[Seattle-editorial] FP: $87 Billion for Iraq?

[Jeremy G Kahn]

I think we should mention McDermott in the title.  How about "MCDERMOTT 
QUESTIONS $87B FOR IRAQ" instead of just "$87 BILLION FOR IRAQ"?

Good story too.  Again, we might want to cite the source in the link.

Approve.

typist at speakeasy.net wrote:

>OK, I've really got to get away from the computer, but I'm inspired by the stuff on line today.  There is a mention of our own politician in this one:
>
>subtitle:  $87 BILLION FOR IRAQ:
>title:  Another Vietnam?
>
>text: Citing the administration’s “many, many missteps” in Iraq, Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) said Congress should deny any funding request for Iraq until an agreement with the United Nations has been concluded on security and reconstruction of Iraq, adding, “We cannot go it alone. We cannot demand total control.” 
>
>“I did not think the President was right to go into Iraq,” McDermott said in a Sept. 8 statement. “The errors of President Bush and those around him must be corrected, not funded.” 
>
><a href="http://seattle.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=32894&group=webcast"> Full story. </a>
>
>Judy
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Seattle-editorial mailing list
>Seattle-editorial at lists.indymedia.org
>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/seattle-editorial
>  
>