Search results

The Center for Strategic and International Studies Report The most poignant and descriptive part of the report comes in the preamble to the conclusions: “Eleven days in Iraq left indelible images in our minds. Fathers escorting young girls to school; young men waiting in long lines...

Romeo - You are right on. Only caveat is if the fed is proping up the markets then it might confuse the charts.

MarcD - As far as I know, and I'm not a CPA or tax lawyer, you are correct about not going to prison for not paying taxes. As you said not filing is another issue and can perhaps be reason for incarceration. When I have resided in other countries we were advised by attorneys to always file each...

All the howling and slinging insults just makes it seem the points are getting close. If you are standing by the target don't complain when you get hit by an arrow.

Tater - You want to get rid of Bush. SH wants to get rid of Bush. Looks like allies to me. Maybe just political bedfellows?

Optional - From what I know of you I wouldn't believe that you support SH. But there are some ominous clouds on the horizon that we would be well advised to watch. SH might take encouragement from wherever he can but I wouldn't want to be in the line that gives him aid and comfort.

The Bush administration is under fire and Saddam and his sons Uday and Qusay have picked up the message. __________________________________________ Interesting take from a foreign news source. Seem SH & sons, having being emboldened by the libs, have stepped up their offensive to retake...

MarcD - In the former post I was quoting someone on the tax statement and responding to some of the points in their post.

MarcD - I know a man who is going to prison sometime very shortly for refusing to pay federal income taxes. I agree that this is rare but in one case I know of that is what is happening. This man believed he didn't have to file or pay.

I suspect this plays better in Manhattan and LA than in flyover country. ________________________________ You don't have to suspect it doesn't play well in flyover country. Bush is our boy through and through.

Rearden To his credit though, I belive he advocated voluntary welfare, only recommending that the producers/owners of goods freely hand over the fruits of their labor to the incapable/moochers/lazy non-producers. Today's liberals take this altruism to whole different level, when they...

You keep harping on the "lies" aspect of the earlier post. The "lies" were followed by a "?", does that not show on your screen. It also ends with a question about "faulty intelligence" for the ten warnings. I personally have never stated that they are lies or believe that they raise to that...

Desperation Phil Brennan Wednesday, July 16, 2003 DESPERATION 1: The loss of hope and surrender to despair 2: a state of hopelessness, leading to rashness. (Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary) The second definition best describes the condition of the National Socialist Democrat Party...

Wednesday, July 16, 2003 12:28 p.m. EDT Clinton-Era Reports Cited Saddam-bin Laden Ties In the nearly two years since President Bush named Iraq as part of the "Axis of Evil," the American press has been working overtime denying that there was ever any link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11...

Unlike the claims of the administration they were not delivered as statements of fact in evidence to indict a regime and justify a war. They were not offered by elected officials reporting official policy (as mandated by law in the case of the SOTU address), before the US Congress and the...

THERE THEY GO AGAIN! The press corps has made up its mind on Iraq. Result? Basic facts will be mangled: TUESDAY, JULY 15, 2003 THERE THEY GO AGAIN: It isn’t hard to state the Bush Admin’s case about that uranium-from-Africa statement. According to the Admin, Bush’s “sixteen...

WHERE’S THE OUTRAGE? Matthews went on the air and played dumb. HOWLER readers? They were mightily satisfied: WEDNESDAY, JULY 16, 2003 THERE YOU WENT AGAIN: Amazing! HOWLER readers staged a Tuesday tantrum, forced to read offensive material that could be interpreted as vaguely...

Is it proper to characterize these as "lies"? Or were they just, *ahem* "intelligence" failures on the part of those who issued these pre-war warnings? _______________________ This is part of the quote from the website and I believe that it asks a question on how to characterize these...

It is my point that certain,(including the president, vice-president, sec. defense, sec. state, etc...) of the administration's statements have been made in direct conflict with officially recognized evidence to the contrary, and under the oath of office, and before the American people and our...

Not even close. Just ask the House Managers _______________________________________ Please clarify. We are on completely different tracks.