Something To Say-World

Something to Say-World blog is a forum where I can vent and share my strong viewpoints with the world, and get feedback from others, whether they are pro or con, for or against my positions. The main thing is that we engage in a thought provoking discussion with hopes of seeing the world in a more clearer and different light than we did before initiating our intellectual dialogues. __________ MOTTO:Committed To Relentless Pursuit Of Hidden Truths -Globally-

Monday, September 24, 2007

GENERAL ABIZAID'S RECENT VIEWPOINT ON A NUCLEAR IRAN! Will his Common-Sense Outlook Prevail or Will That Of The Trigger-Happy And Deceptive Neo-Cons?

(Photo: AP News/Yahoo News)

General’s Abizaid’s recent common-sense viewpoint about the U.S. and the world living with a nuclear Iran was sweet music to the ears. Reason being is that finally someone with credible moral, ethical and military authority is saying publicly what many reasonable thinking peoples have been touting for sometime. This blogger being one of them, proudly, I must admit.
The significance of the General’s bold comments is that he is not just expressing his own views, but those of general officers that are still on active duty and other retired generals as well.

The General stated, as reported by Robert Burns, AP Military Writer: "There are ways to live with a nuclear Iran," Abizaid said in remarks at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank. "Let's face it, we lived with a nuclear Soviet Union, we've lived with a nuclear China, and we're living with (other) nuclear powers as well."

To me this “profound” statement is the most practical and realistic counter-argument to those neo-conservatives-both inside and out of the Bush administration-that are calling for an inevitable tactical military strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities before Bush leaves office in January 2009.Just as in the misguided, poorly thought out and inefficiently planned 2003 invasion of Iraq, the same recklessness and irresponsibleness is being exhibited by some of the same neo-con war-mongers that were instrumental in influencing President Bush to invade Iraq in the first place. Now they are on the move again. I often ponder just who are they actually looking out for and representing; the nation, themselves and/or certain international companies? Certainly, with their failed record, they cannot claim to be espousing principles that are in the best interest of the USA as a nation, and its peoples as a whole.

But now the primary question is: Whether President Bush will once again allow his ears to lean solely in the direction of the neo-cons, such as Vice-President Cheney, as he did during the intense deliberations leading up to the decision to launch an ill-fated invasion? Thus, rebuffing the wise counsel of a proven warrior and statesman such as retired General Colin Powell, former Secretary of State and Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, respectively, who advised him-purportedly- against the invasion.

There are times I wonder if Mr Bush, during his private moments of reflection, wishes he had listened to Colin Powell? He probably will never admit publicly that he regrets not taking the former secretary of state’s advice more-to-heart, and with more in depth forethought that clearly was warranted. Irrefutably, if he had, he wouldn’t find himself -and most of all the USA- in the Iraq fiasco that has become an embarrassing reality and an albatross as to the ultimate outcome of his presidential legacy. Again, who will the President listen to on how Iran should be dealt with in respects to its objective of pursuing a nuclear capability? You decide!
Read entire story: Click Link.

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Electronic Village: Barack Obama is a Better Choice than Hilary Clinton for Black America

Electronic Village: Barack Obama is a Better Choice than Hilary Clinton for Black America

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

O.J. SIMPSON! DID THE STINGER GET STUNG? APPARENTLY! Allegedly, set up by Roccio, his informer!

(Photo: AP News/Yahoo News)

I know there are more important things that I could write about, but I just can’t help jumping into the fray on the O.J. Simpson SAGA. I am hooked because of the unbelievable stupidity and irony that I see human beings committing practically every single day that’s reported in the news.

And so, as new revelations come forward about the O.J. Las Vegas incident (see my previous post below) the more it appears he was actually set up by the very person, Thomas Roccio, that informed him of a deal going down to sell some O.J.’s memorabilia in a Las Vegas hotel that O.J. claims was stolen from him. Simpson said Riccio called him several weeks ago to inform him that people "have a lot of your stuff and they don't want anyone to know they are selling it," Simpson said-per Kathleen Hennessey, Associated Press Writer via Yahoo News.

It is now revealed that Roccio was wired, and audio taping the entire incident with intent to sell to the media because “business hasn’t been good in the last month or so” and “he needs money to feed his kids;” per the incomparable and usually thorough Bill O’Reilly of Fox News, The Factor. Tom Roccio did indeed call TMZ.COM before calling the police first. Da! TMZ.COM is an entertainment news magazine that claims to “cover Hollywood as it really is...and celebrities as they really are,” and was the first to air the tape. Roccio, no doubt, was paid handsomely for the audio(?). So his kids want be starving, at least for a while.

So it seems O.J., the stinger got stung. However, it is reported that his accusers have both storied and shaky pasts, respectively. So he just might “walk” again-from jail time-despite all the embellished charges the Las Vegas police and district attorney have filed? If that were to happen, should O.J. be called “Teflon O.J. instead of the Juice; just as John Gotti -the Teflon Don-was named in New York because of the various times he was acquitted or walked away from federal courts of law? You decide!

Read entire story: Click Link!

Monday, September 17, 2007

O.J. (SIMPSON) DIDN’T DO IT! Simply not smart enough! Or is he?

(Photo: Goolge Images)

O.J. didn’t do it! That is kill his ex-wife Nicole and Ron Goldman, committing two brutal murders .

Recent events pertaining to the “bungled-supposedly-sting operation” that took place in Las Vegas last week to get back his-purportedly-stolen memorabilia, coupled with the unprecedented after mass of confusion, leads me to believe that O.J. isn’t that smart. Intelligent, yes, but not too smart.

Anyone that would screw up such a simple and uncomplicated robbery could not have master-minded a double murder, what some have termed “the perfect crime.”
Sure it was alleged that the evidence was contaminated and the jury was polarized and so on. But those are issues that have been debated endlessly, culminating with immeasurable disdain and , yes, even hate for O.J. And we all know what that hate is based on, pure and simple. Don’t we?

O.J. got away-if he is actually guilty-with killing two white people.
In the great United States of America that is not supposed to happen. Understanding that such a beastly crime should not be acceptable irregardless of the race and color of the victims and the perpetrator. But when the perpetrator is a black man and the victims are white, a totally different mind set takes control among those enforcing, prosecuting, adjudicating our laws, and the white majority public in general. Just refer to history.

Once again, if O.J. was so incompetent in executing a non-complex robbery job, then how could he have perpetrated a double murder with expert-precision and end up not being convicted? Has he outsmarted himself this time? Has his own cockiness and stupidity finally given the authorities and O.J. haters what they have been looking for since he was acquitted of the two murders? Is the Las Vegas debacle going to seal O.J.s fate of spending considerable time behind bars? Will justice finally prevail? Or will it just be the wheels of vengeful-justice in motion? Still, I maintain-with slight reservation-that he didn’t do it? Or did he? And then again, perhaps, his aging is affecting his cognitive abilities. You decide!

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

GENERAL PETREAUS’ IRAQ PROGRESS REPORT TO CONGRESS: Appeared To Be More Of An Attempt To Influence Policy Than Providing an Objective Assessment!

(Photo: AP/Yahoo)

I watched General Petraeus’ Iraq Progress Report to Congress via CNN and CSPAN yesterday, and I must say, although he provided pretty mush a detailed assessment on the progress being made in various areas, and the lack there of as well, I still found his approach and method of providing the report to be somewhat disappointing.

It was apparent to me that the General’s report was skewed towards attempting to influence the Congress and the Nation into the same mind set as the Bush administration is proffering: Stay the course; don’t cut ands run; we need more time-though not sure how much; and to leave now will cause a catastrophic outcome. He spoke as if the US American public and the world doesn’t comprehend that the latter hasn’t been the case already; understanding he was referring to proportionality as far as more violence and sectarian cleansing, and so on.

In my “bias” opinion, bias in the sense that I was vehemently opposed to the invasion in the first place, the General could have left out the speculations about the calamity that will ensue in the event of an immediate pull out of US forces from Iraq. As everyone predicts, whether pro or con, after a full withdrawal of US forces, more-likely-than-not “all-out-hell” will break loose. But as some have wisely stated, it is now up to the Iraqis to clean up the mess the US has created but with continued support from the US; that which does not involve ground forces. Staying there any longer, merely exacerbates and further fuels the problem, even more. Thus, leave it to the politicians to sort out whether to or not to withdraw US forces; with the General's "how to" input.

Furthermore, General Petraeus is keenly aware that it will take a good two years-at minimum-to remove all the operational and support equipment that is now cluttering up the Iraqi landscape. Thus, in actuality, if a full withdrawal were to begin today, it would not be before 2009 or 2010 before such a massive undertaking would be realized in its entirety. Also, very few politicians and bureaucrats are talking about the fact there will still be troops left manning the military bases that have been built on Iraqi soil; some 51 major and minor facilities, as last reported.

As former Senator Lee Hamilton, Co-Chair of the Iraq Study Group, stated: “the duty of the military is not to set national policy, but to follow it. And the Congress cannot allow a military leader to do so. “ It seems both the General and the President ignored that longstanding military protocol and tradition, and Constitutional principle.

As such, I stand by my posting from yesterday, in that Bush had a hidden agenda to influence the General's progress report when he conducted a surprise visit last week. Whether realized or not on the General's part, the commander-and chief's visit had an impact on the General's objectivity in the manner in which he gave his presentation. My only hope is that the Congress, both democrats and republicans, will not allow the General’s obvious misguided attempt as an effective proxy diplomat and White House tool-versus his simply carrying out his role as a military commanding officer-to sway their opinions. I say cut-off the purse string for all unnecessary operational funding, now! You decide!

Sunday, September 09, 2007

GENERAL PETRAEUS’ REPORT TO CONGRESS AND PRESIDENT BUSH: Did The President's Surprised Visit To Iraq Have A Hidden Purpose?

(Photo: Sunday Times-UK)

Perhaps, I am just too cynical and mistrusting of politicians and the Bush administration, specifically. But there is nothing like seeing the “commander-and-chief” on international news arriving in the war zone , as was the scene last week. Quite naturally, there was a telling moment in one's mind viewing projected images of the president actually placing himself in harm’s way, whether perceived or real, to get-supposedly-a first-hand look at the situation, pat the troops on the back, while getting a lot of news coverage with a perfect backdrop for photo opportunities at the same time. And, no doubt, ultimately, with optimistic hope of influencing in his favor the outcome of General Petraeus’, US commander in Iraq, report to Congress(?).

Unquestionably, a visit by the President to the front lines is the right thing to do during times of war and continuous loss of US American lives, coupled with being a good morale booster for the troops as well. But the timing is “especially’ troubling when General Petraeus is to provide a report to Congress this week on progress of the surge in troops that was first launched earlier this year (two announced troop surges, January and May , respectively).

Again, could it be that Mr Bush’s primary motive and hidden agenda was to simply try in a subtle manner to influence or mitigate the General’s report? A face-to-face, eyeball-to-eyeball communication is of utmost importance when one wants to convey a message as to what one would like to be presented which will be favorable to one’s policies and objectives. Thus, wishing that the general will desist from revealing his true gut feelings, while not lying, but not being totally up front and candid either. In essence, a clear message was probably subtly given to the general: “I need your help if we are to [stay the course] and not [cut and run], as many in the Congress want.” That is more-or-less what the trip’s message was actually meant to send, in my experienced opinion.

You see, only rarely do leaders, whether military or civilian, have to give direct-explicit orders; merely hint by implying, firmly- and at times adding humor- what he or she would like to see as an outcome. So who knows what was discussed in private, out of the eyes of the vigilant and hungry media? Bottom line: was Mr Bush’s trip, perhaps, bordering on an obstruction of a Congressional hearing; I thought to my suspicious mind?

My understanding is that General Petraeus is honorable, ethical, patriotic and independent-minded. And as a professional military officer and leader, he will not place his loyalty to the President above what is best for the country, the troops, and the Constitution. In simple terms, all indications are: "he is to be trusted." Let’s all pray that he “stays the course” and follows the dictates of his moral and ethical character, as his established reputation so portrays him to be. You decide!

Thursday, September 06, 2007


(Story and Photo: CBS2 News, Chicago/Yahoo News)

Dave Warwak, a teacher at Fox River Grove Middle School, claims he was ordered to leave class for teaching his students about veganism (a philosophy and lifestyle that seeks to exclude the use of animals for food, clothing, or any other purpose). And he believes he may be fired.

Some here in England are laughing and comparing this case to a similar one that occurred in their public education system in which "Schools are dropping the Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils; a Government backed study revealed. The study found some teachers are reluctant to cover the atrocity for fear of upsetting students whose beliefs include Holocaust denial, etc.

Dave Warwak's situation is just one more prime example of extreme political correctness in teaching at the expense of providing students with a comprehensive perspective on life. Voice your outrage by calling the school principal at: 847-516-5105 or 5100.
Read entire story: Click Link

Tuesday, September 04, 2007

PAUL HARVEY:Happy 89TH Birthday!

Photo: (google photos) and wish Paul Harvey, my favorite and the most trusted radio broadcaster of our time, a Happy "89th" Birthday. And congratulations on a spectacular 74 wonderful years on the radio. Paul, may you see many, many more birthdays!