Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

In Washington They're Asking, "Why isn't Obama held to the same standards of honesty as white people?"

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Bradley K Sherman

unread,
Dec 26, 2012, 2:29:41 PM12/26/12
to
Well libs? Want to take a shot at answering the question?

Joan in GB-W

unread,
Dec 26, 2012, 5:59:56 PM12/26/12
to

"Bradley K Sherman" <brad...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:6adc90e33154668b...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
> Well libs? Want to take a shot at answering the question?
>

OK, what president took this country into a war over LIES about weapons of
mass destruction?

thinbluemime

unread,
Dec 26, 2012, 6:32:26 PM12/26/12
to
GW Bush along with Dick and the gang did, of course. But listen to what
Lawrence Wilkerson had to say about that:


JAY: Did President Obama make a mistake, was he wrong not to--at least, to
have a proper due process of investigation, the possibility of crimes
committed by Bush and Cheney, both on the front of torture and on the
question of the Iraq War itself?


WILKERSON: Yes. Yes. And the way I would have done that would have been to
give, as Bill Clinton did for different reasons to Janet Reno on one or
two occasions, I would have distanced myself from it as president, because
I realize the political ramifications, but I would have given Eric Holder
carte blanche: do what you think is right; I will not stop you. And I
think Eric Holder would have done it. I think he would have found some
guilty people, too.


-----------

A MUST SEE INTERVIEW FOR EVERY AMERICAN - 8 part interview with Lawrence
Wilkerson
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=33&Itemid=74&jumival=736

Lawrence Wilkerson is a retired United States Army soldier and former
chief of staff to United States Secretary of State Colin Powell.

Bill Steele

unread,
Dec 26, 2012, 6:43:33 PM12/26/12
to
In article
<6adc90e33154668b...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net>,
"Bradley K Sherman" <brad...@panix.com> wrote:

> Well libs? Want to take a shot at answering the question?
>

Not when it's posed nby a troll.

1845 murdered in Obama's organized communities

unread,
Dec 27, 2012, 5:36:47 AM12/27/12
to
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 16:59:56 -0600, "Joan in GB-W" <jjk...@aol.com>
wrote:

>
The WMD Saddam Hussein used on his own people in the 1980s and '90s?
The WMD that Saddam trucked into Syria just before we kicked his ass?
The WMD Syria's Assad is preparing even now to use on ~his~ own
people?

thinbluemime

unread,
Dec 28, 2012, 8:30:52 PM12/28/12
to
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Congressman, ...any misgivings about things that you were
not able to accomplish

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, I will say that it’s really unfortunate that
the Democratic leadership in the House did not support an impeachment
effort to challenge the Bush administration, and Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney,
on the lies that took us into war in Iraq. That was a pivotal moment for
this country. And instead of choosing the Constitution, our leaders chose
politics. Bad choice. The fact is that today, after a decade of war, we
are looking at an eventual bill for that Iraq war of $5 trillion. We’re
looking at perhaps as many as a million innocent civilians perishing—for
war that was based on lies. People have to remember this. This isn’t just
because it’s, you know, forget about the past. No, you cannot forget about
the past. We went to war based on lies.


http://www.democracynow.org/2012/12/28/outgoing_rep_dennis_kucinich_with_2

emoneyjoe

unread,
Dec 29, 2012, 1:03:05 AM12/29/12
to
How can anybody come up with a number
like $5 Trillion, war is a huge tragedy, but there
is no reason to exaggerate to that extent.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/12/15/what-did-the-iraq-war-cost-more-than-you-think


The decision to invade was made because
the ultimatum that Saddam and his sons leave
Iraq was not effective, not on any "lies" as the
democrats try to claim.

Can the sniveling creep come up with a
more convincing source than a single congress
man?





thinbluemime

unread,
Dec 30, 2012, 12:44:13 PM12/30/12
to

thinbluemime

unread,
Dec 30, 2012, 12:56:19 PM12/30/12
to
On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 01:03:05 -0500, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com> wrote:

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — The nine-year-old Iraq war came to an official
end on Thursday, but paying for it will continue for decades until U.S.
taxpayers have shelled out an estimated $4 trillion. Over a 50-year
period, that comes to $80 billion annually.Although that only represents
about 1% of nation’s gross domestic product, it’s more than half of the
national budget deficit.

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2011-12-15/general/30778140_1_iraq-war-iraq-and-afghanistan-veterans-budgetary-assessments

thinbluemime

unread,
Dec 30, 2012, 12:58:47 PM12/30/12
to
On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 01:03:05 -0500, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com> wrote:

emoneyjoe

unread,
Dec 30, 2012, 4:43:10 PM12/30/12
to
On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:56:19 -0500, thinbluemime
Math moron, $80 Billion is only about 5% of
the deficit, and the US will not be spending on
Iraq for 50 years, their oil revenue should be
enough to pay for anything they need.






0 new messages