thanks wise...itend to add letters and run words together as my keyboard tends to lag and such,,,ugh.... i'm on a broadband connection but when i type on here it is so slow....so then i get lazy about fixing the typos and so on, lol...
hey brad,,,why don't you read my article on this subject that i posted today,,,it will show you just how credible he is,,,and it can be done using words of conservatives and bush himself,,,here's a link to make it easy... Link
aaron,,,1st off....anyone who testifies, whether in public or private, by law is testifying "under oath" whenever doing it before Congress. It is a crime to lie to Congress, therefore, everyone who is called to speak to them is inherently under oath. he whole "under oath" thing is a red herring by someone (and it's tough to tell who, and it really doesn't matter) or is just an idea put out by people who don't really know what they are talking about (an
About a week ago, Richard Clarke testified before the 9/11 commission under oath, in public. He also offered a heartfelt apology, something that he was the 1st and still the only to do. Since his testimony, he has been the victim of a massive charachter assasination. Clarke has handled it all in stride, backing up his words, giving context to situations and even findi
jeb, that ws chief justce warren berger's quote , right? just curious Free Sociey Defined....the other side of this and sim. issues... Link
well,,,i made the call on Katrin (as did Jill) a,,,lucky for kwame his tema won, despite him not really doing anything,,,again. now it's the couple who is seemingly using each other to win against bill , who i think is the best, troy, who i would have selling for my company any day, but not in charge of it...and their liability in kwame. if someone held a gun to my head, i would say Bill deserves the job,,,even tho amy has a better re
i never stated that the judge made any law...i just stated that it was a judge that protecteed Parks and others rights,,,to that point, the legislatures and executive parts of the govt were unwilling to bend on the issue and cited other things which legally backed up their position....it took a judge to go against the majority in the state and change the practice. read my piece before you comment please,,,the parks example was just one of many
Tonight CN8, which every philly cable subscribers know as the comcast channel that doesn't show flyers games, will be doing a live call in show at 8pm about medical marijuana and that canada has now approved it into law...and they cite american medical journals as supporting the move for the US...i know everyone won't be able to, but if you are a comcast subscriber in pa, nj, de and a little of maryland you may want to check it out
Nader today announced he asked for a meeting (and was granted) with John Kerry to discuss best ways to defeat President Bush....kind of gives creedence to what i stated in my article.
of course, i may want to clean up the typos if that were to happen, lol oh, the lacerations of freehand typing, lol
thanks fawn...i would like to see brad put those 2 articles side by side and let the people see an actual "equal time" debate on here ...but i doubt that would happen.
thanks man,,,i didn't want to just repeat myself and figured the link would be easier for everyone...i don't always agree with you, but i do appreciate your comments and i like the fact that you actually seem to think about subjects in a critical manner which is rare on this board....again, thanks, much appreciated:)
i should be posting the follow up later today or early tomorrow
thanks for your comments vince,,,i am preparing a follow up article, so i'm not really addressing stuff here anymore...but i do appreciate your remarks:)
i disagree with the premise that only legislatures have passed laws in our republic (which is what we are). If it wasn't for the courts, Rosa Parks would have been forced to sit at the back of the bus to cite just one example... Not to mention, one of the fundamental concepts of any democracy is that the majority is obligated to not oppress the minority...not slam it because they couldn't get 51% i don't want to go on and on here,,for
thank you for your comments :)
About a month ago, longtime consumer activist and advocate Ralph Nader threw his hat into the political arena. He announced that he once again would seek the Presidency of the United States. This of course sent shockwaves thru Democratic camps and I think I heard a few champagne corks go off over at GOP headquarters. Nader's entry into the 2004 Presidential race was a
whatever,,,people will read this and make up their own minds,,,which is fine by me,,,i don't need to grandstand for the people...still not 1 word in response to Rice refusal to testify publicly and more smokescreens...we all know ya don't like me brad,,,don't let your hate drive you insane here, lol...move on,,,you'll have plenty to grandstand about in future posts, i promise you,,,but this is really getting boring....and i'm not really interested in t
ok,,,,where do i start? 1st off...i find it amusing that someone would call me an ideologue when they are coming in here with statements like " What Clarke said in his book and testimony directly contradicts..." when NO such evidence has been brought to light...nothing at all is backed up except for one reference to an already discredited fox news piece. and fox is about as good of a source to me as the nation is to you. ..just for the record
one more question,,,why don't ya comment on my deadwood article or something non political...instead of being wrapped up in these political debates that you and i both know that we are never going to agree...and at this point, you and i will both take the others words in the worst possible way without even trying,,,either that, or perhaps take me up on my repeated offer of discussing this thru private email instead of trying to "play to the audience" h
brad,,,why are you chasing me around and publicly posting my articles over issues we should have hashed out between us.? i offered a communication tool in my personal email to discuss these differences. i really do resent the fact that i haven't chased you around or commented on your articles that i disagree with like you have chosen too, in a sense, picking a fight. i think you make a lot of bluster out of nothing. and i feel that if you wish
brad's link is just a link to fox's misused piece of slander that the republican commission members unsuccessfully tried to hit Clarke with...when asked if he was lying in the 2002 backround briefing, which was mischarachterized by fox news and that was pointed out without objection by Nebraska's Bob Kerry during the testimony. but what the neocons who are screaing for classified information to be released so they can use it for politica
lol dan
i think we make the same points on more than one occasion jeb,,,i just think you may have got caught up in the propoganda surrounding me not liking the way some can push around and effectively silence people on this forum and not being intimidated into complying. my methods are sometimes rough, but based on some of the emails i have gotten (i learned real quick how many peoople don't want to speak up and don't want to lose a comfortable forum for their
also conservative...notice how the comission members have not sought to question him again, even in private, neither was that testimony brought up as a contradiction by any of the commission members. they tried to use manipulated and out of context fox news documents...but i would think if Clarke was giving such false testimony as you want to suggest by your innappropriate accusation, the commission would have leveled perjury charges against him,,,or a
JoeUser Forums