I understand your skepticism, but evangelicalism is a lazy man’s theology – cherry-pick a passage of the Bible that confirms your prejudices, use it to justify murder or genocide or taking land away from whoever, and that’s all the work/ reading required. And no worries about the morality of wars of aggression etc – the “good” people are justified in whatever they do to the heathens. Like somebody said – the jihadists and Bush (and the neocons) have a lot in common.

Bush said to James Robinson: ‘I feel like God wants me to run for President. I can’t explain it, but I sense my country is going to need me. Something is going to happen… I know it won’t be easy on me or my family, but God wants me to do it.’

(the Guardian, 2003)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/nov/02/usa.religion

There is an accumulated body of evidence that lends credence to this story. Most importantly, Bush has said many things himself, of a very similar nature.

“Mr Bush revealed the extent of his religious fervour when he met a Palestinian delegation during the Israeli-Palestinian summit at the Egpytian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, four months after the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

One of the delegates, Nabil Shaath, who was Palestinian foreign minister at the time, said: “President Bush said to all of us: ‘I am driven with a mission from God’. God would tell me, ‘George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan’. And I did. And then God would tell me ‘George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq’. And I did.”

Mr Bush went on: “And now, again, I feel God’s words coming to me, ‘Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East.” (the Guardian 2005)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/oct/07/iraq.usa

Bush is a reflexively conservative Christian. Not a diehard ideologue — that would require too much reading, too much seriousness. It is not in his character. He does not talk “theology.” Moreover, he surrounded himself with advisors who weren’t religious (though yes, they used religion.) Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld. . . couldn’t quote a Bible verse to save their lives. But yes, they were happy to use the Christian right.

So sorry, I don’t believe it for a minute.

and i was for getting saddam out of kuwait but not going to baghdad because he had vx and we couldn’t protect our troops in 1991

saddam didn’t buy aluminum tubes for an extra 150 miles of conventional weapons…he didn’t want it to put a real nuke in…saddam was cheap and buying those tubes was for a reason…

that reason being that what would be the easist way to get the US out of the middle east…in 1991 if we had went on to baghdad and he managed to hit a few hundred or thousand at the time with vx it would of been all over the european news and the US would leave with their tail between their legs…

so what did he want those aluminum tubes for? well, like everything saddam did…it was a half assed plan that included putting what would appear nuke material – like maybe sometype of tactial nuke..but mostly it would have been crap with vx or mustard gas or something that came from Libya -libya gave up their nuke stuff after we captured saddam in 2003-in it to take out some troops on their way in and the US would be forced to pull out

saddam would have invaded the Kurds say probably in 2005 because noone would care about him invading the south of iraq…then when AS IN 1991 EVERYONE WOULD HOLD HANDS TO GO INTO IRAQ…thus, the US would be forced to pull out of the middle east with their tail between their legs…

as stated in the 2007 NIE…in 2003 Iran dispensed with their nuke program when we invaded Iraq…

saddam came to power in 1979 with the help of france…iran came to power in 1979 with the help of the french…then they fought a war for 8 years killing iraqis and iranians well both stayed in power

if the US put saddam in power it was up to them to take him out of power…make up ur mind…

i wasn’t against wilson writing what he did it was better than the subject coming from saddam

it was what cheney did afterwards that was the problem then by 2005 it became very clear that cheney was going to continue to make the US look bad by continuing to prove things we could not prove

saddam only needed “al queda” after he was out of power

the only intel used was “zarqawi went to iraq on one leg” which is code i am not going to reveal…i stated not to use it…but cheney always put the intel field in the cross hairs by revealing code as truth and then using it against us

cheney only wins if iraq goes back to sanctions or if he runs the war…that strategy is still up for a decision

and those who attack me…DON’T KNOW ANYTHING!!!

after 6 years my phone has finally stopped ringing for no reason early every morning knowing i had been up all night in pain going to the bathroom and just maybe getting a little sleep out of exhaustion…my phone would ring day and night from unknown callers

oh, let me think…for the past 6 years…i have had SLEEP DEPREVATION, LACK OF MEDICAL CARE….I WAS NOT ALLOWED TO SEEK MEDICAL ATTENTION UNLESS AN ORGAN WAS FAILING and i have a letter to that effect…BECAUSE CHENEY WAS NOT TORTURING ANY AMERICAN CITIZEN

so, u all have mental disorder because u believe the news and movies

If you wish to debate these issues, I certainly welcome the discussion. If, however, you are merely offended because you hold identical biblical views, or remain in denial concerning the influence of fundamentalism on Middle East policy, then I expect your response will be more vitriol. The ball’s back in your court.

I’m not sure what you’re getting at

in my defense though I’m frequently not sure what people are getting at

I realize I’m not supposed to end a sentence with a preposition but English were never mine goodest subject

if one cannot understand that Saddam had no means with which to finish a war he started in 1991 then one has no common sense

and if one believes that Saddam invaded Kuwait in order to start a war with the US then one has no common sense
**************************************************

Sir, correct me if I am wrong. But did not that conflict happen in the GeoI watch? Did you not see an article in the Washington Post where his family, that would be the Bushes owned 10 acres of prime Kuwaitee Oil property? Humm…..wonder why we felt the need to set right a wrong….do you think he was trying to make a wrong a right because his daddy had his property seized while a US Senator who voted against the 2nd WW? Oh, ya think he had a conflict in voting on that subject? Maybe? Maybe not.

and if one believes that Saddam invaded Kuwait in order to start a war with the US then one has no common sense

Remember Valarie Plame. Don’t even let that cross your little ole selective bred brain.

the US was at war with saddam since 1991…we had 2 (count them) no fly zones…in which our AMERICANS pilots patroled

saddam keep building anti-aircraft networks around his zone which included parts and the cable for the nteworks from china…which we keep taking out

our pilots were being shot at on a weekly basis…

if one can not understand that saddam had some plan to finish the war he started in 1991 then one has no common sense

is america surrounded by enemies in the middle east…yes, even our friends

should we become muslims and throw in the towel? NO

saddam did pay palestinians to send their children to their deaths for the cause of ISLAM aka PAN ARABISM? YES

for whatever the faults that happned doesn’t mean the whole thing was not the right thing to do…were we to wait for saddam to be ready for us…i don’t mean the mushroom cloud…but that is what some people wanted to hear and saddam…

if bush didn’t say what he said saddam would of believed that he had a spy in his circle…and just like 1991 he would have taken them out and shot them

was saddam going to tell the truth? NO…did saddam tell the truth? NO…did saddam have more ties with Chiraq then he ever had with rummy? YES

have a good night

You wrote:
About George W’s intelligence. It is suspected that the main reason members of species homo sapiens have such large brains is to handle the complexity of social interactions in large communities. With other primate species, brain size is correlated with the size of the communities in which they live.

I suspect George W is low in those brain functions measured by IQ tests and that are related to analysing networks of cause and effect, but he may be high in others that IQ tests do not measure related to social interaction and obtaining allies.

I think you kind of miss the point. GWB is a product of selective breeding. The sort that produces generations of upper-class twits in the UK, whose family money entitles them to a kind of, well, assisted living that has nothing to do with brain size and everything to do with accidents of birth. It is simply an accident of birth that he was born into the Bush family fortunes and was given the connections that come from going to the right schools and joining the right clubs and doing what those who came before him told him to do. His prize was the key to the kingdom and this has nothing to do with his abilities or competencies or even his own desires. He did what he was programmed to do. No more and no less.

About George W’s intelligence. . . . but he may be high (with)in others . . . .

That I can agree with.

I suspect George W is low in those brain functions measured by IQ tests and that are related to analysing networks of cause and effect, but he may be high in others that IQ tests do not measure related to social interaction and obtaining allies.

A Y

“He is a successful businessman”.

My impression is that George W (ie George II) was never successful at business but that people wishing to curry favour with George H W or with the potential future power himself bailed out his failures or gave him preferential deals.

**********************************
Cheney is the sucessful one, opps. mea culpa, mea culpa. smiting my chest three times.

GeoII, was never successful at anything, not even getting hi. It was not until he got involved in the Rangers with 1.8 percent interest (money loaned to him) that the MLB commissioner wanted to keep the Rangers with a Texas owner that he was eventually given another 10 percent share (Presidential in my math) then the sale went through.

Think about this Prescott voted against going against Adolph Hilter. Why? Money. back in the 40′s he was given 1.5 million for less than 1 share of 1 company that was seized by the US.

“He is a successful businessman”.

My impression is that George W (ie George II) was never successful at business but that people wishing to curry favour with George H W or with the potential future power himself bailed out his failures or gave him preferential deals.

He is a successful business man. GeoI was almost as unsuccessful as his grandfather Prescott Bush, but then he made a shit load of money trading with Hitler. Most of Prescott’s assets were seized during WWI as trading with the enemy acts. Now Herbert Walker, whom W was named after was a merciless business man. I wonder if W’s mother has more balls than his father. I am reading a book about that right now.

It is also interesting that Prescott’s money was used to finance a steel corp that built Auschwitz and others.

The link below is to the Institute of Public Accuracy.
A response to George Magog Bush’s, 2003 “State of the Union.”

http://www.accuracy.org/article.php?articleId=1030

The experts have some insightful editorial about this speech. Sixty days later our country attacked a sovereign state. Lincoln was a smart guy, or so I’ve read somewhere.

I am sure GeoI was misquoted as you see he is too stupid to speak french. Maybe tried, I am sure, but I am sure he was just misunderstood. You know those french people they always overreact to everything. You know that they mission is accomplished it was a short term investment of solider and time.

What we are doing now is defending the aggressions of those people and the alkida has to be stopped from committing acts of aggression against the US. Don’t you see?

Mahmoud Abbas told a similar story from June, 2003 – that god told Bush to invade Iraq & Afghanistan.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bush-god-told-me-to-invade-iraq-509925.html

I appreciate what you have had to say.

*************************************
gwen 1, May 25, 2009 at 5:29 pm

Mike Appleton, did you know Presdient Lincoln was a witch?

Sure, I read it in a book…..by a French guy…….
*********************************

I do not believe that he was a witch he was a spiritualist.

Sure, I read it in a book…..by a French guy…….

OOOhh, What time and place? Count me in.

FF LEO, the producer owes you 10%.

–
As it should be with no doubt!

Rumsfeld felt it was “vague,” that it “might not mean something,” and that there was “no good basis for hanging hat.”

None of ‘Us’ with a capital ‘u’ has remained silent since Day 1
- 9/11/01…

Not to worry. Those of us who were paying attention then, are still ‘on it’ now and have been all along – especially since 2002.

—
(CBS) CBS News has learned that barely five hours after American Airlines Flight 77 plowed into the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld was telling his aides to come up with plans for striking Iraq — even though there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks.

That’s according to notes taken by aides who were with Rumsfeld in the National Military Command Center on Sept. 11 – notes that show exactly where the road toward war with Iraq began, reports CBS News National Security Correspondent David Martin…

“…It was 12:05 p.m. when the director of Central Intelligence told Rumsfeld about the intercepted conversation.

Rumsfeld felt it was “vague,” that it “might not mean something,” and that there was “no good basis for hanging hat.”

In other words, the evidence was not clear-cut enough to justify military action against bin Laden.

But later that afternoon, the CIA reported the passenger manifests for the hijacked airliners showed three of the hijackers were suspected al Qaeda operatives.

“One guy is associate of Cole bomber,” the notes say, a reference to the October 2000 suicide boat attack on the USS Cole in Yemen, which had also been the work of bin Laden.

With the intelligence all pointing toward bin Laden, Rumsfeld ordered the military to begin working on strike plans. And at 2:40 p.m., the notes quote Rumsfeld as saying he wanted “best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit S.H.” – meaning Saddam Hussein – “at same time. Not only UBL” – the initials used to identify Osama bin Laden.

Now, nearly one year later, there is still very little evidence Iraq was involved in the Sept. 11 attacks. But if these notes are accurate, that didn’t matter to Rumsfeld.

“Go massive,” the notes quote him as saying. “Sweep it all up. Things related and not.”

This meeting would have to have take place prior to the Iraq invasion, which was March 20, 2003. I think Mr. Hamilton has stated the wrong year.

Could it be May 26, 2002 in Paris, France?

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/05/20020526-2.html

Chirac does not visit Washington in 2002, but does in September and November of 2001. 2001 is to early to be assembling the ‘Coalition of the Willing’.

Laugh or cry George Magog Bush needed war in the most urgent way, absurd.