PDA

View Full Version : For those who oppose the war?



LWW
10-12-2007, 08:08 AM
Doesn't it bother you that the hijacker of the Achille Lauro killed American Leon Klinghofer in cold blood, and then after being forced to the ground in Italy presented Iraqi diplomatic paper...and fled to Baghdad where he lived on a comfy Iraqi pension until we came in?

Doesn't it bother you that Iraq attempted an assassination of a former US President?

Doesn't it bother you Iraq paid homicide bombers to go into Israel and kill Americans?

Doesn't it bother you that Saddam gassed and killed thousands of his own people?

Doesn't it bother you that Saddam brought about the deaths of hundreds of thousands through his years of brutality?

Doesn't it bother you that the 1991 ceasefire was broken by Iraq with impunity?

Doesn't it bother you that Clinton and the New York Times beat the WMD drum for 8 years and then they tell yo "BUSH LIED!" and so many of you swallow it whole without question?

Doesn't it bother you that the UN was totally corrupt and complicit in this through the oil for food programs.

Doesn't it bother you that you constantly repeat lies told by the DNC when the authorization to use force is very explicit and says nothing like what the MSM claims we said?

Doesn't it bother you that we found in Iraq exactly what we said we would yet the DNC beats the "BUSH LIED!" drum incessantly?

Or, does none of that matter so long as you can shout down opposition?

LWW

LWW
10-14-2007, 05:50 AM
The silence is deafening...and revealing.

LWW

pooltchr
10-14-2007, 07:25 AM
You aren't playing fair. Asking questions like these require someone to actually think about the big picture. Someone might even have to question their own position on too many things. It's much easier to just cut and paste the DNC spin on topics they want to consider. Shame on you for actually posing legitimate questions! /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif
Steve

DeadCrab
10-14-2007, 08:05 AM
Shame on all those who support the war but don't show up to fight it.

Don't give me that too old crap, they'll waive just about anybody in these days.

Pony up, or clam up, chickenhawks.

pooltchr
10-14-2007, 09:42 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DeadCrab:</font><hr>
Shame on all those who support the war but don't show up to fight it.

Don't give me that too old crap, they'll waive just about anybody in these days.

Pony up, or clam up, chickenhawks.

<hr /></blockquote>

I served my time during Viet Nam. I have EARNED the right to take a stand without listening to this kind of crap.
Have YOU ever been to war?
Steve

DeadCrab
10-14-2007, 10:26 AM
If YOU went to Viet Nam, then YOU have earned the right.

However, hasn't it ever bothered you just a little bit that when you were in Viet Nam some of the biggest hawks who put you there made very sure their sons didn't have to go?

Doesn't it jerk your chain when someone like LWW sings the praises of the war in Iraq...never served on active duty..and then expects someone else to fight it for him?

As a vet, I would think that you would see the immorality of someone sending someone else to war when they would not be willing to put themselves at risk.

But since you are a vet, I'll respect your opinion to see it the way you do. Those who didn't pony up, get no pass from me.

bamadog
10-14-2007, 10:53 AM
You are aware that we live in a Democratic Republic, aren't you?
If national issues were decided by the direct participation of the citizens instead of voting for our representatives, can you imagine the chaos?
We are approaching the point in this country where nearly half of the workers pay NO fed. income tax. Yet, they regularly vote on the tax rates of those who do pay. Are you advocating that only property owners should have a vote about their property tax rates? Are you advocating that only male voters should have a vote about the draft? Perhaps those who pay more taxes should have more votes? Perhaps veterans should have more votes?

DeadCrab
10-14-2007, 11:06 AM
**********************
Perhaps veterans should have more votes?
***********************

Hmmmmmm....interesting idea.

LWW
10-14-2007, 11:07 AM
I took the oath sir.

Did you?

LWW

LWW
10-14-2007, 11:09 AM
I have not been to war sir and am thankful that nary a shot was fired in anger during my time.

I thank you for your service, and all of those who have honorably served, and I pity those who do not understand the sense of honor military service brings.

LWW

LWW
10-14-2007, 11:17 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DeadCrab:</font><hr> Doesn't it jerk your chain when someone like LWW sings the praises of the war in Iraq...never served on active duty..and then expects someone else to fight it for him<hr /></blockquote>
Doesn't it embarass you that you come in a thread, don't answer a question, and then show your arse with an ad hominem attack?

You sir would never begin to understand the military whatsoever, and had an opportunity to serve or not serve at your discretion. You chose NOT!

How dare you come in as a pompous arse and insult someone who did.

I did not do active duty, correct. I was in during a time that a true "MOTHER OF ALL WARS" was possible against the USSR. I took the oath and was prepared to go. As I said, I am thankful that war never developed, and I am in no way equating my duty with the duty of those in Iraq or Afghanistan...but it gives you no right, other than the right to show your true colors, to denigrate my service or any service person.

Now, how about telling us about what you did to repay the patriots before you for your freedon? Let's here of your turn on watch? I'm thankful that nothing happened on mine again brother...but I walked the walk as well as talked the talk.

LWW

SKennedy
10-14-2007, 11:19 AM
I too served..active duty..Navy, as I've discussed on here before....
I don't fault those who are pro the war in Iraq and then do not rush down to join the service. The draft ended in 1973. We all have our reasons for doing different things and joining the military is a personal thing. Dodging the draft was not my choice; however, I could at least understand why someone would elect to do so. Some were cowards, but not the majority. For the "lefties" on here to suggest that a conservative thinker on this forum is a coward or doesn't stand for what he thinks is right because he is not in the military and pleading to go to Iraq is just plain wrong and stupid!

DeadCrab
10-14-2007, 11:29 AM
Since I am not asking anyone else to fight for me, it is irrelevant as to whether I have served or whether I have made an effort to get myself into the Iraq fiasco.

The point is, I just would not ask someone to fight unless I was going to at least try to go with them. I am most certainly not asking anyone to fight in Iraq for me.



But since you asked, I voluntarily served three years active duty in the US Army, and three years active reserves.

The fact that I served on active duty does not influence my stance that I will never support a war that I am unwilling to fight in myself. If anything, it reinforces it.

Have a happy day.

LWW
10-14-2007, 12:17 PM
No. The point is that people have already fought for your freedom and you denigrate those who were willing to take the risk.

You have the right not to serve, and I will not fault you for that until you make the asinine remarks you made earlier.

And, FWIW, I attempted to re-up at age 44 on 9/12/01, enlisted in 1976, discharged in 1982, reached the rank of E5, and was not allowed to re-enlist because of an older ankle injury that I had managed to hide through the enlistment process.

Now, you sir, owe an apology to every reservist and peace time soldier here.

I doubt that we will get it.

LWW

LWW
10-14-2007, 12:18 PM
And sir I thank you for your service to your country.

LWW

pooltchr
10-14-2007, 08:04 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DeadCrab:</font><hr>
If YOU went to Viet Nam, then YOU have earned the right.

However, hasn't it ever bothered you just a little bit that when you were in Viet Nam some of the biggest hawks who put you there made very sure their sons didn't have to go?
<font color="red"> To tell the truth, I wasn't too concerned about who wasn't there. My thoughts were pretty much focused on who was there...my buddies, and those who wanted to kill us. Our priorities were dealing with the reality of the situation. Nobody wanted to be there, but there was a job to do, and we took an oath to do it to the best of our abilities. </font color>

Doesn't it jerk your chain when someone like LWW sings the praises of the war in Iraq...never served on active duty..and then expects someone else to fight it for him?
<font color="red"> I don't know if he ever served or not...and don't really care. Part of what we were fighting for was the right of our citizens to speak their mind. I do prefer those who take the time to become informed before they do. I don't put much stock in anyone's opinion if I feel it's based on a limited or biased source. I enjoy having conversations with open minded people. The rest are pretty much a waste of perfectly good oxygen. </font color>

As a vet, I would think that you would see the immorality of someone sending someone else to war when they would not be willing to put themselves at risk.
<font color="red"> Our oath was to defend the country against all enemies. And when you put on the uniform of the United States military, that is your job. Sure, we questioned sone of the decisions being made, but the bottom line was you take your orders and do what you are supposed to do. If you don't, your buddies can get killed, and so can you. </font color>

But since you are a vet, I'll respect your opinion to see it the way you do. Those who didn't pony up, get no pass from me.
<hr /></blockquote>
<font color="red"> I appreciate that. I can't fault someone who hasn't been in the service, because I don't know individual circumstances. When you are under fire, it's nice to know that the people covering your backside are there because they want to be there, not because they were forced to be there. </font color>

Steve

SKennedy
10-14-2007, 08:37 PM
And if you were as young as I, you certainly gave no thought to politics....and you are correct about only wondering who is there and certainly not who is not there.

bamadog
10-14-2007, 09:30 PM
Excellent post pooltchr.

LWW
10-15-2007, 03:49 AM
Ditto.

And, it's a shame that leftist hate is introduced into the thread...but not a single response to the meat of a single question.

I'm wondering why that is.

LWW

Qtec
10-15-2007, 04:07 AM
How do you explain the fact that in the summer of 2000, Condi said Saddam was 'contained' and C Powell said Saddam was 'unable to project war on his neighbours' but 6 months later he was considered a threat to the US by GW etc.?

The only ''WMDs' CW found are pre 1991 duds, which are sometimes detonated by mistake in Iraq and have so far killed no-one. Are these the WMDs that Saddam would give to AlQ?
There is a BIG difference between a nuke which would kill 1,000s and these rusty old ex-CWs that go up in a puff of smoke and might give 3 bystanders a headache!

Saddam was a bad guy and we are all glad he got served justice but we don't all agree that the war was necessary or useful in the WOT.
After 9/11 ,the decision to invade Iraq was made and the WMD issue was the excuse. There can be no doubt that they exaggerated intel and deliberately mislead in order to sway public opinion in favour of the war.
Example; Condi and Bush both used the "mushroom cloud" phrase when in reality Saddam was at least 8 yrs away at from having a nuke- and thats without sanctions! This phrase rebounded throughout the media and 24/7 on Fox. Old ladies were buying nuke bunkers and gas masks. It was Freedom Fries, the Stars and Stripes and anyone who didn't support the war was obviously a traitor.

The Downing St memo, the forged Niger docs, 'curveball' and the Alu tubes issue show that the Govt was less than honest about their motivations and the strength of the intel.

[ QUOTE ]
Woodward describes a relationship between Cheney and Secretary of State Colin L. Powell that became so strained Cheney and Powell are barely on speaking terms. Cheney engaged in a bitter and eventually winning struggle over Iraq with Powell, an opponent of war who believed Cheney was obsessively trying to establish a connection between Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network and treated ambiguous intelligence as fact.

Powell felt Cheney and his allies -- his chief aide, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby; Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz; and Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith and what Powell called Feith's "Gestapo" office -- had established what amounted to a separate government. <hr /></blockquote>








Q web page (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17347-2004Apr16.html)
web page (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/04/september11/main520830.shtml)

Q

Qtec
10-15-2007, 04:13 AM
Q to a RW neo-con.

"What if invading Iraq escalates and WW3 begins?

A. "Wonderful! Then we will have Rapture!".

Tom DeLay, "It can't come soom enough for me."!!!!!!!!!!!!


video- Rapture Ready........ (http://www.newscloud.com/read/Lieberman_DeLay_Are_Ready_for_the_Rapture)

Hidden agenda's?

Q

LWW
10-15-2007, 04:16 AM
OK, dutchboy who has been beaten down before.

2000 wasn't 2003. The way you tell that is when you look at the calender.

WMD's were found in abundance in Iraq.

What happened also is that the MSM redefined WMD away from the UN resolution definitions.

THOUSANDS of illegal missiles were found. Enough "bug spray" to murder all life on Earth was found. In guarded miloitary sites. Along with aerial dispersion shells.

Strains of numerous chem weapons were found, along with human testing labs.

David Kaye said in the ISG report that Iraq was an even more deadly place than anticipated.

Does the neoleft ever mention any of this?

No.

Why?

"IF IT DOESN'T FIT, WE MUST OMIT!"

That being said, thanks for at least having the courage to make a case, albeit an uninformed one.

LWW

LWW
10-15-2007, 04:19 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Q to a RW neo-con.

"What if invading Iraq escalates and WW3 begins?

A. "Wonderful! Then we will have Rapture!".

Tom DeLay, "It can't come soom enough for me."!!!!!!!!!!!!


video- Rapture Ready........ (http://www.newscloud.com/read/Lieberman_DeLay_Are_Ready_for_the_Rapture)

Hidden agenda's?

Q <hr /></blockquote>
And, please, take your religious hatred elsewhere.

1-You paint, for the sake of building straw men, with an extremely broad brush.

2-This is America. People are entitled to their 1st amendment rights whether the neoleft likes it or not.

LWW

DickLeonard
10-15-2007, 07:34 AM
DeadCrab GWB was 1273 on the list to get in the Texas Air National Guard then suddenly he was # One. His training consisted of training on a jet that was being eliminated from the AirForce so he would never have to go to VietNam. He did take time off to go all over the country trying to get Rpubs elected. His service records cannot be found.

Jessie "The Body" Ventura said it best. When Martha Stewart lied she was sent to Jail. When the U.S lies we go to War.####

DickLeonard
10-15-2007, 07:36 AM
DeadCrab every right winger is for the War their just not for fighting the WAR.####

DickLeonard
10-15-2007, 07:57 AM
Qtec The Saudia Regime is just as bad sa Saddam was. 18 of crew that hit the World Trade Center were Saudis not an Iraquii in the Bunch. We piloted all of OBL relatives out of the country when no planes were suppose to be in the air.

They had 800 billion dollars in our banks which we could have attached and then brought Democrazy to them.

The Saudia Adminstration told Pres. Bush to tell junior to stop saying he is going to bring Democrazy to the Middle East. GWB has stop pushing that Idea.

Colin Powell has lost my respect for not jumping that ship.####

Bobbyrx
10-15-2007, 09:03 AM
It's a FACT that only 7% of Gitmo inmates are terrorists! Most were handed to the US FOR MONEY by unscrupulous people. Its a fact that many innocent people have died in US custody, at least 40 died under torture.
Q
<font color="red">Still waiting for the source of these "facts" </font color>

LWW
10-15-2007, 09:53 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bobbyrx:</font><hr> It's a FACT that only 7% of Gitmo inmates are terrorists! Most were handed to the US FOR MONEY by unscrupulous people. Its a fact that many innocent people have died in US custody, at least 40 died under torture.
Q
<font color="red">Still waiting for the source of these "facts" </font color>

<hr /></blockquote>

Evidence?

LWW

LWW
10-15-2007, 09:55 AM
Evidence, other than the proven lies of Michael Moorecheeseburgers?
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DickLeonard:</font><hr> Qtec The Saudia Regime is just as bad sa Saddam was. 18 of crew that hit the World Trade Center were Saudis not an Iraquii in the Bunch. We piloted all of OBL relatives out of the country when no planes were suppose to be in the air.

They had 800 billion dollars in our banks which we could have attached and then brought Democrazy to them.

The Saudia Adminstration told Pres. Bush to tell junior to stop saying he is going to bring Democrazy to the Middle East. GWB has stop pushing that Idea.

Colin Powell has lost my respect for not jumping that ship.#### <hr /></blockquote>

LWW

Gayle in MD
10-15-2007, 10:12 AM
Hey Q, can you believe these nuts on here are still lying about WMD, and David Kaye! I wonder why they never sight the man, and the administration, which put Saddam in power? The administration that created the Talliban? the administration which spread all the nukes and weapons around in the middle east in the first place.

The Pentagon, the State Department, and the National Security Agency, had already stated that the weapons found in Iraq, were not the weapons referred to by this administration in the build up to this illegal, immoral occupation. Even Bush has admitted there were no WMD's found, and that Iraq, and Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Qtec
10-15-2007, 10:47 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Who are the Guantanamo Detainees?
Mark Denbeaux and Joshua W. Denbeaux claim to have used US government data to have assembled a profile of the Guantanamo detainees. They claim their data shows:

1. Fifty-five percent (55%) of the detainees are not determined to have committed any hostile acts against the United States or its coalition allies.
2. Only 8% of the detainees were characterized as al Qaeda fighters. Of the remaining detainees, 40% have no definitive connection with al Qaeda at all and 18% are have no definitive affiliation with either al Qaeda or the Taliban.
3. The Government has detained numerous persons based on mere affiliations with a large number of groups that in fact, are not on the Department of Homeland Security terrorist watchlist. Moreover, the nexus between such a detainee and such organizations varies considerably. Eight percent are detained because they are deemed "fighters for;" 30% considered "members of;" a large majority - 60% - are detained merely because they are "associated with" a group or groups the Government asserts are terrorist organizations. For 2% of the prisoners, a nexus to any terrorist group is not identified by the Government.
4. Only 5% of the detainees were captured by United States forces. 86% of the detainees were arrested by either Pakistan or the Northern Alliance and turned over to United States custody. This 86% of the detainees captured by Pakistan or the Northern Alliance were handed over to the United States at a time in which the United States offered large bounties for capture of suspected enemies. <hr /></blockquote>

Q etc

LWW
10-15-2007, 11:28 AM
Sorry dude, unsubstantiated and based on what someone "CLAIMED" they had researched.

The clinker is that, even if the numbers you posted are correct, they directly contradict the claim which I disputed that 7% of inmates were terrorists and 93% weren't.

Pay close attention. It isn't our fault if people are sold off as "terrorists". Our responsiblility is to find out and then hold or release them. You are claiming we did that. I agree.

Now, how would you like to talk about these poor innocents who have been released and then killed/terrorized again.

LWW

Bobbyrx
10-15-2007, 11:41 AM
What a joke. Mark Denbeaux and Joshua W. Denbeaux are LAWYERS WHO REPRESENT DETAINEES for crying out loud. Great source. You probably still believe Baghdad Bob. At least this report gives both sides. web page (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/26/washington/26gitmo.html)

Bobbyrx
10-15-2007, 11:49 AM
According to Johnny Cochran and Robert Shapiro there is a 99% chance that O.J. is innocent....

LWW
10-15-2007, 12:15 PM
So, you did find a link.

Did you read it?

If you had you would find that it disputes your figures by a factor of a little over 900%...

LWW

bamadog
10-15-2007, 01:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Hey Q, can you believe these nuts on here are still lying about WMD, and David Kaye! I wonder why they never sight the man, and the administration, which put Saddam in power? The administration that created the Talliban? the administration which spread all the nukes and weapons around in the middle east in the first place.

The Pentagon, the State Department, and the National Security Agency, had already stated that the weapons found in Iraq, were not the weapons referred to by this administration in the build up to this illegal, immoral occupation. Even Bush has admitted there were no WMD's found, and that Iraq, and Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif



<hr /></blockquote>

Please show the evidence that the US instilled Saddam and the Taliban, if you have any.
Your "blame America first" ideology indicates that you are either willfilly ignorant of history or so blinded by your hatred of GWB that you will trash our country to attack him. Either way, it is shameful.

LWW
10-15-2007, 01:28 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bamadog:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Hey Q, can you believe these nuts on here are still lying about WMD, and David Kaye! I wonder why they never sight the man, and the administration, which put Saddam in power? The administration that created the Talliban? the administration which spread all the nukes and weapons around in the middle east in the first place.

The Pentagon, the State Department, and the National Security Agency, had already stated that the weapons found in Iraq, were not the weapons referred to by this administration in the build up to this illegal, immoral occupation. Even Bush has admitted there were no WMD's found, and that Iraq, and Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif



<hr /></blockquote>

Please show the evidence that the US instilled Saddam and the Taliban, if you have any.
Your "blame America first" ideology indicates that you are either willfilly ignorant of history or so blinded by your hatred of GWB that you will trash our country to attack him. Either way, it is shameful. <hr /></blockquote>
Goodun Dawg.

I think it was JLW and SS that had their arses handed to them when they repeated the ihnint comments about President Reagan backing Bin Laden and AQ.

They are least talking a little.

Me thinks it's almost time to start working out on the heavy bag so I can be in shape to throw the heavy leather of truth at em.

So far these little truthjabs seem to just leave them stunned.

LWW

Qtec
10-15-2007, 06:12 PM
FACT.

[ QUOTE ]
Only 5% of the detainees were captured by United States forces. 86% of the detainees were arrested by either Pakistan or the Northern Alliance and turned over to United States custody. This 86% of the detainees captured by Pakistan or the Northern Alliance were handed over to the United States at a time in which the United States offered large bounties for capture of suspected enemies. <hr /></blockquote>

How can US forces tell who is who when THEY don't even speak the language?

So basically some scumbag raghead delivers 5 men to the US, takes the money and runs and the US declares it has caught some terrorists?
In civilized countries its the LAW that dictates what can and cannot- not some dictator who makes Laws to suit him.
We in the West believe that a person is innocent until proven guilty, etc......................Get my drift?
The US supposedly entered Iraq to enforce the Law- human rights, Democracy etc but has any of those principals been applied to those accused in Gitmo?

At least 40 people have been tortured to death in US custody and the people now in prison for these crimes are rthe lowest ranked. SO MUCH FOR SUPPORTING THE TROOPS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Either listen or go back to AZ.

This is your last chance.

If you- if spite of the evidence- still claim the Iraq war was justified and neccesary, lets hear it.

The truth is you have NOTHING. There were no WMDs- in FACT, GW said it himself! "We found no WMDs".





Q

Qtec
10-15-2007, 06:18 PM
If these guys are all guilty WHY NOT BRING THEM TO A COURT OF LAW????????????????????
Q

LWW
10-16-2007, 03:20 AM
It's called using interpreters dude. It's called markings...Saddam's Fedayeen for example had tattoos like gangs...or the old standby would be if they were shooting at us.

LWW

LWW
10-16-2007, 03:21 AM
They are not entitled to trial in the US, although tribunals are starting now...but you knew that.

LWW

LWW
10-16-2007, 03:25 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Either listen or go back to AZ.

This is your last chance.

If you- if spite of the evidence- still claim the Iraq war was justified and neccesary, lets hear it.

Q<hr /></blockquote>
OK Dutchboy:

1-The forum isn't yours.
2-It was you who RAN when the data was reported to you on AZB.
3-The fact that you lack the intellectual honesty to process it is your prblem and not mine.
4-If I had been treated remotely politely by the left here I would have been long fgone and leave you to your lovefest.
5-On top of the rudeness I'm starting to get PM's from neoleftists begging me to leave...it seems the "tolerance" for things is pretty thin over here.

LWW

Bobbyrx
10-23-2007, 08:43 AM
Which court would you suggest? Let me guess.......oh maybe the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ???

Gayle in MD
10-23-2007, 10:49 AM
You're absolutely right, Q, and the information has been highlighted in a number of books on the war.

Anyone stupid enough to jump on here and try to say the we found the WMD's Bush referred to in his lies which were used in the lead up to this illegal war for regime change in, and occupation of Iraq, which BTW, was, NOT sanctioned by the congress, must have been living under a rock for the last four years.

The State Department, in fact, made an official statement that those weapons found, were not the weapons referred to by Bush in his pre-war statements.

There was no connection to al Qaeda, or 9/11, and Saddam, was not considered to be an immediate threat.

The administration was yapping about invading Iraq before 9/11 ever happened, amny who resigned in protest to Bush's lies and law breaking, have confirmed that, over and over.

Not one single statement that these jerks from AZ have made, is true, not one. They write false information, and then demand you prove them wrong, LMAO, that's pretty good.

jSaddam was no immediate threat, no WMD's no connection to al Qaeda, and no connection to 9/11. Do any of thes jerks have any reasonable explanation why Bush chose to invade a country that he knew was no immediate threat, instead of focusing on the man who DID lead the attack on 9/11.

Do any of them address the sixteen words in the STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS, that Bush used, even after the CIA and the NSA told him not to use them?

Do they want to discuss Condoleeza Rice, lying when she said that no one had ever even though about people flying airplanes into buildings, when we had that intelligence a decade earlier, and she was told about it by Clarke?

anyone fo them want to addres the reason why Richard Clarke our COUNTER TERRORIST CZAR, was ignored for NINE MONTHS after he requested an emergency meeting with the president? NINE MONTHS!

Rice answered that question, she said the President didn't want to swat at flies, well, turns out those "FLIES" were crashing jets into buildings, and almost wiped out the White House, or the Capital, and the Pentagon. Pretty poor judgement, huh, refusing to take the very threat the outgoing president warned him about, seriously, due to a preconcieved determination to attack a country that was no immediate threat?

There is no defending this incompetent administration, or this ignorant, incompetent lying POS President, or his Cabinet. Liars, all. Too bad we can't send them to Iraq! Too bad none of them will ever have the pleasure of being waterboarded, while they're freezing, with music blasting in their ears, in stress positions. Too bad we can't sue them all for all the treasure they've wasted and all the lives lost and wasted on an unnecessary war, in the wrong country, for the wrong reasons.

Too bad we have to put up with people spreadig lies around, that have already been proven to be lies, over and over again, without listening to their falsely percieved delusions of debating granduer!


"Hey, President Bush, Torture doesn't work. People don't tell you the truth, they just tell you what they think you want them to say."

George Bush, "He he he, ah, well, yeah, he he he, that's the policy, we always torture people so they tell the lies we want to hear, that's our foreign policy, stupid! This Administration will not allow the truth to stand in the war of our war on terror!"
/ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif


All hat, no cattle, /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

LWW
10-23-2007, 11:33 AM
I have a question for you Gayle...have you ever read the authorization to use force in Iraq, or not?

LWW

Qtec
10-23-2007, 09:04 PM
eg8r said it better than I ever could. You don't debate, you lecture. I stopped conversing with you when I realized it was a waste of time because of your total inability to accept facts which go against your beliefs.
You said the Downing Street Memo was a fake even after I showed you a video of Tony Blair verifying its exisistance.
If anyone mentions how odd it is that 3 bulidings of a particular construction - for the first time in history- collapsed from fire you say "OMG, here we go , the whacko looney conspiracy theorists ".
In the same breath you contend that Saddam DID have WMDs but he managed to transport every single one [ no post 1991 WMDs have been found] to Syria under the noses of the US.

You don't WIN debates, you bore people to death because as Ed says, you don't listen and you certainly can't read.

Q.

LWW
10-24-2007, 04:33 AM
Tell the truth Dutchboy.

You left after I tired of your moonbatology and piece by piece crushed your "truther" ideas and left you in your own words explaining that building 7 was a demo job that made it collapse straight down from the bottom up causing an explosive debris field from the implosion of the building...with silent explosives!

LWW

Bobbyrx
10-24-2007, 03:53 PM
"If anyone mentions how odd it is that 3 bulidings of a particular construction - for the first time in history- collapsed from fire you say "OMG, here we go , the whacko looney conspiracy theorists ".
<font color="red"> Just curious, why did they collapse?</font color>

LAMas
10-24-2007, 08:53 PM
A scientific explaination:

http://www.debunking911.com/paper.htm

bamadog
10-24-2007, 11:35 PM
Gayle, why do you suppose Clinton's National Security Advisor, Sandy Burglar, was stuffing Top Secret documents down his pants in the National Archives?
Who was he working for?

LWW
10-25-2007, 04:21 AM
Dawg, don't you know it was Karl Rove who slipped those docs to Sandy under a bathroom stall!

It's all part of a corn-spiracy!

LWW

LWW
10-25-2007, 04:23 AM
QTEC,

Why is it you feel the need to devolve every thread you enter yet never actually answer the Q's at the top of the thread?

LWW

hondo
10-25-2007, 07:28 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote LWW:</font><hr>

Q<hr /></blockquote>
OK Dutchboy:


4-If I had been treated remotely politely by the left here I would have been long fgone and leave you to your lovefest.

LWW <hr /></blockquote>

A clue! A clue! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif
We all love you &amp; respect you. Goodbye. ( Don't forget
Bamadog.)

Bobbyrx
10-25-2007, 10:54 AM
I don't mean what really happened. I want Q's version.

LWW
10-25-2007, 11:37 AM
Sit down with a cold beer...it's a goodun.

LWW