A second alt.prophecies.nostradamus site!!! LOL!! Jeez...what a pleasant
surprise, Marv! Congratulations on a really nice splash page that's both
funny and informative. I love the Nosty CGI animation -- FUNNY! Makes me
wanna' get going on that long learning curve.
The APN 'ticker news' (RSS?) feed is a great idea and works smoothly. It
really helps promote APN and give it some 'class.'
The weather spot is a sharp idea and relates directly to the hot spots in
the world now (you might wanna consider Mogadishu next).
If you want me to put a link to your site from my splash page and/or from
the cartoon pic of you, just let me know and I'll do it.
I can see you're still working on your photo section...looking forward to
seeing it.
Americans are anxiously waiting for the chimp to make himself more a fool
and an idiot than we know he already is -- that 'surge' will be his Little
Bighorn. The firing of ordnance into Somalia from US gunships shows that
ultraconservative military chowderheads have momentarily taken over the
Bush agenda...in concert with Rove and Cheney...and are further expending
US military strength in a most futile manner. I saw a really sick, creepy
senior Pentagon CNN correspondent with a hard, grim face tell Hardball
Chris this morning (in a roundtable discussion) that the US hasn't lost
and was coming back someday to the Mideast and that those people better
'watch their p's and q's.' Chris and the other panel members sat frozen as
this really mentally ill ***** warned the terrorists in the Mideast that
'when we come back, it's going to be really bad for you' (paraphrased a
bit) and 'you'd better get ready for it.' Chris Matthews said, "you're
scarin' me." I just couldn't believe it. I gotta' find the video of
that...

Docrodile ;)~

"Marvin The Paranoid Android" <marvinparanoidandroid@hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:1168436328.648603.115960@k58g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

This doesn't sound good eh?

Bush has more confidence in his own military judgement then that of his
generals.

With luck, the Dem's will call in the generals and those on the ground
to ask them their opinions on 'The Surge' before making a final
decision. The Chimp can't send more troops to their death without
Congressional approval can he? Or is there a signing statement *****'s
lawyer can come up with to bypass dealing with Congress?

Cheers!

-- Marvie

http://ca.geocities.com/marvie_the_paranoid_android/ :-D

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


With Iraq Speech, Bush to Pull Away From His Generals

By Michael Abramowitz, Robin Wright and Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, January 10, 2007; A01

When President Bush goes before the American people tonight to outline
his new strategy for Iraq, he will be doing something he has avoided
since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003: ordering his top military
brass to take action they initially resisted and advised against.

Bush talks frequently of his disdain for micromanaging the war effort
and for second-guessing his commanders. "It's important to trust the
judgment of the military when they're making military plans," he told
The Washington Post in an interview last month. "I'm a strict adherer
to the command structure."

But over the past two months, as the security situation in Iraq has
deteriorated and U.S. public support for the war has dropped, Bush has
pushed back against his top military advisers and the commanders in
Iraq: He has fashioned a plan to add up to 20,000 troops to the 132,000
U.S. service members already on the ground. As Bush plans it, the
military will soon be "surging" in Iraq two months after an election
that many Democrats interpreted as a mandate to begin withdrawing
troops.

Pentagon insiders say members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have long
opposed the increase in troops and are only grudgingly going along with
the plan because they have been promised that the military escalation
will be matched by renewed political and economic efforts in Iraq. Gen.
John P. Abizaid, the outgoing head of Central Command, said less than
two months ago that adding U.S. troops was not the answer for Iraq.

More ...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/09/AR2007010901872.html

A second alt.prophecies.nostradamus site!!! LOL!! Jeez...what a pleasant
surprise, Marv! Congratulations on a really nice splash page that's both
funny and informative. I love the Nosty CGI animation -- FUNNY! Makes me
wanna' get going on that long learning curve.
The APN 'ticker news' (RSS?) feed is a great idea and works smoothly. It
really helps promote APN and give it some 'class.'
The weather spot is a sharp idea and relates directly to the hot spots in
the world now (you might wanna consider Mogadishu next).
If you want me to put a link to your site from my splash page and/or from
the cartoon pic of you, just let me know and I'll do it.
I can see you're still working on your photo section...looking forward to
seeing it.
Americans are anxiously waiting for the chimp to make himself more a fool
and an idiot than we know he already is -- that 'surge' will be his Little
Bighorn. The firing of ordnance into Somalia from US gunships shows that
ultraconservative military chowderheads have momentarily taken over the
Bush agenda...in concert with Rove and Cheney...and are further expending
US military strength in a most futile manner. I saw a really sick, creepy
senior Pentagon CNN correspondent with a hard, grim face tell Hardball
Chris this morning (in a roundtable discussion) that the US hasn't lost
and was coming back someday to the Mideast and that those people better
'watch their p's and q's.' Chris and the other panel members sat frozen as
this really mentally ill ***** warned the terrorists in the Mideast that
'when we come back, it's going to be really bad for you' (paraphrased a
bit) and 'you'd better get ready for it.' Chris Matthews said, "you're
scarin' me." I just couldn't believe it. I gotta' find the video of
that...

Docrodile ;)~

"Marvin The Paranoid Android" <marvinparanoidandroid@hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:1168436328.648603.115960@k58g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

This doesn't sound good eh?

Bush has more confidence in his own military judgement then that of his
generals.

With luck, the Dem's will call in the generals and those on the ground
to ask them their opinions on 'The Surge' before making a final
decision. The Chimp can't send more troops to their death without
Congressional approval can he? Or is there a signing statement *****'s
lawyer can come up with to bypass dealing with Congress?

Cheers!

-- Marvie

http://ca.geocities.com/marvie_the_paranoid_android/ :-D

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


With Iraq Speech, Bush to Pull Away From His Generals

By Michael Abramowitz, Robin Wright and Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, January 10, 2007; A01

When President Bush goes before the American people tonight to outline
his new strategy for Iraq, he will be doing something he has avoided
since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003: ordering his top military
brass to take action they initially resisted and advised against.

Bush talks frequently of his disdain for micromanaging the war effort
and for second-guessing his commanders. "It's important to trust the
judgment of the military when they're making military plans," he told
The Washington Post in an interview last month. "I'm a strict adherer
to the command structure."

But over the past two months, as the security situation in Iraq has
deteriorated and U.S. public support for the war has dropped, Bush has
pushed back against his top military advisers and the commanders in
Iraq: He has fashioned a plan to add up to 20,000 troops to the 132,000
U.S. service members already on the ground. As Bush plans it, the
military will soon be "surging" in Iraq two months after an election
that many Democrats interpreted as a mandate to begin withdrawing
troops.

Pentagon insiders say members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have long
opposed the increase in troops and are only grudgingly going along with
the plan because they have been promised that the military escalation
will be matched by renewed political and economic efforts in Iraq. Gen.
John P. Abizaid, the outgoing head of Central Command, said less than
two months ago that adding U.S. troops was not the answer for Iraq.

More ...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/09/AR2007010901872.html

After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Marvin The Paranoid Android"
<marvinparanoidandroid@hotmail.com> Spat the Words

This doesn't sound good eh?

Bush has more confidence in his own military judgement then that of his
generals.

With luck, the Dem's will call in the generals and those on the ground
to ask them their opinions on 'The Surge' before making a final
decision.

One of the US commanders (not sure what his rank was) was interviewed
and said he didn't feel more troops was the answer. He thought they
needed to give more responsibility to Iraqis. The problem is not that
US troops are overwhelmed by insurgents... the problem is a weak
Iraqi gov't and no will to stay cohesive. The rule of the 'tribe' is
stronger than the rule of Federalism. Those same Iraqis who we are
trying to install into power are the same individuals who are comitting
sectarian atrocities.

We could decrease our troop strength to 5, or increase it to
500,000 and it wouldn't change the level of violence. This 'surge'
is helping only one person, George Jacob Dingle-Berry Bush, so
he can try to save face before we boot him out of office and
investigate his ***** all the way to jail (starting a war of
agression is an apt charge, you know, the same thing we
accused Japan and Germany of doing in WWII).

The Chimp can't send more troops to their death without
Congressional approval can he? Or is there a signing statement *****'s
lawyer can come up with to bypass dealing with Congress?

Cheers!

-- Marvie

http://ca.geocities.com/marvie_the_paranoid_android/ :-D

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


With Iraq Speech, Bush to Pull Away From His Generals

By Michael Abramowitz, Robin Wright and Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, January 10, 2007; A01

When President Bush goes before the American people tonight to outline
his new strategy for Iraq, he will be doing something he has avoided
since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003: ordering his top military
brass to take action they initially resisted and advised against.

Bush talks frequently of his disdain for micromanaging the war effort
and for second-guessing his commanders. "It's important to trust the
judgment of the military when they're making military plans," he told
The Washington Post in an interview last month. "I'm a strict adherer
to the command structure."

But over the past two months, as the security situation in Iraq has
deteriorated and U.S. public support for the war has dropped, Bush has
pushed back against his top military advisers and the commanders in
Iraq: He has fashioned a plan to add up to 20,000 troops to the 132,000
U.S. service members already on the ground. As Bush plans it, the
military will soon be "surging" in Iraq two months after an election
that many Democrats interpreted as a mandate to begin withdrawing
troops.

Pentagon insiders say members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have long
opposed the increase in troops and are only grudgingly going along with
the plan because they have been promised that the military escalation
will be matched by renewed political and economic efforts in Iraq. Gen.
John P. Abizaid, the outgoing head of Central Command, said less than
two months ago that adding U.S. troops was not the answer for Iraq.

More ...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-

dyn/content/article/2007/01/09/AR2007010

901872.html=20

After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Marvin The Paranoid Android"
<marvinparanoidandroid@hotmail.com> Spat the Words

This doesn't sound good eh?

Bush has more confidence in his own military judgement then that of his
generals.

With luck, the Dem's will call in the generals and those on the ground
to ask them their opinions on 'The Surge' before making a final
decision.

One of the US commanders (not sure what his rank was) was interviewed
and said he didn't feel more troops was the answer. He thought they
needed to give more responsibility to Iraqis. The problem is not that
US troops are overwhelmed by insurgents... the problem is a weak
Iraqi gov't and no will to stay cohesive. The rule of the 'tribe' is
stronger than the rule of Federalism. Those same Iraqis who we are
trying to install into power are the same individuals who are comitting
sectarian atrocities.

We could decrease our troop strength to 5, or increase it to
500,000 and it wouldn't change the level of violence. This 'surge'
is helping only one person, George Jacob Dingle-Berry Bush, so
he can try to save face before we boot him out of office and
investigate his ***** all the way to jail (starting a war of
agression is an apt charge, you know, the same thing we
accused Japan and Germany of doing in WWII).

The Chimp can't send more troops to their death without
Congressional approval can he? Or is there a signing statement *****'s
lawyer can come up with to bypass dealing with Congress?

Cheers!

-- Marvie

http://ca.geocities.com/marvie_the_paranoid_android/ :-D

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


With Iraq Speech, Bush to Pull Away From His Generals

By Michael Abramowitz, Robin Wright and Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, January 10, 2007; A01

When President Bush goes before the American people tonight to outline
his new strategy for Iraq, he will be doing something he has avoided
since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003: ordering his top military
brass to take action they initially resisted and advised against.

Bush talks frequently of his disdain for micromanaging the war effort
and for second-guessing his commanders. "It's important to trust the
judgment of the military when they're making military plans," he told
The Washington Post in an interview last month. "I'm a strict adherer
to the command structure."

But over the past two months, as the security situation in Iraq has
deteriorated and U.S. public support for the war has dropped, Bush has
pushed back against his top military advisers and the commanders in
Iraq: He has fashioned a plan to add up to 20,000 troops to the 132,000
U.S. service members already on the ground. As Bush plans it, the
military will soon be "surging" in Iraq two months after an election
that many Democrats interpreted as a mandate to begin withdrawing
troops.

Pentagon insiders say members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have long
opposed the increase in troops and are only grudgingly going along with
the plan because they have been promised that the military escalation
will be matched by renewed political and economic efforts in Iraq. Gen.
John P. Abizaid, the outgoing head of Central Command, said less than
two months ago that adding U.S. troops was not the answer for Iraq.

More ...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-

dyn/content/article/2007/01/09/AR2007010

901872.html

Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:

This doesn't sound good eh?

Bush has more confidence in his own military judgement then that of his
generals.

With luck, the Dem's will call in the generals and those on the ground
to ask them their opinions on 'The Surge' before making a final
decision. The Chimp can't send more troops to their death without
Congressional approval can he? Or is there a signing statement *****'s
lawyer can come up with to bypass dealing with Congress?

Cheers!

-- Marvie

Congrease has two options here; cut off the money, impeach the chimp. As
CiC, Shrub can
order deployment of the entire armed forces if he feels like it. The toops
can comply,
or mutiny. Those are the only real options. We're going into Sadr City;
that's going to
be a real bloodbath. I hate being right...

Charly

Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:

This doesn't sound good eh?

Bush has more confidence in his own military judgement then that of his
generals.

With luck, the Dem's will call in the generals and those on the ground
to ask them their opinions on 'The Surge' before making a final
decision. The Chimp can't send more troops to their death without
Congressional approval can he? Or is there a signing statement *****'s
lawyer can come up with to bypass dealing with Congress?

Cheers!

-- Marvie

Congrease has two options here; cut off the money, impeach the chimp.
As CiC, Shrub can order deployment of the entire armed forces if he
feels like it. The toops can comply, or mutiny. Those are the only real
options. We're going into Sadr City; that's going to be a real
bloodbath. I hate being right...

Charly