His death is, long run, bad news for the US since he will be more powerful as a martyr than he was as a relatively quiescent jihadist in recent years. Since US imperialism vs the Muslim world hasn't come to an end, and will not, due to our having to kowtow to Israel, this is far from the end of the story. Those who think it is are extremely naive. If the US got completely out of Afghanistan and Iraq and dismantled its bases in the Persian Gulf, things might rapidly improve, but those moves are as likely as seeing pigs fly.

is that his act of terrorism so unhinged the US that it sent us mindlessly into coslty wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that we can never hope to win. Their costs are threatening our financial stability. This result alone has made him second greatest terrorist of the last two centuries, at least.

Hilary's statement today seemed to ensure that Osama's legacy will continue. Not did she say that his death justifies the last ten years of war, but that it should embolden us to continue with even more war.

Walt is quite correct, that his act will likely have little effect on political growth in the Arab world. The whole restoration of the caliphate sounded likely pure fantasy from the beginning. But even his call for the caliphate had important propaganda value inside the US -- it further panicked many in the US, providing political support for unending war against the Muslim world.

As of today Osama is only the second greatest, since first place has to go Gavrilo Princip who set of a chain of events that led to the suicide of three major empires. However, the events Osama precipitated are still playing out and if the fools running this country carry out Hillary's threats, they may yet succeed in bankrupting this country.

"one could argue that the movement he founded has already failed. He hoped to inspire a broad fundamentalist revolution that would topple existing Arab governments and usher in a unified Islamic caliphate"

Really?

I think the movement he founded has succeeded beyond anyones expectations. Probably even his own.

Existing Arab governments ARE toppling or have been toppled in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, Lebanon, the gulf, and, well, just about every where....

While Bin Laden himself may not have a played a role in this, and it's hardly a unified Caliphate that is shaping up, things are undoubtedly moving in a direction Osama would not have been entirely unhappy about.

Nobody gets exactly what they set out for, but I think Osama will wind up with a very close second.

GAZA — Hamas officials here condemned on Monday the American operation that killed Osama Bin Laden, with Ismail Haniya, the leader of the Hamas government, calling it a “continuation of the United States policy of destruction.”

Ismail al-Ashqar, a Hamas lawmaker, described it as “state terrorism that America carries out against Muslims.”

He said in a statement that the United States could have arrested him and put him on trial, and said that the United States had “harmed itself by provoking Islam and Muslims.”

Similarly, Arabs in the village of Silwan, adjacent to the City of David neighborhood in Jerusalem, rioted Monday night in protest over the elimination of Osama Bin Laden. The rioters threw stones at police and attempted to block roads.

Similarly, Arabs in the village of Silwan, adjacent to the City of David neighborhood in Jerusalem, rioted Monday night in protest over the elimination of Osama Bin Laden. The rioters threw stones at police and attempted to block roads.

The Passing of Osama and its Impact
With much of what has been written in the Western press I am in agreement. It’s a pleasure to read such analyses. I do not agree with everything, and there are things about which these papers do not write.
Let me take recourse to an old adage missing the woods for the trees. In what I am about to say the trees are as important as the woods. I would not like to miss on the trees while scampering in the woods.
Islamization and Islamism by now are the way of life for average Pakistanis. Very few of them have even the intellectual acumen to understand that life is about more than mere Islam, or any other religion for that matter. This has gone so far that Pakistanis cannot think of having their being except in obedience to what is represented to them as Islam: they on their own are not capable of making a judgment about Islam and leave the interpretation to maulvis, who are themselves benighted and understand little of Islam or Quran.
Pakistan’s politics hovers around the preservation of the upper classes who control, it is said, something like 80% of the resources of the State. It has even been claimed that many of the upper classes do not pay their taxes. Obviously, then, the revenues of the State must be coming from the less fortunate. This is a prescription for the widening of the distance between the upper and the lower classes.
The Pakistan army is a law unto itself. No one in the civilian government has the gumption to control the army. In Pakistan’s 64 years past military rule has alternated with civilian governments but for the most part government has been controlled by the army and has actually been with the army chief – Yahya Khan, Ayub Khan, Ziaul Haq, Musharraf, Kayani. Not one of them was a great soldier, and of course none of them was a statesman. Army chiefs have repeatedly shown that they were unsuited for the role of head of state or head of government.
Pakistan’s economy has been in the doldrums for long, in spite of repeated doles from places like WB and IMF – and subventions from the US in lieu of services performed, or not performed, in the global war against terror. Pakistan is in no position ever to stand up and look anyone in the eyes. As we know, so much of its revenues are taken up in the expenses of government and army and repayment of international debts that very little, if even a little, is left for development expenditure.
There has been little by way of the growth of the infrastructure of education, research, and scientific and technological advance. These could have proceeded if the place had been spared the impact and hold of the madrassa system which dishes out morons and holds the minds of the students to medievalist and obscurantist ways of thinking. On top of all this, while there is no hinterland of scientific education and research and certainly nothing like technological innovation and advances in any field, we are asked to believe that Pakistan made its nuclear weapons and missiles.
In respect of Kashmir, most Western authors are almost dismissive and content to leave the question in a tone of seeming neutrality but even then an underlying pro-Pakistan attitude. Nothing will be gained by referring to disputed Kashmir, as if that was an adequate way of disposing of the question. For Pakistan, Kashmir is the summum bonum of its existence and the chief article of faith that unites all strands of opinion within the country in a universally anti-Indian attitude. That attitude has brought four wars, which Pakistan started and lost, and in one case it even lost East Pakistan. If Pakistan persists with that attitude and goes on to further wars there is little doubt that the result shall be further vivisection of West Pakistan, or rump Pakistan, or Pakistan as we now know it.
It was in pursuit of Kashmir that Pakistan alighted on the idea of using the low-cost expedient of terror against India, especially after it had been invented and successfully tried in Afghanistan. If it could work against the mighty Soviet Union, why would it not work against India which never pretended to the military power of the Former Soviet Union? But, arguably, India has shown up a better economic performance than did the Former Soviet Union.
Pakistan, through its ISI, went to the extent of building successively outfits like HuM, LeT, JeM, LeJh, TTP, the Haqqani network, and several others as instruments through which it worked and implemented its policies and choices in respect of India – Punjab, Eastern Indian states, and finally Kashmir, where the show still goes on.
Kashmir is predominantly Muslim. Western concern for the Muslim population of Kashmir is touching indeed, were it not for presenting some relief to the utter discomfiture of Pakistan in the current post-Osama situation.
One does not and cannot contribute to the enlightenment of the discourse, much less any possible solution to complicated and long-standing problems like Kashmir, if one does not take a genuinely neutral position on the subject. If analysis remains tied to one side, then such ideas are not worth looking at: they will certainly not help towards resolving the question. For Pakistan it is Kashmir that is the “core issue”.
On the present occasion let us talk about Pakistan and Afghanistan and Osama bin Laden. For so long Pakistan went on denying the presence of Osama in Pakistan, and now the US has blown off the cover altogether, leaving Pakistan completely bare and naked as a compulsive sponsor of terror as instrument of its policies. US leaders, especially Hillary Clinton and some others, still speak of Pakistan’s cooperation in the war against terror. At least at this late stage someone in the US administration should have woken up to the facts of the situation and seen that Pakistan has never been, is not now, and shall never be with the coalition of the willing in the global war against terror whether as frontline non-Nato ally or as anything else. The US administration shall not proceed to declare Pakistan a state sponsor of terror but surely it could have reconsidered and reorganized some of its policies and approaches with better regard for ground actualities. It seems there is no prospect of any such result: Obama may be reelected but he by himself cannot carry US foreign policy forward in Afghanistan if it is not freed from the shackles that bind it to Pakistan.
Pakistan’s principal concern in respect of Afghanistan also has been dictated by its, Pakistan’s, compulsive assessment of the “Indian threat”, which so permeates the army chief’s worldview that he is unabashedly India-centric in his thinking on matters of strategy. He and others before him have thought of Afghanistan as an area that gives Pakistan territorial depth vis-à-vis India when the next showdown with India takes place. Pakistan has been preparing for that showdown after the fiasco of the Kargil war (1999), which failed to produce any results in spite of the best efforts of the Musharraf-Nawaz Sharif duo. When Pakistan begins the next war, it will be interesting to see how its all-weather friend behaves.
Afghanistan is not a province of Pakistan. Pakistan should have realized by now that it is not the arbiter of the fate of the Afghan people, because Pakistan can hardly look after its own people – consider its experience in the wake of the unprecedented floods of last year which left so many homeless and resourceless that they are still a long way from being rehabilitated, in spite of relief and supplies pouring in from all over the world.
Pakistan even now wants the US to begin negotiations with the moderates among the Afghan Taliban whom it wants to see installed as part of government in Afghanistan. Is Pakistan in such a position of power and prosperity that it can dictate how its neighbour ought to be organized? For one thing, what is a moderate Taliban? To my mind, that is a contradiction in terms. A Taliban would not be a Taliban if he were moderate. A Taliban is necessarily and inherently extremist and Islamist in his approach to everything. It would be an error for the US to open negotiations with any section of the Afghan Taliban – merely for keeping Pakistan in good humour. There is a limit beyond which nonsense should not go. Negotiating peace with the Taliban shall be unmitigated nonsense.
We understand of course that Pakistan wants that Afghanistan should be under some kind of a government that shall be friendly to Pakistan, preferably under the control of Pakistan. Additionally, it should eliminate Indian influence in Afghanistan. Pray, what has been the nature of Indian participation in any kind of reconstruction programmes in Afghanistan? Has India sought to translate its participation in those programmes into control of Afghanistan’s policy choices in any sphere or to deflect those choices in a pro-Indian direction? It is a fortuitous circumstance that India does not share a boundary with Afghanistan. Pakistan, which does, has made complete mess of its opportunity – because it wants to control Afghanistan.
Talking of the woods after talking about the trees so far, let me add that the US needs to consider the question of meeting global terror in the post-Osama scenario. Osama has passed but not the ideas that he propagated while he was around. His ideas have been taken up by numerous other outfits, by whatever name called. Their inspiration remains the same: the historical experience of Islamic societies at the hands of Western powers whom they regard as exploitative and repressive and aggressive. We should expect that terrorist outfits shall proceed to new adventures not far different from 9/11 and 26/11 and that their targets shall continue to be, as of old, the Christian, Jewish, and Hindu societies and cultures. Representatives of these societies need to sit together and devise means of meeting the challenges of the future Islamist terrorists. That process should begin without further delay.
However, a condition precedent of the success of such effort will be recognition of those who are with us and those who are not with us. Pakistan is certainly not with those who will organize the new coalition against Islamist terror. The last effort lasted a mere 10 years. The next may be much longer and may span several generations. But with a long-term view of things, the present leaders of societies worldwide need to come together now and devise means now for meeting the coming challenges. The challenge shall make its presence felt frequently. The new coalition shall have to meet the new challenge whenever and wherever it raises its head. There is no question of bringing about some kind of a diplomatic solution, because nothing such shall be possible. There can be no meeting ground between Islamist extremists and their targets: the choice is stark: either we or they. There should be no room in that coalition for any country that likes to play on both sides of the line.
V. C. Bhutani, vineycb1@vsnl.com, Delhi, India, May 3 2011, 1504 IST

ARVAY: Quite so.

"He hoped to inspire a broad fundamentalist revolution that would topple existing Arab governments and usher in a unified Islamic caliphate,"

I listened to/read many of OBL's comments, his emphasis on an Islamic caliphate is vastly overstated by you. He stood in opposition to Western imperialism. He seemed somewhat libertarian about the governance. In that he wanted Arabs to determine Arab governments, not the West.

You write lightly of a "unified Islamic caliphate" but apparently know little or nothing of Muslims. Muslims are just as diverse as "Christians." Not Baptist, Catholics, Episcopals and Methodists, but all of them and more. I don't know what it means to be Muslim--and I've studied religion my whole life, said the shihada, believing in one God and rejecting the trinity. I'm still the same sinning fellow I always have been, but Islamic doctrine and dogma are the least fantastic of all three. I don't regularly pray, drink beer though I try to avoid pork. But, I do fast for Ramadan--it being a reminder of Lent and the last vestige of fasting and austerity in Christian tradition.

Here's my point. There is no agreement on the day Ramadan starts. Each little fiefdom seems to want to declare it for themselves. Hence, the first day of Ramadan will span 4 days, when only two are logically acceptable. (Ramadan starts, it being just another lunar month, if a religious and holy month--Ramadan starts with the new moon.) So, the beginning and end of Ramadan are ostensibly unknown, these can be calculated but the religious authorities like to have their highest, each personally see the moon in it's new phase. This despite the need to rent prayer space for special Eid prayers. They will rent the 3 day block rather than the one day for the 4 hour event.

As others have stated, OBL knew us far better than we understood them. He realized his aims by the very nature of Bush's response. Further, the very reason for the Arab Spring is precipitated by OBL's attacks. Those strained our budgets, those caused us to squander our resources in two areas and cost us our eyes and ears and attention in Egypt, Tunisia and elsewhere. No man leads a revolution, the people make it happen. OBL was never a threat to try to rule the world, but he prevented us from doing it.

So long as we control and pervert countries like Pakistan, we will find dysfunctional gov'ts. Some wrote on and on about the nature of Pakistanis. I know many, and many have nothing in common with the other. Most are better read, and more tolerant than you'd imagine. But, when you resort to caricatures of others (and I mean othery others like foreigners you don't know, nor understand) you're pretty much talking loud and saying nothing.

I agree with most of what Dr Walt wrote, though he overstates the threat from a Caliphate. This might help you get it Dr. Walt, what are the chances of US Baptists uniting? The Southern Baptists and the Baptists Convention divide is every bit as bitter as the Sunni/Shia for most and far more relevant. Remember, no Muslim West of Egypt nor East of Pakistan has any clue what Shia are. But, we're told they are deeply divided. (in about 5 countries.)

I would have loved to see Bin Laden stand trial, face the evidence, and face those he harmed. I'm no defender of the lives or liberty of our leaders--they all should face death upon retirement for general purposes perhaps. But, I'd rather they be forced to sit and listen to all those who's opinions and concerns they ignored before.

The “Osama Bin Laden Is Dead Story” Has Many Questions That Need To Be Investigated.

May 4, 2011

Osama Bin Laden was a terrorist and deserved the death penalty. This is why the media must investigate this story instead of merely parroting the information that was provided by the government.

Based on my experience as a decorated US Army combat veteran, this story has credibility problems. I tried to post these questions in the comments section of several mass media publications and they did not get posted. A free press is essential in a free society because it has a duty to investigate what the government is doing and it must educate citizens. A free media must publish all responsible questions from the public and be open to debate. Thomas Jefferson said that given the choice between government and a printing press, he would take the printing press.

1. Why they did not show Osama’s body publicly? In 1967, Che Guevara the Communist guerrilla was captured alive wounded in Bolivia, interrogated, killed and his body was displayed to the world media. A responsible government would display Osama’s body to the media and to a panel of international physicians to prove without a doubt the death of the most wanted terrorist in the world. The government version that Osama’s head was too damaged to show the public is not credible. Morticians can prepare a body for public display. Media and international physicians would be welcome to take DNA samples from the body as total proof of Osama’s demise.

2. Osama was unarmed when they shot him? Osama was a terrorist veteran of the Afghan Soviet war that was waged in the 1980s between Islamist guerrillas and the Soviet Union. Anybody with his background would have alarmed, mined and booby trapped his house. Weapons would be in his possession at all times and in every room of the house, including hand grenades. He had plenty of time to install command detonated mines everywhere outside and inside the compound. I have problems believing that the most wanted terrorist in the world was killed while unarmed. When I was in a war zone, my weapon was with me at all times and I slept with it and lots of ammo and hand grenades, could Osama be so foolish that he did not have weapons in his room?

3. There were no American casualties? This is simply not credible because attacking a compound that is occupied by dangerous men that had plenty of time to prepare for defense, makes it certain that the attackers must sustain casualties. Osama’s terrorist group specializes in suicide bombers of both sexes. They could not spare even one of them to protect their leader?

4. Why did we spend $1.5 Trillion dollars occupying and "nation building" Iraq and Afghanistan instead of targeting Osama's less than 1,000 terrorists?. We could have got Osama 10 years ago at a reasonable cost. When American troops landed in Afghanistan after the 9/11 terrorist attack, the Afghan Northern Alliance had already overthrown the Taliban government that harbored Osama. It was not necessary to occupy the country. A war using Special Forces would have been sufficient

5. Why are we still involved in the Israeli-Muslim conflict? This is the cause of the war on terror. We inherited Israel’s enemies and they struck us on 9/11. The effects of our involvement will continue until we divorce from the Muslim world and focus on killing the actual terrorists until they are finished. Our absence from the Muslim world will make Muslims eventually stop provoking us with terrorism because they will want to keep us out. It is common sense that it would be in the Muslim interest to stop terrorism against America to keep America from coming back to their lands. With America out of the Israeli-Muslim conflict, the Muslims will be free to focus on their affairs and their problem with Israel. Israel has nuclear weapons and a strong military that assures it that it can survive any war without America. The only beneficiaries of the present war on terror are the war contractors and the special interest groups.

Some possible explanations for this unusual story;

a) The government killed Osama Bin Laden but it believes that it is not necessary to provide conclusive proof of their actions because they are universally loved and trusted. This means that they are incompetent because they did not prove their story.

b) Osama Bin Laden was hooked on opium and developed a false sense of security. His followers shared this drug problem and failed to fortify and provide guards for the Osama compound.

c) The masses are so stupid that they will accept without question anything that the government and media tells them, so why bother with proof?

d) Osama Bin Laden died years ago, and now it is a convenient time to bring him back to distract the masses and continue the hugely profitable war on terror and gain mass support for a government that cannot exist without debt and financial dependency on special interest groups.

e) This story is a case that simply shows the irresponsibility and incompetence of the American government.

The $6 Trillion spent on the war on terror (direct and indirect costs)continues to pile additional debt and there is no end in sight. The money that was wasted on fighting this war with a wrong strategy could have been wisely invested by loaning it to private enterprise companies that would be protected from cheap imports. A new industrial policy like South Korea’s would reconstruct and protect a new American industrial base that would replace the industry and technology that global corporations exported to China and other Third World countries under the globalization false ideology that has ruined America and Europe and created millions of permanently unemployed people. America would be able to replace imports with nationally produced products and services. The trade losses would end and careers in science, engineering, chemistry and skilled jobs would be abundant in an industrial economy.

With a new industrial base, America would be independent of imports and global debt financing. Presently, the Federal government needs to annually beg and borrow $1.65 Trillion a year from international capital and US investors because the industrial base of the American economy is only 9%.

There are not enough corporate or individual taxpayers to support the huge Federal, State and local governments, plus their armies of government contractors. In any case, the American governments must reduce their size and expenses by 40% to balance their budgets and avoid digging America deeper into debt and dependency on the kindness of creditors.

The present economic and political dependency of the American economy on debt, special interest groups and imports makes a continuation of the present globalist war on terror fatal for America. It’s a choice of nation building America before it becomes a terminal case of financial and social cancer, or continue to dig the debt and dependency grave deeper until we end like other failed world powers, including the British Empire, the French Empire and Soviet Union.

Roman Gil
http://roman-gil1.blogspot.com
www.facebook.com/roman.gil1
http://twitter.com/RomanGil1

Well, the death of Bin Laden is somehow secret and vague. It is not clear to know what happened to him, and his family. In my opinion, War is not good. He is a victim of war. Everyone has to fight for their life. In this story, we should draw a lesson about peace in life. Peace is everything. People should not think about war that is as a tool of solving problem.
John from digi
(http://www.digiseo.com/en - seo)

This is quite interesting. When I was walking to work the other day I saw the title - Bin Ladin Dead, and I had to backtrack to really see what I was reading. It was shocking - but I didn't know how to react.

This post helped to clarify just what this means and wil mean for us. And judging by the comments, there are a lot of conspiracy theories abounding. One could take some funny quotes from all that has been said about his demise and understand how the media is portraying this whole thing.

We Can’t Afford This Unlimited Government and Its Interventionist Foreign Policy

By intervening in the Israel-Muslim conflict, we created the conditions that started the American war with Muslim terrorists. Intervening in other countries always leads to war and enemies. Terrorism is the strategy of the powerless when they fight the powerful. The phase in this permanent war is that terrorists will detonate dirty or conventional nuclear bombs on the NATO countries and America. We have to stop the steps that are leading us to this end.

The terrorists have more time and supporters than we have money. To survive we have to stop all interventions in the world. Defend our borders and attack only targeted actual terrorists. A total divorce from foreign affairs and the world's problems will eventually cause the Muslims and other foreigners to focus on their own affairs and their problems with their enemies because they will see that America is out of their areas and that it's in their best interest to end terrorism against America to keep us out. This is the only way to end this permanent war before we enter the terminal stage of our economic and social cancer.

The Federal, State and local governments must reduce their size by 40% to fit actual taxes. There are not enough taxpayers to support this huge 3 level government of over 20 million people and an equal number of people that are employed by dependent government contractors. Taxes are too high already. Most taxpayers are struggling with increasing local property tax increases and the rising cost of living. In Rockland county, NY a wealthy suburb, 20% of the population depend on Medicaid a Federal and State welfare health insurance program that local New York counties must now pay a large share of using property taxes. Most the Medicaid recipients are illegal alien mothers and their American born “anchor babies”. The Federal government’s refusal to enforce immigration laws is causing the downfall of many American States and communities because of the tax burden of supporting millions of new aliens each year.

The United States is overpopulated and cannot afford to add millions of legal and illegal immigrants every year. 47% of American households are too poor to be legally obligated to pay income taxes. There are not enough corporations to support this size government and in any case their share of Federal income taxes is only 7% after all their tax breaks. Many including General Electric, pay no income taxes at all, and even take corporate government welfare subsidies.

Many of the CIA, military and government officials have quit and joined contractors that pay them more. These costly contractor employees are now back in their former government jobs at the taxpayer expense. The dependence of the military and CIA on contractors are a major drain of taxpayer money and a threat to our freedom. These people are mercenaries that depend on war to make profits and to live. They are not patriots serving their country; they are serving their greed for taxpayer money. 57% of Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan are contractors. On May 15, 2011 there are 50,000 troops and 63,000 contractors in Iraq.

The “war on terror” has been contracted out and turned into a permanent business. Contractors are now making more profit than during World War 2 and other wars. Now they are not merely suppliers, they perform many military jobs that traditionally are performed by military personnel. This is a huge waste of taxpayer money and dangerous for national security because the contractors will never fight like soldiers when wars heat up. They can simply quit. The U.S. military relies on contractors to the point that they depend on them for vital military supplies including fuel, within war zones in Afghanistan. The contractors charge the U.S. military $457 a gallon for delivered fuels and pay the Taliban and other enemy forces $1,500 per truck as security protection payments. This is a disgrace and a fraud on taxpayers.

The war contractors are a powerful special interest group. An economist recently estimated that the true cost of the “war on terror” is $5 trillion. This is such an important business that the contractors will never willingly give it up. It is unlikely that they will willingly quit and return to low paid jobs like most of the American taxpayers that they prey on. The war contractors are the greatest national threat to America and we must terminate this business before we end up a failed state like the Soviet Union.

Instead of cutting the size of the government, there are plans to expropriate pension plan contributions that people were forced to pay. The cuts and elimination of Medicare and Social Security is a theft of the contributions that were forced on wage earners. The majority of Americans will be in deep poverty without these programs that were designed to serve the contributors. Instead this money will go to the bloated government and its dependent contractors.

By continuing to appoint men of the failed globalization ideology to positions of power, we are voting for our hangman at the gallows. We have to restore George Washington's constitutional republic that was designed to represent national interests, not just special interests.

This fiscal year the Federal government must beg and borrow $1.65 Trillion dollars out of a budget of $3.7 Trillion. This debt money should not be spent on war contractor profits and foreign affairs. Confront reality; The USA is the largest debtor in world history. The annual trade deficit (losses) is over $700 billion. Industry is only 9% of the economy. According to the official government statistics, 36% of males 16 to 64 years old are permanently out of the labor force and don't count.

There is no global market for American products. The total value of American exports is only $1.5 trillion a year and most of these are not manufactured products. The national current account balance (profit-loss) is more than a negative $700 billion. Globalization is draining the wealth out of America and the European “free trade” countries that practice this false globalist ideology.

We need to re-industrialize to become financially and politically independent from the global corporations and special interests. America has to nation build to restore its prosperity. 47% of American households are too poor to be legally obligated to pay income taxes. American owned companies cannot compete with imported global corporate products made with cheap labor. We cannot survive competing with Chinese that earn $200 a month.

Focus on our own problems, end globalization, mass immigration and re-industrialize with free enterprise competitive American owned companies before we become another failed state. Stop voting for the two political parties that ruined America. Choose independent politicians and change them when they sell out to the special interest groups. Constitutional government must represent national interests that include corporations, the rich, the middle class and the poor.

Roman Gil
http://roman-gil1.blogspot.com