First they took us to war based on many lies, propaganda, and instilling fear of foreign attacks, so they could profit from the war. Then some others ended up in jail on bribery charges. Now old Wolf is facing corruption charges. Do they take the cover of religion to hide their sins? Then you have these hypocrite predator preachers who don't practice what they preach.
2007-05-09 08:12:11 · 7 answers · asked by San jap 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Not all only most.
2007-05-09 08:24:18 · answer #1 · answered by ChaliQ 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Did Bill Clinton lie when he attacked Iraq during Operation Desert Fox in December 1998 because he said Iraq had WMD?
Get your facts straight before you start spouting off.
Did Spain, UK, Poland, Italy, Japan take part in the "lies and propaganda?"
Did Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman lie by voting for the war?
Wolfowitze IS NOT FACING CORRUPTION CHARGES. There isi NO CRIMINAL CASE.
He is at odds with European members of the World Bank who listen to people like you.
You sound like a bigot prejudiced against religious people.
/
2007-05-09 15:24:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It sure looks that way. Isn't it ironic that members of the NeoCon clique who aren't even current members of Dubya's administration are also imploding. They couldn't even escape the stain of his corruption by deserting a sinking ship. Is this fate, karma, or simply poetic justice? In any case, it couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch of people. Poor Paul Wolfowitz! He just doesn't seem to understand that as head of the World Bank, he's supposed to set an example to his underlings, not break the rules because of his position. Tsk, tsk! I predict Wolfy will be gone by this time next week, because the bank directors are certainly not amused by his behavior. Next up is good old Al Gonzales. I expect him to be gone within a month. If not, I certainly think we will see him marginalized by Congress in their dealings with his department. Why, the poor fellow doesn't even seem to be able to remember his name, much less important details, like major events occurring in the department he is supposed to be overseeing. Why would Congress continue to interface directly with an airhead who doesn't seem to care what's happening in his own purview? Talk about an incompetent. But then, I guess that's really not surprising at all, seeing as almost all of Dubya's appointees are incompetents. I guess that old adage that "birds of a feather flock together" really does have some truth to it.
2007-05-09 15:47:45 · answer #3 · answered by MathBioMajor 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
San,
My friend, I'm still waiting for your 'crook' allegations - facts? None? Where are they? The lukewarm, re-hashed-many-times-over trash that you are flinging around is ancient. I am not an apologist for this, or any, administration. But, if you want to start a discussion let's have some meat, something to chew on. "Predator preachers"? Who are they? C'mon San the Man, let's get with some faces, facts and figures!
2007-05-09 15:24:21 · answer #4 · answered by Pete W 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A politician is of a magnitude higher than any other professional to be corrupt. Rep, Dem or Indy, it makes no difference. Where money and law intersect you will find corruption.
2007-05-09 15:22:32 · answer #5 · answered by Eric C 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You're right. It'd probably be much easier to be a liberal Democrat and have no ethical or moral yardstick. To live in a world where an insincere "I'm sorry." and a few crocidile tears will remedy everything.
2007-05-09 15:17:52 · answer #6 · answered by not gh3y 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Some are. Most aren't.
Like any other group.
2007-05-09 15:23:13 · answer #7 · answered by Sean 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋