Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Selectric II who wrote (24332)	1/4/2004 9:24:56 AM
From: jttmab	Respond to of 93284

You can take your information from the source, or you can accept third parties' spin on it. I liked Ari Fleischer's "spin". In his official capacity as White House Press Sec., he speaks for the Pres. You could take the position that Ari made his comment [along with Powell and the DoD] contradicting the President. But I don't recommend going in that direction. jttmab

To: Selectric II who wrote (24332)	1/4/2004 12:28:42 PM
From: Rick McDougall	Respond to of 93284

Bush & Environment nrdc.org

To: Selectric II who wrote (24332)	1/4/2004 5:55:13 PM
From: nz_q	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

SelectricII, First I'll assume you are serious about your replies to my posts. a. Thank you for the warm welcome. b. I don't see why your comment about "or are you just an old, recycled member under another moniker?" are you feeling paranoid? looking for dupes everywhere? I'm only asking to see your answer and assert how reasonable of a person you are. I don't think I've replied to you before besides the last 1-2 posts. Excuse my questioning but if we are to converse in any serious manner, I'd like to know what reasoning level you have. No offense if there is a misunderstanding. c. The information I provide was from the congress signed war authorization resolution. Where do you see the spin? Either the congress singed it or not. ------Check your facts on what it takes for our nation to get an offensive posture and initiate an unprovoked war against another nation. ONLY WAY TO DO is to use the "imminet threat" clause----- d. Your reply was attacking the congressmen instead of looking at the content. *******The fact remains that GW BUSH used the imminent threat clause to get war authorization ******** singed and documented. All else is spin after the facts from either side. THE INFORMATION IS FROM THE SOURSE: War Authorization Resolution. Any sane and reasonable person, regardless of his/her bias would easily see that fact and don't even argue. Your quote is from???? what source?? If you are just kidding then I can understand that we cannot hold a serious conversation. I'm interested in hearing the facts pics and direct quotes, either caught on news, tape, or written and not opinions, regardless what side speaks them. Since I'm new here, but have been reading a number of posts, I'd like to say that at present I'm not interested in entering any pissing contests. If that's your intent or anyone else's then please do keep the fights to yourselves. Again, thanks, and nice to be on board. I do enjoy reading all the material posted. It ranges from extreme entertainment, to plain redicolus, to very serious. ps: curious..if the posts are "yawn" why do you even bother to reply????

To: Selectric II who wrote (24332)	1/4/2004 11:52:43 PM
From: nz_q	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 93284

ok.. 1. I read the "congress signed war authorization resolution," as you put it, and didn't see the word "imminent" anywhere in it. Further, as you so aptly pointed out, it was an act of Congress, not the Administration. -So that there are no misunderstandings. You now assert that it was congress that came up with the war idea against Iraq and not the President/his administration? GW Bush administration di not ask congress to authorize based on the "imminent threat" Yes or No? Please re-read the links Message 19650749 The question remains and goes to the scope of the thread. Is lying to congress in order to get ok for and unprovoked war against another sovereign nation an impeachable offense? 2. Not paranoia here, how about you? What "dupes" are you referring to? I guess you'll just have to judge my "reasoning level" for yourself and act accordingly. Thanks for the gratuitous insults, though. They're noted. -Your direct quote: “are you just an old, recycled member under another moniker?” 3. See #1. Check your own facts. -See above link(s) 4. I didn't attack any congressmen. I simply noted their political slant to offset your presentation of their political views as gospel. -No attack? You called them “democRats” with capital R. Your quote. BTW Kanjorski supported the resolution for war and he did speak in favor of GW Bush. Makes me wonder if you actually read what people post before forming an opinion. Kanjorski to Vote for Resolution Authorizing U.S. Military Action Against Iraq Sees ‘Imminent Threat’; Says Resolution Strikes ‘Appropriate Balance’ Wilkes-Barre, PA - Congressman Paul E. Kanjorski (PA-11) today announced that he will vote for the resolution authorizing U.S. military action against Iraq when it comes before the U.S. House of Representatives next week. house.gov 5. Please publish and cite your support from "THE SOURCE [sic]: War Authorization Resolution." My sources don't seem to jibe with yours. -I guess we must be reading different documents. It’s ok. Fully understandable. How deep if at all would you like to get into the word game and structure of the Resolution? Unlike you, I'll reserve judgment on your sanity and reasonableness for some other time. -Unlike me? I was merely asking questions to clarify your thinking and positions. Where did I say that I have passed judgment on you.??? The threads show that you have engaged me directly with your comments first, asking? wondering? If I’m an old recycled member, you proceeded to label two congressmen as "decocRats" and ended your post with a "Yawn". Please go back and re-read your post, place yourself in my position, as new member to SI, and tell me if and how was I supposed to reply. I'm not trying to offend, only trying to understand. Thank you for your consideration.