1,748 Days since the Declaration Of "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED"

[maineman]

I'd prefer a few hundred dead AQ in Baghdad than one old figurehead...his 10 minutes of infamy is long past.....but hell, thats just me....
Clinton didn't get him and Bush didn't get him.....sounds like a tie to me...

a tie? Well...he had not killed 3K Americans on Clinton's watch...but even so...if it is a "tie", why do you continually pillory Clinton while simultaneously adoring Bush?

 

[Alpha1]

And just to set the story right....I'm spent a few nights in a foxhole, a few in some shitty bunkers.....unlike you...

I was issued my combat boots, helmet, greens, 45 handgun, ammo and M1,( in those days ), 30 minutes after I got off the ship in Cuba....I know Gitmo quite well....though I admit, I'm damn glad nobody was shooin' at me there .....
at lease I didn't have to share my hole with any suspected Castro sympathizers....

 

[Alpha1]

a tie? Well...he had not killed 3K Americans on Clinton's watch...but even so...if it is a "tie", why do you continually pillory Clinton while simultaneously adoring Bush?

I don't pillory Clinton, nor do I adore Bush.....in live in the real world....facts are facts.....

No...OBL didn't kill 3K Americans at that particular time...but Clinton plainly said he was after him...tryed to kill him didn't he, or so he says now....or is that just a myth....anyway, he missed...

He and his comrades were responsible for a couple of embassies, USS Cole, and if I had to guess, I'd venture he or his followers had a hand in a few other attacks against US interests in the region....Clinton..Bush, yeah, a tie....neither got him...

The 3K just shows OBL had a little more success after dodging Clintons lame attempts on his life.......too bad he was still alive to realize his success....

 

[Annie]

The Hamilton Beach ad renders it impossible. Advertising here sucks. It's intrusive.

Offer differences between paying and non.

 

[Dr Grump]

Yes. You are.
And I don't care about your pet conspiracies, given that's all they are.

No conspiracy. It is a fact that 70% of Yanks believed, as one stage, Sadman had something to do with 9-11. Why? If you can't answer, or don't have an opinion, that is fine. But don't come spouting on THIS board about FACTS every other post, when one is pointed out, you dismiss it out of hand or refuse to give an opinion on it.

My opinion is that Bush (more importantly, one of his puppet masters Cheney) pushed that theory. Maybe your theory is the "left" leaning media pushed it. Maybe 70% of Americans are just dumbfucks and can't tell the difference between different actions of different peoples/countries/terrorist organisations.

Whatever the reason, YOU must have an opinion as to why that 70% figure came up. And that is what you are being asked. If you have no idea, no foul, but a lot of your cred just went out the window because 90% of your posts consist of making demands of others to back up their opinions or facts. All we're doing is asking the same. If you want to set a tone to your debate standards, then live up to them, or risk being marginalised as an arrogant ass at best, or a troll at worst.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

you seem to have a lot of questions but can't find the cojones to answer one.

I will now answer all of yours and maybe that will cause a similar response.

ONE. Yes. I do not believe the government had any involvement and pity those who do. But wacko conspiracy theorists have always been a part of American politics. And as I have said over and over again. Administration officials denied the connection lamely and lately. For months and months in the fall of 2002, speech after speech referred to Al Qaeda, 9/11, WMD's and Saddam...over and over and over again. But hey....if that had nothing to do with 70% of America getting it wrong, show some stones and offer up YOUR suggestion as to how and why they were deceived.

TWO. First.... a majority of democrats elected to congress voted AGAINST the war...the rest caved into the brilliant posturing of the Rove Team that made the vote one about patriotism... I was upset with all of them.

THREE. No. They believed that they would lose their seats in congress if the public perceived them as being soft on Saddam..the guy who most of them felt was responsible for 9/11.

FOUR and FIVE. Asked and answered above.

SIX. Like I have said. Democrats voted to keep their seats. THey were aware of the 70% figure like everyone else. They felt that if they voted against the war, that their constituents would consider that they had voted against a war designed to get the guy who planned 9/11. They caved. I was and remain furious with all who did.


SEVEN. The intelligence was far from "clear". It was loaded with caveats and qualifiers. There was certainly plenty of indications that Saddam might have been involved with weapons of mass destruction... but there was ZERO intell that he was involved with 9/11....yet 70% of America believed he had been...which provided the political leverage to convince job security conscious congressmen and women to vote to give Bush the authority to use force as a last resort rather than risk the wrath of their constituencies.

People believe what they want to believe. Blaming the President or his Administration is idiotic. HE and others REPEATEDLY stated Saddam was not involved in 9/11. To then make the ignorant statement he secretly lied to everyone is amazing. How do you convince people of something when you openly repeatedly say the opposite?

You have no proof of any of this, just your opinion. And you don't want anyone elses opinion unless it agrees with you. We did not invade Iraq because Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11, this administration did not EVER say we did. In fact it repeatedly said he had nothing to do with 9/11. I guess Clinton believed that too? We have quotes from him in 2002 supporting the President and his position. Stating for the record that Saddam Hussein was a threat and had Chemical and Biological weapons and an active program. Now do your sparky dance and demand that the quote be resupplied .

 

[eots]

People believe what they want to believe. Blaming the President or his Administration is idiotic. HE and others REPEATEDLY stated Saddam was not involved in 9/11. To then make the ignorant statement he secretly lied to everyone is amazing. How do you convince people of something when you openly repeatedly say the opposite?

You have no proof of any of this, just your opinion. And you don't want anyone elses opinion unless it agrees with you. We did not invade Iraq because Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11, this administration did not EVER say we did. In fact it repeatedly said he had nothing to do with 9/11. I guess Clinton believed that too? We have quotes from him in 2002 supporting the President and his position. Stating for the record that Saddam Hussein was a threat and had Chemical and Biological weapons and an active program. Now do your sparky dance and demand that the quote be resupplied .

Boston.com / News / Nation / Cheney link of Iraq, 9/11 challengedEvidence of a connection, if any exists, has never been made public. Details that Cheney cited to make the case that the Iraqi dictator had ties to Al Qaeda ...
www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/09/16/cheney_link_of_iraq_911
Cheney link of Iraq, 9/11 challenged
By Anne E. Kornblut and Bryan Bender , Globe Staff and Globe Correspondent, 9/16/2003

WASHINGTON -- Vice President Dick Cheney, anxious to defend the White House foreign policy amid ongoing violence in Iraq, stunned intelligence analysts and even members of his own administration this week by failing to dismiss a widely discredited claim: that Saddam Hussein might have played a role in the Sept. 11 attacks.

Evidence of a connection, if any exists, has never been made public. Details that Cheney cited to make the case that the Iraqi dictator had ties to Al Qaeda have been dismissed by the CIA as having no basis, according to analysts and officials. Even before the war in Iraq, most Bush officials did not explicitly state that Iraq had a part in the attack on the United States two years ago.

But Cheney left that possibility wide open in a nationally televised interview two days ago, claiming that the administration is learning "more and more" about connections between Al Qaeda and Iraq before the Sept. 11 attacks. The statement surprised some analysts and officials who have reviewed intelligence reports from Iraq.

YouTube - Cheney: I never linked Iraq with 9/11. Oh really?
Content of this nature is not necessarily prohibited on ...
1 min 2 sec -
[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJiNtpIpD6k[/ame]


Cheney Lies To High Schoolers About Debunked Iraq/al Qaeda Connection
“Addressing about 100 wide-eyed Wyoming high school students learning about government and the political process,” Vice President Cheney yesterday repeated one of the key fabrications that helped send the United States into war.

During the question and answer session, one student asked, “I was wondering — I’m not trying to start a debate, or anything, but do you still think that the Iraq war can be won?” Cheney immediately answered “yes,” adding, “I think we’re making significant progress now.”

He then launched into a justification of the war, citing the September 11 attacks. “The fact of the matter is Iraq is part of the global war on terror,” he told the students. “And you’ve got to go back and look at what happened on 9/11.” Cheney recounted the tale of the late al-Qaeda operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, one of the administration’s great pre-war myths:


CHARLESTON AIR FORCE BASE, South Carolina (CNN) -- President Bush insisted that al Qaeda and al Qaeda in Iraq are part of the same terrorist network, during a speech Tuesday at Charleston Air Force Base in South Carolina.


President Bush said Tuesday that al Qaeda in Iraq is part of Osama bin Laden's terrorist network.

"Some say that Iraq is not a part of the broader war on terror," Bush said. "They claim that the organization called al Qaeda in Iraq is an Iraqi phenomenon -- that it's independent of Osama bin Laden and it's not interested in attacking America. That would be news to Osama bin Laden."

YouTube - Bush has to admit to Iraq connection with 9/11
Blithering fool makes up jibber-jabber on the spot;
2 min 5 sec -
[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-c8Bf8LWWk[/ame]



there is many more of these deceptive statements but I'm sure you got the point or are you going to go on one of your crazy conspiracy theory's about how they are made up web sites or look a like actors or the work of the terrorist

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And yet he never said they were involved, your supposed prove does not say he said anything of the sort. It just says he didn't discount it, provide me a direct quote from Cheney saying " Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11" You keep linking to things tat do not even say what your spin claims they said.

 

[eots]

And yet he never said they were involved, your supposed prove does not say he said anything of the sort. It just says he didn't discount it, provide me a direct quote from Cheney saying " Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11" You keep linking to things tat do not even say what your spin claims they said.

he said Iraq and said the terrorist that killed 3000 on Sept 11 none of which is any more true than Saddam did it ,so the implication was clearly made on many occasions and in many forms as well as a lie by omission and regardless of what intelligence said during Clinton all the new Intel said little or no wmd threat and it was withheld and far to many lies where told to ever post them all

 

[RetiredGySgt]

he said Iraq and said the terrorist that killed 3000 on Sept 11 none of which is any more true than Saddam did it ,so the implication was clearly made on many occasions and in many forms as well as a lie by omission and regardless of what intelligence said during Clinton all the new Intel said little or no wmd threat and it was withheld and far to many lies where told to ever post them all

WELL except for that tiny matter that the President can NOT withhold information from the different intel agencies from Congress. Congress gets independent briefings from said organizations.

But wait, I forgot, you think a secret organization ( so secret you and all your buddies know about it) actually runs the Government, they must have told those Congressman and Senators to not read the reports they received independently from the CIA, FBI and every other 3 letter intel agency we have. Or wait, no thats not it. This secret cabal just ordered all these agencies to write what they wanted. Wait, maybe you have another theory, please enlighten us ignorant deluded hicks on how this works.

 

[eots]

WELL except for that tiny matter that the President can NOT withhold information from the different intel agencies from Congress. Congress gets independent briefings from said organizations.

But wait, I forgot, you think a secret organization ( so secret you and all your buddies know about it) actually runs the Government, they must have told those Congressman and Senators to not read the reports they received independently from the CIA, FBI and every other 3 letter intel agency we have. Or wait, no thats not it. This secret cabal just ordered all these agencies to write what they wanted. Wait, maybe you have another theory, please enlighten us ignorant deluded hicks on how this works.

Shortly after 9/11 President Bush issues order asking CIA, FBI, DOD, NSA, and Cabinet members to restrict clearances greatly and limit all information to 8 members of Congress, effectively eliminating 92 clearances. The Presidential order can be found at Think Progress.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Shortly after 9/11 President Bush issues order asking CIA, FBI, DOD, NSA, and Cabinet members to restrict clearances greatly and limit all information to 8 members of Congress, effectively eliminating 92 clearances. The Presidential order can be found at Think Progress.

Ahh so now your just claiming the 8 members of Congress were either in on it or lied to? What happened to your insistance that the secret cabal can do anything they want with the full knowledge and acceptance of all members of any party in Congress?

 

[eots]

Ahh so now your just claiming the 8 members of Congress were either in on it or lied to? What happened to your insistance that the secret cabal can do anything they want with the full knowledge and acceptance of all members of any party in Congress?

No you ignorant man ,I'm not claiming anything IT IS IN PUBLIC RECORD
Originally Posted by eots

Shortly after 9/11 President Bush issues order asking CIA, FBI, DOD, NSA, and Cabinet members to restrict clearances greatly and limit all information to 8 members of Congress, effectively eliminating 92 clearances. The Presidential order can be found at Think Progress.

(The rest of the statement is your own crazy ramblings and distortions)'

"What happened to your insistance that the secret cabal can do anything they want with the full knowledge and acceptance of all members of any party in Congress?"

 

[Gunny]

No conspiracy. It is a fact that 70% of Yanks believed, as one stage, Sadman had something to do with 9-11. Why? If you can't answer, or don't have an opinion, that is fine. But don't come spouting on THIS board about FACTS every other post, when one is pointed out, you dismiss it out of hand or refuse to give an opinion on it.

My opinion is that Bush (more importantly, one of his puppet masters Cheney) pushed that theory. Maybe your theory is the "left" leaning media pushed it. Maybe 70% of Americans are just dumbfucks and can't tell the difference between different actions of different peoples/countries/terrorist organisations.

Whatever the reason, YOU must have an opinion as to why that 70% figure came up. And that is what you are being asked. If you have no idea, no foul, but a lot of your cred just went out the window because 90% of your posts consist of making demands of others to back up their opinions or facts. All we're doing is asking the same. If you want to set a tone to your debate standards, then live up to them, or risk being marginalised as an arrogant ass at best, or a troll at worst.

Bull. It is a fact that 70% of whoever got polled was ignorant enough to beleive that crap, and they had to be libs. I've not heard ANY conservatives say such a thing. The administration came out and made a point of stating that there was no evidence to support Saddam being involved in 9/11.

This is just another myth the left insists on attempting to perpetuate regardless the facts. Again, I haven't seen one person on this board making such a claim except liberals.

Y'all must be easily misled.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Bull. It is a fact that 70% of whoever got polled was ignorant enough to beleive that crap, and they had to be libs. I've not heard ANY conservatives say such a thing. The administration came out and made a point of stating that there was no evidence to support Saddam being involved in 9/11.

This is just another myth the left insists on attempting to perpetuate regardless the facts. Again, I haven't seen one person on this board making such a claim except liberals.

Y'all must be easily misled.

Further from my recent research I discovered the 70 percent figure may in fact be made up. The number was closer to just over 50 percent at the time of the votes to allow force.

 

[maineman]

And just to set the story right....I'm spent a few nights in a foxhole, a few in some shitty bunkers.....unlike you...

I was issued my combat boots, helmet, greens, 45 handgun, ammo and M1,( in those days ), 30 minutes after I got off the ship in Cuba....I know Gitmo quite well....though I admit, I'm damn glad nobody was shooin' at me there .....
at lease I didn't have to share my hole with any suspected Castro sympathizers....

Gitmo. now that is one hell of a ******* war zone. wow. you're the man.

 

[maineman]

I don't pillory Clinton, nor do I adore Bush.....in live in the real world....facts are facts.....

No...OBL didn't kill 3K Americans at that particular time...but Clinton plainly said he was after him...tryed to kill him didn't he, or so he says now....or is that just a myth....anyway, he missed...

He and his comrades were responsible for a couple of embassies, USS Cole, and if I had to guess, I'd venture he or his followers had a hand in a few other attacks against US interests in the region....Clinton..Bush, yeah, a tie....neither got him...

The 3K just shows OBL had a little more success after dodging Clintons lame attempts on his life.......too bad he was still alive to realize his success....

Clinton WAS after him. By our current president's own admission, he rarely ever even THINKS of him anymore. But he is YOUR man, so you really don't get all that critical of what HE says or does, or does not do.

 

[Dr Grump]

Further from my recent research I discovered the 70 percent figure may in fact be made up. The number was closer to just over 50 percent at the time of the votes to allow force.

Your research is faulty. Gee, why am I surprised...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-06-poll-iraq_x.htm

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Your research is faulty. Gee, why am I surprised...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-06-poll-iraq_x.htm

Perhaps english is not your first language? Let me provide the date for your article...

Posted 9/6/2003 8:10 AM

Now lets see what I said....

Further from my recent research I discovered the 70 percent figure may in fact be made up. The number was closer to just over 50 percent at the time of the votes to allow force.

 

[eots]

Bull. It is a fact that 70% of whoever got polled was ignorant enough to beleive that crap, and they had to be libs. I've not heard ANY conservatives say such a thing. The administration came out and made a point of stating that there was no evidence to support Saddam being involved in 9/11.

This is just another myth the left insists on attempting to perpetuate regardless the facts. Again, I haven't seen one person on this board making such a claim except liberals.

Y'all must be easily misled.

WASHINGTON -- Vice President Dick Cheney, anxious to defend the White House foreign policy amid ongoing violence in Iraq, stunned intelligence analysts and even members of his own administration this week by failing to dismiss a widely discredited claim: that Saddam Hussein might have played a role in the Sept. 11 attacks.

Evidence of a connection, if any exists, has never been made public. Details that Cheney cited to make the case that the Iraqi dictator had ties to Al Qaeda have been dismissed by the CIA as having no basis, according to analysts and officials. Even before the war in Iraq, most Bush officials did not explicitly state that Iraq had a part in the attack on the United States two years ago.

But Cheney left that possibility wide open in a nationally televised interview two days ago, claiming that the administration is learning "more and more" about connections between Al Qaeda and Iraq before the Sept. 11 attacks. The statement surprised some analysts and officials who have reviewed intelligence reports from Iraq.


YouTube - Cheney: I never linked Iraq with 9/11. Oh really?
Content of this nature is not necessarily prohibited on ...
1 min 2 sec -
[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJiNtpIpD6k[/ame]




YouTube - Bush has to admit to Iraq connection with 9/11
Blithering fool makes up jibber-jabber on the spot;
2 min 5 sec -
[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-c8Bf8LWWk[/ame]