former Secretary of State James Baker
and former Congressman Lee Hamilton. Late last year,
America's independent Iraq Study Group recommended that the US should seek
Iranian and Syrian support in stabilising Iraq. President Bush has ignored the
suggestion.

In our discussions, we all agreed that there is no magic
formula for success in Iraq.

And one message came through loud and clear: Failure in Iraq
would be a disaster for the United States. Oh looks like
disaster for the United States

The consequences of failure are clear: Radical Islamic
extremists would grow in strength and gain new recruits.
Yes you carry on spending obscene amounts of money on war because there are
100,000's of extremists .........look there's one behind you!

They would be in a better position to topple moderate
governments, create chaos in the region, and use oil revenues to fund their
ambitions. No it's just that they would not sell their oil
to you or in U.S. $ wrecking the U.S. economy

Iran would be emboldened in its pursuit of nuclear weapons.
Like it's not already....and that's only according to you

Our enemies would have a safe haven from which to plan and
launch attacks on the American people. With the invisible
weapons of mass destruction

On 11 September 2001, we saw what a refuge for extremists on the other side
of the world could bring to the streets of our own cities.
your not going to let that go any time soon

For the safety of our people, America must succeed in Iraq.
Yes you already said that

The most urgent priority for success in Iraq is security,
especially in Baghdad.

Eighty percent of Iraq's sectarian violence occurs within 30
miles (48km) of the capital. Is that by chance where 80%
of U.S. troops are?

This violence is splitting Baghdad into sectarian enclaves,
and shaking the confidence of all Iraqis. Now look what
you've gone and done

Only the Iraqis can end the sectarian violence and secure
their people. then why do you need so many Americans
there?

And their government has put forward an aggressive plan to do
it. I see the Iraqi government is taking tips from the U.S.
aggressive plan better than a peace plan

Our past efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two principal
reasons: There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure
neighbourhoods that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents.

And there were too many restrictions on the troops we did
have. what, they weren't allowed to kill as many people as
they wanted? Aww

Our military commanders reviewed the new Iraqi plan to ensure
that it addressed these mistakes.

They report that it does. They also report that this plan can
work. The military has it's own agenda so of course it
would agree

'Strong commitment'

Let me explain the main elements of this effort: The Iraqi
government will appoint a military commander and two deputy commanders for their
capital.

The Iraqi government will deploy Iraqi Army and National
Police brigades across Baghdad's nine districts.

When these forces are fully deployed, there will be 18 Iraqi
Army and National Police brigades committed to this effort - along with local
police.

These Iraqi forces will operate from local police stations -
conducting patrols, setting up checkpoints, and going door-to-door to gain the
trust of Baghdad residents.

This is a strong commitment. But for it to succeed, our commanders say the
Iraqis will need our help.

So America will change our strategy to help the Iraqis carry
out their campaign Ohh its their mess now is it to
put down sectarian violence - and bring security to the people of Baghdad.

This will require increasing American force levels. So I have
committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq.
That's just under 1 troop to every 1,000,000 Iraqi people

The vast majority of them - five brigades - will be deployed
to Baghdad.

These troops will work alongside Iraqi units and be embedded
in their formations.

Our troops will have a well-defined mission: to help Iraqis
clear and secure neighbourhoods, to help them protect the local population, and
to help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the
security that Baghdad needs.

Many listening tonight will ask why this effort will succeed
when previous operations to secure Baghdad did not. Ohh
you read my mind!

Here are the differences: In earlier operations, Iraqi and
American forces cleared many neighbourhoods of terrorists and insurgents - but
when our forces moved on to other targets, the killers returned.
You got to laugh, I'd have never thought they would do that

This time, we will have the force levels we need to hold the
areas that have been cleared. yep 1 to 1,000,000 is a good
ratio

In earlier operations, political and sectarian interference
prevented Iraqi and American forces from going into neighbourhoods that are home
to those fuelling the sectarian violence. Now with a
couple of extra soldiers it'll all be
O.K.

This time, Iraqi and American forces will have a green light
to enter these neighbourhoods - and [Iraqi] Prime Minister [Nouri] Maliki has
pledged that political or sectarian interference will not be tolerated.

I have made it clear to the prime minister and Iraq's other
leaders that America's commitment is not open-ended. Now
you speak Arabic?

If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its
promises, it will lose the support of the American people - and it will lose the
support of the Iraqi people. you haven't already?

Now is the time to act. The prime minister understands this.
Code for "do as I say"

Here is what he told his people just last week: "The Baghdad
security plan will not provide a safe haven for any outlaws, regardless of
[their] sectarian or political affiliation." True Iraqi
translation " those bloody Americans will leave us high and dry eventually"

This new strategy will not yield an immediate end to suicide
bombings, assassinations, or IED [improvised explosive device] attacks.
you should take out the word immediate from this sentence

Our enemies in Iraq will make every effort to ensure that our
television screens are filled with images of death and suffering.
Caused by America and Britain

Yet over time, we can expect to see Iraqi troops chasing down
murderers, fewer brazen acts of terror, and growing trust and cooperation from
Baghdad's residents.

When this happens, daily life will improve
for you,  Iraqis will gain confidence in their leaders, and the
government will have the breathing space it needs to make progress in other
critical areas.

Most of Iraq's Sunni and Shia want to live together in peace -
and reducing the violence in Baghdad will help make reconciliation possible.
But earlier you said the Sunni were terrorists?

Benchmarks

A successful strategy for Iraq goes beyond military
operations. So why did you start military operations?

Ordinary Iraqi citizens must see that military operations are
accompanied by visible improvements in their neighbourhoods and communities.

So America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it
has announced. and what do the Iraqi's think of this
condescending, bombastic remark?

To establish its authority, the Iraqi government plans to take
responsibility for security in all of Iraq's provinces by November.
You plan is what you meant to say, you'll start
removing troops then so you have a year to make the party  and next
presidential candidate look good

To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country's economy, Iraq will pass
legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis. But
you said some of them were terrorists

To show that it is committed to delivering a better life, the
Iraqi government will spend $10bn (£5.2bn) of its own money on reconstruction
and infrastructure projects that will create new jobs.

To empower local leaders, Iraqis plan to hold provincial
elections later this year.

And to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation's political
life, the government will reform de-Baathification laws - and establish a fair
process for considering amendments to Iraq's constitution.

America will change our approach to help the Iraqi government
as it works to meet these benchmarks. Backtrack you mean

In keeping with the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group,
we will increase the embedding of American advisers in Iraqi Army units - and
partner a Coalition brigade with every Iraqi Army division.
Still control the Iraqi army

We will help the Iraqis build a larger and better-equipped
Army - and we will accelerate the training of Iraqi forces,
ready to start bullying Iran which remains the
essential U.S. security mission in Iraq.

We will give our commanders and civilians greater flexibility
to spend funds for economic assistance. As in more
contracts for U.S. companies

We will double the number of Provincial Reconstruction Teams.
Double our U.S. contracts

These teams bring together military and civilian experts to
help local Iraqi communities pursue reconciliation, strengthen moderates, and
speed the transition to Iraqi self reliance.

And Secretary [of State Condoleezza] Rice will soon appoint a
reconstruction coordinator in Baghdad to ensure better results for economic
assistance being spent in Iraq.

As we make these changes, we will continue to pursue al-Qaeda
and foreign fighters. Yes use this sentence to divert the
subject from the matter of lots of money also coming out of Iraq

Al-Qaeda is still active in Iraq. Its home base is Anbar
Province. Well why don't you just pop round for a chat,
I'm sure it was all a big misunderstanding, you know, clash of cultures or
something like that.

Al-Qaeda has helped make Anbar the most violent area of Iraq
outside the capital.

A captured al-Qaeda document describes the terrorists' plan to
infiltrate and seize control of the province. Captured
from a C.I.A. photocopier

This would bring al-Qaeda closer to its goals of taking down
Iraq's democracy, building a radical Islamic empire, and launching new attacks
on the United States at home and abroad.

Our military forces in Anbar are killing and capturing al
Qaeda leaders - and protecting the local population. you
should take "protecting" from this sentence

Recently, local tribal leaders have begun to show their
willingness to take on al-Qaeda.

As a result, our commanders believe we have an opportunity to
deal a serious blow to the terrorists. We all believe in
something whether it's true or not is something else!

So I have given orders to increase American forces in Anbar
Province by 4,000 troops. With an area of
140000 square kilometres and a population of 1.2 million people, that'll
help

These troops will work with Iraqi and tribal forces to step up
the pressure on the terrorists. OOhhh they won't have
anywhere to hide will they

America's men and women in uniform took away al-Qaeda's safe
haven in Afghanistan - and we will not allow them to re-establish it in Iraq.
Well it looks like they are quite good at hide and seek in
Afghanistan then

Iran and Syria

Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial
integrity - and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge.

This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing
terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq.
NOTE: Late last year, America's independent Iraq Study
Group recommended that the US should seek Iranian and Syrian support in
stabilising Iraq.

Iran is providing material support for attacks on American
troops. A couple of border tribes dealing in guns
like they always have

We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt
the flow of support from Iran and Syria. That won't be
hard since it is a very tiny minority

And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing
advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.
Seek and destroy good strategy ....worked well so far

We are also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq
and protect American interests in the Middle East. That's
what this war has been all about protecting American interests because it's so
hard up it has to fight for every dollar

I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier
strike group to the region. is that
because some of the fleet is "helping" bash some "terrorists" in Somalia

We will expand intelligence sharing - and deploy Patriot air
defence systems to reassure our friends and allies. We
will invade more and more peoples privacy on the off chance of finding the Al-Qaeda
hide and seek champion

We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help
them resolve problems along their border. We will stop
Iraqis fleeing into Turkey

And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining
nuclear weapons and dominating the region. No because you
want to dominate the region

We will use America's full diplomatic resources to rally
support for Iraq from nations throughout the Middle East.
That'll be a quiet party then

Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf
States need to understand that an American defeat in Iraq would create a new
sanctuary for extremists - and a strategic threat to their survival.
So you have woken up to the fact that you're in a war you cannot win

These nations have a stake in a successful Iraq that is at
peace with its neighbours - and they must step up their support for Iraq's unity
government. Sorry don't see any other country at war with
Iraq except the U.S.A.

We endorse the Iraqi government's call to finalize an
International Compact that will bring new economic assistance in exchange for
greater economic reform.

And on Friday, Secretary Rice will leave for the region - to
build support for Iraq, and continue the urgent diplomacy required to help bring
peace to the Middle East.

'Decisive conflict'

The challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is
more than a military conflict.

It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time.
Yes impose American ideology on cultures that don't want
Wallmart and McDonalds and a fat society

On one side are those who believe in freedom and moderation.
Most of the worlds population

 On the other side are extremists who kill the innocent ,
America

 and have declared their intention to destroy our way of
life.

In the long run, the most realistic way to protect the
American people is to provide a hopeful alternative to the hateful ideology of
the enemy - by advancing liberty across a troubled region.

It is in the interests of the United States to stand with the
brave men and women who are risking their lives to claim their freedom - and
help them as they work to raise up just and hopeful societies across the Middle
East. With Wallmart and
Mcdonalds and a fat people

From Afghanistan to Lebanon to the Palestinian Territories,
millions of ordinary people are sick of the violence, and want a future of peace
and opportunity for their children. So pack up, go home
and let them do it

And they are looking at Iraq. With
disbelief

 

They want to know: Will America withdraw and yield the future
of that country to the extremists - or will we stand with the Iraqis who have
made the choice for freedom? No they don't

The changes I have outlined tonight are aimed at ensuring the
survival of a young democracy that is fighting for its life in a part of the
world of enormous importance to American security.

Let me be clear: The terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are
without conscience, and they will make the year ahead bloody and violent.

Even if our new strategy works exactly as planned,
which it won't ... gotta  love his optimism deadly acts
of violence will continue - and we must expect more Iraqi and American
casualties. lots more

The question is whether our new strategy will bring us closer
to success. I believe that it will. There we go that magic
word believe billions of trillions of dollars of technology and you don't know 
and still no sign of an exit policy

Victory will not look like the ones our fathers and
grandfathers achieved. oh yes, lets try and stir a little
emotion

There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a
battleship. not in the desert

But victory in Iraq will bring something new in the Arab world
- a functioning democracy that polices its territory, upholds the rule of law,
respects fundamental human liberties, and answers to its people.
and the U.S.A.

'Crucial moment'

A democratic Iraq will not be perfect. But it will be a
country that fights terrorists instead of harbouring them - and it will help
bring a future of peace and security for our children and grandchildren.

Our new approach comes after consultations with Congress about the different
courses we could take in Iraq.

Many are concerned that the Iraqis are becoming too dependent
on the United States  killing Americans ...fine way
to show how dependent you are on them

- and therefore, our policy should focus on protecting
Iraq's borders and hunting down al-Qaeda. So you'll be
chasing your tail then

Their solution is to scale back America's efforts in Baghdad -
or announce the phased withdrawal of our combat forces. Oh
lets have a guess....Umm Novemer-2007

We carefully considered these proposals. And we concluded that
to step back now would force a collapse of the Iraqi government, tear that
country apart, and result in mass killings on an unimaginable scale.
and leave you with not so much power in the area

Such a scenario would result in our troops being forced to
stay in Iraq even longer, and confront an enemy that is even more lethal.
Oh so that billions of
trillions of dollars of technology can see into the future sometimes

'Quiet sacrifice'

If we increase our support at this crucial moment, and help
the Iraqis break the current cycle of violence, we can hasten the day our troops
begin coming home. First you have to break your own circle
of violence

In the days ahead, my national security team will fully brief
Congress on our new strategy. This is where you have been
going wrong, you should get your international security team as  a national
team can only speak of national affairs not international?

If Members have improvements that can be made, we will make
them. Or ignore them

If  (When) circumstances change, we will
(not) adjust. Honourable people
have different views, and they will voice their criticisms.
Which they already have around the globe

It is fair to hold our views up to scrutiny. And all involved
have a responsibility to explain how the path they propose would be more likely
to succeed. you got yourself into this mess now you can
get yourselves out of it

Acting on the good advice of Senator Joe Lieberman and other
key members of Congress, we will form a new, bipartisan working group that will
help us come together across party lines to win the war on terror.
Yes get the grown ups to help you...

This group will meet regularly with me and my Administration,
and it will help strengthen our relationship with Congress.
Oh you mean butt lick now you don't have so much power

We can begin by working together to increase the size of the
active Army and Marine Corps, so that America has the Armed Forces we need for
the 21st Century. Well with Iran and Syria in your sights
you might need a couple of extra soldiers

We also need to examine ways to mobilize talented American
civilians to deploy overseas (SPIES) - where they can help build democratic institutions
in communities and nations recovering from war and tyranny.
Well they might as well stay in the U.S. 

In these dangerous times, the United States is blessed to have
extraordinary and selfless men and women willing to step forward and defend us.

These young Americans understand that our cause in Iraq is
noble and necessary - and that the advance of freedom is the calling of our
time. With an average I.Q. of 75 I doubt that they do
understand what they are doing and when has Martial law been called freedom?

They serve far from their families, who make the quiet
sacrifices of lonely holidays and empty chairs at the dinner table.

They have watched their comrades give their lives to ensure
our liberty.

We mourn the loss of every fallen American - and we owe it to
them to build a future worthy of their sacrifice. What a
pile of propaganda bullshit

 

'Trying times'

Fellow citizens: The year ahead will demand more patience,
sacrifice, and resolve. Bucketloads

It can be tempting to think that America can put aside the
burdens of freedom. It did the day it invaded

Yet times of testing reveal the character of a Nation.

And throughout our history, Americans have always defied the
pessimists and seen our faith in freedom redeemed. like in
Korea and Vietnam

Now America is engaged in a new struggle that will set the
course for a new century. We can and we will prevail. I
hope not

We go forward with trust that the Author of Liberty will guide
us through these trying hours. Thank you and good night."
I think you should write your own speech next time