20 Questions for President Bush About Iraq

[chefmike]

Sorry, no dick in this thread... with the exception of the chimp-in-chief, of course...

20 Questions for President Bush About Iraq
Arianna Huffington 03/27/2006

As part of his latest PR push on Iraq, President Bush has been giving another round of speeches and -- wonder of wonders -- fielding questions from audience members and reporters alike. He even took a question from Helen Thomas for the first time in over three years -- a decision he later said he "semi-regretted."



Well, as long as he's in a question-answering state of mind (or is it a poll-driven state of desperation?), I thought I'd offer up a few questions of my own about Iraq for the president.

1.) Last week, you insisted: "I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong... it's simply not true." Yet source after source after source suggests otherwise, including your former Treasury Secretary, Paul O'Neil, who has said that invading Iraq was a goal set out at your first National Security Council meeting, just ten days after your inauguration: "It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying 'Go find me a way to do this.'" Mr. President, is Paul O'Neil lying?

2.) Despite the fact that dozens of Iraqis a day are dying in sectarian violence, you continue to insist that Iraq is not in a civil war. How many dead Iraqis per day would it take before you'd be willing to concede that civil war has broken out?

3.) Speaking of civil war, your Iraq-is-not-a-civil-war assessment was directly contradicted by former prime minister Ayad Allawi, a man whose credibility you considered unimpeachable in 2004, saying: "He's a brave, brave man... You can't change the dynamics on the ground if you've criticized the brave leader of Iraq." Has your opinion of him changed now that he's no longer saying what you want to hear?

4.) Allawi has said: "We are losing each day, as an average, 50 to 60 people through the country, if not more. If this is not civil war, then God knows what civil war is." Do you think this is something you might discuss with God next time you speak?

5.) You have steadfastly supported Secretary Rumsfeld, recently claiming: "He's done a fine job." Just how bad would things have to get before you'd be willing to downgrade that to "a so-so job"? What, in your eyes, would you consider "a really crummy job"?

6.) You have indicated that you now believe that there will be American troops in Iraq until at least 2009, saying the decision about withdrawing all U.S. forces will be made by "future presidents and future governments of Iraq." Given that, do you now feel that your May 2003 Mission Accomplished moment, during which you claimed "major combat operations in Iraq have ended," was a tad premature?

7.) Was the flight suit you wore intentionally one size too small?

8.) Yes or no, are we building permanent military bases in Iraq? If yes, how many?

9.) Total U.S. expenditures on the Iraq war have now been pegged at $320 billion. Assuming the war had never happened, what would we have done with that money?

10.) No one died as a result of Watergate, but thousands have died to rid the world of an imminent threat that wasn't. Will history declare your administration's actions in the lead-up to the war in Iraq a greater scandal than Watergate?

11.) You and several members of your administration have repeatedly said members of Congress saw "the same intelligence" as you did before the invasion. But in the Sept. 21, 2001 PDB, you were told that there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the September 11th attacks. And yet you never gave this information to Congress. Do you still believe they saw "the same intelligence" you did?

12.) In your opinion (as opposed to Halliburton's), has there been war profiteering in the Iraq war? Do you know how many billions have gone unaccounted for? Are you even curious?

13.) Do you agree with Harry Truman that war profiteering is treason?

14.) You have said America has no choice but to remain in Iraq to prevent Al Qaeda from using the country as a terrorist base. Would you say Al Qaeda's presence in Iraq has increased or decreased since we invaded?

15.) You claimed, in September 2002, that "you can't distinguish between Al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror." Did you really mean this?

16.) Can you not differentiate between a group of evil ultraradical Islamic fundamentalists who carried out the September 11 attacks and an evil secular nationalist who, despite the frantic efforts of your administration, has in no way been directly linked to 9/11?

17.) Given that you claim intelligence about Iraq was not manipulated, was intelligence that suggested Iraq didn't have WMD as welcome as intelligence that suggested it did? Could an intelligence official who brought you the former expect to advance as quickly as one who brought you the latter?

18.) You've said it is "preposterous" to claim that the diversion of troops and equipment to Iraq had anything to do with the government's delayed response to Hurricane Katrina, but a secret Pentagon report and the head of the National Guard say otherwise. Were people suffering and dying in Louisiana and Mississippi because so many of our National Guard members and so many billions of tax-payer dollars were diverted to Iraq?

19.) Given that you've made the Iraq war a top priority of your administration, have you ever discussed military service with your daughters? How would you feel if they enlisted?

20.) More than 2,300 American soldiers have been killed and over 17,000 wounded since the Iraq war began. Care to predict what these numbers will be at the end of the "long, hard slog"?

This article and all related links, etc. here-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ariann...n_b_17966.html

[chefmike]

I love this lady...

20 More Questions for President Bush

Arianna Huffington 03/28/2006

Yesterday, hoping to take advantage of George Bush's current question-answering state of mind, I put forth 20 questions about Iraq for him. I haven't heard back. But that's okay, I actually have some more questions for him. Because while Iraq is clearly the defining issue of his presidency, it is far from the only debacle he's overseen.

Here then, with a nod to Paul Harvey, are the... rest of the questions:

1.) Is the limit of your imagination replacing Andy Card with Josh Bolten?

2.) Why, during your 2004 campaign did you assure voters, "any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires... a court order" when you had been specifically authorizing wiretapping without court orders for nearly two years?

3.) Why was your attorney general unable to provide a response beyond "Um, none come to mind, Senator" to back up your 2006 State of the Union claim regarding warrantless wiretaps that "previous presidents have used the same constitutional authority I have and federal courts have approved the use of that authority"?

4.) The GOP crowd that was going to "restore honor and integrity" to Washington has instead given us Abramoff, DeLay, Libby, Frist, Santorum, Safavian, and Claude Allen. If this is what integrity looks like, can you blame those who'd like to bring back Oval Office blow jobs?

5.) Speaking of Claude Allen, your top domestic policy advisor, he abruptly resigned on Feb. 9 and was arrested a month later over a petty shoplifting scam (despite being in the highest White House pay bracket). In 2003 you nominated him as a judge to the 4th Circuit US Court of Appeals - a nomination that the Democrats scuttled. Knowing what you know now, was this the right decision?

6.) In 2003, when you said "I want to know the truth" about who leaked Valerie Plame's identity, did you ask your staff what they knew? If you didn't ask them, why not?

7.) Do you consider Dick Cheney to be a successful vice president? Why do you think so few Americans approve of the job he's doing?

8.) Why did it take less than two weeks after the unveiling of Janet Jackson's right boob at the Super Bowl before the GOP Congress held hearings on the matter, but 14 months before you caved to public pressure and allowed the 9/11 Commission to be formed? Had the 9/11 widows not pressured you to form the commission, would you ever have done it?

9.) Why wasn't your testimony to the 9/11 commission under oath? Why did you insist on having Dick Cheney in the room with you?

10.) With the domestic war on terror underfunded and understaffed, do you consider it a smart allocation of resources to have the FBI form a squad exclusively devoted to cracking down on sexually explicit material involving consenting adults?

11.) After Katrina, you said "I take responsibility" for the failure of the government. Is this the only disaster during your five years in office for which you take responsibility?

12.) In its post-Katrina rebuilding efforts, your administration, according to the Wall Street Journal, "is importing many of the contract practices blamed for spending abuses in Iraq," including contracts awarded without competitive bidding and cost-plus provisions "that guarantee contractors a certain profit regardless of how much they spend." So what's the thinking on this one, Mr. President -- 'If at first you don't succeed...'?

13.) You came into office pledging to be "a uniter, not a divider." What grade would you give yourself on that?

14.) Given your public pronouncements about your extensive Bible reading, what are your thoughts on Jesus' teachings about the poor?

15.) Why did Vice President Cheney fight tooth and nail to keep the records of his energy task force secret? What is he hiding?

16.) Given that we now know the heads of oil companies attended the vice president's energy task force meetings, and given that they denied it when they appeared before Congress, would you say they lied to Congress? Is this why Senator Ted Stevens was so adamant that they not be sworn in before their testimony?

17.) Would you have sent your daughters to a school whose science department taught that the earth is 10,000 years old?

18.) You appointed Karen Hughes, a woman who speaks no Arabic or Farsi, and who has no education in Middle East matters, to be our goodwill ambassador to the Muslim world. If another country appointed a goodwill ambassador to the United States who spoke no English and knew nothing about our country, how do you think that person would do?

19.) Why do you think the United States is so much more unpopular in virtually every country in the world since you took office? Are being respected and being "strong" mutually exclusive?

20.) Would you say you are someone who is able learn from his mistakes?

this article and it's related links, etc. here-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ariann...e_b_17988.html

[trish]

loved your question (4):

4.) Allawi has said: "We are losing each day, as an average, 50 to 60 people through the country, if not more. If this is not civil war, then God knows what civil war is." Do you think this is something you might discuss with God next time you speak?

first it made be laugh.

for bush, american brand capitalism(which he confuses with democracy) is a religion to be forced upon all non-believers.

[SidChromeAU]

I've kept a low profile whilst Americans on this board have discussed politics, but - as I have said once before - your internal poiltics affect the entire world. That being said, I feel it reasonable to say something.
Firstly, this may interest many of you: http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=3687 - sure, it's ironic and satirical in style, but it makes some good points. The link to the damning NY Times article is well worth following.
Further, a segment in the Australian programme Foreign Correspondent entitled 'Iraq's Missing Millions' was superb in exposing some of the shit that the US is pulling in Iraq. Go here for a synopsis: http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/content/2006/s1598397.htm - what the synopsis doesn't detail is a part about the awarding of initial contracts to Haliburton, which were awarded without even a competitive bid. Apparently, most contracts were awarded to the first company to put it's hand up. Funnily, Haliburton was first in line. In another Custer Battles fuckup, they were contrated to supply trucks as part of a security contract (I think it was, anyway) - so they did. Of the 35 or so trucks they promised, two worked. Their defence was along the lines of 'well, we delivered trucks, we didn't promise that they would work'.
A lot of this supports the articles chefmike posted - notwithstanding the enormous body of further evidence now available. It is absolutely clear that the US engineered this war, largely for commercial purposes (which dovetailed nicely with the dickhead-in-Chief's desire to get even for daddy). The aftermath is probably the greatest orgy of profiteering ever seen. You started a war to make money, not to make the world a better place. You - literally - have made a killing.
Surely this is illegal? I know that it is exceptionally difficult to impeach a president, but surely there is enough evidence to warrant an attempt?
Have Americans any idea of the contempt which which they are now held by just about everyone else on earth? Well - lots of people despise you, but even allies like my country no longer trust you. You no longer live in a democracy - you are certainly stumbling towards a religious/capitalist dictatorship in all but name. You allowed this arsehole two bites of the cherry. One term - particularly as the first poll was rigged - would have been forgivable, but two? You are now reaping what you have sown. Unfortunately, so will the rest of us.
I realise that some members are now going to howl for my blood. In the past, some have reacted angrily to any foreign critique of your country. Too fucking bad - if you had cut the 'My country right or wrong' crap when you first became aware of how badly things were going, outsiders wouldn't have to speak out. At some point, you have to take responsibility for your actions as a nation. There is no 'right or wrong' here - you are horribly, breathtakingly wrong.
This actually isn't meant to be an attack on all Americans per se, but it is becoming so very difficult not to just write you off as a job lot. Get your fucking house in order.
Of course, now that I have dared to speak out against your ruling elite, I suppose I can expect my country to be listed for democratisation?

[ezed]

SidChromeAU,
I don't even know where to begin addressing your post. I'm tired. But I'll let you know first, I think you're right in case I poop out before I'm finished. I think Iraq came about (as one of chefmike's 20 questions suggested) because we needed a new base in the mid-east. The fucking greedy, dickless Saudi's wanted our military bases out. Bush also wanted to avenge his father. Cheney was rubbing his hands saying, I see money to be made here. And they made plenty and will.

We have dicks in office. If Kerry was elected, we'd have a bigger dick in office. He need assistance to find his fly. Bush can find his fly but doesn't remember what it's called. We got problems, no one of character and talent will run. Why? The technological age. ie Media! Who the fuck that has balls, character and conviction would ever run for office today. They'd be gunned down out of the starting gate with everything in their past. Which by the way qualifies them for handling these type of situations.

America has it's foundation in law based on right and wrong. Unfortunately, this created a peitry (sp) dish for lawyers. And over 230 years lawyers, like a virus, have crippled our system. They go on to become judges, congress men, and senators. And they control the country and put forth figure heads like Bush, Clinton and Kerry to run our country. Who are immune to critisism because they have no character. And puppet masters such as Cheney roll up the dough, indirectly of course.

Back in the day, we had the Soviet Union to temper our idiocy. Now we don't. Now we have Dr. No (Osamha Bin I've got a long beard and I am tall) holed up in his secret enclave.

History repeats itself over and over again. The Romans, The British Empire. They fall because bureaucracy strangles them. But I think we'll come back. I think we got another 100 to 200 years left in us. I don't know if America realizes how we look to our allies. We'll see in the next election. Bush won't be thrown out, too much money to be made for congress and the courts to act that fast. And if they did, then what? Besides Al-Qida seems to be focusing on fucking up the Iraq mission and not on taking out cities. Maybe I'm wrong on this but who knows. I know it's harder for them to communicate and organize.

Change moves slowly but does move despite the assholes currently in charge.

Well I've been all over the map on this post, forgive me I'm tired.

[latrix67]

Here's onr I would hav asked

21) Would you have gone to war without the support of Tony bLair & the British Military to back you up?

Granted we have'nt lost as many Servicemen as the U.S,But we are tired of the losses ,both Military & Civilain & the is a strong belief within the British Military,more so at junior rank level,that it was a mistake to take the action that followed,all suppoed on the belief that WMD's existed.
L67

[SidChromeAU]

Just to clarify (and I know that you haven't suggested this, but others may misinterpret my above post): I don't condemn individual Americans, but as a group you've pretty much blown it. Few among your allies trust you or your motivations, and it appears clear that you are no longer masters of your own destiny. Rather, a small elite (which frankly appears to cross party lines, as the parties themselves appear to be at the beck and call of the super-rich) decides your fate for you. I'm not pushing the whole conspiracy/hidden-government barrow, just commenting that real power is no longer held by a majority of your population - the bsllot appears meaningless. The entire west is afflicted - somewhat - similarly, but to nowhere near the extent you are. I once read that the difference between you and us (Australia) was that you achieved independence by force, whereas we did so via the ballot box. This has shaped our national characters. Due to your initial history of distrust of governmental authority (the British, initially) you tend to be much more antagonistic towards your government, and your private enterprise sees nothing wrong with pursuing it's own interests ahead of the national interest. We voted to become an independent state, and became one via the legal process. As such, we don't have a cultural imperative (as you do, it appears, at times) to defy government purely on principle. we do all the time, the national sport is practically hanging shit on any elected official (that's our strongly Irish background, which militated against British colonial rule), but we don't do so institutionally. We see government as a tool - something with which to work, that works for us. You seem to take amuch more adversarial approah, and see government as an impediment to be subverted and worked around.
It appears that this cultural difference has enabled your major corporations to take advantage of a distrust of government to your people's detriment. So - you end up as you are now, with major US corporations acting as privateers, and fighting a major war by proxy. Rather than raise their own armies (as, for example, the Dutch East India Company did) and appoint their own generals, they have merely subverted your government. After all, it's cheaper and less risky to use the legitimate armed forces to fight their dirty war for them.
As I come from a miltary background, I am absolutely certain that the majority of your professional men at arms are totally appalled at what they are being used for. Unfortunately for them, good, professional soldiers follow orders. It doesn't help them when their C in C is an outright puppet of those who have suborned them. I find it interesting that butchers like Milosevic have been - finally, when it became politcally convenient - called to account for war crimes. Surely a President who has gone to war for such spurious reasons, and wasted so many lives, and so much materiel, will not be similarly accused of war crimes. Really: when one fights a war for profit, and with such catastrophic consequences, surely the war becomes a criminal enterprise? I'm not damning the men - and women - on the ground. They are following orders (other than the unfortunately usual atrocities that are committed in time of war), but the cowards who are hiding in Washington and delivering those orders are the vilest of criminals. Iraq invaded Kuwait for - amongst other reasons - pillage, and was condemned for it. If one of the nations on Bush's shit list acted as he has, he'd fall all over himself 'puinishing' them, yet he will never be called to account.
As far as history repeating itself goes, I feel that the current conflict, coupled with some draconian internal politics, and the continuing rise of the religious right in the US, may well see the end of US dominance. I know that many Americans have little idea of what happens in the world beyond their doorstep, but you are now so thoroughly discredited that you may never regain your postion of trust - and leadership. I geniunely believe that the door has been left open for the Chinese to continue working toward their own hegemony. The American Century (pt2?) may well be ending. Anything that weakens you, strentghens your opponents - for instance, your chances of acting against Iran are now much diminished, because of your actions in Iraq. Syria is now much safer from your actions. Even if a legitimate case were to be presented for action against both - both much worse states than Iraq ever was - you will now struggle to find support for action. Guess who is lending more and more assistance to States such as these? Who needs an enormous amount of POL to drive a rapidly growing economy? China. Where is all of the oil? In places like - for example - the Sudan. How many Americans are aware that China is heavily financing, and actively supporting, the North Sudanese Muslim development of the oil fields in southern - Christian/Animist - Sudan, much to the detriment of the locals. How many Americans could find the Sudan on a map? China is, similarly, developing close relations with states such as Nigeria - I wonder what Nigeria produces tanker-loads of? The Chinese must be overjoyed at the disunity that is convulsing the west.
lartix67 - then Q22 could well be 'how much did you really tell the Australian Government to get them to come on board in Iraq?', because we are there, too. Many of us supported our initial involvement, because it was sold to us as a war of liberation. Few now would continue to spport the war, and the government that committed us to another US-promulgated war would be in Oppostion at the first opportunity - and our ballot boxes still work.

[White_Male_Canada]

Sorry, no dick in this thread... with the exception of the chimp-in-chief, of course...

20 Questions for President Bush About Iraq
Arianna Huffington 03/27/2006

As part of his latest PR push on Iraq, President Bush has been giving another round of speeches and -- wonder of wonders -- fielding questions from audience members and reporters alike. He even took a question from Helen Thomas for the first time in over three years -- a decision he later said he "semi-regretted."



Well, as long as he's in a question-answering state of mind (or is it a poll-driven state of desperation?), I thought I'd offer up a few questions of my own about Iraq for the president.

1.) Last week, you insisted: "I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong... it's simply not true." Yet source after source after source suggests otherwise, including your former Treasury Secretary, Paul O'Neil, who has said that invading Iraq was a goal set out at your first National Security Council meeting, just ten days after your inauguration: "It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying 'Go find me a way to do this.'" Mr. President, is Paul O'Neil lying?

2.) Despite the fact that dozens of Iraqis a day are dying in sectarian violence, you continue to insist that Iraq is not in a civil war. How many dead Iraqis per day would it take before you'd be willing to concede that civil war has broken out?

3.) Speaking of civil war, your Iraq-is-not-a-civil-war assessment was directly contradicted by former prime minister Ayad Allawi, a man whose credibility you considered unimpeachable in 2004, saying: "He's a brave, brave man... You can't change the dynamics on the ground if you've criticized the brave leader of Iraq." Has your opinion of him changed now that he's no longer saying what you want to hear?

4.) Allawi has said: "We are losing each day, as an average, 50 to 60 people through the country, if not more. If this is not civil war, then God knows what civil war is." Do you think this is something you might discuss with God next time you speak?

5.) You have steadfastly supported Secretary Rumsfeld, recently claiming: "He's done a fine job." Just how bad would things have to get before you'd be willing to downgrade that to "a so-so job"? What, in your eyes, would you consider "a really crummy job"?

6.) You have indicated that you now believe that there will be American troops in Iraq until at least 2009, saying the decision about withdrawing all U.S. forces will be made by "future presidents and future governments of Iraq." Given that, do you now feel that your May 2003 Mission Accomplished moment, during which you claimed "major combat operations in Iraq have ended," was a tad premature?

7.) Was the flight suit you wore intentionally one size too small?

8.) Yes or no, are we building permanent military bases in Iraq? If yes, how many?

9.) Total U.S. expenditures on the Iraq war have now been pegged at $320 billion. Assuming the war had never happened, what would we have done with that money?

10.) No one died as a result of Watergate, but thousands have died to rid the world of an imminent threat that wasn't. Will history declare your administration's actions in the lead-up to the war in Iraq a greater scandal than Watergate?

11.) You and several members of your administration have repeatedly said members of Congress saw "the same intelligence" as you did before the invasion. But in the Sept. 21, 2001 PDB, you were told that there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the September 11th attacks. And yet you never gave this information to Congress. Do you still believe they saw "the same intelligence" you did?

12.) In your opinion (as opposed to Halliburton's), has there been war profiteering in the Iraq war? Do you know how many billions have gone unaccounted for? Are you even curious?

13.) Do you agree with Harry Truman that war profiteering is treason?

14.) You have said America has no choice but to remain in Iraq to prevent Al Qaeda from using the country as a terrorist base. Would you say Al Qaeda's presence in Iraq has increased or decreased since we invaded?

15.) You claimed, in September 2002, that "you can't distinguish between Al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror." Did you really mean this?

16.) Can you not differentiate between a group of evil ultraradical Islamic fundamentalists who carried out the September 11 attacks and an evil secular nationalist who, despite the frantic efforts of your administration, has in no way been directly linked to 9/11?

17.) Given that you claim intelligence about Iraq was not manipulated, was intelligence that suggested Iraq didn't have WMD as welcome as intelligence that suggested it did? Could an intelligence official who brought you the former expect to advance as quickly as one who brought you the latter?

18.) You've said it is "preposterous" to claim that the diversion of troops and equipment to Iraq had anything to do with the government's delayed response to Hurricane Katrina, but a secret Pentagon report and the head of the National Guard say otherwise. Were people suffering and dying in Louisiana and Mississippi because so many of our National Guard members and so many billions of tax-payer dollars were diverted to Iraq?

19.) Given that you've made the Iraq war a top priority of your administration, have you ever discussed military service with your daughters? How would you feel if they enlisted?

20.) More than 2,300 American soldiers have been killed and over 17,000 wounded since the Iraq war began. Care to predict what these numbers will be at the end of the "long, hard slog"?

This article and all related links, etc. here-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ariann...n_b_17966.html

1. O`neil is a nutjob. What does a treasury secretary know about warfare.He spent his time galavantly around the globe with Bono. Bono! ( Clinton signed the Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998 HR 4655 )

2. Iraqi`s are now assuming more and more control,ergo becoming a larger target.For some reason terrorists dislike getting into firefights with Marines.

3.Allawi the FORMER PM. The death rate in Iraq is lower than in the US 5.7 per thousand vs. 8.3 per thousand according to the 2005 World Almanac.First the "quagmire,lets cut and run" didn`t work.Now the "civil war" mantra. The marxists left`s wet dream.

4.See # 3.

5. LOL This is too easy. Robert McNamara (D)

6. The war was over in weeks.Show me where Saddam`s standing army in uniform is?

7. An asinine juvenile emotional venoumous question .

8.Why not.There are bases in Germany aren`t there? And it`s been what,60 years since WWII ?

9. Spend it on the poor. We`ve spent over 5 Trillion on the war on poverty.Let`s cut and run,we ain`t winning that one.

10.Read Saddam`s mukhabarat files,now available.In their own words how they support and engage in terrorism.Poor Huffy must feel like an arse now.

11. Refer to #10

12.Name at least 3 other companies that do what Halliburton does?

13. Huffy is now just deranged and completey unhinged. No bid contracts are subject to limited profitt margins of about 3% Besides that, they did nothing very wrong in an extremely stressfull job: Halliburton to be reimbursed for most disputed Iraq contract costs http://www.forbes.com/finance/feeds/...fx2557300.html

14. Ansar-Al-Islams terrorist bases in Iraq,operated by Saddam,are now gone.Name me 3 bases run by terrorists in Iraq today?

15.Read saddam`s own spy agencies (mukhabarat) documents . Full opertaional relationships with OBL/Al-Qaeda ,Abu Sayef and more:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/...in551632.shtml
http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/pro...docex.htm#iraq

16.No one claimed a direct link.The opertaional link is glaringly self-evident.

17.No WMD`s ? LOL Heard that canard too many times. Even the IAEA admit to 500 tons of yellowcake uranium at Al-Tuwaitha,south of Bagdahd.1.5 tons of it highly refined.Yeah,no wmd`s at all.

18.Oh boy,Katrina again.Show me which article of the Constitution that says," And there shall be a FEMA." There is none, and the USA is a Republic.The Feds are not and never have been the primary first responders.They cannot under law enter a State without permission.Go ask Kathleen Blanco why she waited over 24 hours to allow the Feds into Louisiana.

19.The ol` chickenhawk routine,"why don`t you go and serve!" Well,first off,there`s a little thing called division of labor.Read about it Arrianna,then get back to me.Secondly,why don`t YOU go serve in an abortion clinic and perform abortions,being a pro-baby killer yourself.
See how that argument easily whipsaws.

20.More than 300,000 civilians were killed by Saddam. Can you predict how many more hundreds of thousands of lives would be lost by doing nothing.

Arrianna is a well known idiot. Don`t pin your hopes on an elitist snob.

[chefmike]

Arrianna is a well known idiot. Don`t pin your hopes on an elitist snob.

Arianna is not the idiot. If you believe the reich-wing rubbish and excuses that you "answered" her questions with, well...you know what they say, if the jackboot fits...

Elitist snob? I don't know if you listen to him or not, but your post and it's bogus talking points puts you squarely in the camp of Rush "the junkie" Limbaugh. Doesn't he have solid-gold faucets? Or did he have to hock them to buy more oxycontin?

[White_Male_Canada]

Arrianna is a well known idiot. Don`t pin your hopes on an elitist snob.

Arianna is not the idiot. If you believe the reich-wing rubbish and excuses that you "answered" her questions with, well...you know what they say, if the jackboot fits...

Elitist snob? I don't know if you listen to him or not, but your post and it's bogus talking points puts you squarely in the camp of Rush "the junkie" Limbaugh. Doesn't he have solid-gold faucets? Or did he have to hock them to buy more oxycontin?

Another emotional knee-jerker.

Arianna,married to rich oil men,how quaint.

Care or dare to rebut my "bogus talking points"? Of course not,you have nothing,no facts,merely hype and hyberbole in your emotionoal rant of a response. Do you understand why Democrats lose ?

I`ll wait for a reply to the Mukhabarat files from you yourself. Or the IAEA`s own words concerning tons of yellowcake uranium.But hey,uranium doesn`t count ! It only causes cancer and slow death.

http://gaypatriot.net/2006/03/23/mor...r-plan-in-2003


http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Boo.../iaeaplan.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer

Rush was addicted to painkillers ! Oh my,how shocking since oxycontin is only one step below heroin in regards to pain killers.Take a course and you`re fucked.Far as i`m aware Rush made his own money and didn`t marry a big oil man for his.

Only in your most deluded world would people who wanted LESS government be accused of being evil and those wanting to control every facet of your life , as being saintly.

As a Libertarian/Conservative it`s our job to get big brother out of our hair and not into our bedrooms as you wish them to be.We do not care what you do,as long as it harms no one else,tax payers are not forced to pay for it and special privilages granted because of it.

You`ve choosen marxism,you live with it.We choose liberty.