[Grovenet] Resolution: Iraq is no longer a treat to the US and the UN resolutions against Saddam are no longer relevant.
Ed Davie
edavie at verizon.net
Tue Apr 3 23:04:53 PDT 2007
Thanks, I'll look it over.
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: Ron D'Eau Claire
To: 'Forest Grove local interests list'
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 10:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Resolution: Iraq is no
longer a treat to the US and the UN resolutions
against Saddam are no longer relevant.
I keep hearing of this but I would like to see a
list of what it consists of.
Ed
-------------
Here's a few links and excerpts to get you
started.
It looks to me like many Democrats are
determined to make the President look
good - or better - in order to line the pockets
of their constituents.
I'm sure if you download a copy of the bill
you'll have more details than
you ever wanted.
Ron D'Eau Claire
WASHINGTON - Like their counterparts in the
House, the Senate has larded its
version of an "emergency" war spending bill with
nearly $20 billion in
pork-barrel outlays, including $100 million for
the two major political
parties' 2008 presidential conventions.
The $121 billion bill includes $102 billion for
the troops fighting in Iraq
and Afghanistan, as well as $14 billion for
Hurricane Katrina aid and more
than $4 billion for "emergency farm relief."
"Congress will have to make the choice between
booze and balloons or bullets
and body armor," John Hart, a spokesman for Sen.
Tom Coburn, R-Okla., told
The Examiner on Monday. Coburn and a handful of
other senators hope to shame
their colleagues into stripping the pork out of
the war spending bill.
The Senate bill is $18 billion more than
President Bush requested for
military operations. The House bill, which
passed last week, exceeded the
administration's request by $21 billion and
included money for spinach
growers, peanut storage and citrus farmers.
If the Senate bill goes to conference committee
as written, the two chambers
may find themselves fighting over the best cuts
of pork.
Full story at
http://www.examiner.com/a-640957~Senate__emergency__war_bill_has_almost__20_
billion_in_domestic_spending_tacked_onto_it.html
--------------------------
WASHINGTON - Congress has loaded up President
Bush's request for "emergency"
spending on the Iraq war with more than $20
billion in "pork" for members'
districts.
Money for peanut storage in Georgia, spinach
growers in California, menhaden
in the Atlantic Ocean and even more office space
for the lawmakers
themselves is included in what has ballooned
into a $124 billion war bill.
"This emergency supplemental bill has more
ornaments hanging over our many
branches of government than the White House
Christmas tree," Rep. Jerry
Lewis, R-Calif., said.
Originally, Bush asked for $105 billion in
emergency funding. Democratic
leaders say they want to grant the request to
continue funding the war
despite their desire to end it.
"We have provided all of the money the president
requested- and more,"
boasted House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer.
That includes $74 million for peanut storage,
$25 million for spinach
growers and $100 million for citrus growers.
It also includes $16 million to convert the old
Food and Drug Administration
building in southwest D.C. into more office
space for the Capitol. That
"emergency" expenditure comes at a time when
taxpayers already shell out
$600 million "more than double the original
estimate" for a mammoth
expansion of the Capitol, which includes 160,000
feet of new office space...
Full story at:
http://www.examiner.com/a-619204~Congress_loads_up__20_billion_in_pork.html
-----------------------
Updated: 10:08 a.m. PT March 31, 2007
WASHINGTON - President Bush, seeking to one-up
Congress' Democratic majority
in a showdown over the Iraq war, suggested
Saturday that lawmakers should be
ashamed that they added non-war items to an Iraq
spending bill.
"I like peanuts as much as the next guy, but I
believe the security of our
troops should come before the security of our
peanut crop," Bush said in his
weekly radio address, referring to a provision
in the war funding
legislation that earmarks $74 million for secure
peanut storage....
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17887549/
----------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com
[mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Ed Davie
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 8:42 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Resolution: Iraq is no
longer a treat to the US and
the UN resolutions against Saddam are no longer
relevant.
I keep hearing of this but I would like to see a
list of what it consists of.
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: Ron D'Eau Claire
To: 'Forest Grove local interests list'
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 7:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Resolution: Iraq is no
longer a treat to the US and the UN resolutions
against Saddam are no longer relevant.
Whatever happened to all the "pork" the
Democratic congress dumped into the
funding bill?
Yeah, they are saying, We support the troops,
if
I get XXX millions for my
pet project at home...
If it's still there, by vetoing the bill the
President cuts off an obscene
money grab by the Democratic majority in the
Congress and likely a number of
Republicans who have joined forces. I haven't
kept track of all the
additions tacked onto that bill.
Ron D'Eau Claire
-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com
[mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of David Morelli
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 6:28 PM
To: grovenet
Subject: [Grovenet] Resolution: Iraq is no
longer a treat to the US and the
UN resolutions against Saddam are no longer
relevant.
There seems to be a question in circulation
asking if Congress can
limit the activities of the military in Iraq,
or
even pull them
home. They already limited the President's
actions when they gave
Bush permission to invade Iraq to eliminate
the
treat to the US from
Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction.
************************************************************************
********************************
Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of
United
States Armed Forces
Against Iraq
"SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED
STATES
ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION. The President is authorized
to use the Armed
Forces of the United States as he determines
to
be necessary and
appropriate in order to
(1) defend the national security of the United
States against the
continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations
Security
Council Resolutions
regarding Iraq."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html
************************************************************************
*********************************
1) What is the "continuing threat posed by
Iraq"
that requires
defense of our national security?
2) What "United Nations Security Council
Resolutions regarding Iraq"
are still in relevant?
Those are the only two questions that need to
be
answered to
determine if the President has authority to
conduct military
operations in Iraq. If neither apply, the
authorization is sunset.
I suggest that Al-Qaeda is not the government
of
Iraq, and never had
authority or weapons in Iraq until after the
Bush invasion. I
suggest that the UN resolutions governed the
"no
fly zone",
government persecution of Iraq citizens, and
inspection of weapon's
production facilities, and I suspect that the
current Iraqi
government is in full compliance with all of
them.
The job of nation building may not be done,
and
the job of building a
democratic Iraq may not be done. But, that
wasn't in the
authorization to go to war.
David
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
More information about the GroveNet
mailing list