George W. Bush



November 4, 2004

Jason wrote:

>>That's right folks, use your freedom of speech to protest against the freedom of
>>speech.
>>
>>It's the American way!
>>
>>
>
>Its called spamming Thomas not freedom of speech. And yes there is a
>very large diffenence.
>

In a public forum? No, it's not. He wasn't advertising anything, he
wasn't telemarketing on your personal phone number, and mountain biking
occurs on the surface of the Earth, he has a perfect right to express
any opinion he wants on any forum he wants. You have a filter file,
perhaps you are just too dumb to figure out how to use it? Does he
constantly change his email address, does he post anonymously? Since you
are apparently opposed to freedom of speech, by all means, I encourage
you to exercise your freedom of speech, by protesting against your right
to exercise your right to freedom of speech, it only makes you look more
like the idiot you are. You are an a American, no?

I think he's a hero.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
 
* Thomas Lee Elifritz <[email protected]>:
> In a public forum? No, it's not. He wasn't advertising anything, he
> wasn't telemarketing on your personal phone number, and mountain biking
> occurs on the surface of the Earth, he has a perfect right to express
> any opinion he wants on any forum he wants. You have a filter file,
> perhaps you are just too dumb to figure out how to use it? Does he
> constantly change his email address, does he post anonymously? Since you
> are apparently opposed to freedom of speech, by all means, I encourage
> you to exercise your freedom of speech, by protesting against your right
> to exercise your right to freedom of speech, it only makes you look more
> like the idiot you are. You are an a American, no?
>
> I think he's a hero.
>
> Thomas Lee Elifritz
> http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net


Actually no he doesnt have the right to post whatever he wants where
ever he want Thomas and neither does anyone else just read your ISP TOS.

And no thank god I'm not an american.

Jason
 
November 4, 2004

[ca.environment removed]

See how easy that is?

Jason wrote:

>Actually no he doesnt have the right to post whatever he wants where
>ever he want Thomas and neither does anyone else just read your ISP TOS.
>
>

And you have every right to broadcast your stupidity to the world by
proclaiming your inability to use a filter file. Use Firefox, it's got a
vastly improved filter manager.

>And no thank god I'm not an american.
>
>

Then why are you complaining to a US ISP rather than simply filtering a
poster who never changes his handle and never posts anonymously? I know,
you're a moronic driveling idiot, your ignorance is incurable, you have
an IQ of 50 and you live in Canada, a nation of climate change denyers
and scientific illiterates. It must be a North American problem, not
just a US problems. Hell, it looks like a global problem, but I admit,
bicycles are part of the solution..

Thus, you have every right to use your freedom of speech to protest
against the freedom of speech. ISPs are a dime a dozen, I'm sure there
will be many to replace the one he loses, and you apparently have
nothing better to do than spam ISPs with emails proclaiming your
dissasatifaction with your fundamental right to freedom of speech, since
you seem incapable of editing headers as well as managing a filter file.

Your usenet posting history isn't pristine either, shall we spam your
ISP too?

http://www.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&q=author:Jason+author:<[email protected]>&btnG=Search

X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: [email protected]

Go ahead everybody, spam this address with abuse complaints, it's your fundamental ... ability.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
 
Hey Chris -- I have an amazing idea! I just noticed that your website --
http://www.ramsays-online.com -- accepts orders from us blood mongers down
here in the USA. Why don't you show us all what a Big Man of Conviction you
are and stop selling products to Americans? That way, you won't have to get
blood on your hands by doing business bad people. Hey, that's what you said
about Bush below!! Amazing!!

Bet you don't do it! Have a great evening, Hypocrite!!

Goodoz
(Patriot, Consumer of Bloodless Products and Liberator of overgrown forest
that is crying to become a bike
trail)



"Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
> > (3) Afghanistan and Iraq were/are overpopulated with dangerous ASSHOLES
that
> > will give their own life to kill innocent civilians. These ASSHOLES
have
> > demonstrated that they will hijack aircraft from within our borders and
kill
> > thousands in one sweep if we don't kill them first. September 11 was
> > neither healthy for people, or the environment. One must consider
> > priorities....er eh, nevermind...you obviously don't get it.
> >
>
> The ASSHOLES were mostly Saudi nationals, you know, the people that
> funded Bushs campaign and does their best to keep oil prices for the US
> at affordable levels? Or maybe you don't know. I suspect 51% of the
> the USA doesn't know.
> --
> _________________________
> Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
> http://www.ramsays-online.com
 
"Shawn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Jeff Strickland wrote:
> > "Shawn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>Jeff Strickland wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>(2) violates binding treaties,
> >>>
> >>>Big deal, other countries that pollute even more are not even covered.
> >
> > And
> >
> >>>the treaties drive jobs away.
> >>
> >>What does pollution have to do with the Anti Ballistic Missile Treaty?
> >>Jobs and ABM?
> >>
> >
> >
> > Coming live and direct from ca.environment, and looking at the other
> > newsgroups targetted by Vandeman, makes it clear to me that he is
talking
> > about the Koyoto Treaty, nothing else.
> >
> > You might think he is making reference to a different treaty, but you
don't
> > know Mike very well if you think he cares about anything other than his
> > whacked out view of the environment. I do not suggest that taking a
position
> > on the environment is whacked out, I only suggest that the view that
Mike
> > has is whacked out.
>
> Kyoto wasn't ratified by the Senate. ABM was, and yes Vandamage is a
> wack job.
>
> Shawn

Despite that fact, Mike is talking about the Kyoto (did I spell it wrong
earier?) treaty.
 
"Pete" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Mark Hickey" <[email protected]> wrote
>
> >>
> >>Kyoto wasn't ratified by the Senate. ABM was, and yes Vandamage is a
> >>wack job.
> >
> > In fact, in an almost unheard of moment of unity, the senate voted 100
> > to ZERO to NOT ratify the Kyoto treaty because of the obvious
> > problems. It was NOT a good idea, IOW.
>
> Actually, it was 95-0, 5 non voting.
> Even Kerry thought it was a bad idea...:)
>

Kerry thought lots of things were a bad idea, before he thought they were
good ideas.



> Pete
>
>
 
On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 15:21:00 -0800, "Jeff Strickland"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Despite that fact, Mike is talking about the Kyoto (did I spell it wrong
>earier?) treaty.
>
Kyoto is the correct spelling, after the city in Japan where they met
to write it.

Much easier to look things up with the correct spelling.

Complex issue, and approving it vs not approving it has more
ramifications than how much poluution there will be.

There is inconsistent treatment of different countries in there, based
more on politics than technology.

Happy trails,
Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA
Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom
 
Goodoz wrote:

> (3) Afghanistan and Iraq were/are overpopulated with dangerous ASSHOLES that
> will give their own life to kill innocent civilians. These ASSHOLES have
> demonstrated that they will hijack aircraft from within our borders and kill
> thousands in one sweep if we don't kill them first. September 11 was
> neither healthy for people, or the environment. One must consider
> priorities....er eh, nevermind...you obviously don't get it.

So lets have a look at the score card for Iraq.

Coalition Military Deaths 1269
'Western' Civilian Deaths 100
Iraqi Military Deaths(1) 10,000
Iraqi Civlian Deaths(2) 100,000

People Responsable for 9/11 killed/captured 0

Mate, you've invaded the wrong bloody country.


(1) The US has not released bodycount information. The figure of
10,000 is based on Iraqi Ministry of Heath figures.
(2) The exact number of Iraqi civilian deaths is unknown. Only around
15,000 have been confirmed, but many expert reports estimate the figure
at 100,000

http://icasualties.org/oif/
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040908/D84V554G0.html
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200410/s1230305.htm
 
With all due respect to your opinion, statistics can be manipulated to
represent any facts from any angle.

Is it not true that an individual, who wears no identifiable uniform, who
represents no official flag, who kills without state sponsorship (that's
murder) can be considered a Terrorist and ALSO considered to be a civilian?
Many of these "civilians" are running around with TNT and machine guns. I
hope the coalition continues to relieve them of their mysery.

As for invading the wrong country -- America's Liberation of Iraq has
brought to most of that nation, rebuilt infrastructure, schools for
children, food, more fair treatment for women, Law (in most cases), a vote
that is representative of the masses and many other good things. However, a
noteworthy side benefit for the US is that the enemy is now coming to engage
us.

I do understand a little of the animosity though...when you live in a
country that feeds, funds, defends, develops, employs and does so many other
good things for so many places in the world, It's easy to see why so many
people hate us.

We're too nice!! (unless you're an asshole terrorist)


"Hans Moleman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Goodoz wrote:
>
> > (3) Afghanistan and Iraq were/are overpopulated with dangerous ASSHOLES
that
> > will give their own life to kill innocent civilians. These ASSHOLES
have
> > demonstrated that they will hijack aircraft from within our borders and
kill
> > thousands in one sweep if we don't kill them first. September 11 was
> > neither healthy for people, or the environment. One must consider
> > priorities....er eh, nevermind...you obviously don't get it.
>
> So lets have a look at the score card for Iraq.
>
> Coalition Military Deaths 1269
> 'Western' Civilian Deaths 100
> Iraqi Military Deaths(1) 10,000
> Iraqi Civlian Deaths(2) 100,000
>
> People Responsable for 9/11 killed/captured 0
>
> Mate, you've invaded the wrong bloody country.
>
>
> (1) The US has not released bodycount information. The figure of
> 10,000 is based on Iraqi Ministry of Heath figures.
> (2) The exact number of Iraqi civilian deaths is unknown. Only around
> 15,000 have been confirmed, but many expert reports estimate the figure
> at 100,000
>
> http://icasualties.org/oif/
> http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
> http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040908/D84V554G0.html
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200410/s1230305.htm
 
Goodoz wrote:
> With all due respect to your opinion, statistics can be manipulated to
> represent any facts from any angle.

I think the stats I gave are well sourced. I haven't tried to put any
'spin' on them.

> Many of these "civilians" are running around with TNT and machine guns. I
> hope the coalition continues to relieve them of their mysery.

I've made an effort to seperate Iraqi Military deaths from Iraqi
Civilain deaths, but that's not really my point.

My point is, in your war against the terrorists responsable for 9/11 all
invading Iraq has done has resulted in is the deaths of over 100,000
people, created a recruiting ground for Islamic fundimentalists and
somehow succeded in unifying Shi'ite and Sunite extremests against you.

Despite spending $143,633,000,000 on the war in Iraq, despite having
lost 1269 soldiers, despite having the full military support of major
world powers you have not caught a single terrorist responsable for 9/11.

And while you continue to pour more funds and more lives into the
occupation of Iraq, the heat is off Osama. He's sitting in a cave
somewhere planning his next attack on US soil.

It's my belief your commander in chief has made a bad decision. I'm not
surprised Powell has left.
 
"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> .Coming live and direct from ca.environment, and looking at the other
> .newsgroups targetted by Vandeman, makes it clear to me that he is talking
> .about the Koyoto Treaty, nothing else.
>
> No, the ABM.
>

Come on, V! You don't really expect us to believe you have even a shred of a
clue about the ABM. I suspect you are weak on Kyoto, and the ABM is way over
your head.

Of course, you are going to say that I am the clueless one because of the
typo, Koyoto.
 
Goodoz wrote:
> With all due respect to your opinion, statistics can be manipulated to
> represent any facts from any angle.
>
> Is it not true that an individual, who wears no identifiable uniform, who
> represents no official flag, who kills without state sponsorship (that's
> murder) can be considered a Terrorist and ALSO considered to be a civilian?
> Many of these "civilians" are running around with TNT and machine guns. I
> hope the coalition continues to relieve them of their mysery.
>

To the tune of 100,000? I don't think so. IF, and that is a very large
if, we had targeted only those who were retaliating to a perceived US
invasion (which one can certainly make a case that they are/were), the
numbers would be closer to the toal of military deaths. Some statistical
data manipulation is certainly done in these statistics, but the numbers
of collateral dead is extremely high (one can also make a case that
those civilians accidentally killed by Iraqui terrorists/fredom
fighters, or whatever, would have not been killed if the US forces were
not there).

> As for invading the wrong country -- America's Liberation of Iraq has
> brought to most of that nation, rebuilt infrastructure, schools for
> children, food, more fair treatment for women, Law (in most cases), a vote
> that is representative of the masses and many other good things. However, a
> noteworthy side benefit for the US is that the enemy is now coming to engage
> us.
>

Wrongo. The infrastructure moneys were redirected to repair the oil
production capabilities and train an Iraqui police corps. The end result
is that the country, did not receive the infrastructure improvements
that were promised. Some of this was their own fault (they actually
destroyed many of the systems under construction), but not all of it.
From what I've read, these people have a right to be angry, though to a
degree, some of the blame for these failings fall on them as well.

> I do understand a little of the animosity though...when you live in a
> country that feeds, funds, defends, develops, employs and does so many other
> good things for so many places in the world, It's easy to see why so many
> people hate us.
>
> We're too nice!! (unless you're an asshole terrorist)
>

Tell that to the civilians who were held, brutally, and illegally (in
violation of our constitution) in Cuba or in prisons in Iraq. Frankly,
we are looking a whole lot like the folks we tend to condemn. I am
embarrassed to be associated with those who believe this war has
improved Iraq. There was a book written about the Reagan years titled,
"Sleepwalking Through History," (decent book, actually). The title of a
book on a similar topic now would be more like, "Seeing the World
Through Rose Colored Glasses."

....stuff deleted from previous post

Rick
 
On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:54:49 GMT, Scott Burley <[email protected]> wrote:

..On 03 Nov 2004, the cheeks of Mike Vandeman parted, and a trumpetous
..noise emerged:
..
..> On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 16:14:01 -0600, "the Moderator"
..> <sparky@no_spam_engineer.com> wrote:
..>
..> .
..> ."Andy Chequer" <andy@(youdon'twantthisbitinit)thisisasparagus.com>
..> wrote in .message news:[email protected]...
..> .> >(7) is almost universally hated around the world.
..> .>
..> .> We don't like the monkey man over here. Particularly vexing is his
..> .> abreviation of "terrorism" to "turr".
..> .>
..> .> Andy Chequer
..> .>
..> .
..> .The President may mispronounce a word, but he does not mispronounce
..> his .intent.
..>
..> Yes, he does. His intent was and is to get his hands on Iraqi oil.
..
..If we're getting all this oil from Iraq, why is oil so damned expensive?

'cause Bush can't seem to get it.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 20:14:10 -0500, "RoadWarrior400"
<[email protected]> wrote:

..
.."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..news:[email protected]...
..>
..> BS. I am sure that the election was rigged by Republican secretaries of
..state
..
..There was always the thought in the back of my mind, that you believed the
..unsupportable garbage you spew on Usenet. Now I'm sure you're just another
..troll who has alot of spare time to perfect your craft.
..
..RW

From: "t r u t h o u t" <[email protected]>
Subject: FOCUS: Greg Palast | Kerry Won
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 18:15:03 -0800

FOCUS: Greg Palast | Kerry Won
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/110504V.shtml

Click to SUBSCRIBE -> mailto:[email protected]
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
"Hans Moleman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Goodoz wrote:
>
> > (3) Afghanistan and Iraq were/are overpopulated with dangerous ASSHOLES
that
> > will give their own life to kill innocent civilians. These ASSHOLES
have
> > demonstrated that they will hijack aircraft from within our borders and
kill
> > thousands in one sweep if we don't kill them first. September 11 was
> > neither healthy for people, or the environment. One must consider
> > priorities....er eh, nevermind...you obviously don't get it.
>
> So lets have a look at the score card for Iraq.
>
> Coalition Military Deaths 1269
> 'Western' Civilian Deaths 100
> Iraqi Military Deaths(1) 10,000
> Iraqi Civlian Deaths(2) 100,000
>
> People Responsable for 9/11 killed/captured 0
>
> Mate, you've invaded the wrong bloody country.
>
>
> (1) The US has not released bodycount information. The figure of
> 10,000 is based on Iraqi Ministry of Heath figures.
> (2) The exact number of Iraqi civilian deaths is unknown. Only around
> 15,000 have been confirmed, but many expert reports estimate the figure
> at 100,000
>
> http://icasualties.org/oif/
> http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
> http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040908/D84V554G0.html
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200410/s1230305.htm

So the numbers jump from 16,000 to 100,000 and no one bats an eye? I would
say the survey is flawed.
 
In article <[email protected]>,
Chris Phillipo <[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
> > As for invading the wrong country -- America's Liberation of Iraq has
> > brought to most of that nation, rebuilt infrastructure, schools for
> > children, food, more fair treatment for women, Law (in most cases), a vote
> > that is representative of the masses and many other good things. However, a
> > noteworthy side benefit for the US is that the enemy is now coming to engage
> > us.
> >
> >
>
> The infrastructure still has to be rebuilt and only because the US
> destroyed it. ...

I have had the privilege to spend several dozen hours interviewing, for
a book project, my neighbor and friend who headed up the engineering
teams assessing reconstruction projects in South Central Iraq for
Coalition Provisional Authority. Contrary to your claim here, the vast
bulk of reconstruction needs are associated with decades of neglect by
Saddam. Saddam spent heavily on militarily significant projects, and
they provide stark contrast with the apparent neglect of the ordinary
folks. Superhighways with no local access. Crumbling schools and clinics
in the cities and villages, contrasted with gargantuan modern military
hospital. Irrigation pump systems working at a fraction of needed
capacity, and that because of the skill and dedication of the local folk.

> ... Children were starving only because of the corrupt oil
> for food program, the masses of Iraq are Shite Muslims, they are not
> friendly to the US so there will NEVER be a vote that is representative
> of the masses unless Bush's secret plan was to replace the Baath regime
> with a Shite regime and make Iraq a province of Iran. If 1200 of your
> bravest being killed in sneak attacks is a side benefit then I begin to
> understand the policy shaping that going on.
>
> This will follow the same formula as other countries that were brought
> the gift of democracy. The US appointed leader will be allowed to run
> for office, he will be the only face and name the people will see for
> over a year and campaigning will last about a month for all other
> contenders, and they will have to do it without US money.
 
On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 10:53:08 -0500, Steve Schulin <[email protected]>
wrote:

..In article <[email protected]>,
.. Chris Phillipo <[email protected]> wrote:
..
..> In article <[email protected]>,
..> [email protected] says...
..> > As for invading the wrong country -- America's Liberation of Iraq has
..> > brought to most of that nation, rebuilt infrastructure, schools for
..> > children, food, more fair treatment for women, Law (in most cases), a vote
..> > that is representative of the masses and many other good things. However, a
..> > noteworthy side benefit for the US is that the enemy is now coming to engage
..> > us.
..> >
..> >
..>
..> The infrastructure still has to be rebuilt and only because the US
..> destroyed it. ...
..
..I have had the privilege to spend several dozen hours interviewing, for
..a book project, my neighbor and friend who headed up the engineering
..teams assessing reconstruction projects in South Central Iraq for
..Coalition Provisional Authority. Contrary to your claim here, the vast
..bulk of reconstruction needs are associated with decades of neglect by
..Saddam. Saddam spent heavily on militarily significant projects, and
..they provide stark contrast with the apparent neglect of the ordinary
..folks. Superhighways with no local access. Crumbling schools and clinics
..in the cities and villages, contrasted with gargantuan modern military
..hospital. Irrigation pump systems working at a fraction of needed
..capacity, and that because of the skill and dedication of the local folk.

So bombs don't do any harm? BS.

..> ... Children were starving only because of the corrupt oil
..> for food program, the masses of Iraq are Shite Muslims, they are not
..> friendly to the US so there will NEVER be a vote that is representative
..> of the masses unless Bush's secret plan was to replace the Baath regime
..> with a Shite regime and make Iraq a province of Iran. If 1200 of your
..> bravest being killed in sneak attacks is a side benefit then I begin to
..> understand the policy shaping that going on.
..>
..> This will follow the same formula as other countries that were brought
..> the gift of democracy. The US appointed leader will be allowed to run
..> for office, he will be the only face and name the people will see for
..> over a year and campaigning will last about a month for all other
..> contenders, and they will have to do it without US money.

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
"Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>> >
>> > The infrastructure still has to be rebuilt and only because the US
>> > destroyed it. ...
>>
>> I have had the privilege to spend several dozen hours interviewing, for
>> a book project, my neighbor and friend who headed up the engineering
>> teams assessing reconstruction projects in South Central Iraq for
>> Coalition Provisional Authority. Contrary to your claim here, the vast
>> bulk of reconstruction needs are associated with decades of neglect by
>> Saddam. Saddam spent heavily on militarily significant projects, and
>> they provide stark contrast with the apparent neglect of the ordinary
>> folks. Superhighways with no local access. Crumbling schools and clinics
>> in the cities and villages, contrasted with gargantuan modern military
>> hospital. Irrigation pump systems working at a fraction of needed
>> capacity, and that because of the skill and dedication of the local folk.
>>
>
>
> Which brings me to another point, countries crippled by sanctions are
> then held up as examples of what a tragedy the dictatorship has brought.
> In this case it was not US sanctions at least. It is the case in Cuba,
> however.

It is a pretty broad brush you paint with Chris. We have a planet full
of
independent thinking nations that do not toe the line with the USA that can
,if they so choose, help other countries out with any aid they so choose.
Why does'nt Russia continue to prop up such a small island nation such as
Cuba
as they did in the late 50's up untill the 80's. Why is Cuba our fault? If
"the revolution" is such a noble concept why are N Korea or China not
pumping
massive amounts of aid to Castro/Cuba?

respectfully
Lou W


> --
> _________________________
> Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
> http://www.ramsays-online.com
 
"Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <ouOid.208994$a85.95232@fed1read04>, [email protected]
> says...
>> > Which brings me to another point, countries crippled by sanctions are
>> > then held up as examples of what a tragedy the dictatorship has
>> > brought.
>> > In this case it was not US sanctions at least. It is the case in
>> > Cuba,
>> > however.
>>
>> It is a pretty broad brush you paint with Chris. We have a planet
>> full
>> of
>> independent thinking nations that do not toe the line with the USA that
>> can
>> ,if they so choose, help other countries out with any aid they so choose.
>> Why does'nt Russia continue to prop up such a small island nation such as
>> Cuba
>> as they did in the late 50's up untill the 80's. Why is Cuba our fault?
>> If
>> "the revolution" is such a noble concept why are N Korea or China not
>> pumping
>> massive amounts of aid to Castro/Cuba?
>>
>> respectfully
>> Lou W
>>
>>
>
> I know that the US has deemed the UN irrelevant, but it is still made up
> of independent nations that do provide aid to counties in need,
> including those the US has put sanctions on. If all commuinism is a
> cancer that metastasises across the world and all communist regimes are
> somehow intertwined, explain to me why the Bush government is shoveling
> money China's way while trying to stop every dollar headed to Cuba.
> Other than satisfying an old vendetta that is.

Can't answer the question, I see.... No surprise there, eh?


> --
> _________________________
> Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
> http://www.ramsays-online.com
 
Shawn <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Jeff Strickland wrote:
>
> > (2) violates binding treaties,
> >
> > Big deal, other countries that pollute even more are not even covered. And
> > the treaties drive jobs away.
>
> What does pollution have to do with the Anti Ballistic Missile Treaty?
> Jobs and ABM?

The ABM treaty specifically included language about how to withdraw
from it. Bush followed that treaties requirements to the letter.

And just barely soon enough, if we are lucky we'll have some semblance
of a defense by the time North Korea can field and test a missle
capable of reaching our shores. Everyone puts up the straw dog of
saying its no use against China or Russia, (or France? :->), but those
are sane countries that understand mutual deterance, and have no wish
to enter a suicide pact. NK on the other hand, it is entirely
conceivable that The Glorious Leader might order a launch just to hurt
America, even if it means the utter anihilation of his country.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back