True or False?
From Paul Cummins on the Huffington Post
True or false:
1. Iraq's reconstruction -- as promised before the U.S. invasion -- has been paid for with Iraq's oil reserves...
2. Iraq's weapons of mass destruction posed an imminent mushroom-cloud threat to the U.S.A...
3. The U.S. invasion of Iraq was greeted by cheering Iraqis...
4. Lucrative no-competitive, no-bid contracts are a responsible way to do business...
5. Torture is an effective way to gain essential information and win international admiration...
6. Tax cuts for the affluent are an effective way to fund wartime expenses...
7. Expenses and debts can be increased indefinitely without worrying about revenue...
8. It is the responsibility of tomorrow's children to pay for the debts of today's adults...
9. The president of the U.S. should not feel constrained by the Constitution if he feels that it need not apply to certain situations that he feels warrant circumventing the Constitution...
10. To combat terrorism, the president of the U.S. has the sole and unquestionable power to seize an American citizen on U.S. soil, send him off to prison and hold him there without evidence or charge indefinitely...
11. Spending $186 million dollars a day in Iraq is a good investment for the future of the U.S.
12. Global warming is just a theory which we don't need to take seriously...
13. Increased pollution and climate changing emissions are not sufficient reasons to restrict the profits of coal-producing plants...
14. Nuclear proliferation is not a danger the U.S. needs to be very concerned about...
15. Corporate CEOs have gotten so good they warrant their current $450:1 ratio to workers pay -- up from 43.1 thirty years ago.
16. The U.S. decision to attack Iraq was justified because God told George W. Bush to do so.
How did you score? How does America?
4 Comments:
I wonder what a rightwinger would have to say about this. I bit it would begin with "But, but, but..."
Question #1 suggests the US Army has the right to take Iraqi oil.
Do people really support that?
I certainly don't support the idea that the US owns Iraq's oil. It was an important argument that Bush made that Iraq's oil would pay for Iraq's "liberation" and thus be self-suporting.
In reality, BUSH decided to attack a country that was virtually defenseless against American might - and then take control of the oilfields. I don't think the people of Iraq would have approved of what Bush has done to their country in the name of "freedom." It's their country, not ours, and their oil, not ours.
Reminds me of the wry anti-war sign I saw: "How did our oil get under their sand?"
1-15 = No.
16 = In what passes for his own mind, yes.
Post a Comment
<< Home