Saturday, September 22, 2007


It has been said that Back To Democracy is creating a divisive atmosphere in the village by bringing the impeachment resolution to a vote by the Village Board. I think there is some truth to this, and I apologize for that. Perhaps Democracy is not the most perfect system of government possible. There will always be a certain amount of discord in a functioning Democracy. Perhaps some Athenians complained of this, and would have preferred a return to autocratic rule. Winston Churchill said "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." It could be argued that life would be easier under the rule of a benevolent dictator. George Bush would like to be our dictator as evidenced by his "unitary executive theory" and Dick Cheney would like to be the brains behind him, but the trouble is that the majority of the people don't believe in his benevolence, and are not ready to give up on democracy. So we would like to use the tool of impeachment, that the founders left for us, to try to restore Democracy, and our Constitutionally Limited Democratic Republic. Participate in Democracy - Monday 9/24 7PM at the Fire Hall.


Anonymous said...

Just a few simple questions:

Why do you think we were attacked on 9/11?

What would you have done if you were president after 9/11?

Why wasn't Hillary Clinton, as our NY Senator, on your impeachment resolution? As I recall, she voted for the war, continued to vote to fund the war, and from the beginning said that she was not relying on Bush's intelligence sources because she could not trust him from the beginning.

Just curious.

Allen Carstensen said...

"Why do you think we were attacked on 9/11?"

There are a lot of unanswered questions about that day, that deserve a thorough investigation. The 911 Commission doesn't even mention Building #7. Let me ask you, why did Building #7 collapse all at once neatly into it's own footprint?

Let's assume, just for fun, that the official story is true. Osama ordered the 19 hijackers (15 of whom were Saudi's) to do it, and they were successful beyond anyones wildest dreams. Osama has written quite a bit. His main complaint against us was that we had troops on his holy sites in Saudi Arabia. George Bush pulled those troops out before the invasion of Iraq 3/2003. So, let's see. Osama's the bad guy, responsible for 9/11. After his successful attack, we cave in to his demands, and attack a country, Iraq, that had nothing to do with it. Remember, Sadam and Osama were enemies.

"What would you have done if you were president after 9/11?"

9/12/2001 would've been just another day, because I wouldn't have ignored the August 6th Presidential Daily Briefing entitled "Bin Laden determined to strike in US" I would have put the best people on the job, and made sure they stayed on it until Bin Laden was captured and the plot disrupted. Failing that, I would have made it a law enforcement operation, not a military one.

But wait. Actually, none of that would be necessary, because the day I became president I would have formed "The Department of Peace" Dennis Kucinich would be my Secretary of Peace in my cabinet. I would have cut military spending, and increased foreign aid, and honored our commitment to the Millennium Goals. You see, I don't think the majority of people in the world are evil and stupid. I think, that if we acted a little less imperialistic, and a little more like responsible global citizens, it would vastly increase our chances of survival.

Allen Carstensen said...

Oh yeah, about Hillary. I'm not a big fan of hers but for a fascinating article about what she and others in Congress new and when they new it, go to the link in my last post. The Sydney Blumenthal article.

Anonymous said...

I came to the website hoping for some serious discussion aside from Republicrats we hear in Congress and in the media. Unfortunately your a quack who has fallen off the deep end and your theories are an embarrassment to those who lost their lives on 9/11. All very sad.

Allen Carstensen said...

Here's a hint, when looking for "serious discussion" don't call the individual with whom you are discussing, a quack.

You refer to my embarrassing theories - trouble is I didn't offer any theories at all. I asked you what your theory was that would explain the sudden, complete collapse of building 7 neatly into it's own footprint.

About Me

My photo
Trumansburg, NY, United States