|
|
| Author |
Message |
Brash
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 20 Oct 2002
Posts: 3958
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
 |
Zapper
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 1512
Location: Connecticut
|
 Posted: 03/18/04 - 14:12 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Liberal Propaganda!!!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
sinrakin
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 7044
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 15:00 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
It's a little embarassing actually, to see that poor, stuttering, confused old man caught in his web of lies.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Tura
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 4866
Location: Raleigh, NC
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 15:19 Post subject:
|
|
|
lol I knew someone would post something from moveon.org sooner or later.
That website has 0 credibility. If even that much
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 16:13 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
LOL. They cut it off before he gave his response. Stupid liberals.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Zapper
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 1512
Location: Connecticut
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 18:51 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
You mean the part where he says I never used the term 'Immediate Threat' and then they quote him saying that no state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the world than the regime of Saddam?
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Yabden
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 13 Oct 2002
Posts: 2485
Location: Ohio
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 18:56 Post subject:
|
|
|
democrat vs. repulbican round 34521
DING DING!!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Alerik
Sir Postalot
Joined: 13 Oct 2002
Posts: 1375
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 18:59 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Your right Pheonix, his previous responses weren't enough. Your a j*****s.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 19:00 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Zapper wrote: | | You mean the part where he says I never used the term 'Immediate Threat' and then they quote him saying that no state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the world than the regime of Saddam? |
So? They dug for months to find one quote where he used the term "immediate". That obviously wasn't the official position of the white house. MoveOn.org intentionally left out the part following that to remove Rumsfeld's rebuttal. Why? Beucase Rummy more than likely pwned them as always.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 19:01 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Alerik wrote: | | Your right Pheonix, his previous responses weren't enough. Your a j*****s. |
You're a moron. They put up only the part that looks bad and edited out the rest. That's how propaganda works. It's reminiscent of Michael Moore, only sponsored by the Democratic Party. Pretty pathetic.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Zapper
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 1512
Location: Connecticut
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 19:02 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Phoenix wrote: | | Zapper wrote: | | You mean the part where he says I never used the term 'Immediate Threat' and then they quote him saying that no state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the world than the regime of Saddam? |
So? They dug for months to find one quote where he used the term "immediate". That obviously wasn't the official position of the white house. MoveOn.org intentionally left out the part following that to remove Rumsfeld's rebuttal. Why? Beucase Rummy more than likely pwned them as always. |
b******t
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
sinrakin
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 7044
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Zapper
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 1512
Location: Connecticut
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 19:08 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Haha thats neat how the liberals are twisting their own statements for propaganda purposes!!!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
killswitch
Luke Warm
Joined: 09 Jun 2003
Posts: 325
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 19:26 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Yabden wrote: | democrat vs. repulbican round 34521
DING DING!! |
More like round 345,210,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000...
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 19:30 Post subject:
|
|
|
I was wrong. Rummy did get pwned. Here's the transcript.
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/face_031404.pdf
It would have been wise of him to stick to the story that intelligence, all foreign countries and all democrats at the time believed there were wmd. For example:
"[W]e 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."
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle,
John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 19:34 Post subject:
|
|
|
"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."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 19:35 Post subject:
|
|
|
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime... 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... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
lauren000
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 21 Oct 2002
Posts: 3510
Location: colorado springs
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 20:18 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
why can't politicians just say this is what our intell said and we acted appropriately?
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
ATM Banana
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 02 Jan 2003
Posts: 8575
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 20:41 Post subject:
|
|
|
hmm, cause all that bs thrown in there would prove pointless thus undermining the whole concept of being a politician.
don't you know anything?
when watching politics is like watching one's parents talk about gorwn up things in their grown up voices as a child, they're gonna cover everything up with a sugar coating before they'll come right out and say it.
same with the mass media and politicians.
you have to see past the bs and get to the bottom of things in your own clear concience before you can make any judgements.
that entire trap, as i'd like to call it, made the person seem stupid because he really was, for arguing over words spoken by certain people.
its all irrelivant if he's about to come out saying "our intelligence yadda yadda yadaa" instead of beating around the bush as to what people said.
speaking of yatta...
http://www.verylowsodium.com/fanimutation/exuberance.php
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Tura
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 4866
Location: Raleigh, NC
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 20:45 Post subject:
|
|
|
Whether he was 'pwned' or not...
Bottom line:
Saddam was in league with Al Queda.
He has been a thorn in the WORLD's side for over 15years.
We took him out.
Moveon.org is still a lame website.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Zapper
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 1512
Location: Connecticut
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 20:56 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Phoenix wrote: | "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."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 |
You mean the arsenal congress was told 'existed' but now dosen't? So you agree the administration lied about the WMD and mislead congress also? Cool.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
ATM Banana
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 02 Jan 2003
Posts: 8575
|
|
Posted: 03/18/04 - 21:03 Post subject:
|
|
|
i agree that politics is all bs.
i agree that you're all retarded penis gobblers.
take a lot of sleeping pills and get over life.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Celestra
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 6929
|
|
Posted: 03/19/04 - 04:19 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Phoenix wrote: | | I was wrong. |
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 03/19/04 - 05:02 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Zapper wrote: | | Phoenix wrote: | "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."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 |
You mean the arsenal congress was told 'existed' but now dosen't? So you agree the administration lied about the WMD and mislead congress also? Cool. |
Note that he said the exact same thing in 1998. His opinion obviously wasn't even relying on contemporary intelligence. The fact is everyone believed Saddam to have wmd. The post 9/11 world required him to be removed because his alliance with the muslim world (as demonstrated by his financial support of suicide bombers in Israel) meant that the supposed wmd would likely wind up in the hands of Islamic terrorists. To go back now and criticise the Bush administration for taking necessary action on information that was believed to be true by EVERYONE doesn't really hurt Bush. He did the right thing based on the intelligence at hand.
And it's already been shown that the Bush administration did not lie. Intelligence was simply flawed because we didn't have enough spies inside Iraq. MoveOn.Org's accusations border on libel.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Nuldaan
Sir Postalot
Joined: 07 Nov 2002
Posts: 1179
|
|
Posted: 03/19/04 - 08:40 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Zapper wrote: | | Phoenix wrote: | "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."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 |
You mean the arsenal congress was told 'existed' but now dosen't? So you agree the administration lied about the WMD and mislead congress also? Cool. |
Just to satisfy my own curiousity, how do you come to the conclusion that Bush lied? As opposed to the more obvious conclusion that the government was operating on the best available intelligence?
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Zapper
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 1512
Location: Connecticut
|
|
Posted: 03/19/04 - 20:19 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Because they never said "we believe" or "we strongly believe" they said "he has WMD". If intelligence suggested he had but they did not know it for sure that is what they should have said. Do you disagree?
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Nuldaan
Sir Postalot
Joined: 07 Nov 2002
Posts: 1179
|
|
Posted: 03/19/04 - 20:51 Post subject:
|
|
|
Actually, yes I do. This has been rehashed so many times. There was NO doubt that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons (aka WoMD). We know for a fact that he had them because
a) he used them on his own people after the first gulf war
b) UN inspectors reported that he possessed them before he threw them out
c) He failed to show any evidence that he ever destroyed them
d) When UN teams went back into Iraq shortly before the latest war, they reported no evidence of compliance from Saddam. In fact, they reported that he was simply repeating the same tactics he used the first time. And lastly, they reported that he was directly in violation of multiple UN violations regarding WoMD.
Correct me if I wrong but since we know he had them, he showed no evidence of ever destroying them, and most importantly, he acted as though he still had them, why should we believe anything different? The only way you can come to any other conclusion is by playing 'Monday morning general' and looking at the situation in hindsight.
Given the information available, there was every reason to believe he had them. Even the countries that opposed the invasion never doubted that he had them. By claiming that they were lied to by Bush is insulting and hypocritical. Do you seriously believe that every country in the world blindly follows the US's intelligence, especially when they are so obviously looking for any chance to prove us wrong? Do you seriously believe that they didn't research our claims? Don't you think they would have come forward with any evidence that proved contrary to what Bush was asserting?
Use your head. There was every reason to believe he had them. You'd be better off arguing that Saddam wasn't a threat (as lame as that argument is) than you are arguing that Bush lied about this.
Last edited by Nuldaan on 03/19/04 - 21:13; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Zapper
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 1512
Location: Connecticut
|
|
Posted: 03/19/04 - 20:59 Post subject:
|
|
|
I agree we all thought he had them. But you and I are in a different position. We THOUGHT he had them, we were certain he had them but we did not know it for 100% certainty. How much of that was because the govet kept telling us he had them?
Now on the other hand someone in the administration be it the sec of state or the sec of def and the president are in a very different position when they say that they knew Saddam had WMD it meant they had evidence, it meant that they had concrete proof that there were WMD in Iraq. Powell went to the UN and detailed all his reasons why Saddam had WMD. There was an imminent threat and we had to take him out.
I trusted them. They lied. It is hard to give them more trust.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Nuldaan
Sir Postalot
Joined: 07 Nov 2002
Posts: 1179
|
|
Posted: 03/19/04 - 21:12 Post subject:
|
|
|
I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree. In my opinion, you've given me no proof that they lied. They may or may not have been msinformed but we have no real evidence either way. Logic itself argues that he had them as I stated above. I'll continue to believe that until someone can show me where my thought process is flawed.
I even went to Sin's link and skimmed that hoping to find a comprehensive list of statements so I could judge more fully for myself. All I found was a list of selected quotes that were either later retracted due to inaccurate information or are just flat out misleading in the method they are cited.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730
|
|
Posted: 03/19/04 - 21:30 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Zapper wrote: | I agree we all thought he had them. But you and I are in a different position. We THOUGHT he had them, we were certain he had them but we did not know it for 100% certainty. How much of that was because the govet kept telling us he had them?
Now on the other hand someone in the administration be it the sec of state or the sec of def and the president are in a very different position when they say that they knew Saddam had WMD it meant they had evidence, it meant that they had concrete proof that there were WMD in Iraq. Powell went to the UN and detailed all his reasons why Saddam had WMD. There was an imminent threat and we had to take him out.
I trusted them. They lied. It is hard to give them more trust. |
In the real world there is never 100% certainty. Although Kerry seemed to express it in 1998.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
