Apostolic Friends Forum
Page 1 of 3 1 23
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Apostolic Friends Forum (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/index.php)
-   Political Talk (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=55)
-   -   More of the Bush administration secrets (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=25047)

MikeinAR 07-12-2009 09:21 PM
More of the Bush administration secrets
 
are coming out. It's becoming more and more evident that Cheney and others in that administration had no regard or concern for oversight or our system of checks and balances in three seperate branches of government.

Secret programs that Congress didn't even know about for an 8 year period of time? I certainly don't support every move the Obama administration is making, but it's a relief that those Neo-Con's aren't in power anymore.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/12/us...ntel.html?_r=1

Whoop Harted 07-13-2009 07:38 AM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
George Bush is not a tyrant!

The tyrant is the one in office now!! You are accepting propoganda from the liberal press that wants to take our guns and do away with talking about God!!

George Bush was a GREAT president and I whish Cheney would have made it into the office after him! He was the BEST Vice that we ever have had! Period!

Stop the Bush bashing!

n david 07-13-2009 08:08 AM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
:popcorn2

coadie 07-13-2009 08:11 AM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Additional item from Section 9 of the Constitution.

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
- ex post facto means applying laws retroactively

It looks like the communists want to write laws and make them retro active and try the Bush administration under them. I am sure the New York times is as far from truth and reality as they can be. They actually admitted stories they covered up.

Twisp 07-13-2009 08:12 AM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whoop Harted (Post 771686)
George Bush is not a tyrant!

The tyrant is the one in office now!! You are accepting propoganda from the liberal press that wants to take our guns and do away with talking about God!!

George Bush was a GREAT president and I whish Cheney would have made it into the office after him! He was the BEST Vice that we ever have had! Period!

Stop the Bush bashing!
If you're going to troll, try and be a little more subtle.

1/10

Pressing-On 07-13-2009 08:15 AM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
There isn't enough information on this issue, as yet, but I have two observations:

1. A political cover for Nancy Pelosi
2. A distraction for Obama's efforts to push ambitious health care and energy reform.

Esther 07-13-2009 09:28 AM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On (Post 771699)
There isn't enough information on this issue, as yet, but I have two observations:

1. A political cover for Nancy Pelosi
2. A distraction for Obama's efforts to push ambitious health care and energy reform.
Bingo we have a winner!

DividedThigh 07-13-2009 09:40 AM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
have to agree with esther, and i havent trusted the nytimes, like ever, oh yeah, who is gullible here, huh, dt

SOUNWORTHY 07-13-2009 10:23 AM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whoop Harted (Post 771686)
George Bush is not a tyrant!

The tyrant is the one in office now!! You are accepting propoganda from the liberal press that wants to take our guns and do away with talking about God!!

George Bush was a GREAT president and I whish Cheney would have made it into the office after him! He was the BEST Vice that we ever have had! Period!

Stop the Bush bashing!
I agree 100%. Mike doesn't like President Bush, in fact I think he is the one who thinks Bush was the master mind in 9/11. :nah

I believe G.W Bush will go down in history as one of our strongest president.

Newman 07-13-2009 11:33 AM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeinAR (Post 771619)
are coming out. It's becoming more and more evident that Cheney and others in that administration had no regard or concern for oversight or our system of checks and balances in three seperate branches of government.

Secret programs that Congress didn't even know about for an 8 year period of time? I certainly don't support every move the Obama administration is making, but it's a relief that those Neo-Con's aren't in power anymore.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/12/us...ntel.html?_r=1

Hmmm.... Do you have any idea how many "Czars" have been appointed by Obama?

Are you aware that:

1. They only answer to Obama;

2. There is NO congressional confirmation or oversight;

3. There is a fully functional "shadow" cabinet in place;

4. And that all these people who answer directly to Obama and not to Congress are steadily taking oversight over just about all aspects of American life?

Why not consider what is plain and obvious on its face right now instead of being distracted by the alleged secrets of Cheney? Even as the media focuses on this questionable Cheney story, Obama marches toward his quest for more power and greater oversight of the American economy through cap and trade and health care as more Americans lose their jobs. :foottap

MikeinAR 07-13-2009 12:10 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOUNWORTHY (Post 771737)
I agree 100%. Mike doesn't like President Bush, in fact I think he is the one who thinks Bush was the master mind in 9/11. :nah


I believe G.W Bush will go down in history as one of our strongest president.
You could think that, but you'd be entirely wrong.

I do not believe and have never said that GWB was the mastermind of 9/11. I have no clue who you're talking about unless Dedicated Mind said something like that. 9/11 was a terrorist act committed by Al-qaeda.

I've been critical of many things about the Bush administration including warrantless wiretapping, going against the Genevea conventions in allowing torture of enemy combatants, Cheney's constant involvement in trying to sway the CIA to falsify intelligence on Iraq, and invading Iraq when there was no link whatsoever to Al-qaeda and the REAL war on terror.

There are plenty of logical reasons to be glad the Bush administration is out of power, but I've never accused them of committing 9/11.

Strongest President huh? That's ridiculous and proposterous.

Cindy 07-13-2009 01:01 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeinAR (Post 771811)
You could think that, but you'd be entirely wrong.

I do not believe and have never said that GWB was the mastermind of 9/11. I have no clue who you're talking about unless Dedicated Mind said something like that. 9/11 was a terrorist act committed by Al-qaeda.

I've been critical of many things about the Bush administration including warrantless wiretapping, going against the Genevea conventions in allowing torture of enemy combatants, Cheney's constant involvement in trying to sway the CIA to falsify intelligence on Iraq, and invading Iraq when there was no link whatsoever to Al-qaeda and the REAL war on terror.

There are plenty of logical reasons to be glad the Bush administration is out of power, but I've never accused them of committing 9/11.

Strongest President huh? That's ridiculous and proposterous.

I have no problem with warrant less wiretaps when fighting terrorist. But I do not think torture is needed on anyone. I don't believe fighting terrorism is about laws at all. They are lawless people, they get what they give.
I think the reason that Iraq was invaded was to get rid of Sadaam and his regime.

MikeinAR 07-13-2009 01:23 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cindy (Post 771835)
I have no problem with warrant less wiretaps when fighting terrorist. But I do not think torture is needed on anyone. I don't believe fighting terrorism is about laws at all. They are lawless people, they get what they give.
I think the reason that Iraq was invaded was to get rid of Sadaam and his regime.
I agree. I don't care about terrorists calls being tapped without a warrant. My problem is that the NSA can listen to a phone call of a U.S. citizen who is talking to a person in another country, without any suspicion that either are involved in terrorism. That's a violation of a citizen's 4th Amendment rights.

I have no problem with them doing foreign intelligence of any kind when there are suspected terrorists involved, but American citizens have constitutional rights that have been violated.

I agree on the reasons for Iraq. They wanted Saddam Hussein out of power from day one, before 9/11. Unfortunately, they chose to sell the war as a part of the War on Terror and that was false. Over 4500 U.S. deaths later, the mistake isn't over yet.

GrowingPains 07-13-2009 01:34 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Yeah, BHO has no secrecy at all. He is an open book for the world. Rahm, Nancy and Harry are the most upstanding people in Washington. *PUKE*

Pressing-On 07-13-2009 01:53 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeinAR (Post 771846)
I agree. I don't care about terrorists calls being tapped without a warrant. My problem is that the NSA can listen to a phone call of a U.S. citizen who is talking to a person in another country, without any suspicion that either are involved in terrorism. That's a violation of a citizen's 4th Amendment rights.

I have no problem with them doing foreign intelligence of any kind when there are suspected terrorists involved, but American citizens have constitutional rights that have been violated.

I agree on the reasons for Iraq. They wanted Saddam Hussein out of power from day one, before 9/11. Unfortunately, they chose to sell the war as a part of the War on Terror and that was false. Over 4500 U.S. deaths later, the mistake isn't over yet.
Hey, Mike! Liz Cheney is saying that running for political office is in her horizon.

"It's something I very well may do," said Elizabeth "Liz" Cheney.

Soooo, which do you like better - Senator Cheney or President Cheney? :D :toofunny

RevDWW 07-13-2009 01:54 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeinAR (Post 771846)
I agree. I don't care about terrorists calls being tapped without a warrant. My problem is that the NSA can listen to a phone call of a U.S. citizen who is talking to a person in another country, without any suspicion that either are involved in terrorism. That's a violation of a citizen's 4th Amendment rights.

I have no problem with them doing foreign intelligence of any kind when there are suspected terrorists involved, but American citizens have constitutional rights that have been violated.

I agree on the reasons for Iraq. They wanted Saddam Hussein out of power from day one, before 9/11. Unfortunately, they chose to sell the war as a part of the War on Terror and that was false. Over 4500 U.S. deaths later, the mistake isn't over yet.
It was sold by both Repubs and Dems and the UN as war on nuclear weapon potential. Oh and let's not forget that Saddam was know as a tyrant who was know to attack and invade other countries.

Seems there was evidence that Al-Q was doing some training in Iraq with Sad's approval as well.

RevDWW 07-13-2009 01:57 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrowingPains (Post 771853)
Yeah, BHO has no secrecy at all. He is an open book for the world. Rahm, Nancy and Harry are the most upstanding people in Washington. *PUKE*
The following post is complete TIC and spiked with heavy sarcasm:

This is an Administration that is completely transparent!

MikeinAR 07-13-2009 02:06 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RevDWW (Post 771859)
It was sold by both Repubs and Dems and the UN as war on nuclear weapon potential. Oh and let's not forget that Saddam was know as a tyrant who was know to attack and invade other countries.

Seems there was evidence that Al-Q was doing some training in Iraq with Sad's approval as well.
Why would Saddam Hussein have allowed a destabalizing force like al-qaeda in his country? That would have been suicide on himself given the Sunni/Shiite make up of that country. That didn't pass the smell test in 2003 and it still doesn't.

I may have "seemed" that way, if you drink the Neo-Con kool-aid but I challenge you to bring us anything that was ever proven that al-qaeda was in Iraq, before we invaded it. No intelligence agencies really believed that Saddam Hussein allowed Al-qaeda in Iraq. That was pure myth! Our own invasion of Iraq allowed the power vaccum which led to the Iraqi chapter of Al-qaeda.

It's irresponsible to put brave men and women in harm's way because things "seem" a certain way. They should only be called upon when this country is in imminent danger. Iraq posed no danger to the U.S. whatsoever.


Also, no one from the U.N., except the Bushies, tried to sell a war based on WMD. Hanz Blix stated publicly time and again there was evidence of WMD in Iraq and if given more time he felt like he could prove it. Of course, the Neo-Con's weren't willing to wait and chose a needless war.

Let's not revise history to make it seem like the rest of the World agreed with us.

Light 07-13-2009 02:45 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeinAR (Post 771861)
Why would Saddam Hussein have allowed a destabalizing force like al-qaeda in his country? That would have been suicide on himself given the Sunni/Shiite make up of that country. That didn't pass the smell test in 2003 and it still doesn't.

I may have "seemed" that way, if you drink the Neo-Con kool-aid but I challenge you to bring us anything that was ever proven that al-qaeda was in Iraq, before we invaded it. No intelligence agencies really believed that Saddam Hussein allowed Al-qaeda in Iraq. That was pure myth! Our own invasion of Iraq allowed the power vaccum which led to the Iraqi chapter of Al-qaeda.

It's irresponsible to put brave men and women in harm's way because things "seem" a certain way. They should only be called upon when this country is in imminent danger. Iraq posed no danger to the U.S. whatsoever.


Also, no one from the U.N., except the Bushies, tried to sell a war based on WMD. Hanz Blix stated publicly time and again there was evidence of WMD in Iraq and if given more time he felt like he could prove it. Of course, the Neo-Con's weren't willing to wait and chose a needless war.

Let's not revise history to make it seem like the rest of the World agreed with us.
Mike It is useless to try and reason with the unreasonable. These people scream stand up and take responsibility for your actions, yet when it comes to someone in their party (bush & chenie chin chin) they scream at the top of their lungs, don't hold our guys responsible for the laws they broke. We must not look back.
I say BULL prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.

coadie 07-13-2009 03:07 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light (Post 771872)
Mike It is useless to try and reason with the unreasonable. These people scream stand up and take responsibility for your actions, yet when it comes to someone in their party (bush & chenie chin chin) they scream at the top of their lungs, don't hold our guys responsible for the laws they broke. We must not look back.
I say BULL prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.
You must not be familiar with the law. Our constitution doesn't allow us to write and backdate laws. Are you strong enough to show us interrogation laws that were violated?
How about the briefings on interrogation that Pelosi attended. Why didn't she see anything wrong?

Obama's followers really go for the abortion. Get rid of the pesky "undesirable weeds" as Planned Parenthood calls the unborn babies.

Cheney did fantastic when Obama started prancing on waterboarding. He knew exactly which reports Obama was hiding and wouldn't release.

So light, tell us which laws you refer to. Otherwise we know it is just noise.:gotcha

n david 07-13-2009 03:09 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeinAR (Post 771861)
Why would Saddam Hussein have allowed a destabalizing force like al-qaeda in his country? That would have been suicide on himself given the Sunni/Shiite make up of that country. That didn't pass the smell test in 2003 and it still doesn't.

I may have "seemed" that way, if you drink the Neo-Con kool-aid but I challenge you to bring us anything that was ever proven that al-qaeda was in Iraq, before we invaded it. No intelligence agencies really believed that Saddam Hussein allowed Al-qaeda in Iraq. That was pure myth! Our own invasion of Iraq allowed the power vaccum which led to the Iraqi chapter of Al-qaeda.

It's irresponsible to put brave men and women in harm's way because things "seem" a certain way. They should only be called upon when this country is in imminent danger. Iraq posed no danger to the U.S. whatsoever.


Also, no one from the U.N., except the Bushies, tried to sell a war based on WMD. Hanz Blix stated publicly time and again there was evidence of WMD in Iraq and if given more time he felt like he could prove it. Of course, the Neo-Con's weren't willing to wait and chose a needless war.

Let's not revise history to make it seem like the rest of the World agreed with us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light (Post 771872)
Mike It is useless to try and reason with the unreasonable. These people scream stand up and take responsibility for your actions, yet when it comes to someone in their party (bush & chenie chin chin) they scream at the top of their lungs, don't hold our guys responsible for the laws they broke. We must not look back.
I say BULL prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.
If W and Cheney are liars about the WMD's ... add these to your list of people who should be prosecuted for the lies:

Former President Clinton
Former Clinton Sec of State Madeline Albright
Former Clinton Nat Sec Adv Sandy Berger
Sen. Carl Levin
Former Sen. Tom Daschle
Sen. John Kerry
Rep. Nancy Pelosi
Sen. Bob Graham
Former VP Al Gore
Sen. Ted Kennedy
Sen. Robert Byrd
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller
Rep. Henry Waxman
Current Sec of State Hillary Clinton

You want to prosecute W and Cheney for lying on Iraq's WMD's ... then you best add these DEMOCRATS to your list of defendants.

Idiots. :blah

This isn't revising history ... this is revisiting documented history:

Quote:
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[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.

"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."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that . 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 redefine 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."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"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 mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains 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 capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 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."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"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 . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"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."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"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. 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."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 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. "[W]ithout 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 has 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.
Gotta go - be back tomorrow to read your pathetic excuses on why it's W and Cheney's fault ... but not the DOZENS of Democrats who were talking about WMDs in Iraq well before W even got into office.

Whoop Harted 07-13-2009 03:12 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light (Post 771872)
Mike It is useless to try and reason with the unreasonable. These people scream stand up and take responsibility for your actions, yet when it comes to someone in their party (bush & chenie chin chin) they scream at the top of their lungs, don't hold our guys responsible for the laws they broke. We must not look back.
I say BULL prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.
LOL

We'll see how reasonable you will be when it is BraaaaaackO's time to take responsibility for his antiChrist actions! The man is one of the worst that this country has ever seen.

We thought JCarter was bad, he will look like an angel next to BRAAAAAAAKO!(Isn't that the sound a donkey makes?)

(Or a good healthy belch!):ursofunny

Whoop Harted 07-13-2009 03:13 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by n david (Post 771881)
If W and Cheney are liars about the WMD's ... add these to your list of people who should be prosecuted for the lies:

Former President Clinton
Former Clinton Sec of State Madeline Albright
Former Clinton Nat Sec Adv Sandy Berger
Sen. Carl Levin
Former Sen. Tom Daschle
Sen. John Kerry
Rep. Nancy Pelosi
Sen. Bob Graham
Former VP Al Gore
Sen. Ted Kennedy
Sen. Robert Byrd
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller
Rep. Henry Waxman
Current Sec of State Hillary Clinton

You want to prosecute W and Cheney for lying on Iraq's WMD's ... then you best add these DEMOCRATS to your list of defendants.

Idiots. :blah

This isn't revising history ... this is revisiting documented history:



Gotta go - be back tomorrow to read your pathetic excuses on why it's W and Cheney's fault ... but not the DOZENS of Democrats who were talking about WMDs in Iraq well before W even got into office.
LOVE THE LIST!!!!


Read it and weep Democrits!!!!

Whoop Harted 07-13-2009 03:20 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light (Post 771872)
Mike It is useless to try and reason with the unreasonable. These people scream stand up and take responsibility for your actions, yet when it comes to someone in their party (bush & chenie chin chin) they scream at the top of their lungs, don't hold our guys responsible for the laws they broke. We must not look back.
I say BULL prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.
ATTENTION!!!! ATTENTION!!!!!



FOR THE HOOP HARTED AWARD OF THE DAY!!!



IT GOES TO .....

LIGHT AND MIKE!!!!








Does it stink in here or is it just me?

MikeinAR 07-13-2009 03:28 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by n david (Post 771881)
If W and Cheney are liars about the WMD's ... add these to your list of people who should be prosecuted for the lies:

Former President Clinton
Former Clinton Sec of State Madeline Albright
Former Clinton Nat Sec Adv Sandy Berger
Sen. Carl Levin
Former Sen. Tom Daschle
Sen. John Kerry
Rep. Nancy Pelosi
Sen. Bob Graham
Former VP Al Gore
Sen. Ted Kennedy
Sen. Robert Byrd
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller
Rep. Henry Waxman
Current Sec of State Hillary Clinton

You want to prosecute W and Cheney for lying on Iraq's WMD's ... then you best add these DEMOCRATS to your list of defendants.

Idiots. :blah

This isn't revising history ... this is revisiting documented history:



Gotta go - be back tomorrow to read your pathetic excuses on why it's W and Cheney's fault ... but not the DOZENS of Democrats who were talking about WMDs in Iraq well before W even got into office.
This is easy n_david. You do realize that Bill Clinton never called for an invasion of Iraq based on intelligence that was inconclusive at best don't you? Sure there were many in Washington D.C. who thought that there was a possibility that Saddam Hussein had WMD's. The difference is many of them didn't try to falsify intelligence just so the country could go to war.

The Neo-Con's in the Bush administration made the inexcusable decision to mislead the American people, Congress the U.N. in their push to war. I realize that's what Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the others wanted all along, but is that really an excuse to make up intelligence and mislead the country?

The fact remains that no other previous U.S. administrations had been foolish enough to invade Iraq based on questionable intelligence.

Cindy 07-13-2009 03:28 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Good grief, how childish some people get when discussing politics or religion.

TJJJ 07-13-2009 03:30 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cindy (Post 771900)
Good grief, how childish some people get when discussing politics or religion.
Go get-em Granny!

:thumbsup

MikeinAR 07-13-2009 03:30 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light (Post 771872)
I say BULL prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.
From the Newsweek article last week on Attorney General Holder, it's sounding like you may get your wish on those who decided to approve torture. I say let the subpeona's fly and let's decide who broke the law.

coadie 07-13-2009 03:32 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whoop Harted (Post 771893)
ATTENTION!!!! ATTENTION!!!!!



FOR THE HOOP HARTED AWARD OF THE DAY!!!



IT GOES TO .....

LIGHT AND MIKE!!!!








Does it stink in here or is it just me?
:smack

citizen 07-13-2009 03:40 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
They need to drop these investigations.

The previous administration did what they thought should be done to carry out what they thought needed to be carried out - whether it was to protect the country or to get Sadam for saying mean things against Bush Sr....Bush/Cheney were not the worst to occupy the White House but we as Christians defend them as if what they did was a mandate from God. These jokers are far from God and never listen to Him at all.
One day real Christians will wake up and seperate themselves from the so called Conservative Politico.

The NeoCons are no better than the Liberati. And maybe worse because they are wolves in sheeps' skin. They are a bloody lot and are certainly as LUSTY (as we see) as anyone else in any other party.

But I think they should drop any investigations - just drop it because the whole country was afraid right after 9/11.

coadie 07-13-2009 03:45 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeinAR (Post 771903)
From the Newsweek article last week on Attorney General Holder, it's sounding like you may get your wish on those who decided to approve torture. I say let the subpeona's fly and let's decide who broke the law.

You have a very revengefull spirit. so does Holder. Vengeance is mine, I will repay saith the LORD

Pastor Wright at Trinity Church in Chicago taught black theology to obama also. It was that of getting even. In one of obama's campaign speeches he promised to get even.
What the desparate people on the left believe is now that obama has exposed his empty suitedness, attacking the previous office will boost his strongly disapprove ratings up. It takes a clear unemployed mind about 2 seconds to see that will not get him his job back.

Mike. what laws did he break?
When did Pelosi first mention that (she was in that committee)
What is your education level?

.by the way, Holder is procedureally contemplating appointing a special prosecutor. They decide if and when and whom to subpoena. Holder is walking on eggshells because 3 indictments in Alaska imploded and had convictions tossed because the Justice department used over reaching prosecutors.

Democrats are still trying to exact revenge on people they hate. Revenge is easy to see from a distance. It is driven by hate.

Question Mike. Obama appointed a Secretary of Education that came from Chicago. His district had horrible drop out rates. He pioneered the concept of a separate school for gays and sodomites. What ever happened with that?

coadie 07-13-2009 03:50 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeinAR (Post 771899)
This is easy n_david. You do realize that Bill Clinton never called for an invasion of Iraq based on intelligence that was inconclusive at best don't you? Sure there were many in Washington D.C. who thought that there was a possibility that Saddam Hussein had WMD's. The difference is many of them didn't try to falsify intelligence just so the country could go to war.

The Neo-Con's in the Bush administration made the inexcusable decision to mislead the American people, Congress the U.N. in their push to war. I realize that's what Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the others wanted all along, but is that really an excuse to make up intelligence and mislead the country?

The fact remains that no other previous U.S. administrations had been foolish enough to invade Iraq based on questionable intelligence.
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

Question Mike. Are we still in Iraq?
Is there some misunderstanding? Oblahma said we were out rapidly. did he flip flop? I enjoy seeing how his leg tingling adherents respond to promises made with expiration dates.

MikeinAR 07-13-2009 04:02 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by coadie (Post 771917)
You have a very revengefull spirit. so does Holder. Vengeance is mine, I will repay saith the LORD

Pastor Wright at Trinity Church in Chicago taught black theology to obama also. It was that of getting even. In one of obama's campaign speeches he promised to get even.
What the desparate people on the left believe is now that obama has exposed his empty suitedness, attacking the previous office will boost his strongly disapprove ratings up. It takes a clear unemployed mind about 2 seconds to see that will not get him his job back.

Mike. what laws did he break?
When did Pelosi first mention that (she was in that committee)
What is your education level?

.by the way, Holder is procedureally contemplating appointing a special prosecutor. They decide if and when and whom to subpoena. Holder is walking on eggshells because 3 indictments in Alaska imploded and had convictions tossed because the Justice department used over reaching prosecutors.

Democrats are still trying to exact revenge on people they hate. Revenge is easy to see from a distance. It is driven by hate.

Question Mike. Obama appointed a Secretary of Education that came from Chicago. His district had horrible drop out rates. He pioneered the concept of a separate school for gays and sodomites. What ever happened with that?
If people went above and beyond LEGAL means and used interrogation tactics that were unlawful, then I believe they should be prosecuted. I don't believe AG Holder is going after Bush and Cheney specifically, but I think the evidence may be beginning to reveal that people within the administration went above the legally approved means of interrogation. If they did, then the rule of law should apply to them, just as it does to me and you.

No one's above the law right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by coadie (Post 771921)
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

Question Mike. Are we still in Iraq?
Is there some misunderstanding? Oblahma said we were out rapidly. did he flip flop? I enjoy seeing how his leg tingling adherents respond to promises made with expiration dates.
All of those quotes yet President Clinton worked with the U.N. inspectors/sanctions and with diplomatic means to disarm Iraq. He never lauched a land invasion of Iraq. Do you understand the differences in the decision President Clinton made and the one GWB made? President Clinton's decision seems wise from this side of history, don't you agree?

I voted for Bob Barr so President Obama didn't make me any promises, but I think he's adhered to what he said in the campaign on Iraq. He said he would responsibly (not in some type of stampede out of the country) withdraw the troops from Iraq. He immediately set a time table to do that.

GWB refused to set any such timetable, thus leaving Iraq as an open ended obligation. I see a major difference there myself.

Cindy 07-13-2009 04:40 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by coadie (Post 771917)
You have a very revengefull spirit. so does Holder. Vengeance is mine, I will repay saith the LORD

Pastor Wright at Trinity Church in Chicago taught black theology to obama also. It was that of getting even. In one of obama's campaign speeches he promised to get even.
What the desparate people on the left believe is now that obama has exposed his empty suitedness, attacking the previous office will boost his strongly disapprove ratings up. It takes a clear unemployed mind about 2 seconds to see that will not get him his job back.

Mike. what laws did he break?
When did Pelosi first mention that (she was in that committee)
What is your education level?

.by the way, Holder is procedureally contemplating appointing a special prosecutor. They decide if and when and whom to subpoena. Holder is walking on eggshells because 3 indictments in Alaska imploded and had convictions tossed because the Justice department used over reaching prosecutors.

Democrats are still trying to exact revenge on people they hate. Revenge is easy to see from a distance. It is driven by hate.

Question Mike. Obama appointed a Secretary of Education that came from Chicago. His district had horrible drop out rates. He pioneered the concept of a separate school for gays and sodomites. What ever happened with that?
Why are you asking Mike about his education level?

MikeinAR 07-13-2009 05:11 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cindy (Post 771942)
Why are you asking Mike about his education level?
I actually just read that part of his post Cindy. haha!

I didn't realize my intelligence was being called into question but if you're wondering coadie, I have a bachelors in business admin. Hope that helps. :ursofunny

And if I might coadie, what were you trying to imply by asking my education level?

Light 07-13-2009 05:30 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by coadie (Post 771880)
You must not be familiar with the law. Our constitution doesn't allow us to write and backdate laws. Are you strong enough to show us interrogation laws that were violated?
How about the briefings on interrogation that Pelosi attended. Why didn't she see anything wrong?

Obama's followers really go for the abortion. Get rid of the pesky "undesirable weeds" as Planned Parenthood calls the unborn babies.

Cheney did fantastic when Obama started prancing on waterboarding. He knew exactly which reports Obama was hiding and wouldn't release.

So light, tell us which laws you refer to. Otherwise we know it is just noise.:gotcha
As usual you mouth overloads your mind. If a law is broken and you do not know it is broken, how can you prosecute the law breaker????? Congress found out this week so hang the crooks high. Prosecute the law breaker. The law breaking was still going on without the knowledge of OB and the congress.You like most republicans can't stand on the facts so you bring up a red herring. PUT UP OR SHUT UP did BUSH and the Repugnats stop abortion? NO Did they even try to overturn Roe V wade NO.

Pressing-On 07-13-2009 05:44 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeinAR (Post 771950)
I actually just read that part of his post Cindy. haha!

I didn't realize my intelligence was being called into question but if you're wondering coadie, I have a bachelors in business admin. Hope that helps. :ursofunny

And if I might coadie, what were you trying to imply by asking my education level?
I missed that too, because I still have him on Ignore. :toofunny

MikeinAR 07-13-2009 05:45 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On (Post 771973)
I missed that too, because I still have him on Ignore. :toofunny
Hmmm... that may be the right course of action. :thumbsup

Cindy 07-13-2009 05:48 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On (Post 771973)
I missed that too, because I still have him on Ignore. :toofunny
:ursofunny

SOUNWORTHY 07-13-2009 05:51 PM
Re: More of the Bush administration secrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light (Post 771960)
As usual you mouth overloads your mind. If a law is broken and you do not know it is broken, how can you prosecute the law breaker????? Congress found out this week so hang the crooks high. Prosecute the law breaker. The law breaking was still going on without the knowledge of OB and the congress.You like most republicans can't stand on the facts so you bring up a red herring. PUT UP OR SHUT UP did BUSH and the Repugnats stop abortion? NO Did they even try to overturn Roe V wade NO.
Ho Hum Light. Nasty as ever this week. WOW!!


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:17 PM.
Page 1 of 3 1 23
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.