| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Michelle Malkin" |
| Date: |
12 Jun 2005 05:24:30 PM |
| Object: |
More Evidence of Treason |
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1650822,00.html
--
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
Michelle Malkin (Mickey) aa list#1
alt.atheism atheist/agnostic list name collector
BAAWA Knight & EAC Bible thumper thumper
http://questioner.www2.50megs.com
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
.
|
|
| User: "Mark" |
|
| Title: Re: More Evidence of Treason |
12 Jun 2005 06:34:40 PM |
|
|
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in
news:RJCdndXnBuqIKzHfRVn-iQ@comcast.com:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1650822,00.html
uh...and this has *WHAT* to do with atheism???
presumably the atheist/theist axis and liberal/conservative
axis are orthogonal
--
Mark
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michelle Malkin" |
|
| Title: Re: More Evidence of Treason |
12 Jun 2005 11:20:09 PM |
|
|
"Mark" <mark@no.answer.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9673C72E5AF99markisnotavailable@68.1.17.6...
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in
news:RJCdndXnBuqIKzHfRVn-iQ@comcast.com:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1650822,00.html
uh...and this has *WHAT* to do with atheism???
presumably the atheist/theist axis and liberal/conservative
axis are orthogonal
Alt.atheism isn't only for discussions of atheism. It's for
whatever interests atheists. Many of us are interested in
and concerned with the state of politics in the world today.
If you are an atheist who isn't interested in this, read
another thread. No one is forcing you to read this one.
And, if you're not an atheist, who asked you?
--
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
Michelle Malkin (Mickey) aa list#1
alt.atheism atheist/agnostic list name collector
BAAWA Knight & EAC Bible thumper thumper
http://questioner.www2.50megs.com
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
--
Mark
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark" |
|
| Title: Re: More Evidence of Treason |
13 Jun 2005 07:52:01 PM |
|
|
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in news:5-
CdnY8xs7ftlDDfRVn-1w@comcast.com:
"Mark" <mark@no.answer.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9673C72E5AF99markisnotavailable@68.1.17.6...
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in
news:RJCdndXnBuqIKzHfRVn-iQ@comcast.com:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1650822,00.html
uh...and this has *WHAT* to do with atheism???
presumably the atheist/theist axis and liberal/conservative
axis are orthogonal
Alt.atheism isn't only for discussions of atheism.
sure...still, a reader with a passing interest might hope that
alt.atheism was primarily for the discussion of issues and
concerns particular to or even remotely related to atheism.
and if your link to the timesonline article was somehow
atheistically significant, I wanted to know what I was missing.
It's for whatever interests atheists.
my guess is that, when considered in toto, the interests of
atheists span pretty much the entire spectrum of human thought
and behavior...even for an alt group, that's a pretty broad
charter ;^D
Many of us are interested in
and concerned with the state of politics in the world today.
If you are an atheist who isn't interested in this, read
another thread. No one is forcing you to read this one.
that wisdom cuts both ways...no one is forcing you to read
my replies or to take the initiative and energy to answer
them...but nonetheless, you've done so...if my post offends
you, why bother?
And, if you're not an atheist, who asked you?
welcome to Usenet! <VBG>
--
Mark
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michelle Malkin" |
|
| Title: Re: More Evidence of Treason |
13 Jun 2005 09:42:16 PM |
|
|
"Mark" <mark@no.answer.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9674D44BFA1Dmarkisnotavailable@68.1.17.6...
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in news:5-
CdnY8xs7ftlDDfRVn-1w@comcast.com:
"Mark" <mark@no.answer.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9673C72E5AF99markisnotavailable@68.1.17.6...
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in
news:RJCdndXnBuqIKzHfRVn-iQ@comcast.com:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1650822,00.html
uh...and this has *WHAT* to do with atheism???
presumably the atheist/theist axis and liberal/conservative
axis are orthogonal
Alt.atheism isn't only for discussions of atheism.
sure...still, a reader with a passing interest might hope that
alt.atheism was primarily for the discussion of issues and
concerns particular to or even remotely related to atheism.
and if your link to the timesonline article was somehow
atheistically significant, I wanted to know what I was missing.
It's for whatever interests atheists.
my guess is that, when considered in toto, the interests of
atheists span pretty much the entire spectrum of human thought
and behavior...even for an alt group, that's a pretty broad
charter ;^D
Many of us are interested in
and concerned with the state of politics in the world today.
If you are an atheist who isn't interested in this, read
another thread. No one is forcing you to read this one.
that wisdom cuts both ways...no one is forcing you to read
my replies or to take the initiative and energy to answer
them...but nonetheless, you've done so...if my post offends
you, why bother?
Your post didn't annoy me except in as far as your question
is a very common one. Most of the time, no one bothers to
answer it. Every now and then, I do. The questioner may be
someone who is simply curious. Most of the time, it's
someone trying to make trouble. I suspect you are the former,
not the latter.
And, if you're not an atheist, who asked you?
welcome to Usenet! <VBG>
Too true.
--
Mark
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jenny6833A" |
|
| Title: Re: More Evidence of Treason |
13 Jun 2005 03:55:49 AM |
|
|
Mark wrote:
presumably the atheist/theist axis and liberal/conservative
axis are orthogonal
Faking/inventing reasons to go to war aren't a liberal/conservative
matter either. The article Michelle posted should be posted
evereywhere.
:-)
Jenny
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark" |
|
| Title: Re: More Evidence of Treason |
13 Jun 2005 08:06:42 PM |
|
|
"Jenny6833A" <Jenny6833A@aol.com> wrote in
news:1118652949.611750.290820@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Mark wrote:
presumably the atheist/theist axis and liberal/conservative
axis are orthogonal
Faking/inventing reasons to go to war aren't a liberal/conservative
matter either. The article Michelle posted should be posted
evereywhere.
:-)
perhaps...though I think I'd be a little bit baffled if it
appeared in comp.lang.fortran or alt.sport.rowing ;^D
--
Mark
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Yang, AthD h.c, Kicking AWOLs Cocaine Snorting Ass" |
|
| Title: Re: More Evidence of Treason |
13 Jun 2005 02:14:09 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 23:34:40 GMT, Mark <mark@no.answer.net> wrote:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in
news:RJCdndXnBuqIKzHfRVn-iQ@comcast.com:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1650822,00.html
uh...and this has *WHAT* to do with atheism???
presumably the atheist/theist axis and liberal/conservative
axis are orthogonal
No one is forcing you to read her posts.
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Sorcery Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec (aka aka Yang's little poltregeist *****)
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.6 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: 12 million FEWER jobs than Clinton and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -1699 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark" |
|
| Title: Re: More Evidence of Treason |
13 Jun 2005 08:01:11 PM |
|
|
"Yang, AthD (h.c), Kicking AWOL's Cocaine Snorting *****"
<eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in
news:jhcqa11a5bl8sbj89ltoscfr0tm7pt0irg@4ax.com:
No one is forcing you to read her posts.
true...but apropos of what? I'm trying to understand the
connection between her post and the subject of "atheism".
do you know of a better way than to ask directly?
--
Mark
.
|
|
|
| User: "Yang, AthD h.c, Kicking AWOLs Cocaine Snorting Ass" |
|
| Title: Re: More Evidence of Treason |
14 Jun 2005 02:39:46 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 01:01:11 GMT, Mark <mark@no.answer.net> wrote:
"Yang, AthD (h.c), Kicking AWOL's Cocaine Snorting *****"
<eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in
news:jhcqa11a5bl8sbj89ltoscfr0tm7pt0irg@4ax.com:
No one is forcing you to read her posts.
true...but apropos of what? I'm trying to understand the
connection between her post and the subject of "atheism".
do you know of a better way than to ask directly?
what could be more relevant than a war lie perpetuated by a sitting
president in the name of his Christian God?
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Sorcery Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec (aka aka Yang's little poltregeist *****)
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.6 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: 12 million FEWER jobs than Clinton and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -1699 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Vaughan" |
|
| Title: Re: More Evidence of Treason |
13 Jun 2005 07:57:09 PM |
|
|
"Yang, AthD (h.c), Kicking AWOL's Cocaine Snorting *****"
<eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in
news:jhcqa11a5bl8sbj89ltoscfr0tm7pt0irg@4ax.com:
No one is forcing you to read her posts.
true...but apropos of what? I'm trying to understand the
connection between her post and the subject of "atheism".
do you know of a better way than to ask directly?
--
Mark Vaughan
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: More Evidence of Treason |
18 Jun 2005 09:14:21 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 18:24:30 -0400, "Michelle Malkin"
<hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1650822,00.html
une 12, 2005
Ministers were told of need for Gulf war ‘excuse’
Michael Smith
MINISTERS were warned in July 2002 that Britain was committed to
taking part in an American-led invasion of Iraq and they had no choice
but to find a way of making it legal.
The warning, in a leaked Cabinet Office briefing paper, said Tony
Blair had already agreed to back military action to get rid of Saddam
Hussein at a summit at the Texas ranch of President George W Bush
three months earlier.
The briefing paper, for participants at a meeting of Blair’s inner
circle on July 23, 2002, said that since regime change was illegal it
was “necessary to create the conditions” which would make it legal.
This was required because, even if ministers decided Britain should
not take part in an invasion, the American military would be using
British bases. This would automatically make Britain complicit in any
illegal US action.
“US plans assume, as a minimum, the use of British bases in Cyprus and
Diego Garcia,” the briefing paper warned. This meant that issues of
legality “would arise virtually whatever option ministers choose with
regard to UK participation”.
The paper was circulated to those present at the meeting, among whom
were Blair, Geoff Hoon, then defence secretary, Jack Straw, the
foreign secretary, and Sir Richard Dearlove, then chief of MI6. The
full minutes of the meeting were published last month in The Sunday
Times.
The document said the only way the allies could justify military
action was to place Saddam Hussein in a position where he ignored or
rejected a United Nations ultimatum ordering him to co-operate with
the weapons inspectors. But it warned this would be difficult.
“It is just possible that an ultimatum could be cast in terms which
Saddam would reject,” the document says. But if he accepted it and did
not attack the allies, they would be “most unlikely” to obtain the
legal justification they needed.
The suggestions that the allies use the UN to justify war contradicts
claims by Blair and Bush, repeated during their Washington summit last
week, that they turned to the UN in order to avoid having to go to
war. The attack on Iraq finally began in March 2003.
The briefing paper is certain to add to the pressure, particularly on
the American president, because of the damaging revelation that Bush
and Blair agreed on regime change in April 2002 and then looked for a
way to justify it.
There has been a growing storm of protest in America, created by last
month’s publication of the minutes in The Sunday Times. A host of
citizens, including many internet bloggers, have demanded to know why
the Downing Street memo (often shortened to “the DSM” on websites) has
been largely ignored by the US mainstream media.
The White House has declined to respond to a letter from 89 Democratic
congressmen asking if it was true — as Dearlove told the July meeting
— that “the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy”
in Washington.
The Downing Street memo burst into the mainstream American media only
last week after it was raised at a joint Bush-Blair press conference,
forcing the prime minister to insist that “the facts were not fixed in
any shape or form at all”.
John Conyers, the Democratic congressman who drafted the letter to
Bush, has now written to Dearlove asking him to say whether or not it
was accurate that he believed the intelligence was being “fixed”
around the policy. He also asked the former MI6 chief precisely when
Bush and Blair had agreed to invade Iraq and whether it is true they
agreed to “manufacture” the UN ultimatum in order to justify the war.
He and other Democratic congressmen plan to hold their own inquiry
this Thursday with witnesses including Joe Wilson, the American former
ambassador who went to Niger to investigate claims that Iraq was
seeking to buy uranium ore for its nuclear weapons programme.
Frustrated at the refusal by the White House to respond to their
letter, the congressmen have set up a website —
www.downingstreetmemo.com — to collect signatures on a petition
demanding the same answers.
Conyers promised to deliver it to Bush once it reached 250,000
signatures. By Friday morning it already had more than 500,000 with as
many as 1m expected to have been obtained when he delivers it to the
White House on Thursday.
AfterDowningStreet.org, another website set up as a result of the
memo, is calling for a congressional committee to consider whether
Bush’s actions as depicted in the memo constitute grounds for
impeachment.
It has been flooded with visits from people angry at what they see as
media self-censorship in ignoring the memo. It claims to have
attracted more than 1m hits a day.
Democrats.com, another website, even offered $1,000 (about £550) to
any journalist who quizzed Bush about the memo’s contents, although
the Reuters reporter who asked the question last Tuesday was not aware
of the reward and has no intention of claiming it.
The complaints of media self-censorship have been backed up by the
ombudsmen of The Washington Post, The New York Times and National
Public Radio, who have questioned the lack of attention the minutes
have received from their organisations.
Copyright 2005 Times Newspapers Ltd.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
