Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: TheDudeDVant on June 22, 2004, 08:41:22 AM
-
Any watch it? Get to see our wonderful Vice president telling a straight up lie on camara??
Get to see Jon Stewart disect that poor author of the book, 'The Connection'... LoL Jon had the guy rethinking his own points he made in his book...
-
Care to share the "straight up lie on camera" with those of us that don't watch that trash?
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Care to share the "straight up lie on camera" with those of us that don't watch that trash?
The daily show, trash? Jon Stewart is God!!
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
The daily show, trash? Jon Stewart is God!!
You've spent too much time on the blue line.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
You've spent too much time on the blue line.
Don't get lost on the orange line either, trust me.
And Jon Stewart is a funny bastid
-
He may not be god. But I was in the audience at one of the tapings, and a vulture brought in by some zooligist (or whatever) flew into the crowd and attacked one of the audience members. For that one brief shining moment, his SHOW was god.
The entire audience broke out into a chant "SUE THEM, SUE THEM" but he walked away happy after they gave him a t-shirt.
Plus, Nugent was a guest and that's always fun.
-
Cheeny said that he had never said that we (america) had 'pretty well proven' the link between Iraqi and Al queda.. He was trying to play down what the administration had said about Iraqi and Al quida (sp)... He was giving CNBC a special interview trying to do this and the woman interviewer quoted him saying that the link was 'pretty well proven' .. Cheeny then said he had never said that. He said it was absolutely not true.. Moments later the clip ran of him saying that very thing to Tim Russert I think it was.
The whole situation was obviously lies to cover up lies...
Humm.. will look for a link.. prlly on his site.. 8)
-
Ok, I thought it was Clinton's book, now wonder martlet don't like him. If you had watched during Clinton, you would have laughed your balls off.
-
There are proven links between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Are you saying that there aren't?
-
The link is not there yet.. perhaps later this week.. The show will run again this afternoon on comedy central at 6pm central. The show is great. Jon Stewart is not what (well some of you would) most would call a bleeding liberal or any other leftist comment one could imagine. He is an american and gives a fair report on whoever he is reporting on. Demos and repubs alike.. If you have not seen the show, you should not judge him. Jon can stand toe to toe with most anyone on most any topic. The man is nothing but charm and wit...
Iron, I am just going by the 911 commissions findings.. You are saying they are wrong? Sure some Al qaeda folk might have met w/ or knew some folk from Iraqi, but they recieved no help from Iraqi..
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
The link is not there yet.. perhaps later this week.. The show will run again this afternoon on comedy central at 6pm central. The show is great. Jon Stewart is not what (well some of you would) most would call a bleeding liberal or any other leftist comment one could imagine. He is an american and gives a fair report on whoever he is reporting on. Demos and repubs alike.. If you have not seen the show, you should not judge him. Jon can stand toe to toe with most anyone on most any topic. The man is nothing but charm and wit...
Iron, I am just going by the 911 commissions findings.. You are saying they are wrong? Sure some Al qaeda folk might have met w/ or knew some folk from Iraqi, but they recieved no help from Iraqi..
No, you are going by what many in the media and press have reported about the findings of the commission. The commission did find links between Al Qaeda and Iraq.
-
really? such as??
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
really? such as??
I have to get ready to go on a service call. Will excerpt from the report when I get back.
-
Here's a few tidbits:
• Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden "explored possible cooperation with Iraq during his time in Sudan."
• "A senior Iraqi intelligence officer reportedly made three visits to Sudan, finally meeting bin Laden in 1994."
• "Contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda also occurred after bin Laden had returned to Afghanistan."
Chairman Thomas Kean has confirmed: "There were contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda, a number of them, some of them a little shadowy. They were definitely there."
-
These are the same reports cheeny is talking about that could neither be confirmed nor denied.. They are unsubstantiated..
Besides, these reports show no cooperation between the two identities.. Only meetings..
Or wait, cheeny said these reports had never been refruted or confirmed was his exact words I believe..
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
These are the same reports cheeny is talking about that could neither be confirmed nor denied.. They are unsubstantiated..
Besides, these reports show no cooperation between the two identities.. Only meetings..
Or wait, cheeny said these reports had never been refruted or confirmed was his exact words I believe..
So you accept some things the commission claims, but not others? I get it now. Selective acceptance. How convenient.
-
Jon Stewart is not what (well some of you would) most would call a bleeding liberal or any other leftist comment one could imagine.
What?!
He is as liberal as you get! OK OK not as liberal as MM but still...
Don't get me wrong I like watching his show most of the time but he almost always has some liberal jerk off on spouting off on how the Repubs are evil and Bush is satan.
He IS funny but his show this year has been as political as you can get and it is so one sided it makes it hard to watch.
Sure Sure he puts in a few ketchup jokes but most of the time it's "Did you see what Bush did today?" BS.
-
When I want unbiased information I always turn to a has been comedian with a 6PM show on cable.
-
Originally posted by Mighty1
What?!
He is as liberal as you get! OK OK not as liberal as MM but still...
Don't get me wrong I like watching his show most of the time but he almost always has some liberal jerk off on spouting off on how the Repubs are evil and Bush is satan.
He IS funny but his show this year has been as political as you can get and it is so one sided it makes it hard to watch.
Sure Sure he puts in a few ketchup jokes but most of the time it's "Did you see what Bush did today?" BS.
You must not have watched him when Clinton was president.. He is a news man that reports current news.. When clinton was pres he had the daily 'did you see what clinton did'... But none of that matters, obviously..
You are totally wrong about his guest.. He has a very good mix of guest..
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
When I want unbiased information I always turn to a has been comedian with a 6PM show on cable.
Glad your up to date on things.. The 6pm show is a re-run of the previous night..
-
Originally posted by Martlet
So you accept some things the commission claims, but not others? I get it now. Selective acceptance. How convenient.
What am I accepting and what am I not??
Are you not guilty of selective acceptance believing against the 911 findings?? How convenient!!
-
Jon is da chits and funny as hell most of the time, although the Haliburton Fairy and Pinocchio make it easy for him to whip up plenty of witty satire. The man carries the Comedy Channel.
-
OK, this certainly indicates ties. Perhaps they didn't have the resources or the cooperation of Al Qaeda to confirm colaboration?
Well, I can't paste from the document itself. However it's in statement 15 where they mention the 3 meetings between Al Qaeda and Iraqi officials.
-
Iron... there were contacts between our diplomats and Japanese diplomats prior to Pearl Harbor. Just because there were meetings does not translate into ties.
-SW
-
Maybe not, there are other indicators though. Still, why would they need to meet three times if they were not discussing collaboration?
-
I don't know. I'm sure if this were turned around to be us, we'd already know the excuse. First one, help us with this. Second one, give us money or weapons. Third one, join us or die.
Of course thats all conjecture - but that differs little all the way up to through the administration... seems lots of things these days are based around conjecture.
-SW
-
Well, there was certainly plenty of conjecture in the panel's report.
One thing I don't think many will deny is that Saddam hated America. Why wouldn't he use whatever means available to strike at us?
-
Originally posted by Martlet
So you accept some things the commission claims, but not others? I get it now. Selective acceptance. How convenient.
ROFLMAO That's rich coming from you Martlet. :rofl
Originally posted by Martlet
Here's a few tidbits:
• Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden "explored possible cooperation with Iraq during his time in Sudan."
• "A senior Iraqi intelligence officer reportedly made three visits to Sudan, finally meeting bin Laden in 1994."
• "Contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda also occurred after bin Laden had returned to Afghanistan."
Chairman Thomas Kean has confirmed: "There were contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda, a number of them, some of them a little shadowy. They were definitely there."
•Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden tried to get a meeting with Saddam but was refused.
•Senior Iraqi officials went to Sudan 3 times to tell him no meeting with Saddam.
•He kept trying to meet with Saddam but was again refused.
I get it now. Selective acceptance. How convenient.
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
I don't know. I'm sure if this were turned around to be us, we'd already know the excuse. First one, help us with this. Second one, give us money or weapons. Third one, join us or die.
-SW
For some odd reason, I seriously doubt threatening Saddam's henchmen would result in the desired outcomes :rolleyes:
-
Sure, plenty of conjecture in the panel - plenty of conjecture thrown around by the heads of the administration. We went to war over conjecture and to-date lies in Iraq. We went to war over proven facts in Afghanistan.
I don't care about Saddam, he's number last on my list of countries that absolutely despise us and definitely have the means to attack us - and openly support those who would and more than likely will.
We went after the LEAST likely threat while bypassing the MOST likely, and one proven, threat.
I could continue on, but it really doesn't matter. No ones opinion of Iraq, Saddam, Al Qaeda "connections", or the Bush administration will change.
-SW
-
Originally posted by Red Tail 444
For some odd reason, I seriously doubt threatening Saddam's henchmen would result in the desired outcomes :rolleyes:
Imagine a golf clap emoticon to match your equally queer rolleyes emoticon.
Now imagine that those three lists of mystical threats I listed were in fact made up to show how three meetings could be three completely different requests/demands for help.
Now imagine that you realised that, and your reply would have never have had to gone from imagined to be put into digital pixels to only prove my statement went a mile over your head.
-SW
-
the same people who will tell you that stewart is not a liberal will tell you that the media is not liberal.
lazs
-
The fact of the matter according to the panel's report is that there were three meetings. They go on to say that Bin Laden requested training camps. Their conjecture is in stating that apprently Iraq never responded. However, in an earlier paragraph they state that Al Qaeda did in fact have a terroist camp in Iraq. Since they acknowledge the terrorist camp in Iraq how can they conclude that Iraq "apparently" never responded?
-
Guys, let's put the political BS aside here...
Baghdad was for years the official, undisguised home address of Abu Nidal, then the most-wanted gangster in the world, who had been sentenced to death even by the PLO and had blown up airports in Vienna and Rome. Baghdad was the safe house for the man whose "operation" murdered Leon Klinghoffer.
In 1993, a certain Mr. Yasin helped mix the chemicals for the bomb at the World Trade Center and then skipped to Iraq, where he remained a guest of the state until the overthrow of Saddam.
In 2001, Saddam's regime was the only one in the region that openly celebrated the attacks on New York and Washington and described them as just the beginning of a larger revenge.
And it was after, and not before, the 9/11 attacks that Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi moved from Afghanistan to Baghdad and began to plan his now very open and lethal design for a holy and ethnic civil war.
-
I don't know Iron, and I don't pretend to know. I have seen from the track record of our current administration that they aren't firing on all cylinders, which means I can't believe them either. So, I'm forced to question it until the time comes I see strong evidence and not more of this loose almost evidence but not so much.
-SW
-
I misread the report, doesn't state there was a training camp in Iraq, only that at least one terrorist group in Iraq joined Al Qaeda.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
I misread the report, doesn't state there was a training camp in Iraq, only that at least one terrorist group in Iraq joined Al Qaeda.
After the invasion??
-
Doesn't say when, assuming it was in the '90's. Here's a link to the report: http://www.9-11commission.gov/. Maybe you can copy and paste, all I get is little boxes, can't change the font.
-
conservitiles dont care if any link between osama and sadam exists, they dont care if any real wmd exist. They just want one reasonable lie that cant be disproven that they can tell to justify all this to themselves.
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
What am I accepting and what am I not??
Are you not guilty of selective acceptance believing against the 911 findings?? How convenient!!
You have trouble reading, too.
Where did I say I didn't believe the 9/11 findings?
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
Glad your up to date on things.. The 6pm show is a re-run of the previous night..
Couldnt get the rights to "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?" reruns?
Stewart is a joke.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
conservitiles dont care if any link between osama and sadam exists, they dont care if any real wmd exist. They just want one reasonable lie that cant be disproven that they can tell to justify all this to themselves.
I'm conservative and I care very much.
So in at least this case, you are wrong.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
You have trouble reading, too.
Where did I say I didn't believe the 9/11 findings?
gee guy.. You say Iraqi and Al Queda have connections, the 911 commision said they did not.. Either you do not believe them or you are in self denial..
Now answer my question..
You say: So you accept some things the commission claims, but not others? I get it now. Selective acceptance. How convenient.
What do I accept and what do I not accept??
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
gee guy.. You say Iraqi and Al Queda have connections, the 911 commision said they did not.. Either you do not believe them or you are in self denial..
Now answer my question..
You say:
What do I accept and what do I not accept??
Actually, as I pointed out, the 9/11 commission said Iraq and Al Qeada DID have connections. They also said they did not cooperate on 9/11.
I agree with both statements. You state here again that the 9/11 commission said they had no connections. That means that you are either:
a: tossing out one of their findings
or
b: can't read.
Which is it?
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
Any watch it? Get to see our wonderful Vice president telling a straight up lie on camara??
When he lies in front of a grand jury and has his law license pulled by a federal judge tell me about it.
-
Originally posted by Krusher
When he lies in front of a grand jury and has his law license pulled by a federal judge tell me about it.
DOH!
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
Guys, let's put the political BS aside here...
Baghdad was for years the official, undisguised home address of Abu Nidal, then the most-wanted gangster in the world, who had been sentenced to death even by the PLO and had blown up airports in Vienna and Rome. Baghdad was the safe house for the man whose "operation" murdered Leon Klinghoffer.
In 1993, a certain Mr. Yasin helped mix the chemicals for the bomb at the World Trade Center and then skipped to Iraq, where he remained a guest of the state until the overthrow of Saddam.
In 2001, Saddam's regime was the only one in the region that openly celebrated the attacks on New York and Washington and described them as just the beginning of a larger revenge.
And it was after, and not before, the 9/11 attacks that Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi moved from Afghanistan to Baghdad and began to plan his now very open and lethal design for a holy and ethnic civil war.
Abu Abbas spent more time in Iraq than his homeland.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Actually, as I pointed out, the 9/11 commission said Iraq and Al Qeada DID have connections. They also said they did not cooperate on 9/11.
I agree with both statements. You state here again that the 9/11 commission said they had no connections. That means that you are either:
a: tossing out one of their findings
or
b: can't read.
Which is it?
Guess you missed where I wrote this part?? Iron, I am just going by the 911 commissions findings.. You are saying they are wrong? Sure some Al qaeda folk might have met w/ or knew some folk from Iraqi, but they recieved no help from Iraqi..
yes yes.. reading skillz..........
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
Guess you missed where I wrote this part??
yes yes.. reading skillz..........
Then expand on this statement you made:
You say Iraqi and Al Queda have connections, the 911 commision said they did not.. Either you do not believe them or you are in self denial..
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Then expand on this statement you made:
GD marlet.. I thought we were talking more 'connection' than these people swaping spit in the shower.. These events we are talking about can not even be proven.. Your just being foolish. Iraqi did not help Al queda w/ 911.. Your 'connection' was nothing more than a possible meeting that might have occured in some unknown location.. Dude, get over yourself..
Do you have something to add other than argumentative statements?
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
GD marlet.. I thought we were talking more 'connection' than these people swaping spit in the shower.. These events we are talking about can not even be proven.. Your just being foolish. Iraqi did not help Al queda w/ 911.. Your 'connection' was nothing more than a possible meeting that might have occured in some unknown location.. Dude, get over yourself..
Do you have something to add other than argumentative statements?
Heh, the vicious vole spits and curses when he's backed into a corner.
Get over YOURSELF. You make contradictory statements that disprove your own argument, then you cry when your called on it? Take your elementary argument to romper room if you can't take the heat.
Otherwise, buck up and get your story straight.
-
Chairman Thomas Kean has confirmed: "There were contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda, a number of them, some of them a little shadowy. They were definitely there."
The commission said there were CONTACTS not CONNECTIONS between Iraq and al-Qaeda. Some of the contacts "were a little shadowy" meaning they had trouble proving they actually made contact. But Yes, we know for a fact Iraq did meet with al-Qaeda at least 3 times to tell them no.
Buck up and get your facts straight.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
The commission said there were CONTACTS not CONNECTIONS between Iraq and al-Qaeda. Some of the contacts "were a little shadowy" meaning they had trouble proving they actually made contact. But Yes, we know for a fact Iraq did meet with al-Qaeda at least 3 times to tell them no.
Buck up and get your facts straight.
I'm glad you have inside information about what was discussed in those meetings.
Thanks for sharing!
-
You know something the 9/11 commission doesn't? Is there a secret "For Martlet Only" version?
Stop being a stereotypical NeoCon and quit distorting the truth.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
You know something the 9/11 commission doesn't? Is there a secret "For Martlet Only" version?
Stop being a stereotypical NeoCon and quit distorting the truth.
Who's distorting the truth or mentioned a "secret version".
I said they met. Meeting is most definitely a connection. YOU'RE the one that seems to know what the content and outcome of the meetings were.
Stop being a stereotypical moonbat and making up facts.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Who's distorting the truth or mentioned a "secret version".
I said they met. Meeting is most definitely a connection. YOU'RE the one that seems to know what the content and outcome of the meetings were.
Stop being a stereotypical moonbat and making up facts.
From the 9/11 Commission's Report
“We have no credible evidence that Iraq and Al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States”
Get this thru your thick skull.
To follow your logic Colin Powell, Dan Rather, George Bush, Sr., and Madeline Albright were connected to al-Qaeda.
-
You obviously need to go back and read the entire thread. That's old news. I've been saying Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 since shortly after 9/11.
What were you saying about thick skulls again?
-
Then what the %#@* are you arguing about? You say there was a connection. You say you agree with the commission there is no connection. It's like watching a dog chase his tail.
-
Actually, it's more like watching someone that can't follow a thread. Go back and read it again.
-
Wtf ARE you arguing aboot?
btw. rpm, the dude's got a Boosh avatar. That's just goofy and weird. Yer gonna be spinning yer wheels for the next 3 pages at least.
-
No. I don't need to read it again, you need to make up your mind. you either agree with the commission's report or you don't. You can't bed the truth to make up your own facts. You may have an opinion, but you have no facts.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
No. I don't need to read it again, you need to make up your mind. you either agree with the commission's report or you don't. You can't bed the truth to make up your own facts. You may have an opinion, but you have no facts.
If you had gone back and read the thread, you'd realize how absolutely ridiculous that comment is pertaining to this discussion.
-
Yeah Nash. I'm working on Excedrin headache # 365 : The NeoCon rant.
I know how he is. He's lonely, living alone with his Fox News feed. He thinks he wins the debate if he just keeps posting. It doesn't matter if it makes sense.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Yeah Nash. I'm working on Excedrin headache # 365 : The NeoCon rant.
Heh, don't fret, when your mom comes home and explains the conversation to you you'll feel better. Then you can pick up where you left off.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Yeah Nash. I'm working on Excedrin headache # 365 : The NeoCon rant.
The headache would stop immediately if you would listen to Mr. Martlet instead of waiting for your turn to speak.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Heh, don't fret, when your mom comes home and explains the conversation to you you'll feel better.
I'm not the one still living with his Mother.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
I'm not the one still living with his Mother.
Oh, my apologies. I guess you'll never get someone to explain the conversation to you.
You're doomed to a life of ignorance.
Excellent comeback, by the way. Get help with your next one.
-
You'll love this one then. :D
(http://www.gilbertv.com/coppermine/albums/052104b/jesus_hates_republicans.jpg)
-
Of course, that makes absolutely no sense, but it has as much to do with the discussion as anything else you've said.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Heh, the vicious vole spits and curses when he's backed into a corner.
Get over YOURSELF. You make contradictory statements that disprove your own argument, then you cry when your called on it? Take your elementary argument to romper room if you can't take the heat.
Otherwise, buck up and get your story straight.
LMAO Martlet... What a load of fecal matter... You have nothing... Your only tryin to make the word 'connection' imply something more.. Take your BS elsewhere.. 8)
-
ok... seems to me that the only couhntries that supported terrorists and that had a regime of terror and that we could get any kind of concensous on to attack were afghan and iraq...
we did that.
How would you liberals be doing things? Are you certain that your solutions would be accepted by all and so clear as to prevent any world or domestic critisim? I have heard no solutions by kerry or the left. only mudslinging.
lazs
-
That one is easy enough to answer lazs. We saw what Clinton did for eight years. Need I say it?
-
Originally posted by AKIron
There are proven links between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Are you saying that there aren't?
the point isn't if the links exist or not. (links to meetings have been shown, but any suport, or agreement comeing from these has not IIRC)
the point is that the man said the links where pretty well proven, then when the 9/11 comission says there is no meaningful link, he lies out his bellybutton and says he never said there was a link. then they run the tape showing where he did say it.
regardless of the link or not, he's a lying piece of crap. he's not lying about a BJ he's lying about 'evidence' that sent our men to die.
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
the point isn't if the links exist or not. (links to meetings have been shown, but any suport, or agreement comeing from these has not IIRC)
the point is that the man said the links where pretty well proven, then when the 9/11 comission says there is no meaningful link, he lies out his bellybutton and says he never said there was a link. then they run the tape showing where he did say it.
regardless of the link or not, he's a lying piece of crap. he's not lying about a BJ he's lying about 'evidence' that sent our men to die.
TY for making my point better than I could.. lol
Where is Ken Star at now??? Where are the independent investigators? Where is the Liberal media reporting on this? Why, when the lie is to a liberal media reporter does it go unreported except on a 'fake' news organization??
-
Originally posted by GScholz
AKIron what happened to you? How did you become Darth Iron of the ultra conservatives?
Happened in about '79, when Carter let Iran slap us around. Was cemented when Reagan whupped the commies.
-
I like to think that I am reasonable. That doesn't mean I'll change my view simply because someone else believes they have proven me wrong.
Reagan may have dealt with the Iranians under the table but the hostages were released upon his inauguration. If the Iranians had been unwilling to deal I have little doubt that Reagan would not have left them there for another year.
-
So, you're saying that Iran is a kidnapping, extorting, nation of thugs? Weren't you onboard with their peaceful attempts at nuclear power?
-
Nice sidestep there GScholz, not so deft as mine though. :cool:
-
Carter never did get our people out of Iran. They were there for 444 days. Reagan did, on his first day in office. The facts regarding their release are unknown.
-
"Reagan did."
Yeah he wasn't half way through his innauguration speech as the hostages were getting set free. Man he works fast...
It's widely believed that Reagan/Bush Sr. did much to ensure that the hostages remained hostages until Carter was defeated.
-
The US did release frozen Iranian assets but I don't really think that qualifies as ransom since the money was theirs. However, I will agree that Iran is full of kidnappers.
-
You do realize that you're talking two different events here, right? The Iran-Contra thing had nothing to do with the hostages in Iran.
-
He may have sold them arms to gain favor with the kidnappers. I told him to nuke all the bastards and let God sort 'em out, but did he listen to me? Noooo. Even tho he did whup the ruskies I am a bit sore we never got to shoot any nukes. ;)
-
Jackboot? You won't see me idolizing Nazis or flying their planes exclusively. But you go ahead and spin it anyway that makes you feel better GScholz and have a restful sleep.
-
you just have to learn to speak conservitive/republican.
by side tracking the conversation on to old topics that can't be settled they have in effect admitted that Chaney is a lying POS.
they'll never admit they're wrong, or that one of their sacred cows might have actualy been caught. changing the subject is as close to an admition as you can get.
-
Refusing to continue an argument when it becomes obvious that the other side is impervious to reason isn't side stepping.
-
when you have 1 tape where he says it, and another tape (from a later date) where he denies ever saying it.
it's not the guy who says Chaney's a liar who is impervious to reason, it's the side-stepper.
-
All politicians lie, thought we had already established that. Some do it in the interest of their country and some in their own personal interest. Not saying that lying is ever the right thing to do but sometimes it is more despicable than others. Won't you agree?
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Yeah Nash. I'm working on Excedrin headache # 365 : The NeoCon rant.
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl I been reading this thread and I was thinkking about that old commercial, too...made me stop dead in my tracks with laughter!
Good one :aok
-
So, if confirmed links mean a definite connection, whether considered meaningful or not...does this equate collaboration?
My pointbeing, there have been reports of links and business dealings between the Bush family, and Saudi government...does this mean that somehow the Bush family is intimately connected to the Saudi govrnment?
It's easy to draw conclusions with this type of fuzzy math...and while we're on that tip...
What should we make of Rummy and Saddam shaking hands back in 83?
Way too easy to draw BS conclusions on incomplete information, but it's all we've been dealing with for 3+ years, so get over it, please!
-
Originally posted by AKIron
All politicians lie, thought we had already established that. Some do it in the interest of their country and some in their own personal interest. Not saying that lying is ever the right thing to do but sometimes it is more despicable than others. Won't you agree?
absolutely, with a lie about private matters to cover up a personal weakness, being not near so despicable as a lie about national security, that was used as 'evidence' to sent our troops off to die in a war that was a financial boon to the liar himself.
no argument from me on that at all. lying is wrong but some lies are worse than others, with Chaney's lie being one of the worst.
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
LMAO Martlet... What a load of fecal matter... You have nothing... Your only tryin to make the word 'connection' imply something more.. Take your BS elsewhere.. 8)
con·nec·tion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (k-nkshn)
n.
1.
1. The act of connecting.
2. The state of being connected.
2. One that connects; a link: made a connection between the two pipes.
3. An association or relationship: There appeared to be no connection between the two crimes.
4. The logical or intelligible ordering of words or ideas; coherence.
5. Reference or relation to something else; context: In this connection, the agreement can be seen as a step toward peace.
6. A person, especially one of influence or importance, with whom one is associated, as by kinship or common interests: used her connections to land a job.
7. A conveyance or scheduled run providing continuing service between means of transportation: missed my connection in Atlanta.
8. A physical link, such as by wire or fiber-optic cable, between two or more points in a telecommunications system: established a connection to the Internet.
9. A means or channel of communication: couldn't hear due to the bad phone connection.
10. Slang.
1. A drug dealer.
2. A purchase of illegal drugs.
You cry a lot when you're wrong.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Ah, the old bait and switch (or rather switch and bait in this case). Classic.
You became a conservative when Carter let the Iranians "slap you around", but when Reagan let them do the same ... even far more, you ignore it.
*Golf clap* How very conservative of you.
Speaking of bait and switch, what's Iran have to do with the Iraq/Al Qaeda connection?
-
Originally posted by Martlet
con·nec·tion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (k-nkshn)
n.
1.
1. The act of connecting.
2. The state of being connected.
2. One that connects; a link: made a connection between the two pipes.
3. An association or relationship: There appeared to be no connection between the two crimes.
4. The logical or intelligible ordering of words or ideas; coherence.
5. Reference or relation to something else; context: In this connection, the agreement can be seen as a step toward peace.
6. A person, especially one of influence or importance, with whom one is associated, as by kinship or common interests: used her connections to land a job.
7. A conveyance or scheduled run providing continuing service between means of transportation: missed my connection in Atlanta.
8. A physical link, such as by wire or fiber-optic cable, between two or more points in a telecommunications system: established a connection to the Internet.
9. A means or channel of communication: couldn't hear due to the bad phone connection.
10. Slang.
1. A drug dealer.
2. A purchase of illegal drugs.
You cry a lot when you're wrong.
nice sidestep. we've already been here before though. running out of new places to duck the issue.
just a reminder, here is the actual issue-
the point isn't if the links exist or not. (links to meetings have been shown, but any suport, or agreement comeing from these has not IIRC)
the point is that the man said the links where pretty well proven, then when the 9/11 comission says there is no meaningful link, he lies out his bellybutton and says he never said there was a link. then they run the tape showing where he did say it.
regardless of the link or not, he's a lying piece of crap. he's not lying about a BJ he's lying about 'evidence' that sent our men to die.
even if you could somehow find proof that SH actually flew one of the 9/11 planes, Chaney would still be a liar, because he denied saying something that there is proof he had said.
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
nice sidestep. we've already been here before though. running out of new places to duck the issue.
just a reminder, here is the actual issue-
even if you could somehow find proof that SH actually flew one of the 9/11 planes, Chaney would still be a liar, because he denied saying something that there is proof he had said.
I don't have to provide proof. The issue was TheDudeVant said the commission said there was no connection between Al Qeada and Iraq, when in fact they said the opposite.
When Cheney gets disbarred for lying under oath, then cry to me.
-
3. An association or relationship: There appeared to be no connection between the two crimes.
“We have no credible evidence that Iraq and Al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States”
(http://www.gilbertv.com/coppermine/albums/06042004/racerx.jpg)
-
The commission was a political tool. Their conclusions were based on biased conjecture. Hussein was a threat but is no longer. Don't like it, too bad, vote for Kerry if you can.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
The commission was a political tool. Their conclusions were based on biased conjecture. Hussein was a threat but is no longer. Don't like it, too bad, vote for Kerry if you can.
A political tool? The panel was bipartisan and chaired by a Republican. Your NeoCon conclusion is based on biased conjecture. I do plan on voting for Kerry.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
(http://www.gilbertv.com/coppermine/albums/06042004/racerx.jpg)
Who's saying they cooperated on 9/11?