War Widow To Bush, You Are Not Serving The People

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by Psychoblues, Aug 27, 2006.

  1. Psychoblues
    Offline

    Psychoblues Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,701
    Thanks Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Missisippi
    Ratings:
    +143
    Don’t this kick butt!!!!!!!! Sadly, Americans are not about “kicking butt” but they are about justice and truth. Too sad the prez doesn’t share this truism, don’t you think?


    “I just got off the phone with Hildi Halley, a woman from Maine whose husband is a fallen soldier. Yesterday President Bush met with her privately, and news of their meeting was reported in a local Maine paper, the Kennebec Journal. The paper shared few details of the meeting, saying simply that Halley objected to Bush's policies and that she said Bush responded that there was no point in them having a "philosophical discussion about the pros and cons of the war."

    But Halley has just given me a much more detailed account of her meeting with Bush. She told me that she went much farther in her criticism of the President, telling him directly that he was "responsible" for the deaths of American soldiers and that as a "Christian man," he should recognize that he's "made a mistake" and that it was his "responsibility to end this." She recounted to me that she was "very direct," telling Bush: "As President, you're here to serve the people. And the people are not being served with this war."

    I reached Halley at her home in Falmouth, Maine. She told me that her husband, Patrick Damon, who's long been active in Democratic politics, had been in Afghanistan as an engineer building roads when he died in June. She said she was first told that it was of a heart attack, but that subsequently she was told there was no sign that a heart attack had killed him. An invesigation into his death is continuing.

    Halley, who's also been politically active for Democrats, said she told GOP Senator Olympia Snowe that she'd like a phone call from Bush. Subsequently Halley got a call from White House staffers looking to set up a private meeting. Bush came yesterday.
    Halley tells me that she told the President that she's been opposed since "day one" to both the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    "I talked to him about how important this person was to me," Halley recounted, speaking of her husband. "It's not just a soldier who died. Lives are changed forever...I said, `This doesn't make sense to me.'"

    "He said, `Terrorists killed three thousand people, we had to go to war.'" Halley continued to me. "I said, `Well, who put the Taliban into power? The United States did.' He said, `I'm not going to have a philosphical debate over politics.' The whole conversation was very gentle."

    Halley says that while Bush was personable and receptive to her, she was very direct and critical of Bush's policies and insisted that the right thing to do was to end the war.
    "We literally sat knee to knee...I looked deep into his eyes and talked to him about love and losing people and that he was responsible for this. I said, `I didn't vote for you, but you are my President. And you're not serving me.'"
    "I said I believed it was time to put an end to this. His job is to find solutions. I said, `You yourself have said you had erroneous information going into this.'"
    She continued: "I said, `As a Christian man, you realize that when you've made a mistake it's your responsibility to end this. And it's time to end the bleeding and it's time to end the war.'"
    "I said, `what would truly bring healing is to start working on changing your policy towards the Middle East...as President, you're here to serve the people. And the people are not being served with this war.'"
    She added: "I told him, `It's time as a Christian to put our pride behind us."
    Halley said that the President appeared moved by what she'd said, but that she doubted it would bring about any real change. "He cried with me," she recounted. "I feel he responded to me emotionally. I don't know if that's going to change policy. It probably won't. But I hope it makes him think a little bit further."

    http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeeh...the_people_are_not_being_served_with_this_war

    I'll admit, serving the people is a tough nut to crack. But the actions and antics of GWB are quite frankly ridiculous.


    Psychoblues
     
  2. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,548
    Thanks Received:
    8,163
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,165
    President Bush is trying to end the war, the only way it can be ended: With victory.

    He didn't start the war. He doesnt take pleasure in good Americans dying to protect our freedom. Why would he?

    I can't figure out why you guys have such a difficult time understanding this: We are at war because a bunch of evil men want to kill us! And those of us they don't kill they want to rule over. They don't want us to be a free people.

    The enemy is real whether you want to acknowledge it or not. So we either fight to survive, or we let them continue to wage war against us, let them murrder our friends, our family, our children, and grandchildren. The war isnt going to stop just because we stop fighting it. Its just going to get bloodier because evil wins when good men do nothing.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Stephanie
    Offline

    Stephanie Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Messages:
    70,236
    Thanks Received:
    10,818
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +27,360

    Avatar...
    I do believe we are talking to a bunch of people, who would LIKE FOR US TO LOSE, so it can advance their political agenda....

    It's a sad and sick thought......
    But I'm convinced of it...


    It makes my heart ache to have to realize this.......:cry: :cry:
     
  4. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,548
    Thanks Received:
    8,163
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,165
    I think there are alot, too many, who do want us to lose. But i think there are also alot who just dont know any better.

    And despite what happened I still have hope. Christ can change men, and changed men can change the world.
     
  5. theHawk
    Offline

    theHawk Registered Conservative

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    10,901
    Thanks Received:
    2,072
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Germany
    Ratings:
    +5,788

    Well that about sums up the lunacy of this nimrod. She claims she opposed the Afgan war from the start, just because the US put them in power. Its funny how liberals are all say when we make a mistake we should correct it with a policy change. Yea, it was a mistake if we had any helping hand with the Taliban and Saddam, but that sure as hell doesn't mean we shouldn't correct that policy. But apparently helping such regimes aren't big enough mistakes to reverse policy on in the minds of liberals, even if they threaten to attack or do attack our country. But I guess thats the essence of liberal logic for ya, its better to have a dictator/regime stay in power even after they attack your country, rather than go to war to stop them.

    And if she was so against the war from the start, what the hell was her husband doing there? I smell bullshit.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. William Joyce
    Offline

    William Joyce Chemotherapy for PC

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    9,693
    Thanks Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Caucasiastan
    Ratings:
    +1,349
    And what, exactly, would this entail?

    Bush certainly did start the war in Iraq. With absolutely no connection whatsoever to "people who want to kill us," he launched an attack on it in order to do Israel's heavy lifting. The Jewish neocons for years had salivated for an attack on Iraq, and 9/11 was a fitting excuse.

    The root of the problem we face is that the Muslim world is at war with Israel and vice versa. But through no advantage to us, and by pure controlling by Jews like Lieberman, Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, etc., we find ourself dragged in on the side of Israel. This is costing us billions of dollars, thousands of lives and unending erosion of our civil liberties.

    I could take all that. I could even take that we're doing it all to please the Jews. But don't you think it's pretty fucking weird that we're not even allowed to talk about it? Or question it? In all the coverage of this, you simply never hear the word "Jew," ever? You hear "Muslim," Islam, islamofascist, Muslim terrorist, etc. repeated ad nauseum. But you could watch a thousand hours of TV and read a million words in the NYT, and never ONCE hear or see the driving influence of the whole goddamn thing: the Jews.
     
  7. Bonnie
    Offline

    Bonnie Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    9,476
    Thanks Received:
    668
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Wherever
    Ratings:
    +669
    Hey psycho, why don't you post about those who have lost family members but still support what the president is doing, and are very proud of their fallen family members, knowing if we pull out with the job only being 85% finished the terrorists win, Iraq loses, and we lose, the civilized world loses, and most importantly that their family members will have died for nothing??????
     
  8. William Joyce
    Offline

    William Joyce Chemotherapy for PC

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    9,693
    Thanks Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Caucasiastan
    Ratings:
    +1,349
    I have no good answer for this (if I'm the psycho you're talking about).

    The vast majority of those who have lost family members are white Christians who very rightly are loyal to the U.S. But this is a loyalty betrayed by Jews, who care NOTHING for us, only that we do their dying for them. But I would not deign to directly lecture someone who has lost a loved one over there about this. Still, it has to be said.
     
  9. Bonnie
    Offline

    Bonnie Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    9,476
    Thanks Received:
    668
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Wherever
    Ratings:
    +669
    There is a really good book I'm reading that you may want to as well, it's entitled "Neoconservatism " Why We Need It" by Douglas Murray which explains in very eloquent terms the price we pay if we sit back and do nothing about terrorism. Not a lot about Jews in it, but much about how the anti-war contingency will, if allowed, here, and in Europe will be the doom of freedom and Democracy.

    One of the most salient points he makes has to do with Europe's "melting pot" and how it is becoming the demise of European sovereignty.
     
  10. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    I'll check that out. Europe does not have, never really has had a 'melting pot'. There have been 'colonists', now people of former colonial nations, that come to the former ruling empire home bases and practice their culture within a culture. That is multi-nationalism, sort of parallel playing amongst toddlers. Europe is the home of the Balkans and Balkinization. We know how well they dealt with the fallout of that.
     

Share This Page