My questions to deb will be in blue her response will be in black.
I got Debs responses from her blog http://citizenspen.blogspot.com/
Dear Deb,
"To
deny that this administration is using Christian "code"
to manipulate
the masses is short sighted and dismissive of
the partisan attempt to
harness those who would gladly
annihilate your freedoms in order to
dictate their dogma."
Can you give me an example of Christian "code" that manipulate
the masses? What dogma do you see this Administration pursuing?
The
whole "Axis of Evil thing was to play to Neo-Christians. By his
own
admission he has "to keep repeating things over and over
and over again
for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the
propaganda." His
references to "His purpose," "Evil-doers," and
most recently, "We
believe in life," in reference to his vetoing of
stem-cell research,
are all examples of this. Harriet Myers was a
woman of "grace," and it
goes on and on. If you know your Bible,
then you pick up on his
references all the time.
Examples of dogma:
*A Constitutional ammendment banning gay marriage, which
should be considered a civil issue.
*Denying new lines of stem-cells for research, which should
be a medical issue.
*Their attempt to ban the "Morning After" pill.
*Their support of Pharmacists that refuse to dispense the
"Morning After" pill.
*Their long-range goal of denying women the right to choose.
A country for the people and by the people allows individuals
to choose.
"He bombed a sovereign nation without credible evidence."
Do
you deny that every intelligence agency in the world thought
Saddam had
weapons of mass destruction? Do you deny that he
defied over 15 U. N.
resolutions for over ten years? Do you deny
that the Congress of the
U.S. granted him authority to use force
on the same evidence that
George Bush had?
It
has been proven that they intended to go to war with Iraq
before 9/11.
It did not matter what the intelligence agency
said to them. They made
it perfectly clear what kind of
information they wanted and they were
more than willing
to use hyperbolic rhetoric to make false claims and
false links,
in other words, lie to the American people to get what
they want.
"He has not held Rumsfeld accountable for Abu Grab."
The
investigation into Abu Grab did not implicate Rumsfeld, but
you feel
that he should be held accountable for every action of
everybody in
uniform because he is Secretary of State.
What
happened to the buck stops here? With Rumsfield it has
been more about
passing the buck. He has been a failure at
executing this war and
should have been removed years ago.
"He has held captives in Gitmo without trial for over 5 years."
These are terrorist[s], what should be done with them?
How do we know that? They have not been tried.
This
administration is not above the law. The legal system that is
good
enough for our murderers, pedophiles, and rapists is good
enough to
handle terrorists. Good citizens have faith in our system.
I certainly
have more faith in the system than I do for these
cowboys that seek to
avoid the system and by doing so have
tarnished the name of our good
country around the world.
Bush
has moved to comply with the Supreme Court to reform
the tribunals.
This doesn't seem like a Presidency that is not
being held accountable.
Finally--and it's about time. This is despite the fact that he
has tried to rig the Supreme Court. It gives me hope.
You say "Hussein was complying with the international
community" but the Washington Times on March 22, 2004
wrote "Democratic
presidential candidate John Kerry complains
that President Bush pursued
a unilateralist foreign policy that
gave short shrift [shift] to the
concerns of the United Nations
and our allies when it came to taking
military action against
Saddam Hussein.
Taken
out of context!!! Kerry is talking about Bush ignoring
Germany, France
and the majority of U.N. participants, and
he was/is absolutely right.
Now we are seeing the results of that.
But
the mounting evidence of scandal that has been uncovered
in the U.N.
Oil For Food program suggests that there was never
a serious
possibility of getting Security Council support for
military action
because influential people in Russia and France
were getting paid off
by Saddam. After the fall of Baghdad last
spring, Franceand Russiaa
tried to delay the lifting of sanctions
against Iraq and continue the
Oil for Food program. That's
because France and Russia profited from
it: The Times of
London calculated that French and Russian companies
received
$11 billion worth of business from Oil for Food between 1996
and
2003...
Off topic! Every country has scandals (i.e.
Iran/Contra,
Abrimoff, Abu Grab). I do not think that this
Administration
should have a "holier than thou" attitude with any
country. It seems
like you are just cutting and pasting information....
...and
then this by the NewsMax.com Staff For the story behind
the story...
Wednesday, Nov. 16, 2005 12:15 p.m. ESTNew
Documents Reveal Saddam Hid
WMD, Was Tied to Al Qaida
Recently discovered Iraqi documents now being
translated by
U.S. intelligence analysts indicate that Saddam Hussein's
government made extensive plans to hide Iraq's weapons of
mass
destruction before the U.S. invasion in March 2003 - and
had deep ties
to Al Qaida before the 9/11 attacks. The explosive
evidence was
discovered among "millions of pages of documents
" unearthed by the Iraq
Survey Group weapons search team,
reports the WeeklyStandard's Stephen
Hayes. This would seem
to be evidence that there were Weapons of Mass
Destruction.
Oh please. If this were true it would be all
over the news with
every republican talking head crowing about how they
have
been avenged. I am not familiar with this "study," but I bank
on
my logic that if it were true the neo-cons would be in our
face day and
night. (True, not the best argument, but I'm
getting tired and have to
rely more on gut instinct :^/)
Tenet said he has "absolutely no recollection" of the CIA
official warning him about Curveball."It
is simply wrong for
anyone to intimate that I was at any point in time
put on
notice that Curveball was probably a fabricator," he said.
In
order to be lying one must be knowingly telling a falsehood.
At the
time of this information being given to the public it
was thought to be
true. Who did the administration try to
destroy because they publicly
challenged their claim? Was
it James L. Pavitt or Tyler Drumheller?
Valerie
Plame. I do not believe Tenet or any other person
in this
administration that is trying to cover their behind
by saying "I do not
recall." They have proven time and time
again that they do not "recall"
any information that does not
suit them to have out to the American
public. You cannot
convince me that this administration is nothing
short of a
disaster and I hope to prove to you by the evidence of the
next election that the citizen's will have the last word.
Hope to hear your comments.
Mr. X.
Comments