Forum

TruthMove Forum

TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum

Gore & UN Panel Win Nobel Peace Prize (3 posts)

  1. Victronix
    Member

    If Gore runs, and openly opposes the war strongly, this could make it difficult on the Greens to put up a candidate. A friend of mine said that they should never give this to someone like him, but instead just admit that it's been a bad year for peace. Someone else I know pointed out that Kissinger and Carter got them too, and that "Gore's climate campaign is a great example of limited hang out."

    http://www.oilempire.us/gore.html

    Gore, U.N. panel share Nobel Peace Prize for fighting global warming

    Carla Marinucci,Joe Garofoli, Chronicle Staff Writers

    Friday, October 12, 2007

    (10-12) 12:05 PDT Palo Alto - -- Al Gore and a United Nations panel were jointly awarded the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize today for their work fighting global warming, which the former vice president called "a true planetary emergency." http://www.sfgate.com/flat/archive/2007/10/12/chro...

    Posted 9 years ago #
  2. truthmod
    Administrator

    Definitely good information up here: http://www.oilempire.us/gore.html

    It just seems hard for a lot of people to understand that Gore is not necessarily to be trusted, but most of what he's saying about global warming is true (in the general sense). Environmental issues are real, they're not an elite globalist hoax. But career establishment politicians like Gore are probably not going to give an honest and full account of what's going on and what should be done about it.

    BTW, whatever happened to that claim that David Ray Griffin was to be nominated for the Nobel?

    Posted 9 years ago #
  3. Victronix
    Member

    An interesting article on impeachment -

    Betraying Their Oath of Office: Impeachment, Cowardice and the Democrats

    . . . Forty towns in Vermont and the State Senate had already presented their Congressional delegation with similar petitions. Impeachment advocates reported the results to Cong. Olver from each town meeting. Leverett's vote was 339-1; Great Barrington was 100-3. No vote in any of the towns or cities was less than a two-third majority "yes" in favor of impeachment, according to long-time activist, Atty. Robert Feuer of Stockbridge, Mass.

    With three fourths of reports completed Cong. Olver, who voted against the war, raised his hand and said, "Spare me, I know full well the overwhelming majority of my constituency is in favor of impeachment." He then told them he would not sign on to any impeachment resolution whether against Bush or against Cheney (H.Res. 333 introduced by Cong. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)). He was quite adamant.

    In taking this unrepresentative position, Rep. Olver's position was identical to that of the House Democratic leadership and many of his Democratic colleagues.

    The Democratic Party line on impeachment is that Bush and Cheney are the most impeachable White House duo in American history (they believe this privately). The Democrats do not want to distract attention from their legislative agenda, and need Republican votes for passage. Moreover, they do not have the votes to obtain the requisite two-thirds of the members present for conviction in the Senate.

    Strangely, none of these excuses bothered Republicans when they impeached Bill Clinton in the House for lying under oath about sex and proceeded to a full trial in the Senate where they failed to get the required votes. Can Clinton's "high crimes and misdemeanors" begin to compare with this White House crime wave? http://www.counterpunch.org/nader10132007.html

    Posted 9 years ago #

Reply

You must log in to post.