Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: GtoRA2 on December 12, 2003, 04:13:37 PM
-
I do not care if you thought the war was right or wrong.
Using the death of our soldiers to push your joke of a presidential run is wrong...
Make up your own minds.
Link to a add so wrong I can barely type this. (http://www.kucinich.us/dk.html)
-
Only an idiot would believe Bush took the US to war so that American corporations could realize greater profits.
-
The statistics in and of themselves are sickening. But this blatant attempt to capitalize on them is just as bad.
-
We should make another one..
"In the years the dictator was in place in Iraq, this many families were killed, separated, or tortured."
I'd have no problem with a movie like that if it was putting forth independent ideas, but to use it as a political tool to advance your own career is so vile its beyond words.
-
Delirium
My thoughts exactly. david k is a scum bag. So vile I can not believe it.
-
I am fuggen speachless
This is just wrong, to use the names of the dead in an add without thier permission should be illeagel, or were all of them supporters.
Let W. use any footage in his campagn and hear the left cry foul.
:mad:
-
That is ****ing disgusting!
-
The guy is a complete tool. The person that writes his add is even worse. He's fighting with several Conservative website owners now.
Misha (http://www.nicedoggie.net/) told him what a moron he was, and mentioned he hoped he'd have an "accident" and the guy called the press and the feds. I'm putting him on next years dead pool. It might be worth some points.
-
I think the add itself is fine. I think its suicide to associate your self with it as a candidate.
I cant believe a real add company is involved. Its like the companies that show something anyoying or disgusting for 45 seconds and then tell you for 5 seconds how that thier product can fix it. All you remember is the unplesent feeling associated with thier product.
And like the office equipment place that has mafia thugalikes killing and burrying office equipement. You dont want anything gut level negative associeated with your name.
People should also be careful to make sure that that they say what they can prove. Not what they think.
Unless they are posting on this BBS anyway.
-
An angry add for an angry party.
I wonder how many Germans and Japanese died so Boeing could build bombers?
-
Send him a message. I just did....
-
Bush lied. Deal with it.
-
People like him are why they make Guns and Bulletts.:mad:
-
the point is the lies make him a murderer. thats what you get when you vote for a cokehead murderer. what did you expect?
-
Originally posted by lord dolf vader
the point is the lies make him a murderer. thats what you get when you vote for a cokehead murderer. what did you expect?
Just how many closed head injuries have you had?
-
Here we go again.
It's funny how the same people can't show us what Bush lied about, yet keep spewing the garbage.
Who's the liar?
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Here we go again.
It's funny how the same people can't show us what Bush lied about, yet keep spewing the garbage.
Who's the liar?
LIE #1: "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program ... Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons." – President Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in Cincinnati.
LIE #2: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." – President Bush, Jan.28, 2003, in the State of the Union address.
LIE #3: "We believe [Saddam] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." – Vice President Cheney on March 16, 2003 on "Meet the Press."
LIE #4: "[The CIA possesses] solid reporting of senior-level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade." – CIA Director George Tenet in a written statement released Oct. 7, 2002 and echoed in that evening's speech by President Bush
LIE #5: "We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." – President Bush, Oct. 7.
LIE #6: "We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] for missions targeting the United States." – President Bush, Oct. 7.
LIE #7: "We have seen intelligence over many months that they have chemical and biological weapons, and that they have dispersed them and that they're weaponized and that, in one case at least, the command and control arrangements have been established." – President Bush, Feb. 8, 2003, in a national radio address.
LIE #8: "Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is enough to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets." – Secretary of State Colin Powell, Feb. 5 2003, in remarks to the UN Security Council.
LIE #9: "We know where [Iraq's WMD] are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat." – Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003, in statements to the press.
LIE #10: "Yes, we found a biological laboratory in Iraq which the UN prohibited." – President Bush in remarks in Poland, published internationally June 1, 2003
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
LIE #1: "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program ... Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons." – President Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in Cincinnati.
LIE #2: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." – President Bush, Jan.28, 2003, in the State of the Union address.
LIE #3: "We believe [Saddam] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." – Vice President Cheney on March 16, 2003 on "Meet the Press."
LIE #4: "[The CIA possesses] solid reporting of senior-level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade." – CIA Director George Tenet in a written statement released Oct. 7, 2002 and echoed in that evening's speech by President Bush
LIE #5: "We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." – President Bush, Oct. 7.
LIE #6: "We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] for missions targeting the United States." – President Bush, Oct. 7.
LIE #7: "We have seen intelligence over many months that they have chemical and biological weapons, and that they have dispersed them and that they're weaponized and that, in one case at least, the command and control arrangements have been established." – President Bush, Feb. 8, 2003, in a national radio address.
LIE #8: "Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is enough to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets." – Secretary of State Colin Powell, Feb. 5 2003, in remarks to the UN Security Council.
LIE #9: "We know where [Iraq's WMD] are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat." – Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003, in statements to the press.
LIE #10: "Yes, we found a biological laboratory in Iraq which the UN prohibited." – President Bush in remarks in Poland, published internationally June 1, 2003
And where is your proof that any of the above is un true?
-
So what you're saying is someone is lying to the president? It's all intel. It isn't like he sat in his closet and made up stories. He passed on intel that other people gathered. His intelligence gatherers came to many of the same conclusions that others did.
Some of that intel is STILL supported by senior level Iraqis.
lie2 ( P ) Pronunciation Key (l)
n.
1. A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.
2. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
So what you're saying is someone is lying to the president? It's all intel. It isn't like he sat in his closet and made up stories. He passed on intel that other people gathered. His intelligence gatherers came to many of the same conclusions that others did.
Some of that intel is STILL supported by senior level Iraqis.
lie2 ( P ) Pronunciation Key (l)
n.
1. A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.
2. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.
OH man don't you know everyone Is lying but the dumbocrates.
-
Here's the real tragedy... we went to war and our arguments for or against are all based upon faith.
We shouldn't even be having this discussion. The evidence should have been so damning that there left no doubt whatsoever.
Granted, there will always be the conspiracy theorists that always think that the government is engaged in some sort of nefarious plot, but that's not the case here. A large portion of the population does not believe the administration.
So... What's next?
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
Here's the real tragedy... we went to war and our arguments for or against are all based upon faith.
We shouldn't even be having this discussion. The evidence should have been so damning that there left no doubt whatsoever.
Granted, there will always be the conspiracy theorists that always think that the government is engaged in some sort of nefarious plot, but that's not the case here. A large portion of the population does not believe the administration.
So... What's next?
I think that is the case here. Do you think the conspiracy theorists you speak of think they are such?
You're one of them.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
You're one of them.
You can't prove it.
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
You can't prove it.
I don't have to. It's evident to the majority of the population. The only ones that don't see it are you conspiracy theorists.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
I don't have to. It's evident to the majority of the population. The only ones that don't see it are you conspiracy theorists.
It becomes less evident with each passing day.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A857-2003Nov4¬Found=true
-
So when exactly do we call Bush on his claims of WMD? How long before we say... excuse me Mr. Bush, but ummmmm, WHERE"S THE BEEF?
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
It becomes less evident with each passing day.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A857-2003Nov4¬Found=true
You quote an article over a month old that not only says the majority of American's support Bush, but 1 in 7 not only support him, but think the war in Iraq is number one on the list. Thanks.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
You quote an article over a month old that not only says the majority of American's support Bush, but 1 in 7 not only support him, but think the war in Iraq is number one on the list. Thanks.
You're welcome.
The public's decoupling of Iraq from the war on terrorism is ominous for Bush, because the high marks he has received for fighting terrorism have helped to hold together support for the actions in Iraq, several polling analysts suggested. In April, 77 percent of Americans believed the war in Iraq was part of the war against terrorism, but this number slipped to 66 percent in September and to 61 percent last week, when the latest poll was conducted. At the same time, Americans' approval of the situation in Iraq has dropped to 47 percent from 50 percent in September and 75 percent in April.
39% can hardly be considered fringe.
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
LIE #1: "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program ... Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons." – President Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in Cincinnati.
LIE #2: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." – President Bush, Jan.28, 2003, in the State of the Union address.
LIE #3: "We believe [Saddam] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." – Vice President Cheney on March 16, 2003 on "Meet the Press."
LIE #4: "[The CIA possesses] solid reporting of senior-level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade." – CIA Director George Tenet in a written statement released Oct. 7, 2002 and echoed in that evening's speech by President Bush
LIE #5: "We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." – President Bush, Oct. 7.
LIE #6: "We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] for missions targeting the United States." – President Bush, Oct. 7.
LIE #7: "We have seen intelligence over many months that they have chemical and biological weapons, and that they have dispersed them and that they're weaponized and that, in one case at least, the command and control arrangements have been established." – President Bush, Feb. 8, 2003, in a national radio address.
LIE #8: "Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is enough to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets." – Secretary of State Colin Powell, Feb. 5 2003, in remarks to the UN Security Council.
LIE #9: "We know where [Iraq's WMD] are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat." – Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003, in statements to the press.
LIE #10: "Yes, we found a biological laboratory in Iraq which the UN prohibited." – President Bush in remarks in Poland, published internationally June 1, 2003
Where's a lie???
Show me a lie, show the world a lie. You will be remembered in history. "Sandman exposes the President of the US of A"
Troller or a *******, or both.
I hope both.
-
The only thing bad about Iraq was its cruel treatment of civilian and political prisoners. But countries such as China and North Korea are much worse.
The White House tried to cover up the intel that showed North Korea was pursuing a nuclear missle plan.
-
GtoRA2: I do not care if you thought the war was right or wrong.
Using the death of our soldiers to push your joke of a presidential run is wrong...
Delirium: "In the years the dictator was in place in Iraq, this many families were killed, separated, or tortured."
So guys, if we tried to criticise the Hitler's politics (not comparing W to Hitler, just using the context), we should not use the germans who died in Hitler's cause - because it is offencive to the noble soldiers. And we should not use the german victims - jews, russians, poles, etc, because the dictator Stalin was killing them in even greater numbers.
So, according to your, guys rules of discussion, what are we allowed to say[/b] about Hitler's policies that is bad if we cannot mention the deaths his policies caused?
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d
GtoRA2: I do not care if you thought the war was right or wrong.
Using the death of our soldiers to push your joke of a presidential run is wrong...
Delirium: "In the years the dictator was in place in Iraq, this many families were killed, separated, or tortured."
So guys, if we tried to criticise the Hitler's politics (not comparing W to Hitler, just using the context), we should not use the germans who died in Hitler's cause - because it is offencive to the noble soldiers. And we should not use the german victims - jews, russians, poles, etc, because the dictator Stalin was killing them in even greater numbers.
So what can we say about Hitler that is bad?
miko
If you can't tell the difference, you need to take a few more "English as a second language" classes.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Using the death of our soldiers to push your joke of a presidential run is wrong...[/URL]
How about using the deaths of over 3,000 people do to terrorism? What about scheduling your campaign kick off to coincide with with the anniversary of 9/11?
-
Originally posted by miko2d
{edited rhetorical basis for stupid rhetorical question}
So what can we say about Hitler that is bad?
{carrying the tangential rhetorical thought to an extreme...}
and Hitler was a vegetarian and did not drink or smoke...
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
and Hitler was a vegetarian and did not drink or smoke...
That should have set off some alarms... :)
-
So, according to your, guys rules of discussion, what are we allowed to say about Hitler's policies that is bad if we could not mention the deaths his policies caused?
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d
So, according to your, guys rules of discussion, what are we allowed to say about Hitler's policies that is bad if we could not mention the deaths his policies caused?
miko
If you aren't smart enough to figure it out, then just avoid the topic.
-
And the idiots begin to stack - one by one.
Some of you ****birds are worse than the individual who associates himself with this add.
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
And the idiots begin to stack - one by one.
Some of you ****birds are worse than the individual who associates himself with this add.
That was profound. Thanks.
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
That was profound. Thanks.
Especially humorous coming from you. :aok
Im sorry you werent impressed with the contents of my post.
The truth is that every once in awhile I see a post that throttles me - I cant quite explain it - its almost as if Ive lost all hope for humanity as a species.
Your post, for example, did this to me.
Since I have very little chance of holding an intelligent conversation with you, much less swaying your opinion, I have elected not to put much thought through the keyboard - waste is a terrible thing.
In this case, you can think of my post as 'thinking out loud' if it suits you.
-
Dissent is not allowed Martlet. Thats your whole aggenda.
Kill all disentors!
Then point out how everyone aggees with you.
Your like the teacher in the last emperorer.
Only without the class.
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
LIE #1: "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program ... Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons." – President Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in Cincinnati.
LIE #2: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." – President Bush, Jan.28, 2003, in the State of the Union address.
LIE #3: "We believe [Saddam] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." – Vice President Cheney on March 16, 2003 on "Meet the Press."
LIE #4: "[The CIA possesses] solid reporting of senior-level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade." – CIA Director George Tenet in a written statement released Oct. 7, 2002 and echoed in that evening's speech by President Bush
LIE #5: "We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." – President Bush, Oct. 7.
LIE #6: "We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] for missions targeting the United States." – President Bush, Oct. 7.
LIE #7: "We have seen intelligence over many months that they have chemical and biological weapons, and that they have dispersed them and that they're weaponized and that, in one case at least, the command and control arrangements have been established." – President Bush, Feb. 8, 2003, in a national radio address.
LIE #8: "Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is enough to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets." – Secretary of State Colin Powell, Feb. 5 2003, in remarks to the UN Security Council.
LIE #9: "We know where [Iraq's WMD] are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat." – Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003, in statements to the press.
LIE #10: "Yes, we found a biological laboratory in Iraq which the UN prohibited." – President Bush in remarks in Poland, published internationally June 1, 2003
Sheesh don't you hate it when you hit back a slow lob and it gets smashed back at you?
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Dissent is not allowed Martlet. Thats your whole aggenda.
Kill all disentors!
Then point out how everyone aggees with you.
Your like the teacher in the last emperorer.
Only without the class.
Who says I don't love dissent? Dissent is a vital part of our government's success. A government you spend much of your time crying about.
There is a difference between dissent and slander, though.
-
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1080698,00.html
-
Dingbat, Here is a thought "when France puts up 87 billion they can hire only French companys" how about that?
When you pay the band you get to pick the music.
-
Godamn some of you need a clue...
I have no problem with anyone asking Bush to prove his claims. I have no problem with the people wanting proof. I think Bush deserves more time, but I also think he should be impeached if he was lying to us. If we have proof he lied for his own purposes he needs to be punished there needs to he proof though.
My outrage over this has nothing to do with bush, and everything to do with using the names of our dead men in a tasteless add that tells the families there loved ones died for nothing or greed. That's just wrong.
Those of you who cant step away from the bush hate long enough to see that are sad..
You want proof? That's fine so do I. What I don't want is some tool of a politician using dead soldiers.
I would be just as pissed if a rep did this.
-
I dont know why u guys discuss if Bush is a liar or not. He surely lied about things, maybe cause he was misinformed - id ont know.
But anyway this video is as pathetic as the one where u can see pathetic patriotic pictures of US soldiers in the Iraq. Its all emotional scheisse and wont help to discuss this topic in an objective way.
-
I don't about you, but dying is pretty emotional.
-
Originally posted by Monk
I don't about you, but dying is pretty emotional.
Sure! But it depends on how u the press ur government or whoever uses the death for propaganda purposes.
-
You know that 'loss of all hope for humanity' feel I was talking about earlier?
I just got it again.
-
Originally posted by Scootter
Dingbat, Here is a thought "when France puts up 87 billion they can hire only French companys" how about that?
When you pay the band you get to pick the music.
I'm abstaining from the argument. I just disagree with rude... My wife was going to be sent to Iraq, but she was still in AIT. They didn't send her for this reason.
By alienating countries even further than the US has, I don't feel is a just policy.
I also feel the DHS is a frigging joke, in terms of immigration. I will not start my rant on that here...
-
i think this video was more to the point and dont support a specific political campain.
http://www.takebackthemedia.com/onearmy.html
-
Originally posted by miko2d
So, according to your, guys rules of discussion, what are we allowed to say about Hitler's policies that is bad if we could not mention the deaths his policies caused?
miko
No miko,
What some apparently are saying is that criticizing their own in power is just wrong and underhanded, however it is okay to do so of the opposition's candidates.
They want proof in the form of links, sources, etc whenever the opposition makes a statement (they'll discount it anyway no matter what is furnished). Yet, some of those that demand that proof refuse to return the courtesy when they make statements.
Just my opinion of what I've noticed BTW.
-
Originally posted by bigsky
i think this video was more to the point and dont support a specific political campain.
http://www.takebackthemedia.com/onearmy.html
Actually, that video is mostly propaganda. Much of what is said in it is slanted or untrue. The last thing I saw before I clicked the "x" is taking an OpEd quote that was reproduced in the Army Times and attributing it TO the Army Times. While the statement is technically correct, it's extremely misleading unless you actually read the article IN the Army Times.
Originally posted by SaburoS
No miko,
What some apparently are saying is that criticizing their own in power is just wrong and underhanded, however it is okay to do so of the opposition's candidates.
They want proof in the form of links, sources, etc whenever the opposition makes a statement (they'll discount it anyway no matter what is furnished). Yet, some of those that demand that proof refuse to return the courtesy when they make statements.
Just my opinion of what I've noticed BTW.
Why do you guys continue to cry about being asked to back up your accusations? Perhaps it's because you rarely can?
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Godamn some of you need a clue...
I have no problem with anyone asking Bush to prove his claims. I have no problem with the people wanting proof. I think Bush deserves more time, but I also think he should be impeached if he was lying to us. If we have proof he lied for his own purposes he needs to be punished there needs to he proof though.
What if he did but there is no paper trail, audio tapes, etc.?
What if he didn't have the intelligence to filter out the lies from the truths told to him, but he just passed on the "faulty" intel anyway?
Is he not the 'Captain of his ship'?
What about all those that gave the President false intel?
Should they be punished also?
What should the punishment be? Getting fired? LOL.
It would have meant (if true BTW, inconclusive so far) that many of our soldiers and Iraqi civilians died on a lie.
My outrage over this has nothing to do with bush, and everything to do with using the names of our dead men in a tasteless add that tells the families there loved ones died for nothing or greed. That's just wrong.
Those of you who cant step away from the bush hate long enough to see that are sad.
But what if what they say is the truth?
Would you still be upset?
Right now we don't REALLY know what the truth is.
You want proof? That's fine so do I. What I don't want is some tool of a politician using dead soldiers.
If true though, then you'd agree that what Bush and Co did would be a more serious crime?
I would be just as pissed if a rep did this.
I would hope so!
Would you rather everyone kept quiet about the possibilty of wrongdoing of your candidate or would you feel secure in his/her innocence that criticism should be voiced in a free and democratic nation?
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Why do you guys continue to cry about being asked to back up your accusations? Perhaps it's because you rarely can?
You care to back that up?
Links please. Nothing out of context either.
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
You care to back that up?
Links please. Nothing out of context either.
Sure. Scroll up 3 posts.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Sure. Scroll up 3 posts.
Oh, that proved it, so profound :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
Oh, that proved it, so profound :rolleyes:
See? I back up my accusations.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
See? I back up my accusations.
So you think ;)
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
So you think ;)
Think? It was pretty obvious. You asked for an example, I gave you one.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Think? It was pretty obvious. You asked for an example, I gave you one.
We'll leave it at you and I disagree. Not unusual.
Having said that, once in awhile, you'll hit on something spot on that I'll agree 100% on.
This was not one of those times. :D
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
Where's a lie???
Show me a lie, show the world a lie. You will be remembered in history. "Sandman exposes the President of the US of A"
Troller or a *******, or both.
I hope both.
Ok, just about Niger:
The most flagrant case, of course, being the yellowcake (uranium) contract, which was a forgery. I'm not sure the British have given up altogether the allegation that Iraq was trying to import yellowcake, but the contract with Niger has been shown to be a forgery. And it only took the IAEA a day or two to figure it out. And President Bush had talked about it in the State of the Union message. The first time I heard about allegations that Iraq imported yellow cake I said, 'well it's possible, we don't exclude anything.' On the other hand, to the layman, when you talk about imported uranium, ah, that's bombs.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1064142126875&call_pageid=1045739058633
In February 2002, Wilson was sent to Niger by the CIA, at the request of Vice President Dick Cheney, to investigate British intelligence claims that Niger had sold yellowcake uranium to Saddam Hussein. His job was to "fill in the gaps of people's understanding of the uranium business - to look at whether such a thing could happen."
Wilson says he investigated who owned and physically had the uranium, the people who would be involved in the decision to sell the substance, how it would be recorded and who would have to sign off on the uranium transfer. He concluded the allegations were "bogus and unrealistic."
"I concluded that this really could not have happened without a lot of people knowing, and without it really being very common knowledge," Wilson says. "And I came back and reported that."
Although Wilson reported it, President Bush still shared the allegations with the country in his annual State of the Union address in January. In an opinion piece in The New York Times six months later, Wilson claimed the White House had used the intelligence report to falsely push for the invasion of Iraq. The next day, the White House acknowledged the information should not have been in Bush's speech.
A week later, columnist Robert Novak revealed that Valerie Plame, Wilson's wife, was a CIA agent tracking weapons of mass destruction and had recommended Wilson for the job. The leaking of information broke a 1982 law barring the release of undercover agents' names and, Wilson said, put his wife's life at risk.
Wilson, and others, allege that his wife's identity was revealed as retribution for his public criticism of the case made for the Iraq invasion. According to a Washington Post report in late September, at least six reporters were offered the information about Plame by unnamed White House officials.
http://gainesvillesun.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20031113/LOCAL/211130331
Can't find all the articles saying that when you readed the forged document (the agreement of the niger's president to export the uranium), the UN realized that it was the name and the signature of a president that ruled this country during the 60's :rofl The CIA is awesome :aok :rofl
-
So the president can say anything he likes as long as someone else told it to him.
Even if he ignored the normal intelligence channels and made up his own?
-
Dont you hate liberals?
Nice men like Republicans would never do something like this!
-
RavenSteve, I got news for ya- this is a flight sim board, not a conservtive forum. Lots of us play flight sims and are liberals also, whatever "liberal" means. Don't think you've wandered into a meeting of the John Birch society. :)
-
Originally posted by Pongo
So the president can say anything he likes as long as someone else told it to him.
Even if he ignored the normal intelligence channels and made up his own?
You're just upset that cretin is gone.
-
Originally posted by Cerceuilvolant
Ok, just about Niger
Communication is key. Was the President made aware of the fact that this information was false before he made his state of the union address. This is unclear from the information that I have seen. If he made the statement without knowledge that it was false, then it is not a lie, just inaccurate. He can be ridiculed for having an intelligence agency and/or staff that let him have inaccurate information, but not for lying.
I would like to know myself what really happened, but in the meantime I will take the man at his word.
-
99% of your "defenses" of bushes lies (crimes really) are attacks on the messenger or diversions to another subject or source scewed to the same dogma.
just sad for grown men to cling to lies and liars. and beggs the question what is the motivation for such odd behavior.
closed head injuries indeed. george bush was a coacain addict and is a deserter from the u.s. military. there is no question at all.
-
Originally posted by RavenSteve
Dont you hate liberals?
Nice men like Republicans would never do something like this!
You going to hate this liberal even more when I kick your bellybutton every time you strap on a plane.
-
Originally posted by lord dolf vader
george bush was a coacain addict and is a deserter from the u.s. military. there is no question at all.
It continues to amaze me that there are those who are absolutely convinced based on highly questionable evidence. "GW deserted because there is no record... his commanding officer does not recall..."
The book "Fortunate Son" speaks of a GWB cocaine conviction of which there is no record, and accroding to Newsmax.com,
In a segment "Capital Gang" host Mark Shields headlined "The George W. Bush Cocaine Watch," panelists Margaret Carlson and Al Hunt continued to suggest there was something to the rumors that Bush had used the drug - more than two years after several major media investigations failed to turn up a single witness who would support the story.
Can you imagine the career making story that so many journalists have passed by? Woodward and Bernstein would become minor league players in comparison to someone who broke and could back up this story.
No question at all huh? To this juror, it looks like there is a complete lack of evidence to decide one way or the other.
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
A large portion of the population does not believe the administration.
So... What's next?
The 2004 election will determine that, not polls.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
It continues to amaze me that there are those who are absolutely convinced based on highly questionable evidence.
If any one else had made this comment it simply would not be as completely hilarious as it is. ROTFLOL! :rofl Thanks Holden...I needed a good laugh. I think I would like to put this as a quote in my sig, if you don't mind.
I wonder why you never made a comment like that aimed at the Bush Administration when they became so convinced, based on shoddy evidence, that they started a war.
As far as Bush's drug/alcohol use...why won't he answer the question? When asked if he ever cheated on his wife, he gives a resounding unmitigated "NO". When asked about whether he's ever used illegal drugs, he begins to sound like Clinton asking what the definition of what "is" is. In '94 the Houston Chronicle asked him about past use of illegal drugs and he aswered, "Maybe I did, maybe I didn't." WTF! When the UK paper "Scotland on Sunday" asked if he's used pot or coke before he said, "When I was young and irresponsible, I was young and irresponsible." Does this guy ever give a straight answer?
So if he wasn't a cokehead and drunkard, why not answer the questions? If he was, why obfuscate...why doesn't he take responsibility for his past actions like a man?
-
Originally posted by Airhead
Lots of us play flight sims and are liberals also, whatever "liberal" means.
Thought I smelled some....:mad:
-
Maybe he considers it none of your business?
-
Originally posted by crowMAW
If any one else had made this comment it simply would not be as completely hilarious as it is. ROTFLOL! :rofl Thanks Holden...I needed a good laugh. I think I would like to put this as a quote in my sig, if you don't mind.
Well Crowmaw,
Be sure you also look at my previous posts, where I stated that lack of evidence does not prove anything on the WMD issue. Be sure that you also quote my statements regarding the best reason for ouster of Saddam was his lack of cooperation with international inspectors and 12 years UNSC resolutions.
My statement that lack of evidence does not prove allegations is consistant.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
How about using the deaths of over 3,000 people do to terrorism? What about scheduling your campaign kick off to coincide with with the anniversary of 9/11?
Hadn't heard that yet ... but makes sense ...
One of the reasons Bush discusts me so is the way he uses 9/11... Take a look at his lies list...
Vote Dean :aok
Screw Bush
Oh and to ten lies list.....
Why did the Bush administration leak the name of a certain man's CIA wife ..... a Man who was callign them on thier LIE........ forget his name at them moment ...
Liars
and oh ... if you don't want to go for the fight .. you don't get the plunder ..... the spoils of war....
I think this war is dirty and nasty and if your country thought so too, you shouldn't then try to profit off it.....
Americans just dished out 80 billion wheather they liked it or not ...
-
You know that 'loss of all hope for humanity' feel I was talking about earlier?
I just got it again.
Me too. Seems to coincide with your posts. Either we're experiencing some weird mental resonance or you're a Yank AH BBS neocon. Hmmm...
:aok