Totally with you Ricka - Israel is the major cause of many of the problems in the Middle East because they refuse to even look at a way to integrate with the Arabs - they have consistently treasted the Palistinians in an appauling manner and, while claiming not to be supporting settlements in the West Bank,  have actively funded them.  Iarael has a history of war going back over 4000 years - the original taking of the promised land - "given to them by god" was only achieved by wholesale slaughter of the original occupants.

We are of course now in the midsts of a major Propogana war - This bulls**t the american and british governments are putting out is no more believable than the stuff coming out of  Iraq - it is all propaganda designed to swing public oppinion - truth has nothing to do with it. There is no evidence of weapons of mass destruction - and if the goal was dissarmament then a vastly increased UN inspectorate would do the job - but Bush and Blair do not want dissarmment - they want a reason to support war.

The US uses the vast majority of the Earth's energy resources - about 80% and that energy is much cheaper in the US than anywhere else except the middle east - however the price of oil is not controlled by the US is controlled largely by OPEC and Saudi Arabia has big say - they are a difficult country to manipulate and most of Bin Ladens key personnell are Saudi, as is he.  

A dramatic hike in the oil prices will severly damage the US economic machine which is based on access to cheap energy - add to that a recession and you begin to see why this war makes a lot of sense - A Pro American regime in Iraq will weaken OPEC - This was the way it was back in the  eighties when the US and Britain were giving conventional weapons and all manner of other nasty products to Iraq.  Britain has always been equally heavily involved in this game of regime manipulation.

As to getting rid of the UN and presumably giving the job of global policing to the US government - well if you want a true third world war - go ahead.  Even Europe will start to become enemies of the US if that were to happen - there is no room on this planet for one country no matter how economically powerful to become the appointed moral guradians of the planet - not with the doggy moral attitudes in the states anyway.

Eventually the planet is only going to evolve effectively if we learn to care for each other and empower each other - war is not about empowerment - The UN is the answer - however hard that might be - Yes lets get the UN out of the US - Lets create an independent UN state somewhere and give them the power to resolve disputes and human rights issues without corporate motives.

Most of all the march on Saturday is not just Anti War it is a Peace Rally - we are demanding that this problem be resolved by peaceful means - that may take a while - but there is NO "Clear and Present danger" from Iraq - there is no evidence of weapons of mass destruction, there is no evidence of build up of troups in readiness for a military strike against any other country, there is no evidence of any links to terrorism - There is nothing to support war - and growing opposition by Russia, France and Germany and others including a number of Muslim states.

85% of the British populaton polled last week were against war without a second UN resolution - 45% were against a war with a second resolution - Tony Blair in a interview with almost the entire audience against him seemed to say "I don't care if everyone is agaist the war, we are goin in anyway" - every day more and more MPs are objecting it will be interesting to see how many join the March.

I am looking forward to it - and I think this is going to be so big - that a few trannies out there are not going to attract any media attention - we are just going to be a normally representative of the transgender community.    

Ricka  I totally agree with everything you say which is why I wil be there on 15th - for my own conscience as much as to help make a point - Current predictions are that this march will draw over 1 million supporters - London will not be a good place to drive in 15th - it will be at a standstill - The cost of policing the demonstration alone is going to hurt the government.

Katie you are right - but I don't have a choice and we are all have human rights - I demand mine - If the media chooses to use that to try to belittle the importance of this demonstration so be it - I think everyone knows that Anti war movements attract liberal people anyway and we have always been a rather bohemian group anyway - If not me they will find someone else, so come one girls, don't let the threat of being used for Propaganda undermine your right to be who you are.

I was interested listening to that missive by Colin Powell the other day - interesting isn't it - The western media works on the assumption that if the goverment says it - it must be true - if the Iraqi government says it it must be lies - That is how Propaganda works - but it only works then the people are like sheep - this time we are not. Those of us with open minds can understand manipulation and propaganda.

Imagine this scenario in Court -

"We know you are guilty - so unless you cooperate we are going to kill you."

"But I didn't do it - Look here is the evidence to prove I didn't do it"

"We don't believe you - we know you are guilty - and we don't have to prove it - so cooperate or we are going to kill you"

"How am I supposed to cooperate"

"Admit you are guilty"  

Have I got it wrong or is that what is happening - We are presuming guilt and now using Saddam's refusal to admit he is guilty as the justification for war. Are we about to see this principle introduced into western law - guilty till you admit it - This was the system applied by the Spanish Inquisition, and various fundametalist groups in the past.

I am sure that all is not right in Iraq - Saddam is a nasty piece of work - but he is not alone - there are a lot of bad leaders - but that does not warrent US and British troups killing and maiming thousands of innocent people. There is a peaceful means of resolving this - the UN, and this is an opportunity for us to give the UN the power it needs to maintain peace by peaceful means.

I have feeling that the death toll of British and American soldiers will be a lot higher this time than before - The people of Iraq do not want this war - and they will fight - not to stay in another country but to try to stop an invasion.  When the dust settles and or politicians ask us to morn the dead - I will not be there - In fact I am seriously considering decucting my portion of the contribution to the cost of this war from my tax bill and donating it to an appropriate world peace charity.

I will feel compassion for the families of the dead though more for the innocent Iraqi people than the British and American Soldiers - who knew the risks when they joined up.

"...there's not a military force on the planet which has a chance of defeating the US."  True - but you can't use military force to fight gurrilla warefare because you can't see the enemy - They attack then blend into the crowd - Sharron has tried ther approach of "kill everyone you think is the enemy and then claim they were not innocent when they are dead" - We still have the outcome of that policy to face after Iraq.  

Heather--

You just made my point! ;D

Why use something big if something smaller will work?
(Everybody keep your snide comments to yourself.)

Evansville, IN's nearest "Big Neighbor" is Louisville, KY...90 minutes to my east. Next up: Either Nashville, TN (Hi, Stevie!), Indianapolis, IN OR St. Louis, MO--2.5-3 hours minimum travel time. Cincinnati, OH is 4 hours out. Chicago, IL is 5-6 hours out, Atlanta, GA is 6.5 hours away, and while everything may be up to date in Kansas City, KS or MO (take your pick), I'm not driving 8 hours to find out. (I'm not joking when I say I live in the sticks, kids.) So I TOTALLY understand the need for good gas mileage...and like you, would like to see our dependence reduced greatly. Hence, a more fuel efficient vehicle...that I can get into without a ladder.  

Luv 'n hugs,

Jayne Sakura 
"Almost-Angel, T-Girl Genius, and Ultra-Flirt"

I guess it is time for me to get in on this one.

While I believe that getting rid of Saddam Hussein would be a positive development, I question the motives of our leaders.

It is hard for me to give my unconditional support to a government that I cannot trust and a president whom I do not respect.  Certainly our leaders, who are Texas oil men, have their beady little eyes on the Iraqi oil fields.  Also, Bush is probably motivated by the desire to finish what his father started.  I wonder if they will simply try to grab Iraq's oil wealth and only make a meager effort to rebuild the country.

Clearly, the sanctions and inspections that took place during the 1990's failed.  Something different must be done, and war, as nasty as it is, may be the only answer.  But my support for such an effort is very weak, and if our leaders make even the slightest mistake, my weak support will likely turn to strong opposition.

Another problem that I have is that we are going after Iraq vigorously, but we are far more careful with North Korea.  Certainly, North Korea has a greater potential to inflict damage on the U.S. than Iraq does.  But they have nuclear weapons, so we are afraid to confront them too strongly.  While confronting North Korea right now would be risky, I wonder if in the long run backing down would be more risky.  The message we are sending is that all of the world's nasty little countries need to develop nuclear weapons as quickly as they can, or else the United States and Britain may come down hard on them and they will not be able to defend themselves.  I see massive nuclear proliferation in the future unless the current policies are modified.

The ultimate solution to our problems in the middle east is to pour as much money as we can into finding a replacement for oil.  That part of the world is full of nasty people and nasty, violent regimes which are feeding themselves on our money.  Imagine how nice it would be if we had no economic reason to have anything to do with that part of the world.  We could then cut off the massive flow of money to those countries, and the nasty people there would be unable to finance their nefarious plots.  Because of oil, we are forced to deal with a once-great civilization that has collapsed into chaos and instability.  That must change.

As a final thought, consider this possibility.  Iraq invaded and occupied Kuwait, so we complained that Iraq had done a terrible thing and we needed to go in and drive them out.  What if, for example, Zambia invaded and occupied Malawi in a similar fashion.  Would we be so quick to go in and correct the situation?  I think not.  We are quick to claim the moral high ground when our national economic interest is threatened, but we do nothing when countries that are not of strategic interest to us commit terrible crimes.  That sounds like hypocrisy to me.

Heather H.

Stevie is right about cars being a necessity in the U.S.  In Utah, everything is spread out, and except for the urbanized area around Salt Lake City, the state is extremely sparsely populated.  Public transportation that serves the entire state would not be feasible.  There are numerous large trucks and SUVs here, and some people actually need them (although many could probably get along with something smaller).  Many of the roads in remote, rural parts of the state which are popular for recreation are not passable to ordinary cars, so high-clearance, typically 4-wheel-drive vehicles are needed to access these places.

I found a good compromise.  I do not want to burn any more of the nasty oil than I need to, but I also like to explore the desert and I occasionally have reason to haul large amounts of material.  So I bought a small pickup truck.  It is not 4-wheel-drive, but it has good ground clearance and can make it over all but the worst roads.  I get about the same fuel efficiency that Jayne describes for her car.  The only downside is that it has very limited passenger space.

All the responses I have seen simply reaffirm my belief that we need to get off our dependence on oil.  Our national security must not depend on a commodity that is obtained from some of the nastiest places in the world.

Heather H.

Stevie--

Just a quick note--as of today, I suspect it is no longer an if but when we're off to war. I suspect Colin Powell has done his job at the UN, and done it well. (I also suspect he'd look really cute in an A-line dress and 3" heels.)

Having said all that, I still maintain that war is evil, even when necessary. Sad to say, if we must go and kill off the best and brightest, let us all hope for two things: a quick and decisive end, and that we ("we" being the US and Allies) are actually allowed to fight...and win the d@mn thing for once.

I am not a big fan of politicians in general. (I'm not that big a fan of Generals, either.) Bush (Sr. or W), Clinton (either of them), Reagan, Blair (plum trousers notwithstanding), Thatcher, or pick one that I've missed. I am equal opportunity--I poke fun at all of them.

Whatever one thinks of Mr. Bush, however, I look at what he has had to put up with. The 9/11 bombings...Saddam Hussein...fiscal woes here at home...The Columbia tragedy, still painfully fresh to me. Whether or not one thinks he "stole" the election, that is a load for anyone who would be holding the office right now. Frankly, I feel that it's better him than me. (I can shop better, 'cause I don't have all the Secret Service cuties and media cams all over me, 24/7. Ick.)

My political leanings are somewhat conservative, and somewhat liberal. It depends on the topic, really. But I suspect we both agree on a number of issues, deep down.

I also suspect we disagree on some things, too. But I'm leaving that alone for now. ;D

Luv 'n hugs,

Jayne Sakura
"Almost-Angel, T-Girl Genius, and Ultra-Flirt"

PS--If anyone marches en femme, I recommend flats, not heels. Might have a looonng marching route...! ;D

HI GIRLS, I'M ALL FOR WAR. IT'S GOOD BUSINESS,AND HELPS CUT DOWN THE POPULATION OF MALE CHILDREN IN THIS COUNTRY.WHY...I'M READY TO GO MY SELF AS SOON AS THE IRAQIS LAND ON MIAMI BEACH...N-O-T.......I WENT LAST TIME 2 TOURS IN VIETNAM,WOUNDED TWICE -BRONZE STAR-PRESIDENTIAL UNIT CITATION....YOU REALLY DON'T WANT TO KNOW WHAT I THINK ABOUT THESE IDIOTS IN WASHINGTON & BAGDAD,IT WOULD TAKE UP  ALL OF TRANNYWEBS SPACE,AND LEAVE NO ROOM FOR T-GIRL VOICES...WAR IS HUMAN INSANITY,INSTIGATED BY IDIOTS...WHEN WE FIGHT A WAR WE HAVE RULES....THE FIRST RULE OF WAR IS "THERE ARE NO RULES" AMERICA HASN'T FOUGHT A WAR TO WIN SINCE WW2,AND THAT'S THE BIGGEST CRIME AGAINST THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY WHO SACRIFICE THIER SONS (NOW,DAUGHTERS,TOO) ON THE ALTAR OF FREEDOM.... DON'T GET ME STARTED,YOU KNOW HOW I GET...PHYLISS

What can I say ... well said LadyJayne.

I've enjoyed Stevie's posts these past months, and I hope she's not going to take this one disagreement to heart... I guess we can't agree all the time can we, but here goes:

Iraq has done nothing wrong (recently) so what's it all for?

Are our governements (UK and US) so righteous ?
China has been occupying Tibet for years, yet the US signed a trade treaty, and when the main man came here to the UK, they lined police vans up so he couldn't see the protests - what's more they even raided a private flat, to remove a Tibetan flag that was being flown from a balcony he may just have seen.

Then there's East Timor, both UK and US supplied arms. We (UK) sold fighter jets to help Indonsesia suppress the rebels, how many lives were taken by those planes? Blair and Bush, and their predessors have sponsored world terrorism, the world over. To cry war on terrorism is just hyprocisy. As an English girl, Blair to me is guilty of accomplice to murder, nothing less. I'm ashamed of what he and the Tories before him, have done in our name.

And lets not forget the Irish question. Personally I can damn well understand why they didn't want to be ruled from London (I certainly dont). But remember US girls, how some of your citizens funded not just the IRA, but the Loyalist side too, and how when London or Dublin tried to extradite some of the 'terrorists', some of your judges said it was a 'political' act.

Our Foreign Secretary talked about an 'Ethical Foreign Policy' when he was an opposition MP, and yet he's overeen the selling of arms to any tin pot dictator who's prepared to pay.

Why should some terrorism be acceptable when sponsored by the UK or US governments, but not when somebody else does it?

This impending war is wrong, damn wrong.

I don't know what coverage its got outside the UK yet, but did the rest of you know that much of the great intelligence dossier Colin Powell referred to that was published in Britain ... was actually written by a Californian post-grad student 12 years ago. So it wasn't exactly current! Whoops the spin machine f**ked up.

As they say, here in England. Guy Fawkes was the last man to enter parliament with honest intent.

<Paranoid mode on>

Of ocurse everything I post is being recorded, due to the so called RIP bill (Regulatry Investigationary Powers) so no doubt my cards have now been marked. So now they know, I'm not just a Tranny, I'm an 'off message' Tranny.

There's probably a car outside right now ...

<Paranoid Off>

Yours, Liz

I read recently about some people in the U.K. that had their cars impounded by the police for running them on the oil from the fryer at the fish and chip shop while I know this is possible, (I think someone in the U.S. did it with the oil from Mc Donalds once) and I know a guy that ran a car on corn oil with good results.
the reason the cars were impounded was because the "fish fat" was not taxable as a road fuel. ;D ;D

They would have to be slip on shoes, Bush is too stupid to figure out straps. ;D

I think it would be a good idea for the States to follow Europe on this (not overnight, but gradually over time). It would not only reduce consumption, and thereby make the air in the cities cleaner, it would reduce the US need for foreign oil, and its economy would become more resiliant to varying oli prices.

...and not have an Urban Assault Vehicle Sport Utility Vehicle (or is it Sport Futility Vehicle?) to waste gas in? In America? I don't think so.

You are making sense, Lizzie. Stop that!

Too bad, really...the Princess Flyer gets pretty decent mileage. To wit: Currently, I pay somewhere in the range of $1.60-$1.70/gallon for gas. I can fill my 13 gallon tank for $22, provided I have totally emptied the tank. I get about 300 miles to a tank, or about 6-8 days of driving about...all in the city.

This is from a 1994 Nissan Sentra SE, with about 125,000 on it....and this includes all needed smog equipment.

Why on earth would I want a gas guzzler?  ??? Everything I save in gas can therefore go to herbs, hose, skirts and makeup.

And people wonder why I can dress so well.... ;D

Luv 'n hugs,

Jayne Sakura  
"Almost-Angel, T-Girl Genius, and Ultra-Flirt"

Well, as Rikki already knows I'll be there too.

Alice, Rikki is absolutely right Tony's not going to like it one little bit if half a million people turn out.
They have already made a half-hearted attempt to try and ban it, which only makes me more determined.
I'd go even if they did. What would they do then, arrest everyone ?

It was once said that for evil to prosper, good men need do nothing .... well this tranny wont do nothing.

Pray for peace girls,

Luv, Liz Tyler

Stevie

We clearly have strongly differeing view here and I don't want to stir things up - I don't like Bush at all - I think he is a serious threat to life as we know it - I can't stand to listen to him speak - there is just something about his body language etc that drives me nuts - I had the same problem with Margaret Thatcher - a women who damaged Britain more than any Prime Minister in our long history - But that's another debate.  Blair is going the same way - increasingly coming across as slimy and untrustworthy - as others have said - he is on a personal missioin that has nothing to do woth the welfare of the UK citizans.

I tried to follow what was happening in Florida via the news but Bush to his credit is a master politician and propagandist - even better than Adolf Hitler.  However I have now read Michael Moore's Stupid White Men, which although I admit is biased against Bush (and Blair) does present some strong and powerful evidence that the Florida Election was corrupted by Jed Bush.

We see very little of the US media in the UK - and I know you see even less of ours - what we do see is tainted and biased by largely right wing control - Huge sections of the media are owned by a few very rich "Stupid White Men" and it was interesting to read how Rupert Murdocks publishing company tried unsuccessfully to bury Michael Moores Book.

If this war goes ahead I think we are all going to learn just how little anyone had managed to do to stop terrorism - Police already haveevidence of dirty bombs in the UK - and all medical practitioners in some areas were given emergency Smallpox vacinations last year. Terrorism is so easy as was seen with the Anthrax scare in 2001.  

You don't stop it with guns - you stop terrorism by removing the causes - when 3 billion people on this planet do not have clean drinking water - but the problem could be solved for a fraction of the cost of War on Iraq - you start to understand why people hate the British and Americans enough to give their lives to strike a blow for their cause.

A massive 90% of the worlds wealth is in the hands of a just 2000 families - and it seems that they will not be happy until they have it all - If we were to put the same resources and energy into solving poverty that we are devoting to war - perhaps we would not need a war at all - and in addition the rest of the world would begin to respect the wealthy instead of despising them.

I see Neville Chamberlain is alive and well. http://mywebpages.comcast.net/fashionlab/Images/Smileys/Wink01.gif


Stevie:

Ouch! :-/ That one hurt, and it maybe isn't called for. (If nobody calls for it in 30 days, however, it's all yours. ;D) While I do not agree with his policies at the time, I feel his heart was in the right place. He meant well, and probably more so than we on this side of the pond will ever know.

As for the coming war: while I am not really for this idiocy that is looming, I am not totally against it, either. I'd rather we not go to war if we don't have to.

But if we must, then my comment stands:"a quick and decisive end, and that we ("we" being the US and Allies) are actually allowed to fight...and win the d@mn thing for once." In short: I don't want to see us go to war, but if we do, then let's make it a short one.

In fact, let's teach all the kids today about the horrors of war, since we here in the US don't really have much to work with. Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm is past history for today's youth, and Vietnam is ancient history. We won't even discuss Korea, much less WW2. We need to teach our youth what war really is, because I think that they have no clue. They're soft. What little they think they know they have gotten from Hollywood.

So let's send in a bunch of young people--kids, anymore--who have had little training. Hand them a machine gun and send them in to fight, fight long, fight hard. Maybe lose a leg, or an arm. Maybe even die, fighting for whatever the h*ll it is that we are fighting for. They'll discover that there isn't going to be many heroic rescues, that stuff breaks down and jams, and they can't pull the pin on a grenade with their teeth. They'll learn that Hollywood has lied to them.

And when their friends and peers start having to go to the funerals, and young wives (or husbands) lose their loved ones, and 4 year olds lose their Mommies and Daddies, perhaps we will wake up to discover what some of our overseas counterparts already know--that war really is an evil thing.

I meant what I said: if we are going off to war, then let's make it a real one. Not a "Police Action"...a war, raw and bloody and ugly. Let's win the d@mn thing, bring everyone home, throw the survivors parades and show them the respect they deserve, while mourning their lost comrades.

Perhaps then maybe they will learn what our generation didn't--or wouldn't--about what a war is.

And maybe, just maybe, we can finally beat our swords into plowshares.

Luv 'n hugs,

Jayne Sakura 
"Almost-Angel, T-Girl Genius, and Ultra-Flirt"

The UK RIP bill is akin to the US Carnivore act.

Here's a link to one of the protest sites

http://www.fipr.org/rip/

You can now go to jail in the UK if you encrpyt data and refuse to hand over the digital key. You could genuinally forget or lose it, guilty until proven innocent.
And is a criminal or terrorist really going to worry about if they encrpyt their emails?

The ISPs are now duty bound to record everything.

If you want to ensure the authorities dont know where you surf, best get another dial up account, just register with a fake name and put the 1741 (or whatever?) number witheld code on the front of the dialup number.

Of course the Intelligence community would have difficulty keeping tabs on all of us, just too much data. But if you were to be singled out, be careful.

Ketie got me wondering... less than three quid a gallon, I thought it was more than that.

Then I realised she's worked it out in US Gallons.
My car runs super-plus unleaded so is typically another 5p a litre. Still around 360-370 per uk gallon. I average about 23 or 24 mpg in the daily rush hour ('only' a 3.2. litre engine, but that's big here in Europe).

But there is a serious point here. In Europe petrol is heavily taxed, which definetly makes us more aware of consumption figues, and euro-cars tend to be physically smaller than american ones, and usually have much smaller engines (e.g. 1.4, 1.6, 1.8 etc)

I think it would be a good idea for the States to follow Europe on this (not overnight, but gradually over time). It would not only reduce consumption, and thereby make the air in the cities cleaner, it would reduce the US need for foreign oil, and its economy would become more resiliant to varying oli prices.

good for you girls, if these A$$HOLE politicians had to go and fight themselves, they wouldn`t be so keen to start these wars. >>>:(

At the end of the day Blair is a politician - he needs votes and he needs support from labour MP's and he is fast losing both - and he knows it - If London is brought to a standstill on 15th he will have to take note and so will the media - who afterall are only intersted in a story - and a Prime Minister with the contry and parliament against him is a story - the more we protest the more dictatorial he appears and the less popular.

Lets hope you guys over the rin the USA can shout loud enough to give bush a wake up call - He stole the presidancy in the first place and managed to get elected with the lowest popular vote and less than 25% of the Americal people voting for him - and look what he has done since he got in - For the list of Year one disasters read Michael More's Stupid White Men.  

I'll bet the turn out at the next election will be higher.

I'LL GET THE BAIL MONEY READY....PHYLISS  :-/

Just a few thoughts about the oil thing, most of the gasoline you put into the engine doesn`t get burned all. that is needed is for someone to design a really efficient fuel system,
Most European engines are more efficient because gasoline cost $3 to $4 a gallon there, as to alternative fuels, there are quite a few of them around, yes you can still drive at 100 m.p.h. and you don`t have to fill the tank every 10 miles they are generally less polluting than gasoline, so why are they not readily available?
Because the OIL companies buy up the technology before it comes on to the market and store it away for the time when the oil runs out so they don`t lose their monopoly on the worlds fuel supply, if they can`t buy it they simply get their "friends" in government to make it so difficult for anybody to use these fuels that they usually give up and go away.
I am speaking from experience as a mechanic and not quoting the National Enquirer on this, the only way to change this situation is for people to demand better gas mileage from their cars, imagine what would happen in the U.S. if gas went up to $3 a gallon overnight.

I have decided to make the trip to London for the March on February 15th - and I shall be doing my best to stand out from the crowd (That Pink Fluffy Jacket and Pink Combats if its not too cold) and fly the flag for TGirls against War - any other girls going - any of you going to the other marches around the world - and if so will you be going dressed or in drab.

I hope that if you see me even if you are in drab - you will have the courage to say hello - I know its a bit scary - but I won't reveal your secret and I'm sure talking to me won't out you.

I see the Stop the War Campaign is encouraging everyone to stop work immediately if war breaks out and if possible to take to the streets and protest - I am going to see what we can do in Hull to bring the city to a stand still for a few hours if it happens.  There are a couple of intersections that gridlock the city if blocked.  

Still, I've enjoyed the debates, whether I'm disagreeing with Suekie about guns, with Rikki about Iraq, or with Jayne about anything. http://mywebpages.comcast.net/fashionlab/Images/Smileys/Laugh01.gif


Stevie, hon--

I truly hate to disagree with you, but...we don't really disagree on that much. ;D (Ricka, stop laughing or I'll make you stay after the debate to clean erasers.)

I do not like the concept of war, as I will always hold it to be an evil thing. Evil or not, however, it is sometimes a necessary thing.

Do we need to get Mr. Hussein out? I am of the opinion he is probably not terribly stable, and needs to be shown the exit. I can say that, because (a) I live in a country that had, until the Patriot Act passed, free speech, and (b) I think that there are many other leaders that are not terribly stable, either...they just hide it better. Including ours.

Another point of agreement: we can't afford ignore our obligation to do everything we can to help establish stability in the aftermath. 'Nuff said there.

In terms of the region overall: The Jews and Arabs have been fighting long before 1948. In point of fact, they have been squabbling since the days of Jacob and Esau, or roughly 4 to 6 thousand years--or more. (In essence, if you take into account the Old Testament writings, this is a family feud that is way out of hand.) It is about more than just the land...it is an intense hatred of the people that far outdates the existance of modern day Israel, on both sides.

Finally, on oil: I drive a sake-sucker. I have since I got my driver's license...way back when. (Way, way back when.) I like them because (a) I don't want to pay 30 bucks to fill my tank every few days; (b) I drive mainly on city streets, hence, I need no off-road capabilities, and (c) I like not needing a ladder to get into the Princess Flyer. ;D

However, this does not mean I want a car that can't pass anything because it drives like it's constipated, either. ;D Until they get that fixed, don't waste my time.


Now, to Heather:

I agree. North Korea is far more dangerous to us. Because, frankly, I suspect that they are much more likely to use their weapons. Asians, as a culture, do not like to lose respect, or "lose face". They lost face, in one very large sense, back in the 1950's, and have been waiting patiently ever since. Add to that the mix of a Communist regime that wants to wipe out Capitalism...'tis an icky mess.

Finally, your comment: "We are quick to claim the moral high ground when our national economic interest is threatened, but we do nothing when countries that are not of strategic interest to us commit terrible crimes. That sounds like hypocrisy to me." Well said, and no argument from me there.


Ricka, sugah--

I wouldn't be so paranoid if my entire government wasn't out to get me!

Since this is probably being marked somewhere, by some soulless, nameless bureaucrat, then Uncle Sam, mark my cards as follows:  "Centrist, somewhat conservative male to female transgenderist with occasional leftist leanings. I work for a Christian intitution, but has a Shinto/Buddhist/New Age bent. I burn incense, just because. I drive an import, and support an oil war only if necessary. I considered voting for Ralph Nader in the last election. I'm white, not "Euro-American"...please. I do not care much for Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, or James Dobson. I do not watch football, basketball, golf, or NASCAR. I AM a Navy vet, with Naval Anniversary medal and cold war victor medal. I do not own, nor do I want, a gun. I listens to New Age music, and practice yoga for fun. I do not like John Ashcroft OR the Office of Homeland Security. I want bigger boobs, a smaller waist, and a flat-rate tax. I want the government out of the education business, except to fund college educations, and believe that those paying student loans should have their loans forgiven. I want every teenager, at graduation, to enroll in a branch of the military for a two or three year stint...minimumally, to pay for said education. I have an IQ higher than than the President, VP and Attorney General...combined. I believe in free speech and a free press, but I also advocate returning to the Family Hour on TV...including cable channels. I do not necessarily see homosexuality as being wrong, but at the current time, I'm not quite in favor of gay marriage. The Carnivore System is poorly named, poorly run, and unconstitutional by any standard...including the current Bush administration. It is worse run if you run it like you have Amtrak, the USPS, and NASA. I am more than a number...I am a free person. I am also a thinking person, and therefore you SHOULD consider armed and dangerous. I do not play well with others."

Think that'll frost somebody's giblets?;D


Finally, Rikki--

Your comment:"Eventually the planet is only going to evolve effectively if we learn to care for each other and empower each other - war is not about empowerment - The UN is the answer - however hard that might be - Yes lets get the UN out of the US - Lets create an independent UN state somewhere and give them the power to resolve disputes and human rights issues without corporate motives." Sorry, Rikki--I disagree. The UN has a history of being horrifically soft. If we (we being the world governments, NOT just the US/UK) would stand down, and allow them to do what they were originally intended to do, then I might--MIGHT--agree with you. But as far as I can see, they have a history of failures all over the planet. Until/unless they are given some teeth, they will continue to be powerless. Given the current feelings toward the UN in the US, at least, I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Luv 'n hugs,

Jayne Sakura 
"Almost-Angel, T-Girl Genius, and Ultra-Flirt"

Ladies:


I am a US Navy vet, and I am not sure that a war is where we need to be...yet. I am still waiting for someone to "show me the money", if you will. I agree with Phyliss, as well as many of you.

Let us remember one thing: War--in any form, under any rules, or lack thereof--is an evil thing, and as such is never to be taken lightly. The protestation of same can be equally as nasty. (I remember the Vietnam protests.)

Protest wisely. Don't take undue chances, especially if you go en femme. And let us all know how you did.

Luv 'n hugs,

Jayne Sakura
"Almost-Angel, T-Girl Genius, and Ultra- Flirt"

For the record girls, I wont be an object of ridicule for the Lies of Mass Distraction media machine.

I'm not passable (unless its very dark). Daylight outings would have to be confined to myopia conventions.

Just back from London, tonights Evening Standard is predicting 500k people, but I would not be surprised if its nearer the million.

As to the when, I fear all hell will break lose in just over a fortnight, once the spinmasters have spent a week be-littling the protesters.

Gas prices down here, Palm Beach Florida are almost $2 a gallon now and will probably go higher in the next few weeks, the prices usually go down in the summer months when there are less people here, and even though all the stores are within 2 miles from here, you still have to drive a car because the public transport system is very poor.
 ::)

Thank you Stevie for pointing out that not all tranny girls are left-wingers. It often scares me to think that people I have so much in common with can be so different. I would like think that I am not the only person who likes a feminine way of life and was born male but has enough common sense to understand why Bush and Blair have done and continue doing what they believe is necessary for the security of the world.

Well, if anyone does give you grief for being against the administration just because you're a tranny, at least you can say one of your tranny friends is on their side, so it balances out.

Well, Kuwait was an ally of ours at that time, so we did have an obligation to deal with Iraq. Kuwait was an ally because of business, and that business was oil, but the country was an ally just the same. It's a little different than just watching two sovereign nations attack one another with no direct ties to us on either side. In that case, and depending on the situation, the entire world might still have an interest in getting involved to restore peace, especially the countries in the immediate area.

I, too, would like to see an alternative to fossil fuels. I'm sure we will find acceptable fuels to replace oil, but it might be a while before we are all driving vehicles that run on them. It's not enough to just have an alternative power source, though. The new fuel will have to allow for the types of vehicles we're used to. As long as oil is available and doesn't cost much more than the alternatives, consumers will stick with what they like. The new cars and trucks will have to be just as fast, large, luxurious, cool, and convenient on long trips as our current vehicles, or they won't make a dent in the problem.

I'm used to driving big sedans and trucks, and I'm not about to start driving a car small enough to store in my closet, or one that has a top speed of only 40 MPH, or one that can travel only 10 miles before refueling is required (and certainly not all of the above). However, I'm confident that we'll eventually solve all of the problems associated with consumer expectations. It's just a question of how much time it will take us to get there.

Lizzie, I'm glad you've enjoyed my posts, and I've enjoyed yours, too. There's no way we can agree on everything all the time, and that's going to be especially true as we spend more time getting to know each other here and discussing things other than our favorite lipstick colors. Religion and politics (especially politics) will always provoke strong differences of opinions, so either we can stay away from those topics or we can put our civility to the test and hope that maturity, mutual respect, and common courtesy win out more often than not.

Personally, I'd hate to think that I had to watch what I discuss around here. If it ever gets to that point, I'll probably leave, but I seriously doubt we'll have to worry about that. Things have gotten a little heated sometimes, but so far I've enjoyed the freedom we have here (within Mabel's limits) to discuss whatever is on our minds. Trannies have political views, too, and we shouldn't be made to feel that our positions on important issues are any less valid than anyone else's.

Of all the Trannyweb members who have spoken up so far, it appears that I'm the furthest to the right, at least where economics and international relations are concerned, and I might be running the risk of isolating myself here. Still, I've enjoyed the debates, whether I'm disagreeing with Suekie about guns, with Rikki about Iraq, or with Jayne about anything. LOL

Regarding the Chamberlain comment, that was not a jab at any one person, and I think it was appropriate. The way in which I said it was partly tongue-in-cheek (hence the emoticon), but it also clearly illustrated my point, which is that we can't always assume that others are rational and peaceful just because we are. We have to know exactly with whom we are dealing, and I think the Chamberlain approach is the wrong approach in this situation. However, there are those today who approve of Chamberlain's policies then and still practice them in 2003, so I think my comparison was valid without being insulting. I'm sure some of the members here would associate my approach to foreign policy with those of Reagan and Thatcher, and I would be flattered by the comparison, whereas other might feel insulted. Those associations (if and when valid) are intended to save time, not to insult. I admire Churchill, Reagan, and Thatcher, but I don't get bent out of shape when others express a lack of admiration (to put it mildly) for those leaders.

Five days a week, I drive over seventy miles back and forth to work. I drive very fast on the open highway. I drive a 6000-pound truck with a V-8 engine. Before that, my last three cars were Cadillac sedans, and they all had hungry V-8s. Depending on what day you check, a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline in my area costs anywhere from US$1.00 to US$1.50, and I consider that outrageous. Taxes already make up almost half of the price.

The best way to ruin your political career in my state (and in most other states in the USA) is to even remotely suggest that gasoline taxes should be increased. What goes in Europe might be fine for the Europeans, but that excessive gas-taxing business won't fly over here. Except in handful of large cities, we depend on our vehicles more than Europeans because we're so spread out. We have to drive everywhere, and in my case, nothing is close to anything else. Also, we love our cars, especially the ones that use the most gas (sports coupes, luxury sedans, SUVs, etc.), and we won't give them up just because someone else doesn't like them.

Having said all of that, yes, I'd love to get away from using oil-based fuels and use a different type of fuel that offers the same performance. I don't think the answer is to make gasoline engines more efficient. I think we should look to alternatives. As Diana pointed out, though, it's not just a question of technology. There are a lot of political games being played (in the open and behind the scenes) to keep oil the fuel of choice.

Sarah, assuming that we do go in and get rid of Hussein's government, I agree that we have an enormous responsibility to help that country rebuild (the same applies to Afghanistan). As with Japan and Germany after WWII, we can't afford to leave behind a vacuum to be filled by the next brutal dictator. Some will question using taxpayer dollars to help reconstruct another nation, but that's one of the responsibilities we must assume when we make the decision to go to war.

Now is the time to discuss whether we should go in, but once that's happened, I don't think we can afford ignore our obligation to do everything we can to help establish stability in the aftermath. Otherwise, we'll have to decide whether to go back every ten years, and public support for that nonsense simply won't be there. If we act this time, we must do things correctly. Otherwise, we shouldn't even be involved. If we don't clean up our own messes, we'll give others legitimate reasons to hate us, and then we'll risk losing all credibility with our allies and would-be allies.

We can say (with opposing opinions, of course) that Iraq and Afghanistan caused all of this to happen in the first place, but when we decide to do something about it, we become responsible from that point forward, until stability has been achieved. However, if we accept responsibility, as we did in creating new allies with Japan and West Germany after WWII, we can possibly establish good relationships and democratic models in the Mid East. I think it's worth the effort, considering the alternative.

Rikki, I disagree with one part of what you said. It was the part after "We clearly have strongly differeing views here and I don't want to stir things up..." LOL

I could respond item for item, but all I really wanted to do was speak up for the other side, so readers would know that being a tranny doesn't automatically make one a left-winger. There are plenty of us right-wing chicks out there, too.

Regarding the war, from a non-political perspective, I think I can safely say that it is going to happen. The wheels are already in motion, so I doubt that a march will help or hurt anyone's cause at this point. Yes, it will be an opportunity to give politicians something to think about (one way or the other) during the next US & UK elections, but I seriously doubt that pro-war or anti-war demonstrations will sway either of our current governments this late in the situation.

Regarding what Katie said about trannies being exploited, there's probably something to that, assuming you march as trannies. If you march as women, I think you'll be O.K., but that's assuming you pass. I agree that the media and politicians alike would probably focus on the tranny issue, and politicans would try to discredit protestors who disagreed with them. That applies to both left and right.

I have yet to see the 'evidence'.All that has been seen so far are some blurred photographs,and some tapes of people apparently discussing pulling the wool over our eyes.Nothing that could not have been manufactured by our own side,if they wish to show the nescessity for war.We can be as deviuous as anyone,if not more so.We have the technology.
I am not saying that I believe Saddam Hussein is not a threat.He obviously is.But is he such a danger to our superior force? Isn't that whole purpose of the west holding many times the power required to take out humanity altogther? So that no-one would even think about taking us on.
So what is the reason for going in?

To take out his armed forces? No problem there,but not really nescessary,we have overwhelming superiority.

To kill civilians? Not intentionally,but it will happen.

To kill Hussein himself? One airstrike could do that,if our intelligence can find him!

Or to destroy his weapons of mass destruction? Now we do have a problem.We haven't found any.Yet.

He may strike first,of course.But considering the huge sums spent on defence,and the way we boast about how well we can defend ourselves,where is the danger?

So,we have lots of dead,and to what purpose?

I am a realist,and I know we will attack sooner or later, with or without UN approval.With I can just about tolerate.At least it would mean that most of the western world agrees on the policy.Without,and it is just a bully and his sidekick exercising their muscles.Not on a defenseless weakling,true,but the principle is the same.

Terrorism can take many forms.Aren't we just as guilty if we destroy another country,or merely threaten to,just because we perceive it as a threat?

I've said my piece/peace.And I am thankful I'm in a country where I can,without fear of a knock on the door. Others are not so fortunate,but force is not the way to make changes.

Sue.X

I was able to reach the FIPR site just fine, Suekie. Maybe it was temporarily down.

For those who are interested, here's more on Carnivore:

Carnivore Wins "Most Heinous" Internet Award

StopCarnivore.org

StopCarnivore.org has a Franklin quote on the home page that I often use in my pro-Second Amendment discussions (right to keep and bear arms) and I think it applies to this situation as well. It's a handy website.

"Those who would give up essential liberties for a measure of security, deserve neither liberty nor security." - Benjamin Franklin


More on the USA Patriot Act:

The USA PATRIOT Act has a chilling effect on educational freedom

Dear Katie,I think you will find there are 4.55l to 1gal.UK.Makes the price nearer £3.40 or $5.60 approx. Can't remember the UK/US gallon conversion.
I have a large 5str auto estate,capable of over 120mph, and expect to return over 30mpg average,and can achieve 45+.
If there was a viable alternative,I would willingly forego some of that,in the interests of the environment and for our children.
For the same reasons,I don't want the warmongers screwing up the environment with nuclear fallout or biological and chemical weapons,over which no-one has any real control. We've all seen the results of nuclear weapons used in anger,and biological and chemical tests.
Now,if someone could/would develop a biological weapon that reduced testosterone to a level that reduced aggressiveness to a minimum but sustained survival...
Sighs.I know,it's that competitiveness that has got us to where we are today,and will be needed if we are to progress beyond the confines of Earth and into space.We just need to drop te baggage that goes along with it.
Sue.X  

Hi girls,

Just a thought.  I hope I'm not going to hurt any of us by saying this but we are people who when dressed, often have trouble just walking down the street.  We are people who are easily targeted when others want to hurt someone.  We are also frequently victims of ridicule on TV and in the press.

I think that if any of us turn up for a march en femme, we could unwittingly become scapegoats for a government set on war.

The No 10 and Whitehouse spin doctors, the Alistair Campbells of this world, could ensure that Rikki or Lizzie or even me, appear on the cover of every Sunday tabloid as the face of the kind of Britain or America that 'we don't want'.

Can you imagine the headlines?  Look at the kind of press we already get when we just turn up for the Derby!

I just have a feeling that going on a march like this, en femme, could undermine what it's all about.  Yes, we want to make a statement about our community but this is not the place to do it.

We could just be playing into the hands of the very people who want this war so badly.  We could be their greatest ally.

A vast turnout by huge numbers of ordinary people will hurt them but put a few trannies in among the crowd and that will give them the excuse to say that only 'perverts' are against a war.

After all, the pictures on the front pages will not be of the 'ordinary' folk maching for what they believe.  They'll be pictures of you in your little dress or suchlike!  Come on girls, take Jayne's advice - protest wisely!

If you really believe you can help to stop this war by marching, please do it in drab and don't give the press (and govt) an excuse to invalidate or demean what could otherwise be a good wakeup call to those who need a kickup the arse.

Hugs,

Katie  :)
PS I will be there too but nobody will know!

Got into the carnivore page ok,so I thought I'd have a peek at that other web page.

'The browser is unable to....'

Has it started? Are they onto me already? Am I being paranoid now?

Of course,it could be my browser really is unable...Makes you think sometimes.

Sue.XX

I see Neville Chamberlain is alive and well. I wonder how many Jews would've been spared the horror of the holocaust had it not been for the appeasement policy of Chamberlain and his ilk. Unfortunately, there are still those who haven't learned from history, and I fear they are the ones destined to repeat it.

We can stop Saddam Hussein now, before things get out-of-hand. This is not a court case. We do not have to prove beyond any doubt that he is a danger to the rest of the world (and to his own people). We know what he's done and what he's capable of doing, so his days are numbered. Besides, waiting for the smoking gun means someone has already been killed, and the goal is to prevent him from striking. We already have enough evidence to prove the case to ourselves, and anything we tell the UN is strictly out of diplomatic courtesy. The UN is a weak and corrupt body full of self-serving members. It has no power or authority, nor should it. If it were up to me, I'd get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US (as G. Gordon Liddy often says). As far as the Iraqi people being innocent victims, they've had their chances to do something about Hussein and failed to act. I'll reserve my sympathy for the American, British, Israeli, and other soldiers who put themselves in harm's way to defend us from the wannabe Hitlers of the world.

Regarding the oil factor, consider that France and Russia have oil contracts with Hussein, and when he goes, the contracts go with him. The anti-war crowd is just as concerned about the flow of oil as those who support the war, if not more. We won the first war, and we could've taken the Iraqi oil by force, but we didn't.

While I think many of the anti-war protestors are well-intentioned, I also think they are misguided, and I obviously disagree with their conclusions and their reasoning. However, if any of you participate in anti-war (or pro-war) demonstrations, I hope all goes well and that none of you get hurt or mislabeled by the media.

Previously,I was only aware of rumours about systems capable of selectively intercepting internet messages (by some sort of keyword/combination of words system?)

It seems they have now not only done it,but proudly announce it and the fact they will be using it.I know there are supposed to be safeguards and rules regarding the use of the system,but have they never heard of hackers,and people can be and oftem are bought.

Might as well get my name in there as well:-
War.Iraq.Saddam Hussein.Better add Carnivore for good measure.That should do it.
If enough people do something similar,can we crash the system?

Big Brother is watching YOU
From 1984 by George Orwell,1948

Sue.X

I quite agree.  The fuel companies rule the world.  Nothing is more important than their relentless quest for more profits.  That's all that matters.  If we have to go to war and kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people in order to make more profits for the oil companies, then so be it.

If two thirds of the world's population have to live in poverty in order that the rich oil companies can get richer, then it has to be.  After all, nothing else could possibly be more important than more oil profits!  Could it?



What?  Think yourselves very lucky.  In the UK gasoline or petrol as we call it here, is sold in litres (or liters).

There are 3.79 litres to a gallon and a single litre of unleaded costs us 75.9 pence (call it 76 pence just to make it easier to work out).

So 3.79 litres at 76 pence means a gallon will cost us UK£2.88.

At the current rate of US$1.62748 to the British Pound, that means we are already paying US$4.69 for a gallon of fuel and most of that is tax.

No wonder we had fuel protests last year.  Another example of 'Rip-off Britain'!

Hugs,

Katie  :!

p.s. Stevie, you're FBI is really loosing it. Normally when you make up names for such things you choose docile, banal names, like Japanese cars, but could you get any more aggressive and threatening name than "CARNIVORE" ;D ;D ;D

Hugs

Sarah

Much as I would love to get to London,it's not possible.I don't know if there is anything arranged locally,but if so,I will be there.En femme,of course.I have nothing else.
Would love to see that catfight!
Sue.X

Well, I suppose I'm in the minority once again. I salute Bush and Blair for being tough against terrorism. No sane person wants war, but sometimes we simply must use force.

Also, Bush didn't steal the 2000 election. Sadly, most citizens in the USA don't realize how fortunate they are to be able to elect their own public officials, and they fail to show up on election day (or on any of the multiple days of early voting) for a variety of lame reasons. Who knows how the election would've gone if we had between 90% and 100% turnout, but I suppose the citizens who actually care made their voices heard, and the others don't really deserve any sympathy. Be that as it may, our current President won by the prescribed method, fair and square. It just happened to be the closest Presidential election in our history. I didn't vote for Bush myself (I voted for Harry Browne of the Libertarian Party), but I think he's generally doing a good job dealing with terrorism (not perfect, but good). The same goes for Tony Blair, even though I probably wouldn't support his party if I were a citizen of the U.K. Still, I have to give him credit when he's right. I think Churchill is a great political role model, by the way.

I'm not trying to intentionally ruffle any feathers, but I do want to speak out for the hawks among us, and demonstrate that the tranny community here is politically diverse (well, somewhat, anyway). Maybe I'll see some of you from the other side of the demonstrations.

Hi Girls

To chuck in my two penn'orth.

I do believe Hussein has got weapons of mass destruction, albeit chemical and biological rather than nuclear. The nuclear threat is being hyped by our side to worry us.

I don't believe there is any meaningful link between Iraq and Al Qa'eda. Anymore than there is between the UK and Al Qa'eda, after all we have "sympathisers" over here and I'm sure they make phone calls.

I believe that any war could get bloody. Either we seek to bomb our way to success, which will fail because it is a blunt weapon and is most unlikely to kill Hussain. I'm also uncertain as to whether bombing 60,000 litres of anthrax is a good thing. The collateral damage is likely to be significant, although I don't go with "millions of civilians".

Alternatively we put the ground troops in. That will lead to losses on both sides. Although we decry Iraqi troops and vaunt our overwhelming superiority I think history shows that people fighting in their own country will be much more resolute. I also understand that Bush won't let the American generals have anything like the number of troops they want for a ground war?

I believe the aftermath of such a war would be just as bad. Despite what our politicians would have us believe I don't think there is any credible political alternative for Iraqi. 15 years ago, as a well educated, emerging nation that might have been the case but the intervening years with the destruction of their infrastructure, both physical and social, seems to have brutalised their society to the point where that's unlikely and they'll be left in the hands of extremist factions. So we would be left with another de-stabilised middle eastern country. At best another Afghanistan, at worst another Lebannon, and in any case a haven for terrorists.

It will also provide a rallying point for extremists world-wide and will certainly be the biggest recruiting promotion for terrorism ever.

So, what should we do. Yes, we need to deal with the weapons of mass destruction. Yes (ish) we need to remove Hussein, although his removal in most cases will lead to de-stabilisation. War is a high risk strategy. If its threat leads to a coup by the Iraqi armed forces and his replacement with a sane dictator more in tune with western requirements then that is probably the best outcome. If the war goes ahead then we all lose big-time. I see nothing in between.

How would I proceed? Well, loathe as I am to agree with the French (sorry Annik), I think they may have got it right this time. We should give more time to the inspectors, we should aid them by the Americans giving them up to date intelligence on where they think the weapons are. Unfortunately the Juggernaut is rolling and the only outcome is war or backing down and Bush and Blair aren't going to back down.

Haven't we learnt anything from Northern Ireland? You can't fight brutality with brutality, it only brutalises everybody.

Sarah

Interesting phone poll on national radio at lunchtime today.Apparently,44% support an invasion-with a second resolution.This drops rather dramatically to just 9% without.
Wonder if Blair was listening? Or if he will listen.

Sue.

Ricka, I agree with you 100% about that Carnivore system, and that's exactly the type of sneakiness we have to watch out for with any government. In theory, it's a useful system, but in practice, watch out!

Like I said, I agree with Diana56 and others about supply and demand keeping oil popular. As long as oil prices can be kept low enough, consumers will continue to be happy with oil-based products. If the prices get too high, consumer interest will demand alternatives. Unfortunately, that consumer demand doesn't exist right now.

The other way to create consumer demand is to offer consumers something better than the gasoline engine. No one wants an electric car that's small, ugly, has to be recharged every five minutes, and tops out at 60 MPH. However, if anyone can offer me a car or truck that runs on a cheap alternative fuel, has all the room and comfort I demand, looks reasonably cool, can run for hours without refueling, and still goes 100+ miles an hour, I'll stand in line to buy one. Now, the trick is to get an inventor who can't be bought off by the oil companies. LOL

As for why we are doing business in the Mideast now, it's oil. As for why our soldiers are in Afghanistan and Iraq, that's where the terrorists get their order and funding.