It may have started with sexual escapes. It ended with Perjury to a grand jury.
Posted By: Myra on 2005-10-30
In Reply to: I'm sure you defended - Pres. Clinton...sm-- Starcat
So for all the Monica smokescreen, there was a crime committed by a jurist, none the less. He (Clinton) lost his law license. But no one even feels it necessary to mention that.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Grand Jury Declines to Indict McKinney...sm
Grand Jury Declines to Indict McKinney
Grand jury declines to indict Cynthia McKinney in connection with Capitol Police confrontation
WASHINGTON, Jun. 17, 2006
By LAURIE KELLMAN Associated Press Writer
(AP)
(AP) A grand jury declined Friday to indict Rep. Cynthia McKinney in connection with a confrontation in which she admitted hitting a police officer who tried to stop her from entering a House office building.
The grand jury had been considering the case since shortly after the March 29 incident, which has led to much discussion on Capitol Hill about race and the conduct of lawmakers and the officers who protect them.
We respect the decision of the grand jury in this difficult matter, said U.S. Attorney Kenneth Wainstein.
His statement, released late Friday, also included support for the officer involved, Paul McKenna, and the Capitol Police. He said, This is a tremendously difficult job, and it is one that Officer McKenna and his colleagues perform with the utmost professionalism and dignity.
With that, Wainstein closed a case that has simmered with racial and political tension.
I am relieved that this unfortunate incident is behind me, McKinney said in a statement Friday night. I accept today's grand jury finding of 'no probable cause' as right and just and the proper resolution of this case.
The encounter began when McKinney, D-Ga., tried to enter a House office building without walking through a metal detector or wearing the lapel pin that identifies members of Congress.
McKenna did not recognize her as a member of Congress and asked her three times to stop. When she ignored him, he tried to stop her. McKinney then hit him.
McKinney described the encounter as racial profiling, insisting she had been assaulted and had done nothing wrong.
McKinney is black. McKenna is white.
She received little public support for that stance, even within the Congressional Black Caucus.
Wainstein, meanwhile, sought an indictment from a federal grand jury, with assault on a police officer mentioned in the filings as a possible charge. That is a felony that would require an indictment.
The grand jury then subpoenaed several House aides thought to have witnessed the encounter. McKenna, too, testified. The grand jury voted not to indict her. Prosecutors also could have charged McKinney with simple assault without having to seek an indictment.
Members of the black caucus privately urged McKinney to put the matter behind her. The next morning, she appeared on the House floor to apologize.
I am sorry that this misunderstanding happened at all, and I regret its escalation, and I apologize, McKinney, D-Ga., said April 6. There should not have been any physical contact in this incident.
Federal Grand Jury Digging Deep into Bush Crimes
PRESIDENT INDICTEDFEDERAL GRAND JURY DIGGING DEEP INTO BUSH CRIMES
By Greg SzymanskiA federal whistleblower close to the Chicago federal grand jury probe into perjury and obstruction charges against President Bush and others said indictments of top officials were handed down this week. A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the Northern District of Illinois, however, refused to confirm or deny the source’s account.
“We are not talking about any aspect of this case, and our office is not commenting on anything regarding the investigation at this time,” said Randall Sanborn from the office of U.S. federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, the attorney conducting the grand jury probe into whether Bush and others in his administration violated federal law in a number of sensitive areas, including leaking the name of a CIA operative to the media.
In December 2003, Fitzgerald was named special counsel to investigate the alleged disclosure of Valerie Plame’s name to several mainstream columnists, but the present grand jury probe has expanded to include widereaching allegations of criminal activity as new information has surfaced.
Although the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Chicago is staying silent, it is well known that Fitzgerald is digging deep into an assortment of serious improprieties among many Bush administration figures, based, in part, on subpoenaed testimony provided by former Secretary of State Colin Powell.
According to whistleblower Tom Heneghen, who recently reported on truthradio.com, Powell testified before the citizen grand jury that Bush had taken the United States to war based on lies, which is a capital crime involving treason under the U.S. Code. “Regarding the Powell testimony, there is no comment,” said Sanborn.
However, sources close to the federal grade jury probe also allegedly told Heneghen a host of administration figures under Bush were indicted, including Vice President Richard Cheney, Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Cheney Chief of Staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, former Attorney General John Ashcroft, imprisoned New York Times reporter Judith Miller and former Cheney advisor Mary Matalin. Heneghen, unavailable for comment, also allegedly told sources White House advisor Karl Rove was indicted for perjury in a major document shredding operation cover-up.
In recent weeks, there has been much controversy over Fitzgerald’s wide-reaching probe, which is extending far beyond the Bush administration to include what some have called “a wholesale cleansing” of a crimeladen White House and Congress.
Fitzgerald’s investigation is said to be also centered on members of the 9-11 Commission, members on both sides of the aisle in the House and Senate and also select high-powered members of the media.
Needless to say, administration officials are “fighting mad” with Fitzgerald. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts is trying to derail Fitzgerald’s probe by calling him to testify before the Senate regarding his true motives behind the investigation.
Political observers are now wondering whether administration-friendly Republican legislators, some under investigation themselves, are conspiring like President Nixon did in Watergate with Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox in an attempt to shield the Bush administration from prosecution.
In late July, reports about the recent bomb scare in the subway under the congressional offices at the Dirksen Building—coincidently near where Fitzgerald was holding his grand jury hearings—raised questions as to whether government operatives were sending the zealous prosecutor a “warning message” that he was entering dangerous waters with his investigation.
The bomb scare was reported to local police late Monday afternoon, July 18, causing the subway to be evacuated for approximately 45 minutes while bomb sniffing dogs and SWAT team members searched for what was reported to be “a suspicious package” left on one of the subway cars.
Fitzgerald began serving as the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Illinois in September 2001. He was initially appointed on an interim basis by former Attorney General Ashcroft before being nominated by Bush.
The Senate confirmed his nomination by unanimous consent in October 2001. In December 2003, he was named special counsel to investigate the Plame case. Based on the testimony of ABC sources in late July, it appears that at least two close associates of Rove testified before the grand jury. One was Susan Ralston, a longtime associate of Rove and considered to be his right hand.
The other was “Izzy” Hernandez, regarded as Rove’s left hand and now a top official in the Commerce Department.(Issue #33, August 15, 2005)
No doubt.......they ended up with democrat
xx
It's not that he had sex, he committed perjury
It's not JUST that he lied to the American people (you're right...he could've kept his mouth shut then), but it's the fact he also lied UNDER OATH which is a crime for which he was rightly impeached.
Now, when a Republican shakes his foot in a bathroom then suddenly his sex life becomes impeachable fodder to the libs, but don't pick on poor Bill Clinton! He's different!
In my view either they're all held to the same standard or they're not, and if you say that Republicans should be held to a higher standard simply because they profess *values* then you're admitting liberal Democrats have none. Can't have it both ways.
And the jury's still out on that one.
nm
Why.....it's just a perjury technicality..that's all, LMBO!
It was okay to *get* Clinton on a ******perjury technicality***** but we should not prejudge the republicans..ha, yeah, right..oh please..
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson: What Crime?
 Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson: What Crime?
The new GOP talking point to defend anyone indicted by Patrick Fitzgerald will be the perjury technicality. Apparently the criminalization of politics theme wasn't picked up by the GOP.
Video -WMP Bittorrent-WMP QT later
As Think Progress notes: Perjury is just a little technicality punishable by up to five years in prison
To Tim's credit, he did bring up the case made by republicans against Clinton.
Perjury - lying under oath - How is it that
Bush swearing on the Bible and breaking his oath to the American people is "no big deal." Generalities, don't have all night to type here. Just answering that Clinton lied about sex, but Bush took us into an absolutely unfounded war for no good reason, with no good intelligence, Cheney knew in 1994 what would follow an invasion into Iraq, an absolute disaster of foreign policy, so I cannot give Bush any respect. And I do agree that the Dems who voted to give Bush free reign should not be voted back into office, and for your information, I, for one, will not vote for Hilary for the aforementioned reason. Our country has changed immensely in the last six years with all of this policital strife, the hate that Bush has evoked here and around the world, and the shame he has commanded. My prayer is that he does absolutely nothing for the next year and couple of months. Wish the windshield cowboy would take a long drive back to Crawford.
Like I said, principle of the constitution escapes you
xx
Sorry the parallel escapes you. It doesn't
And the analogy is completely on-point. Methinks thou protestest too much.
I will wait for the jury to come in.
We haven't heard the whole story or even the tip of the iceberg. Personally, I cannot abide Bill O'Reilly. John Murtha is a 37 year military veteran and has always been a hawk. I would like to hear more of what he knows. I will withhold judgment until I do hear.
This sharing the wealth...the pub mantra that escapes no one.
"collective ownership of resources" in Alaska (straight out of the moose's mouth)....that VERY different, too?
BTW, tax cuts, tax credits, progressive tax system is VERY American and not the least bit socialist. Letting tax cuts expire and tax rates return to their previous levels is hardly a radical policy. Rich folks have ALWAYS paid higher tax rates under the progressive tax order. Until that system is replaced, there is nothing unusual at all about the proposal to adjust the rate, or the candidate who is proposing to do it.
Run and hide if you like, but don't expect to pull the wool over anybody's eyes except the choir members whose votes are already in McC's pocket. This hypocrisy will not be escaping the undecided independents whose votes can make or break the pubs bid for the White House.
What part of just stating fact escapes you?
didn't amount to a hill of beans when it came time for your representatives to roll their sleeves up and hammer out a compromise. My statements are supportive of bipartisan initiatives (as in both parties coming to a middle ground) that move us forward from here. Whether or not I agree with the plan, which side of the fence I live on or what percentage of support for the plan is reflected in the latest polls is immaterial at this point. I keep my eyes on the prize. Those folks needed to do THEIR JOBS, get past their differences, try to come up with solutions and do what is right for the economy...or at least give it their BEST shot. Go stir somebody else's pot.
Do you think Bush committed perjury with the American people?
or is that just "business as usual" to go to war without any truth whatsoever. Hmmm....perjury.... out and out lies.... how far do you want to go with the truth? Perjury versus death......I take perjury, thank you very much. By the way, when, if ever, do you think Bush will ever have to tell the truth, or is just a waste of time asking for the truth as someone else posted he will be out of office soon, so let him go....yada yada yada. But I will say that the Dems have to get their backs up and get on him big time.....so tired of lie after lie after humungous lie from this admin, and I couldn't be happier that he will be leaving, if we are still the United States of America as I knew it when I was growing up... that United States of America is long gone thanks to liars like Bush and his ilk. Perjury....hmmm.
What's pathetic and "UnAmerican" is being judge and jury
THAT is what is truly pathetic.
To sexual deviant
Thank you for your post. I totally agree with you. I have to say that I am ashamed that I used the word "normal" in one of my posts to the others becuase I was so offended that people think this way and consider themselves to be "normal". Then after I posted I looked at it and said to myself ugh!.
I have a friend who I was in school with all the way from grade 1 through 12. When we were in high school she told us she was gay. That's when she told us that she had always liked girls since she was in grammar school, but in our little town in the east coast she never dared say anything and when she finally did tell her parents, they treated her horribly. She said I don't do anything differently than you do. I get up, I work, I cook, I eat, I watch movies, it's only my sexual preference.
All I know is I get highly irritated when I hear people trying to meddle in others lifes when it does not affect them and is none of their business. I have the same issues with the right-to-lifers. Why people don't just live their own lives and stop trying to tell other people what to do with theirs.
Again I apologize for stating the word "normal" in my other post.
Sexual intercourse
takes a man and a woman. Imagination won't get you anywhere. All the "love" in the world won't make it happen.
Yes, Santorum apparently has own sexual repression as well
He apparently would like a threesome. Below is the transcript from when Santorum was on Imus's show the other day:
Santorum: Did your wife tell you that she called me the other day?
Imus: She didn't.
Santorum: She didn't?
Imus: No, what about the autism thing?
Santorum: Well she called and the first thing she said to me was you know Suzanne Wright? I said sure and then she says, well I'd like to do a threesome.
What? (Imus stopped cold in his boots)
Imus: I think she meant a conference call.
Gay people are not sexual deviants - see message
And my knickers are not in knot. LOL (I did laught at that).
This is one subject we will disagree on. There are plenty of straight people who are sexual deviants. There are a lot of gay people who are way more normal than straight people. All those child molesters, predators who hack up women, pornography predators, etc. - never once have I ever heard any of them were gay.
You may not agree with their lifestyle but it doesn't make it wrong. They are human beings with feelings and emotions. As for anatomy being created for that type of behavior - their parts fit just fine with each other. Marriage is more than just sex anyway. Their lifestyle may not be your cup of tea, but that doesn't make it wrong for them and I believe people should let them live their lives whatever way they want to. Would you want the gays coming in telling you how to live your life?
As for what the bible says (or your interpretation of it)...I know that would kind of be considered to be for the faith board but it is pertaining to the conversation here. The bible has been used throughout history to fit the viewpoints of the ones trying to make a point. As for it's validity there are too many unanswered questions for me.
You are correct that you have the right to post your opinion, the same as I do mine. I just found your comments so...not offensive but more of shocking that anyone even thought this way, let alone publicly stated it. And I guess I did find it offensive to put gay people in the same category of pornographers and people who want to marrry animals, etc.
All of us are unique people made by our creator. We all have our "flaws" and none of us are perfect. The creator knows this and for some reason he created everyone with different lifestyles. Not all gay people are the ones you see running around the streets dressed in makeup and costumes dancing in the parade, or like that girl that was on the news skipping and throwing leaflets in a church yelling it's okay to be gay.
I just say if they want to marry, let them marry. It's their life and we have no right to deprive them of the same human rights we want to enjoy. It all boils down to we are all people. Don't tell me what I can and cannot do in my home and I will not tell you what you can and cannot do in yours. Letting them marry whomever they want will not affect me in my personal life.
It's funny because I was raised the same way you are thinking, but times are changing and after being out and around in the world I became more intelligent, independent, open minded, tolerant and thoughtful of others. Just wish we all could.
It is the name given to me by my grand
children, that is the sweetest name in the world to me, it is music to my ears from them. Wish you could understand that.
Yes, it is Grand!
The whole event is just awesome. Two million people, positive, upbeat, ready to step up and accept the challenge of this dynamic new president to use whatever gifts and talents we have to work with our fellow citizens to help make this a better world. I give praise that this day has come.
And yet you STILL refuse to condemn child sexual abuse!
When this was first posted, it was posted before there were separate political boards. Still, there was no response.
You people have done nothing by drive-by sniping posts for the last couple weeks, to the point where some of them had to be removed by the moderator.
Yet you're AFRAID to post outrage over child sexual abuse?
I guess we can leave it at that. You're obviously more outraged that I posted regarding this subject than you are at the subject itself.
And THAT speaks volumes.
isn't democracy grand?
Yes, Chele, your comparison is kind of like how 50 million of us who voted for the other guys have had to put up with Bush for 8 years...that's democracy for you. Maybe you are the one who needs to wise up.
Do looks really mean this much to you, I remember a grand lady, not much to look at but OMG
The woman was Eleanor Roosevelt. To say she was nothing to look at was an understatement. Very homely looking but what she accomplished which made me think of her when others are talking about looks. Do looks matter- what about a person's soul and heart- does that not count for anything now?
My stepmom worked in Washington during WWII. She saw Eleanor Roosevelt several times. She told me about how Mrs. Roosevelt would board a pubic bus and say hello to the people sitting there, not pretentious at all. I remember her later when she was working at the United Nations as a delegate. She became one of the greatest women of the 20th Century. She was an humanitarian and civic leader (among other roles). She worked for the welfare of youth, black Americans, the poor, and women, at home and abroad. She persuaded her husband to create NYA which gave financial aid to students and young people. She worked closely with the NAACP. She visited the troops overseas during WWII. She was a leader in human right efforts. What she may have lacked in looks she certainly made up for it in her good deeds.
We had 4,000 in Grand Rapids, MI. A LOT more than we expected. nm
nm
Saw another estimate of $30 grand, and then a report that
Is that arrogant or what?
So you find the sexual abuse of children funny? Pretty sick. NM
Yes, it's hard not to watch the alcoholic buffoon, the guy sued for sexual harassment, etc.
nm
Obama is saying the same thing and he has no grand plan...
either than he has shared. He said it in the O'Reilly interview. O'Reilly asked him if he would invade Pakistan to get him and he would not say yay or nay.
So, following your logic...thumbs down on you, O?
Just part of his grand, coverup plan
lol!
Oregon Christian Coalition Head Resigns - Family Sexual Abuse
If these are *family values* then the right is RIGHT. I'm proud to say I
don't have 'em!
These people get scarier and scarier every day, and I'm keeping my children
away from them!
Christian Coalition head to withdraw from political life
10/10/2005, 5:50 p.m. PT
By RUKMINI CALLIMACHI The Associated Press
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — The longtime head of the Christian Coalition of Oregon
said Monday that he is withdrawing from public life, a day after news reports
detailed accusations of sexual abuse against him by three female relatives.
I am thankful for a family that loves and supports me, and intend to withdraw
from public life until this is resolved, Lou Beres wrote in a statement posted
on the organization's web site, at http://www.coalition.org
Beres has denied any criminal misconduct and wrote that he will pursue the
Biblical response and do all within my power to reconcile with that person.
Multnomah County District Attorney Michael Schrunk told The Oregonian
newspaper that officials are investigating the complaints against Beres.
The three women — now adults — allege they were abused by Beres as preteens.
Their families called the child abuse hot line last month, after the three
openly discussed the alleged abuse for the first time.
I was molested, one of the women, now in her 50s, told The Oregonian. I was
victimized and I've suffered all my life for it. I'm still afraid to be in the
same room with him.
Beres, 70, has blamed personal and political enemies for the complaint.
Only one of the three cases appears to fall under Oregon's statute of
limitations on sex abuse, which expires after six years. Authorities said that
case involves a young woman who was allegedly abused by Beres when she was in elementary school.
A nephew of Beres' is standing up for the three women.
My family has gone through hell, said Richard Galat, 41, of Oakland, Calif.,
who told detectives that his uncle had molested several female relatives over
the years.
Lives have been ruined. Those of us who have come forward have been
ostracized, verbally abused and the victims of character assassination...It must
stop, he said.
In response to Galat's statements, Beres said on the Christian Coalition web
site Monday, I am grieved by the false allegations of my nephew, Richard Galat.
I am attempting to determine the source of each claim.
Beres, who did not immediately return a phone message from The Associated
Press, is the former head of the Republican Party in Multnomah County, the
Democratic stronghold that includes Portland.
Jim Moore, who teaches political science at Pacific University in Forest
Grove, said Monday that Beres has not been particularly influential in Oregon
politics.
In fact, under his leadership, the Christian Coalition in Oregon has gone
downhill.
In state legislative races in 2004, for example, Moore said that, we found
that Christian Coalition candidates basically did not do as well as they did in
the past.
Oregon Republican Chairman Vance Day said Beres hasn't been much of a factor
in state GOP politics since he stepped down as Multnomah County chairman about 10 years ago.
I don't view this as having any major impact on politics here in Oregon; I
don't think the Christian Coalition has a big footprint here at all, he said.
The group did support a constitutional amendment against gay marriage that
passed handily with voters in November of 2004, but support for that cause was
rallied by another conservative-leaning group, the Defense of Marriage
Coalition.
Tim Nashif, the political director of that group, said he has few details
about the allegations, and added that his group is not associated with the
Christian Coalition.
Anytime any family goes through anything like this it's a pretty grievous
situation and our hearts go out to them, he said. The truth has a tendency to
come out.
Isn't Fitzgerald's grand injury investigation into Rove, et al.
about to come to an end soon?
I think October is going to be a very interesting month. 
This all started because you said
*founded on Christian principles*....now I see you've moderated it to *God* Yes, they were *Deists* not Christians as you said in your first post...big difference....not that you will even admit there is a difference.
First of all, GP started this particular
thread, so she is not responding to anybody's attacks in this case. Second, I think it is very mean to attack someone's religious beliefs. Third, GP indicated that George Bush said that God told him to be president. If I remember correctly, George Bush said that God told him to RUN for president. So he did. SP did not say that God doing the right thing would put McCain in the White House, nor did she imply it. She said that she has faith that God will do the right thing and that his will for the country will be done. Imagine, two Christian practicing their faith and treating God as if he actually exists.
Guess what? God told me to call my sister last weekend. Am I delusional too? Or is it only delusional to think God speaks and leads if you are national figure?
That is not how it started...
This has been going on for quite a while on the Politics forum. The rabid right-wing Christians have been forcing their beliefs on all of us for months and months and months. They have quoted scripture and told us that anyone who does not believe as they do is destined to burn in eternal fire. They have no respect for people of other religions. I was born into a Jewish family, and I have never felt animosity towards any Christian until recently. These posters have forever changed my opinion of Christianity and not for the better!
For nm-So have I. Plus 2 others started lately.
Does that give you a hint?
Don't get that started here......... sm
That is rude and totally uncalled for.
Looks like you started it
When you tried to accuse W of having a double digit and O of triple.
The fact of the matter is you don't know what GW's score is or O's for that matter. I've been on several sites pro and con for both sides. I've read that people were trying to pass a lie that GWs was 99 (looks like you want to believe the lie too). However there are many sites that say he scored around 129. They also said that some people want to believe O's is higher, but according to his SAT/LSAT is ranges in the 115-120. However, it also says that he won't release his SAT score. Imagine that....Obama not releasing information? Say it ain't so Joe.
The fact is before you start accusing someone of a low or high IQ score maybe you should research a little more. We get it, by your posts you don't like GW. Don't know many who do (including myself), but I don't lie to make one look bad.
Don't even get me started.
Double standards, contradicting, arrogance, etc. How much money does that jet cost for promotional tours? I thought stimulus passed.
You don't even know who I am, I only started coming here.
x
No, it started with a real
when they couldn't find anything, they dug up the sex scandal. Clinton was investigated for 7 years; can you name a high-level Clinton administartion official indicted? I know Clinton can't practice law; he was also impeached...what's your point?
So if WWWIII is to be started to
we're just supposed to sit down and shut up? Excuse me, but I was raised Catholic and I do not support this at ALL. Bush does NOT have a direct line to God Almighty.
No, not at all...it started on the far left rag...
the dailykos. That is where it broke. And then the rest of the far left picked it up and ran with it.
I was the first to congratulate Obama on his renouncing of the behavior. But even with him saying that, his supporters continue the salvos at Palin's family. Big time Dem pundits on TV still taking shots at her. Blogs still taking shots at her. Posters on this board still taking shots at her. Now you take people who are not committed yet, they see this happening, and you are left with only two conclusions...either Barack was very serious and meant what he said (which I believe) and his followers and pundits and the media are still going to attack regardless; or that he just made that statement to take the political high road while all the time in the background he is saying "sic her." It has to be one of the two...but either way, if his supporters and big Dem pundits continue the attack it reflects badly on his candidacy. I realize that he cannot control what people do...but one would think they would heed what he says (they claim to believe everything he says) and just lay off...but, to each his own.
Let's just get some more rumors started.
x
you are wishing him out before he has even started?
I understand being cautious, but can't you give the guy a chance? I gave Bush a chance even though I didn't vote for him. I'm not happy with how it turned out, but I wasn't wishing him out of office before he even started.
If your son joined after the war started...
I would be interested to know what HE thinks. There is no draft. No need to send your son to die. Again, you and I disagree on whether or not we should be there. I think that it is silly to think that Hussein was not a threat, or at the very least, a future serious threat. I think our biggest mistake was not taking him out and getting this all done the first time.
Judy started it.......
then I just got sucked in. It was like watching the toilet overflow. What can you do?
I know the Californias started
For awhile, I thought I was in California with all the license plates and Hawaiian shirts everywhere. Got tired of all the traffic too.
they became Medquist! I started sm
wit the Detroit office of TL in 1981 and worked for the company until February of 2006. Like you I made big bucks but after the change to the name Medquist and subsequent yearly changes like everyone else I left. At one time I workekd directly for John Donoho out of the Feasterville office and couldn't have been happier. My whole career with them was spent working at home but hiring MTs and supervising in the area that I live in. I miss the way it use to be. I was 50 years old when I left them and I truly remember a time when they valued their employees, gave bonuses, raises and great Christmas gifts. Its too bad MTs starting out now don't have that type of experience. Yes you could write your own ticket even with TL. They would gladly give out a good raise to a person who had great quality and production and was loyal to the company. Very sad to see what they hve done.
Wrong. It may have started that way...
But once again has degenerated to immature name calling and personal attacks.
5 years old? well when do you think the war started?
who hid a fact there were no WMDs? and there WERE you just dont find the mass media reporting on them. ill find that link to if you would like me to if you want to deny there were ever any weapons found, and let me remind you how long did they have before we invaded to move the weapons?
No iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, that was not why we went in now is it? was that said? We are attacking Iraq because they attacked us? NO, because they WOULD HAVE ATTACKED US as soon as they could.
as most everyone in that link agreed...
5 years old? well when do you think the war started?
who hid a fact there were no WMDs? and there WERE you just dont find the mass media reporting on them. ill find that link to if you would like me to if you want to deny there were ever any weapons found, and let me remind you how long did they have before we invaded to move the weapons?
No iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, that was not why we went in now is it? was that said? We are attacking Iraq because they attacked us? NO, because they WOULD HAVE ATTACKED US as soon as they could.
as most everyone in that link agreed...
|
