0 registered (),
17
Guests and
2
Spiders online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
#208277 - 30/09/03 03:10 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by off2cjb: Wil, give it up with the WMD and terrorism. Your hero Bill let the terrorists get away with what they did. They bankrolled his push for the whitehouse and he let them live freely. So, Bush didn't give $43 Million to the Taliban? I want you to note the date of THIS ARTICLE . Now, ask me again who bankrolls terrorism? Come on, I'm waiting....
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208278 - 30/09/03 03:13 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Member
Registered: 26/12/01
Posts: 2527
Loc: Land of OZ - Home of the Jayha...
|
Originally posted by off2cjb: Wil, give it up with the WMD and terrorism. Your hero Bill let the terrorists get away with what they did. They bankrolled his push for the whitehouse and he let them live freely. The ones that tried to destroy the World Trade center in '93 were caught and are in jail. The bombers on the African embassies were caught and are in jail. Timothy McVeigh was executed. How is Bush any better? Saddam and Osama are still running around putting out more videos than MTV.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208279 - 30/09/03 03:14 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Member
Registered: 20/12/01
Posts: 4932
Loc: Fort Worth, TX
|
Well you won't get any argument out of me on that point. Sheer is a dumbass but he had a point on that one. The WOD is the stupidest thing going. Unfortunately the majority of politicians on both sides of the aisle support it.
Edit: I just had to add something though. Everyone in the UN was happy with the Taliban for doing this. The aid money was for farmers that were not able to profit from poppy production anymore. Of course people like you and Sheer twist this into some massive conspiracy. It isn't like we recognized their government man. Getting rid of the heroin production in Afghanistan was a good thing. I still think the WOD is misguided, but you can't really put it at the feet of Bush like you would like to.
_________________________
Redsox1113: F*** Iran, the only thing that ever came out of iran was the iron sheik, and hulk hogan whipped his ass. F'em
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208280 - 30/09/03 03:24 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I am wetting my pants Nancy. Mr Reagan? Is that you? Libbie op-ed pieces aren't proof idiot. Then why do you conservatives take everything Bill O'Reilly says as the Gospel? Most of the intelligence was the same that Clinton used to bomb Iraq in '98. And if I remember right, you conservatives screamed bloody murder when he did it too. Why is it ok with one President, but not the other? Please tell me, Sally. I'm waiting. I would call that you being an idiot for buying into the conspiracy. WHAT CONSPIRACY, DUMMY?? SHE TESTIFIED ON CAPITOL HILL!!! Were you born an ostrich, or do you just like to bury your head in the sand for fun? He specifically said that we don't know if Saddam was involved. The administration never said we were to begin with. So then, please tell me genius, what are we fighting a war over there for, then? That was the reason we a) went to the UN and told them that Iraq was in bed with the terrorists, B) that we were in imminent danger from the WMD's that they had, and c) any day now, Saddam was going to attack us. We attacked them as a pre-imptive strike. If it wasn't about terrorists, then PLEASE tell me what it was for. He never said the British gave us the intelligence. He said it was according to them. Good God, you conservatives play these word games so much... WHAT IS THE F*CKING DIFFERENCE?? "According to them..." Doesn't that IMPLY that the British gave us that intelligence?? At the very LEAST it implies it. I took it to mean that our agency had no reliable evidence for it. So then why was it in the State of the Union? If they had no reliable evidence about it, it shouldn't have even been mentioned. The fact that Saddam had bought uranium before from them is always conveniently left out when you extremist libbies bring this up.
Do you know this for sure, or is this just ACCORDING to you? Oh, if we all could be as 'enlightened' and 'progressive' as you. You extreme leftists just think you have it all figured out don't you. Well, don't we? I mean, look how well off we were in the 90's under Clinton. If Bush is so good, how come jobs keep disappearing?
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208281 - 30/09/03 03:27 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Member
Registered: 20/12/01
Posts: 4932
Loc: Fort Worth, TX
|
Originally posted by Aero Steve: The ones that tried to destroy the World Trade center in '93 were caught and are in jail. The bombers on the African embassies were caught and are in jail. Timothy McVeigh was executed. How is Bush any better? Saddam and Osama are still running around putting out more videos than MTV. Nice try. The rank and file of Al Qeada have been largely decimated. The organization has a fraction of the capabilities it did two years ago. Saddam is no longer in control of Iraq. I don't agree with cjb's assertion completely, but had Clinton acted against bin Laden 9-11 may have never happened. I can't blame him though. Hindsight is 20/20 after all.
_________________________
Redsox1113: F*** Iran, the only thing that ever came out of iran was the iron sheik, and hulk hogan whipped his ass. F'em
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208282 - 30/09/03 03:30 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Member
Registered: 11/03/02
Posts: 4411
Loc: The Woodlands, TX
|
Originally posted by WilMac1023: [QUOTE]Originally posted by off2cjb: [qb]]So, Bush didn't give $43 Million to the Taliban?
I want you to note the date of THIS ARTICLE .
Now, ask me again who bankrolls terrorism? Come on, I'm waiting....I smelt B.S. when I saw this or at least something was taken out of context like most libs do: web page
_________________________
Hoosier by birth, Red Raider by choice... like KNIGHT and day.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208283 - 30/09/03 03:47 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Member
Registered: 23/10/00
Posts: 4557
|
Originally posted by WilMac1023: Originally posted by off2cjb: [b]Wil, give it up with the WMD and terrorism. Your hero Bill let the terrorists get away with what they did. They bankrolled his push for the whitehouse and he let them live freely. So, Bush didn't give $43 Million to the Taliban?
I want you to note the date of THIS ARTICLE .
Now, ask me again who bankrolls terrorism? Come on, I'm waiting....[/b]Written by a liberal loser for the liberal LA Times. Come on Wil, you have to do better. Also, there isn't one iota of fact in that article. Just useless hearsay. You hippies suck. Bring actual non-disputable facts with you. Isn't this the same man who got in lots of trouble working with the LA Times from printing liberal lie after lie.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208284 - 30/09/03 03:53 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Member
Registered: 20/12/01
Posts: 4932
Loc: Fort Worth, TX
|
Originally posted by WilMac1023: Then why do you conservatives take everything Bill O'Reilly says as the Gospel? I don't so I guess you would have to ask someone else about that. And if I remember right, you conservatives screamed bloody murder when he did it too. Why is it ok with one President, but not the other? Please tell me, Sally. I'm waiting. I think most of the people that were against it saw it as a way for him to take the focus off of his scandals. I was for it at the time. WHAT CONSPIRACY, DUMMY?? SHE TESTIFIED ON CAPITOL HILL!!! Were you born an ostrich, or do you just like to bury your head in the sand for fun? Gotta link? So then, please tell me genius, what are we fighting a war over there for, then? That was the reason we a) went to the UN and told them that Iraq was in bed with the terrorists, B) that we were in imminent danger from the WMD's that they had, and c) any day now, Saddam was going to attack us. We attacked them as a pre-imptive strike. If it wasn't about terrorists, then PLEASE tell me what it was for.
Saddam was and has been in bed with terrorists for years. Look at his support for groups like Hamas dummy. The President specifically said that we were going to war before Saddam became an imminent threat in the SOTU. The administration never said Saddam was an imminent threat. Our intelligence agency along with all the agencies in the world thought he had these weapons. He continued to not comply with his obligations under the cease fire from the first war for 12 years. The UN past resolution after resolution and did nothing to enforce them. Good God, you conservatives play these word games so much... WHAT IS THE F*CKING DIFFERENCE?? "According to them..." Doesn't that IMPLY that the British gave us that intelligence?? At the very LEAST it implies it. No it doesn't imply that. It implies that British intelligence was telling us that he tried to buy the uranium, but they could not give us the evidence. The party they got it from did not want it shared with us. Do you know this for sure, or is this just ACCORDING to you?
I mispoke. The Nigerians have said Saddam tried repeatedly to buy uranium from them in the '80s, but they supposedly turned him down then. Well, don't we? I mean, look how well off we were in the 90's under Clinton. If Bush is so good, how come jobs keep disappearing?[/QB] I don't know maybe because Bush inherited a nice fat recession and terrorists attacked us.
_________________________
Redsox1113: F*** Iran, the only thing that ever came out of iran was the iron sheik, and hulk hogan whipped his ass. F'em
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208287 - 30/09/03 03:59 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Here is how much sense you conservatives make. Republican Logic
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208288 - 30/09/03 04:06 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Member
Registered: 20/12/01
Posts: 4932
Loc: Fort Worth, TX
|
Originally posted by Mobycat:
Ah...not true. The recession began after Bush took office. (To be fair, the expansion started under Bush the Dad.)[/QUOTE] Yeah it started right after he took office and was a direct result of the dot com collapse. I think Presidents roles in the economy are overated anyway. It doesn't matter who is in office. It is going to go up and down naturally.
_________________________
Redsox1113: F*** Iran, the only thing that ever came out of iran was the iron sheik, and hulk hogan whipped his ass. F'em
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208289 - 30/09/03 04:08 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Member
Registered: 12/09/00
Posts: 8375
Loc: the hue of dungeons and the sc...
|
Originally posted by 2001frontier: Originally posted by Mobycat: [b] Ah...not true. The recession began after Bush took office.
(To be fair, the expansion started under Bush the Dad.)Yeah it started right after he took office and was a direct result of the dot com collapse. I think Presidents roles in the economy are overated anyway. It doesn't matter who is in office. It is going to go up and down naturally.[/b][/QUOTE] Agreed on that. While he technically didn't "inherit" it, Clinton also didn't cause it. But they get the credit or blame regardless - this is what will cause Bush's downfall, if anything.
_________________________
"Nature has constituted utility to man the standard and test of virtue. Men living in different countries, under different circumstances, different habits and regimens, may have different utilities; the same act, therefore, may be useful and consequently virtuous in one country which is injurious and vicious in another differently circumstanced" - Thomas Jefferson, moral relativist
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208290 - 30/09/03 04:21 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Member
Registered: 20/12/01
Posts: 4932
Loc: Fort Worth, TX
|
I think the economy will be in much better shape by the time the election rolls around. It is already improving. I also think it depends on the Dems nominee.
_________________________
Redsox1113: F*** Iran, the only thing that ever came out of iran was the iron sheik, and hulk hogan whipped his ass. F'em
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208291 - 30/09/03 04:21 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Ok, here's the FBI memo that she sent: MEMO It was promptly ignored.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208293 - 30/09/03 04:25 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Member
Registered: 11/03/02
Posts: 4411
Loc: The Woodlands, TX
|
Originally posted by Mobycat: Agreed on that. While he technically didn't "inherit" it, Clinton also didn't cause it. But they get the credit or blame regardless - this is what will cause Bush's downfall, if anything. Moby, you're pretty smart for a liberal. I'm glad you can see outside the box. I thought you were going to argue that point. I wish you would haven't said anything though so I could see how many lefties think the President plays a major role in the economy status. WilMac, I finally see where you are going... you're just posting b.s. to make fun of libs. Sorry I took you serious before.
_________________________
Hoosier by birth, Red Raider by choice... like KNIGHT and day.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208294 - 30/09/03 04:27 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by NismoXse02: WilMac, I finally see where you are going... you're just posting b.s. to make fun of libs. Sorry I took you serious before. Uh, yeah dude. That's what I'm doing.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208295 - 30/09/03 04:34 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Member
Registered: 12/09/00
Posts: 8375
Loc: the hue of dungeons and the sc...
|
Originally posted by NismoXse02: Moby, you're pretty smart for a liberal. I'm glad you can see outside the box. I thought you were going to argue that point. I wish you would haven't said anything though so I could see how many lefties think the President plays a major role in the economy status. I think the Presidency does have *some* influence on where things go, but not a lot. Greenspan has more power over the economy (and I suppose, by logic, that would say the President does by appointing him). While the economy does go through it's cycles, I think the dot-com thing was an apparation of sorts - the economy would have continued chugging along (slow, fast, whichever), but the dot-com magnified it unbelievably.
_________________________
"Nature has constituted utility to man the standard and test of virtue. Men living in different countries, under different circumstances, different habits and regimens, may have different utilities; the same act, therefore, may be useful and consequently virtuous in one country which is injurious and vicious in another differently circumstanced" - Thomas Jefferson, moral relativist
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208297 - 30/09/03 04:38 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Member
Registered: 20/12/01
Posts: 4932
Loc: Fort Worth, TX
|
Originally posted by WilMac1023: Ok, here's the FBI memo that she sent:
MEMO
It was promptly ignored.Oh, I have read that before. That in no way shows that Bush knew about the attacks before they happened. Nice try though. The ineptitude of the FBI before 9-11 is definately alarming, but again this in no way shows that BUSH KNEW!
_________________________
Redsox1113: F*** Iran, the only thing that ever came out of iran was the iron sheik, and hulk hogan whipped his ass. F'em
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208298 - 30/09/03 04:39 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Member
Registered: 11/03/02
Posts: 4411
Loc: The Woodlands, TX
|
_________________________
Hoosier by birth, Red Raider by choice... like KNIGHT and day.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208299 - 30/09/03 04:41 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by 2001frontier: Originally posted by WilMac1023: [b]Ok, here's the FBI memo that she sent: MEMO It was promptly ignored. Oh, I have read that before. That in no way shows that Bush knew about the attacks before they happened. Nice try though. The ineptitude of the FBI before 9-11 is definately alarming, but again this in no way shows that BUSH KNEW![/b]In the words of Barbara Bush: "I'm done with you."
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208300 - 30/09/03 04:48 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Member
Registered: 20/12/01
Posts: 4932
Loc: Fort Worth, TX
|
Hey, I can't help it if you bring tired bogus arguments to the table man. God if you want to argue the bush knew conspiracy angle at least bring up how Bush just sat at the school while we were being attacked. We all know he should have ran outside screaming like a mad man instead of waiting for the Secret Service to come up with a plan to move him.
_________________________
Redsox1113: F*** Iran, the only thing that ever came out of iran was the iron sheik, and hulk hogan whipped his ass. F'em
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#208301 - 30/09/03 04:57 PM
Re: Who Is Lying about US involvement in Iraq?
|
Member
Registered: 23/10/00
Posts: 4557
|
WilMac, from 1 to 18 posts. You had a heck of a first day. Welcome to XOC. It only gets better. Good to see you (FNG) sticking to your guns.
You're still a bleedin heart liberal PETA backin commie, but I respect that.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|