Religions > Bible > Re: US Assumes Sound Policy Regarding Terrorism Only If It Impeaches and Imprisons Terrorist Traitor Bush
| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Bad Medicine Bush" |
| Date: |
09 Jan 2004 04:37:45 PM |
| Object: |
Re: US Assumes Sound Policy Regarding Terrorism Only If It Impeaches and Imprisons Terrorist Traitor Bush |
No doubt about it: Bush lied.
People died.
Jeff George <george666@comcast.net.munged> wrote:
Hey, where are all the Chimpy Asslickers responses to this? I was
really interested in seeing how they would rationalize these lies.
On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 06:45:05 -0800, George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr. <gltjr@cmhs.edu> added the following words of wisdom:
from the Washington Times
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020927-500715.htm
The International Atomic Energy Agency says that a report cited by
President Bush as evidence that Iraq in 1998 was "six months away"
from developing a nuclear weapon does not exist.
"There's never been a report like that issued from this agency,"
Mark Gwozdecky, the IAEA's chief spokesman, said yesterday in a
telephone interview from the agency's headquarters in Vienna, Austria.
"We've never put a time frame on how long it might take Iraq to
construct a nuclear weapon in 1998," said the spokesman of the agency
charged with assessing Iraq's nuclear capability for the United
Nations. In a Sept. 7 news conference with British Prime Minister
Tony Blair, Mr. Bush said: "I would remind you that when the
inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied — finally denied
access [in 1998], a report came out of the Atomic — the IAEA that they
were six months away from developing a weapon.
"I don't know what more evidence we need," said the president,
defending his administration's case that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein
was building weapons of mass destruction.
The White House says Mr. Bush was referring to an earlier IAEA
report. "He's referring to 1991 there," said Deputy Press
Secretary Scott McClellan. "In '91, there was a report saying that
after the war they found out they were about six months away."
Mr. Gwozdecky said no such report was ever issued by the IAEA in
1991. Many news agencies — including The Washington Times —
reported Mr. Bush's Sept. 7 comments as referring to a 1998 IAEA
report. The White House did not ask for a correction from The Times.
To clear up the confusion, Mr. McClellan cited two news articles
from 1991 — a July 16 story in the London Times by Michael Evans and a
July 18 story in the New York Times by Paul Lewis. But neither article
cites an IAEA report on Iraq's nuclear-weapons program or states that
Saddam was only six months away from "developing a weapon" — as
claimed by Mr. Bush. The article by Mr. Evans says: "Jay Davis, an
American expert working for the U.N. special commission charged with
removing Iraq's nuclear capability, said Iraq was only six months away
from the large-scale production of enriched uranium at two plants
inspected by UN officials." The Lewis article said Iraq in 1991
had a uranium "enrichment plant using electromagnetic technology
[that] was about six months from becoming operational."
In October 1998, just before Saddam kicked U.N. weapons
inspectors out of Iraq, the IAEA laid out a case opposite of Mr.
Bush's Sept. 7
declaration.
"There are no indications that there remains in Iraq any physical
capability for the production of weapon-usable nuclear material of any
practical significance," IAEA Director-General Mohammed Elbaradei
wrote in a report to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan.
Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair on Sept. 7 cited an agency "report"
declaring that satellite photography revealed the Iraqis had
undertaken new construction at several nuclear-related sites. This
week, the IAEA said no such report existed."
Jeff George
SLAP (Socialist Liberation Army of the People)
SLUG (Socialists for Liberty United Government)
Power to the People! Vive la revolution!
Bush sure pulled that one right out of his nether orifice,
now didn't he.
.
|
|
| User: "Vera Six" |
|
| Title: Re: US Assumes Sound Policy Regarding Terrorism Only If It Impeaches and Imprisons Terrorist Traitor Bush |
09 Jan 2004 04:44:13 PM |
|
|
Crossposting is not polite in the usenet. Please stop it.
You can post to all addresses separately.
Please take not, too, that we are not a politics forum. You are
off-topic as well.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bad Medicine Bush" |
|
| Title: Re: US Assumes Sound Policy Regarding Terrorism Only If It Impeaches and Imprisons Terrorist Traitor Bush |
09 Jan 2004 05:37:53 PM |
|
|
Perhaps quite afraid that peace might break out and innocents live,
the unethical and 'net ignorant "Vera Six" <verasix@t-online.de> wrote:
Crossposting is ...
It's a perfectly acceptable and originally-intended aspect of the Usenet.
I suggest that you learn more about it.
Besides, your whining is offtopic on all these groups, which makes your
post inappropriate and an abuse of the medium.
To get back to the subject: Bush claims God would talk to him. Do you
believe that? How many innocent people would you kill for a liar? Does
the scripture you read have anything to say about lying, killing, or such?
Did you know that leaders of Bush's own religious denomination have
been asking him to repent of his wrongdoing? Do you believe that the
world is going to be brought to an end in fire then turned over to you,
as other people are sent to eternal torment?
No doubt about it: Bush lied.
People died.
Jeff George <george666@comcast.net.munged> wrote:
Hey, where are all the Chimpy Asslickers responses to this? I was
really interested in seeing how they would rationalize these lies.
On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 06:45:05 -0800, George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr. <gltjr@cmhs.edu> added the following words of wisdom:
from the Washington Times
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020927-500715.htm
The International Atomic Energy Agency says that a report cited by
President Bush as evidence that Iraq in 1998 was "six months away"
from developing a nuclear weapon does not exist.
"There's never been a report like that issued from this agency,"
Mark Gwozdecky, the IAEA's chief spokesman, said yesterday in a
telephone interview from the agency's headquarters in Vienna, Austria.
"We've never put a time frame on how long it might take Iraq to
construct a nuclear weapon in 1998," said the spokesman of the agency
charged with assessing Iraq's nuclear capability for the United
Nations. In a Sept. 7 news conference with British Prime Minister
Tony Blair, Mr. Bush said: "I would remind you that when the
inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied — finally denied
access [in 1998], a report came out of the Atomic — the IAEA that they
were six months away from developing a weapon.
"I don't know what more evidence we need," said the president,
defending his administration's case that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein
was building weapons of mass destruction.
The White House says Mr. Bush was referring to an earlier IAEA
report. "He's referring to 1991 there," said Deputy Press
Secretary Scott McClellan. "In '91, there was a report saying that
after the war they found out they were about six months away."
Mr. Gwozdecky said no such report was ever issued by the IAEA in
1991. Many news agencies — including The Washington Times —
reported Mr. Bush's Sept. 7 comments as referring to a 1998 IAEA
report. The White House did not ask for a correction from The Times.
To clear up the confusion, Mr. McClellan cited two news articles
from 1991 — a July 16 story in the London Times by Michael Evans and a
July 18 story in the New York Times by Paul Lewis. But neither article
cites an IAEA report on Iraq's nuclear-weapons program or states that
Saddam was only six months away from "developing a weapon" — as
claimed by Mr. Bush. The article by Mr. Evans says: "Jay Davis, an
American expert working for the U.N. special commission charged with
removing Iraq's nuclear capability, said Iraq was only six months away
from the large-scale production of enriched uranium at two plants
inspected by UN officials." The Lewis article said Iraq in 1991
had a uranium "enrichment plant using electromagnetic technology
[that] was about six months from becoming operational."
In October 1998, just before Saddam kicked U.N. weapons
inspectors out of Iraq, the IAEA laid out a case opposite of Mr.
Bush's Sept. 7
declaration.
"There are no indications that there remains in Iraq any physical
capability for the production of weapon-usable nuclear material of any
practical significance," IAEA Director-General Mohammed Elbaradei
wrote in a report to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan.
Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair on Sept. 7 cited an agency "report"
declaring that satellite photography revealed the Iraqis had
undertaken new construction at several nuclear-related sites. This
week, the IAEA said no such report existed."
Jeff George
SLAP (Socialist Liberation Army of the People)
SLUG (Socialists for Liberty United Government)
Power to the People! Vive la revolution!
Bush sure pulled that one right out of his nether orifice,
now didn't he.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bad Medicine Bush" |
|
| Title: Re: US Assumes Sound Policy Regarding Terrorism Only If It Impeaches and Imprisons Terrorist Traitor Bush |
09 Jan 2004 07:58:53 PM |
|
|
Clueless and hysterical, "Vera Six" <verasix@t-online.de> wrote:
Crossposting is not polite in the usenet.
Sure it is, when it's ontopic. Your blather, however, isn't.
Please stop it.
Control yourself if you can. Freedom is a religious experience.
If only you could muster the courage to try it sometime.
You can post to all addresses separately.
That would be wasteful and inappropriate. Look it up.
In the meantime, keep your nonsensical rubbish to yourself,
or don't be surprised when you get called on it.
Now, getting back to the subject, Bush has tried to claim that
God would somehow speak to him. He is, of course, lying,
and those who are truly religious aren't about to support him.
Perhaps quite afraid that peace might break out and innocents live,
the unethical and 'net ignorant "Vera Six" <verasix@t-online.de> wrote:
Crossposting is ...
It's a perfectly acceptable and originally-intended aspect of the Usenet.
I suggest that you learn more about it.
Besides, your whining is offtopic on all these groups, which makes your
post inappropriate and an abuse of the medium.
To get back to the subject: Bush claims God would talk to him. Do you
believe that? How many innocent people would you kill for a liar? Does
the scripture you read have anything to say about lying, killing, or such?
Did you know that leaders of Bush's own religious denomination have
been asking him to repent of his wrongdoing? Do you believe that the
world is going to be brought to an end in fire then turned over to you,
as other people are sent to eternal torment?
No doubt about it: Bush lied.
People died.
Jeff George <george666@comcast.net.munged> wrote:
Hey, where are all the Chimpy Asslickers responses to this? I was
really interested in seeing how they would rationalize these lies.
On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 06:45:05 -0800, George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr. <gltjr@cmhs.edu> added the following words of wisdom:
from the Washington Times
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020927-500715.htm
The International Atomic Energy Agency says that a report cited by
President Bush as evidence that Iraq in 1998 was "six months away"
from developing a nuclear weapon does not exist.
"There's never been a report like that issued from this agency,"
Mark Gwozdecky, the IAEA's chief spokesman, said yesterday in a
telephone interview from the agency's headquarters in Vienna, Austria.
"We've never put a time frame on how long it might take Iraq to
construct a nuclear weapon in 1998," said the spokesman of the agency
charged with assessing Iraq's nuclear capability for the United
Nations. In a Sept. 7 news conference with British Prime Minister
Tony Blair, Mr. Bush said: "I would remind you that when the
inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied — finally denied
access [in 1998], a report came out of the Atomic — the IAEA that they
were six months away from developing a weapon.
"I don't know what more evidence we need," said the president,
defending his administration's case that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein
was building weapons of mass destruction.
The White House says Mr. Bush was referring to an earlier IAEA
report. "He's referring to 1991 there," said Deputy Press
Secretary Scott McClellan. "In '91, there was a report saying that
after the war they found out they were about six months away."
Mr. Gwozdecky said no such report was ever issued by the IAEA in
1991. Many news agencies — including The Washington Times —
reported Mr. Bush's Sept. 7 comments as referring to a 1998 IAEA
report. The White House did not ask for a correction from The Times.
To clear up the confusion, Mr. McClellan cited two news articles
from 1991 — a July 16 story in the London Times by Michael Evans and a
July 18 story in the New York Times by Paul Lewis. But neither article
cites an IAEA report on Iraq's nuclear-weapons program or states that
Saddam was only six months away from "developing a weapon" — as
claimed by Mr. Bush. The article by Mr. Evans says: "Jay Davis, an
American expert working for the U.N. special commission charged with
removing Iraq's nuclear capability, said Iraq was only six months away
from the large-scale production of enriched uranium at two plants
inspected by UN officials." The Lewis article said Iraq in 1991
had a uranium "enrichment plant using electromagnetic technology
[that] was about six months from becoming operational."
In October 1998, just before Saddam kicked U.N. weapons
inspectors out of Iraq, the IAEA laid out a case opposite of Mr.
Bush's Sept. 7
declaration.
"There are no indications that there remains in Iraq any physical
capability for the production of weapon-usable nuclear material of any
practical significance," IAEA Director-General Mohammed Elbaradei
wrote in a report to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan.
Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair on Sept. 7 cited an agency "report"
declaring that satellite photography revealed the Iraqis had
undertaken new construction at several nuclear-related sites. This
week, the IAEA said no such report existed."
Jeff George
SLAP (Socialist Liberation Army of the People)
SLUG (Socialists for Liberty United Government)
Power to the People! Vive la revolution!
Bush sure pulled that one right out of his nether orifice,
now didn't he.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
