First Cop: OK, Beeblebrox, hold it right there, we got you covered!
Zaphod’s Extra Head: Cops!
Zaphod: Anyone else want a guess?
Ford: Yeah ... this way!
Second Cop: We don’t wanna shoot you, Beeblebrox.
Zaphod: Suits me fine!
Trillian: Back to the lift?
Zaphod: Back to the lift!
(Cops open fire)
Arthur: Hey, I thought they said they didn’t want to shoot at us!
Ford: I thought so!
Zaphod: You said you didn’t wanna shoot us!
First Cop: It isn’t easy being a cop!
Ford: What did he say?
Zaphod: It isn’t easy being a cop.
Ford: That’s his problem!
Zaphod: I think so!
Ford: Listen, we’ve enough problems of our own having you there shooting at us! If you’d like to avoid laying your personal problems on us, I think we’d all find it easier to cope!
Second Cop: Now, look, buddy, you’re not dealing with any dumb, two-bit, trigger-pumping morons with low hairlines, little piggy eyes and no conversation! We’re a couple of caring, intelligent guys you’d probably really like if you met us socially. I don’t go around gratuitously shooting people and then brag about it in seedy space rangers bars. I go around gratuitously shooting people, then I agonise about it afterwards to my girlfriend!
First Cop: And I write novels!
Second Cop: Yeah, he writes them in crayon.
First Cop: Though I haven’t had any published yet, so I’d better warn ya, I’m in a mean mood!
Ford: Who are these guys?
Trillian: I preferred them shooting.
Second Cop: So are you gonna come quietly or you gonna let us blast ya out?
Ford: Which would you prefer?
(Another fusillade ensues)
Second Cop: You still there?
First Cop: We didn’t enjoy that at all.
Ford: We could tell!
Second Cop: Now, listen to this, Beeblebrox. And you’d better listen good!
Second Cop: Er ... because it’s gonna be very intelligent, and quite interesting ... and humane.
Zaphod: OK, shoot. I mean, fire away! No, no, I mean ...!
(another round of shooting)
First Cop: Sorry, misunderstanding there.
Second Cop: Beeblebrox, either you all give yourselves up, and let us beat you up a little, though not too much because we are firmly opposed to needless violence, or ... er ... or we blow up this entire planet! And one or two others we noticed on the way over!
Trillian: That’s crazy! You wouldn’t do that!
Second Cop: Yes, we would! I think we would, wouldn’t we?
First Cop: Yes, we’d have to. No question.
Trillian: But why?
First Cop: Tell her.
Second Cop: You tell her!
First Cop: You tell her!
Trillian: Will one of you tell her!
Both Cops: It isn’t easy being a cop!
Ford: Listen ... if we keep them talking, maybe their brains will seize up.
First Cop: Shall we ... shoot them up again for a while?
Second Cop: Why not?
First Cop: Yeah.
Ford: Wait ...
Zaphod: Well, that just about wraps it up for this lifetime, I guess.
Ford: Well ... it’s really been nice running into you again, Zaphod.
Zaphod and Ford (singing loudly): Zaglabor astragard, Hootrimansion Bambriar ...
Arthur: What the hell are you doing?!
Ford: A Betelgeuse death anthem. It means, “After this, things can only get better.”
Mother Jones wrote:
Mother Jones: I read that you made up your mind as you were sitting in the National Cathedral during the prayer service for the victims. You listened, as so many Americans did, to the dean of the National Cathedral as he prayed that "as we act, we not become the evil we deplore." At that moment, you said, you knew what you had to do.
Barbara Lee: Well, the vote was a very agonizing vote. Like the nation, I'm grieving and searching, in mourning, angry, trying to sort through all my feelings. I think everyone is doing that. And of course the memorial service was a time to really stop and reflect on all those who so tragically died, the victims and their families, and what an appropriate testimonial to them would be. ... And so in that context I was listening to the members of the clergy, searching to try and see if I could find some direction and clarity. You know, in moments like these — when you're agonizing, when you're uncertain in terms of the ramifications of any very serious actions that you're going to take — you have to go within, and use your head and your heart, and all the faculties that you have, to try to make decisions. And so, as I thought about that one line in the prayer, I said, "You know, this is the right vote — you've got to vote no."
MJ: Did you know before casting your vote that you were likely to be the only dissenting member of Congress?
Lee: Oh, no — I did not know that. Many members have these same concerns. The use of restraint is of concern to a lot of them. We don't want to see this spiral out of control; we don't want to see the cycle of violence continue.
We all agree that we've got to bring these terrorists to justice and to make sure that they're never allowed to perpetrate such an evil act as they did. And so all of us are dealing with that. We know that the President has the authority to go to war under the War Powers Act. The Congress has a responsibility to provide the checks and balances and to exercise some oversight. I don't believe that we should disenfranchise the people of America in the war-making decision-making process. At least minimally, we should be able to know which nation we're planning to attack and have some input into that. We should know what the exit strategy is. I'm not talking about all the details of a war plan, but certainly we should have more than a five-hour debate. To me, that's just not the best way to make public policy.
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature ... 9/lee.html
Barbara Lee wrote:
While Congress debates how to best, and most quickly end the occupation and bring our troops home, we need to begin with an agreement on the outcome: when our troops come home, they should all come home. There should be no permanent military bases in Iraq. When President Bush refused to rule out permanent bases, as he did in a recent press conference, he fed the widespread perception that the U.S. intends a permanent occupation of Iraq, which is one of the forces that is fueling violence on the ground.
It is also not too soon to begin the process of ensuring that the lessons of this failed war are learned. That means oversight and accountability: we must examine how we got into this position – the administration’s case for war, the use of prewar intelligence, the implementation of the war, everything – in order to ensure that our nation NEVER finds itself in this position again. http://lee.house.gov/index.cfm?SectionI ... tionTree=2
Official: Saudis to back Sunnis if U.S. leaves Iraq
Saudi King Abdullah reportedly has said his kingdom would back Sunnis if the United States leaves Iraq.
December 13, 2006
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah has warned Vice President Dick Cheney that Saudi Arabia would back the Sunnis if the United States pulls out of Iraq, according to a senior American official.
The official said the king "read the riot act" to the vice president when the two met last month in the Saudi capital, Riyadh.
The New York Times first reported the conversation Wednesday, saying Saudi support would include financial backing for minority Sunnis in the event of a civil war between them and Iraq's Shiite majority.
Asked about the meeting, a senior Saudi official -- who spoke on condition he not be named -- ruled out using terminology such as "warning" or "threatening." He said, "I believe the Saudi position was clear, that things might deteriorate or drift in Iraq, and then the kingdom will find itself forced to interfere."
The official also added: "This is not only expected from Saudi Arabia, but also Jordan and a lot of other Arab countries can't stand still and see things going that direction."
A senior Jordanian official, asked if this issue was also discussed during President Bush's meeting with King Abdullah of Jordan, said: "This is a matter that His Majesty is always concerned about."
The White House dismissed the report.
"That's not Saudi government policy," press secretary Tony Snow said in Washington, according to The Associated Press.
"The Saudis have made it clear that they're committed to the same goals we are, which is a self-sustaining Iraq that can sustain, govern and defend itself, that will recognize and protect the rights of all, regardless of sect or religion," Snow said, the AP reported.
Cheney's November 25 visit marked his fourth trip to Saudi Arabia as vice president. An official with Cheney's office said the one-on-one meeting lasted two hours.
The Saudi king told Cheney that his country would be forced to step in and support "like-minded Sunni Arabs" if the situation in Iraq fell apart and the Sunnis' safety was in jeopardy, the senior U.S. official said.
The monarch said he would "intervene aggressively on one side absent an American presence," the source said.
The source said the king did not mean to imply that Saudi Arabia would support al Qaeda in Iraq, but rather tribal groups. However, some of those groups overlap with insurgents who are fighting Americans, the source conceded.
The bipartisan Iraq Study Group that reported to President Bush and Congress said last week that money from Saudi citizens is funding Sunni insurgents in Iraq, although the Saudis may not know exactly where their money is going. (Watch how Saudis may be helping Iraqi insurgents)
Kenneth Pollack of the Brookings Institution said Saudi Arabia has a reason to take sides.
"They're terrified that Iraq is going to fall into civil war. They're terrified that civil war will spill over into Saudi Arabia. But they're also terrified that the Iranians, backing the various Shiite militias in Iraq, will come out the big winner in a civil war," Pollack told CNN.
However, the king's tough words to Cheney don't mean Saudi support for the United States is wavering, said Richard Murphy, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia.
"This has nothing to do with the Saudi-American alliance," Murphy said. "What it has to do with is the Saudi concern that we will quickly evacuate Iraq and that the Shia majority will take revenge actions against the Sunni."
In his meeting with Cheney, the Saudi king voiced strong opposition to talks between the United States and Iran, which has a majority Shiite population. According to the senior American official, the king told Cheney that Sunni Arab states, including Saudi Arabia, believed that talking to Iran was dangerous.
The Iraq Study Group called for engaging other countries in the region, including Iran and Syria, in the search for solutions in Iraq.
The Saudis are "nervous about giving Iran any more legitimacy or any more influence in Iraq," Murphy said.
"[Iraq is in] everybody's backyard -- Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran," he said. "And they all have interests, they're all watching each other very closely lest one get an undue advantage over the other. And it's going to take an extraordinarily skillful, wide-ranging regional diplomacy on America's part to cope with that."
A senior U.S. official said the conversation between Cheney and King Abdullah reflects the "anxiety about the situation" and the Saudi concern about being left "high and dry" if the United States leaves Iraq.
But the official said leaving Iraq is a "doomsday scenario" that will not happen because the United States isn't going to withdraw.
"We are not walking away from it," the official said.
CNN's Elise Labott, Kelli Arena, John King, Elaine Quijano, Caroline Varaj and Zain Verjee contributed to this report.
Copyright 2006 CNN. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest