Government - June 2006

2006-06-18 18:35:12 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-06-18 17:45:42 · 13 answers · asked by maivas229 5

2006-06-18 17:15:19 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

Imagine you could say something to George W. Bush w/out any consequences.

2006-06-18 17:02:28 · 42 answers · asked by Ravi 2

2006-06-18 16:26:00 · 9 answers · asked by pas 5

They certainly act like it.We are the greatest We can take on the word We are the global police We are invincible Sorry I don't wish to live under any regime' that is judge jury and executioner

2006-06-18 15:59:40 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous

That would put our farmers back to work and we would depend on Arab countries less. Seems like a great way to replace tobacco farming. What is taking so long?

2006-06-18 15:57:10 · 13 answers · asked by ChrisJ 3

2006-06-18 15:36:49 · 18 answers · asked by citizen 1

2006-06-18 14:24:15 · 4 answers · asked by erok2020 3

2006-06-18 14:22:57 · 5 answers · asked by clank 2

2006-06-18 14:22:11 · 14 answers · asked by christine2550@sbcglobal.net 2

What are the legal requirements, number of members needed?
What is the law in the US?

2006-06-18 14:21:04 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous

Can't find anything more on it in the news. Which is strange.

2006-06-18 14:06:57 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments only prohibit discrimination by government bodies. They do not apply to private organizations. It is within the rights of private organizations to discriminate on the basis of gender, race, national origin and religion. What general limits, if any, would you impose on the discriminatory acts of private organizations?

2006-06-18 14:02:15 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-06-18 14:01:47 · 6 answers · asked by scorp 1

2006-06-18 12:49:08 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

ever notice how the dem party bashes and complaines and crys and whines...especially hearing that zarqawi was killed...thier answer...so what he is no big deal...but did our troops beat him???....bush goes to iraq again...dems...ohhh a stunt!....dems loose in california.......bwaaaaaaaaaaaa.....the fact is that 'a good day for america"...is a bad day for democrats"

2006-06-18 12:41:00 · 8 answers · asked by bushfan88 5

2006-06-18 12:30:37 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

THE TOP FIVE LIES
ABOUT THE AFGHANISTAN WAR
Produced by the Anti-War Committee of Students in Solidarity at the University of Pittsburgh

How many people do you know who claim to be skeptical, who pride themselves on their distrust for authority, who like to pretend that they're wise to the ways of the world -- and then, every time there's a war, they swallow the lies of the government with all the gullibility of a three-year-old child in the lap of a department store Santa Claus? Don't fall into that trap yourself! Learn to identify and refute official misinformation when you see it. Let's count down some of the common misconceptions about this war:
Lie #5: "We're not at war with the Afghan people -- look, we're bringing them food!" Reality: Afghanistan is in the midst of a severe drought which threatens literally millions of people with starvation. Even before the threat of U.S. bombing, the World Food Program (WFP) said that nearly 6 million people were in need of immediate food assistance. When the threat of war caused massive movements of refugees and internally displaced people, the WFP raised that number to 7.5 million. UN agencies were keeping huge numbers of people alive, but the war danger -- as well as the U.S. demand that Pakistan seal its border with Afghanistan -- caused the WFP to suspend deliveries of wheat flour to the country. We have no idea how many people have already died as a result. Meanwhile, the U.S. dropped 37,000 individually-wrapped packages of food from the sky. You do the math. That's enough to feed about 37,000 people for one day, in a country where seven and a half million are in danger of starvation. Additionally, the spokesman for an international charity active in Afghanistan told the London Independent that "Random food drops are the worst possible way of delivering food aid. They cause more problems than they solve." Not the least of which is the fact that Afghanistan has the highest number of unexploded land mines in the world. There are already 10 or 15 mine incidents every day, and with people scrambling into mine-ridden areas to pick up random packages of food dropped from U.S. planes, that number is only going to go up.


Congresswoman McKinney holds up a mockup of a food packet and an unexploded cluster munition, both of which are being dropped on Afghanistan. Can you tell which is okay to pick up and try to eat?

Lie #4: "Oil? Who said anything about oil?" Reality: The Caspian Sea region has potentially the world's largest oil reserves, likely making Central Asia the next Middle East. The problem is piping it out. Afghanistan occupies a strategic position between the Caspian and the markets of the Indian subcontinent and east Asia. It's prime territory for building pipelines, which is why the oil company Unocal -- as well as the U.S. government -- welcomed the Taliban's rise to power in 1996 as a promising source of "stability." That turned out to be a pipe dream (so to speak), but people like our Commander-in-Chief and the oil men around him have never given up on the tremendous profit possibilities that Central Asia offers. And if you don't think such considerations are crossing their minds at this time of crisis, may we suggest a refresher course in The Facts of Life?

Lie #3: "The U.S. is trying to liberate the people of Afghanistan from Taliban tyranny." Reality: The U.S., Russia, and Iran have been aiding a rough coalition of armed groups called the Northern Alliance. The Northern Alliance's fighters are drawn mainly from ethnic minority groups in Afghanistan who have been persecuted by the Taliban. But their record is also a bloody one. Groups like the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA), which have been fighting against fundamentalism and for democracy in Afghanistan for years, have publicly stated that the fundamentalist gangsters of the Northern Alliance are not an acceptable alternative to the fundamentalist gangsters of the Taliban. No wonder: Human Rights Watch implicates the Northern Alliance in "indiscriminate aerial bombardment and shelling, direct attacks on civilians, summary executions, rape, persecution on the basis of religion or ethnicity, the recruitment and use of children as soldiers, and the use of antipersonnel landmines." By now everyone knows that Osama bin Laden was among the mujihadin recruited by the CIA to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. Meet the next generation.

Lie #2: "America is coming together." Reality: Tens of thousands of people have been laid off in the airline industry alone. The government quickly responded to the airline industry crisis with a multi-billion-dollar bailout package for the companies in order to keep afloat the profits of shareholders and the salaries of CEOs, but when it came to aiding the thousands of workers laid off, Congressman Dick Armey said that that would be contrary to "the American spirit." Maybe it is. Maybe it's the "American spirit" to make common working people pay for a crisis and to bear the burdens of an expensive war. But it certainly doesn't have anything to do with "togetherness."

And the biggest lie of them all . . .
Lie #1: "It's possible to win a 'war against terrorism.'" Reality: Terrorism is a tactic, not a political or social force in and of itself. Anyone can use it, and the idea that you can wage a "war" against it is as dishonest as the idea behind the "War on Drugs." The use of food as a political weapon, indiscriminate aerial bombardment, and the arming of gangsterish groups of religious fanatics all count as "terrorism" by any reasonable definition of the word, and the United States has long employed all of them -- and more. This war is really about sordid material interests and power (see especially Lies numbers 2 and 4, above), and in defense of these interests the U.S. is prepared to shift the label "terrorist" as it sees fit, to apply to all manner of dissident political movements and not just marginal bands of fanatics like bin Laden's al-Qa'ida. Conversely, it's willing to call its own terrorists "freedom fighters" (see Lie number 3 above). Maybe some of them will get transformed into "terrorists" again in a few years. It's a sick game and a charade, and the government is manipulating the very real grief and anger of the people of the United States after the September 11 atrocities to get us all to fall for it again. Don't believe them for a second.

2006-06-18 12:08:20 · 9 answers · asked by joeblack605 2

2006-06-18 12:07:26 · 1 answers · asked by JP 1

THE 9/11 ATTACKS - WHAT WE KNOW:
The Bush administration was comprised of a group of people who had published a radical foreign policy. Elements of this policy include what is now known as the Bush preemptive doctrine. When Paul Wolfowitz first created this policy for the George H. W Bush administration it was dismissed as insane. This group of people created an agenda and a strategy to advance it. This group openly stated ”Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor. Domestic politics and industrial policy will shape the pace and content of transformation as much as the requirements of current missions.“ The Bush administration was comprised of people who had a clear and public MOTIVE for creating or enabling the attacks of 9/11. This is a issue that should be addressed by our media, our lawmakers, our citizens and the rest of the world.
Every procedure that was in place to deal with domestic hijackings was ignored on the day of the attacks.
Why did the Secret Service feel that there was no need to protect George W. Bush?
George Bush resisted an official inquiry into the worst national disaster since Pearl Harbor for 18 months. Any reasonable person would want to know what happened and they would want to make sure that there were no traitors in our mists. It was reasonable to consider the possibilities that the people who planned an attack like this had inside help. A president would want this checked out. George W. Bush wanted no investigation. He already had an official story and was quickly passed on to the press.
Every bit of evidence at Ground Zero and the Pentagon was confiscated and destroyed, and not preserved as crime scene evidence. This in itself is a crime. No need to look further. This is not in dispute. The George W. Bush is responsible for ordering or allowing the destruction of crime scene evidence.
There is not a shred of evidence that a 757 hit the Pentagon. All films from security cameras at the scene were confiscated and never seen again. The few frames of video from the Pentagon security camera were leaked to the public from an anonymous source in the Pentagon. When information is leaked from the Pentagon during a heightened state of emergency it is cause for concern. Neither the administration or the press question this breech of security. This is a clear indication of an intentional leak designed to sell the official story. If a 757 had hit the Pentagon they would have released the videos that were confiscated.
The hole made in the Pentagon crash is far too small for a 757 to have made.
Dozens of bin Laden family members were hurried out of the country without FBI interrogation immediately after the attacks.
None of the alleged hijackers was on any passenger list of the hijacked planes.
Eyewitness accounts describe a windowless, blue plane hitting the WTC.
Someone placed ‘put’ orders on the two hijacked airlines before the attacks, and stood to net huge stock market profits.
The Twin Towers both collapsed at free fall speed in the manner of a planned demolition, with visible explosions occurring in sequence on floors never hit by the planes.
The owner of the WTC admitted that Tower 7 was ‘taken down’ (intentionally demolished) by the Fire Department. THIS IS A CONFESSION! DO WE NEED MORE EVIDENCE?
Condoleezza Rice lied under oath to the Kean Commission about the warning memo that stated bin Laden was targeting the US.
Condoleezza Rice lied when she claimed that no one could have imagined an attack using airliners as weapons. NORAD had drilled for such events 2 years before the Bush White House claimed that they never could have imagined it.
George Bush claimed he saw the first plane hit Tower One, when no photos of the crash had been shown on any television screen.
George Bush sat silently in a classroom for seven full minutes after being informed that a second plane had hit the WTC. Why did George W. Bush react to the attacks differently than every other person in the nation? While every American jumped into emergency mode, George W. Bush did not flinch. He was not worried about his own safety or about the security of the nation. Why not?
NORAD did not send up a single interceptor jet despite knowing that four hijackings were taking place.
FBI agents and bomb sniffer dogs went through trash bins in both WTC Towers for weeks prior to the attacks. They were suddenly removed prior to the attack. Some people in our government were trying to do their job, others might have been trying to prevent the job from being done.
Dick Cheney was in charge of a series of drills held on the morning of September 11th, simulating attacks by hijacked airliners on the WTC.
No one in the US government is willing to investigate any of these and hundreds more concerns about this terrible event.
THE WARS AGAINST AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ – WHAT WE KNOW:
Members of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) occupy or had occupied many important positions in the present Bush administration.
PNAC explained the need for wars against Iraq and Afghanistan in papers published in the late 1990’s.
PNAC urged President Bill Clinton to invade Iraq, but was turned down.
PNAC member, Paul Wolfowitz, ADMITS that it was about OIL! HE ADMITTED IT! THE PRESS IGNORED THIS!!! ARE YOU LISTENING! DO YOU NEED MORE PROOF THAN A CONFESSION FROM ONE OF THE ARCHITECTS OF THE WAR??? ARE YOU LISTENING???
The PNAC thesis “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” stated that Americans would not accept pre-emptive wars against Iraq or Afghanistan unless there was a ‘catastrophic event like a New Pearl Harbor’ inside the country. Again we establish motive for complicity in the events of 9/11.
The Bush administration was trying to negotiate an oil pipeline deal with the Taliban before 9/11. They promised the leaders of Afghanistan a ‘carpet of bombs’ should the deal fall through. The deal fell through.
Deputy Director of the FBI, John O’Neill, quit his job in protest over this threat. O’Neill died in the attacks on the WTC on September 11th.
The attack on Afghanistan was explained as retaliation against the Taliban for not turning Osama bin Laden over to American authorities.
Both Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powel stated prior to 9/11 that Saddam Hussein did not possess weapons of mass destruction and that he was unable to pose a threat to his neighbors or the US.
George W. Bush came into the White House intent upon removing Saddam Hussein from power.
Donald Rumsfeld stated that the response to 9/11 should be an attack on Iraq because that’s where the targets were.
The UN inspectors were given unfettered access to sites Iraq, and requested more time to complete their task.
Everyone in the Bush administration with access to the media stressed that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction capable of killing millions of Americans.
A totally false connection between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein was fabricated and repeated at every possible opportunity.
In October, 2002, George W. Bush lied to the Congress of the United States about the imminent threat posed by Saddam Hussein. In a brazen and impeachable act, he manipulated intelligence information in order to procure Congressional approval for his war against Iraq.
Condoleezza Rice, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld spent months assuring the American public that their lives were in great danger unless the US waged a preventive war against Iraq. There was no doubt about the accuracy of their information, they said. No doubt at all. Mushroom clouds were on the horizon.
In January, 2003, George W. Bush lied to the nation in his SOTU speech about nuclear material obtained by Saddam. His unrelenting terror tactics and repeated references to Iraq’s WMD’s paved the way for public acceptance for a war he had planned for years.
In February, 2003, Colin Powell lied to the UN on two separate occasions in a futile attempt to convince the Security Council of the immediate threat presented by Iraq.
Despite UN inspectors’ statements to the contrary, George Bush told the nation that Saddam Hussein was not in compliance with the UN resolution requiring open inspections.
In March, 2003, boasting of a bombing strategy named ‘shock and awe,’ George Bush invaded Iraq.
More than 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died in George Bush’s war. Nearly 1700 American troops have lost their lives. Nearly 200 coalition forces are dead. Untold thousands are maimed. The carnage continues and civil war is imminent.
The minutes of the Downing Street meeting between George Bush and Tony Blair revealed an agreement to attack Iraq months before the invasion itself.
George W. Bush violated international law by waging a preventive war on a non-threatening, sovereign nation. That illegal war continues to this day.
THE ABUSE AND TORTURE OF PRISONERS – WHAT WE KNOW:
On May 7th, 2002, the US officially withdrew from the International Criminal Court (ICC). The US now has immunity from the court for US citizens suspected of atrocities. US soldiers serving overseas are immune from prosecution in the court, while politicians and US officials, including CIA operatives, can claim diplomatic immunity.
Shortly after 9/11, WH legal counsel, Alberto Gonzalez, drafted a memo in which he virtually changed the rules of prisoner treatment. The memo declared the war on terror to be conflict against a vast, outlaw, international enemy in which the rules of war, international treaties and even the Geneva Conventions did not apply. Alberto Gonzales was subsequently appointed US Attorney General.
In January, 2002, the WH legal department issued another memo concluding that neither the Geneva Conventions nor any of the laws of war applied to the conflict in Afghanistan.
In February of 2002, George Bush signed a secret order authorizing the CIA. To set up a series of secret detention facilities outside the United States, and to question those held in them with unprecedented harshness.
•The Bush administration then began to send terror suspects to other countries for interrogation, thereby absolving the US of blame for torture applied elsewhere.
In 2003, Abu Ghraib was formally handed over to tactical control of military-intelligence units for the expressed purpose of extracting information from detainees.
As an outcome of regular inspections, the International Commission of the Red Cross broke its rule of secrecy by publicly complaining of the systemic abuse of prisoners, in Iraq and Afghanistan, detailing methods of abuse that were in clear violation of international law.
In 2004, hundreds of photographs and video tapes were released that revealed shocking methods of abuse and torture of detainees in Abu Ghraib prison.
Despite many complaints about abuse, no investigation of prisoner treatment was held until it was clear these photographs were about to be leaked to the media.
Many civilian contractors were employed to carry out ‘interrogations’ of detainees.
Many of the detainees had committed no crimes, but had been arrested in huge sweeps of Iraqi men intended to secure information about insurgent attacks.
Interrogations were conducted and supervised by military intelligence operatives who ordered that prisoners be ‘softened up’ for questioning.
Abuses often were sexual in nature, preying upon the cultural sensitivities of Moslem men regarding nudity and public sexual acts.
Abuses were systemic throughout Iraq and Guantanamo Bay.
Hundreds of other photos and videos were kept secret by the Pentagon, and have recently been ordered released to the public.
The Bush administration attributed the abuse to the work of a few ‘bad apple’ underlings, and denied any knowledge or approval by anyone in the administration.
Reports of Koran desecration at Guantanamo were corroborated by the Pentagon.
To date, civilian aircraft continue to fly terror suspects to other countries for harsh and illegal interrogation methods.
To date, no one in the Pentagon or the White House has been held accountable for the widespread abuse and torture of prisoners. To date, only enlisted personnel have been charged with any abuses or torture. To date, further investigations have been dropped.

2006-06-18 12:03:51 · 21 answers · asked by joeblack605 2

a simple yes or no will sufice

2006-06-18 10:25:59 · 38 answers · asked by Geaux_Tigers 2

2006-06-18 09:59:02 · 10 answers · asked by ben s 3

2006-06-18 09:30:35 · 30 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-06-18 09:01:40 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-06-18 08:56:52 · 5 answers · asked by Paul M 1

After the sad joke of an administration we've had for the last two terms (?!), the next person can't HELP but look good by comparison.

2006-06-18 08:47:23 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

The more I learn about this guy, the more I like him.

2006-06-18 08:40:38 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-06-18 08:20:03 · 7 answers · asked by I-C-U 5

must be good for the conservatives to have the corporate media behind them

2006-06-18 08:19:30 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous