OT: 87 Billion and No Accountability

[EXAGON]

I prefere the monkey [img]http://mitya.pp.ru/anato/bush.jpg[/img]

[Peake]

I'm having a hard time believing that this one isn't simply a joke. White House Puts Limits on Queries From Democrats By Dana Milbank Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, November 7, 2003; Page A29 The Bush White House, irritated by pesky questions from congressional Democrats about how the administration is using taxpayer money, has developed an efficient solution: It will not entertain any more questions from opposition lawmakers. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A9708-2003Nov6?language=printer

[Johnny Bitch]

The only problem I see with addressing all of the issues is that you guys come up with 10 different attacks on the President EVERY week. It gets old having to contradict alot of the bullshit that is posted on this board. Alcohol = johnny = unemployed = sean. :wave:

[Dan South]

[quote]Originally posted by WOW: [b] It gets old having to contradict alot of the bullshit that is posted on this board. [/b][/quote]I understand, WOW, and I sympathize. That's why instead of B.S., I've posted FACTS (see above). If you don't like those facts, please write a letter to Mr. Bush. Don't blame the messenger.

[pseudonym]

I would be curious as to know why so many CIA assents turn on us and go the other way? Could it be they were against us from the beginning and where just playing our hand to their own agenda, with the pre-existing context of turning when the time was right to their advantage? Or did they genuinely believe in the deal that were getting and then found-out they were getting screwed. At least you could see two of the reasons(Osama and Saddam)as past allies, for whats going on now. The conspiricy theories just don't connect all the dots for me, thats all. Unless all your saying is that madmen rule the world, I prefer there being reasons instead of instinct on all this crazy shit going on. :confused:

[Peake]

[quote]Originally posted by WOW: [QB]The only problem I see with addressing all of the issues is that you guys come up with 10 different attacks on the President EVERY week. [/quote]That's exactly the point. There is so much wrong with what they're doing, and new things surface so often, that even a five year-old would see it. The government is supposedly for the people, of the people, by the people. Not "screw you democrats, we're doing what we want anytime we want". (I still can't believe that the last story isn't a bad joke of some sort.) It's bad enough with terrorists still running around loose, to have to know that your own government won't work together for the good of the American people.

[pseudonym]

Im not exactly sure why I'm posting this, but sometimes the obvious is mis-information. Everything is in "flux". That was difficult for me to understand because I came from a traditional family believing in the American Dream. I don't like fascists, it's also my nature. But, when "big" stuff happens like 911, there is going to be some "serious shit go down". Thats when all the "old deals" come back to haunt us. You can "fault" anyone you want, but unless you are privy to secret government information, then it's all just an arguement. This country is backed-up with lots of stuff we would like to know. I'm sure there are a few people out there whom have intimate information about the Kennedy assasination, but they like living more than "truth". As absurd as it sounds, the older you get, the less BS you want. ;)

[Chuck Moore]

Peake?????? not really sure who I supposedly made a personal attack against, and not really seeing the contradiction you were reffering to. I was simply offering a bit of advise not to let hatred of an individual keep you from discerning wheather a course of action is correct or not. You are completely free to ignore that advise if you wish. I would love to have a debate on substance tht included some loical reasoning behind your point of veiw other than "I hate Bush.... Bush is for that, so it must be wrong!!!!" c'mon man, you can do better than that, at least make it interesting.

[alcohol_]

Rambling thoughts, Clinton promoted NAFTA and WTO. Jobs have been hemorrhaging since. Bush protects the steel industry, Dem president candidate Kucinich agrees with Bush. Kucinich promotes multilateral trade negotiations and is antipathetic to globalization. I used to support the textbook economics ideology of unrestrained trade, but since unrestrained trade is an ideology and not a practice I think it needs to be rethought. Globalization works for the global corporations, not for US citizens. Liberal economist Paul Krugman feels that even slave labor wages of sweat shops is a positive thing in backward countries, but two members of my band have lost their jobs that have been exported to India. They're having difficulty exploiting their education and are working as low level laborers to keep money flowing. Certainly, these things need to be thought out and anyone who just buys the policies of their favorite political party isn't doing himself/herself a favor because such an unthinking allegiance could work to their disadvantage.

[YYZ]

Originally posted by Dan South: "Chuck, I'm sorry that you feel embarrassed, but if I had your grasp of the situation, I, too, would be embarrassed. Bush is not fighting terrorism; he's fighting for business opportunities in the Middle East, mostly oil and gas opportunities for companies like Halliburton, Enron, and Unocal. The money that we have spent in Iraq makes this clear. Iraq had no al Qaeda connection; Afghanistan was full of al Qaeda. Yet, we've spent over a hundred times as much money and manpower in Iraq. Why? Because Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world. By the invasion of Afghanistan was not a charity case. There was an economic incentive there, as well. In the mid-90's, Unocal wanted to build a natural gas pipeline through Afghanistan. Enron and Halliburton had plans for an oil pipeline in the same area. Unocal sent a representative to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan to discuss the deal in 1996. That representative was George W. Bush. Subsequently, Unocal brought top Taliban officials - you know, those guys who sponsored bin Laden and oppressed women - to Texas to wine and dine them. The Taliban was taken to Wonderland, to NASA's mission control center (!), and some of them were even flown up to South Dakota to see Mount Rushmore (an al Qaeda target?). In 1998, al Qaeda blew up two U.S. Embassies in East Africa. President Clinton ordered an immediate halt to all business dealings with the Taliban, a move that killed both pipeline projects. Or did it? Unocal and Enron began making massive contributions to the Bush candidacy. They needed a new man in the White House if they were going to recover their pipeline projects. Within weeks of taking office, President Bush allowed the pipeline negotiations to resume. They continued for several months, when disagreements between Enron, Unocal, and the Taliban could not be worked out. Unocal and Enron backed out on the deals DAYS before 9/11, infuriating the Taliban. Coincidence? He are some more facts for you to consider. Bin Laden family investment in Arbusto (G.W.Bush's oil company): $50,000.00 Bin Laden family contributions to Harvard (Bush's alma mater): $2,000,000.00 Bin Laden family investment in the Carlyle Group (Bush, Sr.'s employer after the Presidency): $2,000,000.00 Saudi royal family's contribution to G.H.W. Bush Presidential Library: $1,000,000.00 Saudi royal family's contribution to Barbara Bush's literacy program: $1,000,000,00 Where G.H.W. Bush stays on his trips to Saudi Arabia: The palaces of the Saudi royal family. Saudi arms purchases in the 1990's, much of it through G.H.W. Bush's Carlyle Group: $172,000,000,000.00 ($172 billion). Saudi deposits in American banks: over $1,000,000,000,000.00 ($1 trillion). Saudi holdings in various American stock exchanges: over $1,000,000,000,000.00 ($1 trillion). Saudi contribution to the Iran/Contra deal (brokered by G.H.W. Bush): $30,000,000.00 Former employee of Unocal: Hamid Karzai, Bush-installed "president" of Afghanistan. Former consultant to Unocal: Zalmay Kalilzad, U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan. Date that the Afghanistan natural gas pipeline deal (forbidden by President Clinton) was finalized by President Bush: December 27, 2001. And the list goes ON and ON and ON. I realize that it's comforting to imagine that our brave President is over in the Middle East ridding the world of "evil doers," but that is NOT his prime objective. Bush, Cheney, and the Bush family are COMPLETELY IN BED with the Bin Laden family, the House of Saud, Enron, Unocal, and Halliburton. Bush's focus is on one thing: money. Keep the money flowing in the Middle East. Keep the oil and gas flowing. Don't let anyone (Saddam, Taliban) keep us from making money. If they get in the way, bomb them. Send troops over to those dust bowl countries to lay down their lives to protect the flow of money and oil. I'm sorry Chuck, WOW, GZ, but you have been sold on a dangerous, far reaching lie by an Administration who likes to cry wolf ("terrorism") to earn your unwavering support, but whose clear objective is NOT the dismantling of al Qaeda - or we'd be spending the $87 billion in Afghanistan and Pakistan - but rather the perpetuation of business deals in the Middle East. Bush wraps these dirty deals up in the flag, and you fall for it. A lot of Americans fall for it, because we want to believe that someone at the top is looking out for us. Well, it's nice to believe that, but if you want it to be true, you had better vote for a Democrat in 2004, because Mr. Bush is sodomizing this great country in 2003." Dan you're right. PLEASE TO ALL OF YOU, READ THIS: [url=http://www.newamericancentury.org/]Project For The New American Century[/url] If you really want to know what is the ultimate plan of the current administration, you have to know about this group. Read the Statement Of Priciples and the names of those that support it: Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Steve Forbes, Dan Quayle etc... Read the report "Rebuilding America's Defense" especially on page 51. THEY needed a new Pearl Harbour 1951 to implement this elaborate tranformation of the American domination. Jean Claude

[Johnny Bitch]

[quote]Saudi deposits in American banks: over $1,000,000,000,000.00 ($1 trillion). [/quote] [quote] Saudi holdings in various American stock exchanges: over $1,000,000,000,000.00 ($1 trillion). [/quote]And we wonder why we didnt just blow them up? After 9/11 , if the Saudi family would have pulled their money out of the US stock market, the market would have fallen FACE DOWN. The US has been getting oil from S.A. for 60 years, NOT since Bush took office, but since the end of WW2. The Saudi family has put that money back into the US stock market for 60 years. This is a complicated issue, think about all of this and try to come to a conclusion beside "its all GWB's fault".

[StoneinaPond]

[quote] This is a complicated issue, think about all of this and try to come to a conclusion beside "its all GWB's fault". [/quote]I have, and am continuing to. But why don't you give us a few hints about your take on this issue. Seriously.

[Johnny Bitch]

Here is some more input: After 9/11 GWB told the "Royal" family that they HAD to change their ways(stop funding terrorist), S.A. gave lip service to the issue and did NOTHING. So, the President made a decision to pull OUT of S.A. The US has closed our base in S.A. and have moved the troops elsewhere(sp). The US is no longer protecting the Saudis. We might look into a terror attack(FBI investigation) , but we are no longer a presents in SA and the terror attacks in that country will grow 10 fold in the next 2 years. SA has started going through a revolution. UBL wants to take over SA and he might just do it, first he must get rid of the present government. There are several battles going on here, (1) all out civil war in the middle east, (2) WW3 has started and will take several years to complete.

[StoneinaPond]

[quote] So, the President made a decision to pull OUT of S.A. The US has closed our base in S.A. and have moved the troops elsewhere(sp). [/quote]And we did this because....? Sincerely trying to follow your reasoning. Just don't dig yourself a hole. :p

[Peake]

[quote]Originally posted by Chuck Moore: [b]Peake?????? not really sure who I supposedly made a personal attack against, and not really seeing the contradiction you were reffering to. I was simply offering a bit of advise not to let hatred of an individual keep you from discerning wheather a course of action is correct or not. You are completely free to ignore that advise if you wish. I would love to have a debate on substance tht included some loical reasoning behind your point of veiw other than "I hate Bush.... Bush is for that, so it must be wrong!!!!" c'mon man, you can do better than that, at least make it interesting.[/b][/quote]You use the word "hate" twice, in reference to me. Sorry, no personal characterizations are allowed in a rational conversation. If you're missing having one, it's your fault :-) But why not address a single issue that's been presented even on this page? How about today's thought: Saddam is still around, and has the US exactly where he wanted them, as sitting ducks in his own country. If this is true, it is hardly a course of action one could possibly approve of.

[Peake]

[url=http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1521&e=6&u=/afp/20031113/pl_afp/us_iraq_attacks_031113150054]Here\'s the story.[/url]

[Saint Johnny B]

Let me see, 87 Billion to suppossedly rebuild Iraq, the destruction would not have occurred if Bush and Cheney had not lied through their teeth, Bush and Cheney do not want to personally pay for the desruction these two men ordered, but instead want to stick it, yet again, to the American taxpayer, while they can pocket as much money as they want because no one is keeping track, and at the same time the cut the benefits of veterans and the also insure that America loses all of her manufacturing jobs. No Accountablity of 87 Billion Dollars of the American Taxpayer Money = Scandal of World-Wide Proportions Perpetrated By a Gang of Criminals Lead By Bush and Cheney

[Dan South]

[quote]Originally posted by WOW: [b]Here is some more input: After 9/11 GWB told the "Royal" family that they HAD to change their ways(stop funding terrorist), S.A. gave lip service to the issue and did NOTHING.[/b][/quote]GWB doesn't TELL the Saudis to do ANYTHING. [quote][b] So, the President made a decision to pull OUT of S.A. The US has closed our base in S.A. and have moved the troops elsewhere(sp). The US is no longer protecting the Saudis. We might look into a terror attack(FBI investigation) , but we are no longer a presents in SA and the terror attacks in that country will grow 10 fold in the next 2 years.[/b][/quote]WOW, our troops are still in SA, but the Saudi's did not give us permission to launch attacks into Iraq from the SA bases. I think that this may be the source of your confusion. [quote][b] SA has started going through a revolution. UBL wants to take over SA and he might just do it, first he must get rid of the present government. [/b][/quote]You are quite correct. The royal family is quite large (hundreds of princes), and some members are at odds with the leadership. Some are sympathetic to UBL and his cause. Some may have helped him with the attacks. These are not the people who are running SA [i]per se[/i], but they may end up running SA in the future.

[Johnny Bitch]

[quote] GWB doesn't TELL the Saudis to do ANYTHING. [/quote]Thats the entire point, they did not listen. [quote] WOW, our troops are still in SA, but the Saudi's did not give us permission to launch attacks into Iraq from the SA bases. I think that this may be the source of your confusion. [/quote]Now we are getting into the next "phase" of the war. I dont claim to know any "secrets" but I have an opinion. I have several theories about what the next move in the war will be. I am not always right, I have eaten crow on occasion and I must say it is the tastiest. :D [quote]The royal family is quite large (hundreds of princes), and some members are at odds with the leadership. Some are sympathetic to UBL and his cause. Some may have helped him with the attacks. These are not the people who are running SA [i]per se[i], but they may end up running SA in the future. [/quote]This is the revolution I was referring to. . . . Stone in a pond(rock in the lake :) ), What hole are you talking about?

[StoneinaPond]

[quote] What hole are you talking about? [/quote]It was merely a friendly warning to be intellectually sound in your arguments. That's all. Nothing ominous. :wave: But please, let me hear these thoughts of your's about Part II.

[Johnny Bitch]

Your looking for ammo, just join the conversation. :idea:

[StoneinaPond]

[quote] Your looking for ammo, just join the conversation. [/quote]Damn, he figured it out! But no, you are starting to make some sense (so far) and I am genuinely interested where this argument is going.

[Johnny Bitch]

This war is far from over and troops are being positioned for the next phase. Watch reports for troop movements(what you can believe). My guess is that GWB will let us get through Christmas(if he can) and then the next "phase" will begin. I had the "invasion" of Iraq down to the day, but then a sand storm goofed it up and they left two weeks later. [quote]you are starting to make some sense [/quote]This is because we are actually talking about the issue. I spend 90% of my time here trying to straighten out bullshit.(bush lied, jail bush, enron) this type stuff.

[StoneinaPond]

[quote] ...then the next "phase" will begin. [/quote]Stop being a tease. What do you think will happen next? [quote] I spend 90% of my time here trying to straighten out bullshit.(bush lied, jail bush, enron) this type stuff. [/quote]And you are right. He did lie. ;)

[Johnny Bitch]

[quote] And you are right. He did lie. [/quote]Which lie are you reffering to? :p

[Dan South]

[quote]Originally posted by WOW: [b] [quote] And you are right. He did lie. [/quote]Which lie are you reffering to? :p [/b][/quote]Bush lie #1 - Iraq was developing nuclear weapons. Bush lie #2 - Iraq tried to buy uranium from Niger. (One of the officials who "signed" the forged document had been out of office for ten years.) Bush lie #3 - The aluminum tubes were used for uranium enrichment. (They were not suitable for this purpose according the the IAEA.) Bush lie #4 - Saddam had ties to al Q. (Wesley Clark was asked by the administration to use his position as a CNN analyst to promote this idea, but he refused as the claim could not be proven). Bush lie #5 - Bush claimed that he watched the first plane hit the WTC on TV as it happened. (That footage wasn't aired until the following day.) Bush lie #6 - Iraq has mobile bio weapons plants. (Zero found by the UN inspectors or by the US military.) Bush lie #7 - Iraq is developing delivery systems for WMD's that could reach the US. Bush lie #8 - The objective of the Iraq was is to free the Iraqi people and bring democracy to Iraq. (Okay, so why aren't the Iraqis voting?) Bush lie #9 - The war was over in May (also knows as the "aircraft carrier lie"). Bush lie #10 - The French are against us. (The French were trying to save us embarrassment.) Bush lie #11 - We will bring the "evil doers" to justice. (Nope, they're still at large, and our military isn't even operating in the country (Pakistan) where they're hiding.) Bush lie #12 - The Patriot act will not infringe on the rights and freedoms of Americans. Bush lie #13 - It's not about the oil. Our President, pathological liar.

[Saint Johnny B]

Mr Low, Are you getting a piece of that 87 billion or a kickback or...er...payoff...from the big Dick C. Has the big Dick C come over to your house and given you a deposit...er... of special information. C'mon man, we can hear that giant sucking sound eminating from your low place. Low's new prediction: Never-ending killing, death and destruction with never-ending spending of more billions and no accountability.

[Johnny Bitch]

[quote] I spend 90% of my time here trying to straighten out bullshit [/quote]I use the above two post as a reference on this quote.

[Johnny Bitch]

[quote] Our President, pathological liar. [/quote]I thought putting clinton into the argument was a NO-NO.

[Saint Johnny B]

Bush and Cheney are the biggest liars around, and the suffering they have inflicted is of world-wide proportions. They suck and so do you, Mr. Low.