Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Exactly, so if WMDs were your reason for supporting the war, nothing happened which should have changed that view
Stop kazzing. You cannot prove Obama said he was born in Kenya.Too funny coming from you... remind me again why you voted for that clown, Romney?
Why did you vote for the Marxist Obama?
Bwahahaha.....another one that believes Obama was born in Kenya and the world is flat.....bwahaha.
No, Obama lied about being born in Kenya. He was born in Hawaii. He is the original birther, patient zero of the birther movement
You didn't hear about that? He lied to his publisher who put it in his bio. Unfortunately they thought he was an idiot and wouldn't sell a book and gave it to their most incompetent researcher to verify the bio. Miriam something. The idiot she was she didn't verify it. They were right Obama was a nobody, but the Democratic party latched onto him for being a black sycophant who would follow instructions. He did and now we're in this jam where a lifetime mediocrity is trying to run an economy which he has zero skills, experience or education to do. Sucks, huh? There is no happy ending to this story. But at least it will soon be over
The WMD made in the late 80's/early 90's were almost all found and/or destroyed by weapons inspectors. The U.N. estimated they had taken care of about 95% of them before being pulled out by Clinton in 1998; at which point, Clinton bombed the shit out of much of the remainder in Operation Desert Fox.You're the idiot, nowhere did NYCarbineer show that I said that. Hint, I didn't. He's stupid. I said John Kerry voted for the war. As well as Joe Biden. And he's about to vote for another if she wins the nomination.
How stupid are you people?
John Kerry (Pres), Biden (Veep), Hillary (possible Pres) voted for the war. You people can't process that information, and you call other people idiots? Classic
No, you're the idiot. You said "what should we do with the Democrats who voted for the war" and I was explaining to you why they did.....can't you even read? There wasn't one single Democrat that was in on Bush's and Cheney's coercion of the CIA to go along with their reasoning, if there is prove it.
It's bad enough that you blame the politicians that voted for the war when they weren't in on the lies, but to continue doing it after the truth has been exposed makes you the real idiot.
While US war propagandists presented the attack on Iraq as an extension of the “war on terrorism,” it is well known that the Bush administration had drawn up plans to use military force to overthrow the regime of Saddam Hussein long before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. September 11 was seized on as a pretext for stampeding public opinion to accept US military intervention.
The charge that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction was selected , as Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz later admitted, for “bureaucratic reasons”—i.e., it was the one allegation that the State Department, the Pentagon and the CIA all agreed could provide a serviceable cover for the real motives: seizing vast oil resources and establishing US dominance of the Middle East.
Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq Bush s big lie and the crisis of American imperialism - World Socialist Web Site
Let's see... we know Iraq had WMDs, we know this because we helped him make them, and he used them on Iran, and his own people (the Kurds). We know he continued making them, cause he admitted it bragged about it. We know he still had them cause the numbers did not add up for what was used and destroyed. We know he said he was gonna keep making them and even build nukes to bomb us and Israel, not unlike Iran claiming they are gonna do the same. We found these chemical weapons buried in the sand after the war. We have photos. The evidence of these WMDs has been widely distributed. Yet, here we are with democrats saying... he lied about WMDs Iraq didn't have any WMDs.
So why are the democrats this obtuse?
So then why did Democrats lie and say they were there and authorize W to invade when they knew they weren't there?
Also, do you know how wide of access to intelligence the Senate Intelligence Committee has?
The Democrats didn't lie and say they were there.....they just believed doofus George and Cheney, like the rest of the country.
Do you even read the news?
Exactly, so if WMDs were your reason for supporting the war, nothing happened which should have changed that view
You really must be dense. If there were no WMDs, there was no reason to support the war. What happened was we found out there were no WMDs, ergo, no reason to have invaded.........What the hell do we care what kind of government Iraq has? Has it improved?
Hell no, we just wasted 7000+ lives, I guess that doesn't mean anything to you.
Stop kazzing. You cannot prove Obama said he was born in Kenya.Why did you vote for the Marxist Obama?
Bwahahaha.....another one that believes Obama was born in Kenya and the world is flat.....bwahaha.
No, Obama lied about being born in Kenya. He was born in Hawaii. He is the original birther, patient zero of the birther movement
You didn't hear about that? He lied to his publisher who put it in his bio. Unfortunately they thought he was an idiot and wouldn't sell a book and gave it to their most incompetent researcher to verify the bio. Miriam something. The idiot she was she didn't verify it. They were right Obama was a nobody, but the Democratic party latched onto him for being a black sycophant who would follow instructions. He did and now we're in this jam where a lifetime mediocrity is trying to run an economy which he has zero skills, experience or education to do. Sucks, huh? There is no happy ending to this story. But at least it will soon be over
You are truly dense. Why don't you post up some links where you get your information that shows we are in a jam as far as the economy is concerned.......if you can.
Bush vs. Obama on the Economy In 3 Simple Charts UPDATED
Give examples. Don't just make the claim. Makes you look like an idiot Republican.Silly Ds...they claim W sucks and Bo's great...and yet the reality clearly indicates they are brothers doing the bidding of the oligarchy.
Prove your claim he lied to his publisher......Stop kazzing. You cannot prove Obama said he was born in Kenya.Too funny coming from you... remind me again why you voted for that clown, Romney?
Why did you vote for the Marxist Obama?
Bwahahaha.....another one that believes Obama was born in Kenya and the world is flat.....bwahaha.
No, Obama lied about being born in Kenya. He was born in Hawaii. He is the original birther, patient zero of the birther movement
You didn't hear about that? He lied to his publisher who put it in his bio. Unfortunately they thought he was an idiot and wouldn't sell a book and gave it to their most incompetent researcher to verify the bio. Miriam something. The idiot she was she didn't verify it. They were right Obama was a nobody, but the Democratic party latched onto him for being a black sycophant who would follow instructions. He did and now we're in this jam where a lifetime mediocrity is trying to run an economy which he has zero skills, experience or education to do. Sucks, huh? There is no happy ending to this story. But at least it will soon be over
Stop kazzing .... they said they had no evidence he had WMD. Compared to your bullshit that they believed he did have WMD.That isn't what they said, none of them said Hussein does not have WMDsStop kazzing. You were already shown that France, Germany, Russia and China did not believe Hussein had WMDThey're such idiots. The Congressmen (both Senators and Representatives) who voted for the war were doing it because they believed GW's/Cheney's lies....like most Americans....you can't blame them for voting for the war, none of us wanted Saddam to be able to build a nuclear weapon......that doesn't put them in the same category as criminals Bush and Cheney, who knew better. Shows just how smart some conservatives are when they make that comparison.
You're the idiot, nowhere did NYCarbineer show that I said that. Hint, I didn't. He's stupid. I said John Kerry voted for the war. As well as Joe Biden. And he's about to vote for another if she wins the nomination.
How stupid are you people?
John Kerry (Pres), Biden (Veep), Hillary (possible Pres) voted for the war. You people can't process that information, and you call other people idiots? Classic
No, you're the idiot. You said "what should we do with the Democrats who voted for the war" and I was explaining to you why they did.....can't you even read? There wasn't one single Democrat that was in on Bush's and Cheney's coercion of the CIA to go along with their reasoning, if there is prove it.
It's bad enough that you blame the politicians that voted for the war when they weren't in on the lies, but to continue doing it after the truth has been exposed makes you the real idiot.
While US war propagandists presented the attack on Iraq as an extension of the “war on terrorism,” it is well known that the Bush administration had drawn up plans to use military force to overthrow the regime of Saddam Hussein long before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. September 11 was seized on as a pretext for stampeding public opinion to accept US military intervention.
The charge that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction was selected , as Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz later admitted, for “bureaucratic reasons”—i.e., it was the one allegation that the State Department, the Pentagon and the CIA all agreed could provide a serviceable cover for the real motives: seizing vast oil resources and establishing US dominance of the Middle East.
Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq Bush s big lie and the crisis of American imperialism - World Socialist Web Site
Gotcha, Trixie,
W is an evil genius. He was in the Oval Office less than 9 months when 9/11 happened. The Democrats 8 years before that. Democrats including John Fing Kerry were all over the Senate Intelligence committee which you apparently don't know what they do and the broad access to intelligence they have. He proceeded to con the Democrats, UN, French, Russians and Germans into thinking Hussein had WMDs, which he had repeatedly used before.
Of course it's my partisanship that makes me hold both sides accountable for what they did and your rigid adherence to a life following strict logic and impartiality that makes you realize Republicans are demonic aliens from another galaxy and Democrats pure as the driven snow full of love for their fellow man and incapable of lying even to save their own lives.
One question, what's your favorite flavor of Kool-Aid? I'm guessing cherry. Am I right?
It's kind of early for you to be so drunk. The main reason for invading turned out to be bullshit ... you've got to be completely brain-dead to think of that as "nothing happened."Stop kazzing...No, you're the idiot. You said "what should we do with the Democrats who voted for the war" and I was explaining to you why they did.....can't you even read? There wasn't one single Democrat that was in on Bush's and Cheney's coercion of the CIA to go along with their reasoning, if there is prove it.
It's bad enough that you blame the politicians that voted for the war when they weren't in on the lies, but to continue doing it after the truth has been exposed makes you the real idiot.
While US war propagandists presented the attack on Iraq as an extension of the “war on terrorism,” it is well known that the Bush administration had drawn up plans to use military force to overthrow the regime of Saddam Hussein long before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. September 11 was seized on as a pretext for stampeding public opinion to accept US military intervention.
The charge that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction was selected , as Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz later admitted, for “bureaucratic reasons”—i.e., it was the one allegation that the State Department, the Pentagon and the CIA all agreed could provide a serviceable cover for the real motives: seizing vast oil resources and establishing US dominance of the Middle East.
Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq Bush s big lie and the crisis of American imperialism - World Socialist Web Site
Let's see... we know Iraq had WMDs, we know this because we helped him make them, and he used them on Iran, and his own people (the Kurds). We know he continued making them, cause he admitted it bragged about it. We know he still had them cause the numbers did not add up for what was used and destroyed. We know he said he was gonna keep making them and even build nukes to bomb us and Israel, not unlike Iran claiming they are gonna do the same. We found these chemical weapons buried in the sand after the war. We have photos. The evidence of these WMDs has been widely distributed. Yet, here we are with democrats saying... he lied about WMDs Iraq didn't have any WMDs.
So why are the democrats this obtuse?
Bush admitted he didn't have any WMD's.
You are such a liar, he did not
"Now look, part of the reason we went into Iraq was -- the main reason we went into Iraq, at the time, was we thought he had weapons of mass destruction. It turns out he didn't, but he had the capacity to make weapons of mass destruction." - George Bush, 8.21.2006
Exactly, so if WMDs were your reason for supporting the war, nothing happened which should have changed that view. You know, except you being a partisan hack who doesn't care about anything else but your party winning over truth and your country. Ooooooohhhhhhhhh.......
Your requiring proof only proves how out of touch you are...and I have not been an R since the 80s, when I was uninformed like you, believing the two parties are different.Give examples. Don't just make the claim. Makes you look like an idiot Republican.Silly Ds...they claim W sucks and Bo's great...and yet the reality clearly indicates they are brothers doing the bidding of the oligarchy.
Why is it stupid and gullible to believe the president when he's laying out a case for war following a major attack on the country?The WMD made in the late 80's/early 90's were almost all found and/or destroyed by weapons inspectors. The U.N. estimated they had taken care of about 95% of them before being pulled out by Clinton in 1998; at which point, Clinton bombed the shit out of much of the remainder in Operation Desert Fox.No, you're the idiot. You said "what should we do with the Democrats who voted for the war" and I was explaining to you why they did.....can't you even read? There wasn't one single Democrat that was in on Bush's and Cheney's coercion of the CIA to go along with their reasoning, if there is prove it.
It's bad enough that you blame the politicians that voted for the war when they weren't in on the lies, but to continue doing it after the truth has been exposed makes you the real idiot.
While US war propagandists presented the attack on Iraq as an extension of the “war on terrorism,” it is well known that the Bush administration had drawn up plans to use military force to overthrow the regime of Saddam Hussein long before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. September 11 was seized on as a pretext for stampeding public opinion to accept US military intervention.
The charge that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction was selected , as Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz later admitted, for “bureaucratic reasons”—i.e., it was the one allegation that the State Department, the Pentagon and the CIA all agreed could provide a serviceable cover for the real motives: seizing vast oil resources and establishing US dominance of the Middle East.
Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq Bush s big lie and the crisis of American imperialism - World Socialist Web Site
Let's see... we know Iraq had WMDs, we know this because we helped him make them, and he used them on Iran, and his own people (the Kurds). We know he continued making them, cause he admitted it bragged about it. We know he still had them cause the numbers did not add up for what was used and destroyed. We know he said he was gonna keep making them and even build nukes to bomb us and Israel, not unlike Iran claiming they are gonna do the same. We found these chemical weapons buried in the sand after the war. We have photos. The evidence of these WMDs has been widely distributed. Yet, here we are with democrats saying... he lied about WMDs Iraq didn't have any WMDs.
So why are the democrats this obtuse?
So then why did Democrats lie and say they were there and authorize W to invade when they knew they weren't there?
Also, do you know how wide of access to intelligence the Senate Intelligence Committee has?
The Democrats didn't lie and say they were there.....they just believed doofus George and Cheney, like the rest of the country.
Do you even read the news?
Ah, so Democrats are just stupid and gullible. You could be right on that
You're too funny. Retarded, but funny...Your inability to understand the difference between unconfirmed credible reports and confirmed credible reports is dully noted.That doesn't fascinate me. I'm just trying to help you think more clearly because you're not making sense. I took nothing out of context. In December, 2001, the Bush administration was informed by the CIA that hijacker Atta did not meet with Iraqi officials in Prague. It was confirmed there was no meeting.What is with your fascination with Cheney's dick and my mouth? Are you jacking off or something? Or just recognizing that you've lost the argument?Can you take Cheney's dick out of your mouth long enough to realize when Cheney said that the report was "credible," that was a lie? The claim that Atta met with Iraqi officials in Prague was not credible in September, 2002. The CIA determined that claim was false in December, 2001 and notified the Bush administration of their findings.You are still not reading it correctly. The guy did travel to Prague on a number of occasions. That is the first statement. There are facts that back that up. Note he did not say that any of those known trips had anything to do with anything other than travel.A year after 9.11 and 9 months after the CIA debunked the Atta in Prague rumor...
September 8, 2002
Vice President Dick Cheney speaks with Tim Russert on NBC News’ Meet the Press [link to source]
VICE PRES. CHENEY: We spent time looking at that relationship between Iraq, on the one hand, and the al-Qaeda organization on the other. And there has been reporting that suggests that there have been a number of contacts over the years. We've seen in connection with the hijackers, of course, Mohamed Atta, who was the lead hijacker, did apparently travel to Prague on a number of occasions. And on at least one occasion, we have reporting that places him in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official a few months before the attack on the World Trade Center...
Mr. RUSSERT: What does the CIA say about that? Is it credible?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: It's credible. But, you know, I think a way to put it would be it's unconfirmed at this point.
That is a bald-faced lie. Atta did not "apparently travel to Prague." Not being in Prague means he did not meet there with senior Iraqi officials. The CIA did not say the story was credible, the CIA in fact informed the Bush administration 9 months earlier the story was not true. And Chaney was lying when he said the story was "unconfirmed at this point." The story was indeed confirmed .... confirmed by the CIA to be bullshit.
Now we go to the next statement where he says on at least one occasion,... we have reporting that places him with the Iraqui guy. This is widely known, that there was a report of it happening. Do you deny that there was a report of it happening? The report came from officials of an ally. Are you saying we should state that reports from our allies are not "credible?" Are you saying we should call our allies liars, call out our allies as full of "bullshit?" He then follows with it's unconfirmed, as it remains... unconfirmed. Unconfirmed means it is not confirmed.
But gratz on learning how to read dates and dropping your story about my links being just about something in 2004. I guess you could say your reports were unconfirmed. Or would you say complete bullshit?
Again, I find it amazing that even after it was WIDELY KNOWN that it was UNCONFIRMED ... that you continued to believe that SADDAM WAS BEHIND 911.
When Cheney said it was "unconfirmed, " that was a lie. It was confirmed -- confirmed to be false. It was a different person with a similar name who may have met with an Iraqi official in Prague and the CIA was able to determine through phone records that the hijacker Atta was inside the U.S. during the time of that purported meeting.
You may now resume your "job."
Your trying to redefine words to take on different meanings out of context. For example, your trying to define unconfirmed as meaning confirmed. Your full of shit.
Some 9 months later, Cheney, who apparently spurred the CIA investigation into the purported meeting, went on national television and claims the report was credible. It wasn't and the Bush administration knew it wasn't. He also claimed the report wasn't confirmed. It was confirmed to be false and the Bush administration knew that too.
Yes - but how much did he spend there ?OK so you pulled that story out of your ass. Got it.Link?Did you see where W took a $100,000 speaking fee from a homeless shelter. Admittedly, it was ill-advised to offer that kind of a fee to anyone. But as an ex-president, you would think that Bush would speak for free at such an event. Compassionate conservative, my ASS!
I dont see you complaining about Bill Clinton's half million dollar speaking fees in Kazakhstan, you little hypocrite.
If Bill Clinton took a six figure sum of money (or ANY money, for that matter) to speak at a homeless shelter, I'd criticize him six ways to Sunday. There's no doubt in my mind that you would to. But I guess you don't see a problem with it if Bush does it. Know what that makes you?
I heard Bill Clinton got 200,000 for speaking at a whorehouse.
Prove your claim he lied to his publisher......Stop kazzing. You cannot prove Obama said he was born in Kenya.Why did you vote for the Marxist Obama?
Bwahahaha.....another one that believes Obama was born in Kenya and the world is flat.....bwahaha.
No, Obama lied about being born in Kenya. He was born in Hawaii. He is the original birther, patient zero of the birther movement
You didn't hear about that? He lied to his publisher who put it in his bio. Unfortunately they thought he was an idiot and wouldn't sell a book and gave it to their most incompetent researcher to verify the bio. Miriam something. The idiot she was she didn't verify it. They were right Obama was a nobody, but the Democratic party latched onto him for being a black sycophant who would follow instructions. He did and now we're in this jam where a lifetime mediocrity is trying to run an economy which he has zero skills, experience or education to do. Sucks, huh? There is no happy ending to this story. But at least it will soon be over
.... oh, wait ... you can't, you're just kazzing again. Nevermind.
lmfao at your link. Those are the reasons????? Talk about taking history out of context, let me guess you are 21 years old?As with the Reagan administration (and with many of the same people behind the scenes), the purpose of the Bushleague was to propel America into a situation that would leave succeeding administrations, and even generations, little if any choice. The policies establish by the clique would have to be pursued.
this is the best post on this thread.Reagan is worshipped by the CIA controlled media because he was the president who got the ball rolling for the destruction of america that each president since then has continued and expanded upon.
Brainwashed sheeple.
10 reasons why Ronald Reagan was the worst president of our lifetime - Orlando liberal Examiner.com
lmfao at your link. Those are the reasons????? Talk about taking history out of context, let me guess you are 21 years old?As with the Reagan administration (and with many of the same people behind the scenes), the purpose of the Bushleague was to propel America into a situation that would leave succeeding administrations, and even generations, little if any choice. The policies establish by the clique would have to be pursued.
this is the best post on this thread.Reagan is worshipped by the CIA controlled media because he was the president who got the ball rolling for the destruction of america that each president since then has continued and expanded upon.
Brainwashed sheeple.
10 reasons why Ronald Reagan was the worst president of our lifetime - Orlando liberal Examiner.com
