Text 47994, 197 rader
Skriven 2007-02-01 10:00:36 av Roy Witt (1:397/22)
  Kommentar till text 47977 av Jay Talbot (1028.fidonews)
Ärende: World's view of USA from bad to worse :(
================================================
01 Feb 07 02:56, Jay Talbot wrote to Roy Witt:


 >> 30 Jan 07 05:39, Jay Talbot wrote to Roy Witt:


 >>> 29 Jan 07 03:24, Jay Talbot wrote to Michiel van der Vlist:


 >>>> Hello All!

 >>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6286755.stm


 >>>> Cheers, Michiel

 >>>  JT> I would say it's a direct reflection on our current
 >>>  JT> administration's abuse of power,
 >>>
 >>> What abuse of power would that be?


 >>  JT> Hmmm.... Where to begin. First, he lied to everyone to start the
 >>  JT> war in Iraq.
 >>
 >> It has previously been established that this isn't true. At least two
 >> years ago.


 JT> So when were WMD's found? Never was last I heard.

That shouldn't be the question. The question is, who supplied the world
with false information? It wasn't GWB...


 >>  JT> Second, Bush has signed quite a few Presidential Signing
 >>  JT> Statements, including giving himself a license to ignore Congress
 >>  JT> (look it up).
 >>
 >> Generally any executive statement made with the signing of a law can
 >> be said to be a signing statement. There are three categories of
 >> 'signing statements'.


 JT> http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20060113.html

 >>  JT> Third, he also installed an illegal spying program against
 >>  JT> American
 >>  JT> >  JT> citizens.
 >>
 >> Apparently it's not illegal as the legislative body in DC hasn't shot
 >> it
 >> > down. Nor has any court. And in fact the Congress has renewed it
 >> before it was to expire.


 JT> Actually, it was illegal. Congress had nothing to do with the spying
 JT> program until it came under fire by civil rights groups. Now, the
 JT> Administration is transferring the oversight to a secret court to
 JT> make it more legal, but it still doesn't make it right.

Who created Homeland Security?

 >>  JT> Need I go on?
 >>
 >> Only if you have something that hasn't come to light yet.

 >>>  JT> and the prez's total incompetence with foreign policy.
 >>>
 >>> You should look at it from a different perspective. The incompetence
 >>> and
 >>> > unreliability of the foreigners plays into the equation more than
 >>> > US
 >>> foreign policy has gone bad.

 >>  JT> I differ in opinion. In essence, our foreign policy in the
 >>  JT> current Administration has been all about oil.
 >>
 >> So, 911 was because of oil? Where did we benefit from that?


 JT> Ummm.... No, you took things out of context. 9/11 was caused by some
 JT> Muslim radicals who hate the US because they consider us unclean
 JT> infidels. The war on Iraq was mostly caused by revenge (not good in
 JT> my book either) but also the hopes that the US would benefit greatly
 JT> by controlling Iraqi oil after the war.

 JT> http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1485546,00.html

Oh? Left wing radicals from Britain know this, how?

 >>  JT> When politics and greed mix, it's not a good combo, ya know?
 >>
 >> Yeah, I've been seeing it in the Demoratic led congress for decades.


 JT> Ah yes, but the last couple of decades has been run by Republicans
 JT> who proved they couldn't do much better.

Actually, they proved that the Democrats aren't as good as their word.
Bi-partisan politics is their cry, but they never practice what they
preach.


 >>  JT> IMHO, this leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
 >>
 >> You're not alone there.

 >>>  JT> But if you haven't looked lately, he's not exactly popular here
 >>>  JT> at home either.
 >>>
 >>> Neither was Jesus Christ, but he was and still is your only savior.

 >>  JT> If I could ever claim to be a Christian, I'd call that statement
 >>  JT> blasphemous.
 >>
 >> And then I'd say you don't know what you're talking about.


 JT> Let me put it this way: Bush is no Jesus Christ.

No one ever said that he was...

 >>  JT> But since I don't, I'll call it a bad comparison.
 >>
 >> Good choice.

 >>  JT> Jesus didn't send thousands off to die and kill,
 >>
 >> But because of him and his teachings, many millions have fought and
 >> died. And that was only in the 1st millennium after he died.


 JT> Right, but it didn't have to be that way. Religious lunatics should
 JT> stay out of politics and positions of power and influence.

Religion has spawned more wars and killed more people since the dawn of
the first idle than anything else. Christian, Muslim, Jew, etc..

 >>  JT> his followers did much later on. Huge difference.
 >>
 >> So far, George has only lost 3000...


 JT> Right, but how many more thousands have come back severely wounded?
 JT> And to each of the "only" 3000+ families who have to deal with it
 JT> every day, what would you say?

What do you suppose was said to the 3000 who died on 9/11? Sorry, that's
the way it goes?

 JT> Personally, I know of one young woman who's without her husband now.
 JT> He was only 21 and died right before x-mas by a roadside bomb. I
 JT> can't imagine a more painful way to go. Neither she nor he deserved
 JT> it, and I can say the same for the 3000+ as well.

You do know that the US military is an all volunteer military, right? By
joining up, you know what may lie ahead of you come peace or war and you
take an oath to do your duty. I'd say that they knew what they were doing
and took their chances, just like every civilian in Iraq and other
countries where life is in danger on a daily basis. Fortunately we have a
leader who has vowed that it won't happen in our country as long as he's
the President. What the Dems do with the WH after he's gone is beyond his
control and I fret on a daily basis that the Dems never regain the WH as
long as there's a threat to this country out there, for as long as they
maintain abandoning an ally in time of need.

 >>  >>  JT> Other than that, I agree with others. Try some happy news for
 >>  >>  JT> a
 >>>  JT> change. :)
 >>>
 >>> In all of the years that I've known Michiel, he's never had anything
 >>> happy to say. Oh, I'll take that back; just once he was happy that I
 >>> agreed with him on one issue.

 >>  JT> lol! Well, I can't argue with you on that. I haven't been around
 >>  JT> in
 >>  JT> >  JT> quite some time. I'll tell ya though, the whole Intel and
 >>  JT> IBM solving the power leaks in processor chips made me smile. :)
 >>
 >> You mean my processor has a leak?!


 JT> lol! Yes, it does. Where do you think all that heat comes from? The
 JT> micro-transistors, when they get smaller, had a horrible power leak
 JT> and caused a ton of over heating.

Is that why they made the processor chip bigger and mounted it to a big
heatsink with a fan blowing over it?

               R\%/itt




--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000
 * Origin: SATX Alamo Area Net * South * Texas, USA * (1:397/22)