PDA

View Full Version : GW : Hands off my cash.



Qtec
08-15-2003, 10:47 AM
I,m speechless.

[ QUOTE ]
WASHINGTON Americans who were POWs in the Persian Gulf War (search) are struggling to understand why the Bush administration is trying to block them from receiving a $1 billion settlement they won against Saddam Hussein's regime in July.

<hr /></blockquote>

Q

http://www.foxnews.com.edgesuite.net/story/0,2933,94804,00.html

eg8r
08-15-2003, 11:55 AM
I had never heard of this. Pretty interesting, Clinton and Bush agree on something. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r

Cueless Joey
08-15-2003, 12:11 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> I had never heard of this. Pretty interesting, Clinton and Bush agree on something. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
Considering Clinton had Iraq bombed in 1998, they agree one thing.
Saddam's an azz. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

eg8r
08-15-2003, 12:25 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Considering Clinton had Iraq bombed in 1998, they agree one thing.
Saddam's an azz. <hr /></blockquote> Isn't it funny that when Clinton bombed Iraq, all the Liberals thought that was the right thing to do. Now they all changed their minds. Wonder why?????

eg8r

Qtec
08-16-2003, 02:54 AM
Whats bombing Iraq got to do with this . This is about money.

Also , the situation has changed. Saddam is gone and the US has control over Iraq. [ financially anyway .]

Q

Ken
08-16-2003, 06:35 AM
eg8r, You have bought into one of the most ridiculous arguments the right has ever made. The fact is that Clinton's bombing of Iraq did not cost the life of a single American. Bush did not just bomb Iraq, he sent in many Americans to get killed or wounded. I don't think "Iraqi Freedom" is worth the loss of even one American.

The only reasonable argument for taking out Saddam is that he had the ability to supply terrorists with chemical and biological agents as well as funding. That, however, was not enough to win support for the war and justify the loss of so many lives.

It sounds like you are listening too much to that Nazi, Sean Hannity. I considered myself a conservative until I started hearing his insane rantings.
KenCT

eg8r
08-17-2003, 06:53 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think "Iraqi Freedom" is worth the loss of even one American.
<hr /></blockquote> Well, I thank you for chiming in. It is funny to hear you state the differences in Clinton's bombing and GWs. One of the differences you forgot to mention was that Bush appears to have done a better job. When Clinton was done, Saddam continued doing whatever it was he did before. Once again, thank you for lacking to point this out. I wonder who bought into what????

[ QUOTE ]
It sounds like you are listening too much to that Nazi, Sean Hannity. I considered myself a conservative until I started hearing his insane rantings.
<hr /></blockquote> LOL, I wonder what you consider yourself now. If one guy speaking his mind has caused you to question which political party you belonged to, I wonder how easily swayed you are on other subjects.

eg8r

eg8r
08-17-2003, 06:57 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Whats bombing Iraq got to do with this . <hr /></blockquote> Go back and read the posts made by myself and Joey, and you will see that we branched off on a similar subject. In the link you provided, you strategically left off the section which stated that Clinton had also stood in the way of those people getting the money. Since your intentions are to show Bush in a bad light, I made reference to Clinton who did the same thing. In that reference I noted that it was funny, Bush and Clinton agreed on something. Joey then stated that they both agreed that Saddam needed to get bombed. So that is where we are now, any more questions????

eg8r

Qtec
08-17-2003, 10:14 PM
[ QUOTE ]
LOL, I wonder what you consider yourself now. If one guy speaking his mind has caused you to question which political party you belonged to, I wonder how easily swayed you are on other subjects <hr /></blockquote>


Changing one's opinion doesnt happen overnight. Being swayed by facts is not a weakness ,its a sign of intelligence . Sometimes you see BS for what it is .

What I think Ken is saying is that the party and the values that he has always believed in ,are not represented by GW and Co.

I have read some of the transcripts of Mr Hannity [ see www.dailyhowler.com (http://www.dailyhowler.com) ] and the way he distorts the truth is amazing. He constantly states 'facts', that are untrue. These lies are then repeated throughout the nation on other networks and eventually stated as facts by other pseudo-journalists. They should have a disclaimer at the end of the show saying,
'any similarities to real events or persons is purely coincidental'.

A lot of people believe tv pundits , they have a lot of influence on whats news and whats not.

eg
Take the report on Saudi Arabia's involvement in funding terrorism that was deemed classified. Have you seen any huge news stories about the Bush- bin Laden connection ? Any stories about the brutality of the Saudi regime ? Or about how much power do the Saudi's have in the Whitehouse ?

If money is power , then I think its safe to assume that its not too far fetched to believe that they OWN GW. The Bushes have made millions if not billions from the Saudi's. Dont you think they want something in return ?

Shouldnt that be investigated ?

What about the Bush- bin Laden - Carlyle Club connection ? Dont you think its important or even that there could be a conflict of interest in the fact that the Ex President Bush is making deals with the Saudi's while his son is in the Whitehouse. [GW has always been backed by the Saudi's and has many buisness connections with the Royal family ]?

If you are in Politics for personal gain , you can be bought .The major investors in the Carlyle Club [ of which GW was a member , and daddy Bush is a member and of which GW will again join ] are the Saudi's.

If there is one country that has immediately benefited from Saddam's deposement , its Saudi Arabia.

Whatever way you look at it , you keep coming back to the same people . They can only get away with what they do because the press, especially TV news , is controlled by a small number of people. Its in their own interests to be chummy with the Govt and not make waves.


Its a fact the the CIA is not allowed to spy in Saudi Arabia .

People like S Hannity are mouthpieces for the Rep party , pure and simple. They confuse issues and spread gossip. When you consider that more than 90% of the American press is owned by 6 companies , innacurate statements are echoed aroud the country spraeding what basically is propaganda.

You cannot believe that you will hear the facts anymore ,not on political debates and not even on the 6 o'clock news on Fox.

cheesemouse
08-18-2003, 04:57 AM
Qtec,

Gees, you mean FOX News isn't 'FAIR and BALANCED'??? Now I'm really confused. I didn't think a large corporation like FOX would lie and slant the news. What will I ever do now if I want to find the truth about events in the wide wide world???...............I know!!! I'll just rely on you and Erg8 to give me the facts from the edges and I will have to fill in the middle /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Seriously, I think Hannity is hysterical, His frantic ravings give me a good laugh but it makes me sad that he is just another one in the long list of entertainers that give journalism a punch in the face. The ratings on FOX are high and that is a testement to the fact that the American viewer is asleep at the wheel. Sad but true but funny also....LOL

eg8r
08-18-2003, 08:24 AM
[ QUOTE ]
What I think Ken is saying is that the party and the values that he has always believed in ,are not represented by GW and Co. <hr /></blockquote> Ken was not mentioning what GW was doing, he was mentioning what Sean Hannity was doing. Do you know Ken well enough to put words in his mouth???? He is a big boy and he can respond if he chooses.

eg8r

eg8r
08-18-2003, 08:25 AM
[ QUOTE ]
The ratings on FOX are high and that is a testement to the fact that the American viewer is asleep at the wheel. Sad but true but funny also....LOL <hr /></blockquote> How did you feel when CNN was on top?

eg8r

TomBrooklyn
08-18-2003, 10:38 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ken:</font><hr> The only reasonable argument for taking out Saddam is that he had the ability to supply terrorists with chemical and biological agents as well as funding. That, however, was not enough to win support for the war and justify the loss of so many lives.<hr /></blockquote>Especially since there is no evidence that he even had those weapons or supplied that funding.

Qtec
08-18-2003, 11:53 PM
You dont hear much about WMD these days .The only reports from Iraq you get are when somebody gets shot .

Todays shooting of a camerman shows just how jumpy the soldiers on patrol really are . It must be obvious by now that there is too much resentment against the US in Iraq to do the job properly

They should get the UN involved but they want to keep total control . I wonder why.

I wonder whats going to happen when thr Iraqis have their Democratic election and the they vote to throw the US/ Brits out of Iraq ?


Q