May
27
Tina wrote: Usually, when a party of individuals wants to restore their credibility following an incident in which they are morally & legally wrong,…
(especially in the eyes of everyone else who KNOWS that this party of individuals are morally & legally wrong) the guilty party takes the 1st step by ADMITTING that they acted illegally.
**
Of course, I am talking about the Iraq 2003 invasion by the US.
(even though Article VI Paragraph 2 of the US Constitution states that:
Any treaty signed by the US becomes part of the Supreme Law of the Land)
The US signed the UN Charter (1945) which outlaws starting wars (with 2 exceptions):
1) Country A may attack country B (Thus country B may attack country A)
2) If the UN Security Council specifically authorizes it.
**
Addressing #1:
It has been discredited that Saddam had a link with Bin Laden.
Addressing #2
The UN Security Council NEVER authorized the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
**
Thus, the 03 Iraq invasion was & is ILLEGAL.
**
When Obama “spoke against” the Iraq war (at any time) he NEVER admitted it was an illegal act of aggression…he just said that it would have “undetermined consequences”.
QUESTION;
Do you think that the non-American people of the world will accept American moral leadership in the UN & the world …just because we elect a biracial man as President??
If Obama doesn’t admit that the 03 Iraq invasion was & is ILLEGAL, then how much credit does he deserve as far as “restoring America’s credibility” (in the eyes of Americans AND non-Americans)??
I predict that as Obama fails to own up to TRULLY restoring America’s credibility as President, those in love with the “Messiah” will tell themselves that the 03 Iraq invasion was legally & morally justified (and thus, no need for Obama to admit that the 03 invasion was illegal)…How about that for irony & hypocrisy????!!!!!
**and if you think I support McCain, then you’re wrong (the only difference is that Obama a slick salesman)
Designer Handbags
Apr
10
Mercer wrote: To combat the depression by a forced credit expansion is to attempt to cure the evil by the very means which brought it about; because we are suffering from a misdirection of production, we want to create further misdirection - a procedure that can only lead to a much more severe crisis as soon as the credit expansion comes to an end… It is probably to this experiment, together with the attempts to prevent liquidation once the crisis had come, that we owe the exceptional severity and duration of the depression.
The only thing we learn from history, I am afraid, is that we do not learn from history.
The very people who have spent the past several years assuring us that the economy is fundamentally sound, and who themselves foolishly cheered the extension of all these novel kinds of mortgages, are the ones who now claim to be the experts who will restore prosperity! Just how spectacularly wrong, how utterly without a clue, does someone have to be before his expert status is called into question?
Oh, and did you notice that the bailout is now being called a “rescue plan”? I guess “bailout” wasn’t sitting too well with the American people.
The very people who with somber faces tell us of their deep concern for the spread of democracy around the world are the ones most insistent on forcing a bill through Congress that the American people overwhelmingly oppose. The very fact that some of you seem to think you’re supposed to have a voice in all this actually seems to annoy them.
I continue to urge you to contact your representatives and give them a piece of your mind. I myself am doing everything I can to promote the correct point of view on the crisis. Be sure also to educate yourselves on these subjects - the Campaign for Liberty blog is an excellent place to start. Read the posts, ask questions in the comment section, and learn.
H.G. Wells once said that civilization was in a race between education and catastrophe. Let us learn the truth and spread it as far and wide as our circumstances allow. For the truth is the greatest weapon we have.
In liberty,
How to Lose Weight
Feb
20
catthbr wrote: Or do you think that perhaps increasing employee wages would stimulate the economy? - and I’m not talking a $20/wk raise - I mean a really income increase.
“This legislation should help to restore the flow of credit to households and businesses that is essential for economic growth and job creation, while at the same time affording strong and necessary protections for taxpayers,” Ben Bernanke
