According to the Grand Rapids Press, nearly 1000 students and professors from the conservative Calvin College in Grand Rapids, MI are taking out a full-page ad to protest George W. Bush’s commencement address appearance this Saturday.
The speaking engagement was requested and arranged by Bush’s top political advisor Karl Rove who, according to NEWSWEEK, informed a College employee at a “Presidential” event back in March that “Bush was hoping to deliver a graduation speech in Michigan this year and asked if Calvin College, a small Christian school in Grand Rapids, might be a willing venue.”
Ironically enough, The Press quotes the chair of the college’s communcation arts and science department who gave his approval for the event as accusing the objecting students and professors of turning the appearance into a “political event.”
The fact that the appearance was arranged by Bush’s top political advisor, who was specifically looking for a venue in swing-state Michigan for Bush to speak at is apparently to be ignored.
Yesterday’s Press described tomorrow’s stinging full-page ad:
“By their deeds ye shall know them,” reads the paid advertisement, quoting the Bible. “Your deeds, Mr. President — neglecting the needy to coddle the rich, desecrating the environment, and misleading the country into war — do not exemplify the faith we live by.
“Moreover, many of your supporters are using religion as a weapon to divide our nation and advance a narrow partisan agenda. …We urge you not to use Calvin College as a platform to advance policies that violate the school’s religious principles.”
More than 750 alumni, students and staff have signed Friday’s advertisement, while about 100 of Calvin’s 300 faculty members put their names on the Saturday ad.
And in reply, The Press quotes the professor who defends the Bush appearance…
He finds it unfortunate some staff have chosen to bring political tensions into play.
“They say they welcome his visit and promoting dialogue, but the way to do that is not to announce everything a person is doing wrong,” Bytwerk said. “This brouhaha makes a political event out of what was not a political event.
While Bytwerk may like to believe that this weekend’s political event “was not a political event”, a report in this week’s NEWSWEEK on Rove’s political “thank you” tour would seem to suggest otherwise…
…
Why Michigan? White House officials insist politics didn’t play a role in sending Bush back to a state he narrowly lost in 2004. Yet Saturday will mark Bush’s third visit to the Wolverine State this year. Less than six months into his second term, Bush has paid multiple visits to the hard-fought states of 2004—and he’s not the only one. Since March, Rove has been out headlining fund-raisers and county GOP dinners in battleground states like Ohio, Florida and Wisconsin. Administration officials describe Rove’s travels as a post-election “thank you” tour to reward Bush’s supporters. But others say it’s an attempt to shore up the GOP base and stoke enthusiasm for Bush’s agenda as the 2006 midterm elections approach.
Nope. It’s not a political event at all. And the “Clear Skies Initiative” will clear the air. And “No Child Left Behind” won’t leave any children behind. And when the “Mission Accomplished” banner goes up, the mission will have been completely accomplished.
George W. Bush’s Bizzarro World continues. We just have to live in it.
Yet even the good conservative Calvinist Christians of Grand Rapids are beginning to understand what an embarrassing figure this country currently has occupying the White House and misrepresenting our country to the world.
UPDATE: A number of Calvin students have set up a Google discussion forum called “Our Commencement Is Not Your Platform”, described as “A place to dialogue and organize for those opposed to George W. Bush commandeering Calvin’s 2005 Commencement.”
Bytwerk is a jerk! It’s amazing what jerks like to try and pass off as logic. Hurray for the true Christians at Calvin College in Grand Rapids. They know the difference between the walk and just empty talk. Everyone everywhere should be protesting against Bush, Rove, et al. The louder the better. Love the ad in the paper tactic.
Finally, thats the way a christian is supposed to think..I feel the same way…
Hallelujah. God doesn’t always work in such mysterious ways – only Bush and Rove.
To George W. Bush:
Even with your Nazi control of the mass media, all Americans will know the disgrace you placed on this great country. My suggestion is give the Michigan speech in protest. Tell the student body how lying to Americans, lying about Iraq, and cheating to win in the last 2 presidential elections made you the man you are today. Tell all in attendance how you used 9/11 to manipulate the system to screw the average American and the environment ROYALLY. Tell them how you succeeded in using your power to bring 3rd world countries to their knees instead of helping them. Here’s some "FOOD FOR OIL (thought): Talk about the speech George Galloway unloaded to all the ROBOTS in the US CONGRESS about the truth in IRAQ. Tell them how you are the most greedy despicable corrupt president ever and unless your administration plans a move to a cave in Afganistan soon, your ace is on the fast track to jail.
Grizzly Bear Dancer
It seems that more and more people are willing to step up to the podium and be heard. Blessed be that there are those who are living their faith instead of mouthing the words or using it as a shield against the reality of it all. Peace
Greg Palast’s latest on our serious problem with propaganda:
Cowardice in Journalism Award for Newsweek – Goebbels Award for Condi
Wednesday, May 18, 2005
by Greg Palast
"It’s appalling that this story got out there," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on her way back from Iraq.
What’s not appalling to Condi is that the US is holding prisoners at Guantanamo under conditions termed "torture" by the Red Cross. What’s not appalling to Condi is that prisoners of the Afghan war are held in violation of international law after that conflict has supposedly ended. What is not appalling to Condi is that prisoner witnesses have reported several instances of the Koran’s desecration.
What is appalling to her is that these things were reported. So to Condi goes to the Joseph Goebbels Ministry of Propaganda Iron Cross.
But I don’t want to leave out our President. His aides report that George Bush is "angry" about the report — not the desecration of the Koran, but the reporting of it.
And so long as George is angry and Condi appalled, Newsweek knows what to do: swiftly grab its corporate ankles and ask the White House for mercy.
But there was no mercy. Donald Rumsfeld pointed the finger at Newsweek and said, "People lost their lives. People are dead." Maybe Rumsfeld was upset that Newsweek was taking away his job. After all, it’s hard to beat Rummy when it comes to making people dead.
And just for the record: Newsweek, unlike Rumsfeld, did not kill anyone — nor did its report cause killings. Afghans protested when they heard the Koran desecration story (as Christians have protested crucifix desecrations). The Muslim demonstrators were gunned down by the Afghan military police — who operate under Rumsfeld’s command.
Our Secretary of Defense, in his darkest Big Brother voice, added a warning for journalists and citizens alike, "People need to be very careful about what they say."
And Newsweek has now promised to be very, very good, and very, very careful not to offend Rumsfeld, appall Condi or anger George.
**more**
Greg Palast was awarded the 2005 George Orwell Prize for Courage in Journalism at the Sundance Film Festival for his investigative reports produced by the British Broadcasting Corporation. See those reports for BBC, Harper’s, The Nation and others at Greg Palast’s Website.
================================
As usual, Palast NAILS it.
I’m more than overjoyed and thrilled at what these Christians published in the Newspaper ad. It should happen in every city and every state. Maybe it will.
I think they have a great ad. I hope it is effective. And a Shout out to George Galloway. Wooooot!
1) When has Bush ever NOT given a speech that wasn’t politically partisan? I seem to remember reading about a speech he gave last year where he deviated from the solemnity of the occasion completely and went wandering off on some partisan political rant. It surprised enough people that it was even reported.
2) I wonder how many of the graduates will be escorted from the building by a fake Secret Service agent?
3) Maybe Bush will be met with the same type of warm reception Ann Coulter received when guest speaking at the University of Texas in Austin.
4) Or maybe Bush’s watchdogs will just taser a few of the more outspoken Christian graduates to set an example.
5) Or maybe the Bush watchdogs will check everyone’s names at the door against those appearing on the newspaper advertisement…and not allow them admittance…even if they are there to graduate.
Gee, I get the feeling we are about to see some Good Ol’ Time Religion, don’t you?
I’m starting to understand what republicans mean when they say "political". It never has the usual meaning. I think part of their strategy is to debase our language [and therefore our culture] to a point where we can no longer communicate with one another. They’re subtly redefining words all the time, and this is one small example.
Look at a few examples of how republicans use the word "political", and see if you can find a pattern:
a voting machine maker declared VR’s Divestiture for Democracy "political" and announced that they won’t pay any attention to it… [link to the BradBlog item or link to the Raw Story item that inspired it]
recently bush has said that the senate should put politics aside and confirm john bolton… [link to the story on please don’t read my blog or link to the news item that inspired it]
now this clown claims that those who oppose bush are making a political event out of a non-political one…
I finally get it! "Political" now means "against opposition", and "non-political" means "unopposed". In the same way that terms like "unanimity" and "common purpose" mean "you must agree with us", anybody who does not agree is classified as "political".
It’s such a fine point it almost seems irrelevant and yet this constant undermining of the language, along with multiple simultaneous underminings [in the educational system, for instance] can do us horrible damage. As I read it, our only hope of avoiding such damage involves paying attention and doing whatever we can to oppose the damage. In other words, I think we have to get "political" about it.
I wonder if Bush will cancel. I think Bush knows people are gunning for him so he might be a bit afraid to make an appearance.
You know damn well they’ve seen the ad by now & they wouldn’t want the press showing Bush making a speech where people are booing.
Booing? That would never be allowed to happen. Those who so much as entertained thoughts of booing would be taken to a "free speech zone" where they could watch their own commencement on television!
I hope the students attending that Bush address turn their backs on Monkeyboy and drop their drawers. Wouldn’t that be a stunning photo op? Most likely, though, Bush and Rove and company will flake off if there is a hint of possible confrontation with real opposition, just like they did with their SS roadshow choosing only the GOP choir to attend. They just can’t handle the truth.
Universities are the natural place to start a revolution.
I suspect bush is in a hole on this one. Excluding a big chunk of the students and 1/3 of the faculty from the graduation ceremony will not go unnoticed, and hopefully won’t go unreported [but who knows these days]. On the other hand, cancelling without a very good excuse will be seen as a major political victory by the ad writers and their supporters. What’s a despot to do?
On another subject: Did Galloway make a speach recently? [kidding] If so I certainly missed any comment on it on television. Its amazing that what is one of the most powerful speaches I have heard in years goes largly unreported in our press.
El Pueblo Unido Jamas Sera Vencido!
WP # 10 I too have pointed this out. Your post is a bit more succinct than mine have been.
I have lamented not being able to discuss "politics" but instead only having what are really non-partisan criminal issues to discuss.
These criminal issues are masked by the neocons as "politics". For instance presidental policies that include routine lying to the public, subverting the press, alienating the US from the world community, and being pro-torture.
Calvin Students I read some of the posts on the blog Brad mentions – which was fired up as an adjunct to the anti-bu$hit protest.
There was some talk of distress at trolls that showed up there, and an explanation by the person who started the ant-bu$hit thread.
They did pretty good for not usually having to deal with trolls.
It would help them to observe how we handle trolls here: respectfully sticking to our topic and allowing them a voice so long as it does not turn juvenile like Wycliff or bozo like neocons.
Apparently most of the folks at Calvin College are quite aware of what Jesus would do. It’s time to drive the moneychangers (and politicians using the name of religion in vain) out of the temple folks. Congratulations to the good students of Michigan for leading the charge!
Oh, Bush will show. His handlers want him to and therefore he will. But now, we will see only cheering students and faculty in an effort to "prove" the dissenters a simple-minded aberration. No one is allowed to dis Bush. Heaven forbid.
The irony is, that any cheering new graduates will be the first Christian class to out themselves as having been left behind – without even knowing it.
But the risk to the Michigan College, and other religious institutions like it, is that if this event comes off, it will enlighten true Christians to the idea that Michigan College has not been successful at instilling and fully supporting even the most basic of human values: truth.
How did they fail? I suppose one need look no further than the faculty who have the responsiblity for the Christian education of these youth.
I give my utmost respect to those at Michigan College who have spoken out against providing a stage for the ever travelling Twisted Bush and Big Brothers Circus and Sideshow.
Bush is in full campaign mode. One wonders who is watching the home base, doing the job of President, making sure we don’t get attacked again a la 9/11.
I just heard a fellow on NPR referring to these times in the Congress as being like the days of LBJ when the Dems held the presidency, congress and the USSC. He said he felt at that time that LBJ was leading the Dems like sheep to the slaughter. Of course we Dems feel that way today, that Bush is leading the lemmings over the cliff. Since I don’t disagree I find it curious that he somehow would think that’s a good thing for today.
We were only spared of more LBJ mistakes because he was advised and did retire. Bush has no such modesty and will continually overreach until America is in shambles. Only the stong hand of adults will smack him down — MP Galloway was one. Are there any Americans to follow?
Spending part of my life growing up in Grand Junction, MI about 15 mi west of South Haven, my suggestion to this college would be to let Michigan Congressman John Conyers Jr. speak at your presentation. He is one of the few American politicians trying to make a difference. JC stood up on January 6th, 2005 against the rigged 2004 Presidential election is which George Bush cheated. He was responsible for 102 page report about Ohio irregularities which gave Bush his 2nd stolen victory. Fl (again),NM, OH, and NV were the swing states where massive electronic and improvised humanistic fraud occured. NM would have been the easiest to prove. He has also been outspoken about Iraq and many many other issues in which the current Bush administration has either taken away right and liberties or blatent wrongdoings against US citizens and the world. He recently wrote a great piece at Thomas Paine.com refuting bogus claimes by a Republican representatve who deceptively wrote an article steering Americans from the real voting issues (a common practice of the Bush administration). The old boy also has his own blog for comments and interactions designed mainly for Mi residents. John Conyers Jr is one of the few stand up men in Congress and if you want a classic modern day hero from your own state, you should send an invitation to him to speak at your commencement.
To the students and staff at Calvin College, I applaud your stand against Bush delivering a speech at your school this weekend. In its brevity, the ad you plan to run is clear, succinct and surgical in addressing the disaster that is this administration.
If things don’t change, we are on a path to losing our rights and freedoms as citizens of this country. Thank you for acting on the courage of your convictions and setting such a fine example.
Deborah
From one Christian to the fine Christian folks at Calvin. Congratulations on your graduations and your convictions… Thank you for standing up us. Yo make the rest of the country proud !!!!!
Amen to COMMENT #4 [link]
…Grizzly Bear Dancer said on 5/18/2005 @ 7:39pm PT… Well said!!!!!!!!
Amen to COMMENT #4 [link]
…Grizzly Bear Dancer said on 5/18/2005 @ 7:39pm PT… Well said!!!!!!!!
Calvin students I salute you – may you make a better world for yourselves than the one he who must never be named is trying to leave you…
The question was asked about why is Bush pushing so hard in Michigan and spending so much time there. My guess he is picking up shipments of Amway products for his downliners. HA! I hear tell those Amway folks in Grand Rapids are bigtime Bush supporters so he wants to be among friends.
Student and Faculty of Calvin can you please make a sign to wave at George W. -Yellowstone GRIZZLY BEARS refuse to become inbreeds like BUSH & BLAIR. Connect the Yellowstone Grizzly. Quickly, the Bush administration has rolled back or reversed over 400 environmental standards and or laws. Last year the Bush administration reversed a law President Clinton enacted called the "Roadless Rule" which protected 58 million acres of wild public forest land. There are less than 1000 Grizzly Bears in the lower 48 states. There lands are being destroyed by oil, mineral, and timber interests which are in bed with the Bush admininstration. Last December, the Bush administration changed the laws of forestry so these companies can go in and destroy a forest without even an impact statement to the public anymore effectively removing Americans from protecting this land. The other remaining wildlife is also in trouble but the Grizzly Bear tells me his pain. The government is trying to delist the bear to kill it off. Offroad vehicles are destroying their habitat and commercial growth has no limitation. The Yellowstone Grizzly population is isolated from the barely holding on population of bears. They do not appreciate being turned into inbreeds like George W. Bush and Tony Blair who lied about Iraq to take control of their oil. The Yellowstone Grizzly now risked death to mate outside Yellowstone and Canada which has been severly clearcutting along the US border still legally hunts them down. We need Canada’s help. The Grizzly which is the most powerful Spiritual creature in the animal kingdom and stands for the "Wild West" on my state flag of California was shot or poisoned to extinction here in the early 1920s. Careless greedy fcks like our president has his own special plan for this country and the last wild lands. The Grizzly has one more chance to survive. Wild Bears Project Director Louisa Willcox at the NRDC National Resources Defense Council http://www.nrdc.org has a plan to reconnect the Yellowstone Grizzly before they disappear only to live in Alaska. The Robots in Congress which hold a majority OK’d a plan to dig in the Alaskan Arctic rufuge next even though even Democratic Senator lightweight John Kerry admits is unnecessary and a mistake. I apologize for taking this space but you all cannot hear the silent screams i hear. Americans must come together and take back their voice is government which was 1st stolen in Presidential Election 2000 which candidate Gore won.
I haven’t read all your posts yet. But my thoughts are:
It would be a mistake for Bush to risk speaking on this occasion. If he does go ahead, he clearly believes that people who claim to be Christains are either (a) liars like he himself, or (b) simple sheep who can be "persuaded" to keep quiet and "follow their leader" like good little obedient sheep.
Now, it’s up to the those who are the "true" Christians to behave as Jesus Christ would. And Jesus Christ would not give Bush the time of day. He would deliver a stinging, truthful denouncement, like the ad placed in the newspaper.
It will be very interesting to see if Rove and Bush will (a) back off, (b) bully their way through this, or (c) if they come face to face with righteous words of condemnation from God Almighty, thru true Christians.
Hi, GrizzlyBearDancer #20 – What a fabulous idea! Can it be suggested to Calvin College??
Maybe someone can direct their attention to this blogsite. They probably don’t even want a politician to speak at their graduation, however, Mr. Conyers is a class act and a champion of the people. If we had more Congressmen with the integrity and character of John Conyers Jr. we would not be in this mess.
Tell you this Peggy it’s my firm belief that the activism of University and later high school students which led to the end of the Vietnam war. Kids cannot be ignored and them don’t need to get paid in order to tell the truth. They can handle the truth and despise being lied too.
Calvin College should get George Galloway to speak – right alongside Bu$h. Now that would make for a memorable commencement!
It’s the 18-20 year olds that are gonna have to fight the Bushit war. The Kids gotta ROCK! If they find out Bush actually had something to do with 9/11(check out the link to the David Ray Griffin speech at comment #144 blogged by Brad on 5/10/2005 titled"Huffington Post Bush Reelection Biggest Crime in History") then it’s quit conceivable he would repeat the crime to cause reinstatement of the DRAFT. Like how bout those colors to tell you if there’s a homeland terrorist alert. Yellow: move slow sorta sneek around when you walk. Blue:quicken yer step terrorist could be around the corner RED: Better run your ass off cause bomb will be exploding like your in Bagdad BUSHIT…AND that’s exactly where the kids are gonna be sent. The whole Bush administration propaganda based on dumbass mindfck! Even if he don’t reopen the 9/11 case, they are still guilty of everything else including using sympathies of 911 to attack Iraq and enact a plan to destroy the middle class.
Blue Moon ice cream Correction to comment #20. S/B 15 mi east of South Haven. 15 mi west of South Haven would mean I grew up in the lost city of Atlantis because that’s the middle of Lake Michigan. Sorry.
WP #10 and others
I caught on to the Bushies use of "it’s politics" as a dismissive phrase during this episode when The Union of Concerned Scientists published a report documenting Bush’s misuse of science back in 2004. I happened to be working in the lab of someone who signed the report, and I saw the letter he received from Marburger, Bush’s science adviser.
John Marburger III, White House science adviser, said the charges were “like a conspiracy theory report, and I just don’t buy that.” But he said that “given the prestige of some of the individuals who have signed on to this, I think they deserve additional response, and we’re coordinating something.”
What they were apparently coordinating were letters signed by Marburger, to each of the original signitories of the Union of Concerned Scientists document. I saw the letter that was sent to the scientist I was working with. My recollection is that it was threatening, and generally dismissed the UCS concerns as being politically-driven.
Ah, I thought. Whenever the Bush WH (whore-house) wants to discredit something, they say it’s "politically motivated." So it has proved.
Here are some links to Bush’s misuse of science. "Science", for those of you who hated Bio. 101, includes everything from global warming to reproductive rights.
http://www.ucsusa.org/news/pres...cfm?newsID=381
http://www.arhp.org/corevalues/...cepolitics.cfm
http://www.scientistsandenginee...es/000024.html
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/k...on/7985452.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0322-25.htm
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04222/358760.stm
:)Be of good cheer. There are some Christians out there who are beginning to figure out that the agenda of Jesus has little to do with the agenda of Bush. So who knows, maybe these insights will spread throughout the evangelical world and Christians will help elect politicians that realize that Jesus visited, helped, and advocated for the sick, needy, and poor and not Halliburton and Enron. That Jesus was the Prince of Peace not the Prince of Bagdad. That the eye of God is on the sparrow rather than having a total disregard for human beings in a war based on lies and falsehoods. One can only hope.
I am not only not a Christian, but also in danger of turning ANTI-Christian in the last decade thanks to the political "Christianity" of Bush et al. My friends try to remind me that "real" Christians or "good" Christians would never support a lying, murderous, power-hungy, repressive government and I’ve just pursed my lips.
THANK YOU students and faculty at Calvin. and contributors to blogs like these for shining the light on the fact that true Christians aren’t willing to be co-opted by lip service to their faith. I grew up in GR, so I’m pretty impressed at the independence of spirit married to strength of faith demonstrated by this protest. God bless each of you… I’m actually looking forward to my next visit!
In reference to comment #37. The whole George W. Bush administration are a bunch of posturing lyers, truth distortors, or blatently hide the truth if it differs from their "agenda" or point of view they are pushing. Yes, scientific studies and theory gets in the Bushit way. Bush and Cheney are the leaders of wealthy benefactors in a war they created even if they cannot be credited yet with actual 911 involvement. It is a proven fact that Condolezza Rice head of the security department at that time knew of the a planned attack). She was rewarded with her efforts of lying about Iraqi ties to Alkaida and WMD by being Bush’s new Secretary of State. Murderers of a new blind America. Strip Americans of their voice by stealing the last 2 Presidential Elections and then use your Congressional majority to centralize your power out of the hands of the people. Lucky i ain’t in Michigan this weekend.
Thank you Christians. I have been a devout Christian for most of my life but the activities of the Christian Right have caused me to say that I love Jesus and my own wonderful humanist chuch, but the institutional church has descended to idolatry and hatred of Jesus, who was ALWAYS on the side of the outcast and despised. You give me hope that Christians may be able to take back ou religion in ths name of thoose for whom Jesus lived and died.
Christians
The urge to put everything in one box, republican or democrat, and christian, is inaccurate. I am glad the students have not been subverted.
Sometimes we forget that there are over 450-500 differing "denominations" in american christianity. I think the term "churchianity" is a more apt phrase.
Likewise Islam and so many other religions have divisions or denominations. I think "mosqueianity" is a more apt term.
The overriding factor in all this is the branding of a targeted individual or group with the term infidel, heretic, or the like, and then generating hatred toward them thru some form of rhetorical exercise.
At the other end of this is the "wolf in sheep’s clothing" syndrome. In this tactic the wolf must look like a sheep so as to infiltrate the sheep. Then from within subvert and or destroy the sheep.
The students see the wolf and they are "crying wolf" in the correct and proper way of crying wolf.
It is a distortion that the MSM promotes to think that crying wolf always is the wrong thing to do.
The wolf is coming but do not hate him. Just put him in his place. Stay free of hatred.
Nicely spoken, Brer Dredd
SAN FRANCISCO, May 18 (Reuters) – Lexar Media Inc.’s chief executive said on Wednesday that a hearing has been delayed on its request for an injunction to bar Toshiba Corp. from selling memory products in the United States.
This is to watch Toshiba’s mind-controlling people. Toshiba Corp decided in the end of Apr 1999 that it would be a loser PC’s FDC trial and Toshiba Corp mass-mind-controlled to get people’s simpathy as a general sufferer from abnormal U.S. law system. Later, Toshiba Corp succeeded in mind-controlling American people and in reducing the punishment.
(This is not a spam although this is like a spam.)
On Nov 12, 2001 after Toshiba Corp (Japan) opened MLC NAND flash memory technology (for US patent), Lexar Media, Inc (USA) found MLC NAND flash memory by Toshiba Corp and SanDisk Corp (USA) used Lexar’s flash memory controller technology although Toshiba and SanDisk announced the agreement on Oct 6, 1999 and manufactured.
Lexar Media, Inc filed in Santa Clara County Superior Court (USA) a lawsuit alleging theft of trade secrets and breach of fiduciary duty claims in the development of a flash memory architecture against Toshiba Corp, Toshiba America, Inc. and Toshiba America Electronics Corp on Nov 5, 2002. Reversely on Jan 13, 2003, Toshiba Corp filed in United States District Court for the Northern District of California (USA) a lawsuit against Lexar Media, alleging that Lexar flash memory products and peripherals infringe Toshiba’s U.S. Patent but on Jan 25, 2005, the Court construed several key terms in Lexar’s favor, rejecting several of Toshiba’s attempts to avoid infringement of Lexar’s patents. (Detail at http://www.lexar.com/litigation/ and so on.)
On Mar 23, 2005, the Santa Clara County Superior Court jury initially awarded Lexar $381 million in compensatory damages. On Mar 24, 2005, the jury determined that Toshiba should pay an additional $84 million in punitive damages, bringing the total to $465 million. The additional award for punitive damages resulted when the jury found that Toshiba and TAEC’s actions were oppressive, fraudulent or malicious.
Toshiba Corp didn’t simply mind-control the jury to win as always. But, the punitive damage was only a fraction of the $1 billion or more sought by Lexar.
"Toshiba believes that the verdict rendered by the jury was in error, and we plan to pursue all available legal avenues to correct it", Toshiba Corp said in a statement after the Mar 25, 2005 judgement. Toshiba Corp said the legal actions were still undecided.
Further, Toshiba Corp answered "Flash memory supply will go stronger and stronger in FY 2005 and FY 2006.", May 13, 2005 morning Nikkei Newspaper said.
Lexar seeks an injunction that bars the sale of Toshiba’s products in the U.S., including products that have been found to incorporate Lexar’s trade secrets, such as Toshiba’s large and small block NAND flash chips, its CompactFlash, Secure Digital and xD-Picture Cards.
But a post-trial for the hearing has been delayed. The date chancged Apr 13, 2005 to May 16, 2005 and May 16, 2005 to maybe Jun 27, 2005. (The Court’s e-mail told me the next post-trial would be held on Jun 27, 2005, but I can’t know which the e-mail was a real or a lie Toshiba person made.)
Feb 10, 2005 BusinessWire at http://www.forbes.com/businessw...0005270r1.html informed the Toshiba’s malicious : Feb 10, 2005 trial.
Toshiba executive Yoshihide Fujii, who was secretly negotiating with SanDisk Corp, ilegally got Lexar’s trade secret from Hideo Ito, a senior Toshiba executive who sat on Lexar’s board from 1997 to 1999.
In May 1997, Toshiba’s flash memory didn’t make business. By 1997, Toshiba had tried but failed to develop a reliable flash memory controller. In May 1997, Toshiba invested $3 million in Lexar and asked for a seat on Lexar’s board of directors.
Yoshihide Fujii testified that the investment in Lexar was "cheap insurance" for Toshiba. Secretly in May 1997, Toshiba Corp intended to sustain Lexar and simultaneously associate with SanDisk Corp but Toshiba said it collaborated with SanDisk after it dissolved 1997 agreement with Lexar. Officially, on Oct 6, 1999, Toshiba and SanDisk announced the collaboration.
In Japan, media didn’t inform the Toshiba’s malicious, so, most of Japanese would see this Lexar v. Toshiba case just an normal IP (intellectual property) trouble.
Toshiba Corp mind-controlled media or gave media political pressure. As a Toshiba’s political pressure case, Stock Market TV program, Tokyo TV network, Japan, 9:00, 11:00 and 15:30 Monday to Friday, has never informed the Toshiba’s bad news.
Nikkei Newspaper said 2 times on Mar 25 and 26, 2005 mornings, Toshiba Corp collabolated with SanDisk Corp after it dissolved 1997 agreement with Lexar.
Mar 31, 2005 internetnews.com at http://www.internetnews.com/bus...le.php/3494346 Clint Boulton said "Judge may deny Lexar injunction request". Was this an usual propaganda by Toshiba cybazzies ? (Fremont, CA, Apr 7, 2005 — Lexar Media, Inc. announced that the Court has re-scheduled the Apr 13, 2005 post-trial hearing to May 16, 2005.)
I believe Toshiba Corp stole Lexar’s technology.
I give you a fact. Toshiba (R&D) employee Syunsuke Migita, 28 and his 2 older co-workers of NEC Toshiba Space Systems Ltd hacked formerly Japanese Space Agency NASDA’s computer to steal Mitsubishi Electric’s confidential document for NASDA’s satellite Winds on Dec 12, 2001 and they were arrested May 30, 2002 and only Migita was guilty on Sep 6, 2002.
Of course, I hope everybody won’t be cheated by only one Japan’s criminal freemason mind-controlling, Toshiba Corp. Toshiba Corp lost in Mobile PC FDC U.S. trial and the later it succeeded in mind-controlling American people and in reducing the punishment.
Toshiba’s "steal" business is just a Japanese way, according to Toshiba person’s usual saying in the site – Crime : Toshiba must pay $380 mil. for stealing trade secrets, Thursday, Mar 24, 2005 at 15:42 JST, JapanToday at http://www.japantoday.com/e/?co...#038;id=331820. As you know, of course, the "steal" business is just a way of only Toshiba Corp. Toshiba Corp is different especially far from other Japanese companies or Toshiba employees are not company persons but criminals.
And I want the World to know all from that many crazy Toshiba cybazzies were on Yahoo! Finance Message Boards for Lexar Media, Inc. (Of course, they didn’t post any message about the trial to Yahoo! Japan Finance Message Boards for Toshiba Corp but they everyday write there.)
This time, I hope America ruins atrocious and cowardly Toshiba Corp. So Toshiba spies and mind-controls for business.
I strongly believe Japanese former Apple Computer President Eikou Harada was a Toshiba spy and he wasn’t alone in Apple Computer, Inc. You know Toshiba Corp supplies its flash memory for Apple’s iPod Shuffle (1G) and its HDD for Apple’s iPod.
Lexar and FBI should check whether all Japanese employees of Lexar Media, Inc. and formerly, Cirrus Logic, Inc. were Toshiba spies. Toshiba Corp could send Japanese spies to Lexar Media, Inc. (formerly, Cirrus Logic, Inc.) before and after 1997 investment to Lexar Media, Inc and before and after the Oct 1994 contact with Cirrus Logic, Inc.
Please watch Lexar Media, Inc v. Toshiba Corp US Trial for Fair Court. Toshiba Corp is mind-controlling.
Toshiba Corp is crazy for money. (But Toshiba’s money is shared to Toshiba persons not Toshiba Corp, Toshiba stockholders.)
Crazier for money, next Toshiba President Atsutoshi Nishida, who married an Iranian for Iranian business, is more risky than crazy for money, current Toshiba President Tadashi Okamura.
Now in 2005 yen depreciation begins again. I believe, Toshiba Corp is preparing to sell SED (a kind of FED) display TV set to the World in late 2005, so, Toshiba Corp made 2003 Japan’s plasma and LCD display TV set booming to sell Toshiba’s display LSI and digital BS tuner inside most of the TV sets.
In 2004 Sony Corp and Mitsubishi Electric Corp could sell FED display TV set and in 2003 Hitachi Ltd and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co could sell Plasma display TV set and before Sharp Corp could sell LCD display TV set, but America still didn’t have the TV set booming.
(Ref.) Mind-control :
Pravda, Nov 10, 2004, "Mind control: The Zombie Effect" at http://english.pravda.ru/scienc...79/14567_.html
Pravda, Jan 6, 2005, "Psychic security department protects Russian presidents from external psychological influence" at http://english.pravda.ru/main/1...0_psychic.html
Pravda, Jul 14, 2001, "JOHN FLEMING: THE SHOCKING MENACE OF SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE FULL VERSION OF THE ARTICLE" at http://english.pravda.ru/main/2.../14/10131.html
by Seitaro Kanamaru, a Japanese
* My BBS threads in English : I am an Mind-Control Victim by Toshiba Corp since 1997.
http://www.perc.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=794
(My face is at http://www.discussanything.com/...d.php?p=838876.)
* My site in Japanese
http://jbbs.livedoor.jp/news/1301/
I wondered why Bush or Rove would request to speak before this college if they knew it likely they’d be being given a public slap in the face. Then read more and realised it was a marginal state. But even so, I would have thought that the public criticism from a christian college (even a more progressive one) would have hindered rather than helped the campaign.
As for #32 suggesting Galloway be invited to be the next college speaker, I was wondering if the speaking tour proposed for him, or the overtures for that which he confirmed had been made, with your Ivy League universities will go ahead. After all it’s about time you get a chance to hear one of our lefties since you’ve had to put up with speeches by Thatcher for so long – still at least it’s kept her away from us :).
See below for notes and comments on this “article” about lefists at Calvin and President Bush’s commencement visit on Saturday..
POMP AND POLITICS IN GRAND RAPIDS: Bush visit brings controversy
[some liberals at Calvin bring the controversy, Bush doesn’t]
[Some liberal] Students and faculty to protest Christian school’s commencement speaker
May 19, 2005
BY KATHLEEN GRAY
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER
http://www.freep.com/news/mich/...e_20050519.htm
Calvin College may be predominantly Republican, but a visit from President George W. Bush on Saturday is stirring up some discontent among [liberal and leftist] students, faculty and alumni. [see http://www.discoverthenetwork.org for linkages]
One-third of the faculty members have signed a letter of protest that will appear in a half-page ad in the Grand Rapids Press on Saturday, the day Bush is to deliver the commencement address to 900 graduating seniors at Calvin. The ad cost $2,600.
[I did not know there were that many liberals and leftist professors at Calvin but it is good to know. I am glad this event flushed them out. Now we can address them directly and defeat their failed liberal ideas in the arena of ideas. We can also keep a close eye on them to make sure they do not inject their wrong-headed politics into the classroom.]
"As Christians, we are called to be peacemakers and to initiate war only as a last resort," the letter says. "We believe your administration has launched an unjust and unjustified war in Iraq."
[The liberal and leftist faculty members are wrong in their beliefs. Let’s take them one at a time:]
"As Christians, we are called to be peacemakers and to initiate war only as a last resort"
[I’m sorry to say it, but to me that is nothing but sheer cowardice and refined selfishness.
Don’t you get it? We fight wars not to have peace, but to have a peace worth having.
As a strong Christian, President Bush is a peacemaker and he does initiate war only as a last resort. For Calvin professors to present the leftist canards of Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Teddy Kennedy and Michael Moore as “Christian” beliefs is arrogant and wrong. What gives you the right to say that Christ did not want us to protect the safety and freedom of all Americans, while liberating 50 million innocent people in two countries?
And if you think the Iraqi people are not happy we liberated them, I think you need a hug. See: http://www.cnn.com/interactive/...tent.1.11.html
It’s interesting to see how are the current leftist Democrats are linked to other extremist groups, George Soros, radical environmentalists, pro-abortion extremists, and so on. See http://www.discoverthenetwork.org
Leftists at Calvin, I ask you to think about this serious question: do you think Bush and Americans love war, or do they love peace?
Think about it seriously, Leftists at Calvin: I am not asking you to regurgitate the same old liberal mantras…I am asking you to really think…
Leftists at Calvin: I, and Bush, do not feel America is right to attempt to help spread democracy in the world because it is our way and therefore the right way.
Nor do I think America should attempt to encourage Democracy because we are Western and feel everyone should be Western. Not everyone should be Western, and not everything we do as a culture, a people or an international force is right.
Rather, we have a national-security obligation to foster democracy in the world because democracy tends to be the most peaceful form of government.
Democracies tend to be slower than dictatorships to take up arms, to cross borders and attempt to subdue neighbors, to fight wars.
Democracies are on balance less likely to wreak violence upon the world because democracies are composed of voters many of whom are parents, especially mothers, who do not wish to see their sons go to war. Democracy is not only idealistic, it is practical.
Leftists at Calvin, Americans and Bush are by nature peaceful. Americans don’t want to send their sons, or daughters, off to war. They don’t like that kind of excitement, or they don’t like it for long. This is part of why we used to be called Isolationists.
We weren’t and aren’t isolationists–we just have a bias for peace. Can that bias be overcome? Of course. Pearl Harbor overcame it. The Soviet desire to expand and impose communism overcame it. Sept. 11 did too.
Leftists at Calvin, on Iraq: I think that there’s no way ’round it but through it. We have to stay, and we have to win.
I define winning in Iraq as the yielding up of, at the least, a relatively stable society unafflicted by governmental sadism and dictatorship, and, at the most, a stable society in a fledgling democracy that demonstrates, with time, that the forces of Arab moderation, tolerance and peacefulness can triumph.
Such an outcome would give so much good to the world. What a brilliant beacon this Iraq could be, and what a setback to terrorists, who thrive in darkness.
Here is one thing I like about President Bush. He has the moral clarity to make it clear that he hates war, really hates it, and loves peace.
Bush always made it clear he thought the impending and then ongoing war a painful tragedy. Mr. Bush has made it clear, repeatedly, that he hopes for peace, yearns for peace, loves it. Bush does not enjoy war and he hopes and prays we can defeat the terrorists so they will not longer be a problem.
So, Leftists at Calvin, PLEASE stop bashing President Bush, and pretending you do it because you are Christian and he is not. Take the plank out of your own eye before you pay attention to the speck of sawdust in your brother, President Bush’s eye. How can you vote for Demcrats who aggressively promote the killing of innocent unborn baby American boys and girls, through the painful and bloody procedure of abortion? 40 million innocent children have been summarily executed, and you prance around carrying signs and putting your little letters in the papers due to your partisan hatred of Bush. You lost the election, get over it! Sure, you may have policy differences with President Bush, and with 20/20 vision you may critique how one technique or another turned out in the war, please please stop the partisan Bush bashing under the guise of “Christianity”.
With that said, Leftists at Calvin, I’d like to address this constant reference to "Blessed are the peacemakers", as an attempt to further your anti-American and leftist views. Some take quotes from Sermon on the Mount, and make ethical mistakes with it. Leftists at Calvin, the Sermon on the Mount is a declaration of personal Christian ethics, not the rules corporations and states should be run by. If you read Romans Chapter 13, you will see how God says governments should be run: with justice, mercy and grace.
Jesus said to "turn the other cheek". Imagine someone has broken into your house, broke your face, you sue him and take him to court. The judge says "did you hit this man?" The perp answers "Yes". Then imagine if the judge said: "Don’t you go to church?" Perp: "yes". Judge: "well, this is simple, turn the other check, take another whack at him, buster!"
Why does that seem out of order? For a very uncomplicated reason: it is not the judges cheek! Duh! If he were standing there with a broken jaw and missing teeth, he wouldn’t like that judgment.
Leftists at Calvin, the Sermon on the Mount says that we should give to those who ask. So imagine you are the President of a bank, and a homeless man walks in and says "I’d like to borrow $100,000. "Do you have any collateral?" "No" "Why do you think you can borrow $100,000 from this bank?" "Jesus says, ‘turn thou not away .’ What’s wrong here?
It’s not his money, it’s yours that the bank president is giving away. Leftists at Calvin, this is a PERSONAL Christian ethic. He can give his own $100,000, that would not be a problem.
Leftists at Calvin, Romans 13 states: rulers are the messengers of God, the ambassadors of God, they are rending vengeance on evil doers, they are commanded by God to do that. They bear not the sword in vain. The sword is the symbol of capital punishment. The duty of government is justice. Our duty is to live in peace as much as possible.
As long as you have men that are as wicked in the extreme…Hitler, Stalin, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, men of incredible wickedness, then I believe force must be used to bring them to cease their wickedness. Saddam has killed 2 million Iraqis, and caused 6 million more to flee the nation. Not to mention the number of Iranians he has killed. In Iran, veterans of war with Iraq are emaciated, dying a slow death from the poison he used on them. They are dying a slow death that had already taken 22 years in the hospital.
Ann Clwyd, from the British Parliament, talked about Saddam’s use of a plastic shredder. Saddam’s opponents were dropped into it, and they were forced to watch…head first, or feet first and died screaming. Witnesses saw 30 people die like this, and their remains were collected and used to feed the fish in their ponds. They saw Kusi, Saddam’s son, personally supervise this torture. Others were dropped into acid which ate them alive.
Leftists at Calvin, how does anyone argue with the fact that such a man needs to be removed from power?
The Bible makes it clear force must be used to stop evil — Jesus used force to cleanse the temple. He will use far greater force when he comes to end the war with Satan and his minions. The decisive battle with Satan was fought on blackened hill called Golgatha. There was great glee in hell, at last Satan thought he had the arch pretender in his grasp. There was delight in hell, when Jesus uttered his last words, "it is finished". Satan thought he had won the victory. Until that glorious morning when, as the sun rose above the horizon, spreading across the dome of the temple. People saw the tomb was empty, Christ had risen from the dead, Conqueror. The decisive battle has been won, and this is just a clean up operation until he comes back again.
The victory belongs to Christ and those who belong in him.
Now let’s address this liberal lie that Bush did not initiate war as a last resort.
Leftists at Calvin, not every situation requires military action. As a matter of fact, military action is the very last resort for us. As you noticed, for example in North Korea, we’ve chosen to put together a multinational strategy to deal with Mr. Kim Jong-Il.
And a reminder, Leftists at Calvin : When you mentioned Saddam Hussein, I just wanted to remind you that the Barbaric mass murderer and former tyrant dictator Saddam Hussein’s military action took place after innumerable United Nations Security Council resolutions were passed — not one, two or three, but 17 unanimous UN Resolutions.
Leftists at Calvin, the liberation of Iraq and the disarming of Saddam was justified over 14 years, 17 UN resolutions, 2 bipartisan and bicameral overwhelming resolutions, and the overwhelming support of the American people. We were further justified by the Iraqi Survey Group report detailing the WMD, and the linkages found between Saddam and al Qaida.
For more details on the linkages between Saddam and al Qaeda see:
Al-Qaeda’s "Boogie to Baghdad"
http://www.nationalreview.com/y...0410070845.asp
Case Closed (Osama and Saddam link found)
http://www.weeklystandard.com/C...3/378fmxyz.asp
Liberals like to say “There is no connection between Islamic terrorists and the Saddam Hussein regime.” This statement represents one of the few examples of anti-war activists disagreeing with the official line of the Iraqi government. Saddam and his killers always emphasized the proud support of the heroic and revolutionary Iraqi people for Islamic fighters everywhere, including the holy warriors of al-Qaida.
Meanwhile, the al-Qaida crew similarly expresses its solidarity with Saddam – as they did in their Internet statement claiming credit for the recent Kenya attacks, and linking future assaults to potential war against their friends, the Iraqis. If Iraq expresses solidarity with al-Qaida, and al-Qaida expresses solidarity with Iraq, peaceniks face a difficult challenge in arguing that they represent utterly disconnected phenomena.
Furthermore, the disarming of Saddam by force is not based on any links between al Qaeda and Iraq, even though they do exist. They are based on 14 years of flaunting the UN Resolutions and building WMD with the intention of destroying America. We disarmed Saddam for the protection of our people. Thank You President Bush and Thank You Troops!!!
In a videotaped message, the al-Qaida "military commander" for Europe claimed credit for the bombings, saying that the terrorist attack was meant to punish Spain for supporting the war in Iraq. The message came as a total shock to liberals who have been furiously insisting that Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with al-Qaida.
Apparently al-Qaida didn’t think so. After the Madrid bombings, it looks like liberals and terrorists will have to powwow on whether there was an Iraq/al-Qaida link. Two hundred dead Spaniards say there was. Another liberal lie bites the dust.
Al Qaida ADMITTED they are linked to Iraq terrorists after they bombed Spain! So much for the liberal mantra, "no links between al Qaida and Saddam"!
And so, Leftists at Calvin, this nation is very reluctant to use military force. We try to enforce doctrine peacefully, or through alliances or multinational forums. And we will continue to do so.
Leftists at Calvin, we must never forget the lessons of September the 11th. The terrorists will strike, and they will kill innocent life, not only in front of a Red Cross headquarters, they will strike and kill in America, too. We are at war.
Leftists at Calvin, as Bush said right after September the 11th, this would be a different kind of war; sometimes you’d see action and sometimes you wouldn’t. It’s a different kind of war than what we’re used to. And Iraq is a front on the war on terror. And we will win this particular battle in the war on terror.
The battle is now joined on many fronts. We will not waiver, we will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail. President Bush has kept his word to the American people and the world on this.]
Leftist Calvin professors also said:
"We believe your administration has launched an unjust and unjustified war in Iraq."
[“Unjust and Unjustified”? Come on, Leftists at Calvin!
Leftists at Calvin, the democrats are looking for détente with the terrorists…they are playing for a tie. Republicans are playing to win. Democrats don’t believe in a victorious America.
Leftists at Calvin, how would what the democrats are doing now be any different than if they were openly supporting our enemies?
Leftists at Calvin, pacifism and appeasement, in the face of unimaginable inhumanity, is not peace. You may think it is, but try being the victim like the Iraqis under Saddam, and tell me if it’s peace!
“Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay–and claims a halo for his dishonesty." -Robert A. Heinlein
Leftists at Calvin, you liberals used to care about atrocities, you used to care about human rights. Apparently you haven’t been moved by the 300,000 mass graves we found in Iraq… http://www.npr.org/news/special...ce_030514.html
I thought you liberals cared about ATROCITIES!! How can you see men shredded, then say you don’t back war to liberate Iraqis!? http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3284-614607,00.html Saddam threw people into plastic shredders and fed the remains to fish, Saddam raped wives in front of their familes.
Leftists at Calvin, what part of tyranny and murder, using WMD on his own people, hiding WMD production from the UN, and consorting with terrorists do you NOT consider a good reason to disarm Saddam?
If you go back to the 14 month national discussion about going to Iraq, you will see many reasons were discussed for the liberation and disarming of Iraq…and they have all been proven true by events
Leftists at Calvin, you seem to be saying “War is not the answer” … that depends on what the question is now doesn’t it? War ended slavery, fascism, The Taliban harboring al qaeda, ba’athism, Soviet totalitarianism, but other than that, it has a limited repertoire.
Apparently your answer is to have America take no action against barbaric despots who seek America’s destruction.
Leftists at Calvin, Saddam and his supporters wished and planned for the death of every man, woman, and child in America, and Osama has declared since 1998 that every American, civilian or military, adult or child, richly deserves to die. And strong linkages between Osama and Saddam have been documented at: http://www.weeklystandard.com/C...3/378fmxyz.asp
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains of slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!” — Patrick Henry (March 23, 1775)
Leftists at Calvin … Slavery is “peace”. Tyranny is “peace”. For that matter, genocide is “peace” when you get right down to it. Are YOU willing to sit by and do nothing and put up with THAT kind of “peace”?
Leftists at Calvin, remember: PACIFISM IN THE FACE OF AGGRESSION IS SUICIDE.
Leftists at Calvin, if you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace. We seek not your council, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
Leftists at Calvin, the historical consequences of your philosophy predicated on the notion of no war at any cost are families flying to the Super Bowl accompanied by three or four trusted slaves and a Europe devoid of a single living Jew.
Leftists at Calvin, war has never solved anything except for ending slavary, fascism, and communism, Talibanism, and ba’athism.
Leftists at Calvin, it would be nice if there were a way around this. History, not merely my opinion, shows us that there is not.
Leftists at Calvin, we must face the hard and bitter truth that good people can walk away from a fight, but when they do, bad people will have the field and we have seen the horrors they can inflict. For example, Hitler, Stalin, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden…
Leftists at Calvin, if all you are willing to do is think happy thoughts, then those are the consequences. If you want justice, and freedom, and safety, and prosperity, then sometimes you have to fight for them.
Leftists at Calvin, the liberation of Iraq and the disarming of Saddam was justified over 14 years, 17 UN resolutions, 2 bipartisan and bicameral overwhelming resolutions, and the overwhelming support of the American people. We were further justified by the David Kay and Duelfer reports detailing the WMD capabilities Saddam was hiding and building, and the linkages found between Saddam and al qaeda.
Leftists at Calvin …….the Iraqi people are preparing a constitution that provides the same level of civil and personal freedoms that vitually every western country enjoys. Freedom of religion, of expression, of the press. The idea that this is morally equivalant to a brutal dictatorship shows a sharp lack of understanding of the horrors of Saddam’s regime, and the freedoms you yourself enjoy.
So the liberal lie you push is that Bush “rushed to war”, and this is an “unjust and unjustified” war. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
For 14 long years, our country and the world had and open and free discussion on disarming Saddam. I, for one, am glad that Bush and the large coalition of countries have liberated Iraqis, and Iraqi citizens are free to discuss issues without the fear of a dictator torturing them for speaking up. And I’m glad we have a thoughtful, Christian President who has thought through all these issues carefully and thoroughly, along with the best minds we have had in an administration in a long time. We discussed this issue since way before 9-11-01, at our kitchen tables, in our churches and schools, in the UN, inside the Bush Administration and in the US Congress. Senators and congressmen from both sides of the aisle discussed all angles of this issue and voted overwhelmingly to authorize the President to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam Hussein and enforce the 17 UN Resolutions demanding that he disarm now.
I followed the arguments on both sides through the congressional debate, and saw the result: two (2) overwhelmingly supported bipartisan congressional approvals. The first one gave the President the authority to use force against those nations he determines aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent an future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
On 9-14-01, Congress approved the "Joint Resolution To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces" (Resolution 23) In this Resolution, the US Congress gave THE PRESIDENT, George W. Bush, the authority to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons HE DETERMINES planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
http://allen.senate.gov/PressOffice/SJRES23.pdf
House Joint Resolution 64: Passed the House 420-1. September 14, 2001.
Senate Joint Resolution 23: Passed the Senate 98-0. September 14, 2001.
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.
So President Bush was given the authority, in September of 2001, to use force against nations that harbored terrorists, which includes Iraq. But, he wanted to go above and beyond, he wanted to move slowly and deliberately, and make sure he got the approval of the American people and both houses of Congress. So Oct 2, 2002, Joint Resolution 114, the "Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq" was overwhelmingly approved by a bipartisan House and Senate. This joint resolution specifically gave President Bush authority to use force, "Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution."
Full text of the October 2002 Resolution:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/...0021002-2.html
Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq.
SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This joint resolution may be cited as the "Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq".
AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION. The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to
(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq.
I watched as President Bush spurred the UN Security council to action with a September 12 speech to the U.N. General Assembly. I then followed the arguments as Bush, the United States, and the world moved deliberately and slowly, avoiding a rush to war. In November 2002 the UN Security Council issued Resolution 1441, the 16th resolution in 12 years, demanding once again that Saddam Hussein disarm.
The Resolution confirmed that Iraq is and has been in material breach of the 16 previous UN resolutions, and they offered him one last chance to disarm. He was told once again to actively cooperate with the inspectors…bring out your Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) and let the inspectors verify their destruction. If not, he was told he would face the serious consequences of using force to disarm him.
This “final chance” resolution, Resolution 1441, was passed unanimously in November 2002 by all 15 countries in the UN Security Council: France, Syria, the United States, the United Kingdom, China, the Russian Federation, Mexico, Ireland, Bulgaria, Norway, Singapore, Colombia, Cameroon, Guinea and Mauritius. The vote was 15-0.
Nothing in the resolution constrained any Member State from acting to defend itself against the threat posed by Iraq, or to enforce United Nations resolutions protecting world peace and security.
SECURITY COUNCIL HOLDS IRAQ IN ‘MATERIAL BREACH’ OF DISARMAMENT OBLIGATIONS, OFFERS FINAL CHANCE TO COMPLY, UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTING RESOLUTION 1441 (2002)
“Recognizing the threat Iraq’s non-compliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security…”
See the entire UN Resolution 1441 at:
http://www.un.org/News/Press/do...SC7564.doc.htm
So, after ALL THAT careful deliberation and overwhelming support for disarming Saddam, you lefists at Calvin want to go back and rewrite history. Well, I have news for you: we are not going to let you get away with it. You will keep losing elections if you keep promoting these lies, because you no longer have a monopoly on the news sources like you did in the past. The truth will win out.
After all, before the war, President Bush’s foes warn of body bags. There will be body bags. But the question does not seem to be "invade and get body bags" versus "don’t invade and no body bags." If that were so we’d all say fine, no invasion. The question is: "invasion body bags or noninvasion body bags?" Removing Saddam and taking losses, or not removing Saddam and waiting for the losses that will no doubt follow. Saddam is a body-bag bringer. Where he is, loss follows.
From “Gut Time – Colin Powell has persuaded me” by Peggy Noonan
http://www.opinionjournal.com/c.../?id=110003048
Thank God Bush made the right decision to disarm Saddam and liberated the 25 million people of Iraq. Saddam will NOT be passing any dangerous WMD through terrorist groups to have them show up in American cities, which would have killed 10s if not 100s of thousands of innocent Americans. Liberals, have you forgotten 9-11-01 already? If so, Shame on you.
But let us address this accusation of an “unjust” war directly. Liberals like to say that the war to liberate Iraq and disarm Saddam did not meet the long established standards of a “Just War” Just War doctrine or tradition was formulated and promoted 1,600 years ago by Augustine, refined by Aquinas and de Vitoria must address the criteria of:
• Last resort with all other means to resolve the conflict being exhausted,
This WAS the last resort, we tried diplomacy for over 12 years and he continued to build and use WMD. We didn’t want to wait until we see a mushroom cloud over an American city before we disarm him.
• Sanctioned by the society and outsiders to the society, a recognized legitimate authority,
We have a large coalition of countries with us, including many Arab countries. The US Congress voted overwhelmingly for the use of force against Iraq for not complying with UN resolutions, and the UN voted 15-0 to use force if they didn’t comply given one last chance. Furthermore, the Iraqi people themselves wanted to be liberated from this madman that was terrorizing their families.
• Redress of “wrongs” suffered – – – with the “right” intentions (revenge is not in the list of right intentions)
We did not disarm Saddam out of “revenge”…we disarmed him to protect the citizens of the United States and our allies. This redressed the wrongs of his 12 years of contempt for the will of the UN, and his continued torture and building and proliferating WMD through terrorist groups.
• Violence employed must be proportional to the violence suffered (proportionality),
We only used the proportional, necessary force needed to disarm Saddam for the sake of peace.
• There must be a reasonable chance of success; lives lost in hopeless causes are not morally justifiable,
No one doubted the US and our allies would be successful, and we have been. In fact, the war has been an overwhelming success. If you only listen to the liberal mainstream media, you may not know this, so read:
A Look Back (Victor Davis Hanson)
http://www.nationalreview.com/h...0503110746.asp
and
How Far We’ve Come (Victor Davis Hanson)
http://www.nationalreview.com/h...0412030809.asp
and
Better or Worse? (Victor Davis Hanson)
http://www.nationalreview.com/h...0401230840.asp
• Peace established after the war must be preferable to the peaces that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought,
Peace after the war, without Saddam in the picture, is much more preferable to the non-peace we had when Saddam was in power…we had torture, mayhem, tyranny, and starving of citizens for the express purpose of building more weapons of mass murder, like chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.
• Risk to innocents / noncombatants of injury must be minimized and avoided. Combatants and noncombatants role must be distinguishable to avoid civilian casualties.
Risks to innocents and noncombatants was minimized in this war, America has the best technology available and did everything possible to avoid civilian casualties.
Michael Novak is a conservative Catholic theologian and author of numerous books. He addresses the “just war” issue in an article attached below. He points out that the Catholic Catechism assigns primary responsibility not to distant commentators, but to public authorities themselves. This makes sense because “First, they bear the primary vocational role and constitutional duty to protect the lives and rights of their people. Second, they are closest to the facts of the case and – given the nature of war by clandestine terror networks today – privy to highly restricted intelligence. Others have a right and duty to voice their own judgments of conscience, but the final judgment belongs to public authorities”
“What is new in the world of Just War theory in the 21st century is the concept of "asymmetrical warfare." This concept has been developed by international terrorist groups that are not responsible to any public authority.”
“No one today denies that international terrorism is a deliberate assault on the very possibility of international order, or that public authorities have a duty to confront this terrorism, and to defeat it. Either the world community now upholds international order or it backs down from its own solemn agreements. In the latter case, individual sovereign nations will refuse to be complicit in the policy of appeasement. To do otherwise would be to join Saddam’s conspiracy against international order, and to accrue responsibility for anything he might do.
Let us hope that Saddam Hussein as a last resort decides to obey his solemn obligations under the negotiated peace of 1991, and thus at last meets the minimum requirement of international order. In that case, there will be no war. In that case, the policy of the United States will have succeeded without the need for war.”
Michael Novak, The London Times February 13, 2003
http://frontpagemag.com/Article...le.asp?ID=6133
Now, back to the POMP AND POLITICS IN GRAND RAPIDS article:]
More than 800 students, faculty and alumni also have signed a letter protesting Bush’s visit that will appear Friday as a full-page ad in the Grand Rapids paper. The ad cost more than $9,500. [you have wasted your money…America rejects your Bush bashing and America bashing]
"We are alumni, students, faculty and friends of Calvin College who are deeply troubled that you will be the commencement speaker at Calvin," the letter states. "In our view, the policies and actions of your administration, both domestically and internationally over the past four years, violate many deeply held principles of Calvin College."
[OK, I addressed the liberal canard on the war above, but this is a new one! “Domestic” policies and actions violate many deeply held principles of Calvin College? Really? How dare you speak for “Calvin College” in public! Next time please say “violate many deeply held principles of liberals and Leftists at Calvin College."
Besides, what “domestic” policies could possibly be construed as “violating deeply held principles of Calvin”? You mean Bush’s tax relief for all working Americans? That let working Americans at ALL income levels keep more of their own wages, to be spent on what THEY deem important to their families. Is it a “deeply held principle” of “Calvin” that the government should confiscate more and more of our money and waste it on government programs as they see fit?
What other domestic policies are you talking about? Bush’s No Child Left Behind program, with record high funding for education that uses testing, accountability, and high standards to help ensure educational excellence for every child. What is wrong with that?
Or was it Bush’s policies and actions on abortion that go against Calvin’s deeply held principles? The last time I checked, one of Calvin’s and Christ’s principles was to respect life created in the image of God. Bush has fought hard to promote a culture of life, against the aggressive pro-abortion stance of Democrats and their strong supporters, NARAL, Planned Parenthood, People for the American Way, National Abortion Federation, NOW, The Democratic Party, Emily’s List, and so on. See the details and linkages at http://www.discoverthenetwork.org ]
And about 100 students are expected to adorn their graduation gowns with armbands and buttons bearing the slogan: "God is not a Republican or Democrat."
[Are these Calvin students really going to wear armbands with THAT slogan? “I know
Liberals always try to impugn and ridicule Bush’s faith, and try to scare-monger that he is waging war somehow because “God told him to”. This reflects a misunderstanding about Mr. Bush’s faith. Bush actually prays for guidance, for wisdom, for strength. Mr. Bush told an audience the other day that he thinks the most generous gift one person can give another is a prayer. Bush said, "I pray for strength. . . . I pray for forgiveness. And I pray to offer my thanks for a kind and generous Almighty God." This doesn’t make Bush strange. It puts him in the normal range of Americans.
Bush doesn’t think ‘I’m God’s guy, he agrees with everything I do’. If he did it would be disturbing to say the least. But Bush is not John Brown saying God himself told me to start this war, and he’s not an ayatollah saying death to the Great Satan. Bush is just a Christian asking God for help and trying in turn to do what is helpful. When you do this you’re acknowledging your inadequacy and dependence. It’s a declaration not of pride but of humility. To a Christian it’s like declaring reality. It’s like saying, "There’s weather outside."
So Mr. Bush doesn’t shy from conclusions and he isn’t embarrassed that he asks for and needs God’s help.” From “Gut Time” http://www.opinionjournal.com/c.../?id=110003048 ]
"I’m definitely worried about a Christian school being affiliated with the Christian right," said Elise Elzinga, a 22-year-old Lambertville resident who will graduate Saturday with a degree in political science and international relations.
[What worries you about a Christian school being affiliated with the majority of Christians in America, Elise?]
Elzinga sometimes has felt isolated during her years at Calvin because of her views. She volunteered for Sen. John Kerry’s presidential campaign last year. In a poll before the 2004 elections, 80 percent of Calvin’s student body said they planned to vote for Bush.
[Elise, maybe you should examine your soul. ]
But the visit from Bush also has aroused [liberal] alumni and faculty.
David Crump, a professor of religion at the college for the past eight years, said even though he’s not scheduled to get tenure until this summer, he felt he had to speak out.
"The largest part of our concern is the way in which our religious discourse in this country has largely been co-opted by the religious right and their wholesale endorsement of this administration," he said.
[David: there is no “wholesale endorsement of this administration”…just a thoughtful analysis of the facts, and the application of intelligence guided by experience.]
Others said they’re concerned that the Bush speech will politicize the event.
[Oh really! Well, if the unhinged left wants to make a big fuss, they can. But don’t blame it on Bush or his supporters, please.]
"I can see that the Bush administration is gaining capital from this appearance, but I don’t see what it does for Calvin," said Dale Van Kley, who was a history professor at Calvin for 28 years before he joined the staff at Ohio State University in 1998.
[Dale, how arrogant of you! Bush is not doing this to “gain capital”! It is an HONOR for Calvin to be chosen as one of two schools where Bush will make a commencement address. And as President Byker said, "It provides an opportunity for Calvin to communicate its distinctiveness to a broad audience.”]
"What it will mean for the students is that they will be objects of a kind of campaign appearance."
[Dale!? A “campaign appearance”?! Are you familiar with the 22nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution? Bush is not running again! You may not have ever read the U.S. Constitution, or you may see it as an obstacle to implementing liberalism, but here it is just in case:
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/help/constRedir.html ]
Many faculty members don’t share those views.
Randall Bytwerk, a communication arts and sciences professor at Calvin, said this week that he’s thrilled that the president will speak to students. [As are most Americans.]
"It will make commencement memorable. Unless it’s somebody really interesting, it’s low on people’s list of memories," he said. "But no one is going to forget this." Administrators at the college tried to address concerns raised about the Bush visit in a letter to parents of seniors.
In the letter, President Gaylen Byker said it is an honor for Calvin to be chosen as one of only two sites where Bush will speak to graduates. The other is the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis.
[Yes, thank you President Byker, and thank you for not backing down to the radical left.]
"It provides an opportunity for Calvin to communicate its distinctiveness to a broad audience," he wrote. "Please know that accepting this request from the White House does not identify Calvin as an institution that is necessarily aligned with the person or the politics of the president."
Nick Monsma, a junior at Calvin, will return to the college Saturday to volunteer at the commencement ceremonies. He views the president’s visit as a historic opportunity for Calvin.
"It will be a neat opportunity to get close to a sitting president," the 21-year-old Hudsonville native said.
[Thank you for your work, Nick! You are a great American!]
He said he’s disappointed that students, faculty and alumni are protesting the visit.
[Yes, Nick, we are all disappointed with the embarrassing students, faculty and alumni that are protesting the visit. Hopefully they will examine their souls and rethink their mistakes, or at the very least show some civility and maturity.]
"There’s a certain forum for that kind of discussion and I don’t think this is the right forum."
[You are 100% correct, Nick. The forum was the campaign for the 2004 election, and liberals lost the argument. They can express their views in other forums but please don’t disrupt this happy Calvin Graduation occasion and this great American president, George W. Bush.]
The discussion on how the leftists at Calvin went wrong, and a point by point listing of the mistakes they made in their ads, can be found at:
http://groups-beta.google.com/g...lvin-Protester
To the idiot that says we leftists have forgotten 9-11-01, well your president has forgotten Osama Bin Ladin!!!
To the idiot that says we leftists have forgotten 9-11-01, well your president has forgotten Osama Bin Ladin!!!