• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

For those with short memories

Soapweed

Well-known member
My friend Todd Trask sent this to me this morning.

Freedom of speech and denial taken to the ultimate stupidity in certain elements of American society...please don't be one of them.

Remember who declared this war we are in, if you don't like it anymore than I do. It was Congress not the president. They are the only ones who can do that and put our troops into a war that they now don't want to take credit for starting. Unbelievable TT

Although there are certain Bush haters that will never allow themselves to believe what their own Party said before Iraq and Afghanistan .

THIS COUNTRY NEEDS TO RUN THIS VIDEO OVER AND OVER UNTIL ALL OF US FULLY UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON!!!

The most despicable acts of deceit ongoing in this country are the lies and hypocrisy perpetrated by the people seen in this short video. None of them have ever admitted to their total endorsement of the Bush policy or plan.

Here's a video compilation you definitely won't see on main stream, media.

The next time you hear the expression 'Bush's war' remember this----note that there's no 'opinion,' here, just direct video which deserves wide distribution.

http://www.bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-iraq.wmv
 

Mike

Well-known member
Thanks Soap. But you either won't get a response from the left, or they will say Bush had information they didn't have, which was the exact same info. :shock:
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
It's all King George, McSame, and those damned neo-cons faults! :wink:

I guess the Whiners and Libs haven't realized that Bush isn't running for anything in November, but the way they carry on you'd sure think he was! :shock: :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Actually technically this is again another "undeclared war"...The last declared war was WWII...Korea, Vietnam, and every other action have been called military actions, police actions, military operations, or some other mumbo jumbo without a formal declaration of war....

This is the AG's definition:
GONZALES: There was not a war declaration, either in connection with Al Qaida or in Iraq. It was an authorization to use military force. I only want to clarify that, because there are implications. Obviously, when you talk about a war declaration, you're possibly talking about affecting treaties, diplomatic relations. And so there is a distinction in law and in practice. And we're not talking about a war declaration. This is an authorization only to use military force.

Lots of evidence now surfacing that the info given Congress to use to make their decision to authorize "military actions" against Iraq were falsehoods, including censored and altered intelligence material- Including the new smoking gun that Congress has got their hands on- the original National Security Report-- where all the "could be's" , "Maybe", "is thought to be's", and all limiter words were deleted from the copies Congress got- making them look like absolute facts-- and the final sentence "Iraq is no national security threat to the United States" was completely removed...

Thats the reason there is now a bill in Congress to give the security and intelligence committees much more access to the intelligence info--but it is stonewalled because of Bush promise to veto it...

House Passes Intelligence Authorization Bill
Provision Expanding Briefing of Lawmakers May Prompt White House Veto



By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 17, 2008; Page A05

The House yesterday passed by voice vote the fiscal 2009 intelligence authorization bill, which limits the funds available for covert actions next year until all members of the House intelligence panel are briefed on the most sensitive ones already underway.

As included in the bill, 75 percent of money sought for covert actions would be held up until the briefings are held.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/16/AR2008071601444.html?hpid=sec-nation
 

jigs

Well-known member
an act made on falsehoods.... ok, I can agree with that. However, it was the RIGHT thing to do. and we need to finish what we started, because every other little asshole nation is watching how we handle this...... they see a weakness, and they will come after us.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Incidentally we've won every "declared war"- but the undeclared ones ? :???:
 

fff

Well-known member
jigs said:
an act made on falsehoods.... ok, I can agree with that. However, it was the RIGHT thing to do. and we need to finish what we started, because every other little asshole nation is watching how we handle this...... they see a weakness, and they will come after us.

They see plenty of weakness. Those abandoned reconstruction projects setting in the Iraqi desert, an America calling for withdrawal, troops dealing with extended tours, a recession partly caused by badly underestimating the cost of the war, people out of work. Bush has been a disaster for this country.

Invading Iraq was the wrong thing to do and our military will pay for it a long time. We should have been concentrating on Afghanistan. Bush took his eye off them and now they've had time to regroup. We'll be there a very long time and our allies are tired of carrying the load for us.
 

jigs

Well-known member
we need another one like this guy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxdIcmvyl2E&feature=related

here is the Lord of the Libs linking terrorism to Iraq !!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0h6gehCPvpk&feature=related
 

fff

Well-known member
Soapweed said:
My friend Todd Trask sent this to me this morning.

Freedom of speech and denial taken to the ultimate stupidity in certain elements of American society...please don't be one of them.

Remember who declared this war we are in, if you don't like it anymore than I do. It was Congress not the president. They are the only ones who can do that and put our troops into a war that they now don't want to take credit for starting. Unbelievable TT

Although there are certain Bush haters that will never allow themselves to believe what their own Party said before Iraq and Afghanistan .

THIS COUNTRY NEEDS TO RUN THIS VIDEO OVER AND OVER UNTIL ALL OF US FULLY UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON!!!

The most despicable acts of deceit ongoing in this country are the lies and hypocrisy perpetrated by the people seen in this short video. None of them have ever admitted to their total endorsement of the Bush policy or plan.

Here's a video compilation you definitely won't see on main stream, media.

The next time you hear the expression 'Bush's war' remember this----note that there's no 'opinion,' here, just direct video which deserves wide distribution.
http://www.bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-iraq.wmv

This is Bush's war. He asked Congress for their approval and he got it. But he was the one who wanted to go to war with Iraq. Spin all you want, but it's his war. It will be his legacy. And John McCain promises us more of the same.
 

Soapweed

Well-known member
fff said:
Soapweed said:
My friend Todd Trask sent this to me this morning.

Freedom of speech and denial taken to the ultimate stupidity in certain elements of American society...please don't be one of them.

Remember who declared this war we are in, if you don't like it anymore than I do. It was Congress not the president. They are the only ones who can do that and put our troops into a war that they now don't want to take credit for starting. Unbelievable TT

Although there are certain Bush haters that will never allow themselves to believe what their own Party said before Iraq and Afghanistan .

THIS COUNTRY NEEDS TO RUN THIS VIDEO OVER AND OVER UNTIL ALL OF US FULLY UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON!!!

The most despicable acts of deceit ongoing in this country are the lies and hypocrisy perpetrated by the people seen in this short video. None of them have ever admitted to their total endorsement of the Bush policy or plan.

Here's a video compilation you definitely won't see on main stream, media.

The next time you hear the expression 'Bush's war' remember this----note that there's no 'opinion,' here, just direct video which deserves wide distribution.
http://www.bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-iraq.wmv

This is Bush's war. He asked Congress for their approval and he got it. But he was the one who wanted to go to war with Iraq. Spin all you want, but it's his war. It will be his legacy. And John McCain promises us more of the same.

This is where you are wrong. Had enough individual members of Congress had the guts to against Bush, they could have prevented the war. As you can see by the video, they too thought that military action was necessary. The war was declared and the rest is history. You can spin all you want, but until you get some better tires you will continue to be stuck in the mud.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
fff said:
Soapweed said:
My friend Todd Trask sent this to me this morning.

Freedom of speech and denial taken to the ultimate stupidity in certain elements of American society...please don't be one of them.

Remember who declared this war we are in, if you don't like it anymore than I do. It was Congress not the president. They are the only ones who can do that and put our troops into a war that they now don't want to take credit for starting. Unbelievable TT

Although there are certain Bush haters that will never allow themselves to believe what their own Party said before Iraq and Afghanistan .

THIS COUNTRY NEEDS TO RUN THIS VIDEO OVER AND OVER UNTIL ALL OF US FULLY UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON!!!

The most despicable acts of deceit ongoing in this country are the lies and hypocrisy perpetrated by the people seen in this short video. None of them have ever admitted to their total endorsement of the Bush policy or plan.

Here's a video compilation you definitely won't see on main stream, media.

The next time you hear the expression 'Bush's war' remember this----note that there's no 'opinion,' here, just direct video which deserves wide distribution.
http://www.bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-iraq.wmv

This is Bush's war. He asked Congress for their approval and he got it. But he was the one who wanted to go to war with Iraq. Spin all you want, but it's his war. It will be his legacy. And John McCain promises us more of the same.

Your right fff- it is Bush's war- his neocon handlers were planning it long before he took office- and they got their puppet to sell it to the American people thru the media and the "Republican" controlled Congress- that didn't delve deep enough into the facts and let the war hysteria of 9/11 get in the way of sound thinking...

That said I believed in Bush at the time- and was sold right down the same tube--as at that time we had no info to believe that GW was anything but credible and honorable...If I'd been in Congress I'd have probably followed him too....

I think that is the reason now that so many- media, Congressmen, Colin Powell, Scott McClellen, myself, and a majority of the nation feel so scorned and bitter toward the man....That he lied to and duped us and put his military complex and oil buddies wishes ahead of the American peoples welfare...

A people free to choose will always choose peace.
Ronald Reagan

But you have to be given accurate info when making that choice....
 

fff

Well-known member
Soapweed said:
fff said:
Soapweed said:
My friend Todd Trask sent this to me this morning.

Freedom of speech and denial taken to the ultimate stupidity in certain elements of American society...please don't be one of them.

Remember who declared this war we are in, if you don't like it anymore than I do. It was Congress not the president. They are the only ones who can do that and put our troops into a war that they now don't want to take credit for starting. Unbelievable TT

Although there are certain Bush haters that will never allow themselves to believe what their own Party said before Iraq and Afghanistan .

THIS COUNTRY NEEDS TO RUN THIS VIDEO OVER AND OVER UNTIL ALL OF US FULLY UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON!!!

The most despicable acts of deceit ongoing in this country are the lies and hypocrisy perpetrated by the people seen in this short video. None of them have ever admitted to their total endorsement of the Bush policy or plan.

Here's a video compilation you definitely won't see on main stream, media.

The next time you hear the expression 'Bush's war' remember this----note that there's no 'opinion,' here, just direct video which deserves wide distribution.
http://www.bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-iraq.wmv

This is Bush's war. He asked Congress for their approval and he got it. But he was the one who wanted to go to war with Iraq. Spin all you want, but it's his war. It will be his legacy. And John McCain promises us more of the same.

This is where you are wrong. Had enough individual members of Congress had the guts to against Bush, they could have prevented the war. As you can see by the video, they too thought that military action was necessary. The war was declared and the rest is history. You can spin all you want, but until you get some better tires you will continue to be stuck in the mud.

George W. Bush was the person who wanted to go to war with Iraq. At his first Cabinet meeting, he brought up overthrowing Saddam. When 9/11 happened, one of his first questions was "is Saddam behind this?" Not "who did this?", but "was it Saddam?" He's the person who made public everything that made his case for war and classified everything that didn't. He is the person who convinced Americans that Saddam was responsible for 9/11, that terrorist lived in Iraq, that Saddam would give WMDs to terrorist to bring to this country. Had individual members of Congress had the guts to go against Bush we wouldn't be wondering what to do with some dangerous people at GitMo. We woundn't have to wonder who's listening in on our phone calls. We wouldn't have to wonder if our bank is going under or what it will cost to rebuild our military. But if he had the best interests of this country at heart, "individual members" of Congress wouldn't have had to stand up to him. And if the Republican controlled Congress had the best interests of this country at heart, they would not have gone along with everything he asked for. They put their party over their the country.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
You dang libs just have no idea what the concept of personal responsibility is, do you? Never in my life have I seen a group of people who can always find somebody else to blame for an individual's actions.

All members of Congress have the responsibility and obligation to do what they think is right and vote accordingly. To vote for the war and then bitch about it or blame somebody else for the way they voted is rediculous. Every damn one that does that should be thrown out immediately.

At least they could lie about it like Hillary and claim they were against it all along.....
 

fff

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
You dang libs just have no idea what the concept of personal responsibility is, do you? Never in my life have I seen a group of people who can always find somebody else to blame for an individual's actions.

All members of Congress have the responsibility and obligation to do what they think is right and vote accordingly. To vote for the war and then bitch about it or blame somebody else for the way they voted is rediculous. Every damn one that does that should be thrown out immediately.

At least they could lie about it like Hillary and claim they were against it all along.....

"Personal responsibilitity?" They all have a responsibility for every vote they make. Congress went along with Bush and, based on the intelligence they were given, voted to give him his little war. Why should they stand up to him when he presented intelligence from a German source who said Saddam was a danger. The fact that Bush left out that German intelligence had said the guy was unreliable, doesn't matter to you? It does to me. Bush claimed Saddam was trying to buy yellow cake uranium when both State and the CIA had told him it wasn't true, but he somehow managed to leave that part out of his speech. That's Congress' fault?
George W. Bush is the person who pushed this war, not Congress.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
George Bush is their only source of information?

Actually thats a "yes"-- all intelligence was being run thru one of the Administrations departments-- and that allowed him to censor or alter all the material...And they never expected him to be a crook...

Much of the prewar material and documents still haven't seen the light of day- as Bush has taken Administrative immunity on all requests from Congress on many documents and all employees- even denying Congressional subpeonas--which I see the other day a Judge ruled is unconstitutional and against the law...

Many in Congress has expressed their fears of what the Bush regime will seek to destroy before leaving the castle- and apparently someone on the insided is now too- as they are getting some of the documents into Congress's hands....
As I said before- as his castle continues to crumble around him- I think we will find out a whole lot more.....We're already seeing the effect of the crumbling as even Condi Rice and Gates have now come out publicly with stances opposing GW's policies...
 

fff

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
George Bush is their only source of information?

At that time who would have thought the President of the United States would lie in order to get this country into war? Not me. Not Congress. Yes, they're responsible for their vote. Many of them are gone and more will go in November. But it was George W. Bush, along with Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, etc, who stood as spokespersons for this country and deliberately mislead us about Saddam's capability and the intelligence to support it.

Then Senator Graham from FL voted against war with Iraq because he knew better. He wrote an op-ed:

What I Knew Before the Invasion

By Bob Graham

Sunday, November 20, 2005; Page B07

In the past week President Bush has twice attacked Democrats for being hypocrites on the Iraq war. "[M]ore than 100 Democrats in the House and Senate, who had access to the same intelligence, voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power," he said.

The president's attacks are outrageous. Yes, more than 100 Democrats voted to authorize him to take the nation to war. Most of them, though, like their Republican colleagues, did so in the legitimate belief that the president and his administration were truthful in their statements that Saddam Hussein was a gathering menace -- that if Hussein was not disarmed, the smoking gun would become a mushroom cloud.

The president has undermined trust. No longer will the members of Congress be entitled to accept his veracity. Caveat emptor has become the word. Every member of Congress is on his or her own to determine the truth.

As chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence during the tragedy of Sept. 11, 2001, and the run-up to the Iraq war, I probably had as much access to the intelligence on which the war was predicated as any other member of Congress.

I, too, presumed the president was being truthful -- until a series of events undercut that confidence.

In February 2002, after a briefing on the status of the war in Afghanistan, the commanding officer, Gen. Tommy Franks, told me the war was being compromised as specialized personnel and equipment were being shifted from Afghanistan to prepare for the war in Iraq -- a war more than a year away. Even at this early date, the White House was signaling that the threat posed by Saddam Hussein was of such urgency that it had priority over the crushing of al Qaeda.

In the early fall of 2002, a joint House-Senate intelligence inquiry committee, which I co-chaired, was in the final stages of its investigation of what happened before Sept. 11. As the unclassified final report of the inquiry documented, several failures of intelligence contributed to the tragedy. But as of October 2002, 13 months later, the administration was resisting initiating any substantial action to understand, much less fix, those problems.

At a meeting of the Senate intelligence committee on Sept. 5, 2002, CIA Director George Tenet was asked what the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) provided as the rationale for a preemptive war in Iraq. An NIE is the product of the entire intelligence community, and its most comprehensive assessment. I was stunned when Tenet said that no NIE had been requested by the White House and none had been prepared. Invoking our rarely used senatorial authority, I directed the completion of an NIE.

Tenet objected, saying that his people were too committed to other assignments to analyze Saddam Hussein's capabilities and will to use chemical, biological and possibly nuclear weapons. We insisted, and three weeks later the community produced a classified NIE.

There were troubling aspects to this 90-page document. While slanted toward the conclusion that Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction stored or produced at 550 sites, it contained vigorous dissents on key parts of the information, especially by the departments of State and Energy. Particular skepticism was raised about aluminum tubes that were offered as evidence Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear program. As to Hussein's will to use whatever weapons he might have, the estimate indicated he would not do so unless he was first attacked.

Under questioning, Tenet added that the information in the NIE had not been independently verified by an operative responsible to the United States. In fact, no such person was inside Iraq. Most of the alleged intelligence came from Iraqi exiles or third countries, all of which had an interest in the United States' removing Hussein, by force if necessary.

The American people needed to know these reservations, and I requested that an unclassified, public version of the NIE be prepared. On Oct. 4, Tenet presented a 25-page document titled "Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs." It represented an unqualified case that Hussein possessed them, avoided a discussion of whether he had the will to use them and omitted the dissenting opinions contained in the classified version. Its conclusions, such as "If Baghdad acquired sufficient weapons-grade fissile material from abroad, it could make a nuclear weapon within a year," underscored the White House's claim that exactly such material was being provided from Africa to Iraq.

From my advantaged position, I had earlier concluded that a war with Iraq would be a distraction from the successful and expeditious completion of our aims in Afghanistan. Now I had come to question whether the White House was telling the truth -- or even had an interest in knowing the truth.

On Oct. 11, I voted no on the resolution to give the president authority to go to war against Iraq. I was able to apply caveat emptor. Most of my colleagues could not.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/18/AR2005111802397.html
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
I don't doubt that Bush tinkered with the facts. However, I still suppored the war for the following reasons;
1) Saddam was not living up to his obligations with the UN and was making a mockery out of the agreement. Credibility was at stake. If he was allowed to thumb his nose at the world, the message would be sent to every other two-bit dictator that there really was no sheriff in town.
2) Saddam was going to get his programs up and running again. If we wouldn't of tossed him out when we did, we would of had to toss him out later after he attacked and killed more people.
3) An enemy of my enemy is my friend. If you think for a second that Saddam would not of given any weapons, chemicals, etc.... to terrorists to use against us, you need to think again.
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
What about the 30 or so other countries that helped in this action? How many people would have to participate in 'Bush's lies' for your conspiracy to have worked world wide???????????????
 

fff

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
I don't doubt that Bush tinkered with the facts. However, I still suppored the war for the following reasons;
1) Saddam was not living up to his obligations with the UN and was making a mockery out of the agreement. Credibility was at stake. If he was allowed to thumb his nose at the world, the message would be sent to every other two-bit dictator that there really was no sheriff in town.

So since when are you concerned about the UN being mocked? It happens on this board often and you don't run to their defense. More spin. :roll:

2) Saddam was going to get his programs up and running again. If we wouldn't of tossed him out when we did, we would of had to toss him out later after he attacked and killed more people.

Says who? George W. Bush? We know he's not trustworthy. :roll:

3) An enemy of my enemy is my friend. If you think for a second that Saddam would not of given any weapons, chemicals, etc.... to terrorists to use against us, you need to think again.

I don't need to think again. I was right. The war with Iraq was a mistake from the get go. Saddam had nothing to give to terrorists. And if Bush had spent the bilions of dollars frittered away in Iraq on strenghtening our borders, we'd be safer today.

And if you think we can kill everyone who hates this country, you need to think again.
 
Top