George H W Bush october 19 1980, where was he?

[thereisnospoon]

Why do you belittle a potentionally treasonous act?

Treasonous?

Making deals with an avowed enemy of the USA when not officially empowered to do so.
Yes treason.
It appears that this is where Iran Contra started.

You should make an attempt at learning before typing. Doing the latter before the former makes you look stupid.
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."
U.S. Constitution - Article 3 Section 3 - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

 

[JoeB131]

Why are you people defending keeping secrets from the American people?


because you place party over country and KNOW there is shit in this info that would make your litle ronny look really bad.

I guess I see it differently.

The independent council in this case found that Bush was not in Paris. This person stated where Bush was and could obviously prove it to the IC's satisfaction. (My guess, maybe this person was Bush's mistress? I know there were rumors he had one at the time.)

The things is, you have a conspiracy that would have involved THREE Countries, not just one. The US, Iran and France. I could kind of see why the US would want to keep this kind of meeting a secret if government people were involved, but why would France or Iran continue to keep the secret at this point.

Why not publish that picture of Bush shaking hands with the Ayatollah's representative?

I mean, it would strike me as odd that the French could have a candidate for Vice President sneak into their country and they'd be totally cool with that or miss it completely. This seems unlikely.

So I'll ask you again... and let's see if you'll answer this time.

What did the Iranians get out of this supposed deal? What was in it for them?

 

[daveman]

I read when Bush was 4 y/o he pulled a dogs tail once.

Not good at all.

Why do you belittle a potentionally treasonous act?

Oh, you mean like the left defending Kerry's meetings in Hanoi with representatives from Hanoi to rubber-stamp their terms for a US surrender in Vietnam?

Or is that different? Somehow?

 

[daveman]

Why do you belittle a potentionally treasonous act?

Treasonous?

Making deals with an avowed enemy of the USA when not officially empowered to do so.
Yes treason.
It appears that this is where Iran Contra started.

Exactly like Kerry did.

 

[thereisnospoon]

THey NEED to release these documents if he is innocent they will prove his innocence

First there were allegedly witnesses that saw GHW Bush there. Now you claim the existence of "documents".
Lastly, because it not the proof needed but only the seriousness of the charges that matter, you want to turn the legal definition of burden of proof on it's head and demand GHW Bush is innocent of the charges.
Sorry cupcake. First you don't get to see what you perceive to exist based on conjecture. That's the legal definition of a fishing expedition. Second, there's this little thing called "probable cause".
Get off your soap box ,Missie

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I'll ask the question simplier.

If the Bush did a secret deal with the Iranians, what did the Iranians get out of the deal?

Pretty-much the same weapons we were (also).....

....selling to Iraq!!

 

[AmericanFirst]

Why are you people defending keeping secrets from the American people?


because you place party over country and KNOW there is shit in this info that would make your litle ronny look really bad.

How about obamaturd keeping secrets from the American people? Idiot.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Booooooooooosh.






We now return you to your regularly scheduled nonsense.......

 

[Warrior102]

Why are you people defending keeping secrets from the American people?


because you place party over country and KNOW there is shit in this info that would make your litle ronny look really bad.

You have to pass a background check to obtain a clearance to view secret material.

You couldn't make it past the piss test for such a clearance, so STFU.

 

[JoeB131]

I'll ask the question simplier.

If the Bush did a secret deal with the Iranians, what did the Iranians get out of the deal?

Pretty-much the same weapons we were (also).....

....selling to Iraq!!

Guy, first, why do yo do these big fonts and links that don't go anywhere useful? They don't add anything to your weak argument.

Second, we didn't sell the Iranians weapons until 1985, and even not directly. What were the Iranians getting for their troubles in 1980 or 1981?

THird, while we did sell some supplies to both sides in the war, we had nothing on the French and the Russians. The rest of the world sees arms sales as commerce. We see it as a way of rewarding people.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Starting a process that resulted in giving arms to an avowed enemy is treason.
It is giving aid.

Since the United States was never at war with Iran, it's not treason.

However, it never happened, so the whole thing is idiotic.

The US has not been "at war" with anyone since the 1940's.

But some seem to think Jane Fonda is guilty of treason.

"some seem to think"...
That right there defines you liberals. Who cares about some dopey Hollywood wench.
She said what she said and she probably cost herself some movie gigs. So the fuck what.
So a few people want to misuse the word Treason when referring to Fonda's words. Doesn't make it any more treasonous than what Truthmatters is spewing about Bush 41.

 

[The T]

Treasonous?

Making deals with an avowed enemy of the USA when not officially empowered to do so.
Yes treason.
It appears that this is where Iran Contra started.

Exactly like Kerry did.

September 2004:

Kerry Visited Vietnam Peace Talks

WASHINGTON — John Kerry's opposition to the Vietnam War led him to many places, including Paris, where he met with the North Vietnamese in 1970. Kerry said then, and says now, that the meeting was a part of an effort to learn more about U.S. POWs. But some question the propriety of a commissioned Naval officer meeting with the enemy at a time of war.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I'll ask the question simplier.

If the Bush did a secret deal with the Iranians, what did the Iranians get out of the deal?

Pretty-much the same weapons we were (also).....

....selling to Iraq!!

Guy, first, why do yo do these big fonts and links that don't go anywhere useful? They don't add anything to your weak argument.

Second, we didn't sell the Iranians weapons until 1985, and even not directly. What were the Iranians getting for their troubles in 1980 or 1981?

THird, while we did sell some supplies to both sides in the war, we had nothing on the French and the Russians. The rest of the world sees arms sales as commerce. We see it as a way of rewarding people.

BIG FONT = TRUTH

Every 5th grader knows that. Geez

 

[daveman]

There are witnesses who saw him in Paris that day.


There are NO witnesses to him being in DC.

These documents will reveal the truth of his whereabouts on that day.


Do you agree they should be released?

You've been suckered by liars. You're too stupid to see it, though.

The "October Surprise" Theory :: Daniel Pipes

The October Surprise episode holds much interest as a conspiracy theory case study. In particular, two features stand out: Gary Sick's having single-handedly transformed it from a story only taken seriously on the left-wing fringe into a credible mainstream claim; and the clarity with which it confirmed the conspiracy theorists' tendency to accuse others of what they themselves are doing. On this latter point: again and again, one finds that whereas the conspiracy theorists' accusations of collusion and illegal behavior were unsubstantiated, they themselves engaged in precisely such behavior. Examples include:

• They claimed Casey and Bush pretended to be in the United States when they were in Paris and Madrid. Richard Brenneke, perhaps the single most important informant for the October Surprise thesis, claimed to be in Paris and Madrid when credit card receipts proved he was in Portland, Oregon.
  
• They accused Reagan campaign officials of plotting to save their necks, when this is what the conspiracy theorists were doing; at least seven of them (Robert Benes, Richard Brenneke, Ahmed Heidari, Nicholas Ignatiew, Oswald LeWinter, Hamid Naqashan and Will Northrop) were implicated in a 1986 sting operation and the October Surprise offered a way to rehabilitate their reputations.
  
• Sick, a former Carter Administration official, accused the Reagan campaign of secretly working out an arms deal with the Iranians. In fact, as Sick himself already disclosed in 1985, Jimmy Carter initiated such a deal.
  
• Sick accused others of withholding information, yet this is precisely what he did, keeping quiet about the hundreds of thousands of dollars he received from Oliver Stone for the movie rights to the October Surprise story.
  
• Sick accused U.S. government officials of lying, yet he was less than honest himself. He wrote in his New York Times article that he had heard rumors of a Reagan-Khomeini deal during the 1988 election campaign but he "refused to believe them." Not so: on 30 October 1988, at the very peak of the 1988 election campaign, he told The Rocky Mountain News, "At first I dismissed this, but not any more. I'm convinced on the basis of what I heard that there were some meetings in Paris."

 

[California Girl]

I'll ask the question simplier.

If the Bush did a secret deal with the Iranians, what did the Iranians get out of the deal?

Pretty-much the same weapons we were (also).....

....selling to Iraq!!

Guy, first, why do yo do these big fonts and links that don't go anywhere useful? They don't add anything to your weak argument.

Second, we didn't sell the Iranians weapons until 1985, and even not directly. What were the Iranians getting for their troubles in 1980 or 1981?

THird, while we did sell some supplies to both sides in the war, we had nothing on the French and the Russians. The rest of the world sees arms sales as commerce. We see it as a way of rewarding people.

Stick him on ignore - the rest of the board has.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

How amusing......slappin'-around the History-challenged
Teabaggers!!!!!

.

.

​

How amusing, Wingbats like yourself who have double standards not holding accountable the current president while pointing the finger at past presidents who cannot do anymore harm to the United States.

You like....

REPEATING mistakes

.....huh????​

 

[Truthseeker420]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7r2B8E2ybvs]October Surprise or Fixing The 1980 Election - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Avatar4321]

Why are you people defending keeping secrets from the American people?


because you place party over country and KNOW there is shit in this info that would make your litle ronny look really bad.

Keeping secrets? It didn't happen. There is nothing to keep secret about.

You defend Obama keeping secrets from the people EVERY DAY. Hypocrite.

 

[daveman]

Making deals with an avowed enemy of the USA when not officially empowered to do so.
Yes treason.
It appears that this is where Iran Contra started.

Exactly like Kerry did.

September 2004:

Kerry Visited Vietnam Peace Talks

WASHINGTON — John Kerry's opposition to the Vietnam War led him to many places, including Paris, where he met with the North Vietnamese in 1970. Kerry said then, and says now, that the meeting was a part of an effort to learn more about U.S. POWs. But some question the propriety of a commissioned Naval officer meeting with the enemy at a time of war.

But he's a Democrat, so that's okay.

Right, USMB lefties?

 

[daveman]

There are witnesses who saw him in Paris that day.


There are NO witnesses to him being in DC.

These documents will reveal the truth of his whereabouts on that day.


Do you agree they should be released?

You've been suckered by liars. You're too stupid to see it, though.

The "October Surprise" Theory :: Daniel Pipes

The October Surprise episode holds much interest as a conspiracy theory case study. In particular, two features stand out: Gary Sick's having single-handedly transformed it from a story only taken seriously on the left-wing fringe into a credible mainstream claim; and the clarity with which it confirmed the conspiracy theorists' tendency to accuse others of what they themselves are doing. On this latter point: again and again, one finds that whereas the conspiracy theorists' accusations of collusion and illegal behavior were unsubstantiated, they themselves engaged in precisely such behavior. Examples include:

• They claimed Casey and Bush pretended to be in the United States when they were in Paris and Madrid. Richard Brenneke, perhaps the single most important informant for the October Surprise thesis, claimed to be in Paris and Madrid when credit card receipts proved he was in Portland, Oregon.
  
• They accused Reagan campaign officials of plotting to save their necks, when this is what the conspiracy theorists were doing; at least seven of them (Robert Benes, Richard Brenneke, Ahmed Heidari, Nicholas Ignatiew, Oswald LeWinter, Hamid Naqashan and Will Northrop) were implicated in a 1986 sting operation and the October Surprise offered a way to rehabilitate their reputations.
  
• Sick, a former Carter Administration official, accused the Reagan campaign of secretly working out an arms deal with the Iranians. In fact, as Sick himself already disclosed in 1985, Jimmy Carter initiated such a deal.
  
• Sick accused others of withholding information, yet this is precisely what he did, keeping quiet about the hundreds of thousands of dollars he received from Oliver Stone for the movie rights to the October Surprise story.
  
• Sick accused U.S. government officials of lying, yet he was less than honest himself. He wrote in his New York Times article that he had heard rumors of a Reagan-Khomeini deal during the 1988 election campaign but he "refused to believe them." Not so: on 30 October 1988, at the very peak of the 1988 election campaign, he told The Rocky Mountain News, "At first I dismissed this, but not any more. I'm convinced on the basis of what I heard that there were some meetings in Paris."

Truthhater, I DARE you to respond to this post.