If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
"None" wrote in message link.net... If memory serves . . . ALL OF THEM! Please explain how you determined them to be lies. |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
"Dick Locke" wrote in message ... I associate fiscal responsibility with Democrats. QED. Let me revise my statement. Fiscal responsibility has not been associated with Democrats for a very long time by any objective observer. |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
"Dick Locke" wrote in message ... No, the other ones. There are no other ones. |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Mike1 wrote:
Sara wrote: James Martinez wrote: One of the biggest objection to vouchers has been that public taxes should not be used to send children to private or parochial schools. Sorry, but I think public taxes should go to public school systems.... Seeing as "taxes" is a euphemism for "stolen loot", it "should" go nowhere save straight back to the people who were ripped off, while those who think they should have a school that I have no use for (in the same way that I think I should have a new La Crosse weather-station that you would have no use for) should go out and buy it with their own money. Oh, and the thieves responsible tarred and feathered and set alight. My tax dollars support the public schools, because somewhere in those public schools is a future dentist, doctor, policeman or policewoman, or a future biomedical engineer. I may not need any of them today, but I sure might need them tomorrow. My tax money is an investment in *my* future health, happiness, and well-being as well as being an investment in the children of my country. Not stolen loot - it's a nest egg. -- Phyl Alt.TV.ER Homepage & Quotes: http://www.digiserve.com/er/erdex.html http://www.digiserve.com/er/oped/quotes.html |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
"john" wrote in message ... How about , to start with, the Bush administration lie about WMD. What lie about WMD? How about the Bush lie about Iraq posing an immediate threat to our national security? What lie about Iraq posing an immediate threat to our national security? |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
"john" wrote in message news Bush claimed that Iraq had nuclear,biological,and chemical weapons hidden away. NO SUCH WEAPONS WERE FOUND! Don't you read the freaken newspapers? Little has been found to date, but even if none had been found, how would that prove Bush's claim to be a lie? |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
"George Z. Bush" wrote in message ... I disagree. Well, then, that would make you wrong. |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
"Fly Guy" wrote in message ... Then why was Iraq prohibited from having scuds, regardless of the payload? Because the 1991 cease-fire didn't permit Iraq to have them. Or is it a double standard? Nope. |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
"George Z. Bush" wrote in message ... You were on a roll until you said that rising tax revenues leads to deficits. Rising tax revenue does not lead to deficits. That can only happen if you spend more money than you've taken in, and the difference between the two is the deficit. Rising tax revenue never leads to deficits. |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
"In The Darkness" wrote in message ... Jarg wrote: "john" wrote in message Bush, on numerous occasions, said that these weapons threatened our national security. Jarg And how was that a lie exactly? It hasn't been disproven, and even if it were it wouldn't make it a lie. You see, a lie is an INTENTIONAL untruth, not a mistaken statement. "The onus to war was forced upon the Intelligence group from the Top Down, to a given conclusion..." - According to O'Neil. Also according to O'Neil: "O'Neill said Tuesday that he did not mean to imply that the administration was wrong to begin contingency planning for a regime change in Iraq..." (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/Default.aspx?id=3925358&p1=0 ) And from an interview on the Today Show... O'Neil: "Yeah, and the other thing that's good, today the book is going to be available, and this red meat frenzy that's occurred when people didn't have anything except snippets -- as an example, you know, people are trying to make a case that I said the president was planning war in Iraq early in the administration. Actually, there was a continuation of work that had been going on in the Clinton administration with the notion that there needed to be regime change in Iraq." COURIC: So you see nothing wrong with that being at the top of the president 's agenda 10 days after the inauguration? O'NEILL: Absolutely not. One of the candidates had said this confirms his worst suspicions...But I was not surprised that we were doing a continuation of planning that had been going on and looking at contingency options during the Clinton administration. COURIC: Well, we'll get to that in a moment. But you say nowhere did you ever see evidence that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. Well, an intelligent person would draw the conclusion that those charges were being trumped up by the administration as a rationale for the invasion. O'NEILL: No, that's not what I've said...certainly there were lots of inferences and circumstantial things that the national security assessments pulled together in looking at this question of mass destruction. I'm not denying or gainsaying the fact that one could make a case. What I have said is I never saw anything that I considered to be concrete evidence of weapons of mass destruction...That also doesn't make a point that we shouldn't have gotten rid of Saddam Hussein. I'm not making that case. COURIC: Well, do you think an invasion of a country should be based on allusion and assertion? O'NEILL: Well, I think one has to look very hard at the apparatus we have with the national intelligence assessments. And it's why we have presidents. At the end of the day there's one person who gets to decide is what he considers to be convincing proof of basis for going to war, and we elected George Bush and he decided it was good enough. http://www.nationalreview.com/thecor...er-archive.asp And you think he _didn't_ know ? If you read *all* of what he has said, you would realize that is not what O'Neil now claims to have been his view. Brooks A little reading in a dictionary might help clear this concept up for you. Jarg |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
State Of Michigan Sales/Use Tax | Rich S. | Home Built | 0 | August 9th 04 04:41 PM |
Enola Gay: Burnt flesh and other magnificent technological achievements | me | Military Aviation | 146 | January 15th 04 10:13 PM |
Soviet State Committee on Science and Technology | Mike Yared | Military Aviation | 0 | November 8th 03 10:45 PM |
Homebuilts by State | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 14 | October 15th 03 08:30 PM |
Police State | Grantland | Military Aviation | 0 | September 15th 03 12:53 PM |