(from elsewhere)
Johnstembridge1@aol.com a écrit:
PUTTING THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE!
Even if you're not interested in debate, every
American should know the
following:
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during
the month of
January.....
In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in
the month of
January.
That's just one American city, about as deadly as
the entire war torn
country of Iraq.
When some claim President Bush shouldn't have
started this war, consider
the following ...
FDR...
led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average
of 112,500 per year.
Truman...
finished that war and started one in Korea, North
Korea never attacked
us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average
of 18,334 per year.
John F. Kennedy...
started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.
Johnson...
turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average
of 5,800 per year.
Clinton..
went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent,
Bosnia never
attacked us. (we are STILL there)
He was offered Osama bin Ladin's head on a platter
three times by Sudan
and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple
occasions.
In the two years since terrorists attacked us
President Bush has ...
liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban,
crippled al-Qaida, put
nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea
without firing a shot,
and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of
his own people.
The Democrats (and media) are complaining about how
long the war is
taking, but... It took less time to take Iraq than
it took Janet Reno
to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51
day operation.
We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons
in Iraq for less
time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose
Law Firm billing
records.
It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and
the Marines to
destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted
Kennedy to call the
police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.
It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count
the votes in
Florida!!!!
Our Commander-In-Chief is doing the best job he
knows how!
The Military is doing a superb job, given the
circumstances!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to
realize the facts.
So true...
J.
.
|
|
| User: "R. Foreman" |
|
| Title: Re: Foreign Policy of President Bush in Perspective |
28 Oct 2004 12:02:11 AM |
|
|
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> Spat the Words
(from elsewhere)
Johnstembridge1@aol.com a écrit:
PUTTING THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE!
Even if you're not interested in debate, every
American should know the
following:
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during
the month of
January.....
In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in
the month of
January.
That's just one American city, about as deadly as
the entire war torn
country of Iraq.
When some claim President Bush shouldn't have
started this war, consider
the following ...
FDR...
led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average
of 112,500 per year.
Truman...
finished that war and started one in Korea, North
Korea never attacked
us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average
of 18,334 per year.
John F. Kennedy...
started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.
Johnson...
turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average
of 5,800 per year.
Clinton..
went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent,
Bosnia never
attacked us. (we are STILL there)
He was offered Osama bin Ladin's head on a platter
three times by Sudan
and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple
occasions.
In the two years since terrorists attacked us
President Bush has ...
liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban,
crippled al-Qaida, put
nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea
without firing a shot,
and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of
his own people.
The Democrats (and media) are complaining about how
long the war is
taking, but... It took less time to take Iraq than
it took Janet Reno
to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51
day operation.
We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons
in Iraq for less
time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose
Law Firm billing
records.
It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and
the Marines to
destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted
Kennedy to call the
police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.
It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count
the votes in
Florida!!!!
Our Commander-In-Chief is doing the best job he
knows how!
The Military is doing a superb job, given the
circumstances!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to
realize the facts.
So true...
J.
It is true, going to war for wrong reasons swings back around
to bite you - it's political suicide. Bush has no one to blame
but himself (yet he'd blame someone else if he could find a
suitable patsy).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jean Guernon" |
|
| Title: Re: Foreign Policy of President Bush in Perspective |
28 Oct 2004 01:46:31 PM |
|
|
R. Foreman a écrit:
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> Spat the Words
(from elsewhere)
Johnstembridge1@aol.com a écrit:
PUTTING THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE!
Even if you're not interested in debate, every
American should know the
following:
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during
the month of
January.....
In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in
the month of
January.
That's just one American city, about as deadly as
the entire war torn
country of Iraq.
When some claim President Bush shouldn't have
started this war, consider
the following ...
FDR...
led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average
of 112,500 per year.
Truman...
finished that war and started one in Korea, North
Korea never attacked
us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average
of 18,334 per year.
John F. Kennedy...
started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.
Johnson...
turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average
of 5,800 per year.
Clinton..
went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent,
Bosnia never
attacked us. (we are STILL there)
He was offered Osama bin Ladin's head on a platter
three times by Sudan
and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple
occasions.
In the two years since terrorists attacked us
President Bush has ...
liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban,
crippled al-Qaida, put
nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea
without firing a shot,
and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of
his own people.
The Democrats (and media) are complaining about how
long the war is
taking, but... It took less time to take Iraq than
it took Janet Reno
to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51
day operation.
We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons
in Iraq for less
time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose
Law Firm billing
records.
It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and
the Marines to
destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted
Kennedy to call the
police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.
It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count
the votes in
Florida!!!!
Our Commander-In-Chief is doing the best job he
knows how!
The Military is doing a superb job, given the
circumstances!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to
realize the facts.
So true...
J.
It is true, going to war for wrong reasons swings back around
to bite you - it's political suicide. Bush has no one to blame
but himself (yet he'd blame someone else if he could find a
suitable patsy).
Only in your dreams. the fact is that both the senate and the congress
signed to go to war if Saddam was in breach of UN resolution. And he was
in half a dozen ways besides WMDs which he also was and so they did.
Eat your heart out, weasel.
J.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DON" |
|
| Title: Re: Foreign Policy of President Bush in Perspectivehttp://globalfire.tv/nj/04en/politics/rove.htm |
31 Oct 2004 08:43:15 AM |
|
|
R. Foreman wrote:
http://globalfire.tv/nj/04en/politics/rove.htm
http://globalfire.tv/nj/04en/politics/rove.htm
http://globalfire.tv/nj/04en/politics/rove.htm
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> Spat the Words
(from elsewhere)
Johnstembridge1@aol.com a écrit:
PUTTING THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE!
Even if you're not interested in debate, every
American should know the
following:
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during
the month of
January.....
In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in
the month of
January.
That's just one American city, about as deadly as
the entire war torn
country of Iraq.
When some claim President Bush shouldn't have
started this war, consider
the following ...
FDR...
led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average
of 112,500 per year.
Truman...
finished that war and started one in Korea, North
Korea never attacked
us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average
of 18,334 per year.
John F. Kennedy...
started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.
Johnson...
turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average
of 5,800 per year.
Clinton..
went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent,
Bosnia never
attacked us. (we are STILL there)
He was offered Osama bin Ladin's head on a platter
three times by Sudan
and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple
occasions.
In the two years since terrorists attacked us
President Bush has ...
liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban,
crippled al-Qaida, put
nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea
without firing a shot,
and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of
his own people.
The Democrats (and media) are complaining about how
long the war is
taking, but... It took less time to take Iraq than
it took Janet Reno
to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51
day operation.
We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons
in Iraq for less
time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose
Law Firm billing
records.
It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and
the Marines to
destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted
Kennedy to call the
police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.
It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count
the votes in
Florida!!!!
Our Commander-In-Chief is doing the best job he
knows how!
The Military is doing a superb job, given the
circumstances!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to
realize the facts.
So true...
J.
It is true, going to war for wrong reasons swings back around
to bite you - it's political suicide. Bush has no one to blame
but himself (yet he'd blame someone else if he could find a
suitable patsy).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jean Guernon" |
|
| Title: Re: Foreign Policy of President Bush in Perspectivehttp://globalfire.tv/nj/04en/politics/rove.htm |
31 Oct 2004 10:25:37 AM |
|
|
DON a écrit:
Bah, all your continual lies doesn't change the truth I repeat all the
time. Here is a fresh sample:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6362470/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MR. RUSSERT: We are back at Democracy Plaza, Midtown Manhattan, the
site of NBC's election coverage on Tuesday night. We are joined by the
former mayor of New York City, Rudy Giuliani, representing the Bush
campaign.
Welcome.
FMR. MAYOR RUDY GIULIANI, (R-NY): Thank you, Tim.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me show you Osama bin Laden. He was addressing the
world and the nation on Friday, and he said this: "Your security is not
in the hands of Kerry or Bush or al Qaeda. Your security is in your own
hands, and each state that does not harm our security will remain safe."
He's not supporting Bush or Kerry. He's telling America that it's the
policy that's the problem.
MR. GIULIANI: Yeah, I think that's correct and I think it has to be
treated that way. I think Americans have to unite and this should not
be a partisan political issue. I think President Bush reacted to it
exactly the right way. He said, "I'm sure Senator Kerry joins me in
saying that this man should have no influence in our election," and then
John Kerry turned right around and tried to politicize it, and tried to
make the point, well, he hasn't been captured, he hasn't been this, he
hasn't been that.
Well, the fact is, and if you want to be clear about the rest of the
statement, bin Laden--he certainly didn't say he was in favor of John
Kerry and I'm sure he's not but he certainly wants George Bush out of
the White House. He went on and repeated Michael Moore's diatribe
against President Bush, almost word for word, as if he had watched that
movie and been influenced by it in some way, and he makes the point, he
talks about George Bush lying and things like that, almost things coming
out of a political campaign. So, I mean, I think that bin Laden should
be discounted in this election. But there's no question that he very
much opposes George Bush, and I think there's a reason for that, because
the man's on the run.
I mean, if he would ask me on September 11, 2001, just a few miles away
from here when I watched that attack orchestrated by him, by bin Laden,
I would have said this country is going to be attacked multiple times
since then--from then until now. I think we are going to be attacked
again. I hope not, I pray not, but we haven't been, and part of the
reason is the very, very effective policy of this government, which
President Bush turned around on a dime and created an offensive against
terrorism. He's put them on defense and he's put us on offense and bin
Laden having to communicate in that fashion is a lot better than where
he was pre-9/11 and on September 11.
MR. RUSSERT: Are you suggesting if John Kerry wins, bin Laden will take
credit?
MR. GIULIANI: No, absolutely not. I have no idea what his position is
on John Kerry. He didn't say it, and I would imagine, you know, he has
no interest in who wins. I do think he has an interest in who loses,
and that's one of the reasons he put in all those criticisms of
President Bush--and for good reason, because President Bush has put him
on defense. President Bush...
MR. RUSSERT: Well, how well does he know the American people if he's
trying to inject himself on the...
MR. GIULIANI: He probably doesn't know at all the American people. He
made critical mistakes. He thought when he attacked us on September 11,
2001, that we were going to cower, that we were going to back down. And,
in fact, we haven't. We've become stronger as a result of what happened
to us and more united. And I hope it's going to continue that way after
this election.
MR. RUSSERT: You mentioned John Kerry was critical of George Bush not
getting Osama bin Laden in Tora Bora. The Kerry campaign countered,
saying, "George Bush was informed of this tape early on Friday morning."
And for several consecutive campaign stops, he continued to criticize
John Kerry for not being up to the task of commander in chief, and only
when the tape was made public for everyone else did he change his tactics.
MR. GIULIANI: Well, I mean, the fact is the president has shown much
stronger leadership with regard to terrorism than John Kerry. I mean,
John Kerry has changed his position on the war maybe 12, 14 times. He's
changed his position on terrorism numerous times. He's voted against--I
mean, I find this absolutely mind-boggling for a man who wants to be
commander in chief in time of war--he voted against the Persian Gulf
War. When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, John Kerry voted against it.
It didn't pass his global test. It even passed Syria's global test but
not his.
So these are very, very important issues. This is the end of the
campaign. The country has got to select the man they think is better
able to handle a wartime situation. And John Kerry has found himself
always on the side of being anti-war, anti-military--a whole career in
the United States Senate that he ignores in which he's voted against
military funding. During the Ronald Reagan era, he was against our
military. When he came back from Vietnam, he was against our military.
He was against the Persian Gulf War. He consistently attacks our
military now. He does it in the guise of attacking the leadership, but,
in fact, he's attacking the military, the same way he did after Vietnam.
MR. RUSSERT: He will say he voted for all major defense expenditures,
even ones that Secretary of Defense ***** Cheney wanted to cut.
MR. GIULIANI: Oh, I was in the Reagan administration. I remember one
of the strongest opponents of Ronald Reagan's buildup of our military,
which he had to do after President Carter, was John Kerry. One of the
biggest opponents of probably the thing that brought down the Soviet
Union--as Gorbachev says, Ronald Reagan spent him into oblivion, spent
the Soviet Union into oblivion. One of the biggest opponents of that was
John Kerry, and I remember that as if it were yesterday.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn it to consistency. After Osama bin Laden
attacked us, we heard George Bush saying, "We're going to get him. He
can run, but he can't hide. He's wanted dead or alive." And yet
October 22, here's Vice President ***** Cheney on the campaign trail.
(Videotape, October 22, 2004):
VICE PRES. ***** CHENEY: We haven't seen much of him.
Frankly because we think he's probably in a deep hole someplace and hiding.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: "He's in a deep hole hiding." He appeared on TV. And
President Bush, March 13, 2002--this is important. Let's watch.
(Videotape, March 13, 2002):
PRES. BUSH: And I don't know where he is. I'll repeat what I said. I
truly am not that concerned about him.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: It's a much different tone than we heard the days after
September 11.
MR. GIULIANI: I think the point is that Osama bin Laden is very
different than he was before September 11 and on September 11. He's now
a person with three-quarters of his leadership either captured or killed
with a significant amount of his forces captured or killed. He is
displaced. He's not sitting there with nations-state support that he
had before. And instead of being able to attack us, thank God, now what
he's got to do is reduce himself to making some kind of political
documentary and repeating Michael Moore's criticisms. I mean, it is a
far different situation than what we faced before. So when people say,
"We're not safer now," yeah, we're not as safe as we would like to be.
We've got a long way to go. That's why we have to re-elect George Bush.
But the fact is we're in a lot different position.
You know, before September 11, he was capable of doing what he did a few
miles from here. Now, all that he's been reduced to is being on the run
with his forces dramatically reduced because of President Bush's policy,
because of the Bush doctrine. I mean, what President Bush has done is
to put us on offense against terrorism. We had previously been only on
defense, through a number of administrations, not just the Clinton
administration but through a number, and maybe for good reason because
we--I shouldn't say good reason but maybe because we didn't see the
danger as we should.
President Bush has understood that. John Kerry is still in a pre-9/11
mentality. He said that 9/11 didn't change him very much. He said he
wants to go back to when terrorism was just a nuance, meaning pre-9/11.
I don't know when the heck terrorism was just a nuisance. Was it just
a nuisance when they attacked the World Trade Center in 1993 and killed
people in my city in 1993? And John Kerry then proposed gutting our
intelligence budget, and Teddy Kennedy had to oppose it? I mean, he has
a pre-9/11 view, which is the reason why this country would be a lot
safer in dealing with bin Laden and the other terrorists with George
Bush sitting there. He understands the lessons of September 11. John
Kerry has consistently indicated he does not understand what happened to
this country. He's said it to The New York Times: "I wasn't changed
very much by 9/11." Bob Kerrey said he was changed very much by 9/11.
Different Kerrey, right?
MR. RUSSERT: When previous bin Laden tapes have been released, the
president never responded to them. In fact, the administration called
the networks and said, "Be careful about airing this because of
subliminal message and so forth." This time, the president chose to
answer directly to the American people. Was he trying to take advantage
of it politically?
MR. GIULIANI: No, I think the president gave a very judicious and very
statesmanlike answer, and what he said was, "This man should not affect
our election. I'm sure Senator Kerry would agree with me." I mean,
that's the only thing you could have said at a time like that. You
couldn't leave it unresponded to. John Kerry chose to immediately
politicize it and immediately criticize the president, the same way he
tried to criticize what happened in Tora Bora where he's totally
distorted the facts. We were using the elite unit of our Special Forces
in Tora Bora, and it's unclear as to whether or not Osama bin Laden was
there. We didn't outsource it. We had our elite unit of Special Forces
supervising that. We were using Afghan warriors that were tried and
tested and had been successful before, and then we don't know whether or
not he was there or he wasn't. Just like we don't know what happened to
the ammunition and the explosives that John Kerry is now complaining
about, which represents a very small portion of the explosives, 400,000,
that were actually seized and destroyed.
MR. RUSSERT: I want to talk to you about that because you were on the
"Today" show Thursday and asked about it. Here's your answer to the
question and we'll roll it.
(Videotape, Thursday, "Today"):
MR. GIULIANI: The president was cautious, the president was prudent,
the president did what a commander in chief should do, and no matter how
you try to blame it on the president, the actual responsibility for it
really would be for the troops that were there. Did they search
carefully enough? Didn't they search carefully enough?
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: As soon as you uttered those words...
MR. GIULIANI: Yeah, right. Boom.
MR. RUSSERT: ...John Edwards, vice presidential candidate, had this to
say: "George Bush sent his chief surrogate, Rudy Giuliani, out to defend
the president's incompetence, and Giuliani blamed the troops. He said
they didn't do their jobs. The Republicans couldn't be more wrong. Our
men and women in uniform did their jobs. It's our commander in chief,
George Bush, who didn't do his." Why did you say the actual
responsibility for it really would be for the troops?
MR. GIULIANI: Because I was talking about--if you listen to what I said
before that and what I said right after, I'm talking about John Kerry's
position. The point that I was making then, if I wasn't clear enough
then, I've been clear since then and I'm clear now, but I think I was
clear enough then, and they jumped on it. John Kerry is the one who is
blaming the troops. By blaming it on the commander in chief, blaming it
on the leadership and taking away credit from the troops, as I went on
to explain for the 400,000 tons of ammunition and explosives that
they've taken, and seizing on this 1 percent of 1 percent, he is blaming
it on them, on their performance. The same way he did when he came back
from Vietnam and exaggerated his complaints against our troops in
Vietnam. The same way as he did--as he's done about Tora Bora. This is
a consistent, over 20-year approach of John Kerry. The simple fact is
he's anti-war, he's anti-military, he is running away from that, and
then he gets himself into these complaints and blaming it on the troops.
That's what I said.
MR. RUSSERT: Mr. Mayor, Bob Kerrey was just here, a decorated war
veteran. He said he and John Kerry served in Vietnam, decorated heroes.
George Bush was in the Guard, ***** Cheney never served, you never
served. How can you criticize them for being anti-military?
MR. GIULIANI: Because you have to look at John Kerry's career since
Vietnam? All John Kerry wants to do is look at his service in Vietnam.
We respect him for that. We honor him for that. Whatever happens in
this election, I think he's going to always have an honored place in
history for the way he served our country in Vietnam. It's since he
came back from Vietnam that John Kerry turned against his soldiers, his
colleagues in Vietnam. Nobody else did that. He's the one who turned
against them.
He printed a book with the American flag, his name on it, the American
flag turned upside down. A book, by the way, that you have to pay
$1,000 to get because it's out of circulation. He turned against us in
the war--in the Persian Gulf War. He voted consistently against defense
programs, one of the most ardent critics of Ronald Reagan, and he's
taken 14 different positions on this war in Iraq. That's the record
since Vietnam.
The reason why John Kerry doesn't talk about the period of time between
his Vietnam service and today is because he's had a consistent record of
being anti-military, anti-defense, anti-intelligence services, and now
he's trying to do the best that he can to reconcile all those positions,
and that's why he's described as, I guess, a flip-flopper or a person
who changes positions.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me show you the Bush-Cheney administration record in
terms of the economy. Since inauguration day, the unemployment rate has
gone from 4.2 percent to 5.4 percent. That's up 28.5 percent. Jobs,
there's been a net loss of 900,000 jobs. We went from a $281 billion
surplus to a $412 billion deficit. And our national debt has gone from
$5.7 trillion to $7.4 trillion, up 29 percent. Why should the American
people rehire a CEO with that kind of economic record?
MR. GIULIANI: Because President Bush has taken us through maybe one of
the worst things that's ever happened to us, the attack of September 11.
The human toll in that is incalculable and indescribable, but the
effect on our economy was dramatic. We lost over a million jobs as a
result of these attacks that took place. Our economy was going through
bad times when the president took over.
You have to look at what's been going on in the last 13 months. Since
President Bush's tax cuts have had an impact on our economy, which has
been a very favorable one, last 13 months, every single month, economic
growth, some of the strongest economic growth we've had in 20 years. A
million jobs, a million seven now added to our economy since we've
turned it around. President Bush has turned our economy around. The tax
cuts, putting money back into the hands of the American people, putting
it back into their pockets so they can spend it is the reason for that.
John Kerry would raise taxes. He's voted to raise taxes throughout his
Senate career. I think your record tells you more about what you're
going to do when you go into office than the promises that you make,
which sometimes are inconsistent in the case of Kerry, and I think he
will imperil that recovery by raising taxes. George Bush followed the
policies of John Kennedy and Ronald Reagan. John Kennedy and Ronald
Reagan instituted two of the biggest tax cuts we ever had in our history
and we had economic growth.
MR. RUSSERT: Do you agree with Senator Kerrey...
MR. GIULIANI: John Kerry disagrees with that. He wants to raise taxes.
MR. RUSSERT: Do you agree with Bob Kerrey that no matter who's elected,
he's going to have a hard time governing, and he has to move to the center?
MR. GIULIANI: When I heard Bob Kerrey speak before, I said, "That's the
thing we agree on." I think that's absolutely correct. I think that
the next president--I hope the next president will be the same
president, George Bush. But however it turns out, we're Americans; we
have to get together. I think going to the center is exactly right. If
it's the president, you've got to get some Democratic support, you've
got to bring some Democrats into the Cabinet, as he's done. And if it's
a Democrat, it has to work the other way.
We've got to get back to the days in which we had unity on foreign
policy. I saw that after September 11. I mean, I saw Republicans and
Democrats standing next to me, helping me, helping my city--the
president, Democrats and others. We've got to bring back that spirit.
And you know something? We're going to do it. We always do. I mean,
Americans get together. We looked at that Osama bin Laden tape, put the
politics aside and we said, you know, "We're not going to let this man
determine our elections. We're stronger than that, we're better than
that." And I know we're going to get together.
MR. RUSSERT: Ten seconds. You're for George Bush because?
MR. GIULIANI: I'm for George Bush because he's a strong, determined
leader. He's taken our country through the worst attacks in our history.
I believe he's going to be a great president when history looks upon
this because of the way he took us through the worst things that have
happened to us. He's revived our economy; he's going to continue to do
this. And I'll tell you the other reason I'm for him: I know him. This
is a really, really good man and a strong man, and we sure as heck need
that now.
MR. RUSSERT: Rudy Giuliani, we thank you for your views.
MR. GIULIANI: Thank you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
J.
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> Spat the Words
(from elsewhere)
Johnstembridge1@aol.com a écrit:
PUTTING THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE!
Even if you're not interested in debate, every
American should know the
following:
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during
the month of
January.....
In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in
the month of
January.
That's just one American city, about as deadly as
the entire war torn
country of Iraq.
When some claim President Bush shouldn't have
started this war, consider
the following ...
FDR...
led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average
of 112,500 per year.
Truman...
finished that war and started one in Korea, North
Korea never attacked
us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average
of 18,334 per year.
John F. Kennedy...
started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.
Johnson...
turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average
of 5,800 per year.
Clinton..
went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent,
Bosnia never
attacked us. (we are STILL there)
He was offered Osama bin Ladin's head on a platter
three times by Sudan
and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple
occasions.
In the two years since terrorists attacked us
President Bush has ...
liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban,
crippled al-Qaida, put
nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea
without firing a shot,
and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of
his own people.
The Democrats (and media) are complaining about how
long the war is
taking, but... It took less time to take Iraq than
it took Janet Reno
to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51
day operation.
We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons
in Iraq for less
time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose
Law Firm billing
records.
It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and
the Marines to
destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted
Kennedy to call the
police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.
It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count
the votes in
Florida!!!!
Our Commander-In-Chief is doing the best job he
knows how!
The Military is doing a superb job, given the
circumstances!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to
realize the facts.
So true...
J.
It is true, going to war for wrong reasons swings back around
to bite you - it's political suicide. Bush has no one to blame
but himself (yet he'd blame someone else if he could find a
suitable patsy).
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "DON" |
|
| Title: Re: Foreign Policy of President Bush in Perspectivehttp://globalfire.tv/nj/04en/politics/rove.htm |
31 Oct 2004 08:35:25 AM |
|
|
R. Foreman wrote:http://globalfire.tv/nj/04en/politics/rove.htm
http://globalfire.tv/nj/04en/politics/rove.htm
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> Spat the Words
(from elsewhere)
Johnstembridge1@aol.com a écrit:
PUTTING THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE!
Even if you're not interested in debate, every
American should know the
following:
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during
the month of
January.....
In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in
the month of
January.
That's just one American city, about as deadly as
the entire war torn
country of Iraq.
When some claim President Bush shouldn't have
started this war, consider
the following ...
FDR...
led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average
of 112,500 per year.
Truman...
finished that war and started one in Korea, North
Korea never attacked
us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average
of 18,334 per year.
John F. Kennedy...
started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.
Johnson...
turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average
of 5,800 per year.
Clinton..
went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent,
Bosnia never
attacked us. (we are STILL there)
He was offered Osama bin Ladin's head on a platter
three times by Sudan
and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple
occasions.
In the two years since terrorists attacked us
President Bush has ...
liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban,
crippled al-Qaida, put
nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea
without firing a shot,
and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of
his own people.
The Democrats (and media) are complaining about how
long the war is
taking, but... It took less time to take Iraq than
it took Janet Reno
to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51
day operation.
We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons
in Iraq for less
time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose
Law Firm billing
records.
It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and
the Marines to
destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted
Kennedy to call the
police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.
It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count
the votes in
Florida!!!!
Our Commander-In-Chief is doing the best job he
knows how!
The Military is doing a superb job, given the
circumstances!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to
realize the facts.
So true...
J.
It is true, going to war for wrong reasons swings back around
to bite you - it's political suicide. Bush has no one to blame
but himself (yet he'd blame someone else if he could find a
suitable patsy).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jean Guernon" |
|
| Title: Re: Foreign Policy of President Bush in Perspectivehttp://globalfire.tv/nj/04en/politics/rove.htm |
31 Oct 2004 10:19:46 AM |
|
|
DON a écrit:
R. Foreman wrote:http://globalfire.tv/nj/04en/politics/rove.htm
Bah, all your continual lies doesn't change the truth I repeat all the
time. Here is a fresh sample:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6362470/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MR. RUSSERT: We are back at Democracy Plaza, Midtown Manhattan, the
site of NBC's election coverage on Tuesday night. We are joined by the
former mayor of New York City, Rudy Giuliani, representing the Bush
campaign.
Welcome.
FMR. MAYOR RUDY GIULIANI, (R-NY): Thank you, Tim.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me show you Osama bin Laden. He was addressing the
world and the nation on Friday, and he said this: "Your security is not
in the hands of Kerry or Bush or al Qaeda. Your security is in your own
hands, and each state that does not harm our security will remain safe."
He's not supporting Bush or Kerry. He's telling America that it's the
policy that's the problem.
MR. GIULIANI: Yeah, I think that's correct and I think it has to be
treated that way. I think Americans have to unite and this should not
be a partisan political issue. I think President Bush reacted to it
exactly the right way. He said, "I'm sure Senator Kerry joins me in
saying that this man should have no influence in our election," and then
John Kerry turned right around and tried to politicize it, and tried to
make the point, well, he hasn't been captured, he hasn't been this, he
hasn't been that.
Well, the fact is, and if you want to be clear about the rest of the
statement, bin Laden--he certainly didn't say he was in favor of John
Kerry and I'm sure he's not but he certainly wants George Bush out of
the White House. He went on and repeated Michael Moore's diatribe
against President Bush, almost word for word, as if he had watched that
movie and been influenced by it in some way, and he makes the point, he
talks about George Bush lying and things like that, almost things coming
out of a political campaign. So, I mean, I think that bin Laden should
be discounted in this election. But there's no question that he very
much opposes George Bush, and I think there's a reason for that, because
the man's on the run.
I mean, if he would ask me on September 11, 2001, just a few miles away
from here when I watched that attack orchestrated by him, by bin Laden,
I would have said this country is going to be attacked multiple times
since then--from then until now. I think we are going to be attacked
again. I hope not, I pray not, but we haven't been, and part of the
reason is the very, very effective policy of this government, which
President Bush turned around on a dime and created an offensive against
terrorism. He's put them on defense and he's put us on offense and bin
Laden having to communicate in that fashion is a lot better than where
he was pre-9/11 and on September 11.
MR. RUSSERT: Are you suggesting if John Kerry wins, bin Laden will take
credit?
MR. GIULIANI: No, absolutely not. I have no idea what his position is
on John Kerry. He didn't say it, and I would imagine, you know, he has
no interest in who wins. I do think he has an interest in who loses,
and that's one of the reasons he put in all those criticisms of
President Bush--and for good reason, because President Bush has put him
on defense. President Bush...
MR. RUSSERT: Well, how well does he know the American people if he's
trying to inject himself on the...
MR. GIULIANI: He probably doesn't know at all the American people. He
made critical mistakes. He thought when he attacked us on September 11,
2001, that we were going to cower, that we were going to back down. And,
in fact, we haven't. We've become stronger as a result of what happened
to us and more united. And I hope it's going to continue that way after
this election.
MR. RUSSERT: You mentioned John Kerry was critical of George Bush not
getting Osama bin Laden in Tora Bora. The Kerry campaign countered,
saying, "George Bush was informed of this tape early on Friday morning."
And for several consecutive campaign stops, he continued to criticize
John Kerry for not being up to the task of commander in chief, and only
when the tape was made public for everyone else did he change his tactics.
MR. GIULIANI: Well, I mean, the fact is the president has shown much
stronger leadership with regard to terrorism than John Kerry. I mean,
John Kerry has changed his position on the war maybe 12, 14 times. He's
changed his position on terrorism numerous times. He's voted against--I
mean, I find this absolutely mind-boggling for a man who wants to be
commander in chief in time of war--he voted against the Persian Gulf
War. When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, John Kerry voted against it.
It didn't pass his global test. It even passed Syria's global test but
not his.
So these are very, very important issues. This is the end of the
campaign. The country has got to select the man they think is better
able to handle a wartime situation. And John Kerry has found himself
always on the side of being anti-war, anti-military--a whole career in
the United States Senate that he ignores in which he's voted against
military funding. During the Ronald Reagan era, he was against our
military. When he came back from Vietnam, he was against our military.
He was against the Persian Gulf War. He consistently attacks our
military now. He does it in the guise of attacking the leadership, but,
in fact, he's attacking the military, the same way he did after Vietnam.
MR. RUSSERT: He will say he voted for all major defense expenditures,
even ones that Secretary of Defense ***** Cheney wanted to cut.
MR. GIULIANI: Oh, I was in the Reagan administration. I remember one
of the strongest opponents of Ronald Reagan's buildup of our military,
which he had to do after President Carter, was John Kerry. One of the
biggest opponents of probably the thing that brought down the Soviet
Union--as Gorbachev says, Ronald Reagan spent him into oblivion, spent
the Soviet Union into oblivion. One of the biggest opponents of that was
John Kerry, and I remember that as if it were yesterday.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn it to consistency. After Osama bin Laden
attacked us, we heard George Bush saying, "We're going to get him. He
can run, but he can't hide. He's wanted dead or alive." And yet
October 22, here's Vice President ***** Cheney on the campaign trail.
(Videotape, October 22, 2004):
VICE PRES. ***** CHENEY: We haven't seen much of him.
Frankly because we think he's probably in a deep hole someplace and hiding.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: "He's in a deep hole hiding." He appeared on TV. And
President Bush, March 13, 2002--this is important. Let's watch.
(Videotape, March 13, 2002):
PRES. BUSH: And I don't know where he is. I'll repeat what I said. I
truly am not that concerned about him.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: It's a much different tone than we heard the days after
September 11.
MR. GIULIANI: I think the point is that Osama bin Laden is very
different than he was before September 11 and on September 11. He's now
a person with three-quarters of his leadership either captured or killed
with a significant amount of his forces captured or killed. He is
displaced. He's not sitting there with nations-state support that he
had before. And instead of being able to attack us, thank God, now what
he's got to do is reduce himself to making some kind of political
documentary and repeating Michael Moore's criticisms. I mean, it is a
far different situation than what we faced before. So when people say,
"We're not safer now," yeah, we're not as safe as we would like to be.
We've got a long way to go. That's why we have to re-elect George Bush.
But the fact is we're in a lot different position.
You know, before September 11, he was capable of doing what he did a few
miles from here. Now, all that he's been reduced to is being on the run
with his forces dramatically reduced because of President Bush's policy,
because of the Bush doctrine. I mean, what President Bush has done is
to put us on offense against terrorism. We had previously been only on
defense, through a number of administrations, not just the Clinton
administration but through a number, and maybe for good reason because
we--I shouldn't say good reason but maybe because we didn't see the
danger as we should.
President Bush has understood that. John Kerry is still in a pre-9/11
mentality. He said that 9/11 didn't change him very much. He said he
wants to go back to when terrorism was just a nuance, meaning pre-9/11.
I don't know when the heck terrorism was just a nuisance. Was it just
a nuisance when they attacked the World Trade Center in 1993 and killed
people in my city in 1993? And John Kerry then proposed gutting our
intelligence budget, and Teddy Kennedy had to oppose it? I mean, he has
a pre-9/11 view, which is the reason why this country would be a lot
safer in dealing with bin Laden and the other terrorists with George
Bush sitting there. He understands the lessons of September 11. John
Kerry has consistently indicated he does not understand what happened to
this country. He's said it to The New York Times: "I wasn't changed
very much by 9/11." Bob Kerrey said he was changed very much by 9/11.
Different Kerrey, right?
MR. RUSSERT: When previous bin Laden tapes have been released, the
president never responded to them. In fact, the administration called
the networks and said, "Be careful about airing this because of
subliminal message and so forth." This time, the president chose to
answer directly to the American people. Was he trying to take advantage
of it politically?
MR. GIULIANI: No, I think the president gave a very judicious and very
statesmanlike answer, and what he said was, "This man should not affect
our election. I'm sure Senator Kerry would agree with me." I mean,
that's the only thing you could have said at a time like that. You
couldn't leave it unresponded to. John Kerry chose to immediately
politicize it and immediately criticize the president, the same way he
tried to criticize what happened in Tora Bora where he's totally
distorted the facts. We were using the elite unit of our Special Forces
in Tora Bora, and it's unclear as to whether or not Osama bin Laden was
there. We didn't outsource it. We had our elite unit of Special Forces
supervising that. We were using Afghan warriors that were tried and
tested and had been successful before, and then we don't know whether or
not he was there or he wasn't. Just like we don't know what happened to
the ammunition and the explosives that John Kerry is now complaining
about, which represents a very small portion of the explosives, 400,000,
that were actually seized and destroyed.
MR. RUSSERT: I want to talk to you about that because you were on the
"Today" show Thursday and asked about it. Here's your answer to the
question and we'll roll it.
(Videotape, Thursday, "Today"):
MR. GIULIANI: The president was cautious, the president was prudent,
the president did what a commander in chief should do, and no matter how
you try to blame it on the president, the actual responsibility for it
really would be for the troops that were there. Did they search
carefully enough? Didn't they search carefully enough?
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: As soon as you uttered those words...
MR. GIULIANI: Yeah, right. Boom.
MR. RUSSERT: ...John Edwards, vice presidential candidate, had this to
say: "George Bush sent his chief surrogate, Rudy Giuliani, out to defend
the president's incompetence, and Giuliani blamed the troops. He said
they didn't do their jobs. The Republicans couldn't be more wrong. Our
men and women in uniform did their jobs. It's our commander in chief,
George Bush, who didn't do his." Why did you say the actual
responsibility for it really would be for the troops?
MR. GIULIANI: Because I was talking about--if you listen to what I said
before that and what I said right after, I'm talking about John Kerry's
position. The point that I was making then, if I wasn't clear enough
then, I've been clear since then and I'm clear now, but I think I was
clear enough then, and they jumped on it. John Kerry is the one who is
blaming the troops. By blaming it on the commander in chief, blaming it
on the leadership and taking away credit from the troops, as I went on
to explain for the 400,000 tons of ammunition and explosives that
they've taken, and seizing on this 1 percent of 1 percent, he is blaming
it on them, on their performance. The same way he did when he came back
from Vietnam and exaggerated his complaints against our troops in
Vietnam. The same way as he did--as he's done about Tora Bora. This is
a consistent, over 20-year approach of John Kerry. The simple fact is
he's anti-war, he's anti-military, he is running away from that, and
then he gets himself into these complaints and blaming it on the troops.
That's what I said.
MR. RUSSERT: Mr. Mayor, Bob Kerrey was just here, a decorated war
veteran. He said he and John Kerry served in Vietnam, decorated heroes.
George Bush was in the Guard, ***** Cheney never served, you never
served. How can you criticize them for being anti-military?
MR. GIULIANI: Because you have to look at John Kerry's career since
Vietnam? All John Kerry wants to do is look at his service in Vietnam.
We respect him for that. We honor him for that. Whatever happens in
this election, I think he's going to always have an honored place in
history for the way he served our country in Vietnam. It's since he
came back from Vietnam that John Kerry turned against his soldiers, his
colleagues in Vietnam. Nobody else did that. He's the one who turned
against them.
He printed a book with the American flag, his name on it, the American
flag turned upside down. A book, by the way, that you have to pay
$1,000 to get because it's out of circulation. He turned against us in
the war--in the Persian Gulf War. He voted consistently against defense
programs, one of the most ardent critics of Ronald Reagan, and he's
taken 14 different positions on this war in Iraq. That's the record
since Vietnam.
The reason why John Kerry doesn't talk about the period of time between
his Vietnam service and today is because he's had a consistent record of
being anti-military, anti-defense, anti-intelligence services, and now
he's trying to do the best that he can to reconcile all those positions,
and that's why he's described as, I guess, a flip-flopper or a person
who changes positions.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me show you the Bush-Cheney administration record in
terms of the economy. Since inauguration day, the unemployment rate has
gone from 4.2 percent to 5.4 percent. That's up 28.5 percent. Jobs,
there's been a net loss of 900,000 jobs. We went from a $281 billion
surplus to a $412 billion deficit. And our national debt has gone from
$5.7 trillion to $7.4 trillion, up 29 percent. Why should the American
people rehire a CEO with that kind of economic record?
MR. GIULIANI: Because President Bush has taken us through maybe one of
the worst things that's ever happened to us, the attack of September 11.
The human toll in that is incalculable and indescribable, but the
effect on our economy was dramatic. We lost over a million jobs as a
result of these attacks that took place. Our economy was going through
bad times when the president took over.
You have to look at what's been going on in the last 13 months. Since
President Bush's tax cuts have had an impact on our economy, which has
been a very favorable one, last 13 months, every single month, economic
growth, some of the strongest economic growth we've had in 20 years. A
million jobs, a million seven now added to our economy since we've
turned it around. President Bush has turned our economy around. The tax
cuts, putting money back into the hands of the American people, putting
it back into their pockets so they can spend it is the reason for that.
John Kerry would raise taxes. He's voted to raise taxes throughout his
Senate career. I think your record tells you more about what you're
going to do when you go into office than the promises that you make,
which sometimes are inconsistent in the case of Kerry, and I think he
will imperil that recovery by raising taxes. George Bush followed the
policies of John Kennedy and Ronald Reagan. John Kennedy and Ronald
Reagan instituted two of the biggest tax cuts we ever had in our history
and we had economic growth.
MR. RUSSERT: Do you agree with Senator Kerrey...
MR. GIULIANI: John Kerry disagrees with that. He wants to raise taxes.
MR. RUSSERT: Do you agree with Bob Kerrey that no matter who's elected,
he's going to have a hard time governing, and he has to move to the center?
MR. GIULIANI: When I heard Bob Kerrey speak before, I said, "That's the
thing we agree on." I think that's absolutely correct. I think that
the next president--I hope the next president will be the same
president, George Bush. But however it turns out, we're Americans; we
have to get together. I think going to the center is exactly right. If
it's the president, you've got to get some Democratic support, you've
got to bring some Democrats into the Cabinet, as he's done. And if it's
a Democrat, it has to work the other way.
We've got to get back to the days in which we had unity on foreign
policy. I saw that after September 11. I mean, I saw Republicans and
Democrats standing next to me, helping me, helping my city--the
president, Democrats and others. We've got to bring back that spirit.
And you know something? We're going to do it. We always do. I mean,
Americans get together. We looked at that Osama bin Laden tape, put the
politics aside and we said, you know, "We're not going to let this man
determine our elections. We're stronger than that, we're better than
that." And I know we're going to get together.
MR. RUSSERT: Ten seconds. You're for George Bush because?
MR. GIULIANI: I'm for George Bush because he's a strong, determined
leader. He's taken our country through the worst attacks in our history.
I believe he's going to be a great president when history looks upon
this because of the way he took us through the worst things that have
happened to us. He's revived our economy; he's going to continue to do
this. And I'll tell you the other reason I'm for him: I know him. This
is a really, really good man and a strong man, and we sure as heck need
that now.
MR. RUSSERT: Rudy Giuliani, we thank you for your views.
MR. GIULIANI: Thank you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
J.
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> Spat the Words
(from elsewhere)
Johnstembridge1@aol.com a écrit:
PUTTING THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE!
Even if you're not interested in debate, every
American should know the
following:
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during
the month of
January.....
In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in
the month of
January.
That's just one American city, about as deadly as
the entire war torn
country of Iraq.
When some claim President Bush shouldn't have
started this war, consider
the following ...
FDR...
led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average
of 112,500 per year.
Truman...
finished that war and started one in Korea, North
Korea never attacked
us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average
of 18,334 per year.
John F. Kennedy...
started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.
Johnson...
turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average
of 5,800 per year.
Clinton..
went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent,
Bosnia never
attacked us. (we are STILL there)
He was offered Osama bin Ladin's head on a platter
three times by Sudan
and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple
occasions.
In the two years since terrorists attacked us
President Bush has ...
liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban,
crippled al-Qaida, put
nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea
without firing a shot,
and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of
his own people.
The Democrats (and media) are complaining about how
long the war is
taking, but... It took less time to take Iraq than
it took Janet Reno
to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51
day operation.
We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons
in Iraq for less
time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose
Law Firm billing
records.
It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and
the Marines to
destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted
Kennedy to call the
police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.
It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count
the votes in
Florida!!!!
Our Commander-In-Chief is doing the best job he
knows how!
The Military is doing a superb job, given the
circumstances!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to
realize the facts.
So true...
J.
It is true, going to war for wrong reasons swings back around
to bite you - it's political suicide. Bush has no one to blame
but himself (yet he'd blame someone else if he could find a
suitable patsy).
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jean Guernon" |
|
| Title: Re: Foreign Policy of President Bush in Perspectivehttp://globalfire.tv/nj/04en/politics/rove.htm |
31 Oct 2004 11:05:37 AM |
|
|
DON a écrit:
R. Foreman wrote:http://globalfire.tv/nj/04en/politics/rove.htm
Ha yes, I was thinking foreman usual lies. But I see that you merely use
the guy, this is a neo-nazi site, and that you are an anti-semite
*****. Sorry for the mistake.
So you are part of these pieces of ***** Germans turning Nazis again
(http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3592870 ), polluting
us with debunked lies again.
Germany is rotting again, but with the weasels there who were kissing
French butts about the Iraq invasion they all signed to, it is hardly
surprising.
The world is getting sicker by the minute. The only upside is that Krib
will be happy; he likes to puke. ;-)
J.
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> Spat the Words
(from elsewhere)
Johnstembridge1@aol.com a écrit:
PUTTING THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE!
Even if you're not interested in debate, every
American should know the
following:
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during
the month of
January.....
In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in
the month of
January.
That's just one American city, about as deadly as
the entire war torn
country of Iraq.
When some claim President Bush shouldn't have
started this war, consider
the following ...
FDR...
led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average
of 112,500 per year.
Truman...
finished that war and started one in Korea, North
Korea never attacked
us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average
of 18,334 per year.
John F. Kennedy...
started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.
Johnson...
turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average
of 5,800 per year.
Clinton..
went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent,
Bosnia never
attacked us. (we are STILL there)
He was offered Osama bin Ladin's head on a platter
three times by Sudan
and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple
occasions.
In the two years since terrorists attacked us
President Bush has ...
liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban,
crippled al-Qaida, put
nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea
without firing a shot,
and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of
his own people.
The Democrats (and media) are complaining about how
long the war is
taking, but... It took less time to take Iraq than
it took Janet Reno
to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51
day operation.
We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons
in Iraq for less
time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose
Law Firm billing
records.
It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and
the Marines to
destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted
Kennedy to call the
police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.
It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count
the votes in
Florida!!!!
Our Commander-In-Chief is doing the best job he
knows how!
The Military is doing a superb job, given the
circumstances!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to
realize the facts.
So true...
J.
It is true, going to war for wrong reasons swings back around
to bite you - it's political suicide. Bush has no one to blame
but himself (yet he'd blame someone else if he could find a
suitable patsy).
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
