PDA

View Full Version : Without googling...



Qtec
10-31-2010, 09:32 PM
....anyone know what my signature refers to?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Remarkable. You leak a story, and then you quote the story. That's a remarkable thing to do." </div></div>

If you don't, you either slept through 2003 or you watch Fox.

Q

Gayle in MD
11-01-2010, 06:09 AM
Believe me, I know, but I don't want to give it away. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif



G.

Qtec
11-01-2010, 06:14 AM
Too hard? Here is a clue.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BILL MOYERS: On the basis of his intelligence sources Landay wrote there was little evidence to back up the Vice President's claims.

BILL MOYERS: But the story Landay wrote didn't run In New York or Washington - Knight Ridder, remember, has no outlet in either city. So it couldn't compete with a blockbuster that appeared two days later on the front page of the nation's paper of record, with a familiar by-line….

BILL MOYERS: <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Quoting anonymous administration officials, the TIMES reported that Saddam Hussein had launched a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb using specially designed aluminimum tubes...</span>

<span style='font-size: 17pt'><u><span style="color: #3333FF">And there on MEET THE PRESS that same morning was Vice President Cheney.</span></u></span>

DICK CHENEY (MEET THE PRESS NBC 9/8/02): <span style='font-size: 20pt'>There's a story in the NEW YORK TIMES this morning,</span> this is-- and I want to attribute this to the TIMES -- I don't want to talk about obviously specific intelligence sources, but--

JONATHAN LANDAY: <u>Now, ordinarily information-- like the aluminum tubes would-- wouldn't appear-it was top secret intelligence, and the Vice President and the National Security Advisor would not be allowed to talk about this on the Sunday talk shows. But, it appeared that morning in the NEW YORK TIMES and, therefore, they were able to talk about it.</u>

DICK CHENEY (MEET THE PRESS NBC 9/8/02): It's now public that <span style='font-size: 17pt'>in fact he has been seeking to acquire and we have been able to intercept to prevent him from acquiring through this particular channel the kinds of tubes that are necessary to build a centrifuge and the centrifuge is required to take low grade uranium and enhance it into highly enriched uranium which is what you have to have <span style='font-size: 23pt'>in order to build a bomb.</span>"</span> </div></div>



What Cheney failed to mention was........??


Anybody?



Q

Gayle in MD
11-01-2010, 06:20 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Too hard? Here is a clue.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BILL MOYERS: On the basis of his intelligence sources Landay wrote there was little evidence to back up the Vice President's claims.

BILL MOYERS: But the story Landay wrote didn't run In New York or Washington - Knight Ridder, remember, has no outlet in either city. So it couldn't compete with a blockbuster that appeared two days later on the front page of the nation's paper of record, with a familiar by-line….

BILL MOYERS: <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Quoting anonymous administration officials, the TIMES reported that Saddam Hussein had launched a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb using specially designed aluminimum tubes...</span>

<span style='font-size: 17pt'><u><span style="color: #3333FF">And there on MEET THE PRESS that same morning was Vice President Cheney.</span></u></span>

DICK CHENEY (MEET THE PRESS NBC 9/8/02): <span style='font-size: 20pt'>There's a story in the NEW YORK TIMES this morning,</span> this is-- and I want to attribute this to the TIMES -- I don't want to talk about obviously specific intelligence sources, but--

JONATHAN LANDAY: <u>Now, ordinarily information-- like the aluminum tubes would-- wouldn't appear-it was top secret intelligence, and the Vice President and the National Security Advisor would not be allowed to talk about this on the Sunday talk shows. But, it appeared that morning in the NEW YORK TIMES and, therefore, they were able to talk about it.</u>

DICK CHENEY (MEET THE PRESS NBC 9/8/02): It's now public that <span style='font-size: 17pt'>in fact he has been seeking to acquire and we have been able to intercept to prevent him from acquiring through this particular channel the kinds of tubes that are necessary to build a centrifuge and the centrifuge is required to take low grade uranium and enhance it into highly enriched uranium which is what you have to have <span style='font-size: 23pt'>in order to build a bomb.</span>"</span> </div></div>



What Cheney failed to mention was........??


Anybody?



Q </div></div>

The Tubes were not suitable for that function, in the first place.

Qtec
11-01-2010, 06:37 AM
Yeah but what did he fail to mention about the story in the NYT?

Q

Gayle in MD
11-01-2010, 06:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yeah but what did he fail to mention about the story in the NYT?

Q </div></div>

That they, the White House, leaked it themselves, and knew it was not true.

G.

Gayle in MD
11-01-2010, 06:54 AM
They also knew the Yellow Cake story, was BS.

AND they knew there was no reconstitution of Saddam's Chemical Weapons facilities.

And that those Biological Weapons, only have a three month shelf-life, in the first place.

And that the whole Tube story, was not only old, but not true....

And that the Memo from the Niger Embassy, about Saddam trying to get Yellow Cake, was not true, and was in fact, the result of a break in, by a group of Italian thugs, who took only the official stamp, and the stationary from the Embassy, and also were known for securing and selling fake intelligence, to countries, around the world.

They quoted a British Memo, which had been exposed as a scam....and the British knew it was not true, about the attempt by Saddam, to get Yellow Cake, and also, many said that Michael Ledeen, of the American Enterprise Institute, had links to that very Italian group of Thugs, who broke into the Niger Embassy...He had spent three to four months there, setting the whole thing up, and had been seen by the Italian Press, with some from that group of thugs.


G.

LWW
11-01-2010, 04:04 PM
So wikileaks is lying?

LWW

Qtec
11-03-2010, 03:47 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">3 November 2010

George W Bush had 'sickening feeling' over WMD lack



Former US President George W Bush still has "a sickening feeling" <span style='font-size: 20pt'>about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, </span>US media report.

The revelation comes in his memoir, "Decision Points", set to be published next week.

He also reveals that he temporarily considered replacing Vice President Dick Cheney, calling him the "Darth Vader of the administration".

But he has no comment on his successor in the White House, Barack Obama.

The 64-year-old former president defends his decision to invade Iraq in his autobiography, which was obtained in advance by the New York Times.

He argues that Iraqi citizens are better off without the former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, whom he calls a "homicidal dictator", adding the US is also better off without a Mr Hussein pursuing biological or chemical weapons.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>But Mr Bush admits that <u>he was shocked when no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq.</u>
</span>
<span style='font-size: 26pt'>"No one was more shocked and angry than I was when we <u>didn't find the weapons</u>," he writes.</span>

"I had a sickening feeling every time I thought about it. I still do." </div></div> link (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11680239)


<span style='font-size: 26pt'>Hear that LWW? NO WMD.</span>


I believe he is deaf G.

Q


Q

Gayle in MD
11-03-2010, 05:17 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">3 November 2010

George W Bush had 'sickening feeling' over WMD lack



Former US President George W Bush still has "a sickening feeling" <span style='font-size: 20pt'>about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, </span>US media report.

The revelation comes in his memoir, "Decision Points", set to be published next week.

He also reveals that he temporarily considered replacing Vice President Dick Cheney, calling him the "Darth Vader of the administration".

But he has no comment on his successor in the White House, Barack Obama.

The 64-year-old former president defends his decision to invade Iraq in his autobiography, which was obtained in advance by the New York Times.

He argues that Iraqi citizens are better off without the former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, whom he calls a "homicidal dictator", adding the US is also better off without a Mr Hussein pursuing biological or chemical weapons.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>But Mr Bush admits that <u>he was shocked when no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq.</u>
</span>
<span style='font-size: 26pt'>"No one was more shocked and angry than I was when we <u>didn't find the weapons</u>," he writes.</span>

"I had a sickening feeling every time I thought about it. I still do." </div></div> link (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11680239)


<span style='font-size: 26pt'>Hear that LWW? NO WMD.</span>


I believe he is deaf G.

Q


Q

</div></div>

He plays possum when he's been shown for a fool.

Reminds me of Eg who refused to admit that Valarie Plame was a CIA agent.

They only believe what they choose to believe. Even when the entire white House is exposed for committing blatant War Crimes, and treason, they ignore the whole thing.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

sack316
11-03-2010, 02:58 PM
LWW is only saying that continually to you because that one time he questioned whatever Wiki you used as a source. When he confirmed you accredited that as a valid source, he pointed to that same source... which said there were WMDs.

Just in case you were wondering.

Sack

Gayle in MD
11-03-2010, 04:41 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LWW is only saying that continually to you because that one time he questioned whatever Wiki you used as a source. When he confirmed you accredited that as a valid source, he pointed to that same source... which said there were WMDs.

Just in case you were wondering.

Sack </div></div>

Sack,
I'd say that now that George Bush has fully admitted in his book, that no WMD's were found in Iraq, we can finally put atleast that RW myth to bed, wouldn't you say so?

Now if we could stop the false rumors about Death Panels, killing Grandma, and admit that Republicans, and Bush, held the majority, the entire time that this collapse grew into a disaster, we'd really be getting somewhere.

G.

sack316
11-03-2010, 06:06 PM
I wasn't chiming in on specifics of the topic (though, personally I think we did good to take out Hussein, everything else is just a mess regardless of any other details) but was letting Q know why that kept popping up in case he wondered, as sometimes its mention is a little out of texture with the thread topic.

Sack

Gayle in MD
11-03-2010, 08:09 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wasn't chiming in on specifics of the topic (though, personally I think we did good to take out Hussein, everything else is just a mess regardless of any other details) but was letting Q know why that kept popping up in case he wondered, as sometimes its mention is a little out of texture with the thread topic.

Sack </div></div>

I knew that, Sack. I was just chatting with you about the RW myth, about WMD's, and other myths, which some from the right, still refuse to accept, and wondering what you thought about it.

G.

Deeman3
11-03-2010, 08:33 PM
[quote=Qtec]....anyone know what my signature refers to?

[quote]

Q

A futile attempt to change the subject from the recent beat down the left took in the elections? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

pooltchr
11-03-2010, 08:35 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'd say that now that George Bush has fully admitted in his book, that no WMD's were found in Iraq,

G. </div></div>

Now there is an earthshattering piece of news. Bush admits we didn't find the WMD. Really??? We didn't find any???

You know, now that I think about it, that's probably pretty accurate. I'm sure, had we found them, it would have made the news, and we would all know it.

Now, the fact that they weren't there when we got there does not prove that they never existed. It only proves that there were no WMD where we looked, when we were looking.

Saddam was a lot of things, but he wasn't a fool. We gave him ample warning we were coming for him, plenty of time to pack up any evidence and ship it across the boarder.

Not finding it only proves that we didn't find them. And that, according to you, is exactly what Bush is "admitting" in his book.

Thank you for this insightful post.

Steve

Qtec
11-04-2010, 02:03 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LWW is only saying that continually to you because <u>that one time he questioned whatever Wiki you used as a source.</u><span style="color: #990000"> [1]</span><u>When he confirmed you accredited that as a valid source, he pointed to that same source</u><span style="color: #3333FF">[ 2 ]</span>... <u>which said there were WMDs.</u> <span style="color: #663366">[ 3 ]</span>

Just in case you were wondering.

Sack </div></div>


Ok, for the millionth time.


<span style="color: #CC0000">[1]</span>
You mean this one/ link (http://billiardsdigest.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=31150&Number=322998#Post322998)

<span style="color: #3333FF">[ 2 ]</span>

LWW was implying that these docs were false, I said I believed the docs they released to be true, ie I believe that wiki believes they are genuine and the US Govt has never denied these docs are not genuine.

<span style="color: #663366">[ 3 ]</span>

What they found was an ex-WMD. A 20 yr old artillery shell which by no means could be described as a WMD because after time, the components deteriorate and become inert. There was one instance of Al Q setting one of these ex-WMDs off by mistake thinking it contained explosive.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BAGHDAD, Iraq A roadside bomb thought to contain deadly sarin nerve agent exploded near a U.S. military convoy, the U.S. military said Monday. It was believed to be the first confirmed discovery of any of the banned weapons that the United States cited in making its case for the Iraq war.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>Two members of a military bomb squad were treated for minor exposure, but no serious injuries were reported.</span>

<span style='font-size: 17pt'><span style="color: #CC0000">Do you call that a weapon of mass destruction?</span></span>

The chemicals were inside an artillery shell dating to the Saddam Hussein era that had been rigged as a bomb in Baghdad, said Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, the chief military spokesman in Iraq.

Early indications suggest that two chemical components in the shell, which are designed to combine and create sarin during flight, did not mix properly or completely upon detonation, a U.S. official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Kimmitt, however, said a small amount of the nerve agent was released.

Field-test results could be in error
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the results were from a field test, which can be imperfect, and more analysis needed to be done. We have to be careful, he told an audience in Washington Monday afternoon.

Rumsfeld said it may take some time to determine precisely what the chemical was.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Two former weapons inspectors Hans Blix and David Kay said the shell was likely a stray weapon that had been scavenged by militants and did not signify that Iraq had large stockpiles of such weapons.</span>
advertisement | ad info
Advertisement | ad info
Advertisement | ad info

<u>Kimmitt said he believed that insurgents who planted the explosive didnt know it contained the nerve agent</u> </div></div>

Just because some soldier made a report about finding what he described as a WMD does not make it one. It certainly isn't the WMDs that GW was talking about when making the case for invasion.

There were no stockpiles of freshly made chemical weapons. No WMD has ever been found in Iraq that was made after 1992, 21 trears before the invasion.


You need to wake up Sack. Here is a blast from the past from Fox News.

How wrong were they?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>Wednesday, November 13, 2002

FOXNEWS.COM HOME &gt; WORLD &gt; NATIONAL

Iraq Seeks Nerve Gas Antidote Stockpile</span>

NEW YORK Iraq, facing "serious consequences" if it does not comply with a U.N. resolution to admit weapons inspectors, has ordered unusually large amounts of a drug often used to counter the effects of nerve gas, Fox News has confirmed.

The purchases, first reported in The New York Times, are coming from a supplier in Turkey, although the supplier's name is not known. The United States is pressuring the supplier to halt the sales, according to senior Bush administration officials.

"It is definitely raising some eyebrows around here," one U.S. official told Fox News. "If it really means something, we don't know yet, but one can make an assumption."

Such a large quantity of atropine 1.25 million doses, to be exact, along with an unspecified number of autoinjectors could be used by Iraq to protect its soldiers and people from an enemy nerve-gas attack.

But the more likely reason, officials said, is that Iraq wants to stockpile the antidote to protect its own citizens in the event that it uses nerve gas itself.

State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said Tuesday that "any Iraqi order of more [atropine] than is necessary would be alarming<u> because it could indicate a plan to use chemical weapons.</u>" </div></div>


Q


conservative on the roadside bomb incident (http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article3448.html)

wolfdancer
11-04-2010, 02:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not finding it only proves that we didn't find them </div></div>
Now you can't argue with that kind of logic.
In fact we can use that reasoning to "prove" many things
Like just because we can't see God, only proves we ain't looking hard enough.
Just because GW seemed to be the most inept Prez ever, it only proves we didn't look deep enough into the careers of Say... Herbert Hoover, or U.S Grant....
However, a Rasmussen pegged the disapproval ratings of Nixon at 60% and GWB at 59% with LBJ a distant third at 42%

Qtec
11-04-2010, 04:09 AM
My house is haunted. A tv crew staked it out with a bunch of hi-tec equipment. They didn't find any paranormal activity in the 10 years of the project.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not finding the ghost only proves that they didn't find it </div></div>

I still say its haunted.

LOL


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">..........and yes, I have absolutely no proof to back up my wild assertions.

</div></div>


Q. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

sack316
11-04-2010, 04:22 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
You need to wake up Sack. Here is a blast from the past from Fox News.
</div></div>

You need to read Q. Here is a blast from a few hours ago from Sack

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wasn't chiming in on specifics of the topic (though, personally I think we did good to take out Hussein, everything else is just a mess regardless of any other details) but was letting Q know why that kept popping up in case he wondered, as sometimes its mention is a little out of texture with the thread topic.

Sack </div></div>

Sack

Gayle in MD
11-04-2010, 04:50 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not finding it only proves that we didn't find them </div></div>
Now you can't argue with that kind of logic.
In fact we can use that reasoning to "prove" many things
Like just because we can't see God, only proves we ain't looking hard enough.
Just because GW seemed to be the most inept Prez ever, it only proves we didn't look deep enough into the careers of Say... Herbert Hoover, or U.S Grant....
However, a Rasmussen pegged the disapproval ratings of Nixon at 60% and GWB at 59% with LBJ a distant third at 42% </div></div>


Everything gets twisted beyond recognition, by the Republicans, and their sheep.

The fact is, the U.N. Inspectors made it very clear, there were no WMD. The more they looked, and found nothing, the faster the Bush administration rushed us into Iraq, when at that time, afghanistan should have been finished, and al Qaeda should have been destroyed, not Iraq!

The evidence was everywhere, Bush turned his back on getting b.L. an A.Q., to settle the family grudge, over Da Da's screw ups, and go for those oil conatracts for his cronies, just as Cheney wanted him to do.

As much as the right loves to yap about the Constitution, they still don't get it, what Bush did is against every prerequisite required not only by the Constitution, by through international treaties and agreements, which he broke, over and over, law after law.

Hence, it doesn't matter if they were there and moved, or never there in the first place, which is certainly where all of the evidence pointed, after the area had been scoured by the investigators.

When one makes a study of the issue, reads most everything about it, written by loads of officials, CIA, Pentagon, Generals, both national and international agents, it is very clear, he knew damn well, no WMD in Iraq.

He intentionally fear mongered the American People, exploited their fear, and grief, broke our laws, treaties, Constitution, and created a massive mess, wivch actually made everything much worse for us, and far better for al Q. and then walked out and left the whole fiasco for someone else to clear up.

I recall, all of the attacks, when I said, over and over, that the Surge, did not work, and it didn't, it failed, and back then, I told the sheep around here, that it was a civil war, nothing settled, the whole purpose of the Surge, failed, and it remains so to this day. Their responses were the usual, personal attacks, and slander, same tactic used over and over by their Party, both of them, lol..

One thing we can count on is that the right, and the Republicans, will NEVER own up to their misjudgements, and failures.

Republican policies, always fail, and Republicans have no honor.

Some things are as dependable as the sun coming up every morniing, sort of like Eg, who refuses to admit that Valarie was a Secret NOC Agent, specialiing on WMD, or Deeman, never willing to admit that after all those years of him calling Hillary, an opportunist, he hero, Sara Palin, is the most prevasive opportunist, his little darling from
AKA, has turned out to be a quitter, who is the supreme opportunist of all times, the worst and most obvious, we've ever seen in the political arena, AND the dumbest, while Hillary, has proven her grit, determination, and committment to working her ass off for the benefit of America, and handling herself overall, with amazing honor, grace and poise.

There were no WMD, before, OR after Bush illegally invaded Iraq, on LIES.
equal
Facts are facts.

Obama has created more private sector jobs, than Bush did in his entire tenure, and did so while in the midst of an impending Bush Global Depession.

Their cripploing bubbathink does not allow them to grasp the fact, that Democratiics, Liberals, always stand for exactly what our constitution calls for, equal rights, human rights, for all, and looking out for the least of us, as best we can, as all honorable nations, strive to do.

The "rights" of a fetus, do not trump the Rights of a woman's rights, a living humann being.

Gay people are born that way, and being gay does not include being a Pedophile, they are two entirely different things.

Bush was a total F-up!

Prsident Obama, has done a magnificent job, under the worst circimstances in history, two unfinished F-ed up wars, and a collapsed economy, and an increased threat of terrorism, thanks to George Bush. Republloicans have blocked the recovery, with the aid of corrupt corporate pigs, and a RW activist supreme Court, just as corrupt.


The Republicans not only lied to everyone about Iraq, but also about the economy, and no one knew how bad things actually were, until Bush was gone.

Bravo President Obama, for his grace, poise, intellect and determination to make this country a better place.

Bravo Hillary and Bill Clinton, for a successful administration, which created more jobs than all three Republican Administrations combined, AND created excellent agencies to deal with the growing threat of al Qaeda, and terrorism.

The facts prove, over and over, Republicans have NO HONOR and their policies have destroyed this country.

The FLYOVER BUBBAS, are too stupid and uninformed, to realzie anything beyond what their pundits promote, lies, slander, and violence.

The true racist president, in bed with terrorist leaders, was eorge Bush, who let New Orleanians drown and die, and who shakes the hand of a black Haitiian survivor, and then rubs it on Clintons shirt, hence, he's their hero.

Ronald Reagan set this country on a path of total demolition of the Middle Class.

Jimmy Carter maintained peace, here in our country, cut our foreign oil consumption, in half, created a Treaty of peace, between Egypt annd Isreal, which stands to this day, warned us with truthful facts, about the dangers of foreign oil dependence, and he was right about all of it.

Republicans only represent white, wealthy crooks.

Facts are facts. The books tell the true story...not cable news.
G.

LWW
11-04-2010, 05:02 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">3 November 2010

George W Bush had 'sickening feeling' over WMD lack



Former US President George W Bush still has "a sickening feeling" <span style='font-size: 20pt'>about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, </span>US media report.

The revelation comes in his memoir, "Decision Points", set to be published next week.

He also reveals that he temporarily considered replacing Vice President Dick Cheney, calling him the "Darth Vader of the administration".

But he has no comment on his successor in the White House, Barack Obama.

The 64-year-old former president defends his decision to invade Iraq in his autobiography, which was obtained in advance by the New York Times.

He argues that Iraqi citizens are better off without the former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, whom he calls a "homicidal dictator", adding the US is also better off without a Mr Hussein pursuing biological or chemical weapons.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>But Mr Bush admits that <u>he was shocked when no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq.</u>
</span>
<span style='font-size: 26pt'>"No one was more shocked and angry than I was when we <u>didn't find the weapons</u>," he writes.</span>

"I had a sickening feeling every time I thought about it. I still do." </div></div> link (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11680239)


<span style='font-size: 26pt'>Hear that LWW? NO WMD.</span>


I believe he is deaf G.

Q


Q

</div></div>

Then you must be saying wikileaks is lying?

Was the question too complicated?

LWW

pooltchr
11-04-2010, 07:25 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Like just because we can't see God, only proves we ain't looking hard enough.
</div></div>

Or maybe you aren't looking in the right place. I could help you with that. Or, if you prefer, I believe Hondo teaches a Sunday School class, and would probably be happy to point you in the right direction.

Personally, I found Him years ago, and see Him every day!

Steve

Deeman3
11-04-2010, 10:48 AM
I am certain of my God as the Muslims are of theirs. Scarely thought, really.

Of course, in my faith, I don't proceed with certainty, only faith. I don't know who said, "Thoses with the most conviction are often the most wrong!" could be said of Christians, Muslims, Jews and scientists.

The only certainty I have is that I have that right to express and believe what I want. It may be a sin not to try to convery others to my faith and view but if so, so be it. I long ago stopped trying to convince others of my views "rightousness" and found that the world will go on, quite nicely, in fact, despite the obvious self insecurity of one trying to convince another that there is God or not.

So, you or Hondo may be able to teach me something, that would be fine and I would not probably mind sitting through either of your classes.

However, I'd be just as happy talking to Wolfdancer about what he believes or does not. I have learned a lot from his sense of humor but in our many discussions, I have also learned not to think he does not have as intimate knowledge or more of faith and other subjects as all the rest of us do.

I don't think his little comic comments are offensive, do you?

I hope we don't have to jump on every subject, or if we do, let me know. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif I don't want to break up any kabal or anything. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Am I now a person of semi-faith?

sack316
11-04-2010, 10:59 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am certain of my God as the Muslims are of theirs. Scarely thought, really.
</div></div>

What may be even more scary to you is that it's the same entity. How we perceive Him and worship Him may be different, but historically speaking the case is easily made that the Judeo-Christian God (Yaweh) and Allah are one in the same. In fact, our religious histories and beliefs are exactly the same all the way up until Abraham.

Just thought I'd blow your mind a little today /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Sack

pooltchr
11-04-2010, 11:35 AM
Wolf made the comment that we can't see God. I responded that I see him every day. All one has to do is look around at the world, and see His hand on everything.

I just suggested that if he can't see God, perhaps he didn't know where to look, and offered my (or Hondo's) assistance.

I didn't think I jumped on anything, but if I did, I apologize.

Steve

Deeman3
11-04-2010, 12:15 PM
No, Steve. I just think we have enough points of contention on here and was not wanting to see a war over what a person should of should not beleive or about how one person "Knows" God and another may not.

I'll argue faith, for the sake of argument but as Sack says it is either the same God or same no god, so I'll just say "Jack don't need no stinking teachin" /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif except at Golf!!!!

pooltchr
11-04-2010, 12:39 PM
I can't help him with golf, since as a golfer, I bring new meaning to the word handicapped!

Steve

wolfdancer
11-04-2010, 02:21 PM
Try to enroll in a reading comprehension course, if'n they haves one up there in the land that time forgot.
I was using that as an example of "twisted" logic, and it was not intended to be an acknowledgment of my own beliefs or doubts...which I probably shouldn't admit to on this site, where some here try to tie religion in with one's political stance. E.G. Democrats are heathens, while Republicans belong to the party of God.
As for you, YOU? helping me to find God.....You couldn't help me wipe my butt. I'd be afraid when I asked you for some t.p., you would hand me a corn cob, which I understand are plentiful up there, as corn squeezings are an economic staple in them thar parts of the woods.
I was raised as a Catholic, served as an Alter Boy, and contemplated the Priesthood as do many very young Catholic boys. But then something happened...My body began undergoing physiological changes, and I began staining bedsheets in my sleep, sometimes with a little personal help. I decided I could better do God's work, to go forth and multiply!
There is an old adage, never argue politics or religion. I'm guessing you would be as inept in any religious dialogue as you have proved to be in any political debate.
Good thing this site doesn't charge money to participate, as I would be asking for a partial refund for my having to go out of my way to explain things to the ones sitting in the back of the class.

Qtec
11-04-2010, 09:50 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but was letting Q know why that kept popping up in case he wondered, as sometimes its mention is a little out of texture with the thread topic.

Sack </div></div>

Imagine, Al Q found a REAL chemical shell that still worked. Lets say they fired it into a city but the people were already evacuated. What was destroyed?

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>What did this weapon of MASS DESTRUCTION destroy?</span>




<span style='font-size: 20pt'>NOTHING.</span>




A pipe bomb is a WMD.
A lorry load of hairsray could also be a WMD.

Get my drift?


So no. I wasn't wondering, I see through LWW and his pathetic attempts to justify the Iraq invasion because they found old rusty shells that even the terrorists would not touch.

How many GIs have been killed by WMDs in Iraq ?


The case for WAR was,


<span style='font-size: 20pt'>Saddam is building a nuclear weapon.

He could give this weapon to Al Q without leaving a fingerprint.</span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists," Bush said Oct. 7 in his nationally televised Cincinnati speech. <u>"Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving fingerprints.</u>" The terrorists he was referring to were "al-Qaida members." </div></div> link (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34930)

I can't ever remember bush saying ,

"The USA is in imminent danger because Saddam still has some unaccounted for old rusty shells still buried in the desert somewhere."






Q

Qtec
11-04-2010, 10:44 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Then you must be saying wikileaks is lying?



LWW </div></div>

Only a brainless moron could come to that conclusion.

Q...............yet another one-liner from Dorothy.

Qtec
11-04-2010, 10:47 PM
[quote=Deeman3][quote=Qtec]....anyone know what my signature refers to?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Q

A futile attempt to change the subject from the recent beat down the left took in the elections? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </div></div>

Eh no.
Its proof POSITIVE that the Bush Govt lied to its people and Congress and conned them into supporting an unnecessary war with 1,000s of casualties on both sides.

Q

Gayle in MD
11-05-2010, 11:22 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=Deeman3][quote=Qtec]....anyone know what my signature refers to?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Q

A futile attempt to change the subject from the recent beat down the left took in the elections? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </div></div>

Eh no.
Its proof POSITIVE that the Bush Govt lied to its people and Congress and conned them into supporting an unnecessary war with 1,000s of casualties on both sides.

Q </div></div>

The right has parlayed this election into a new ridiculous buzz, that it means that the entire country, is against Democratic policies, and against the president, in spite of the FACT, this is the first time a new president lost only the House, and not the Senate also.

The left wanted Obama and the Democratics to take a much harder stand against the FAILED Republican ideologies, and policies.

IOW, they got mad. The left doesn't have to create a bunch of loony tunes, parading around threatening violence, flaunting racist signs, and making fools of themselves, in order to punish their Representatives, they just do it in the voting booth.

Also, at times like this, "It's the economy, stupid!!

The economy, Bush's global recession, nearly a Depression, and unreaistic expectations on the part of the Baby Boomers....as usual, about how fast we could get the jobs going again, was the reason why Repubs took the house, but it surely isn't a mandate for thier policies, as they admitted themselve, theyre on probation, to see if they can do any better.

They won't.

Totally different reasons, for Repubs gaining seats, from the new twisted election rhetoric of the right.

Not to mention the non stop lies presented by Fux Noise, and the corporate poluters who spent multi billions, in secret, to get their pollution loving Repubs, back into office, so they won't get tougher regulations, or have to live up to professional bahavior.

The Supreme Court handed the Repubs another thrown election.
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif
G.

Deeman3
11-05-2010, 12:06 PM
So, the left is mad at Bush so they take it out on Obama.

Makes perfect sense in what world? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

pooltchr
11-05-2010, 01:23 PM
Go easy on her. It's tough to find out that, not only you've been wrong for so long, but the number of people outside of Washington that agree with her are down to around 25%.

The people sent a message. They don't agree with the liberal zealots!

Steve

Gayle in MD
11-05-2010, 01:32 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So, the left is mad at Bush so they take it out on Obama.

Makes perfect sense in what world? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </div></div>

I didn't say that...

Deeman3
11-05-2010, 02:09 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So, the left is mad at Bush so they take it out on Obama.

Makes perfect sense in what world? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </div></div>

I didn't say that... </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Just kidding, I know what you mean. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif</span>