You don't believe he'd do such a thing?Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: Gaard
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: Gaard
BlackIThinkI'llBecomeARepublicanangst1, the same goes to you. You agree, then, that he lied?
I know he didnt lie.
Without a doubt?
Until substantial evidence is presented, yes.
Originally posted by: Gaard
You don't believe he'd do such a thing?Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: Gaard
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: Gaard
BlackIThinkI'llBecomeARepublicanangst1, the same goes to you. You agree, then, that he lied?
I know he didnt lie.
Without a doubt?
Until substantial evidence is presented, yes.
He said he didn't?
You can't think of a reason why he would?
You haven't seen sufficient proof to the contrary? (I ate the neighbor kid's brains)
I'm trying to figure out why you would, WITHOUT A DOUBT, believe Bush didn't lie.
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Maybe we should post the scroll of Democrats who were espousing the same lies.
Yes, we should. I always add it when Harvey sees fit to spam his quote macro.
So here, let us see what ranking, leading Democrats and left-wingers had to say about Iraq...
We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry ,among others, on October 9, 1998
"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos, among others.
"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002
"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998
"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998
"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002
"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002
"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003
"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998
"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002
"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002
"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002
"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002
"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002
"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002
"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002
"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002
"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
"Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq's enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration's policy towards Iraq, I don't think there can be any question about Saddam's conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Surely these can't be true.
Originally posted by: blackangst1
/sarcasm
Right Harv?
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: blackangst1
/sarcasm
Right Harv?
When it comes to sarcasm, you really need to go home and practice, and you read so piss poorly that you should consider dusting off your copy of "Fun With Dick And Jane."
Remember that stovepiped and completely BOGUS intel I noted just a couple of posts ago? Since you clearly have some short term memory problems, I'll repost it for you again.They ignored any information from competent internal sources that ran counter to their ambitions:
- The "intelligence" fed to Congress and the American people was cherry picked and directed from the top.
- Rumsfeld set his own parallel "intelligence" operation within DOD when the CIA and FBI couldn't tell him what he wanted to hear.
- There was no yellow cake uraniium in Niger.
- There were no aluminum tubes capable of being used in centrifuges process nuclear material.
- There were no facilities for making nerve gas or biological weapons.
- There were no long range rockets.
- There were no WMD's.
- There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq.
Congress was working in the dark with nothing but what they were spoon fed. The biggest mistake made by most in Congress was trusting the Bushwhackos' motives and honesty before the truth became as well known as it is, now.
- They ignored all warnings about the possiblity of an attack like 9/11, despite explicit warnings from people like Richard Clarke, former terrorisim advisor to Presidents Reagan, Bush Sr. and Clinton. Richard Clarke also warned Bush that Saddam probably was not tied to 9/11.
The Bushwhackos didn't want to hear that so they did what any good exec would do -- They fired him.
- They claimed their pre-war planning included plenty of troops to handle foreseeable problems in the aftermath of their invasion, despite warnings from Army Chief of Staff, Eric Shinseki that they would need around 400,000 troops to do the job.
The Bushwhackos administration didn't want to hear that so they did what any good exec would do -- They fired him.
- Before Bush started his war of lies, Ambassador Joseph Wilson was sent to Niger to investigate reports that Saddam was trying to buy yellow cake uranium. He returned and informed that the reports were false.
The Bushwhackos administration didn't want to hear that so they did what any good adminstration would do. They outed his wife, Valerie Plame's identity as a covert CIA operative, blowing off her value to our national security and endangering her life and the lives of everyone who ever worked with her anywhere in the world.
You can complain all you want when I repost the same replies. I could stop if you Bushwhacko sycophants stop posting the same LIES again, and again, and again and again.
< NO sarcasm >
George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and their entire adminstration should be charged, tried and convicted of MURDER for every American who has died in their war of LIES in Iraq and TREASON for shredding the rights guaranteed to every American citizen under the U.S. Constitution.
If you want laughs for your so called "sarcasm," try telling it to the families and friends of the 3,855 American troops who have died in that war. You lying assholes must think that's a barrel of laughs, huh? :roll:
We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry ,among others, on October 9, 1998
"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos, among others.
"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002
"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998
"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998
"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002
"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002
"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003
"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998
"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002
"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002
"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002
"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002
"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002
"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002
"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002
"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002
"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
"Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq's enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration's policy towards Iraq, I don't think there can be any question about Saddam's conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002
Originally posted by: Sinsear
And your Democrat heroes voted to authorize the use of force and fund the war. :thumbsdown::|:thumbsdown: But, clearly your Code Pink-esque Agenda won't acknowledge this. :thumbsdown::|:thumbsdown:
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: blackangst1
/sarcasm
Right Harv?
When it comes to sarcasm, you really need to go home and practice, and you read so piss poorly that you should consider dusting off your copy of "Fun With Dick And Jane."
Remember that stovepiped and completely BOGUS intel I noted just a couple of posts ago? Since you clearly have some short term memory problems, I'll repost it for you again.They ignored any information from competent internal sources that ran counter to their ambitions:
- The "intelligence" fed to Congress and the American people was cherry picked and directed from the top.
- Rumsfeld set his own parallel "intelligence" operation within DOD when the CIA and FBI couldn't tell him what he wanted to hear.
- There was no yellow cake uraniium in Niger.
- There were no aluminum tubes capable of being used in centrifuges process nuclear material.
- There were no facilities for making nerve gas or biological weapons.
- There were no long range rockets.
- There were no WMD's.
- There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq.
Congress was working in the dark with nothing but what they were spoon fed. The biggest mistake made by most in Congress was trusting the Bushwhackos' motives and honesty before the truth became as well known as it is, now.
- They ignored all warnings about the possiblity of an attack like 9/11, despite explicit warnings from people like Richard Clarke, former terrorisim advisor to Presidents Reagan, Bush Sr. and Clinton. Richard Clarke also warned Bush that Saddam probably was not tied to 9/11.
The Bushwhackos didn't want to hear that so they did what any good exec would do -- They fired him.
- They claimed their pre-war planning included plenty of troops to handle foreseeable problems in the aftermath of their invasion, despite warnings from Army Chief of Staff, Eric Shinseki that they would need around 400,000 troops to do the job.
The Bushwhackos administration didn't want to hear that so they did what any good exec would do -- They fired him.
- Before Bush started his war of lies, Ambassador Joseph Wilson was sent to Niger to investigate reports that Saddam was trying to buy yellow cake uranium. He returned and informed that the reports were false.
The Bushwhackos administration didn't want to hear that so they did what any good adminstration would do. They outed his wife, Valerie Plame's identity as a covert CIA operative, blowing off her value to our national security and endangering her life and the lives of everyone who ever worked with her anywhere in the world.
You can complain all you want when I repost the same replies. I could stop if you Bushwhacko sycophants stop posting the same LIES again, and again, and again and again.
< NO sarcasm >
George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and their entire adminstration should be charged, tried and convicted of MURDER for every American who has died in their war of LIES in Iraq and TREASON for shredding the rights guaranteed to every American citizen under the U.S. Constitution.
If you want laughs for your so called "sarcasm," try telling it to the families and friends of the 3,855 American troops who have died in that war. You lying assholes must think that's a barrel of laughs, huh? :roll:
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Dude, you friggin suck at reading comprehension. You just proved a point I addressed. Just take your seat in the front of the short bus and pay attention, kay?
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Dude, you friggin suck at reading comprehension. You just proved a point I addressed. Just take your seat in the front of the short bus and pay attention, kay?
No, it's not OK. Don't like it? Stop posting the same lies.
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Which lie did I post?
How about your cut and paste responses to everything? As I said... persistant you are, intelligent, not so much. you sound like a rabid Democratic puppet.
Originally posted by: Harvey
No, it's not OK. Don't like it? Stop posting the same lies.
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Harvey
No, it's not OK. Don't like it? Stop posting the same lies.
Do you not see the irony here? :roll:
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Harvey
No, it's not OK. Don't like it? Stop posting the same lies.
Do you not see the irony here? :roll:
Only if I'm posting lies. Here's a challenge...
I and others have posted plenty hard proof that the Bushwhackos lied. If you think the Bushwhackos haven't lied, PROVE IT. Go out, and get some credible links to disprove the facts we've posted.
:clock: < crickets > :laugh:
Originally posted by: Harvey
Irony??? Only if I'm posting lies. Here's a challenge...
I and others have posted plenty hard proof that the Bushwhackos lied. If you think the Bushwhackos haven't lied, PROVE IT. Go out, and get some credible links to disprove the facts we've posted.
Clue -- Attempting to shift blame to Congress, Bill Clinton or anyone else is irrelevant. PROVE the administration hasn't lied about the issues we've already documented.
:clock: < crickets > :laugh:
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Prove a negative? haha The only proof I see is your lack of intelligence.
Originally posted by: Pabster
That's not how it works, unfortunately. YOU are making the claims. The burden of proof is on YOU, not me. You've provided absolutely nothing to satisfy that burden.
Originally posted by: Harvey
Exhibit #2 of a reading challenged Bushwhacko sycophant liar bullshitting, evading and sidestepping the issue. I've already provided links, facts, quotes and dates. Now, you'll come back and rag on me that I cut and paste the same answers, so I'll say it again...
The truth doesn't change. As long as you post the same LIES, the same answers apply.
The anti-war crowd in here doesn't give a care about stories like that. If it's not the US doing the torture then it's not news and they don't give a crap because they can't generate their usual fake outrage. That's why the anti-war crowd today aren't really liberals. Liberals used to care about things like that. The anti-war crowd today are nothing but partisan hacks and shills.Originally posted by: Alistar7
The burden of proof in regards to WMD was on Saddam's head. Prove AQ was in Iraq before the US took action, ok.
Posted by Michael J. Totten at 09:55 PM | Comments (32)
March 09, 2006
Zarqawi Was Here
BIARA, IRAQ ? The PUK?s Minister of the Interior ordered 20 heavily armed Peshmerga soldiers to go with me to the borderland mountain village of Biara. For years the village was occupied by Ansar Al Islam, the Kurdish-Arab-Persian branch of Al Qaeda in Northern Iraq. Biara wasn?t the only village seized by the Taliban of Mesopotamia, but it was perhaps the most important. It is there that the Jordanian-born Abu Musab al-Zarqawi had his last stand in Iraqi Kurdistan before the 2003 US-led invasion forced him out.
My Peshmerga weren?t really necessary. I told my translator Alan that I was embarrassed so many military resources were being spent on my account. I probably didn?t need any.
?It?s too much,? Alan said and laughed. He, too, was clearly embarrassed. ?It?s too much. The minister is doing this to be nice. He wants you to know that he cares about you.?
I introduced myself to some of my Peshmerga guards. There were so many it wasn?t easy to speak to them all. I had a hard time looking them in the eye. Jesus, I thought. These guys must think I?m the biggest wimp in the world. Biara isn?t actually dangerous. Zarqawi hasn?t been there for years. But it wasn?t my idea to bring them along. When the minister said ?I will send guards with you? I thought he meant maybe two guys. I cringed when I saw how many picked me up at my hotel in the morning.
Alan and I left Suleimaniya in a convoy. One truck bristling with Peshmerga led the way. Another truck followed. Heads turned as we drove through the small villages. Who might that be was the look on all the faces. I wanted to bury my own face in my hands. It?s just me! I?m not that important! It turned out, though, to be fun.
I don?t know if these guys actually thought I was a wimp because they had to come with me. They probably did. If so, they did a terrific job hiding it. Most likely they didn?t care. Driving up the mountains and into Biara surely beat boring checkpoint detail or whatever else they would have been otherwise doing.
We arrived in Biara and parked near the mosque founded long ago by a Sufi mystic from Turkey. Zarqawi lived in that mosque during the Ansar Al Islam occupation. I could tell most of the Peshmerga guys had never been there. They gawked at the mosque and at the mountains like tourists.
Their disposition had drastically changed since morning. At first they were all business. We will protect you said the look on their no-nonsense faces. Now they looked like boys. Cool! Field trip!
After a few oohs and ahs and the pointing of fingers they found a kebab shop and ordered some lunch. Alan and I went over to join them.
?I don?t have enough food for everybody,? the stunned shop owner said, clearly intimidated by the sheer volume of food he would have to prepare all at once. ?Try the tea shop down the street.?
Alan and I went to the tea shop down the street and settled in.
The proprietor happily made us Iraq-style tea (dark brown, overflowing, and packed with a wallop of sugar) and delicious kebabs.
There were a few other patrons in the tea shop and they eyed me, the obvious foreigner, with a mixture of curiosity and shyness.
?Do want to talk to some of these people?? Alan said. ?I?ll be happy to translate.?
Of course I wanted to talk. That was the reason I went there in the first place.
?Hello,? I said to two slightly goofy looking gentlemen sitting across the tea shop on the other side of the stove.
They both stepped across and we firmly shook hands.
?Do you want to know about life in Biara?? the one on the left said. He spoke perfect English and I did not need Alan to translate.
?Yes,? I said. ?Did you live here when the village was occupied by Zarqawi??
?I did,? he said. ?Life wasn?t good. We had no freedom. TV was banned. Women couldn?t walk outside without an abaya. There was violence. Anyone not affiliated with them was treated badly. During prayer time everyone was required to go to the mosque. If we didn?t go we were insulted and fined 50 dollars.?
50 dollars may not be a lot of money in the United States, but was a huge amount in a remote village in Iraqi Kurdistan while all of Iraq was under international sanctions. People needed the Oil for Food program just to stay alive.
?Did anyone here actually like Ansar Al Islam?? I asked.
?There were one or two very young people,? he said. ?I am from here. We never had anything like that before. I was joking with my friends in this tea shop. We were arrested, chained, blindfolded, and beaten. Laughing was banned.?
?They were like the Taliban,? his friend said.
?Did Ansar kill anyone here?? I asked.
?One person was tortured to death,? he said.
The tea shop owner joined the conversation.
?I was accused of being a member of the PUK,? he said, referring to the left-wing Patriotic Union of Kurdistan political party. ?So they put me in prison.?
Ansar Al Islam?s occupation of Biara and surrounding villages ended in 2003 when the Peshmerga launched a ground invasion with U.S. air support. Biara, including the Zarqawi-occupied mosque, was bombed from the air.
?How did you feel when the Americans bombed your village?? I asked the shopkeeper.
?We were waiting to get rid of them,? he said. ?We were desperate. They were the worst people ever. Many people had to close their businesses and leave this place.?
Two other men came into the tea shop. One wore a military uniform, the other wore civilian clothes. They kept to themselves at first, then came over to talk.
?Did you ever meet Zarqawi?? I asked the man in civilian clothes.
?Few people saw him,? he said. ?He covered his face with a cloth. He wasn?t the boss, though. Chafee was their commander. They had three commanders, actually. We are still afraid of them.?
Apparently the threat to this part of Iraqi Kurdistan isn?t quite over. Otherwise the minister of the interior would not have even thought to send Peshmerga guards with me. But the Islamists haven?t been back since the US and the Peshmerga drove them over the border into Iran. It was hard to imagine they would dare try to come back again without getting themselves killed the instant they arrived.
?When the US attacked,? he said, ?they escaped to an Iranian village. Then Iran sent them to Kirkuk. One guy was arrested in Kirkuk and sent back to Iran. Then Iran sent him back to Kirkuk again.?
I'd have to ask Michael Moore. Or maybe Dan Rather? After all, a lie is supposedly not a lie if the information is fake but accurate.Originally posted by: Gaard
TLC - Try to be honest here. Is a lie of omission still a lie?
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I'd have to ask Michael Moore. Or maybe Dan Rather? After all, a lie is supposedly not a lie if the information is fake but accurate.Originally posted by: Gaard
TLC - Try to be honest here. Is a lie of omission still a lie?
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Prove a negative? haha The only proof I see is your lack of intelligence.
And there you have exhibit #1 of a Bushwhacko sycophant liar bullshitting, evading and sidestepping the issue. I didn't ask you to prove a negative. All you have to do is prove that the words they spoke about the listed issues was true.They ignored any information from competent internal sources that ran counter to their ambitions:
- Rumsfeld set his own parallel "intelligence" operation within DOD when the CIA and FBI couldn't tell him what he wanted to hear.
Did he NOT set up his own parallel operation within DOD to produce the answers he wanted to hear, rather than the truth? PROVE IT!
- There was no yellow cake uranium in Niger.
Was Joseph Wilson right, or was there yellow cake uranium in Niger? PROVE IT! All you need are positive facts.
- There were no aluminum tubes capable of being used in centrifuges process nuclear material.
If you believe there were such aluminum tubes, PROVE IT! All you need are positive facts.
- There were no facilities for making nerve gas or biological weapons.
If you believe there were such facilities, PROVE IT! All you need are positive facts.
- There were no long range rockets.
If you believe there were such long range rockets, PROVE IT! All you need are positive facts.
- There were no WMD's.
If you believe there were such WMD's, PROVE IT! All you need are positive facts.
- There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq.
If you believe Al Qaeda in Iraq was there before the Bushwhackos started their war of LIES, PROVE IT! All you need are positive facts.Those are facts... unless you can provide positive evidence to the contrary. If you don't agree, stop whining and making excuses, and PROVE IT. All you need are positive facts.
- They ignored all warnings about the possiblity of an attack like 9/11, despite explicit warnings from people like Richard Clarke, former terrorisim advisor to Presidents Reagan, Bush Sr. and Clinton. Richard Clarke also warned Bush that Saddam probably was not tied to 9/11.
The Bushwhackos didn't want to hear that so they did what any good exec would do -- They fired him.
No negative to prove, here. Clarke's own documentation makes the case. If you disagree, PROVE IT! All you need are positive facts.
- They claimed their pre-war planning included plenty of troops to handle foreseeable problems in the aftermath of their invasion, despite warnings from Army Chief of Staff, Eric Shinseki that they would need around 400,000 troops to do the job.
The Bushwhackos administration didn't want to hear that so they did what any good exec would do -- They fired him.
No negative to prove, here. Shinseki's own documentation is incontrovertable. If you believe he didn't warn the admin idiots, PROVE IT! All you need are positive facts.
:clock: < crickets > :laugh:
Originally posted by: Pabster
That's not how it works, unfortunately. YOU are making the claims. The burden of proof is on YOU, not me. You've provided absolutely nothing to satisfy that burden.
Exhibit #2 of a reading challenged Bushwhacko sycophant liar bullshitting, evading and sidestepping the issue. I've already provided links, facts, quotes and dates. Now, you'll come back and rag on me that I cut and paste the same answers, so I'll say it again...
The truth doesn't change. As long as you post the same LIES, the same answers apply.