[Rhodes22-list]Wally's political reply
Steve
rhodes2282 at yahoo.com
Fri Apr 23 07:00:59 EDT 2004
Now Dr. Michael; now you know that I have morals &
most importantly I know what a pretty young things is
& would not toularate anything but a Pretty Young
Thing under my desk:-) No exception here - I'm a man
with principles:-)
Steve
--- Michael Meltzer <mjm at michaelmeltzer.com> wrote:
> now Steve, if you were married to Hillary, and a
> pretty young thing wanted to give to a blow job at
> your desk(ok. maybe not pretty
> to me but he likes the trailer trash look), would
> you turn it down???? And would you tell nothing but
> the truth if questioned????, I
> thing be is a slime for other things, what he did to
> the guy from the travel office is a morally bad as
> it comes. and that just one
> example.
>
> MJM
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve" <rhodes2282 at yahoo.com>
> To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list"
> <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 2:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list]Wally's political reply
>
>
> > Bill
> > You have no way of knowing that Iraq does not have
> > WMDs. You don't know where there at. You don't
> know
> > what Sadam did with them. Bottom line.
> >
> > A President is never on vacation. His people are
> with
> > him. He still get briefed. He still doing his
> job.
> >
> > How you can compare Clinton to Bush is beyond me.
> > What is puzzleing is that you would want to take
> > Clinton side on anything. The man made a joke of
> this
> > country, made a joke of the White House, made a
> joke
> > of the justice system. But you take his side.
> That
> > just puzzle me.
> >
> > Here Bush is, a very moral guy, trying to protect
> our
> > society. But you take Clinton side, a married
> man,
> > who get Blow Jobs, while on the job, lie about it
> > under oath, (by the way - that against the law),
> who
> > breaks the law, guess you could call him criminal,
> but
> > you still take Clinton side. And he was disbarred
> > here in Arkansas, and he the joke of our state.
> >
> > I just don't understand it. I guess I never
> will!!!
> > Steve
> >
> > --- Bill Effros <bill at effros.com> wrote:
> > > Not so, Ed.
> > >
> > > I don't have time for a point by point rebuttal,
> but
> > > the heart of your argument seems to be that the
> > > underlying problem is that facts known to the
> > > intelligence community were somehow withheld
> from
> > > the President in a way he could not have known.
> > >
> > > That's not what happened, although it is true
> the
> > > administration wove a fabric of half-truths to
> make
> > > it appear that way.
> > >
> > > In the Clinton White House, the President read
> and
> > > commented on every Presidential Daily Briefing
> (PDB)
> > > he received. George Bush did not read the PDBs.
> > > They were summarized for him every day by CIA
> > > Director Tenet--George Bush himself changed that
> > > procedure. Only, President Bush took a lot of
> > > vacations--he has been on vacation for more than
> 40%
> > > of his time in office--so Tenet was not on hand
> to
> > > summarize all the PDBs.
> > >
> > > Bush was on vacation when the CIA provided the
> > > information about Osama's plans to hijack planes
> > > inside the United States. He remained on
> vacation
> > > at his ranch in Texas for the whole month.
> Tenet
> > > remained in Washington, and testified he didn't
> > > brief Bush for the entire month, although the
> CIA
> > > subsequently said he had flown to the ranch
> once.
> > >
> > > Bush doesn't know what's going on because he's
> > > clearing scrub on his ranch instead of minding
> the
> > > store.
> > >
> > > There's no excuse for it, no matter which side
> of
> > > the political spectrum you favor.
> > >
> > > Bill Effros
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: ed kroposki
> > > To: 'The Rhodes 22 mail list'
> > > Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 11:54 AM
> > > Subject: RE: [Rhodes22-list]Wally's political
> > > reply
> > >
> > >
> > > Wally,
> > >
> > > "The guy got caught messing around and lied
> about
> > > it."
> > >
> > > The messing around part had a more significant
> > > angle. The lady was not only
> > > a subordinate, but in a position where he had
> > > significant responsibility of
> > > trust to her. An intern represents a unique
> > > position. It is more than
> > > employer to employee. Legally and ethically
> is
> > > closer to father and
> > > daughter. She was not put there for his
> sexual
> > > enjoyment. There is no
> > > question that a whole lot of women would
> willingly
> > > have had sex with him.
> > > And, I would have no problem with his doing
> so.
> > > But his taking advantage
> > > the special relationship that the two
> positions
> > > had was a special wrong.
> > > And, he lied in a court proceeding under oath.
> > > That is the crime of
> > > perjury. He was disbarred for that in
> Arkansas;
> > > anybody else would have
> > > time in jail.
> > >
> > > "On the other hand we have a sitting president
> > > that claimed while running
> > > for office that he was against Nation
> Building.
> > > Once elected he spread
> > > around a bunch of rumors as facts leading us
> into
> > > war against a nation that
> > > posed no real threat to our National Security.
> > > This pisses me off much
> > > more."
> > >
> > > Here Rummy's evaluation of intelligence comes
> in
> > > perspective. He was given
> > > information and looked at that information
> thru
> > > narrow blinders. He
> > > evidentially did not fully evaluate all the
> > > alternatives. It appears that
> > > those advisors close to him gave him primarily
> a
> > > narrow view or were content
> > > to let him believe a limited view. Maybe he
> did
> > > not have the smarts to
> > > predict the future or have trust in those who
> saw
> > > different possibilities.
> > >
> > > As President he expected the CIA and the
> > > Pentagon's office of military
> > > intelligence to give him good information. I
> say
> > > that they did not do their
> > > jobs. The attorney general said that they
> were
> > > hindered by the previous
> > > administrations rules (memo). I would say
> that
> > > was not a sufficient excuse.
> > > The president should have been explicitly told
> > > that all information he was
> > > getting was weak and bias. He should have
> been
> > > told that emphatically, and
> > > the fact that he was told that should have
> been
> > > documented (there is no
> > > information that this was done). The fact
> that he
> > > was not strongly informed
> > > of the weakness in his information is
> problematic.
> > > However, I think that at
> > > the time he as President of the USA, he had a
> > > right to expect he was getting
> > > good information. Now that we all know the
> some
> > > of flaws, the issue is, are
> > > the flaws fixed? Since the answers to that
> are
> > > state secrets, it will be
> > > years before the truth gets out.
> > >
> > > Ed K
> > >
> > >
> > >
> __________________________________________________
> > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> > > www.rhodes22.org/list
> > >
> > >
> __________________________________________________
> > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> > www.rhodes22.org/list
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for
> 25¢
> > http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
> > __________________________________________________
> > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> www.rhodes22.org/list
> >
>
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
www.rhodes22.org/list
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
More information about the Rhodes22-list
mailing list