|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 6:24 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Yes, that video says it all.
And who is gonna pull down Bush through Gonzales puppet strings?????
As one newsman says, every hour we find out more lies from this administration, EVERY HOUR!!!!! Yes I'm exaggerating but just barely and this says a lot. Rove is an idiot and hit him and Bush will bleed.....he might even have to spend his days like Idi Amin, in Saudi Arabia.
DD
I echo this person's comments......
| Quote: |
We've just spent billions of dollars, six years and destroyed hundreds of thousands of lives.
There was so much to gain and so little to risk.
Republicans are always upset that tax dollars are allocated for education, arts, and welfare. This is
their way of transferring our billions to their wallets. Weapons, oil, pharmaceutical, construction, and mercenary companies
Even if Bush gets impeached, he will be taken care of. I'm guessing he will live in Dubai. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Crime Blotter: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
| Quote: |
by Paul Craig Roberts
...Alberto Gonzales advised Bush that the president's wartime powers permitted Bush to ignore the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and to use the National Security Agency (NSA) to spy on U.S. citizens without obtaining warrants from the FISA court as required by law. Under an order signed by Bush in 2002, NSA illegally spied on Americans without warrants.
By spying on Americans without obtaining warrants, Bush committed felonies under FISA. Moreover, there is strong, indeed overwhelming, evidence that justice was obstructed when Bush and Gonzales blocked a 2006 Justice Department investigation into whether Gonzales acted properly as attorney general in approving and overseeing the Bush administration's program of spying on U.S. citizens. Also at issue is whether Gonzales acted properly in advising Bush to kill an investigation of Gonzales' professional actions with regard to the NSA spy program.
We are faced with the almost certain fact that the two highest law enforcement officials of the United States are criminals.
...The administration's claim that bypassing FISA was essential to the "war on terror" is totally false and is a justification and practice that the Bush administration, no longer able to defend, abandoned in January of this year.
...In response to a request from members of Congress, the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) launched an investigation into the Bush administration's decision to ignore FISA... On Jan. 20, 2006, Marshall Jarrett, the Justice Department official in charge of OPR, informed senior Justice Department officials of his investigation and its scope.
Gonzales informed President Bush about the OPR investigation, and Bush shut down the investigation by refusing security clearances to the Justice Department officials in OPR. In a response to Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Arlen Specter on July 18, 2006, Gonzales disclosed that President Bush had halted the OPR investigation.
This is the first and only time in history that DoJ officials have been denied security clearances necessary to conduct an investigation. The Bush administration claimed that the secret spying was too crucial to our national security to permit even Justice Department officials to learn about it. However, even as Bush was denying clearances to OPR, he granted identical clearances to: (1) the FBI agents ordered to find who leaked the administration's secret spying to the New York Times, (2) DoJ officials in the Civil Division who had to respond to legal challenges to the illegal spy program, and (3) five private-sector individuals who sit on the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board.
Obviously, the unprecedented denial of security clearances to OPR was done in order to prevent the investigation.[/b]
...Jarrett's superiors, according to government records and to interviews, instructed him not to inform Congress that President Bush had made the decision."
...Attorney General Ashcroft, Deputy Attorney General James Comey, Assistant Attorney General Jack Goldsmith in charge of the Office of Legal Counsel, and James A. Baker, counsel for the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review, all raised objections... Baker went so far as to warn the presiding judge of the FISA court...
...Goldsmith found an ally in Deputy Attorney General Comey. Comey defied the White House in March 2004 when he refused to reauthorize Bush's spying on American citizens unless the program was brought within the law.
...[b]This criminal regime must now be brought to an end. Impeachments of Bush, Cheney, and Gonzales, followed by felony indictments and trials, are imperative if the rule of law in the United States is to be preserved. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| NAVFC wrote: |
Also its foolish when you, Not an American, are trying to claim you know the Americna people so well to say that Americans believe Bush is a tyrant and the worlds worst leader. This is farther from the truth, and something you couldnt know.
You neednt look far for worse leaders, as examples I gave. |
How many logical fallacies exist in that one, short paragraph? Someone from the debate team, do tell...
Oh, and when your premise is *beep* from the start, well... |
No it isnt. I suppose your not intelligent enough to grasp this concept, but disliking a leader doesnt mean you think hes the worst leader ever and or a tyrant. But this is apparently a concept you are incapable of grasping. But you dodge this point to, and all you do is coutner with sarcasm. You hve yet to address a single point Ive made. why? becausre yiou cant so you resort to other means.
if X doesnt like A, it doesnt mean X thinks A is worse then B, just that he doesnt like A.
That is not a logical fallacy.
I have yet to hear of a poll where a significant chunk of people refer to Bush as a tyrant or state he is the worst leader.
The only logical fallacy here is you, a Canadian, trying to elaborate on the minds of the American people, which you ahve already shown you have no clue how the American people think or act or in what manner they make their decisions, and when Bush doesnt get impeached Ill be here showing everyone how much of a dumbass you are.
And no, my premise isnt *beep* you never even coutnered it, you dodged it.
My whole premise is no one is going to waste their time with a impeachment hearing because 1. Too politically risky to do this in a election season 2. Bush would be gone by the time it was over anyway and 3. The country is in enough turmoil as it is, no one is going to want to put it through a impeachment trial, esp. given #1 and #2. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| NAVFC wrote: |
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| NAVFC wrote: |
| 65% of Americans dislike Bush, how ever those same 65% dont necessarily think Bush is a tyrant or the worlds worst leader. |
Actually, they pretty much do. |
You have a poll to back that up or is that another one of your assumptions you make?
No onwe really thinks Bush is the worlds worst leader. Again, so many more worse then him, truly evil people, Kim Jong Il, Mugabe, Putin, etc. |
Yeah... there are soooo many responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands, the gutting of one of the greatest political documents in history, etc.... |
Oh get over that. Bush didnt gut the consitution, no one did.
On the news people protest, criticize the president every day and no one gets in trouble. The fact of the matter is I have yet to see anyone losing any rights guaranteed to them in the consituttion.
Lets do a quick check
Freedom of speech> yep. people still can say what ever the hell they want. bear arms? yep. people are still buying guns.
Search and seizure? yep. The cops still need a reason to search you.
purrsuit of happiness? yep. people can still choose their own path through life.
trial by jury? yep.
just a few. yup there still there?
Deaths of hundreds of thousands? I dont know the death toll from this war, but either way, its a war EFL. In Wars people DIE. Get over it.
Doesnt matter what war, whether you are for or against, people still die, Look at WW2 for instance.
Afghanistan was entirely justified in helping the afghans overthrow the taliban (I dont know why some poeple say the US invaded afghanistan...we didnt..we sent in small groups of special forces to help afghans overthrow their own government..and it worked)
I support overthrowing Saddam.
No one seems to mention anymore the fact that they caught master terrorist Abu Nidal in iraq and shut down more then a few terrorist training camps that were being run there.
As well as getting rid of a major source of funding for PLO terrorists.
But since you brought it up, lets talk about worse people then Bush
Kim Jong IL: Responsible for he deaths of millions due to starvation caused by economic mismanagement, death camps and forced labor camps, of cotnrolling the lives of his citizenry right down to when they can sleep and eat.
Sudans leader: Darfur genocide. Robert Mugabe: hundreds fo thousands dead
Jintao: (chinese leader) Imprisons people fopr speaking against the government, executes for other crimes against the state, harvests organs from prisoners, medical experimentation on prisoners, chinese people have no freedom.
Those are just a few. yet you never complain about their atrocities. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
W.T.Carl
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Why waste your computer time on these knuckleheads? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
[quote="NAVFC"]
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| NAVFC wrote: |
Also its foolish when you, Not an American, are trying to claim you know the Americna people so well to say that Americans believe Bush is a tyrant and the worlds worst leader. This is farther from the truth, and something you couldnt know.
You neednt look far for worse leaders, as examples I gave. |
How many logical fallacies exist in that one, short paragraph? Someone from the debate team, do tell...
Oh, and when your premise is *beep* from the start, well... |
No it isnt. I suppose your not intelligent enough to grasp this concept, but disliking a leader doesnt mean you think hes the worst leader ever and or a tyrant. But this is apparently a concept you are incapable of grasping. But you dodge this point to, and all you do is coutner with sarcasm. You hve yet to address a single point Ive made. why? becausre yiou cant so you resort to other means. |
Because, nav, you're a fool. You take party over citizenship. Thus, you are irrelevant. And a fool.
And, yes, stand by my assertion. Of the nearly 70 percent who think Bush, et. al., are scumbags, they pretty much all think he's an out of control criminal who is destroying this nation and is, indeed, acting like a tyrant. Read some news, eh?
| Quote: |
if X doesnt like A, it doesnt mean X thinks A is worse then B, just that he doesnt like A.
That is not a logical fallacy. |
It is if untrue.
| Quote: |
| I have yet to hear of a poll where a significant chunk of people refer to Bush as a tyrant or state he is the worst leader. |
that's because the question hasn't been asked. Idiot.
| Quote: |
| The only logical fallacy here is you, a Canadian, |
Tell me, liar, where you get your info?  You flat out lie and then talk about logic?
Idiot.
| Quote: |
| My whole premise is no one is going to waste their time with a impeachment hearing because 1. Too politically risky to do this in a election season 2. Bush would be gone by the time it was over anyway and 3. The country is in enough turmoil as it is, no one is going to want to put it through a impeachment trial, esp. given #1 and #2. |
Your point is based in the lowest levels of thought (The Concrete level of development.) and ethical reasoning. You are just plain stupid. I understood your point the first time you said it. A 7 year old could understand your point. They think the same way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NAVFC wrote: |
| Oh get over that. Bush didnt gut the consitution, no one did. |
Delusion is a wonderful thing. Don't ever get on the meds you require so badly: you wouldn't be nearly so entertaining. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="EFLtrainer"]
| Quote: |
| NAVFC wrote: |
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| NAVFC wrote: |
Also its foolish when you, Not an American, are trying to claim you know the Americna people so well to say that Americans believe Bush is a tyrant and the worlds worst leader. This is farther from the truth, and something you couldnt know.
You neednt look far for worse leaders, as examples I gave. |
How many logical fallacies exist in that one, short paragraph? Someone from the debate team, do tell...
Oh, and when your premise is *beep* from the start, well... |
No it isnt. I suppose your not intelligent enough to grasp this concept, but disliking a leader doesnt mean you think hes the worst leader ever and or a tyrant. But this is apparently a concept you are incapable of grasping. But you dodge this point to, and all you do is coutner with sarcasm. You hve yet to address a single point Ive made. why? becausre yiou cant so you resort to other means. |
Because, nav, you're a fool. You take party over citizenship. Thus, you are irrelevant. And a fool.
And, yes, stand by my assertion. Of the nearly 70 percent who think Bush, et. al., are scumbags, they pretty much all think he's an out of control criminal who is destroying this nation and is, indeed, acting like a tyrant. Read some news, eh?
| Quote: |
if X doesnt like A, it doesnt mean X thinks A is worse then B, just that he doesnt like A.
That is not a logical fallacy. |
It is if untrue.
| Quote: |
| I have yet to hear of a poll where a significant chunk of people refer to Bush as a tyrant or state he is the worst leader. |
that's because the question hasn't been asked. Idiot.
| Quote: |
| The only logical fallacy here is you, a Canadian, |
Tell me, liar, where you get your info? You flat out lie and then talk about logic?
Idiot.
| Quote: |
| My whole premise is no one is going to waste their time with a impeachment hearing because 1. Too politically risky to do this in a election season 2. Bush would be gone by the time it was over anyway and 3. The country is in enough turmoil as it is, no one is going to want to put it through a impeachment trial, esp. given #1 and #2. |
Your point is based in the lowest levels of thought (The Concrete level of development.) and ethical reasoning. You are just plain stupid. I understood your point the first time you said it. A 7 year old could understand your point. They think the same way. |
Once again you fail to address any of the points actually made, and those that you sort of hit on not really, well "lowest levels of thought" for instance. No those arent low thoguhts, there COMMON SENSE.
Anyone who knows dick shit about politics will know those 3 things are true. Bush has about as much chance of getting impeached as does Charlie Rangel's draft bill getting passed.
Again: North Korea, Sudan, China. Millions dead due to their tyranny. No complaints from you.
How about actually trying to address points I make instead of dodging them? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| NAVFC wrote: |
| Oh get over that. Bush didnt gut the consitution, no one did. |
Delusion is a wonderful thing. Don't ever get on the meds you require so badly: you wouldn't be nearly so entertaining. |
I went through the checklist EFL. None of the rights guaranteed me by the constitution have ben taken away. Again you diodge it and can niot explain anything. You didnt even try to refute my consituttion check list.
Name 1 right you do not have anymore as a result of Bush's actions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NAVFC, I"m not debating common knowledge with you. You're a fool. You are not worth my, nor anyone's time. Every post you make is nothing more than licking Biush's ass. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 6:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| NAVFC, I"m not debating common knowledge with you. You're a fool. You are not worth my, nor anyone's time. Every post you make is nothing more than licking Biush's ass. |
Bull! stop dodging my points EFL, you coward.
I asked you to name a single right that I do not have thanks to Bush, and you could not even do that!
I hope this demonstrates to everyone here, that your crap, is just that crap, baseless sensationless posts that when confronted by facts you are not able to back up, and all you are able to do is dodge and evade.
I went through that check list in the post, of rights granted by the consituttion..and I still have all of them. Whos the fool EFL? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You do not ahve freedom from search and seizure.
You do not ahve the right to an attorney. You do not have the right to a hearing of your grievances. You do not have freedom from invasion of privacy. Etc. Try reading a newspaper, a blog, anything other than tea leaves given you by the republican party.
Now, let's see how you pretend you do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
You do not ahve freedom from search and seizure.
You do not ahve the right to an attorney. You do not have the right to a hearing of your grievances. You do not have freedom from invasion of privacy. Etc. Try reading a newspaper, a blog, anything other than tea leaves given you by the republican party.
Now, let's see how you pretend you do. |
Umm yes I do have the right to an attorney. No one took that away from me.
Hearing? Ummyes I do.
Umm.. and yes i have freedom to read, i read news papers blogs etc, some of them unfriendly to the admin, and I have yet to have ever had anyone hunt me down for it.
Is something supposed to happen??? will the FBI come to my house if I read the NY times or some other non bush supporting publication?
search and seizure? I have yet to be made aware of any law that says the government can come into my house and search anytime...as far as I know they still have to have probable cause... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NAVFC wrote: |
Umm yes I do have the right to an attorney. No one took that away from me.
Hearing? Ummyes I do.
Umm.. and yes i have freedom to read, i read news papers blogs etc, some of them unfriendly to the admin, and I have yet to have ever had anyone hunt me down for it.
Is something supposed to happen??? will the FBI come to my house if I read the NY times or some other non bush supporting publication?
search and seizure? I have yet to be made aware of any law that says the government can come into my house and search anytime...as far as I know they still have to have probable cause... |
Are you illiterate, thus unable to read, or are you JUST THAT STUPID? Please explain to me where you, personally, are exempted from the Patriot Act? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
