Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Sojourner553 · 05-08-2003, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AdamSmith
Can you name a politician who has ever told the truth?

Right, left, middle, thay all lie and give handouts to their friends.

As long as there is a large government to take money from one group of people and hand it to another group of people there will be large scale corruption.

Agreed, the structure of Congress means represenatives are "supposed" to find some pork for the local folks back home.

But there are still DEGREES of corruption.

It is still true that Democrats are interested in investigating FINANCIAL impropriety, and Republicans mainly interested in investigating SEXUAL impropriety!

TealVeal · 05-08-2003, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mike S.
my question remains how much deception will these apologists make excuses for before they finally cast some doubt on Bush's agenda?

Slim chance getting a straight answer. The thing is all this "deception" is not deception in their eyes, so no amount of it will change their opinion. It's all doubleplus truth to them.

ex-idaho · 05-08-2003, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ultron
The point is that Cheney doesn't have any current ties to Halliburton. That is a conflict of interest. Are all former employees of Halliburton, Boeing, Jet Propulsion Laboratories, etc unable to run for office just because they once worked for a company with close financial ties to the federal govt?

If Bill Clinton worked for Texaco just before assuming office, would that have made him inelligible to run for President?

If the Whitehouse had opened up the bidding instead of having closed door awarding of contracts for a few selected firms alot of the criticism could have been avoided. The fact that they intentionally changed the rules regarding these types of things prior to awarding the contracts to firms with very close political ties screams corruption.

slept2long · 05-09-2003, 03:34 AM

This is obscene.

From CNN

Quote:

The Army Corps of Engineers says a contract awarded without competition to a subsidiary of Halliburton included not only putting out oil well fires in Iraq but also "operation of facilities and distribution of products."

Officials previously have said the multi-million dollar contract only dealt with putting out oil well fires and performing emergency repairs as needed.

Quote:

Flowers did not elaborate on what he meant by "operation of facilities and distribution of products." The White House has long said the oil of Iraq belongs to the Iraqi people.

Quote:

Waxman had written Flowers seeking answers as to why the contract has "no set time limit and no dollar limit and is apparently structured in such a way as to encourage the contractor to increase its costs and, consequently, the costs to the taxpayer." Waxman has said the contract to Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR) could be worth up to $7 billion over two years.

Can someone defend this?

Zanthor · 05-09-2003, 04:02 AM

you didnt mention the really important stuff. water. yes, thats right, simple H2o

from - who really gassed the Kurds?. - ( quite prob not Iraks doing, but Irans. but it suits our purpose to blame Irak, not Iran, at this time, it helps justify our unholy war against the Iraki's.)

http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle1148.htm

the town gassed supposedly by Iraki forces is Halabja, the real prize? - not oil, but water!
but now that the US has control of both, who is the main intended recipient?
ISRAEL....

small quote from the article.

In fact, those who really feel that the disaster at Halabja has bearing on today might want to consider a different question: Why was Iran so keen on taking the town? A closer look may shed light on America's impetus to invade Iraq.

We are constantly reminded that Iraq has perhaps the world's largest reserves of oil. But in a regional and perhaps even geopolitical sense, it may be more important that Iraq has the most extensive river system in the Middle East. In addition to the Tigris and Euphrates, there are the Greater Zab and Lesser Zab rivers in the north of the country. Iraq was covered with irrigation works by the sixth century A.D., and was a granary for the region.

Before the Persian Gulf war, Iraq had built an impressive system of dams and river control projects, the largest being the Darbandikhan dam in the Kurdish area. And it was this dam the Iranians were aiming to take control of when they seized Halabja. In the 1990's there was much discussion over the construction of a so-called Peace Pipeline that would bring the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates south to the parched Gulf states and, by extension, Israel. No progress has been made on this, largely because of Iraqi intransigence. With Iraq in American hands, of course, all that could change.

Thus America could alter the destiny of the Middle East in a way that probably could not be challenged for decades � not solely by controlling Iraq's oil, but by controlling its water. Even if America didn't occupy the country, once Mr. Hussein's Baath Party is driven from power, many lucrative opportunities would open up for American companies.

oil and water? - the 2 most important currencies of the future generations? just 2 fluids the body needs, but which is the most relevant atm?, and just who's lifes are the most important?.
seems to me its the Israelis, the rest of us are just hitching a ride, doing thier bidding, thier paid servants?,
tell me how i am wrong in this analysis?

Zanthor

MortalWombat · 05-09-2003, 06:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ultron
If Bill Clinton worked for Texaco just before assuming office, would that have made him inelligible to run for President?

No, but there would have been a call for 3 or 4 special prosecutors and another impeachment hearing.

johngalt · 05-09-2003, 07:27 AM

i just think about it this way: Bush is probably going to win the next election, unless people become smart and don't vote for him. The problem is though, if Cheney doesn't have a heart attack, the Bush administration will still be corrupt. If he does, then Bush will just find another corrupt guy.

ex-idaho · 05-10-2003, 11:55 AM

Well I heard this morining that he didn't even have to wear the flight suit he just wanted to. This guy operates on pure whimsy.

Terry McCauliffe sent a letter to the Whitehouse asking them to publicly state that they would not use any images from the staged event aboard the USS Lincoln in campaign ads. I see a problem with this. One if they do it they can still be used by the RNC or other special interest groups on behalf of Bush.

The smart thing to do would be to beat them about the head and shoulders with this and really make a fuss about it. Sure your not going to win any Republican votes with it but thier lost anyway. You may pick up some solid Independent votes though and thats were the next president will be elected from.

Fr.Andrew · 05-10-2003, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jat
60 Minutes just did a major story on this a few weeks ago. The Republicians really must think the American people are stupid.

(Fr Andrew): The Republicans are correct, it would seem. But I think even they were taken by surprise at just how easily we can be led around by our noses.

satanka · 05-10-2003, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mike S.
I can't remember where i read it originally but here is one source http://www.larouchepub.com/other/200...ocon_exit.html

That website you got your info from promotes Lyndon LaRouche - who most people - including myself - consider somewhat dubious to completely whacked out.

http://www.larouchepub.com/

I would recommend checking him out before drawing any conclusions from anything that dude says. Below is just one report on LaRouche.

http://www.csj.org/pub_csj/csjbookre...v101lyndon.htm

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-09-2003, 04:02 AM	#25
Zanthor Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 407	you didnt mention the really important stuff. water. yes, thats right, simple H2o from - who really gassed the Kurds?. - ( quite prob not Iraks doing, but Irans. but it suits our purpose to blame Irak, not Iran, at this time, it helps justify our unholy war against the Iraki's.) http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle1148.htm the town gassed supposedly by Iraki forces is Halabja, the real prize? - not oil, but water! but now that the US has control of both, who is the main intended recipient? ISRAEL.... small quote from the article. In fact, those who really feel that the disaster at Halabja has bearing on today might want to consider a different question: Why was Iran so keen on taking the town? A closer look may shed light on America's impetus to invade Iraq. We are constantly reminded that Iraq has perhaps the world's largest reserves of oil. But in a regional and perhaps even geopolitical sense, it may be more important that Iraq has the most extensive river system in the Middle East. In addition to the Tigris and Euphrates, there are the Greater Zab and Lesser Zab rivers in the north of the country. Iraq was covered with irrigation works by the sixth century A.D., and was a granary for the region. Before the Persian Gulf war, Iraq had built an impressive system of dams and river control projects, the largest being the Darbandikhan dam in the Kurdish area. And it was this dam the Iranians were aiming to take control of when they seized Halabja. In the 1990's there was much discussion over the construction of a so-called Peace Pipeline that would bring the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates south to the parched Gulf states and, by extension, Israel. No progress has been made on this, largely because of Iraqi intransigence. With Iraq in American hands, of course, all that could change. Thus America could alter the destiny of the Middle East in a way that probably could not be challenged for decades � not solely by controlling Iraq's oil, but by controlling its water. Even if America didn't occupy the country, once Mr. Hussein's Baath Party is driven from power, many lucrative opportunities would open up for American companies. oil and water? - the 2 most important currencies of the future generations? just 2 fluids the body needs, but which is the most relevant atm?, and just who's lifes are the most important?. seems to me its the Israelis, the rest of us are just hitching a ride, doing thier bidding, thier paid servants?, tell me how i am wrong in this analysis? Zanthor

05-09-2003, 07:27 AM	#27
johngalt Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 204	i just think about it this way: Bush is probably going to win the next election, unless people become smart and don't vote for him. The problem is though, if Cheney doesn't have a heart attack, the Bush administration will still be corrupt. If he does, then Bush will just find another corrupt guy.

05-10-2003, 11:55 AM	#28
ex-idaho Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Spudtopia, ID Posts: 5,315	Well I heard this morining that he didn't even have to wear the flight suit he just wanted to. This guy operates on pure whimsy. Terry McCauliffe sent a letter to the Whitehouse asking them to publicly state that they would not use any images from the staged event aboard the USS Lincoln in campaign ads. I see a problem with this. One if they do it they can still be used by the RNC or other special interest groups on behalf of Bush. The smart thing to do would be to beat them about the head and shoulders with this and really make a fuss about it. Sure your not going to win any Republican votes with it but thier lost anyway. You may pick up some solid Independent votes though and thats were the next president will be elected from.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.