| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"dapra" |
| Date: |
23 May 2007 12:27:51 PM |
| Object: |
'Catastrophic Emergency' |
There is not much to add to the article. But this quote from Bush; "It
Would Be Easier If I Was Dictator". He seems to be working on it.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=ROG20070521&articleId=5721
Bush To Be Dictator In A Catastrophic Emergency
by Lee Rogers
The Bush administration has released a directive called the National
Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive. The directive
released on May 9th, 2007 has gone almost unnoticed by the mainstream
and alternative media. This is understandable considering the huge Ron
Paul and immigration news but this story is equally as huge. In this
directive, Bush declares that in the event of a “Catastrophic Emergency”
the President will be entrusted with leading the activities to ensure
constitutional government. The language in this directive would in
effect make the President a dictator in the case of such an emergency.
The directive defines a “Catastrophic Emergency” as the following.
"Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location,
that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or
disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure,
environment, economy, or government functions;
So what does this mean? This is entirely subjective and doesn’t provide
any real concrete definition of what such an emergency would entail.
Assuming that it means a disaster on the scale of the 9/11 attacks or
Katrina, there is no question that the United States at some point in
time will experience an emergency on par with either of those events.
When one of those events takes place, the President will be a dictator
in charge of ensuring a working constitutional government.
The language written in the directive is disturbing because it doesn’t
say that the President will work with the other branches of government
equally to ensure a constitutional government is protected. It says
clearly that there will be a cooperative effort among the three branches
that will be coordinated by the President. If the President is
coordinating these efforts it effectively puts him in charge of every
branch. The language in the directive is entirely Orwellian in nature
making it seem that it is a cooperative effort between all three
branches but than it says that the President is in charge of the
cooperative effort.
The directive defines Enduring Constitutional Government as the following.
"Enduring Constitutional Government," or "ECG," means a cooperative
effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the
Federal Government, coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity
with respect to the legislative and judicial branches and with proper
respect for the constitutional separation of powers among the branches,
to preserve the constitutional framework under which the Nation is
governed and the capability of all three branches of government to
execute constitutional responsibilities and provide for orderly
succession, appropriate transition of leadership, and interoperability
and support of the National Essential Functions during a catastrophic
emergency;
Further on in the document it states the following.
The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for
ensuring constitutional government.
This directive on its face is unconstitutional because each branch of
government the executive, legislative and judicial are supposed to be
equal in power. By putting the President in charge of coordinating such
an effort to ensure constitutional government over all three branches is
effectively making the President a dictator allowing him to tell all
branches of government what to do.
Even worse is the fact that the directive states that the Secretary of
Homeland Security will serve as the lead for coordinating overall
continuity operations. We already know that the Homeland Security
department is not really working to secure the homeland. Instead the
Homeland Security department is really working to enslave the homeland
just like the Home Office over in the United Kingdom has made that
country an Orwellian hell of closed-circuit TV spy cameras. If such an
emergency is declared, we can only guess what sort of surprises the
Homeland Enslavement department will have for us.
The directive itself recognizes that each branch is already responsible
for directing their own continuity of government procedures. If that’s
the case than why does the President need to coordinate these procedures
for all of the branches? This is nothing more than a power grab that
centralizes power and will make the President a dictator in the case of
a so called “Catastrophic Emergency”.
It is insane that this directive claims that its purpose is to define
procedures to protect a working constitutional government when the very
language in the document destroys what a working constitutional
government is supposed to be. A working constitutional government
contains a separation of powers between three equally powerful branches
and this directive states that the executive branch has the power to
coordinate the activities of the other branches. This directive is a
clear violation of constitutional separation of powers and there should
be angry protests from our legislators about this anti-American garbage
that came from the President.
.
|
|
| User: "Governor Swill" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
08 Jul 2007 01:04:30 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 16:14:17 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
aving
made it O.K. to commit perjury and obstruct justice;
Ah - so you want to get rid of the US Constitution so you do not have
to worry about people being set free for political crimes?
That would be George Bush wanting that.
Swill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
08 Jul 2007 12:29:27 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 02:04:30 -0400, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 16:14:17 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
aving
made it O.K. to commit perjury and obstruct justice;
Ah - so you want to get rid of the US Constitution so you do not have
to worry about people being set free for political crimes?
That would be George Bush wanting that.
Really?
Can you provide an example?
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Governor Swill" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
09 Jul 2007 04:36:48 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 10:29:27 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
Ah - so you want to get rid of the US Constitution so you do not have
to worry about people being set free for political crimes?
That would be George Bush wanting that.
Really?
Can you provide an example?
Yep.
Swill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
09 Jul 2007 08:42:28 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 05:36:48 -0400, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 10:29:27 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
Ah - so you want to get rid of the US Constitution so you do not have
to worry about people being set free for political crimes?
That would be George Bush wanting that.
Really?
Can you provide an example?
Yep.
I doubt it. So far you have not been able to back up any of your
claims.
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eris" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
09 Jul 2007 08:47:03 PM |
|
|
On Jul 9, 9:42 pm, Colin Campbell <activated_...@earthlink.net (remove
underscore)> wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 05:36:48 -0400, Governor Swill
<governor.sw...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 10:29:27 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_...@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
Ah - so you want to get rid of the US Constitution so you do not have
to worry about people being set free for political crimes?
That would be George Bush wanting that.
Really?
Can you provide an example?
Yep.
I doubt it. So far you have not been able to back up any of your
claims.
--
Never, ever give up Colon.
The definition of insanity is to continue to do the same thing over
and over and expect different results.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Hugh Gibbons" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
08 Jul 2007 12:12:57 AM |
|
|
In article <4kkv835d5eollk3enicrri5lfdbcp1d8g6@4ax.com>,
Colin Campbell <activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)>
wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 22:04:45 -0600, Hugh Gibbons
<hugh_gibbons@dontsendmeemail.net> wrote:
I suspect that he is going to redefine 'functional to fit his
political agenda.
Suspect anything you like. I read in the paper today how Iraqi
military failed to show up AGAIN when American troops cleared out
a suspected al-Qaeda stronghold in southern Iraq, resulting in
all the terrorists getting away. They've got a quarter million
members under arms, but maybe a 10th of that show up to work when
ordered.
Which paper?
It's an AP story. You can read it here:
http://find.signonsandiego.com/?q=waiting+for+iraqis&Submit=Go%21
They have failed their most basic requirement, of establishing law
and order in the country. If you can't do that, you are not a
government.
So Iraqi police enforcing traffic laws are not 'law and order?' A
nationwide '911' system coordinating first responders (operational in
2004) is not 'law and order?'
Not if the police don't show up where and when needed, and not if they
continue to allow widespread armed militancy in their country.
Are you even aware that security for over 70% of Iraq has been turned
over to the Iraqi army and police over the past several years?
There's a difference between nominal responsibility and actual
capability.
BTW - can you name a part of Iraq that does not have 'law and order?'
Do you have any clue whatsoever as to what is happening in Iraq?
Every part. Jesus, they can't even do it in the capitol, much less
in the provinces.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
08 Jul 2007 12:40:13 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 23:12:57 -0600, Hugh Gibbons
<hugh_gibbons@dontsendmeemail.net> wrote:
In article <4kkv835d5eollk3enicrri5lfdbcp1d8g6@4ax.com>,
Colin Campbell <activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)>
wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 22:04:45 -0600, Hugh Gibbons
<hugh_gibbons@dontsendmeemail.net> wrote:
I suspect that he is going to redefine 'functional to fit his
political agenda.
Suspect anything you like. I read in the paper today how Iraqi
military failed to show up AGAIN when American troops cleared out
a suspected al-Qaeda stronghold in southern Iraq, resulting in
all the terrorists getting away. They've got a quarter million
members under arms, but maybe a 10th of that show up to work when
ordered.
Which paper?
It's an AP story. You can read it here:
http://find.signonsandiego.com/?q=waiting+for+iraqis&Submit=Go%21
I read the article. It does not appear to support your claims.
According to the article - there are no Iraqi security forces
available in that area and the Iraqi government feels that the
reinforcement forces are needed elsewhere.
BTW - this article kind of blows away the claim that the Iraqi
government is a 'puppet' government as we have to _request_ them to
provide forces and they are not obligated to do so.
So Iraqi police enforcing traffic laws are not 'law and order?' A
nationwide '911' system coordinating first responders (operational in
2004) is not 'law and order?'
Not if the police don't show up where and when needed, and not if they
continue to allow widespread armed militancy in their country.
The Iraqi police do show up where they are needed. In fact your own
reference says so. And since when are police supposed to be combat
troops? The police in Iraq are doing _police_ jobs.
Are you even aware that security for over 70% of Iraq has been turned
over to the Iraqi army and police over the past several years?
There's a difference between nominal responsibility and actual
capability.
And can you name an Iraq province that has been turned over to the
Iraqi army where they are not capable of securing the province?
Do you even know which provinces have been turned over?
BTW - can you name a part of Iraq that does not have 'law and order?'
Do you have any clue whatsoever as to what is happening in Iraq?
Every part. Jesus, they can't even do it in the capitol, much less
in the provinces.
Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance - again.
Have you even bothered to try to learn anything about Iraq?
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Governor Swill" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
08 Jul 2007 01:05:33 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 23:12:57 -0600, Hugh Gibbons
<hugh_gibbons@dontsendmeemail.net> wrote:
It's an AP story. You can read it here:
http://find.signonsandiego.com/?q=waiting+for+iraqis&Submit=Go%21
That link was worthless.
Swill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
08 Jul 2007 12:42:13 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 02:05:33 -0400, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 23:12:57 -0600, Hugh Gibbons
<hugh_gibbons@dontsendmeemail.net> wrote:
It's an AP story. You can read it here:
http://find.signonsandiego.com/?q=waiting+for+iraqis&Submit=Go%21
That link was worthless.
Not if you have any kind of research ability. It took me about 20
seconds to find the article he was talking about.
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Governor Swill" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
09 Jul 2007 04:38:09 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 10:42:13 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
It's an AP story. You can read it here:
http://find.signonsandiego.com/?q=waiting+for+iraqis&Submit=Go%21
That link was worthless.
Not if you have any kind of research ability. It took me about 20
seconds to find the article he was talking about.
It was a list of articles dating from 2003. The data was too old to
bu used for the purpose.
Swill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
09 Jul 2007 08:44:46 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 05:38:09 -0400, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 10:42:13 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
It's an AP story. You can read it here:
http://find.signonsandiego.com/?q=waiting+for+iraqis&Submit=Go%21
That link was worthless.
Not if you have any kind of research ability. It took me about 20
seconds to find the article he was talking about.
It was a list of articles dating from 2003. The data was too old to
bu used for the purpose.
What a lame excuse.
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eris" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
07 Jul 2007 04:03:55 PM |
|
|
On Jul 7, 1:56 pm, Colin Campbell <activated_...@earthlink.net (remove
underscore)> wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 22:04:45 -0600, Hugh Gibbons
<hugh_gibb...@dontsendmeemail.net> wrote:
I suspect that he is going to redefine 'functional to fit his
political agenda.
Suspect anything you like. I read in the paper today how Iraqi
military failed to show up AGAIN when American troops cleared out
a suspected al-Qaeda stronghold in southern Iraq, resulting in
all the terrorists getting away. They've got a quarter million
members under arms, but maybe a 10th of that show up to work when
ordered.
Which paper?
They have failed their most basic requirement, of establishing law
and order in the country. If you can't do that, you are not a
government.
So Iraqi police enforcing traffic laws are not 'law and order?'
After all of the killing and horror, the traffic laws are enforced?
You give new definition to the term whackjob
A
nationwide '911' system coordinating first responders (operational in
2004) is not 'law and order?'
Whatever
Are you even aware that security for over 70% of Iraq has been turned
over to the Iraqi army and police over the past several years?
Are you aware that this has accomplished?
BTW - can you name a part of Iraq that does not have 'law and order?'
At any point in time, all of Iraq.
Do you have any clue whatsoever as to what is happening in Iraq?
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Governor Swill" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
08 Jul 2007 01:03:45 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 10:56:31 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
Are you even aware that security for over 70% of Iraq has been turned
over to the Iraqi army and police over the past several years?
"Several" years? How long? Which 70%? How tough is it to guard
barren desert (which makes up at least half of the country)?
Swill
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Wolf With the Red Roses" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
08 Jul 2007 07:58:57 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 02:03:45 -0400, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote something wonderfully witty:
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 10:56:31 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
Are you even aware that security for over 70% of Iraq has been turned
over to the Iraqi army and police over the past several years?
"Several" years? How long? Which 70%? How tough is it to guard
barren desert (which makes up at least half of the country)?
Believe it or not it is a real *****. Ever been there?
--
"Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional,
illogical liberal minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,
which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Governor Swill" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
08 Jul 2007 10:57:07 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 08:58:57 -0400, The Wolf With the Red Roses
<after-dark-arms@cox.net> wrote:
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 02:03:45 -0400, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote something wonderfully witty:
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 10:56:31 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
Are you even aware that security for over 70% of Iraq has been turned
over to the Iraqi army and police over the past several years?
"Several" years? How long? Which 70%? How tough is it to guard
barren desert (which makes up at least half of the country)?
Believe it or not it is a real *****. Ever been there?
Ok, you skipped over the 'several years' question and let the point
whoosh right over your head.
Who cares about securing sand. What's supposed to be secured are the
civilians and the infrastructure. Both are under daily attack.
Swill
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Wolf With the Red Roses" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
08 Jul 2007 04:53:55 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 11:57:07 -0400, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote something wonderfully witty:
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 08:58:57 -0400, The Wolf With the Red Roses
<after-dark-arms@cox.net> wrote:
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 02:03:45 -0400, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote something wonderfully witty:
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 10:56:31 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
Are you even aware that security for over 70% of Iraq has been turned
over to the Iraqi army and police over the past several years?
"Several" years? How long? Which 70%? How tough is it to guard
barren desert (which makes up at least half of the country)?
Believe it or not it is a real *****. Ever been there?
Ok, you skipped over the 'several years' question and let the point
whoosh right over your head.
Well how long was the several years after WW II?
Who cares about securing sand. What's supposed to be secured are the
civilians and the infrastructure. Both are under daily attack.
Perhaps it is the sand that needs securing. Me thinks that is what
all the oil is under. Quite possible large massive qualities of
weapons as well. The borders are also where the out of country
fighters are sneaking across. Come on now let's face it, do you
actually think that their is one swinging ***** in DC that cares about
Iraqi cities or the inhabitants of?
--
"Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional,
illogical liberal minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,
which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Governor Swill" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
09 Jul 2007 04:46:24 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 17:53:55 -0400, The Wolf With the Red Roses
<after-dark-arms@cox.net> wrote:
Ok, you skipped over the 'several years' question and let the point
whoosh right over your head.
Well how long was the several years after WW II?
I don't know, but the war started with the invasion four years and
some months ago, There wasn't any Iraqi police for nearly a year, and
for the next two years the were recruiting and training and
recruitment centers were being bombed every month. So I'm trying to
figure out how four minus two gets turned into 'several'.
Who cares about securing sand. What's supposed to be secured are the
civilians and the infrastructure. Both are under daily attack.
Perhaps it is the sand that needs securing. Me thinks that is what
all the oil is under.
Ok, you got me there.
Quite possible large massive qualities of
weapons as well. The borders are also where the out of country
fighters are sneaking across. Come on now let's face it, do you
actually think that their is one swinging ***** in DC that cares about
Iraqi cities or the inhabitants of?
I think we already know what's important over there. Heard a blurb
some time back that Iraqi oil production is expected to be at 80% of
prewar levels by next year.
Swill
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
08 Jul 2007 12:51:26 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 11:57:07 -0400, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
Are you even aware that security for over 70% of Iraq has been turned
over to the Iraqi army and police over the past several years?
"Several" years? How long? Which 70%? How tough is it to guard
barren desert (which makes up at least half of the country)?
Believe it or not it is a real *****. Ever been there?
Ok, you skipped over the 'several years' question and let the point
whoosh right over your head.
Who cares about securing sand. What's supposed to be secured are the
civilians and the infrastructure. Both are under daily attack.
Anbar Provence was where the car-bomb factories were. It was also a
major nexus for smuggling arms, ammunition and explosives.
Are you an example of the knowledge and understanding of the anti-war
crowd?
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
08 Jul 2007 12:47:16 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 02:03:45 -0400, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 10:56:31 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
Are you even aware that security for over 70% of Iraq has been turned
over to the Iraqi army and police over the past several years?
"Several" years? How long? Which 70%? How tough is it to guard
barren desert (which makes up at least half of the country)?
It is harder than you think. For example the Anbar province had been
ungovernable back when Saddam was in power. It was pacified last fall
and is being jointly managed by the Iraqi Army and that US Marines.
Do you know anything about the what/where/how/why of events in Iraq?
Or do you get all of your information from a 30 second sound bite from
a reporter who has never set foot in Iraq?
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Governor Swill" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
09 Jul 2007 04:47:21 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 10:47:16 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
It is harder than you think. For example the Anbar province had been
ungovernable back when Saddam was in power.
Post Gulf I.
Swill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
09 Jul 2007 08:46:13 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 05:47:21 -0400, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 10:47:16 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
It is harder than you think. For example the Anbar province had been
ungovernable back when Saddam was in power.
Post Gulf I.
And pre-Gulf I.
I take it you have read any books on the recent history of Iraq.
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Wolf With the Red Roses" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
08 Jul 2007 08:42:26 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 16:05:12 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote something
wonderfully witty:
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 09:21:28 -0400, The Wolf With the Red Roses
<after-dark-arms@cox.net> wrote:
Iraq has a formal government, but it is non-functional.
So exactly what separates us from them? Last time I checked ours
wasn't all that functional either.
I suspect that he is going to redefine 'functional to fit his
political agenda.
Oh, O-tay. Sort of like situational Ethics I guess.
--
"Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional,
illogical liberal minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,
which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
06 Jul 2007 06:04:04 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 20:43:39 -0600, Hugh Gibbons
<hugh_gibbons@dontsendmeemail.net> wrote:
Did you sleep through both elections (UN certified) and the referendum
(also UN certified) where the Iraqi people approved their
constitution?
Here is a link so you can get some remedial education in wo9rld
events:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_elections
Iraq has a formal government, but it is non-functional.
Really? Are they failing to pass and enforce laws? Are they failing
to provide standard government services? Are they failing to create
and manage budgets?
Please tell us what your standard for a 'functional' government is.
(Careful - I will be applying your requirements to other current and
historical governments.)
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Don Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
04 Jul 2007 07:52:59 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 18:41:49 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
Hint: you cannot occupy a country that has an independent government.
And the "government" of Iraq is independent of what, exactly?
Certainly not of our presence there, for if we left tomorrow, it would
be gone by Monday next.
You _can_ occupy a country that has a puppet government of your own
creation--you just don't call your presence an occupation.
Through a jaundiced eye darkly--rheum with a view.
The Squeeky Wheel
http://home.comcast.net/~drdonmartin/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Governor Swill" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
06 Jul 2007 04:09:52 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 18:41:49 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
Hint: you cannot occupy a country that has an independent government.
You really believe this kind of stuff don't you?
Swill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
06 Jul 2007 06:06:45 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 05:09:52 -0400, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 18:41:49 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
Hint: you cannot occupy a country that has an independent government.
You really believe this kind of stuff don't you?
There is nothing to 'believe.' The term 'occupation' has specific
meaning in International Law.
I take it that this is just another example of you not knowing what
you are talking about?
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Governor Swill" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
07 Jul 2007 02:23:04 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 16:06:45 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
I take it that this is just another example of you not knowing what
you are talking about?
And I'll take it that you are a well greased pig desperate to escape
responsibility for your support of this adminstration's failed
policies. You really should get a job as a White House speechwriter.
Swill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
07 Jul 2007 06:16:41 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 15:23:04 -0400, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 16:06:45 -0700, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
I take it that this is just another example of you not knowing what
you are talking about?
And I'll take it that you are a well greased pig desperate to escape
responsibility for your support of this adminstration's failed
policies. You really should get a job as a White House speechwriter.
In this case you are wrong. I am simply somebody who is enjoying
pointing out the fact that you really have no clue about what you are
talking about.
Since you have demonstrated a total lack of understanding of what is
going on in Iraq - how can we take your opinions on that subject
seriously?
Yes, I am laughing at you.
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Free Lunch" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
07 Jul 2007 08:42:42 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 18:41:49 -0700, in alt.atheism
Colin Campbell <activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote
in <hhul83l3lf6fonurp697dqelnc085t5c6p@4ax.com>:
On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 02:32:29 GMT, Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us>
wrote:
It sounds like you need to learn more. For example - the occupation
ended with the first Iraqi election.
Tell that to the thousands of American troops who have died since then.
Mock them with your lies. The United States is still occupying Iraq. You
know that.
If you truthfully think that there is currently an 'occupation' of
Iraq - then this is even more evidence that you do not know what you
are talking about.
Hint: you cannot occupy a country that has an independent government.
What evidence is there that the government of Iraq is independent?
BTW: You haven't a distant clue what you're talking about. In fact, you
couldn't get a clue during the clue mating season if you stood in the
middle of a field of horny clues, smeared your body with clue musk and
did the clue mating dance.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Catastrophic Emergency' |
08 Jul 2007 12:58:21 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 01:42:42 GMT, Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us>
wrote:
Hint: you cannot occupy a country that has an independent government.
What evidence is there that the government of Iraq is independent?
The fact that they frequently ignore our requests?
Here - go read the following Wikipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_government
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
