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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
60 Minutes
USA: CBS 60 Minutes tonight. Whitehouse Whistleblower former treas.
secretary will give the rundown on the truth about the war in Iraq, who really attacked the twin towers, when the war was planned and who is really in charge (Hint: It AIN'T Shrub!) Don't miss it! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
60 Minutes
None wrote:
USA: CBS 60 Minutes tonight. Whitehouse Whistleblower former treas. secretary will give the rundown on the truth about the war in Iraq, who really attacked the twin towers, when the war was planned and who is really in charge (Hint: It AIN'T Shrub!) Don't miss it! Former Treasury Secretary who got canned, supposedly for not supporting the tax cut or being a bush team player. "Tell all" book just out. Use a few "grains of salt." g MTV |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
60 Minutes
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 19:08:25 +0000, MTV wrote:
None wrote: Former Treasury Secretary who got canned, supposedly for not supporting the tax cut or being a bush team player. "Tell all" book just out. Use a few "grains of salt." g Sure. OTOH, it has been well-known that the story is true. They are on record from even before the election that they wanted to go after Saddam. Still, sour grapes or not, it's nice to have a public confirmation from a former insider. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
60 Minutes
"MTV" wrote in message ... None wrote: USA: CBS 60 Minutes tonight. Whitehouse Whistleblower former treas. secretary will give the rundown on the truth about the war in Iraq, who really attacked the twin towers, when the war was planned and who is really in charge (Hint: It AIN'T Shrub!) Don't miss it! Former Treasury Secretary who got canned, supposedly for not supporting the tax cut or being a bush team player. "Tell all" book just out. Use a few "grains of salt." g I did, it's not HIS book, it's someone elses. Either way, the interview should be quite interesting and provide a lot of needed and necessary food for thought for all the right wing republicans who can't seem to get a clue! |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
60 Minutes
In article , devil
wrote: On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 19:08:25 +0000, MTV wrote: None wrote: Former Treasury Secretary who got canned, supposedly for not supporting the tax cut or being a bush team player. "Tell all" book just out. Use a few "grains of salt." g Sure. OTOH, it has been well-known that the story is true. They are on record from even before the election that they wanted to go after Saddam. The U.S. Congress is on record, by vote, for regime change in Iraq since 1998, that was also the position of all the U.S. Presidents since then. jay Sun Jan 11, 2004 Still, sour grapes or not, it's nice to have a public confirmation from a former insider. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
60 Minutes
In article , Go Fig
wrote: In article , devil wrote: On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 19:08:25 +0000, MTV wrote: None wrote: Former Treasury Secretary who got canned, supposedly for not supporting the tax cut or being a bush team player. "Tell all" book just out. Use a few "grains of salt." g Sure. OTOH, it has been well-known that the story is true. They are on record from even before the election that they wanted to go after Saddam. The U.S. Congress is on record, by vote, for regime change in Iraq since 1998, that was also the position of all the U.S. Presidents since then. I love the number of nimrods who think that attacking another country pre-emptively is just business as usual. Why if this is our 'right' isn't it the right of any other country e.g. China vis a vis Taiwan -- India vis a vis Pakistan or vice versa etc etc and why isn't the right of any of the countries whose governments we have intruded on against us? aggressive war -- rather than defensive war -- has not been our tradition in the past century and this emphasis on preventing war rather than pre-emptive war kept us alive through the cold war. It is a dangerous foolish game that these cowardly chickenhawks are playing with our country. And it sets dangerous precedents as well as entirely destroying our moral authority to try to prevent war elsewhere. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
60 Minutes
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:16:48 -0600, Jenn wrote:
I love the number of nimrods who think that attacking another country pre-emptively is just business as usual. Why if this is our 'right' isn't it the right of any other country e.g. China vis a vis Taiwan -- India vis a vis Pakistan or vice versa etc etc and why isn't the right of any of the countries whose governments we have intruded on against us? aggressive war -- rather than defensive war -- has not been our tradition in the past century and this emphasis on preventing war rather than pre-emptive war kept us alive through the cold war. It is a dangerous foolish game that these cowardly chickenhawks are playing with our country. And it sets dangerous precedents as well as entirely destroying our moral authority to try to prevent war elsewhere. Excellent point, well put. Mentioning China in this context is truly frightening. Especially if one has sympathy for Taiwan as it is now, i.e. independent. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
60 Minutes
In article , Jenn
wrote: In article , Go Fig wrote: In article , devil wrote: On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 19:08:25 +0000, MTV wrote: None wrote: Former Treasury Secretary who got canned, supposedly for not supporting the tax cut or being a bush team player. "Tell all" book just out. Use a few "grains of salt." g Sure. OTOH, it has been well-known that the story is true. They are on record from even before the election that they wanted to go after Saddam. The U.S. Congress is on record, by vote, for regime change in Iraq since 1998, that was also the position of all the U.S. Presidents since then. I love the number of nimrods who think that attacking another country pre-emptively is just business as usual. Why if this is our 'right' isn't it the right of any other country e.g. China vis a vis Taiwan -- India vis a vis Pakistan or vice versa etc etc and why isn't the right of any of the countries whose governments we have intruded on against us? aggressive war -- rather than defensive war -- has not been our tradition in the past century and this emphasis on preventing war rather than pre-emptive war kept us alive through the cold war. It is a dangerous foolish game that these cowardly chickenhawks are playing with our country. And it sets dangerous precedents as well as entirely destroying our moral authority to try to prevent war elsewhere. If on the end of your block, there was a house that was dealing drugs and you went on record condemning this... would your moral authority be undermined because you don't want drug dealers on your block ? Is this block and neighborhood in jeopardy because of the drug dealer ? If you sat back and did nothing or even just condemned it, would the problem just go away on its own ? If you stood out there with a video camera recording everyone that went into that drug house, would your moral authority be undermined ? jay Sun Jan 11, 2004 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
60 Minutes
In article , Go Fig
wrote: In article , Jenn wrote: In article , Go Fig wrote: In article , devil wrote: On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 19:08:25 +0000, MTV wrote: None wrote: Former Treasury Secretary who got canned, supposedly for not supporting the tax cut or being a bush team player. "Tell all" book just out. Use a few "grains of salt." g Sure. OTOH, it has been well-known that the story is true. They are on record from even before the election that they wanted to go after Saddam. The U.S. Congress is on record, by vote, for regime change in Iraq since 1998, that was also the position of all the U.S. Presidents since then. I love the number of nimrods who think that attacking another country pre-emptively is just business as usual. Why if this is our 'right' isn't it the right of any other country e.g. China vis a vis Taiwan -- India vis a vis Pakistan or vice versa etc etc and why isn't the right of any of the countries whose governments we have intruded on against us? aggressive war -- rather than defensive war -- has not been our tradition in the past century and this emphasis on preventing war rather than pre-emptive war kept us alive through the cold war. It is a dangerous foolish game that these cowardly chickenhawks are playing with our country. And it sets dangerous precedents as well as entirely destroying our moral authority to try to prevent war elsewhere. If on the end of your block, there was a house that was dealing drugs and you went on record condemning this... would your moral authority be undermined because you don't want drug dealers on your block ? Is this block and neighborhood in jeopardy because of the drug dealer ? If you sat back and did nothing or even just condemned it, would the problem just go away on its own ? If you stood out there with a video camera recording everyone that went into that drug house, would your moral authority be undermined ? jay Sun Jan 11, 2004 so America has a right to invade any country it feels like invading? And this will lead to a better world for us and for everyone else? or heck, even for us? Saddam Hussein posed no particular threat outside his borders -- our job now to tell everyone in the world how to run their countries? Look how well our previous attempts have worked out in Chile, in Iran, in Vietnam etc etc |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
60 Minutes
In article , devil
wrote: On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:16:48 -0600, Jenn wrote: I love the number of nimrods who think that attacking another country pre-emptively is just business as usual. Why if this is our 'right' isn't it the right of any other country e.g. China vis a vis Taiwan -- India vis a vis Pakistan or vice versa etc etc and why isn't the right of any of the countries whose governments we have intruded on against us? aggressive war -- rather than defensive war -- has not been our tradition in the past century and this emphasis on preventing war rather than pre-emptive war kept us alive through the cold war. It is a dangerous foolish game that these cowardly chickenhawks are playing with our country. And it sets dangerous precedents as well as entirely destroying our moral authority to try to prevent war elsewhere. Excellent point, well put. I don't think that during the history of the cold war, those in control were crazy. Misguided... ignorant sometimes stupid... but still they valued human live and were concerned, to various degrees, about opinion. The butcher and the psychopath in N. Korea are way too unstable to have nukes and a stockpile must be stopped.... the risk only will grow. jay Sun Jan 11, 2004 Mentioning China in this context is truly frightening. Especially if one has sympathy for Taiwan as it is now, i.e. independent. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
3 hours 40 minutes at ICN | Sjoerd | Air travel | 4 | November 27th, 2003 06:04 AM |
SIM Card for Botswana with some minutes airtime left! | Kulak | Africa | 0 | November 25th, 2003 06:05 PM |
Trip report YYZ-ORD-SAN SAN-SFO-YYZ | Howard Lem | Air travel | 0 | November 3rd, 2003 05:50 AM |
Trip report CPR-LAS/LAS-CPR | Michael Graham | Air travel | 4 | October 27th, 2003 01:09 AM |
Trip Report NCL-LHR-IAD-SEA-IAD-LHR-NCL (long) | Mark Hewitt | Air travel | 7 | September 23rd, 2003 09:15 PM |