Jesus Christ jingles....your're like the pot calling the kettle black...everything is goddamn doom and gloom with people on the far side of the political spectrum...and plus..I think you should visit Iraq...you'll then change your views on it because it's not a total shithole as you imply it to be...Iraq is the belly of the beast, the middle east...there was this pastor or priest I think...he was set against the war before he went to Iraq...after he visited Iraq....he changed his views on it completely..the guy had an epithany(I might have spelled that wrong)...he was crying....he said the Iraqis he met said that would have killed themselves if Bush didn't come in there and get rid of Saddam...there was not one Iraqi, he said, who didn't have a picture of a loved one that was killed by Saddam...the priest said he was disgusted by the media because all they ever show were negatives of the war..in which case...Iraq is getting pretty stable..there aren't that many bombings as you think...because most of Iraq isn't like that...one of the Iraqi woman officials who is part of the new Iraqi council..she said Iraq was a prison under Saddam..and let me tell you....it was...I recommend reading a new book by Stephen F. Hayes that just came out called The Connection...Democracy for Iraq..may be hard to believe now but hopefuly will lead to a safer middle east because democracy spreads like wildfire and people woulnd't want a theolologist government...and plus we should get t.v's to the people in the middle east because they don't know what the hell is going on in the outside world...Remember...Saddam shipped those weapons out or burried them somewhere...he wasn't refusing letting in inspectors because he still had his underwear on..he was hiding something...anyway...Saddam could have been taking out on human rights alone...the people in Iraq are greatful...trust me...they just need to speak out more against these terrorists because they never had freedom of speech before so think they will be punsihed for speaking out against these terrorists..which is true amonst the terrorists themselves..these terrorists are cults...if someone within the terrorists would complain about their actions..they will be killed...it happens in Palestine all the time...within the terrorists groups there...according to a man..I forgot his name...he's in charge of the Palestinian human rights council I think...he said this year alone so far 350 Palestinians were killed by other Palestinians....shocking....that's why we need democracy...and Bush is starting in the right place..spit on him if you like...but don't even DARE compare him to Hitler..that's a goddamn ignorant comment...that asshole killed almost my whole family...and the stories I've heard about what his party did to my family...don't even go there by even inferring that Bush is like him or even a tiny bit similar...I don't know where you get this bull that the whole world disagreed with us...you call 38 allies with us not the whole world...these countries have been insulted by people like you who disregarded them in Iraq as not even there....we don't need Germany or France...Saddam was their sugar daddy...
Mr Coolest Cat · Member since
How you bunch of girls can argue for so long about fuck all baffles me, grow up.
Maz · Member since
And yet another lesson in maturity from Harvey.
If you don't like it, don't bother to read it, and for heaven's sake, don't post in it. How people can do nothing but thread-crap baffles me.
inu-liger · Member since
[QUOTE][QUOTE]The fact that there was nothing found is not something you can blame on Bush or even on the people who gave him wrong information. The blame for that lies squarely on the shoulders of the government of Iraq.[/QUOTE]
As usual blaming other people for their own mistakes.[/QUOTE]
Does this remind you of a certain person here? ;)
inu-liger · Member since
And Bush Jr. is the worst goddamn president who ever served in the Oval White Office.
He deserves to be shot to death.
Deaky's Middle Nut · Member since
To hear much of the news reporing lately, you'd think a national 9/11 Commission report had blown a giant hole in the Bush administra tion's rationale for toppling Saddam Hussein.
The commission did no such thing.
But that didn't stop congressional Democrats — led by presumptive presidential nominee John Kerry — from renewing their charges that the administration "misled America" about Saddam Hussein's ties to Osama bin Laden.
Again, that's not what the report says.
And even if it did, a Saddam-Osama alliance is not why America opened a front in Iraq as part of the War on Terror.
The staff report, re leased as part of yes terday's final public hearings, says there was no evident connection between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks.
In fact, the Bush administration has never said there was.
The report also says the commission has "no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States."
Again, the administration never said there was.
But the report does say that bin Laden actively sought to work with Saddam, through contacts arranged by the Sudanese government.
Indeed, it says, "a senior Iraqi intelligence office reportedly made three visits to Sudan, finally meeting bin Laden in 1994." Further, it says, "contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda also occurred after bin Laden returned to Afghanistan."
The report claims that those contacts "do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship." But that's far from a flat-out "no ties exist."
And, again, the administration has alleged only that Saddam and al Qaeda maintained contacts that were more than casual or inconsequential, none of which is denied in the commission report.
In fact, as Stephen Hayes writes in The Weekly Standard, the conventional wisdom in Washington long before George W. Bush took office was that Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden were partners in terrorism.
Two Clinton-administration stalwarts, Attorney General Janet Reno and U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White, brought an indictment against bin Laden and a deputy, Mohammed Atef, in 1998 — charging that Saddam and Osama "reached an understanding . . . that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq."
Yes, those allegations were eventually dropped from the indictment. These likely means they couldn't have been proven in a court of law under federal rules of evidence — not necessarily that they were baseless to begin with.
(This underscores the dangers of treating global terrorism in the age of suitcase nukes as a legal — not a military — matter, as candidate Kerry proposes.)
Meanwhile, back in 1999, ABC News reported that Saddam had offered bin Laden asylum, citing their "long relationship" and a December 1998 meeting in Afghanistan between Osama and Iraqi intelligence chief Faruq Hijazi.
That same year, the Congressional Research Service reported that if Saddam Hussein "decides to use terrorists to attack the continental United States, he would likely turn to bin Laden's al Qaeda," which was then recruiting "Iraqi chemical weapons experts."
Did everyone mislead America?
If, in fact, the nation was misled, the misleading began long before George W. Bush entered the White House.
But what if substantive Osama-Saddam ties were for real? Just because the Kean commission hasn't yet found any evidence does not mean it doesn't exist.
As recently as Monday, Vice President Dick Cheney said that Saddam "had long-established ties with al Qaeda" — a statement his spokesman reiterated again yesterday.
Further details can be found in Richard Miniter's vastly illuminating column, located in the New York Post.
In other words, the Kean commission — whose blatantly partisan Bush-bashing has been manifest
inu-liger · Member since
All I read is "blah blah blah". I don't speak blah fluently (although I speak idiot rather fluently)
Deaky's Middle Nut · Member since
I have found that the vast majority of the frothing Bush Haters are clueless to the actual goings on, they simply follow along with the rest of the herd, gleaning their information from the left wing media in the US.
A study has been published on media bias here
Here's some excerpts:
Results: How Close are Media Outlets to the Center?
We now compute the difference of a media outlet's score from 39.0 to judge how centrist it is. Based on sentences as the level of observation (the results of which are listed in Table 8), the Drudge Report is the most centrist, Fox News Special Report is second, ABC World News Tonight is third, and CBS Evening is last.
Given that the conventional wisdom is that the Drudge Report and Fox News are conservative news outlets, this ordering might be surprising. Perhaps more surprising is the degree to which the "mainstream" press is liberal. The results of Table 8 show that the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, USA Today, and CBS Evening News are not only liberal, they are closer to the average Democrat in Congress (who has a score of 74.1) than they are to the median of the whole House (who has a score of 39.0)
Conclusion
Although we expected to find that most media lean left, we were astounded by the degree. A norm among journalists is to present "both sides of the issue." Consequently, while we expected members of Congress to cite primarily think tanks that are on the same side of the ideological spectrum as they are, we expected journalists to practice a much more balanced citation practice, even if the journalist's own ideology opposed the think tanks that he or she is sometimes citing. This was not always the case. Most of the mainstream media outlets that we examined (ie all those besides Drudge Report and Fox News Special Report) were closer to the average Democrat in Congress than they were to the median member of the House.
Farlander · Member since
[QUOTE]So it doesn't matter that 846 have (so far) died in this war because Bush received the wrong info? It doesn't matter than thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians have been killed or injured because the Bush administration made a boo-boo?[/QUOTE]
Of course it matters, but you can't put the blame for that on anyone but the government of Iraq. If they had just complied with what they were required to regarding the weapons inspectors, this would never have happened. A country that has shown it is willing to invade other countries as recently as a decade ago suddenly refuses to allow the weapons inspectors to inspect! You HAVE to go in. It's the only safe option.
[QUOTE]As far as I'm concerned when Iraq received warnings of a possible invasion and then they started allowing inspectors everywhere.[/QUOTE]
No, Hussein was defiant right up until he was captured. If he really had no weapons, I cannot fathom a possible reason for his behavior. That was a deeply stupid thing he did. Perhaps he thought complying made him weak in the eyes of other nations? I don't know.
[QUOTE]He truly deserved to be thrown out, but he wasn't the only one. There are dozens of tyrants in this world just like Saddam Hussein (even some who are a bigger threat to world peace than Saddam himself), but it seems to be like Bush had a special interest in Saddam Hussein.[/QUOTE]
We're not going to go ousting every tyrant in the world. Hussein's refusal to comply with U.N. in his particular position made him someone who needed to be de-throned for the good of world and United States. He was just the biggest problem at the time.
[QUOTE]Obviously he had to convince Americans that invading Iraq and over-throwing him was right.[/QUOTE]
Americans hardly needed convincing of that, except hippie college professors who walk around with no shoes smoking pot all day, and they weren't convinced of anything anyway.
[QUOTE]That's why he came up with the stories about WMD and the links with Al-Qaeda. Today after more than a year of war, WMDs haven't been found and the only link between Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein is that both of them received weapons and were aided by the Reagan administration during the 80s.[/QUOTE]
He went on the information he had and everyone knows it. It was unfortuate our spies made these errors, but as I said, it changes nothing in the end.
[QUOTE]As usual blaming other people for their own mistakes.[/QUOTE]
They don't blame anyone for their mistakes. The point is that their mistakes, while unfortunate, were completely irrelevent. The same thing needed to happen regardless.
[QUOTE]Hitler thought that exterminating the Jews was the best for Germany, Europe and the world. So because the whole world disagreed with him, didn't that matter at all?[/QUOTE]
I am illustrating the difference in the motives of Bill Clinton and George Bush. You are unwilling to concede the point, so you change the subject.
[QUOTE]Let's see what Bush has to say...
- "Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream." —LaCrosse, Wis., Oct. 18, 2000
- "I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family." —Greater Nashua, N.H., Jan. 27, 2000
- "I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully." —Saginaw, Mich., Sept. 29, 2000
- "Rarely is the questioned asked: Is our children learning?" —Florence, S.C., Jan. 11, 2000
[/QUOTE]
Once again you change the subject. Bush makes the occational slip of the tounge in speeches and you pointed it out. Well aren't you clever. Laugh and clap your hands. But you know perfectly well what Bush stands for. You may not agree with it, but you know.
You see how even when I am illustrating an aspect of Bush that is not a support or defense of him in any way, you twist your response into an attack? That tells me that you are either 1.) so consumed with irrational hate that you are unable to see past it or
Deaky's Middle Nut · Member since
"You see how even when I am illustrating an aspect of Bush that is not a support or defense of him in any way, you twist your response into an attack? That tells me that you are either 1.) so consumed with irrational hate that you are unable to see past it or 2.) so unsure of your own position that you feel you must reinforce it to yourself at any available opportunity."
That is the way all of these left wingnuts act! It is the irrational hatred, the intensitude of it, is truly mind boggling.
Just wait, lefties. God forbid your useless guy wins, if you think that you all have shows some hatred, just wait...........
John Kerry IS Jimmy Carter
Farlander · Member since
[QUOTE]That is the way all of these left wingnuts act! It is the irrational hatred, the intensitude of it, is truly mind boggling.[/QUOTE]
True, but let's be fair - there are plenty of right-wing nuts guilty of the exact same thing.
Deaky's Middle Nut · Member since
Yes there are, but the lefties hatred makes the righties look like a Monk convention! The sad part is, the majority of those ewho proclaim to "hate Bush" have no true Idea what the truth would be if it bit them on the ass! They get all of their info from CBS, ABC, and CNN. Sad Sad days!
Holly2003 · Member since
In Dubya's letter to Congress saying why he was about to take military action against Iraq he states clearly that he included Iraq among "those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001." Here's the link, in Dubya's own words:
And for those those who start to drool if they have to read more than a few lines at at time, these quotes really spell out the Bush Admin's attempts to link Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein: -
"The liberation of Iraq removed...an ally of al-Qa'ida" President George Bush, 1 May 2003
"There's overwhelming evidence... of a connection between al-Qa'ida and Iraq"
Vice-President Cheney, 22 January 2004
"Within a week, or a month, Saddam could give his WMD to al-Qa'ida"
Donald Rumsfeld, 14 November 2002
"Saddam was a danger in the region where the 9/11 threat emerged"
Condoleezza Rice, 17 September 2003
Farlander · Member since
Those people have a common foe in us. They may not be working together, but they share a goal. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend," you know. That's all that was being pointed out. In fact, Bush was ADAMANT that Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. The recent information released to the public supports this beyond argument.
Farlander · Member since
"Yes there are, but the lefties hatred makes the righties look like a Monk convention! The sad part is, the majority of those ewho proclaim to "hate Bush" have no true Idea what the truth would be if it bit them on the ass! They get all of their info from CBS, ABC, and CNN. Sad Sad days!"
I disagree. I think the idiocy is shared about equally by both sides. The difference is that younger people, who still have that fire of youth burning inside them, are more easily swayed by the liberal argument. They are so quick to defend it and will do it so violently that it just seems to be unbalanced to that side.
