|
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 |
Big_Bird

Joined: 31 Jan 2003 Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| Point being, I think you're downplaying religion a little too much Big Bird, while perhaps EFL Trainer is going a little too far in the other direction. I think we'd all agree that Bush's lack of planning (poor planning would be giving him too much credit) helped create more support and provide more power to the fundamentalists. |
I know many Arabs, and with few exceptions they are very religious - even those that drink beer and are lax about observing Ramadan. (Only one confesses to me he is not, but swore me to secrecy!) But being religious doesn't necessarily translate into radical extremism. Before the war, Iraqis claim they didn't really think too much about who was Sunni, Shia or Christian. Now the actions of an increasing minority of radicals have made it a life or death issue. But it wasn't inevitable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dogbert

Joined: 29 Jan 2003 Location: Killbox 90210
|
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| NAVFC wrote: |
| Adventurer wrote: |
| Actually, in 2002 many in America were not sure America was going to war. You are saying this in hindsight. I was thinking there was a strong possibility the administration would be committing the troops to war, and I was alarmed by that. Abramoff was connected to politicians who wanted to go to war no matter what. Some people actually did believe the idea that diplomacy was being attempted, and they did have some faith in the administration. So are you saying most of America was retarted for believing that? You are talking in hindsight. And it is clear with the way Abramoff was writing in his e-mail, the administration long made up its mind to go to war which is not what it led the public to believe. And if you were in the US back then, then you would know what I am talking about. You would not have had the 75% of the population supporting the administration to go to war. |
No, Im not talking in hidnsight. I knew it was going to happen. WHen ever you have threats, rherotic, and large re deployment of troops iot means a military conflict is imminent. You were asleep at the wheel. |
yup, if in 2002, you weren't aware we'd invade, you must have had your head in the sand. I wasn't even in America at the time and knew we would be going to war against Iraq sooner or later during Bush's presidency. |
Definitely so. It was practically a plank of Bush's platform.
Bush's reptilian brain was quite obviously in the throes of some sort of Oedipal confusion he felt could only be resolved by war against Iraq. It is too bad that there cannot be true justice come January 2009. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
igotthisguitar

Joined: 08 Apr 2003 Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 3:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Secrecy Invoked On Abramoff Lawsuits
By PETE YOST
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is laying out a new secrecy defense in an effort to end a court battle about the White House visits of now-imprisoned lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
The administration agreed last year to produce all responsive records about the visits "without redactions or claims of exemption," according to a court order.
But in a court filing Friday night, administration lawyers said that the Secret Service has identified a category of highly sensitive documents that might contain information sought in a lawsuit about Abramoff's trips to the White House.
The Justice Department, citing a Cold War-era court ruling, declared that the contents of the "Sensitive Security Records" cannot be publicly revealed even though they could show whether Abramoff made more visits to the White House than those already acknowledged.
"The simple act of doing so ... would reveal sensitive information about the methods used by the Secret Service to carry out its protective function," the Justice Department argued.
"This is an extraordinary development and it raises the specter that there were additional contacts with President Bush or other high White House officials that have yet to be disclosed," said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group that filed the suit. "We've alleged that the government has committed misconduct in this litigation and frankly this is more fuel for that fire."
A response by White House spokesman Trey Bohn referred to the Secret Service, saying, "We have nothing to add to the USSS. position as stated in the court filing."
Sensitive Security Records are created in the course of conducting more extensive background checks on certain visitors to the White House. In sworn statements accompanying the filing, two Secret Service officers said the extra attention is paid to some visitors because of their background, "the circumstances of the visits" or both.
The Sensitive Security Records were discovered in the course of another lawsuit seeking similar records, the court papers state.
Another private group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, also has requested Secret Service records of Abramoff's White House visits. On Friday, the Justice Department asked for a consolidation of the two cases. Such a move would take the CREW case from U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth and give it to Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, an appointee of the current president who is hearing the Judicial Watch case. Lamberth, a federal judge for two decades, has taken both Republican and Democratic administrations to task during his tenure.
To date, the government has turned over Secret Service records referring to seven White House visits by Abramoff � six of them in the early months of the Bush administration in 2001 and the seventh in early 2004 ... just before Abramoff came under criminal investigation.
The White House has released little information about the visits, but none of them appears to involve a small group meeting with President Bush.
Nearly two years ago, just after Abramoff had pleaded guilty in the influence peddling scandal, Bush told reporters, "I can't say I didn't ever meet" Abramoff, "but I meet a lot of people."
"I don't know him," Bush said at the presidential news conference in January 2006. "I've never sat down with him and had a discussion with the guy."
After Bush's comments, Abramoff wrote an e-mail to the national editor of Washingtonian magazine saying that Bush had seen him "in almost a dozen settings, and joked with me about a bunch of things, including details of my kids. Perhaps he has forgotten everything, who knows."
Time magazine reported that its reporters had been shown five photographs of Bush and Abramoff. Most of them, the magazine said, had "the formal look of photos taken at presidential receptions."
MORE ...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/bush_abramoff;_ylt=AsxzHfUKSssvCmnvhV.RVG4DW7oF |
|
| 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
|
|