right, bitch

and pay reparations

and then hang at Nuremberg

As the corporate media is so tightly controlled, perhaps we could look for any good doctors out there. Much of the world consider Bush is insane (at best), with Blair is licking round his heels (to put it politely), surely there must be a few good medicos out their who can sign a piece of paper and see that their criminal insanity receives appropriate attention?

I do not care on whit about the possibility of minute differences between the two sectarian flavours of the single American party. For me it is all unintelligible gibberish.

But to say the whole world believed Hussein had WMD’s and that’s somehow a case for the US (or any other Agressor) to invade and occupy Iraq you will have to disregard somewhere about 80% of the globe and that is counting in all the sick fucks who support any US war for some dollars, a position at some US controlled international institution or even for a photo with the present White House monkey.

Politicians are sacks of shite everywhere. However the polls showed a distinct failure of the relentless and unimaginable costly international propaganda campaign after a year and somewhat ever increasing media-hysteria huge majorities were still against the US attacking Iraq.

In fact unprecedented pre-war demonstrations against the war were organized throughout the whole world and inside the US they were also quite large, contrasting there with the tiny and ridiculously pathetic pro-war demonstrations in a heart-warming manner.

So get all your Gopdems en Demgops and put them against the wall before the world’s lousiest firing squad and if they’re finished take our criminals too.

He is saying that FDR and LBJ altered the US constitution in a manner which was detrimental to America.

FDR was from 1933 to 1945 (He actually won another term, but died before taking it. Just goes to show how rabidly unpopular a leader he was.)

Anyway, lets look at the US Constitutional amendments, as amendments would be the vehicle of such damaging changes, during this period.

We will leave out XX, it is boring and all about the presidential succession.

Lets instead go to the only other example…

Amendment XXI
Section 1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

Section 2. The transportation or importation into any state, territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

Section 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several states, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the states by the Congress.

Okay, judging from Libslayer’s rants, we hereby note that he is in favour of taking away your right to drink. Yep, that is the sum total of the constitutional amendments proposed by FDR, which do not concern presidential succession.

And before you go into it, the US constitution says this about taxation prior to 1964:

Amendment XVI
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

I would say taking a constitutionalist stand against taxes when it comes to FDR is just about shot to hell right now.

Anyway, next ups LBJ 1963–1969

Amendment XXIV
Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Wait, what is this, a piece of legislation which states that not paying your taxes is NOT grounds for taking your vote away? Oh gee whiz, hold on here baby we are DEFINITELY in evil tax-loving territory here aren’t we?/ sarcasm.

And Amendment XXV, which again deals with presidential succession, changes part 3 of XX and doesn’t actually seem anything more then innocous to me.

So, lets see, what is LBJ’s known saving grace? He enforced:

Amendment XV
Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Which dates back to 1870.

That’s common weal or wellbeing. And not every man for himself.

Comment by david — April 29, 2007 @ 8:42 pm

Not only in the common law; also in statute. And that started in, as example, Mass-Bay colony, long before the Constitution was even a dream.

And those who framed the Constitution were Liberals, not “Libertarians,” because the latter did not exist, except perhaps behind the label TORY.

According to Chritianity, there are seven deadly sins. One of those is greed. Thus Reagan’s “Greed is good” is the word of the anti-Christ. Are the words of self-destruction.

UNDER OATH or UNDER ARREST.

Please thinkprogress.org, you are (as always) speaking in half-truths.

the world, yes the whole world did believe that Hussein had WMDs.

but here just for your readers pleasure. I know thinkprogress.org would never dream, ever of putting this up on their site.

read and educate yourself thinkprogress.org. Here are a few quotes about WMDs………

where Democratic politicians lying?

“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real…”
– Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”
– Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 | Source

“One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.”
– President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 | Source

“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”
– President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 | Source

“We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction.”
– Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 | Source

“He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.”
– Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 | Source

“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.”
Letter to President Clinton.
– (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998 | Source

“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”
– Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 | Source

“Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.”
– Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 | Source

“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them.”
– Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 | Source

“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”
– Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source

“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.”
– Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”
– Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 | Source

“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…”
– Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 | Source

“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.”
– Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 | Source

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”
– Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 | Source

“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.”
– Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 | Source

What still amazes me is how ill prepared the interviewer are-in this case this Wolf guy- don’t they do their homework before starting the interview ? don’t they keep archive of related past history on the subject matter? do they know anything about rebutting a answer ?

It almost looks like they (CNN and MSM) are giving this people – manipulative and lying- a stage.

For Hans Blix to hold op the charade and provide for a legal pretence through the UN during the critical timeframe he is not much less to blame for what followed from his actions than the more obvious liars as Colin Powellpoint, Slamdunk Tenet and the rest of these cowardly facilitators who cant even find the guts to admit to themselves their utter failure as human beings, instead never missing an oppertunity to blame someone else.

Then far, far beneath that level of humanity is the category in which Condoleezza Rice fits. These are the spawn of the hell inside their skulls, that are engaged in a “long war” against humanity itself.

Yet one may never, ever, ever forgive the UN even though it might never have had a chance for its failure to even put up some resemblance of a serious effort to stop the warcrime of Agression by it’s most powerful and agressive member as in a cowardly manner mentioned by then SG Kofi Annan, barely heard, certainly not enough to enter the consciousness of the pulic at large, but enough for him to get vilified by the pro-war crowd each and every occasion afterward.