Like Charlie Daniels read this (OT)

"Charlie Daniels' Open Letter to the Hollywood Bunch"



OK -- Let's just say for a moment you bunch of

pampered, overpaid, unrealistic children

had your way and the U.S.A. didn't go into Iraq.



Let's say that you really get your way

and we destroy all our nuclear weapons

and stick daisies in our gun barrels

and sit around with some white wine and cheese

and pat ourselves on the back,

so proud of what we've done for world peace.



Let's say that we cut the military budget to

just enough to keep the National Guard

on hand to help out with floods and fires.



Let's say that we close down

our military bases all over the world

and bring the troops home,

increase our foreign aid

and drop all the trade sanctions

against everybody.



I suppose that in your fantasy world

this would create a utopian world

where everybody would live in peace.

After all, the great monster,

the United States of America,

the cause of all the world's trouble

would have disbanded it's horrible military

and certainly all the other countries

of the world would follow suit.



After all, they only arm themselves

to defend their countries from the mean old U.S.A.



Why you bunch of pitiful, hypocritical,

idiotic, spoiled mugwumps.

Get your head out of the sand

and smell the Trade Towers burning.



Do you think that a trip to Iraq by Sean Penn

did anything but encourage a wanton murderer

to think that the people of the U.S.A.

didn't have the nerve or the guts to fight him?



Barbra Streisand's fanatical and hateful rankings

about George Bush makes about as much sense

as Michael Jackson hanging a baby over a railing.



You people need to get out of Hollywood

once in a while and get out into the real world.

You'd be surprised at the hostility you would find out here.



Stop in at a truck stop and tell an overworked,

long distance truck driver that you don't think

Saddam Hussein is doing anything wrong.



Tell a farmer with a couple of sons in the military

that you think the United States

has no right to defend itself.



Go down to Baxley, Georgia and hold an anti-war rally

and see what the folks down there think about you.



You people are some of the most disgusting examples

of a waste of protoplasm I've ever

had the displeasure to hear about.



Sean Penn, you're a traitor to

the United States of America.

You gave aid and comfort to the enemy.

How many American lives will your little,

"fact finding trip" to Iraq cost?

You encouraged Saddam to think that we didn't

have the stomach for war.



You people protect one of the most evil men

on the face of this earth and won't lift a finger

to save the life of an unborn baby.

Freedom of choice you say?



Well I'm going to exercise

some freedom of choice of my own.



If I see any of your names on a marquee,

I'm going to boycott the movie.

I will completely stop going to movies if I have to.

In most cases it certainly wouldn't be much of a loss.



You scoff at our military whose boots

you're not even worthy to shine.



They go to battle and risk their lives

so ingrates like you can live in luxury.



The day of reckoning is coming

when you will be faced with the undeniable truth

that the war against Saddam Hussein

is the war on terrorism.



America is in imminent danger.



You're either for her or against her.

There is no middle ground.



I think we all know where you stand.



What do you think?



God Bless America!





Charlie Daniels

Copyright (c) 2003 Charlie Daniels

"Columns
Harvey Wasserman

Has Bush suckered the UN and Iraq?
March 9, 2003

Has the Bush Administration suckered the United Nations into weakening Iraq
prior to a mass murderous attack that was pre-ordained years ago?

The facts are these:

· Bush's original official stance was that the United Nations must force Iraq
to disarm, in keeping with treaties signed after Iraq's 1991 defeat after
invading Kuwait. His charges that Iraq had failed to honor these promises
led the United Nations to force it to further disarm;

· According to the official report of UN weapons inspectors, as delivered
Friday, March 7 by Hans Blix, Iraq has made "significant" steps toward
disarming, among other things destroying many of its missiles;

· According to additional reports, Iraq may have destroyed most or all of its
chemical and biological weapons early in the 1990s;

· According to most credible reports, Iraq does not have the near-term
ability to build nuclear weapons;

In short, by all internationally accepted standards, Iraq has moved toward
significant compliance with the formal demands of the United Nations, and
cannot be considered a credible threat to the United States.

At the behest of the UN, Iraq has significantly weakened its ability to
defend its citizens from mass slaughter by an attacking superpower.

But George W. Bush says just such a mass slaughter may come no matter what
the UN Security Council or its weapons inspectors say about Iraq's compliance
with the UN's---and Bush's---original demands.

At his press conference Thursday, March 6, Bush dictated a new requirement
for avoiding mass slaughter on which the UN never voted, and which was never
formally presented to the Iraqis: Saddam Hussein must go.

Should Bush attempt to enforce this demand with mass violence, he will have
used the United Nations---and Iraqi compliance with UN mandates---in a shell
game to diminish the Iraqis' ability to defend themselves.

Such a move would rank as one of the most cynical ploys ever used by any
world leader. It would forever pollute the reputation of the United States
of America. It would permanently cripple if not destroy the peace-keeping
ability of the United Nations.

There's little doubt Saddam Hussein may well have more to hide. He is a
violent dictator, like dozens of others the US has installed in victim
nations over the decades.

But Bush's homeland contempt for the US Bill of Rights and other
Constitutional guarantees of personal freedom, privacy and human rights makes
suspect the kind of "democracy" he might bring to a conquered Iraq.

Through the Project for a New American Century and other right-wing think
tanks, key Bush cohorts such as Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, have long
demanded a "regime change" in Iraq that would lead to US hegemony over Arab
oil reserves. Iraq would be the first Middle Eastern "domino" to fall
definitively under direct US control.

But in 1996, Bush's father, former President George Herbert Walker Bush,
warned that "to occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning
the whole Arab world against us, and make a broken tyrant into a latter-day
Arab hero."

Former Defense Secretary Dick Cheney, now Bush Junior's vice president, later
said that a war in the streets of Baghdad "would have put large numbers of
Iraqi civilians and hundreds of thousands of our troops at risk of being
killed."

Cheney added in 1997 that finding Saddam Hussein was worth "not very many"
American lives. "The only way to make certain you could get him was to go
occupy all of Iraq and start sorting through Iraqis until you find Saddam
Hussein."

Last year Secretary of State Colin Powell warned Bush Junior that an attack
on Iraq without strong global support could be "much more complicated and
bloody" than the first Gulf War.

That might be the understatement of the new millennium. UN weapons
inspectors have increased Iraq's vulnerability to martial conquest. Through
bait-and-switch, Bush has used the UN and its members as instruments of a
military agenda they have not approved.

It's hard to imagine the global firestorm of revulsion and fury that would
explode should Bush now use the advantage they've given him to kill Iraqi
citizens for regional hegemony, as he clearly intended to do all along."

Harvey Wasserman is senior editor of www.freepress.org and author of THE LAST
ENERGY WAR (Seven Stories Press).

hmmm isnt is strange that the Iraqi People support this war and the USA and Mr Bush?

considering all the pimple popping protestors saying were hurting the Iraqi people and shouldnt be helping them ...

another funny thing is all the networks are making such a bid de4al about 1240 Iraqi civilians that have been killed in this Mission, not to damned many of them are talking about the fact that Saddam himself has had 500,000 people killed (executed) in the past 5 years... now devide that down its 100k per year.... hmmm that would make it about 8600 per month then and the bombing has killed less than 1500 so it appears to me that we have SAVED civilian lives!!!!