# Lest We Forget - It's 9/11



## The Batman (Mar 21, 2000)

September 11th must elicit resolve, not sorrow. It must be a prod to national strength, not a milestone of national weakness.

Mourning has passed, memorialization will linger, grit must predominate. Six years have passed and the day of national trauma is long since gone. It is time to wipe away our tears and speak of something other than our pain.


We must avoid turning this date into a maudlin exercise in getting in touch with our feelings. We must insist on not being revictimized every year by politicians and reporters intent on outdoing one another with feigned sincerity.


September 11th should make us mad, not make us weep.











There have been other anniversaries and milestones, throughout our history, and we have not responded the way we are responding now. The phrase “Remember the Alamo” was not meant to elicit sorrow, it was meant to encourage bravery and resolve. Ditto for “Remember the Maine” and “Remember Pearl Harbor.”


When we have been hit before, we have used that event as a motivation to self-defense and national protection. We have marched off to war inspired by the desire to settle the score for an attack upon us. We have believed that the best response to an attack was an overwhelming counterattack.


The real response to Pearl Harbor came at Hiroshima, and even after 50 and 60 years, commemorations above the USS Arizona were meant to honor the dead and reflect on the wickedness of our enemy. 


We are not traditionally a nation of criers. 


So on this anniversary of militant Islam's dastardly attack upon the innocent people of the United States, we should avoid the temptation of pretended sentimentalism. We should resist the pop-psychology rehash of our “pain.” We should refuse to be traumatized or retraumatized by picking the scab of our new national tendency to sit on Oprah's couch and cry. 


We must resist the media-fueled penchant for focusing on how others hurt us and instead remember how we have been strong and persistent.









September 11th shouldn't be about tears streaming down cheeks, it should be about hundreds of firefighters in a matchless act of valor, about some guys on a plane over Pennsylvania, and about men and women in dress uniforms who ran into the burning corridors of the Pentagon. Instead of lionizing the effectiveness of our enemy's attack upon us, we should focus on how Americans responded. We should focus not on fanaticism, but on heroism.










Honoring the terror honors the terrorist. 


Honoring the courage honors the American spirit.


September 11th should be a day we hold our heads high, not a day we hang our heads low. This isn't a day we were beaten, this is a day someone tried to beat us and failed. Let September 11th forever be a day to honor the strength and courage that dominated that day. Yes, 19 Muslims sought to inflict horror and slaughter, but hundreds and hundreds of ordinary Americans sought to defend decency and right. 


And the Americans won. 


September 11th is the day they tried to break us and failed. 


As schools and communities ponder whether and how to continue September 11th commemorations, they must be certain that they are commemorating the right thing. They must make certain they are not drowning in affected grief and effectively furthering the cause of the terrorists. We must not be afraid, or feel sorry for ourselves.










Instead, we must show some backbone and stiff upper lip. We must act like Americans. This date must denote strength, not sorrow.

- Bob Lonsberry
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
- GJS


----------



## Gerry-Lynn (Mar 20, 2002)

Well said Batman - Would'nt it be nice if "We" as a Nation, and the rest of the "Free World" stood United - I know one thing - The Milants sure are - And Look how it has worked for them.

United We Stand... Divided we Fall.

Gerry-Lynn


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Hard to forget when the first thing in the morning your VP realizes she needs to send a reminder email to the company, and the person who normally creates them is out, and I have to spend 2 hours figuring it out.


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

Makes you wonder if anything's really been solved on either side after these 6 years. Osama's still out there, the US has spent a TON of money and for every one Elkida member killed, 30 more take his place. 

But still, the US hasn't abolished Terrorism and the terrorists haven't abolished the US. Both sides are just loosing. What was the point of getting the whole thing started in the first place?


----------



## Y3a (Jan 18, 2001)

finding out who are enemies are.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Yes, and our enemies are a lot closer than some of us may be willing to admit.

As Colin Powell points out in the new issue of GQ, the terrorist threat is deadly serious, but it is not the greatest danger facing this country.


----------



## irishtrek (Sep 17, 2005)

There is an image that I remember seeing that day and that image was some rescue or construction workers on the roof of the Pentagon who took a huge American flag and draped it over the side of the building for every one to see and that image, to me any way, was telling the terrorists that America was NOT dead as they had hoped for and that we Americans WOULD survive.


----------



## MODELGUY (Aug 15, 2000)

*A bad bad day in 01*

I truly hope and pray JUSTICE wins in the end,and believe me IT WILL.. I was at the Trade Center in 99. Still and incredible event which is forever burned in our minds.


----------



## AZbuilder (Jul 16, 1999)

Well guys, I took today and worked at a polling station for our local primary as a poll list clerk that is how I spent this day of rememberance. In your eye Al Quida this AMERICAN is still strong and still standing.

AZbuilder
John

Let Your Imagination Soar


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Carson Dyle said:


> Yes, and our enemies are a lot closer than some of us may be willing to admit.
> 
> As Colin Powell points out in the new issue of GQ, the terrorist threat is deadly serious, but it is not the greatest danger facing this country.


 Let me guess - Michael Bay?


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

To get uncharacteristically serious for a moment - Al Qeuda's victory has gone far beyond just bringing down the towers. I guess their purpose was not only to kill as many infidels as possible, but to strike at our economy.

Well, they succeeded beyond their wildest dreams, imho. How much money has the US spent specifically due to that attack? Extended wars in two foreign countries sucking at our coffers, every business and every important building getting beefed up security, the creation and expenses of the homeland security department, the bankruptcy of several airlines and the decline in air travel business, the additional internal military defense expenses (additional air patrols, fighters in alert, etc)....

9/11 has cost this country _trillions_ that we could have put to better use.


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

It helps to put it all in to perspective to remember that while 9-11 was a tragedy, cigarettes kill more Americans every two days. 



> Yes, and our enemies are a lot closer than some of us may be willing to admit.
> 
> As Colin Powell points out in the new issue of GQ, the terrorist threat is deadly serious, but it is not the greatest danger facing this country.


Haven't read it, but it wouldn't surprise me to hear it's the same folks Eisenhower warned us about at the end of WWII. I think the cost of "keeping us safe" has been too high and of dubious effectiveness.


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

Hey John P, 

Let's not forget that the US, Canada border, which not too long ago, was the largest unprotected border in the world, has now been compromised in the fact that Canadians need a passport to fly to the US. That never existed before a few years ago. 

I also remeber that under Ronald Regan, George W SR, and even Clinton, that the Canada/US relations were strong and that everyone viewed the two countries as "Our neighbor to the North (South)" depending on which side you were on. 

Since Bush JR got in power, TV shows like "That '70's show" and others, have had lines of dialouge like "Canada's not a real country anyway.", "Who cares, they're Canadian." and other such lame remarks. Prior to 2001, Prior to Bush, America never looked at Canada like that. What happened?

Also, do you still call "French Fries" "Freedom Fries" because France didn't want to fight with you in the war? Or is that gone now? Seriously, a LOT of silly things happened to change America's position in the world because of this war.

I just wonder what happens when Bush's term ends. Will the new president keep the war going, or be like Nixon and get the troops home? Also, when this has ended, how long until Iran and Iraq drop the "democracy" in their own countries and get back to hating the west and starting up the "dictator" road again. Will this war be a triumph, or just a blip in time?


----------



## Zorro (Jun 22, 1999)

MadCap Romanian said:


> Will this war be a triumph, or just a blip in time?


No "war of choice", undertaken for fictitious reasons, and which asks no sacrifice of it's rank and file citizenry - can ever_ possibly_ end in "triumph" for the nation that undertakes it.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Zorro said:


> No "war of choice", undertaken for fictitious reasons, and which asks no sacrifice of it's rank and file citizenry - can ever_ possibly_ end in "triumph" for the nation that undertakes it.


But I saw it on TV! "Mission Accomplished"!



John P said:


> Let me guess - Michael Bay?


LOL.

Sad thing is, you're not far off.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

perhaps the saddest legacy of the attack was that we had leadership who instead of telling the american people to " pitch-in, mobilize, sacrifice and help defeat this enemy", the overwelming theme was along the lines of "hey, take a minute, see what those godless bullies did. get real pissed, then go back to the malls like nothing happened. oh and by the way, don't forget to live in fear everyday while we trot out the boogieman to hide our lack of a domestic policy beyond bumper-sticker rhetoric"


----------



## fluke (Feb 27, 2001)

Right On!!


----------



## fluke (Feb 27, 2001)

Zorro said:


> No "war of choice", undertaken for fictitious reasons, and which asks no sacrifice of it's rank and file citizenry - can ever_ possibly_ end in "triumph" for the nation that undertakes it.


AMEN!


----------



## The Batman (Mar 21, 2000)

We Are Winning the War
Thursday 09-13-2007 9:39pm MT 


We are winning the war.

In fact, it is a rout. We have been victorious every day we have fought.

It's unfortunate that we don't see that. Tragic that we cannot recognize our good fortune and success. Astounding that we misperceive this war and its purpose and progress.

But mark my word, we are winning.

To understand that, you must understand the purpose of war and the purpose of the military. You must understand the context of this war and the intent and nature of the enemy we face.

We are engaged in a war of national self-defense and, as it stands now, we have been completely successful. 

The war began, to our understanding, on September 11, 2001. Our enemy had commenced hostilities before then, but prior to that point we were not aware of or engaged in the war.

But on September 11, 2001, it was declared.

Militant Islam, a loosely coalesced religious movement bent on world domination and the destruction of free societies and Judeo-Christian cultures, committed a horrific act of war against the American people in the American homeland.

At that point, the intent of our enemy and the focus of our defense became perfectly clear. The objective of the enemy was to kill Americans in America. The objective of our defense was to prevent that from happening, to defend the American homeland at all costs.

Be clear about that. The “war on terror” -- which is really a fight with the hydra-headed expansionist Islam – is first, last and always a war to defend the American homeland. The enemy made its intentions clear by killing Americans in America. The only purpose of the war is to protect the United States.

That is the standard by which success must be measured. No other yardstick is relevant. 

The goal is not to stabilize Iraq, or take liberty to the Middle East, or to support a friendly government in Afghanistan. Those things may be useful subordinate objectives, but they are only meaningful as they facilitate and support our fight for national self-defense.

Therefore, it doesn't matter if there is a civil war in Iraq. Benchmarks are meaningless diversions. Various charts and graphs showing this number of Sunni casualties or that number of Shi'ite murders is, from the standpoint of our strategic imperative, meaningless. It does not matter how powerful or weak the Taliban is this year or what internal difficulties there are in the new Iraqi government. Those things are mere tactical challenges in the conduct of our strategic campaign.

Certainly, from a humanitarian standpoint, we care about the people of the Middle East and wish them the best. But their interests can only be our interests as long as they further our objective – the defense of the American homeland. 

Our military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq have combined with domestic law-enforcement actions to make it impossible for our enemy to operate tactically in our homeland. Instead, we have induced the enemy into meeting us on the battleground of the Middle East. Whereas the enemy wanted to fight unarmed civilians in America, we have duped him into fighting our armed military in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We have moved the fight from our homeland to his, and we have shifted his attention from our civilians to our military. It has been a brilliant and successful strategy.

No, it is not peace. But peace is not an option our enemy allows us. We did not start this war and we cannot stop it, short of annihilating our enemy's will and decimating his population. Instead, we are engaged in a war of distraction and attrition. We have distracted our enemy from his initial purpose and we have engaged him in a sustained conflict that will strain and may deplete his resources. 

Our victory thus far has not been easy or free. It has exacted a cost in both treasure and blood. But a war of national defense must be fought without regard to cost. The security, liberty and sovereignty of the nation is of paramount importance. 

That is a sobering fact that must be remembered as our country sees a climbing toll of injured or killed members of the armed forces. We must remember the purpose of the military and its basic operating premise. We love and sustain those who serve our country, but the calculus of history is that casualties in the military are a means of preventing casualties in the population. Casualties in the military, including deaths, are tolerated and even expected in the effort to protect the homeland and the citizenry. Societies have militaries and the risks to personnel that go with them because protecting the homeland is of such overwhelming importance. 

The cold hard fact is that when you are in a war of national self-defense – as we are – it is sadly preferable to have troops die on a foreign battlefield than it is to have innocent citizens die in an insecure homeland.

Put another way, we have lost 3,000 so that 300,000,000 might be safe. In the arithmetic of survival, that is a price we have to pay.

And it has paid off.

For six years we have been at war. It is a war of worldwide scope and implication. It is a war our enemy began by launching a ruthless attack inside our borders. It is a war which has engaged our economy, our military, our intelligence agencies and our law-enforcement community. 

And it is a war that has been successful.

If our enemy had the capability to strike us again on our territory, he would have. But he doesn't have it because we have taken it away from him. We have thus far maintained the initiative and the upper hand. 

Yet, ironically, we mock and vilify the war and our handling of it. Common sense says that we should be grateful for six years of protection. Unfortunate reality shows that every defender – from airport screeners to spy agencies, from the Department of Justice to our military in the field – has been attacked by the very ingrates they risk their lives to protect.

Some politicians have even shamefully and treasonously exploited the war for own political ambitions.

But those obstacles are no more important than those thrown in our way by the enemy in the field. The protection of America is worth the bearing of any burden.

And thus far it has been a dazzling success. For six years we have protected the homeland. For six years, plots and sleeper cells have been broken up and our enemy's ability to project power into America has been castrated.

We are winning the war.

In fact, it is a rout. We have been victorious every day we have fought.

- Bob Lonsberry









*Listen to Bob weekdays 5am-9am
...and every Sunday 9am-11am
*
live on the radio: 570 KNRS 
on your computer: live streaming audio
on-demand, anytime: Morning Show Podcasts
on-demand, anytime: Sunday Show Podcasts

*Email Bob* 

*Bob's Books
*_New: Hopiland Christmas_
_A Various Language__Baghdad Christmas_


Lonsberry.com


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

- GJS


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

_*It is one of the great, dark, evil lessons, of history.

A country — a government — a military machine — can screw up a war seven ways to Sunday. It can get thousands of its people killed. It can risk the safety of its citizens. It can destroy the fabric of its nation.

But as long as it can identify a scapegoat, it can regain or even gain power.

The Bush administration has opened this Pandora’s Box about Iraq. It has found its scapegoats: Hillary Clinton and us.

The lies and terror tactics with which it deluded this country into war — they had nothing to do with the abomination that Iraq has become. It isn’t Mr. Bush’s fault.

The selection of the wrong war, in the wrong time, in the wrong place — the most disastrous geopolitical tactic since Austria-Hungary attacked Serbia in 1914 and destroyed itself in the process — that had nothing to do with the overwhelming crisis Iraq has become. It isn’t Mr. Bush’s fault.

The criminal lack of planning for the war — the total “jump-off-a-bridge-and-hope-you-can-fly” tone to the failure to anticipate what would follow the deposing of Saddam Hussein — that had nothing to do with the chaos in which Iraq has been enveloped. It isn’t Mr. Bush’s fault.

The utter, blinkered idiocy of “staying the course,” of sending Americans to Iraq and sending them a second time, and a third and a fourth, until they get killed or maimed — the utter de-prioritization of human life, simply so a politician can avoid having to admit a mistake — that had nothing to do with the tens of thousand individual tragedies darkening the lives of American families, forever. It isn’t Mr. Bush’s fault.

The continuing, relentless, remorseless, corrupt and cynical insistence that this conflict somehow is defeating or containing or just engaging the people who attacked us on 9/11, the total “Alice Through the Looking Glass” quality that ignores that in Iraq, we have made the world safer for al-Qaida — it isn’t Mr. Bush’s fault!

The fault, brought down, as if a sermon from this mount of hypocrisy and slaughter by a nearly anonymous undersecretary of defense, has tonight been laid on the doorstep of... Sen. Hillary Clinton and, by extension, at the doorstep of every American — the now-vast majority of us — who have dared to criticize this war or protest it or merely ask questions about it or simply, plaintively, innocently, honestly, plead, “Don’t take my son; don’t take my daughter.”

Sen. Clinton has been sent — and someone has leaked to The Associated Press — a letter, sent in reply to hers asking if there exists an actual plan for evacuating U.S. troops from Iraq.

This extraordinary document was written by an undersecretary of defense named Eric Edelman.

“Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq,” Edelman writes, “reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia.”

Edelman adds: “Such talk understandably unnerves the very same Iraqi allies we are asking to assume enormous personal risks.”

A spokesman for the senator says Mr. Edelman’s remarks are “at once both outrageous and dangerous.” Those terms are entirely appropriate and may, in fact, understate the risk the Edelman letter poses to our way of life and all that our fighting men and women are risking, have risked, and have lost, in Iraq.

After the South was defeated in our Civil War, the scapegoat was Confederate President Jefferson Davis, and the ideas of the “Lost Cause” and “Jim Crow” were born.

After the French were beaten by the Prussians in 1870 and 1871, it was the imaginary “Jewish influence” in the French Army general staff, and there was born 30 years of self-destructive anti-Semitism, culminating in the horrific Dreyfus case.

After the Germans lost the First World War, it was the “back-stabbers and profiteers” at home, on whose lives the National Socialists rose to prominence in the succeeding decades and whose accused membership eventually wound up in torture chambers and death camps.

And after the generation before ours, and leaders of both political parties, escalated and re-escalated and carpet-bombed and re-carpet-bombed Vietnam, it was the protest movement
and Jane Fonda and — as late as just three years ago — Sen. John Kerry who were assigned the kind of blame with which no rational human being could concur, and yet which still, across vast sections of our political landscape, resonates unchallenged and accepted.

And now Mr. Bush, you have picked out your own Jefferson Davis, your own Dreyfus, your own “profiteer” — your own scapegoat.

Not for the sake of this country.

Not for the sake of Iraq.

Not even for the sake of your own political party.

But for the sake of your own personal place in history.

But in reaching for that place, you have guaranteed yourself tonight not honor, but infamy.

In fact, you have condemned yourself to a place among that remarkably small group of Americans whom Americans cannot forgive: those who have sold this country out and who have willingly declared their enmity to the people at whose pleasure they supposedly serve.

A scapegoat, sir, might be forgivable, if you hadn’t just happened to choose a prospective presidential nominee of the opposition party.

And the accusation of spreading “enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia” might be some day atoned for, if we all didn’t know — you included, and your generals and the Iraqis — that we are leaving Iraq, and sooner rather than later, and we are doing it even if to do so requires, first, that you must be impeached and removed as president of the United States, sooner rather than later.

You have set this government at war against its own people and then blamed those very people when they say, “Enough.”

And thus it crystallizes, Mr. Bush.

When Civil War Gen. Ambrose Burnside ordered a disastrous attack on Fredericksburg in which 12,000 of his men were killed, he had to be physically restrained from leading the next charge himself.

After the First Lord of the British Admiralty, Winston Churchill, authored and enabled the disastrous Gallipoli campaign that saw a quarter-million Allied soldiers cut down in the First World War, Churchill resigned his office and took a commission as a front-line officer in the trenches of France.

Those are your new role models, Mr. Bush.

Let your minions try to spread the blame to the real patriots here, who have sought only to undo the horrors you have wrought since 2002. 

Let them try it, until the end of time.

Though the words might be erased from a million books and a billion memories, though the world be covered knee-deep in your lies, the truth shall prevail.

This, sir, is your war.

Sen. Clinton has reinforced enemy propaganda? Made it impossible for you to get your ego-driven, blood-steeped win in Iraq?

Then take it into your own hands, Mr. Bush.

Go to Baghdad now and fulfill, finally, your military service obligations.

Go there and fight, your war. Yourself.*_

Keith Olbermann


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

Lonsberry is obviously a great American Hero:

"*Mayor Remarks Get Bob Lonsberry Fired From WHAM, Rochester * 


_Newsday is reporting Bob Lonsberry, a conservative talk-show host at WHAM, Rochester, has now been fired after more than a week of intense criticism over recent remarks.

It all began when Lonsberry made on-air comments that alluded to the black Mayor of Rochester, Mayor William Johnson Jr., as a *monkey* and *orangutan*.

Lonsberry, was first suspended by his employer for several days on September 22. At the time he also agreed to undergo diversity training. But, soon afterwards, Lonseberry angered critics again after publishing a web column that attacked his detractors."_

You must be very proud.


----------



## fluke (Feb 27, 2001)

Lets close this thread before its gets out of hand....its a bit to sensitive of subject and its not about *MODEL BUILDING* at all.....If I want a bunch of lies and propaganda.... I'll watch the news.


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

Lou Dalmaso said:


> perhaps the saddest legacy of the attack was that we had leadership who instead of telling the american people to " pitch-in, mobilize, sacrifice and help defeat this enemy", the overwelming theme was along the lines of "hey, take a minute, see what those godless bullies did. get real pissed, then go back to the malls like nothing happened. oh and by the way, don't forget to live in fear everyday while we trot out the boogieman to hide our lack of a domestic policy beyond bumper-sticker rhetoric"


Sorry Lou but I have to vehemently disagree ! I don't know nor care your politics, but I am a devout Conservative. I got this way from many years of observation,living, and seeing the results of appeasers, and opportunistic politicians.
The purpose of our enemies is to change our lifestyle, by "going back to the mall" , resurrecting Wall St, etc., we thwarted their aim. Unless you want to grab a gun and go shoot terrorists, the best thing you can do is "go to the mall" and support the booming economy the terrorists hate.
OK, I suggest buying models !!!  

A couple quotes:
" If you give up liberty for security, you will have neither !" 
-Banjamin Franklin-
" A Liberal is just a Conservative who hasn't been mugged yet!"
-Anon- ?
"If your not a Liberal when you're young, you have no heart. If you're not a Conservative when you're older, you haven't learned anything!"
-Winston Churchill-

You are right on "the Batman" !
Just as in the "Viet Nam 'war' ", we won every battle but lost in the newspapers. Now the same deniers that refuse to guard our borders from terrorists want to cry defeat on the terrorist war too.


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

Philip Marlowe,
I fear your hearing WAY to much NPR and Newsday !! And for God's sake, if Keith Olberman is your source of "information", I just wish your wishes would come true, but I hate to see the nation and the world suffer just so I can say " I TOLD YOU SO " !!
"Polly wanta cracker ??"


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

the Dabbler said:


> Philip Marlowe,
> I fear your hearing WAY to much NPR and Newsday !!
> "Polly wanta cracker ??"


Better than crazy talk like "stay the course" and "return to success".And in the interest of board peace I won't even comment on you two "experts" promoting a racist like Lonsbury over Keith Olbermann as a source of "truth". 

Other than to say, like George Bush, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, and the rest of the buffoons, 

you ought to be ashamed of yourself.


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

PhilipMarlowe said:


> Better than crazy talk like "stay the course" and "return to success".


And as a source you quote a cartoon character, how apropos !! :jest:


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

It took MANY years for the U.S.A. to come into existance. Thank God that Washington "Stayed the course". And there was already an existing structure of government and society in place. 

Those need to be built from scratch in Iran et. al. In "Our" revolution 1/3 of the people were for the Yanks, 1/3 were Loyalists, and 1/3 couldn't care less or where opportunists.
I suspect many on here are 'college graduates', from the present era where all the "Hippies" from the 60's are now in charge. Many should try the real world for a change.

OH, and how many million Cambodians, et. al. died when Hanoi Jane, and "I won't show my military medical records Kerry" convinced wimps to abandon the Viet Namese ? Oh, they don't care to talk about that, sorry.


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

You know, you just read a thread's title, and you know where it's headed ... <sigh>


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

PhilipMarlowe said:


> Better than crazy talk like "stay the course" and "return to success".And in the interest of board peace I won't even comment on you two "experts" promoting a racist like Lonsbury over Keith Olbermann as a source of "truth".
> 
> Other than to say, like George Bush, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, and the rest of the buffoons,
> 
> you ought to be ashamed of yourself.


NO. I am ashamed of YOU as an American to be so "tolerant" in your views. A typical virtue of extreme leftists, "do as I say, not as I do "

I have NEVER heard of Lonsbury ?? and NEVER heard Limbaugh's program. You see I look for the truth ( in a variety of sources ) and make up my own mind. I don't depend on Hate-America radicals. I was also around in WWII when Americans acted like Americans and supported their troops and didn't call them "Baby Killers", etc. And yes, I have several relatives who didn't 'come home'. At least one in Arlington.

Also odd, Conservatives get "fired" for their views ( Lansdberry, above /\ ) Liberals are hailed fro Free Speach. Even the failed Al Franken Radio network ?? ( Hot-Air America ??)


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

the Dabbler said:


> "I won't show my military medical records Kerry" convinced wimps to abandon the Viet Namese ? Oh, they don't care to talk about that, sorry.


Yeah, too bad wimpy Kerry, who actually served his country in combat, doesn't have a distinguished service record like George "Spent the War in the Jungles of Alabama-Maybe" Bush, Dick "Five Deferrments" Cheney, and Donald "I Had More Important Things to Do" Rumsfeld.

Like referring to black men as "monkeys and "orangutans" as your hero Bob Lonsberry did, a bunch of do-nothing chickenhawks who never bothered to serve, smearing a veteran who served his country, is yet another thing you should be ashamed of, not celebrating and promoting as something to be proud of.


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

LOOK, if you're going to character-assasinate at least get the FACTS right. I have said I *don't even know* who Lansberry is. And if you want to attack personalities, how about "ORAL is not sex Willy" or "I detest the military, Willy"
Or " I'm hiding at Oxford Willy " ???
Shall I mention Whitewater, Travel Agency firings, "Lost files in the Whitehouse", oops, I found them !! Charlie Shu (sp.?) money. Bimbo Eruptions, Rape,....yada...

More Liberal crap, " I can't beat your argument so I''l attack your character"


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Dabbler,
Ya know? whenever I see that someone has resorted to name calling , I figure that they've reached the bottom of their "argument barrel" and have resorted to "so's your old man" as the means to support thier opinions.

Hanoi-Jane? Really? are you still hung up on that? 

You realize that she (at the time ) was only a hollywood celebrity? The only person who had a right to be pissed about her actions was _maybe_ her dad. And you know what? he probably loved her anyway.

Do you care as much today about what Angelina Jolie's politics are?

President Bush (whatever I may or may not think about his policies) is always Pesident Bush and I get as aggravated when I see some hater mangle his name or title as I do when I see the same done to Sen. Clinton.

If you (collective tense ) can't show that much respect to someone you may not agree with, then why should your opinion be taken seriously


it falls into that same trap as the "sound bite / bumper stick slogan" mentality I referred to in my earlier post


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

*America should listen to Powell on fear*

_America this week heard from Gen. David Petraeus, an admirable officer of undeniable skill and integrity. His recommendation was familiar: Stay the course.

But most Americans didn't hear the words of another well-known general, whose advice I think gets much closer to addressing our foreign policy predicament:

We're losing the larger war.

Six years after Sept. 11, America's popularity and influence abroad have plummeted. Most foreigners see the United States in negative terms, according to a recent global survey -- and that includes our friends and allies.

On that front, the country needs to listen to another respected general whose counsel carries a lot of clout: former Secretary of State Colin Powell.

In an interesting interview in the latest issue of GQ magazine, Powell -- unburdened of his obligation to toe the Bush line -- speaks some provocative truths about the terror threat and our own self-defeating national fear.

Powell sounds frustrated and skeptical about how the war has come to be framed in our national debates. Contrary to the overblown, alarmist rhetoric about "World War III" and the threat to our very way of life, Powell says the "war on terror" should be put into perspective.

"What is the greatest threat facing us now?" he asks. "People will say it's terrorism. But are there any terrorists in the world who can change the American way of life or our political system? No. Can they knock down a building? Yes. Can they kill somebody? Yes. But can they change us? No. Only we can change ourselves."

The fearmongers among us paint lurid pictures of terrorist hordes poised to invade and take over our cities and, indeed, bring down the Western world.

Nonsense. Osama bin Laden, hiding in a cave somewhere in Pakistan, is going to do that?

With whose army?

We're making these small-fry, bumbling fanatics look much bigger than they are.

And it's diminishing us.

Powell acknowledges that some of the threats are real and serious. We have to take appropriate security measures.

But we also have to keep our heads. We're "taking too much counsel of our fears."

He laments that we're turning away foreign students who used to flock here to study, creating an atmosphere where immigrants and people with Muslim names are treated with hostility and hysteria.

Instead of locking down the country and retreating into paranoid isolation, he says, "let's show the world a face of openness and what a democratic system can do."

First, let's shut down Guantanamo. "It's so harmful to what we stand for," he says. "We are paying a price when the rest of the world sees an America that seems to be afraid and is not the America they remember."

In an echo of Ike's warning about the "military-industrial complex," Powell says the end result of politicians "scaring people to death" with doomsday scenarios could be a "terror-industrial complex."

Our strategy in fighting terrorism shouldn't just focus on flexing our military strength and trying to find a guy in a cave in Pakistan, Powell says. He cites the need for Marshall Plan-like programs abroad.

"It should be about how do we create institutions that keep the world moving down a path of wealth creation, of increasing respect for human rights, creating democratic institutions, and increasing the efficiency and power of market economies? This is perhaps the most effective way to go after terrorists."

President Bush has waged a fear-based presidency as a self-styled "war president." He's not changing course, as he made clear in his address to the nation last night.

We're stuck with Bush's tunnel-vision leadership until the end of his term.

But this country needs a real debate in the 2008 presidential campaign about how best to fight the war on terror. Voters should be looking for a leader with the vision and confidence to project other forms of American strength: our economic and technological know-how, our openness to ideas and diversity, our democratic principles and respect for the rule of law.

We can start rebuilding America's image and credibility abroad by living up to America's core values.

Powell is right: The only thing we have to fear is fear itself._


Randy Scholfield is an Eagle editorial writer. His column appears on Fridays. Reach him at 316-268-6545 or [email protected].

I personally think Colin Powell hit the nail right on the head. 

Though I can just imagine what Bob Lonsberry and his ilk would have to say about Powell's _informed _ opinions.


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

Do you care as much today about what Angelina Jolie's politics are? "

YES ! If she's denegrating her country on foriegn soil to people who use her statements as fodder against us. AND want to KILL us and destroy our society.
THOSE are the things that make countries and ethnic groups hate us. The very fact that Jolie makes her living the way she does is anethema to many of them,. Plus the fact they are jealous of our success because they've been told by our "feel-gooders"
that they' are entitled to the same without the social structure, freedom, and capitalist system. Can YOU name ONE Communist, Islamic, or dictatorial leader who actually LIVES the same way his people do ?
Those things used to be called treason, (".... adhering to their enemies, aiding and abetting.... ")

And again, PhillipMarlow has to quote one of the most left-leaning officer and a newspaper hack to figure out what he thinks.

If the 'war" is so wrong, why did all the leaders in the free world, and their intelligence services agree on the facts at the time, including Hillary Clinton.
Being dis-informed is not a lie !


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

"Hanoi-Jane? Really? are you still hung up on that? "

And are you so concerned about an epithet that you ignore the real point ? Have you not read nor heard all the nasty, vile, untrue, "NAMES" that liberals use daily ? Petraeus is a 'Betrayer". Or does that just work against Conservatives. Gentlemen, clean your own house first before you condemn others. And don't forget your donations to Move On.Org Are they tax deducable ?


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

the Dabbler said:


> And again, PhillipMarlow has to quote one of the most left-leaning officer and a newspaper hack to figure out what he thinks.


Yeah, why would ol' crazy hippie Marlowe wanna listen to a General with military experience that actually _succeeded_ in something, rather than listen to bunch of incompetant old fat rich guys that haven't managed to accomplish anything or predict _anything_ right for six years?


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

I guess people can pick and choose whomever suits their pre-concieved opinion best.
I suppose Petraeus got his stars from some right-wing conspiritor years ago because they planned all this debate waaaay ahead of time. Damned clever those sneaky Conservatives. OH, NO, wait ! Petraeus isn't really a general, it's all a big lie too. He's an actor from Hollywood trying to make the Conservative look bad. Dang that Oliver Stone is clever.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Yes, 
I object when Gen. Petraeus is called anything other than the name his father gave him and the rank his country rewarded him with. I believe I made that point already.

no, I don't reward Move-on with my donations.

I do support any citizen (celebrity or not) who has the courage to stand up and say what they believe. I don't have to agree with it to support it.

I don't really believe that Osama is scouring the newspapers to pull quotes from celebrities to use as "fodder". Please tell me what value a "statement" has these days. "Oooooh, (rubs hands) Oprah agrees that the surge isn't working... wait till I show this around the cave, that'll cheer up the boys!"

Say in your wildest stretch of an example that some famous
oh, I don't know, country singing female trio, said that they were embarrassed to be from the same, oh i dunno, region of the country as a head of state.... 

So what was the long term fall out on the political world stage from that?
beyond the personal and professional prices they paid? 

that sure gave a lot of aid and comfort, didn't it?


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

the Dabbler said:


> Gentlemen, clean your own house first before you condemn others. And don't forget your donations to Move On.Org Are they tax deducable ?



Few things make me chuckle harder than hearing the party of Larry Craig, Ted Haggert, Jeff Gannon, Ted Stevens, Mark Foley, David Vitter, Rush Limbaugh, etc, etc, self-righteously insisting that others need to clean up their act. :freak:


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

Son you been listening Waaaay too much to Alan Colmes. That's his ploy, along with most other leftiists. : "They do it too !" Can't you all get out of the schoolyard mentality ?
OH, you see, I DO listen to the other side, (Colmes, et. al. ) no matter how silly it sounds.


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

the Dabbler said:


> Son you been listening Waaaay too much to Alan Colmes. That's his ploy, along with most other leftiists. : "They do it too !" Can't you all get out of the schoolyard mentality ?
> OH, you see, I DO listen to the other side, (Colmes, et. al. ) no matter how silly it sounds.


Don't bother listening to Alan Colmes, Colmes is to liberalism what the ECW is to professional sports, to whit:not at all. Colmes, like the ECW, engages in a contest where the ending is pre-determined and everything is scripted.

Like most of what's broadcast on the channel where Colmes appears(and again, the ECW), it's all illusion and show, for the entertainment of the not-very-bright who long for the return of the fifties when life was simpler, guys like them were in charge, and everybody else knew their place.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

the Dabbler said:


> in the "Viet Nam 'war' ", we won every battle but lost in the newspapers.


With all due respect, the war in Viet Nam was lost the instant the White House (read: Lyndon Johnson) and the Defense Department (read: Robert MacNamara) pressured commanders and analysts in the field to distort the facts in order to paint a rosier picture of the conflict in Asia. Officers who dared to speak the truth about how dire the situation really was saw their careers go up in flames, while those who looked the other way and towed the party line were given promotions. At the end of the day this pattern of playing fast and loose with the facts caught up with the politicians who enacted it. The same thing happened to MacArthur in Korea; the same thing is happening to the Bush administration now.

The American people know a rat when they smell one. Now if we could just get over our historical amnesia.







the Dabbler said:


> If the 'war" is so wrong, why did all the leaders in the free world, and their intelligence services agree on the facts at the time, including Hillary Clinton. !


I can’t speak for Hillary, but at the time I personally placed a lot of stock in Colin Powell’s speech to the United Nations. That Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld would send this honorable and decent man (and fellow Republican) to make a case for war armed with intelligence data they knew to be questionable at best, and fictional at worst, will go down in history as the desperate act of an amoral administration.



the Dabbler said:


> Being dis-informed is not a lie !


Oh, please.

The men who created a "shoot-the-messenger and only-tell-me-the-good-news" climate at the Pentagon and State Department got just what they were asking for. These guys wanted a war, and they bent the facts to serve their political ends. It's not the first time, and it won't be the last.


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

(Quote: "Don't bother listening to Alan Colmes, Colmes is to liberalism what the ECW is to professional sports, to whit:not at all. Colmes, like the ECW, engages in a contest where the ending is pre-determined and everything is scripted.

Like most of what's broadcast on the channel where Colmes appears(and again, the ECW), it's all illusion and show, for the entertainment of the not-very-bright who long for the return of the fifties when life was simpler, guys like them were in charge, and everybody else knew their place." Quote )

In re: "name calling"
Oh I see it now, anyone who views "channel where Colmes appears"  _is not_ _very bright"._ "And the ending is pre-determined." I should have checked your self proclaimed title under your forum name. "Elitist Luddite"

-Funk & Wagnall's Practical Standard Dictionary-
"Luddite":
"One of a band of workmen who organized to raise riots for the destruction of machinery (1811-1816), so named after Ned Lud, _a feeble-witted mechanic_ who destroyed several stocking-frames."

I think we all know what an "Elitist" is, someone who is much wiser than the rest of we peons and is much better qualified to run the world. They don't take their directions from God because they know more than Him. That's IF he exists.


And of course Colmes is also a stooge in the " vast Right-Wing conspiracy"
Well I just hope you're happy in your world and the Kool-Aid keeps flowing cold and fresh.........I did note you haven't said yet if your contributions to MoveOn.org are deductable.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

the Dabbler said:


> I think we all know what an "Elitist" is, someone who is much wiser than the rest of we peons and is much better qualified to run the world. They don't take their directions from God because they know more than Him.





If that doesn't perfectly describe the delusional, stay-the-course-no-matter- the-costs mind-set of the Cheney/ Bush administration I don't know what does.


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

Al Franken tells a story about Alan Colmes fact checking:

AL FRANKEN: _Well, that's not a radio show, that's a TV show. And that's their sorry excuse for a fair and balanced left-right show. 
You have a conservative right-wing propagandist in Sean Hannity, and you have a moderate mild-mannered, I'll call him, liberal on the other side. But Colmes isn't allowed to argue with Hannity. 

I had this discussion with Alan (Colmes) at the White House Correspondents Dinner, where Hannity, during the war in Iraq, during the first -- you know, during the part that President Bush said the war was over, on the carrier -- during that, he was saying that Democrats were criticizing the president -- that was very, very mild criticism, like of his diplomatic efforts -- and that he couldn't believe they were undermining the commander-in-chief while our men and women were in harm's way.


Well, I Nexused what Hannity was saying during the war in Kosovo. And he was saying far worse, a hundred times worse stuff about Clinton. He was saying Clinton didn't have the moral authority for this war, that he wasn't following the generals' orders. He at one point said we were running out of ammunition. Now, how much is that undermining the commander-in-chief while our men and women are in harm's way?


So I went to Alan (Colmes) and I said, you know, I told him this and he said, "Oh, that's interesting". And I said, "Interesting? You know, Nexus it." And he said, Oh, yeah, I could. You can Nexis your own show, can't you? And he said, "Yeah". I said, "Well, you're going to use it, right?". And he said, "No, well, that's not our format". I said, "Not your format?" He said, "Yeah, um, we, ah, we don't argue with each other, we just argue with the guest". And I said, "Oh, come on; Hannity lies on your show all the time, like, he'll say 90 million Americans are getting an $1,100 tax cut. And they just aren't". And Alan said, "Oh, I've responded to that". And I said, "Yeah, I've seen it; five minutes later you say, actually that's an average and not the typical family." But then the next day, he'll say it again. And can't you at least Nexus it? 

"Well, that's not our format, you know", he said. And I said, "Can't you at least talk to him after the show and say don't say that anymore?" He said, "Well, that's not really --" and I said, "The format of your relationship? Yeah, I get it."


So, this is Fox. That's fair and balanced, which is put on this right-wing thug and this milquetoast moderate, and don't let the moderate, who doesn't lie -- I mean, Alan tries to make good arguments, but to me, it's laying down, it's being used. He's their -- I don't know, I've never heard this word on The NewsHour -- but he is their bitch._


----------



## Jimmy B (Apr 19, 2000)

How is this thread still even open? And so much for the The Batman's good intention to honor those lost on that horrific day. 
Another well intended thread turned into a political pissing contest.


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

And Lincoln too ? Who's own government and Northern supporters wanted him to cut his losses and give up. And by the way, suspended habius corpus and imprisoned disenters, levied illegal taxes.........Not to mention that the founders stipulated that if the "several States" were not content with the federal government it was the "Right and Duty" to seceed ( James Madison" )

And Washington, who's politicians didn't want to fund his cause (sound familiar ).

And Roosevelt, who was losing during most of WWII ? And only "got us out of the depression " thanks to WWII, which he saw coming and sacrificed Pearl Harbor to get us in it. Oh, and also wanted to pack the supreme court with 3 more judges to get his way.

You all have ONE vote, the same as I. If you want to be Commader-in-Chief run for the job.


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

You're right JimmyB.
Something was supposed to be a nice commemoration was turned into a leftist spiel.


----------



## irishtrek (Sep 17, 2005)

Jimmy B said:


> How is this thread still even open? And so much for the The Batman's good intention to honor those lost on that horrific day.
> Another well intended thread turned into a political pissing contest.


I sense a lockout by the end of the day.


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

I know you guys aren't big on facts, but actually it was Batman posting a pro-right rant by a right-wing racist radio talk show host that started the fierce discussions.


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

I object when Gen. Petraeus is called anything other than the name his father gave him and the rank his country rewarded him with. I believe I made that point already.

no, I don't reward Move-on with my donations.

I do support any citizen (celebrity or not) who has the courage to stand up and say what they believe. I don't have to agree with it to support it.

I don't really believe that Osama is scouring the newspapers to pull quotes from celebrities to use as "fodder". Please tell me what value a "statement" has these days. "Oooooh, (rubs hands) Oprah agrees that the surge isn't working... wait till I show this around the cave, that'll cheer up the boys!"

Say in your wildest stretch of an example that some famous
oh, I don't know, country singing female trio, said that they were embarrassed to be from the same, oh i dunno, region of the country as a head of state.... 

So what was the long term fall out on the political world stage from that?
beyond the personal and professional prices they paid? 

that sure gave a lot of aid and comfort, didn't it? 

What a foolish statement. Do YOU read Muslim newspapers ? Or watch Al Jazira (sp?) Yes I believe Bin ladin Does watch U.S. TV, etc. and such statements are use as propaganda to recruit terrorists and incite others to increased violence and to "Stay the course" because they "see" the U. S. is weak and ununited they get incentive to carry on.


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

PhilipMarlowe said:


> I know you guys aren't big on facts, but actually it was Batman posting a pro-right rant by a right-wing racist radio talk show host that started the fierce discussions.


Of course ! It's "The other Guy does it" ( Again) Who put the gun at YOUR head to rant on ??


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Carson Dyle said:


> If that doesn't perfectly describe the delusional, stay-the-course-no-matter- the-costs mind-set of the Cheney/ Bush administration I don't know what does.



Now, now Carson. you know that's not exactly true...

President Bush never claimed to be better than God..just in direct contact. :wave:


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

the Dabbler said:


> Of course ! It's "The other Guy does it" ( Again) Who put the gun at YOUR head to rant on ??


Sorry, it's a character flaw I grieve over on long winter nights, when I see something dishonest, unjust, and/or stupid, I almost feel compelled to point it out, speak my opinion, and do something about it. 

This used to be considered a positive "American" trait.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

the Dabbler said:


> Do YOU read[/color] Muslim newspapers ? Or watch Al Jazira (sp?)




Don't feel bad about not being able to spell _al jazeera_. Neither can anyone in the White House.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Dabbler,
last post for the day,cuz frankly I tire of you.

No I don't read Muslim newspapers or watch Al-Jazera. and thanks to our govt.'s power grabs of the last 6 years, if YOU do, you are probably on a "watch list" somewhere.

Secondly, Osama needn't look to our entertainers for support. He can get that from reading the straight news. 
As long as "stay the course" is the order of the day, he can rest easy.

You know what's good at staying cources? Lemmings. Some times they'll just stay that darn course right off the edge of the cliff.

It OK, tho, I'm sure that the administration can repeal the law of gravity, too. For the sake of National Security


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

What fools you have proved yourselves to be. Oh, and the Lemming myth was dispelled long ago. Watch Animal Planet sometime instead of PBS or NPR.
And thank you for not calling names or insulting anyone, your liberal "tolerance" of others is touching.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Dabbler: You draw comparisons between Bush and Washington & Lincoln, but there's one big difference; Washington and Lincoln held the nation together during a time of crisis, whereas Bush has managed to tear it apart.

As for your misinformed assertion that Roosevelt knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor before it happened, it's the sort of thing Joseph McCarthy might have said. During one of his benders.


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

> You know what's good at staying cources? Lemmings. Some times they'll just stay that darn course right off the edge of the cliff.





the Dabbler said:


> What fools you have proved yourselves to be. Oh, and the Lemming myth was dispelled long ago. Watch Animal Planet sometime instead of PBS or NPR.



Dabblers's as right about that as everything else, sorry, but lemmings *do * march off the edge of cliffs because they lack the ability to change course:

_"Misconceptions about lemmings go back many centuries. In the 1530s, the geographer Zeigler of Strasbourg proposed the theory that the creatures fell out of the sky during stormy weather (also featured in the folklore of the Inupiat/Yupik at Norton Sound), and then died suddenly when the grass grew in spring.[4] This was refuted by the natural historian Ole Worm, who first published dissections of a lemming, and showed that lemmings are anatomically similar to most other rodents.

While many people believe that lemmings commit mass suicide when they migrate, this is not the case. Driven by strong biological urges, they will migrate in large groups when population density becomes too great. Lemmings can and do swim and may choose to cross a body of water in search of a new habitat[5]. *On occasion, and particularly in the case of the Norway lemmings in Scandinavia, large migrating groups will reach a cliff overlooking the ocean. They will stop until the urge to press on causes them to jump off the cliff and start swimming, sometimes to exhaustion and death. Lemmings are also often pushed into the sea as more and more lemmings arrive at the shore.* [6]

The myth of lemming mass suicide is long-standing and has been popularized by a number of factors. It is usually stated that the main source of the belief in the suicide myth was propagated by The Walt Disney Company documentary White Wilderness which includes footage of lemmings migrating and running head-long over a ledge. An investigation in 1983 by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's Brian Vallee, showed that the Disney film makers faked the entire sequence using imported lemmings (bought from Inuit children), a snow covered turntable on which a few dozen lemmings were forced to run, and literally throwing lemmings into the sea to show the alleged suicides. [7]

Due to their association with this odd behaviour, lemming suicide is a frequently-used metaphor in reference to people who go along unquestioningly with popular opinion, with potentially dangerous or fatal consequences. This is the theme of the video game Lemmings, where the player attempts to save the mindlessly marching rodents from walking to their deaths."_

Buy, they must be really stupid to ignore the world around them and march together ignorantly to their demise oblivious to the obvious


----------



## Zorro (Jun 22, 1999)

I haven't watched HANNITY & Colmes in years.


----------



## Dave Metzner (Jan 1, 1970)

OK guys!
#1 this is off topic not modeling related.
#2 This has degenerated into a political arguement!
I'm locking the thread. 
Let's go back to model building discussions and leave the comparisons between Washington, Linclon and Dubbia for another forum!

Dave


----------

