Palin tried to ban books

Actually, it couldn't have been done in 1991, Daddy Bush actually listened to his State Department which TOLD HIM even then that if Saddam was deposed, there would be a power vacuum and there would be civil war. I'd also mention the fact that they NEEDED Saddam Hussein to balance Iran, since we also knew that Iran would get stronger in a power vacuum.

So your not going to tell me. Quite fine.

Thanks for playing though.

Actually, it couldn't have been done in 1991, Daddy Bush actually listened to his State Department which TOLD HIM even then that if Saddam was deposed, there would be a power vacuum and there would be civil war. I'd also mention the fact that they NEEDED Saddam Hussein to balance Iran, since we also knew that Iran would get stronger in a power vacuum.

i didnt know you were blocked from google
i thought telling you WHERE to find it was enough
but here
it starts about mid way down the page

President Delivers "State of the Union"

Our nation and the world must learn the lessons of the Korean Peninsula and not allow an even greater threat to rise up in Iraq. A brutal dictator, with a history of reckless aggression, with ties to terrorism, with great potential wealth, will not be permitted to dominate a vital region and threaten the United States. (Applause.)

The United Nations concluded in 1999 that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons sufficient to produce over 25,000 liters of anthrax -- enough doses to kill several million people. He hasn't accounted for that material. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed it.

The United Nations concluded that Saddam Hussein had materials sufficient to produce more than 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin -- enough to subject millions of people to death by respiratory failure. He hadn't accounted for that material. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed it.

Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent. In such quantities, these chemical agents could also kill untold thousands. He's not accounted for these materials. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents. Inspectors recently turned up 16 of them -- despite Iraq's recent declaration denying their existence. Saddam Hussein has not accounted for the remaining 29,984 of these prohibited munitions. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

May He guide us now. And may God continue to bless the United States of America. (Applause.)

I heard about this. Thank you for posting the article.

I think if the religious right wingers have their way, this type of censorship could become a real issue.

To Glockenspiel and Divertercon - this was my one post on this subject.

No "lies", no "agreeing with lies", no "cheerleading" -- just a thanks for posting the Time Magazine article that I had heard about, but not seen.

I happen to find the idea of censorship highly offensive. Someone else pointed me to this thread when I brought up the subject this morning and I still have not had time to read everything.

Nice to meet you too, though, really.

I want certain points though, not to read this piece of garbage. I could barely stand watching it.

So you mean the whole Saddam/Obama connection that doesn't exist either? That connection?







No matter who uses this line, I find it funny. God loves us more then everyone else, hurrah! Oh wait, I thought God loved all his children equally?

To Glockenspiel and Divertercon - this was my one post on this subject.

No "lies", no "agreeing with lies", no "cheerleading" -- just a thanks for posting the Time Magazine article that I had heard about, but not seen.

I happen to find the idea of censorship highly offensive. Someone else pointed me to this thread when I brought up the subject this morning and I still have not had time to read everything.

Nice to meet you too, though, really.

Don't mind them, they try to run anyone with a smidgen of sense off the boards.

To Glockenspiel and Divertercon - this was my one post on this subject.

No "lies", no "agreeing with lies", no "cheerleading" -- just a thanks for posting the Time Magazine article that I had heard about, but not seen.

I happen to find the idea of censorship highly offensive. Someone else pointed me to this thread when I brought up the subject this morning and I still have not had time to read everything.

Nice to meet you too, though, really.

Don't mind them, they try to run anyone with a smidgen of sense off the boards.

yeah, WMD was PART of it
but not ALL over it, you are being disingenuous to only post that part while ignoring the rest

as to that last bit, please show me where he said anything of the sort that YOU said, i can read what he said, and it wasnt even close to claiming we are loved any more than anyone else
unless you totally dont understand the concept

more lies
i havent tried to "run" anyone off these boards
if you cant handle it, then maybe you need to rethink your stands
and i dont find countering lies as censorship, you both need to learn the meaning of the word

btw, fuck you with your "religious right wingers" bullshit

I'm still waiting for you to admit that Palin did ask the question about banning books.