English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I site by way of AN example (though we know there are a lot more examples) the GLOBAL GAG RULE protected under the Federal Tort Claims Act, thereby making the Govt immune from appeals or prosecution. Set up by Pres Reagan, continued under G Bush SNR, rescinded by Bill Clinton and reinstated by Dubya as 1 of his first official pieces of business, a policy of funding certain clinics around the world with US financial aid for family planning to stop abortions.
However, withdrawal of such funding from clinics around the world, they now have NO money for family planning, which COULD stop un-wanted pregnancies and the NEED for abortions.
U.S. Global Gag Rule affects the globe - Balkans, Africa, S. America, Asia, ANY place dependant on U.S. funding is not allowed to utter the word abortion, so..

Does anyone else find it curious that the Bush Administration ‘s quest to stop abortion is actually re-directing free speech which, is the hallmark of democracy today?

2007-04-01 20:47:13 · 9 answers · asked by Hello 3 in Politics & Government Politics

Under the law in the U.S. abortion is legal, yet the U.S. continue to tell other countries if they want U.S. aid, they can NOT perform, encourage or make an abortion?Do the U.S. look the World in the eye and say “Do as I say, not as I do?” QUOTE “ …Britain's current nuclear weapons system (and, indeed, the one that looks likely to replace it) is umbilically linked to the US. The missiles themselves are leased from the US government. They depend on American maintenance - carried out at a base in King's Bay, Georgia - and American software. All this has one crucial upshot: though we got them on the cheap, paying as little as a 10th of the sum they would have cost if we built and maintained them ourselves, they fail what Plesch calls "the 1940 test": if we were at war without the say-so of the US, we probably couldn't use them. "The current system is like an insurance policy that the insurer can take away if they don't want you to use it"

2007-04-01 20:51:23 · update #1

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1961433,00.html

2007-04-01 20:54:04 · update #2

Re Doctdon..

It's what the US Govt expect .. and it's US peoples money they are using to achieve that.. ;-)

If your theory is correct..;-).. why aren't to good US people up in arms about the Govt wasting thier hard earned money?...

2007-04-08 01:33:05 · update #3

9 answers

Criminals, first, then hypocrites, mainly because they have no balls to admit they're criminals - after all, most of them are gay, just have no guts to come out (banging priests, harrassing pages....)

2007-04-01 20:50:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 3

Bill Clinton signed the Rome Treaty as president of the United States on December 31, 2000.
On September 10, 2001 someone entered into the record of congress something about how his signature was not a commitment on behalf of the U.S. The part that was entered into the record of Congress was not even read into the record. It was just slid into the record.
We all know what happened on September 11, 2001.
The International Crime Commission (ICC) was established for the United Nations by the Rome Treaty to prosecute human rights violations, war crimes etc.
The ICC was notified by the United States that the US no longer wish to be a party of the Rome Treaty and international justice.
Thank You for giving me this opportunity to state that there must have been someone in the US government that knew in advance that some thing(s) were planned for September 11, 2001. FEMA admitted that it was deployed to NYC for an exercise that dealt with a biological disaster on September 10, 2001.
You can hear it for yourself in the "911 Eyewitness" video.
Download it and other 9/11 videos for FREE at
http://www.question911.com/linksall.htm

2007-04-08 14:27:52 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

The abortion issue is frought with passion on all sides. The primary thesis, though, is accurate. This is a nation, in the footsteps of others before it, that is prmarily at war with its own citizens, and there is an effort to keep the domestic population ignorant of the existence and the consequences of US policy. The fact that this isn't headline news is proof that the notion of a liberal media, or even a Free Press, is a myth. We all have reason to be ashamed of what we have tacitly supported, and it is our duty as citizens to take what efforts we can to restore our once-admired republic.

"Every government is run by liars, and nothing they say should be believed."
I.F. Stone

2007-04-07 12:13:45 · answer #3 · answered by Fraser T 3 · 2 1

For one individual to have so much insight, common sense was completely left out of the picture. President Bush didn't make ALL those decisions by himself, and if you were to assume the position of Mr. President, God Forbid, would your decisions be any More popular with the majority ?? Actually, I believe you have been drinking to much Kool-Aid, as Bill O'Reilly says.......God Bless America !!

2007-04-09 06:05:47 · answer #4 · answered by fuzzypetshop 4 · 0 2

Simply put, if you are so committed to abortion all you need to do is to surrender the money and do your own thing. Pure and simple. I think it is long past time for our money to have some strings attached to those that take it.

2007-04-09 04:45:35 · answer #5 · answered by just the facts 5 · 1 1

Do you really think that any amount of money will stop unwanted pregnancies? What are you going to do? try and pay people NOT to have sex? Never going to happen.

2007-04-08 00:20:57 · answer #6 · answered by doctdon 7 · 1 1

All governments must act quickly to rapid changes in circumstances. The US Gov are not hypocrites just trying to keep up with the pace set by public demand and the rat-race in general. It must be hell back there in the full heat of the kitchen.

2007-04-01 20:54:35 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 4

America needs to be taught a lesson.

2007-04-01 21:35:27 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

The us gov is a group of terrorist zionists.

2007-04-01 21:10:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers