Bingo: Bush, Iraq, and Flip Flopping. Stupid Dub finally caught on lying

[glenn1]

So I guess even when capture it in writing (e.g. Letter to Congress), that's not good enough? Gotcha.

The vast majority of the American people will believe this to be a "lie" as much as they found Bill Clinton's Monica testimony to be a perjury worth impeachment. Didn't your side learn a damn thing from watching the Republicans make bloody fools of themselves a few years ago?

 

[Vadatajs]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
libs make up facts that aren't in existance, and them use them to attack conservatives.

Example? And remember it was Reagan who said "facts are stupid things."

heck, the facts just don't matter...look at Kerry's statement "i voted before it before i voted against it"

That is a fact, he did. It's too bad you're too blindly partisan to see that.

everything they are saying is out of desperation to get back in the game.

Really, Most of us here are under the impretion that you're the one rambling on insanely out of desperation.

Bush never said saddam was involved in 9/11

You've managed to bury the one true thing in your entire post with so much horesh1t that it's completely lost. Unfortunately for you, this is only true on a technicality.

You are making it up.

HA HA HA HA, they made up the letter on the whitehouse website??? I really, honestly think you're only posting this garbage to try and convince yourself that it's true.

The commission findings and Bush's statements are "compatible with each other" according to the chairman of the committee.

No they are not. Bush is claiming that 2, maybe 3 meetings tops counts as a relationship. The problem is it clearly wasn't a collaborative one. You can't claim a relationship of animosity and mutually exclusive end goals as justification for invading Iraq, especially now that the WMD charges that led to the invocation of the war powers act in the first place ended up being GROSS EXAGGERATIONS at best and OUTRIGHT LIES at the worst. The one legitimate reason they had is long gone, and everything that the adminstration has said post David Kay saying 'hey, there's no weapons here' has been pure damage control. They asked themselves how to keep the American people behind the war and answered themselves with Goebbels, Goering and their own little Reichtagsbrandverordnung.

this impeachment stuff is hysterical...
i have always thought that libs would go well beyond impeachment, and go for a charge of treason with which they could have Bush executed...

Ted Kennedy sounding the battle cry...
just don't let him drive!!

You and I both know that that won't happen. Bush is the agent of his own destruction. Impeaching him now would be like torpedoing the Titanic after it hit the iceberg.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Hey wow - he's another "lying" thread Now not only do we have a thread on this issue about a "retarded" VP but now we have a thread regarding the same issue that calls the President "Stupid".

*shrugs*

CkG

 

[heartsurgeon]

two of Bin Laden's most senior associates, interrogated by U.S. authorities, "have adamantly denied that any ties existed between Al Qaeda and Iraq

Yep...liberals believe Al Qaeda "associates" when they deny something. It all has a certain symettry.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon

two of Bin Laden's most senior associates, interrogated by U.S. authorities, "have adamantly denied that any ties existed between Al Qaeda and Iraq

Yep...liberals believe Al Qaeda "associates" when they deny something. It all has a certain symettry.

:cookie;

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon

two of Bin Laden's most senior associates, interrogated by U.S. authorities, "have adamantly denied that any ties existed between Al Qaeda and Iraq

Yep...liberals believe Al Qaeda "associates" when they deny something. It all has a certain symettry.

Yeah, isn't it funny how interrogation works. We do it because jusat for the fun of acquiring all those useless lies.

 

[adlep]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon

Bush never said saddam was involved in 9/11

You are making it up.

The commission findings and Bush's statements are "compatible with each other" according to the chairman of the committee.

this impeachment stuff is hysterical...
i have always thought that libs would go well beyond impeachment, and go for a charge of treason with which they could have Bush executed...

When I think about it now, it is very simple to prove that Bush administration was linking 9/11 with Saddam's regime almost on a daily basis, up to a year ago.
They were claiming that Mohammed Atta has meet with Saddam's Intelligence officer in Prague where allegedly they were discussing their "cooperation".
This claim was rebuffed by everybody by now, but the fact that it has been used by the Bush, contradicts his statement about:

""This administration never said that the 9-11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al-Qaida," he said. "

Gotha...

 

[MonkeyK]

Originally posted by: chess9
HS:

No Bush didn't flat out make the assertion that SH and AQ cooperated to bring off 9-11. What Bush, Cheney, and Powell did do though was much more insidious. They inferred that was the case with loose language.
-Robert

:beer:

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: kage69
Well, the Repubs were howling for impeachment when Clinton lied - I look forward to thier support for impeaching our latest lying bastard.

remember clinton did it under oath for testimony? bush hasnt, theres youre big difference, nice try though.

 

[Ilmater]

God I hate you adlep, but at least you now posted this in the right forum.

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: MonkeyK
I think you are reading what you want into the letter. The second item refers to terrorist organizations
including those involved in 9-11. The letter either says that Iraq was a terrorist organization (however that was defined) or that it helped perpetrate 9-11. Which it says is subject to interpretation.

I don't WANT anything from the letter. I was just giving my first glance of the letter. So anyways, yes, rereading the placement of commas, it seems that Bush either claims that Iraq is a terrorist nation or a nation that planned September 11, 2001. So I guess technically he can still justify the war on the claim that Iraq was a terrorist nation.

It's not a very good letter in the first place. It's written in a manner that may imply that Iraq was involved in 9-11 thus appealing to the reader's desire to find the leaders of 9-11. Why write it unless it was added to the Constition and Public Law 107-243 or whatever that is? It IS misleading.

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: MonkeyK

Originally posted by: chess9
HS:

No Bush didn't flat out make the assertion that SH and AQ cooperated to bring off 9-11. What Bush, Cheney, and Powell did do though was much more insidious. They inferred that was the case with loose language.
-Robert

:beer:

:thumbsup:

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
...

this impeachment stuff is hysterical...
i have always thought that libs would go well beyond impeachment, and go for a charge of treason with which they could have Bush executed...

Ted Kennedy sounding the battle cry...
just don't let him drive!!

I thought that a stereotypical conservative voter was in favor of pro-life in abortion but yet pro-death penalty.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: MonkeyK

Originally posted by: adlep

Originally posted by: cash1220
?

where in that letter does it say iraq took part in 9/11?

Here:
including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

So he is making the connection between 9/11 and Iraq, otherwise this entire sentence should not be there.

the letter says including which is not the same thing as equals.

Reading comprehension. It's a beautiful thing. Let me guess, adlep: your standardized Verbal testing scores are poor.