 | | Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
|
(...) There is no need or will to deny it; I at least won't bother. However, you'll find the gap between funding a sustained terrorist action and supplying WMD to those terrorists to be very, very wide. If you can link WMD and supporting terrorists (...) (21 years ago, 11-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Costello wrote: <snip> , that does not (...) But after all that wonderful astuteness, Scott, by what right did your president have to invade a foreign country? His reasons as he listed in every speech and in every (...) (21 years ago, 11-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
|
(...) I know of no mechanism for the voters to recall the president of the United States. Impeachment seems to be the only legal recourse. Yes, no? (...) Considering the long history of the United States, are you sure you wish to typify Gray Davis (...) (21 years ago, 11-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
|
(...) Tell you what froggy, if you want GWB thrown out, why not take a page from the California playbook. Obviously you feel very strongly that Bush has not been a good president, and your feelings run very deep. Why not start a campaign to recall (...) (21 years ago, 11-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
|
(...) the point isn't who supported terrorists and who didn't. I mean, Bush Sr helped train Osama! Reagan helped fund the mujaheddin, the religious warriors who later evolved into the Taliban! And yes SH supported suicide bombers. But specifically (...) (21 years ago, 11-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
|
(...) So you deny that SH supported terrorists? How about the little stipend he offered families to have them sacrifice their children as human incendiary devices? (...) "How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?" Thanks for (...) (21 years ago, 10-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
|
(...) I think the English know something about where arrogance will get you. Zulu wars, US revolution, Barbarian hordes to the north (Scottish). Something like that. I think we've got to learn yet. Mark (21 years ago, 10-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
|
(...) Uh-huh. You have a link for that, John? I thought not...There is no proof to support any such allegations. That lack of proof is the very issue under discussion. The president spoke in terms of dead certainties and has come up empty-handed. (...) (21 years ago, 10-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
|
(...) I believe that the perceived threat was never from the Iraqi military itself, but from the proliferation of WMD from SH's regime to terrorist elements such as Al Qaeda. JOHN (21 years ago, 10-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
|
White House 'lied about Saddam threat' (URL) A former US intelligence official who served under the Bush administration in the build-up to the Iraq war accused the White House yesterday of lying about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. The claims (...) (21 years ago, 10-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Let the backpeddaling and blaming and obfuscating begin! (as if it hadn't already...)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti wrote: <snip> (...) There is common ground between you and I, Richard. I believe that doing the right thing is what matters. And there were naysayers that said that we'd never find anything to agree on. (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Let the backpeddaling and blaming and obfuscating begin! (as if it hadn't already...)
|
|
Let's be clear that this is the backpedaling from the original backpedaling. We shall therefore see an infinite line of small retreats without anyone in the White House daring to admit that they were wrong to do anything anyway. Smoke and mirrors. (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Let the backpeddaling and blaming and obfuscating begin! (as if it hadn't already...)
|
|
(URL) House: Uranium claim incorrect " " WASHINGTON (AP) -- Amid questions about prewar intelligence, the White House is acknowledging that President Bush was incorrect when he said in his State of the Union address that Iraq recently had sought (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More throwbacks to Hitler...
|
|
(...) Thanks for the info, I greatly appreciate it. (...) Hence my doubt regading this one: colony refers to settlement, or pure governance? I'll go with the first, in order to restrict the options. (...) You said nothing about independant nations (...) (21 years ago, 7-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More throwbacks to Hitler...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Laswell wrote: <snip some good stuff that I didn't know--good geography and history lesson there> (...) Well isn't that the American Dream--get rich quick? Everything is a lawsuit these days--how much is a life (...) (21 years ago, 7-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More throwbacks to Hitler...
|
|
(...) <snip> Funny you should mention one of the biggest 'reactionary measures' your country ever had as your example. WWII was going on well before Dec 1941, and yet the bombing of Pearl Harbour is the day that will 'live in infamy'. Not the (...) (21 years ago, 7-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More throwbacks to Hitler...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Laswell wrote: -snip- (...) -snip- Um... Torres Strait Islanders being denied Australian Citizenship? I don't think that is the case... or are you meaning those from the coastal area of PNG (who are not Australian (...) (21 years ago, 7-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: More throwbacks to Hitler...
|
|
(...) Hawaii was a US territory during WWII, just like Puerto Rico is now. Unlike Puerto Rico, Hawaii had been seeking to become a State back in 1903, with Congress finally giving full consideration to the issue in the 1930's, well before WWII (...) (21 years ago, 7-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More throwbacks to Hitler...
|
|
(...) I'm being preciosist here, but what exactly was the status of Hawaii in 1941? AFAIK it only became a state in 1959, and until the late 1800's it was a kingdom. Honest, I got curious when I read this! :-) (...) You may be wrong. The Republic of (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Yahoo Sucks
|
|
(...) No it wouldn't. The US government, and all lesser related governments (states, counties, cities, townships, etc.) are restricted from making laws that prohibit free speech on public property. No such restrictions are made for private/corporate (...) (21 years ago, 5-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
