What would it take for Russia to be #1?
Posted 10 June 2004 - 10:37 AM
I guess the nationalist parties are in most if not all the European countries and their enemies are on the right and left, both devoted to the Lion. If they get to be a threat the right will put
up the money and the left the bodies in the street and try and
muscle them off the stage and the media will call them fascists
and Jew haters etc to put the voter off.
They need their own water well- money supply created (not printed!!!!) dont use that word Woj, by their central bank, at no cost to themselves, thats how New Zealand got itself out of the Great Depression.
Political parties (prostitutes) and the media will rubbish them and call it printing money and make it sound like confette. The fact is
the banks "print it" and thus get a lien of state assets which is why govts were forced to sell them.
If a national govt wants to restore sovereingty they should
consistently reduce the volumn of money that the banks produce
and increase the volumn produced debt free through their own bank by the same amount. The usual method the banks fight it if they cant scare the public from putting in such a govt, is to print huge volumns to cause an inflationary problem to scare the nation and blame the govt for printing money.
The volumn of money in a debt free system will, be much lower than in a debt money system and expand slower. Inflation wouldnt be a problem, the cost of living cheaper, the environment not abused, not the same poverty and need for social hand-outs.
Its always the rural, smaller communities, small business people who are the first to support independance and quality of life, rather than get richer. Where-as those who chase money arent interested in knowing anything about the money system that
robs them. Ironic.
Kvas: The American people didnt commit the crimes against humanity so why should they bother to do anything about it?
Guilty by ommiting ( to do something about it), rather than commiting it.
The UN wont call a spade a spade so why should he and the UN is the world.
Jews were Roman citizens before AD 33. The Apostle Paul was one.
We will all be citizens of Rome, come the chip.
I think you are right DonQ, most people wouldnt see the connection, forget about geneva convent, its zionist convention,
they are training the US in how to deal to dispicable creatures.
Its the US palestine problem.
Good on Chirac for opposing NATO getting involved.
Posted 10 June 2004 - 11:36 AM
*Bush, Thwarted by France, Gains No Ground on Iraq Debt, Troops
Bush failed to win agreement from Group of Eight nations to reduce Iraq's $120 billion of debt and to send more G- 8 troops to stabilize the country.
Jacques Chirac sought to limit relief to 50 percent because of Iraq's revenue from oil reserves, the world's second-largest..
Divisions between the U.S. and France, which opposed the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, also surfaced when Chirac rejected Bush's suggestion that NATO expand its role in Iraq. France and Germany have refused to send troops to Iraq to support the 150,000 that Britain, the U.S. and Italy have there.
``You can't write one big check in the enthusiasm of the moment without considering all the interconnected issues -- oil prices, your country's credit rating, what troops on the ground actually do, Bush wanted an agreement to write off the ``vast majority'' of Iraq's debt, a U.S. official said yesterday. France sought a G- 8 endorsement for ``substantial'' relief, defined by the Paris Club as 50 percent. Iraq owes France about $5 billion.
Differences Over Troops
Bush, 57, wants military assistance in Iraq to relieve commitments on the U.S., which has 140,000 troops there. Britain has 8,900 troops and Italy about 3,000 in Iraq.
Chirac, 71, rebuffed Bush's call for NATO to help more with security in Iraq, saying it's not the alliance's job to ``intervene.'' Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin, 65, said he wouldn't send troops to Iraq because he has none to spare after deployments in Afghanistan and Haiti. Canada, which is already helping to train Iraqi police officers, may do more to help establish democratic institutions such as courts.
``We are certainly prepared to participate,'' Martin said at a press conference. ``I do not believe we will be participating with further troop movements, but we are certainly going to participate with expertise.''
Canada is willing to forgive the C$750 million it is owed by Iraq.
France doesn't want to write down more than half of Iraq's debt because the nation's oil reserves make it better able to pay than some other nations seeking debt relief. ``Iraq is a country which has resources,''
Finance ministers from the Group of Seven nations -- the G-8 excluding Russia -- are pushing oil-exporting nations to raise production to bring down prices.
Debt to Japan
The IMF estimates creditor nations must probably wipe out as much as 80 percent of Iraq's debt to make it ``sustainable'' as the country begins to reconstruct...
``We will take this advice into account,''
Intercepts from Roger Runningen at Sea Island at email@example.com
Posted 10 June 2004 - 11:41 AM
Guilty by omitting ( to do something about it), rather than committing it.
The UN wont call a spade a spade so why should he and the UN is the world.*
Why UN doesn
Posted 10 June 2004 - 11:57 AM
<France doesn't want to write down more than half of Iraq's debt because the nation's oil reserves make it better able to pay than some other nations seeking debt relief. ``Iraq is a country which has resources,'' >
And who's going to forgive this other debt?:confused:
"Sub-Saharan Africa, for example, spends more on servicing its $300 billion debt than it does on health and education for its children."
Well, to be honest, I think globalization is for the lions...
"Wealth, meanwhile, is not being globalised; quite the opposite, it's being concentrated. The world's three richest men, Bill Gates (who is attending the World Economic Forum today), Warren Buffet and Paul Allen, own assets equivalent to that owned by the 600million people in the world's 48 least-developed countries."
The Choice is Clear:
Globalization for Capital, or for People
By Jorge Jorquera
September 11, 2000
The world's giant transnational corporations, and the governments and multilateral institutions that cling to them, are globalising the wrong things, things that are of benefit to them and no one else. And they're refusing to globalise the right things, which would benefit all of us.
Finance sector liberalisation has opened borders to the free flow of capital, so that an estimated $1.5 trillion churns through world currency markets each day. But 90 per cent of this is speculative, of benefit only to the giant hedge funds and banks and, as the peoples of Asia found during the financial crisis of 1997, prone to fly out of a country with little warning but much damage.
World Trade Organisation agreements have promoted free trade. But, while southern economies have had to open up to northern companies' investment, goods and services, Europe and the US are allowed to maintain enormous barriers to the south's main exports, including textiles and agriculture. The last round of free-trade talks will cost the least-developed countries $600million by 2004, according to the United Nations Development Program.
Neo-liberal, market-first economic policies have spread to governments in every corner of the world. But the means by which these policies have been forced on the south - through the International Monetary Fund structural adjustment program - have generated economic stagnation, poverty and inequality. Sub-Saharan Africa, for example, spends more on servicing its $300 billion debt than it does on health and education for its children.
Culture, ideas, theories and communication have also become interlinked and interdependent. But the culture is a facile, junk-food Hollywood monoculture pumped out by the giant news and entertainment companies, such as Disney, Time Warner and News Corporation. And the ideas and theories are all too frequently nothing more than advertisements and PR campaigns, whether in politics, economics or social theory.
Wealth, meanwhile, is not being globalised; quite the opposite, it's being concentrated. The world's three richest men, Bill Gates (who is attending the World Economic Forum today), Warren Buffet and Paul Allen, own assets equivalent to that owned by the 600million people in the world's 48 least-developed countries.
Technology, similarly, is not being spread; it's tightly controlled. Ninety per cent of the world's patents are held in the north, primarily by high-tech companies such as Microsoft, Monsanto and Merck. The WTO's agreement on trade-related intellectual property rights will ensure it stays that way - it was, after all, written by the Intellectual Property Committee, a coalition of 13 US technology companies.
Even the Internet, globalisation's icon, is only increasing inequalities between rich and poor. Half the world's population have never made or received a phone call, let alone surfed the Net; lacking the money for even basic needs, they're not exactly in the market for PCs or Internet service providers.
And while capital can roam the globe, most of the world's people cannot. The borders remain closed to them.
Far from being a liberating process for the world, globalisation has only enhanced the power of the transnational corporation and the wealth of its shareholders. According to the UNDP, 500 corporations now control 70 per cent of the world's trade and 80 per cent of its foreign investment.
Fortunately, there is not just one process of globalisation. There are two. When thousands protest outside the WEF today, they will noisily and vigorously reject one, and just as determinedly uphold another.
The globalisation we reject, which is dominant but failing, is the globalisation of capital, of corporate power. The second globalisation, the rising one, the one S11 is part of, is driven by awakening people's movements all over the world which are rejecting corporate domination and advancing new models of economic and social development of their own.
This is the globalisation that raised its voice in Seattle in November against the WTO; in Washington in April against the World Bank and the IMF; in Chiangmai, Thailand, in May against the Asian Development Bank; and now in Melbourne today against the WEF.
This is the globalisation of solidarity, of people's power. Choose which globalisation you wish to support.
Posted 10 June 2004 - 12:57 PM
muscle them off the stage and the media will call them fascists
and Jew haters etc to put the voter off.*
Who is right who is left?
Democrat Clinton against total objections of Unions ratified Nafta , what let to lowered income of the middle class, practically eliminated *welfair* as a social net, tried to increase income of medical insurances setting payments on all insurers, he called it an overhaul the U.S. health care system.
Clinton set deficit reduction plan by slow government spending on social programs and set cost of it on local and state governments.
Could any right president be more anti-social than leftist Clinton? No.
And Media never mention the bodies of workers of Yugoslavia TV station which Clinton ordered to bomb, so it wouldn
Posted 10 June 2004 - 07:21 PM
and all human, natural and technological resources into one
one regime and the corporate entity is its curent bully boy where-as once it was govt, but govts are to a small degree subject to
citizens (eg Spain dumping their govt and pulling out of Iraq)
because they are held to be accountable becuase they are elected. The corporate entity is not elected or accountable, like the IMF.
But it cannot sustain itself- "increasing inequalities between the
poor and rich...........not in the market for PCs.." Like shooting consumers, eventually the business must become topheavy with
capital and debt but no sales/income so it collapses and goes into liquidation. But the people at the top know this, they are not walking in their sleep (everyone elses nightmare).
War and economic collapse are the quickest way to centralise power and ownership.
The IMF wants the oil for itself thus if it isnt used to pay debt
it can have the more. Govts should just send donations to the IMF. And all because of the lie that Hussein had WMD and was a thteat to the US. And the leaders would rather talk about what little they might do about giving away donations to the IMF as though it was all a good cause the US went there, and certainly not for the oil.
They are all weasels, Chirac isnt quite as bad as the others, he should refuse to wipe any debt and call for reparations and the US to pay the debts of Iraq. That would make him a man among
That is agood article in the Age DonQ but I am sure what he means by s11, if it is Sept 11 attack on the Twin Towers as simbols of the debt machine, I wouldnt agree, although when it first came on the news I had to toss up between Arab terrorists and those Europeans who protest at IMF, WTO type meetings
and I went with the Europeans not Arabs as I thought it was more likely Euros- schemers, not passionate Arabs.
The writer used the term "structural adjustment programmes"
which is a bit like calling a gulag a health camp. Its debt slavery.
Even culture is being conformed to the debt culture.
Its way over time for people to try and become independant
using their own central bank, but at least they are waking up.
The last time it swept the world was in the depression when it had everyones attention and it was Major Douglas with his
social credit democracy and sovereignty, exposing the debt money system. He inspired ther NZ prime minister and we got out of the depression through it. Australia formed the Commonwealth bank earlier for the same reason and although a man was elected prime minister there same time as NZ and
Canada as well, all campaigned on creationg their own debt free money and won their lections only in NZ were they able to do it.
Then came the war. Douglas (Scotsman) travelled to Canada,
Australia and NZ and gave talks. In Auckland he filled the town hall and there were hundreds outside in the street listening through speakers. This was the early thirties.
Some believe that this was one of the reasons for the war. Hitler had done the same. The system was under threat of the people (slaves) waking up. After the war the Keynesian system of govt pumping money into the economy put people back to work and they forgot about it through the war.
It looks like crunch time is looming while the system isnt
sustainable. A world war over the middle east and a collapse
would be in order for the NWO to arrise out of the ashes. We will get the chip in the place of money. The corporates will bring it in for the Lion. They are puting them in their products, now its left to put them in people.
Posted 11 June 2004 - 02:12 PM
....Killing people for their own good
. That's our basic problem in Iraq.
You can try explaining that you are killing them in order to bring freedom and democracy to their nation -- However, this argument is less than convincing if an American bomb or bullet has just killed your child. Or if you were among the 70 percent to 90 percent of the prisoners at Abu Ghraib who were there by accident.
Bush sidesteps questions over prisoners' torture
By James Harding in Savannah, Georgia
President George W. Bush said on Thursday he had instructed officials to adhere to US and international laws when interrogating detainees, but stopped short of denouncing torture.
, Mr Bush resorted repeatedly to a legalistic formulation: "The authorisation I issued was that anything we did would conform to US laws and would be consistent with international treaty obligations."
Bush administration lawyers in 2002 and 2003 prepared memos for the CIA and Pentagon examining how US officials can avoid prosecution for torture.
Mr Bush said on Thursday he could not remember if he had seen those documents, which seek to define torture in the narrowest terms and argue that US officials are not prohibited from torturing suspects if authorised by the president. The commander-in-chief's authority overrides the laws of the US Congress prohibiting torture.
Mr Bush was given several opportunities on Thursday to state his opposition to torture, but instead said that his administration was instructed to stay within the letter of the law: "We're a nation of law. We adhere to laws. We have laws on the books. And those were the instructions from me to the government," Mr Bush said
The remembrances of Mr Reagan's presidency have reinforced the Bush team's sense of purpose
Posted 11 June 2004 - 05:02 PM
And Kofi Annan is presiding over the whole farse while his own people are dying. Debt cancellation for oil-rich Iraq, but interest payments for poverty-stricken Africa. These puppets got a sad existence. They sure get some juicy leftovers though...
The All-African Conference of Churches has called this debt "a new form of slavery, as vicious as the slave trade".
Sub-Saharan Africa's massive external debt is the single biggest obstacle to the continent's development. The $300 billion which African countries owe to foreign creditors represents a crippling burden which fundamentally hampers progress in every sector. The All-African Conference of Churches has called this debt "a new form of slavery, as vicious as the slave trade". As such, it is both a cause and a symptom of the structural inequality in the international economic system.
At a basic level, the legitimacy of Africa's debts is highly questionable. Many of the loans which are being re-paid were made during the Cold War to repressive regimes and corrupt leaders, who used the money to strengthen their rule or to line their own pockets. Many more loans were made without attention to the viability of planned projects or to the capacity of the recipient country to make repayments. Very little of the money filtered its way down to make any real difference in the lives of the African people. Demanding that these people and their new governments now pay for the corruption and mismanagement practiced by previous regimes is simply unjust. These debts are illegitimate, and should be canceled outright.
Africa's debt burden and the zealous pursuit of repayments by international creditors have had severe repercussions in terms of the continent's human development. Forced cutbacks in basic social services have weakened health and education systems and undermined efforts to cope with the AIDS pandemic. Africa's children are suffering from malnutrition and are being denied the right to education by creditors who are determined to bleed Africa's economies dry. Meanwhile, the world's rich countries continue to ignore the huge debt that they owe to Africa, and to the global South more broadly, for centuries of plundering its human and natural resources. Who really owes whom?
There is a growing call from organizations in both the North and South for the complete cancellation of Africa's illegitimate debt, without conditionality imposed by creditors. Past and present initiatives at international debt relief are increasingly acknowledged to be inadequate and flawed. The Enhanced HIPC Initiative, and the Cologne Agreement by the leaders of the G-7 countries, are modest advances, but such measures are too little, too late, and too encumbered with inappropriate conditionalities.
It is past time for Africa's illegitimate debts to be written off. The cancellation of these debts is prerequisite to the continent's development to its full potential in the 21st century.
It somehow reminds me of this story...
All material in these pages are suitable for mature children, but will be found to be objectionable by immature adults (see "Hypocrisy Today" below)
HOW POLITICS WORKS
(This little, tiny story is part of a series, in which I explain to my little daughter how things work.)
Politics works like this: Big People of Big Country buy Big People of Little Country, who, by the way, will be elected in "democratic elections" thanks to big bucks; Big People of Big Country give big loans to Little Country (of course, to buy "made in Big Country"); Big People of Little Country pocket a big chunk and invest it in the Big Country, without ever investing in real development (education, health, the environment, etc); Little People of Little Country work for ever to pay back what they never got; Big People of Little Country thank Big People of Big Country in the name of Little Country, and promise to repay the big debt; and Little People of Little Country get big promises, just like Little People of Big Country. And they lived happily ever after...
Posted 12 June 2004 - 06:00 AM
I couldnt work out what promoted the comment Woj, "'slavery didnt dismantle the US, ity developed on slavery"
The first part is total mystery and the second a gross exageration.
The cotton production industry was based on slavery but one could just as easily say the country was based on prostitution
because brothels and prostetutes were everywhere, certainly more widely distributed than slaves. We have covered the
corrupt education/media informations systems to hide the Lion
in the past so lets not forget to remember to stop using that mindset and the perverted information to drown ourselves in
There was such a thing as white slavery as well. We dont hearabout that just as we only hear about jewish suffering,
same lion same protocol mindset. No point in wanting the change the jungle if we dont change jungle thinking.
I have read that in the South the Rothschilds who dominated the banking would not grant loans for farming unless they were going to grow cotton, so I guess they also had the mortgages on the slave ships and runners and the cotton mills in England,
why else would they dictate on cotton. Jews and Arabs were into African slavery big time before Europeans is my understanding
anyway. And dont tell me that the African leaders have only become corrupt and selling their own down the river lately. IT would have been good trade to capture the neigbhours to settle old score s and sell them to foreigners, whats new. No we must only think in terms of racism and be anti-European and good UN citizens, Protocals stuff.
I go back to DonQ's logical lion-mindset busting comment-
"and who is going to forgive others debts?"
We are all in the same boat. The american taxpayer is going to have to repay the billions daily spent in Iraq for other interests,
their standard of living will continue to go down, I recall about 40 million live on and below the poverty line some time back. This is the so called top socio-economic society and there are heaps lower and more greatly affected by debt. So to split the world
either by racism or between the poorer ones and make all the others throughout the various nations, which runs into multi-millions is just as unforgiveable in my view as the sacrifice of Jugoslavians and Iraqis for the same lion.
We have a common foe and a common system (debt money) against us all and like Lepper we had better get our priorities right instead of letting divide a rule make Lionsville sustainable.
OK so forgive the African debts. The whole lot. Which means the rotters at the top will start all over again with a second Swiss bank account and in ten years the African will be no better off.
I have nothing against Africans that I would support such an act to sustain their true problems.
Posted 12 June 2004 - 06:54 AM
I have nothing against Africans that I would support such an act to sustain their true problems. >
No, I know, their TRUE PROBLEM IS THE WATER WELL. But I'm saying it can only be a hypocrite lion to ask for debt cancellation for Iraq and not for Africa. And Iraq will never "develop" either, the way Saudi Arabia hasn't. Oil can only concentrate wealth in a few hands. At best it'll be "give 'em the fish," or to put in jungle language, "give 'em the scraps"...:confused:
This fragment sums it up...
- Oil breeds war. As communities around oil facilities from Colombia to Nigeria and around the world
can testify, oil is a magnet for violence. According to a recent study by the World Bank, countries
that rely heavily on oil as their primary export are 40 times more likely to be engaged in some form
of civil war, than are those with more balanced economies. Governments that are dependent on oil
are likely to spend much of their wealth on arms to defend themselves and the source of their power.
Rebel groups are likely to target oil facilities because of the large revenues they generate, and
because of the vulnerability of remote pipelines and oil fields.7
- Oil breeds repression and authoritarian regimes. Oil has anti-democratic effects in poor countries.
Scholars have long blamed the lack of democracy in the Mid-East on the corrupting effect of oil
Posted 12 June 2004 - 01:46 PM
In very near future lack of oil will be substitute by problem with water or else. >
Woj, we got here, not a politically motivated lion, but an economically motivated lion. In other words, we are witnessing a hungry lion...
< Direction of Money to the pocket of American corporations is the command in both cases. >
True...which only confirms what I said before. He's even willing to support Ghaddafi so long as it is a good investment. And, in fact, he supported the devil himself, no other than Hussein...:confused:
Posted 12 June 2004 - 02:01 PM
Walesa says "even a cowboy is better than a communist"... No wonder we still live in the Wild, Wild West...
REAGAN TRIBUTE: Lech Walesa remembers Reagan
When talking about Ronald Reagan, I have to be personal. We in Poland took him so personally. Why? Because we owe him our liberty. This can't be said often enough by people who lived under oppression for half a century, until communism fell in 1989.
Poles fought for their freedom for so many years that they hold in special esteem those who backed them in their struggle. Support was the test of friendship. President Reagan was such a friend. His policy of aiding democratic movements in Central and Eastern Europe in the dark days of the Cold War meant a lot to us.
We knew he believed in a few simple principles such as human rights, democracy and civil society. He was someone who was convinced that the citizen is not for the state, but vice-versa, and that freedom is an innate right.
I have often been asked in the United States to sign the poster that many Americans consider very significant. Prepared for the first almost-free parliamentary elections in Poland in 1989, the poster shows Gary Cooper as the lonely sheriff in the American Western, "High Noon." Under the headline "At High Noon" runs the red Solidarity banner and the date--June 4, 1989--of the poll. It was a simple but effective gimmick that, at the time, was misunderstood by the Communists. They, in fact, tried to ridicule the freedom movement in Poland as an invention of the "Wild" West, especially the U.S.
But the poster had the opposite impact: Cowboys in Western clothes had become a powerful symbol for Poles. Cowboys fight for justice, fight against evil, and fight for freedom, both physical and spiritual. Solidarity trounced the Communists in that election, paving the way for a democratic government in Poland.
It is always so touching when people bring this poster up to me to autograph it. They have cherished it for so many years and it has become the emblem of the battle that we all fought together.
Meanwhile in a place called Nicaragua. Of course, I'm sure Walesa never heard of it...
Nearly a Third of Population Malnourished
By Jos? Eduardo Mora*
SAN JOSE, Aug 25 (IPS) - Food insecurity is not letting up in Nicaragua, where around a third of the population cannot meet the basic nutritional requirement of at least 2,200 calories a day, according to the World Food Programme.
A new study by this United Nations agency states that out of a population of 5.4 million, more than 1.6 million people are in this situation, with 680,201 enduring "very high food insecurity", and 947,463 facing "high" insecurity.
Food insecurity exists when people have limited or uncertain access to nutritionally adequate and safe food supplies.
Unemployment, overcrowding, natural disasters and difficulties in food access are the leading reasons why Nicaraguans are going hungry.
Of those affected, 68 percent live in rural areas, where the most vulnerable are children, due to high levels of chronic malnourishment, affecting 38.9 percent of those under age five in the northern department of Matagalpa, according to WFP.
Chronic malnutrition is most evident when a child's growth is stunted, in other words, the child is smaller than normal for his or her age group.
Nationwide, 20 percent of children under five suffer chronic malnutrition and two percent suffer acute malnutrition, Gary Stahl, director of UNICEF (United Nations Children's Fund) in Nicaragua, told IPS.
"Although there has been an improvement in relation to the figures from 1998, malnutrition remains very high, and in this sense Nicaragua is seventh among the 22 countries hardest hit by hunger worldwide," said Stahl.
Posted 12 June 2004 - 09:58 PM
I didnt find any oil mentioned in Nicaragua that went with the poverty.
I havent found any reports on poverty in Iraq under Hussein.
Maybe that is what Bush and Co are really doing: taking that bad oil of everyone for their own good. They must be good guys afterall.
Blacks and chinese built america.
There is a lot more to american than narrow strips of railway lines.
Check again who financed them. Perhaps the chinese went there
for the same reason mexicans go to the US- no case to answer
in Mexico or china for the reasons their own didnt/dont want to live there; because they arent europeans? Racism, exploitation,
embezzlement of state loans, murder of opposition, is only able to be commited by europeans?
It s ahuge country. Did they build New York, Hoover Dam, Golden Gate bridge, the space shuttle, come on Woj stop trying to segregate the exploited into seperate groups to protect the lion from reforms by mass asertiveness. Thats the same as cancelling debt for only certain types/colours etc.
Those who work the seatshop factories on the border with Mexico, do they now own America by the same right? Their rights are to be found in Mexico if they can get rid of the trash that runs the country and denies them their rights. Destroy the whole of America will not bring the mexicans their rights or chinese at home.
Same in Poland, Lepper will do more for the locals than the Walsea-Reagan-Pope could.
The symptoms of the lion are everywhere and his servants are everywhere, in all races and cultures. As long as the groups of little animals blame each other the jungle becomes more than just a jungle.
On tv the other night, a mechanic had his car running on home brewed alcohol which ran more efficient than petrol. Others have run their deisel cars on cooking fat used in takewaway food outlets with a little acohol mixed in it and again got bigger mileage out of it. No loss of power in either case as well.
Apparantly the dairy comp. is researching the use of dairy products - run cars on unseperated cream-animal fat?
See what can happen when people stop thinking through lionsville minds. The world (humanity) in the main is in the material dimension just like people in a religious dimension trapped by a religious cult. No difference between trusting the witch doctors and the bankers/corporate kings.
Posted 13 June 2004 - 04:50 AM
Norwegian rightwing party leader Jan Simonsen, has nominated Bush ( I think this included blair) for a nobel peace prize, for toppling Hussein and reducing the threat of WMD!
Telegraph.co.uk had an article in 8th June about Bush's lastest lie
On the eve of the Iraqi war political appointees over-ruled military lawyers to assert that the president was not bound by US and International Law on torchure. Probably based on his office as commandre-in-chief at war.
A memo from Rumsfeld has been leaked which says national security ends justifies the means.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users