I'm sure that this is not the last word
Those who are intrigued by the UK scandal over MP's expenses and the fallout should click here The "Daily Telegraph probably got more than it bargained for when it started to bash the Labour Party for the transgressions of its members - after all they are the governing party and the DT, a rabidly right wing newspaper, would do anything to push the conservative party line. But when the conservative MPs were identified as the most flagrant offenders they, the DT, reverted to journalistic balance and assembled a page for the masses. This page is the "Scandal for Dummies" - click on it , it is entertaining. John Prescott, who is a heavy chap, actually claimed for two replacement toilet seats. One Tory MP clamed for a 3000GBP duck hoose in his garden and one stately home owner claimed for the cleaning of his "moat".
Another clip for from the "Daily Mail" it details the response from an angry Tory MP click here who claims that people are just jealous of his big house. Not jealous I would say just fed up with helping to pay to run it!
You can't make this stuff up, this story outlines the 13 people, some people hold responsible for the Bush torture implementation and policies. The defence of conservatives and "realists" against some of the wilder theories about world events is that those theories are too fictional - don't sound true. Well sometimes truth is stranger than fiction and the positions advanced by some to show that Obama is in the pocket of Wall St manipulators and that nothing has changed to make the lives of "ordinary" Americans despite rhetoric and claims from Obama will be shown to be true. Just ask yourself in two years time just what has changed?
And a piece from Noam Chomsky here
Another clip for from the "Daily Mail" it details the response from an angry Tory MP click here who claims that people are just jealous of his big house. Not jealous I would say just fed up with helping to pay to run it!
You can't make this stuff up, this story outlines the 13 people, some people hold responsible for the Bush torture implementation and policies. The defence of conservatives and "realists" against some of the wilder theories about world events is that those theories are too fictional - don't sound true. Well sometimes truth is stranger than fiction and the positions advanced by some to show that Obama is in the pocket of Wall St manipulators and that nothing has changed to make the lives of "ordinary" Americans despite rhetoric and claims from Obama will be shown to be true. Just ask yourself in two years time just what has changed?
And a piece from Noam Chomsky here
9 comments:
"The Torture 13" The pre-judgement is already in. No need for a trial. They're already convicted as accused.
Cheney addressed "enhanced interrogation" techniques in a well-presented speech a couple evenings ago. The issue involves three terrorist victims a few years back. Oh I know I know, the mere mention of the name "Cheney" already carries the weight of pre-judgement and there is no need to read his take on the matter.
But for those who have open minds (& I don't find everything Cheney says agreeable, but it is well worth the read for information purposes) Cheney makes one point I'd like to see exposed.
I want to know what information was extracted from the alleged eye-gouged, fingernail-ripped, anal-electroded, broken-boned torture victims.
My delinquency; I forgot to provide the url for Cheney's address:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/21/raw-data-text-dick-cheneys-national-security-speech-aei/
You are not the only one following the expense scandal in England. Jon Stewart did a hilarious bit on the moat story on the Daily Show the other night.
It's rare for any event outside Amerika to get coverage on his show, so this must be big.
DJO
Wally's admission that he finds not all Cheney has SAID agreeable is beside the point. The question surely is whether he finds all Cheney has DONE agreeable.
Concerning how we can get the truth about rendition and torture and all else that Cheney has done: waterboard the sucker a few hundred times and then deport him to Canada (preferably through Vancouver) where the Mounties can taser him until he spills the beans.
It's not an admission. No one waterboarded or tasered the information from me. If it sets your trembling heart at ease, I didn't agree with everything Cheney has DONE. That's not an admission William -- it's a statement.
For example, I did not agree with the invasion of Iraq. That contrasts with the stupid accusation by some circles that I'm all for invading countries and forcing them to conform to my values.
In Cheney's universe, if the information that you provide to us in this blog hasn't been obtained through waterboarding or tasering, how reliable can it be, Wally, eh?!
Goebbels, too, delivered a plethora of "well presented" speeches. He, too, had apologists suggesting that people with "open minds" would give his speeches a listen. No, Wally, there isn't any reason to read what either of them had to say.
That others have made "stupid accusations" about you does not excuse your having said some very stupid things yourself.
Well, William, you are no better than Cheney, after all you want to "waterboard the sucker a few hundred times" and taser him to boot. Cheney justifies it in the name of saving a great number of American lives, whereas you want to commit the same torture to satisfy your sick sense of self-righteous revenge.
"there isn't any reason to read what either of them [Cheney, Goebbels] had to say" just proves the adage that those with closed minds are as nimbleness as a noun, whereas those with open minds are verbs. It's the difference between stagnant water (noun) and fresh water (verb).
Methinks you have won the Get-A-Grip-On-Yourself Award for May.
Cheney is working hard to convince Americans that the only way to get the truth out of a religious fundamentalist is by torture. This week he described Obama's outlawing of waterboarding and other tortures as "unwise in the extreme" and as "recklessness cloaked in rightgeousness."
Now, when a religious fundamentalist like Cheney says "extreme" he means it. So, I suggest that we apply his own extreme methods towards the end of getting the truth out of him. It's not revenge, Wally, but merely giving the devil his due.
In a week when even Condi Rice is weaselling away from her own approval of torture (click here) your defense of Cheney is pathetic.
Finally, Wally, don't let any of this bother you. It's all in fun, though perhaps you're like me: you have difficulty seeing humour when the joke is on you.
William, you continue to make strawmen and drop red herrings. I did not in any way present a "defense of Cheney".
I wrote this; "Cheney makes one point I'd like to see exposed. I want to know what information was extracted ..."
That does not constitute a "defense." You obviously have a reading and comprehension deficiency. Are you going for the Double Blubble Award?
I know it's in fun. I was over in Port Hope on my chrome bike this afternoon chowing down 2 free Harvey burgers. Looking for you. I'm packin' some simile heaters with your name on them. Might show up at Cobourg Clown Council tomorrow eve.
Post a Comment