Pages: 1 … 13 14 15 16 17 … 20

 

2006-07-04 18:02:08
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6582
Where did I tell you to use search, hm?

As to the topic, I find it curious that if she finds it that big an issue she waited so long, and someone just happened to ask her at that exact moment.

And no, I don't get a mod if you quote me.  I get a mod if you quote me out of context repeatedly and then refuse to tell me where I said what it is you're quoting.  It's called harassment.  I also find it interesting that you accuse the mods of Liberal bias when they just banned Xietsu.
2006-07-04 21:14:15
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6703|Canada
impeachment:

The right to impeach public officials is secured by the U.S. Constitution in Article I, Sections 2 and 3, which discuss the procedure, and in Article II, Section 4, which indicates the grounds for impeachment: "the President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

Removing an official from office requires two steps: (1) a formal accusation, or impeachment, by the House of Representatives, and (2) a trial and conviction by the Senate. Impeachment requires a majority vote of the House; conviction is more difficult, requiring a two-thirds vote by the Senate. The vice president presides over the Senate proceedings in the case of all officials except the president, whose trial is presided over by the chief justice of the Supreme Court. This is because the vice president can hardly be considered a disinterested party—if his or her boss is forced out of office he or she is next in line for the top job

What is treason?

In law, treason is the crime of disloyalty to one's nation or state. A person who betrays the nation of their citizenship and/or reneges on an oath of loyalty and in some way willfully cooperates with an enemy, is considered to be a traitor. Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as: "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aided or involved by such an endeavour.

Traitor may also mean a person who betrays (or is accused of betraying) their own political party, family, friends, ethnic group, religion, or other group to which they may belong. Oftentimes, such accusations are controversial and disputed, as the person may not identify with the group of which they are a member, or may otherwise disagree with the group leaders making the charge. See, for example, race traitor.

At times, the term "traitor" has been levelled as a political epithet, regardless of any verifiable treasonous action. In a civil war or insurrection, the winners may deem the losers to be traitors. Likewise the term "traitor" is used in heated political discussion – typically as a slur against political dissidents, or against officials in power who are perceived as failing to act in the best interest of their constituents. In certain cases, as with the German Dolchstoßlegende, the accusation of treason towards a large group of people can be a unifying political message.

Figures in history who are renowned for acts of treachery have subsequently had their names become synonymous with the word "traitor". Some examples are Judas, Benedict Arnold, Pétain and Quisling.


What Are "High Crimes and Misdemeanors?"

Bribery, perjury, and treason are among the least ambiguous reasons meriting impeachment, but the ocean of wrongdoing encompassed by the Constitution's stipulation of "high crimes and misdemeanors" is vast. Abuse of power and serious misconduct in office fit this category, but one act that is definitely not grounds for impeachment is partisan discord. Several impeachment cases have confused political animosity with genuine crimes. Since Congress, the vortex of partisanship, is responsible for indicting, trying, and convicting public officials, it is necessary for the legislative branch to temporarily cast aside its factional nature and adopt a judicial role.


first let's have a look at presidents who were impeached, and why.  This will serve as a measuring stick.

Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-07-04 21:16:13)

2006-07-04 21:28:03
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6703|Canada
Bush lied to Congress and the American public about the reasons for invading Iraq.
    *If Saddam Hussein was an immediate and serious threat to America, as the White House claimed, then Bush might have been justified in invading Iraq. But it appears that Bush misled the public, the Congress and the UN by consistently overstating the threat from Iraq. By lying to Congress, Bush violated US Laws related to Fraud and False Statements, Title 18, Chapter 47, Section 1001 and Conspiracy to Defraud the United States, Title 18, Chapter 19, Section 371.
Lie #1 - Uranium from Niger - Bush said "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." in his State of the Union Address.
Lie #2 - Iraq and 9/11 - Bush led people to believe that Iraq was involved with 9/11 by repeatedly linking them in his speaches. This was so effective that at one point 70% of Americans actually believed Saddam was behind 9/11. Bush has since admitted that this was not true.
Lie #3 - Congress Knew - Bush has stated that Congress had access to all the same information that the White House had. Thus he should not be blamed for making the mistake of going to war. But Bush was briefed many times about the falsehood of various stories and this information never reached Congress. [ZNet]
Lie #4 - Aluminum Tubes - Bush, Cheney, Rice and Powell said that aluminum tubes Iraq attempted to buy were intended for use in a uranium centrifuge to create nuclear weapons. These were the only physical evidence he had against Iraq. But it turns out this evidence had been rejected by the Department of Energy and other intelligence agencies long before Bush used them in his speeches. [NYTimes] [MotherJones] [CNN]
Lie #5 - Iraq and Al Qaeda - Bush still insists that there was a "relationship" between Iraq and Al Qaeda. But the 9/11 Commission released a report saying, among other things, that there was no "collaborative relationship" between Al Qaeda and Iraq. The nature of the relationship seems to be that Al Qaeda asked for help and Iraq refused. Al Qaeda was opposed to Saddam Hussein because Saddam led a secular government instead of an Islamic government. [ZNet] [CNN]
Lie #6 - Weapons of Mass Destruction - Bush insisted that Iraq posessed weapons of mass destruction but his "evidence" consisted mostly of forged documents, plagiarised student papers, and vague satellite photos. The United Nations was on the ground in Iraq and could find nothing. After extensive searches Bush was finally forced to admit that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction.
Lie #7 - Mobile Weapons Labs - Bush and his team repeatedly claimed that Iraq posessed mobile weapons labs capable of producing anthrax. Colin Powell showed diagrams of them at his speech before the UN to justify invading Iraq. These claims originated from Curveball, a discredited Iraqi informer who fed Bush many of the stories related to WMD. On May 29, 2003, two small trailers matching the description were found in Iraq. A team of bio-weapons experts examined the trailers and concluded they were simply designed to produce hydrogen for weather balloons. But, for over a year, Bush claimed these were part of Iraq's bio-weapons program. The expert's report was suppressed and only recently made public. [WashPost]
Lie Factory - The Secret Propaganda Team - Bush wanted so much to convince people of the need to invade Iraq that the White House set up a secret team in the Pentagon to create evidence. The Office of Special Plans routinely rewrote the CIA's intelligence estimates on Iraq's weapons programs, removing caveats such as "likely," "probably" and "may" as a way of depicting the country as an imminent threat. They also used unreliable sources to create reports that ultimately proved to be false.



Bush conducted illegal wiretaps of American citizens.
*unfinished


Bush violated International Law by invading a sovereign country for illegal purposes.
     * "A preemptive attack on Iraq violates the United Nations Charter, which is a treaty and part of the supreme law of the United States under Article 6, clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. signed the UN Charter and we are obligated to uphold the law according to our own"
Chapter 1, Article 2 of the UN Charter states:
3.All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
4.All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
Bush lied to the UN and to Congress about the seriousness of the threat from Iraq, and invaded Iraq in defiance of a vote from the UN Security Council. His actions inflamed the Arab world and set a dangerous precedent for any other country that wants to defy the UN and start their own war.
Principle Vl of the Nuremberg Charter states:
The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under; international law:
    a. Crimes against peace:
        i. Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or
          a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
        ii .Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment
          of any of the acts mentioned under (i).
Bush's invaded a sovereign country that had not threatened the United States and had no ability to do so. Bush had been making plans to invade Iraq even before 9/11.






Bush violated the Geneva Convention by torturing prisoners of war.



Bush held prisoners without formal charges and without legal representation.



Bush used government funds for domestic political propaganda.



The Bush team used uniformed military personnel for Republican party political purposes.



Bush was negligent in his slow response to help victims of Hurricane Katrina.



Bush shows contempt towards the Constitution and democratic ideals.



As you can see, it will take some time to finish as there are plenty of reasons justified by American and international law.  I want to fit more about the patriot act in here**** 
please ask me if you are interested in hearing any of the unfinished points I would make, as to save anyone's concentration, I'll finish here

Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-07-04 21:41:01)

2006-07-04 22:36:00
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6570|Southeastern USA
and how many other threads has this same crap been blown out of the water on?
2006-07-04 22:43:02
BN
smells like wee wee
+159|6788
Spumantiii, I think you have everything covered there. +1 for taking the time to post all this.
2006-07-04 22:44:23
BN
smells like wee wee
+159|6788

kr@cker wrote:

and how many other threads has this same crap been blown out of the water on?
and how many threads blowing this out of the water have been blown out of the water?
2006-07-04 22:46:09
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6570|Southeastern USA
quit anon negging me for consistently handing you your ass
2006-07-05 07:27:28
splixx
ChupaCABRA
+53|6759|Omaha, Nebraska

Spumantiii wrote:

Bush lied to Congress and the American public about the reasons for invading Iraq.
    *If Saddam Hussein was an immediate and serious threat to America, as the White House claimed, then Bush might have been justified in invading Iraq. But it appears that Bush misled the public, the Congress and the UN by consistently overstating the threat from Iraq. By lying to Congress, Bush violated US Laws related to Fraud and False Statements, Title 18, Chapter 47, Section 1001 and Conspiracy to Defraud the United States, Title 18, Chapter 19, Section 371.
Lie #1 - Uranium from Niger - Bush said "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." in his State of the Union Address.
Lie #2 - Iraq and 9/11 - Bush led people to believe that Iraq was involved with 9/11 by repeatedly linking them in his speaches. This was so effective that at one point 70% of Americans actually believed Saddam was behind 9/11. Bush has since admitted that this was not true.
Lie #3 - Congress Knew - Bush has stated that Congress had access to all the same information that the White House had. Thus he should not be blamed for making the mistake of going to war. But Bush was briefed many times about the falsehood of various stories and this information never reached Congress. [ZNet]
Lie #4 - Aluminum Tubes - Bush, Cheney, Rice and Powell said that aluminum tubes Iraq attempted to buy were intended for use in a uranium centrifuge to create nuclear weapons. These were the only physical evidence he had against Iraq. But it turns out this evidence had been rejected by the Department of Energy and other intelligence agencies long before Bush used them in his speeches. [NYTimes] [MotherJones] [CNN]
Lie #5 - Iraq and Al Qaeda - Bush still insists that there was a "relationship" between Iraq and Al Qaeda. But the 9/11 Commission released a report saying, among other things, that there was no "collaborative relationship" between Al Qaeda and Iraq. The nature of the relationship seems to be that Al Qaeda asked for help and Iraq refused. Al Qaeda was opposed to Saddam Hussein because Saddam led a secular government instead of an Islamic government. [ZNet] [CNN]
Lie #6 - Weapons of Mass Destruction - Bush insisted that Iraq posessed weapons of mass destruction but his "evidence" consisted mostly of forged documents, plagiarised student papers, and vague satellite photos. The United Nations was on the ground in Iraq and could find nothing. After extensive searches Bush was finally forced to admit that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction.
Lie #7 - Mobile Weapons Labs - Bush and his team repeatedly claimed that Iraq posessed mobile weapons labs capable of producing anthrax. Colin Powell showed diagrams of them at his speech before the UN to justify invading Iraq. These claims originated from Curveball, a discredited Iraqi informer who fed Bush many of the stories related to WMD. On May 29, 2003, two small trailers matching the description were found in Iraq. A team of bio-weapons experts examined the trailers and concluded they were simply designed to produce hydrogen for weather balloons. But, for over a year, Bush claimed these were part of Iraq's bio-weapons program. The expert's report was suppressed and only recently made public. [WashPost]
Lie Factory - The Secret Propaganda Team - Bush wanted so much to convince people of the need to invade Iraq that the White House set up a secret team in the Pentagon to create evidence. The Office of Special Plans routinely rewrote the CIA's intelligence estimates on Iraq's weapons programs, removing caveats such as "likely," "probably" and "may" as a way of depicting the country as an imminent threat. They also used unreliable sources to create reports that ultimately proved to be false.



Bush conducted illegal wiretaps of American citizens.
*unfinished


Bush violated International Law by invading a sovereign country for illegal purposes.
     * "A preemptive attack on Iraq violates the United Nations Charter, which is a treaty and part of the supreme law of the United States under Article 6, clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. signed the UN Charter and we are obligated to uphold the law according to our own"
Chapter 1, Article 2 of the UN Charter states:
3.All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
4.All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
Bush lied to the UN and to Congress about the seriousness of the threat from Iraq, and invaded Iraq in defiance of a vote from the UN Security Council. His actions inflamed the Arab world and set a dangerous precedent for any other country that wants to defy the UN and start their own war.
Principle Vl of the Nuremberg Charter states:
The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under; international law:
    a. Crimes against peace:
        i. Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or
          a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
        ii .Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment
          of any of the acts mentioned under (i).
Bush's invaded a sovereign country that had not threatened the United States and had no ability to do so. Bush had been making plans to invade Iraq even before 9/11.






Bush violated the Geneva Convention by torturing prisoners of war.



Bush held prisoners without formal charges and without legal representation.



Bush used government funds for domestic political propaganda.



The Bush team used uniformed military personnel for Republican party political purposes.



Bush was negligent in his slow response to help victims of Hurricane Katrina.



Bush shows contempt towards the Constitution and democratic ideals.



As you can see, it will take some time to finish as there are plenty of reasons justified by American and international law.  I want to fit more about the patriot act in here**** 
please ask me if you are interested in hearing any of the unfinished points I would make, as to save anyone's concentration, I'll finish here
+1 for you. Good posts.
2006-07-05 08:02:33
Darth_Fleder
Mod from the Church of the Painful Truth
+533|6827|Orlando, FL - Age 43

Spumantiii wrote:

Bush lied to Congress and the American public about the reasons for invading Iraq.
    *If Saddam Hussein was an immediate and serious threat to America, as the White House claimed, then Bush might have been justified in invading Iraq. But it appears that Bush misled the public, the Congress and the UN by consistently overstating the threat from Iraq.

Darth_Fleder in http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=10924&p=4  wrote:

CNN 1998 (long before Bush) wrote:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- From the Oval Office, President Clinton told the nation Wednesday evening why he ordered new military strikes against Iraq.

The president said Iraq's refusal to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors presented a threat to the entire world.

"Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton said.

Operation Desert Fox, a strong, sustained series of attacks, will be carried out over several days by U.S. and British forces, Clinton said.

"Earlier today I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces," Clinton said.

"Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors," said Clinton.

Clinton also stated that, while other countries also had weapons of mass destruction, Hussein is in a different category because he has used such weapons against his own people and against his neighbors...

Clinton said he made the decision to strike Wednesday with the unanimous agreement of his security advisors.

Timing was important, said the president, because without a strong inspection system in place, Iraq could rebuild its chemical, biological and nuclear programs in a matter of months, not years.

"If Saddam can cripple the weapons inspections system and get away with it, he would conclude the international community, led by the United States, has simply lost its will," said Clinton. "He would surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction."

Clinton also called Hussein a threat to his people and to the security of the world.

"The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people," Clinton said.
http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/
More collected quotes dealing with the lie that "Bush Lied".

"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-Truth! <-----Long before Bush


"Iraq is a long way from USA 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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
This is a quote from Albright during an appearance at Ohio State University by Albright, who was Secretary of State for Bill Clinton.

"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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
This was at the same Ohio State University appearance as Madeline Albright. 
"We 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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
According to the U.S. Senate website, the text of this letter was signed by several Senators, both Democrat and Republican, including Senator John McCain and Joseph Lieberman.

"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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
The text of this statement by Nancy Pelosi is posted on her congressional website.

"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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
This was from an appearance Albright made in Chicago.
She was addressing the embargo of Iraq that was in effect at the time and criticism that it may have prevented needed medical supplies from getting into the country.  Albright said, "There has never been an embargo against food and medicine. It's just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend his money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction, and palaces for his cronies."


"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 mandated 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-Truth!


"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth! <------Inhabitant of White House long before Bush.


"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-Truth!<------Inhabitant of White House long before Bush.


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


"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998.
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-Truth!


"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-Truth!


"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 always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!


"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-Truth!


"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-Truth! <------Inhabitant of White House long before Bush.


"Without 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 is miscalculating America's response to his
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-Truth!
In a speech to Georgetown University.

I would like to point out that many of the comments were made by former occupants of the White House during which time they had access to information long before Bush had an opportunity to lie to them...See Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, Sandy Berger, Madelaine Albright. They had plenty of opportunity to tell their democratic comrades about any distortion of the truth by Mr. Bush at the time. The fact that they and others have since perpetrated the misconception the "Bush Lied' even though many of them were privy to the same information makes them the liars.

So, who lied? I ask again, WHO LIED?
2006-07-05 08:19:35
GATOR591957
Member
+84|6647

kr@cker wrote:

and how many other threads has this same crap been blown out of the water on?
Kracker I really love the majority of your posts, however I must disagree here.  Spumantii has laid out a case that cannot be ignored.  You and others cannot sit there and bury your heads in the sand while this administration buries the reputation of the USA while taking away it's freedoms.  I recently watched a documentary which interviewed several people abroad.  The resounding theme was they are becoming afraid of coming to America to visit in fear they will be arrested.  They can't wait for Bush's term to end and are hoping for a return to the American way.  The documentary was on Discovery channel and it was called, I'm not sure but (name slips me) reporting.  We can call this a republican or democratic thing but it's not, it's an American thing and something must be done about it.
2006-07-05 08:21:09
GATOR591957
Member
+84|6647

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Spumantiii wrote:

Bush lied to Congress and the American public about the reasons for invading Iraq.
    *If Saddam Hussein was an immediate and serious threat to America, as the White House claimed, then Bush might have been justified in invading Iraq. But it appears that Bush misled the public, the Congress and the UN by consistently overstating the threat from Iraq.

Darth_Fleder in http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=10924&p=4  wrote:

CNN 1998 (long before Bush) wrote:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- From the Oval Office, President Clinton told the nation Wednesday evening why he ordered new military strikes against Iraq.

The president said Iraq's refusal to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors presented a threat to the entire world.

"Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton said.

Operation Desert Fox, a strong, sustained series of attacks, will be carried out over several days by U.S. and British forces, Clinton said.

"Earlier today I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces," Clinton said.

"Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors," said Clinton.

Clinton also stated that, while other countries also had weapons of mass destruction, Hussein is in a different category because he has used such weapons against his own people and against his neighbors...

Clinton said he made the decision to strike Wednesday with the unanimous agreement of his security advisors.

Timing was important, said the president, because without a strong inspection system in place, Iraq could rebuild its chemical, biological and nuclear programs in a matter of months, not years.

"If Saddam can cripple the weapons inspections system and get away with it, he would conclude the international community, led by the United States, has simply lost its will," said Clinton. "He would surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction."

Clinton also called Hussein a threat to his people and to the security of the world.

"The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people," Clinton said.
http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/
More collected quotes dealing with the lie that "Bush Lied".

"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-Truth! <-----Long before Bush


"Iraq is a long way from USA 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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
This is a quote from Albright during an appearance at Ohio State University by Albright, who was Secretary of State for Bill Clinton.

"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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
This was at the same Ohio State University appearance as Madeline Albright. 
"We 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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
According to the U.S. Senate website, the text of this letter was signed by several Senators, both Democrat and Republican, including Senator John McCain and Joseph Lieberman.

"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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
The text of this statement by Nancy Pelosi is posted on her congressional website.

"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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
This was from an appearance Albright made in Chicago.
She was addressing the embargo of Iraq that was in effect at the time and criticism that it may have prevented needed medical supplies from getting into the country.  Albright said, "There has never been an embargo against food and medicine. It's just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend his money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction, and palaces for his cronies."


"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 mandated 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-Truth!


"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth! <------Inhabitant of White House long before Bush.


"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-Truth!<------Inhabitant of White House long before Bush.


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


"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998.
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-Truth!


"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-Truth!


"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 always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!


"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-Truth!


"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-Truth! <------Inhabitant of White House long before Bush.


"Without 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 is miscalculating America's response to his
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-Truth!
In a speech to Georgetown University.

I would like to point out that many of the comments were made by former occupants of the White House during which time they had access to information long before Bush had an opportunity to lie to them...See Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, Sandy Berger, Madelaine Albright. They had plenty of opportunity to tell their democratic comrades about any distortion of the truth by Mr. Bush at the time. The fact that they and others have since perpetrated the misconception the "Bush Lied' even though many of them were privy to the same information makes them the liars.

So, who lied? I ask again, WHO LIED?
Bush, he sent the troops to war, period!!!!
2006-07-05 08:21:44
oug
Calmer than you are.
+380|6540|Πάϊ
Who cares if they're called democrats or republicans. Who cares if it's Kerry or Clinton or Bush. It is certain they all lied. The United States Government have lied to their voters and they have lied to the world.
ƒ³
2006-07-05 08:23:20
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|6858

Bubbalo wrote:

Where did I tell you to use search, hm?

As to the topic, I find it curious that if she finds it that big an issue she waited so long, and someone just happened to ask her at that exact moment.

And no, I don't get a mod if you quote me.  I get a mod if you quote me out of context repeatedly and then refuse to tell me where I said what it is you're quoting.  It's called harassment.  I also find it interesting that you accuse the mods of Liberal bias when they just banned Xietsu.
did I not say they asked her during the campain ? did you even read? it took almost 2 years of litagation. dont respond if you dont read
2006-07-05 08:24:21
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6703|Canada

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Spumantiii wrote:

Bush lied to Congress and the American public about the reasons for invading Iraq.
    *If Saddam Hussein was an immediate and serious threat to America, as the White House claimed, then Bush might have been justified in invading Iraq. But it appears that Bush misled the public, the Congress and the UN by consistently overstating the threat from Iraq.

Darth_Fleder in http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=10924&p=4  wrote:

CNN 1998 (long before Bush) wrote:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- From the Oval Office, President Clinton told the nation Wednesday evening why he ordered new military strikes against Iraq.

The president said Iraq's refusal to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors presented a threat to the entire world.

"Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton said.

Operation Desert Fox, a strong, sustained series of attacks, will be carried out over several days by U.S. and British forces, Clinton said.

"Earlier today I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces," Clinton said.

"Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors," said Clinton.

Clinton also stated that, while other countries also had weapons of mass destruction, Hussein is in a different category because he has used such weapons against his own people and against his neighbors...

Clinton said he made the decision to strike Wednesday with the unanimous agreement of his security advisors.

Timing was important, said the president, because without a strong inspection system in place, Iraq could rebuild its chemical, biological and nuclear programs in a matter of months, not years.

"If Saddam can cripple the weapons inspections system and get away with it, he would conclude the international community, led by the United States, has simply lost its will," said Clinton. "He would surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction."

Clinton also called Hussein a threat to his people and to the security of the world.

"The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people," Clinton said.
http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/
More collected quotes dealing with the lie that "Bush Lied".

"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-Truth! <-----Long before Bush


"Iraq is a long way from USA 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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
This is a quote from Albright during an appearance at Ohio State University by Albright, who was Secretary of State for Bill Clinton.

"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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
This was at the same Ohio State University appearance as Madeline Albright. 
"We 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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
According to the U.S. Senate website, the text of this letter was signed by several Senators, both Democrat and Republican, including Senator John McCain and Joseph Lieberman.

"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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
The text of this statement by Nancy Pelosi is posted on her congressional website.

"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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
This was from an appearance Albright made in Chicago.
She was addressing the embargo of Iraq that was in effect at the time and criticism that it may have prevented needed medical supplies from getting into the country.  Albright said, "There has never been an embargo against food and medicine. It's just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend his money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction, and palaces for his cronies."


"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 mandated 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-Truth!


"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth! <------Inhabitant of White House long before Bush.


"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-Truth!<------Inhabitant of White House long before Bush.


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


"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998.
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-Truth!


"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-Truth!


"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 always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!


"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-Truth!


"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-Truth! <------Inhabitant of White House long before Bush.


"Without 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 is miscalculating America's response to his
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-Truth!
In a speech to Georgetown University.

I would like to point out that many of the comments were made by former occupants of the White House during which time they had access to information long before Bush had an opportunity to lie to them...See Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, Sandy Berger, Madelaine Albright. They had plenty of opportunity to tell their democratic comrades about any distortion of the truth by Mr. Bush at the time. The fact that they and others have since perpetrated the misconception the "Bush Lied' even though many of them were privy to the same information makes them the liars.

So, who lied? I ask again, WHO LIED?
funny how after all that he was impeached, huh?
2006-07-05 08:58:46
Darth_Fleder
Mod from the Church of the Painful Truth
+533|6827|Orlando, FL - Age 43

Spumantiii wrote:

funny how after all that he was impeached, huh?
He was impeached for making false statements to a grand jury in sworn testimony. There is no dispute about this. It was NOT about him having sex, but him lying in court about it when a woman brought charges of sexual harassment against him. The purpose of that line of questioning was to establish that he had a pattern of having sexual relationships outside of his marriage and was therefore there was one less impediment in his mind of using his various positions to get female underlings to have sex with him. There was no outcry against him attacking Iraq however, the outcry then was that civilians where perishing by the millions due to sanctions against Iraq and we are all now well aware of where the "Oil for Food" money was going.

GATOR591957 wrote:

Bush, he sent the troops to war, period!!!!
Gator, what a simplistic thing to say, especially in light of the fact the Clinton was using the military in Iraq before Bush, albeit at a smaller scale. What you are ignoring is how the democratic party has been fomenting the lie that Bush lied, which is the real lie. How is your truth detector not picking up on that?
2006-07-05 09:26:08
GATOR591957
Member
+84|6647

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Spumantiii wrote:

funny how after all that he was impeached, huh?
He was impeached for making false statements to a grand jury in sworn testimony. There is no dispute about this. It was NOT about him having sex, but him lying in court about it when a woman brought charges of sexual harassment against him. The purpose of that line of questioning was to establish that he had a pattern of having sexual relationships outside of his marriage and was therefore there was one less impediment in his mind of using his various positions to get female underlings to have sex with him. There was no outcry against him attacking Iraq however, the outcry then was that civilians where perishing by the millions due to sanctions against Iraq and we are all now well aware of where the "Oil for Food" money was going.

GATOR591957 wrote:

Bush, he sent the troops to war, period!!!!
Gator, what a simplistic thing to say, especially in light of the fact the Clinton was using the military in Iraq before Bush, albeit at a smaller scale. What you are ignoring is how the democratic party has been fomenting the lie that Bush lied, which is the real lie. How is your truth detector not picking up on that?
Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that was in conjunction with the United Nations. 

Secondly, which lie are you talking about, the one where we went to war for WMD's, or the next one where they were training AL Queda, or the last one where Sadaam was a bad man.  Not that he wasn't bad mind you but if we were to use his badness as a yardstick we should have been many other places before Iraq.  The Sudan, North Korea etc. etc.

Smaller scale indeed.  War is not an action that should be taken without thorough knowledge of what you are getting into and more importantly having an exit strategy.  Neither of which we had in my opinion.

The topic here is not just the lie or misinformation given by this administration.  It's whether it is grounds for impeachment.  Clearly it is.  However what seems to clog peoples gears is that it's a republican in office.  Again I say he's not a republican, he's an American doing an injustice to the American people.  I would certainly call what Bush has done in the sum as "High Crimes"

On a side note I just read today that the unit assigned to find Bin Laden who is the real criminal in 9/11 was disbanded some months back.  Why?  There's just so many things in this administration that don't add up.

Last edited by GATOR591957 (2006-07-05 09:32:09)

2006-07-05 10:52:17
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6703|Canada

GATOR591957 wrote:

On a side note I just read today that the unit assigned to find Bin Laden who is the real criminal in 9/11 was disbanded some months back.  Why?  There's just so many things in this administration that don't add up.
I heard this as well, probably because his location is known, or he was killed.
Wouldn't it be convenient if he were still alive and producing tapes?  Did you notice how Bin Laden wasn't actually in the last tape?


Anyway, Darth:  if Clinton got impeached for lying on the record, what should be done with Bush?
2006-07-05 11:11:48
Pinto
Member
+13|6600

Spumantiii wrote:

GATOR591957 wrote:

On a side note I just read today that the unit assigned to find Bin Laden who is the real criminal in 9/11 was disbanded some months back.  Why?  There's just so many things in this administration that don't add up.
I heard this as well, probably because his location is known, or he was killed.
Wouldn't it be convenient if he were still alive and producing tapes?  Did you notice how Bin Laden wasn't actually in the last tape?


Anyway, Darth:  if Clinton got impeached for lying on the record, what should be done with Bush?
Again, it's not about lying on the record.  Clinton got impeached for the charges of perjury and obstruction of justice from the sexual harrassment investigation.  Also, Clinton was acquitted by the Senate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_impeachment

For the record, I believe Bush's "lies" are far worse than Clinton's "lies" with respect to outcome to the US and world, however from a legal standpoint, they're not.
2006-07-05 11:31:35
GATOR591957
Member
+84|6647

Spumantiii wrote:

GATOR591957 wrote:

On a side note I just read today that the unit assigned to find Bin Laden who is the real criminal in 9/11 was disbanded some months back.  Why?  There's just so many things in this administration that don't add up.
I heard this as well, probably because his location is known, or he was killed.
Wouldn't it be convenient if he were still alive and producing tapes?  Did you notice how Bin Laden wasn't actually in the last tape?


Anyway, Darth:  if Clinton got impeached for lying on the record, what should be done with Bush?
I agree.  He is most likely cornered where they can get him at any time, or on ice somewhere where he can miraculously be killed just before the elections.
2006-07-05 11:57:10
Colfax
PR Only
+70|6664|United States - Illinois

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Spumantiii wrote:

Bush lied to Congress and the American public about the reasons for invading Iraq.
    *If Saddam Hussein was an immediate and serious threat to America, as the White House claimed, then Bush might have been justified in invading Iraq. But it appears that Bush misled the public, the Congress and the UN by consistently overstating the threat from Iraq.

Darth_Fleder in http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=10924&p=4  wrote:

CNN 1998 (long before Bush) wrote:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- From the Oval Office, President Clinton told the nation Wednesday evening why he ordered new military strikes against Iraq.

The president said Iraq's refusal to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors presented a threat to the entire world.

"Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton said.

Operation Desert Fox, a strong, sustained series of attacks, will be carried out over several days by U.S. and British forces, Clinton said.

"Earlier today I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces," Clinton said.

"Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors," said Clinton.

Clinton also stated that, while other countries also had weapons of mass destruction, Hussein is in a different category because he has used such weapons against his own people and against his neighbors...

Clinton said he made the decision to strike Wednesday with the unanimous agreement of his security advisors.

Timing was important, said the president, because without a strong inspection system in place, Iraq could rebuild its chemical, biological and nuclear programs in a matter of months, not years.

"If Saddam can cripple the weapons inspections system and get away with it, he would conclude the international community, led by the United States, has simply lost its will," said Clinton. "He would surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction."

Clinton also called Hussein a threat to his people and to the security of the world.

"The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people," Clinton said.
http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/
More collected quotes dealing with the lie that "Bush Lied".

"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-Truth! <-----Long before Bush


"Iraq is a long way from USA 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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
This is a quote from Albright during an appearance at Ohio State University by Albright, who was Secretary of State for Bill Clinton.

"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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
This was at the same Ohio State University appearance as Madeline Albright. 
"We 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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
According to the U.S. Senate website, the text of this letter was signed by several Senators, both Democrat and Republican, including Senator John McCain and Joseph Lieberman.

"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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
The text of this statement by Nancy Pelosi is posted on her congressional website.

"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-Truth!<-----Long before Bush
This was from an appearance Albright made in Chicago.
She was addressing the embargo of Iraq that was in effect at the time and criticism that it may have prevented needed medical supplies from getting into the country.  Albright said, "There has never been an embargo against food and medicine. It's just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend his money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction, and palaces for his cronies."


"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 mandated 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-Truth!


"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth! <------Inhabitant of White House long before Bush.


"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-Truth!<------Inhabitant of White House long before Bush.


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


"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998.
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-Truth!


"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-Truth!


"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 always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!


"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-Truth!


"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-Truth! <------Inhabitant of White House long before Bush.


"Without 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 is miscalculating America's response to his
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-Truth!
In a speech to Georgetown University.

I would like to point out that many of the comments were made by former occupants of the White House during which time they had access to information long before Bush had an opportunity to lie to them...See Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, Sandy Berger, Madelaine Albright. They had plenty of opportunity to tell their democratic comrades about any distortion of the truth by Mr. Bush at the time. The fact that they and others have since perpetrated the misconception the "Bush Lied' even though many of them were privy to the same information makes them the liars.

So, who lied? I ask again, WHO LIED?
QFT!!!!
2006-07-05 12:19:23
Pinto
Member
+13|6600

GATOR591957 wrote:

Spumantiii wrote:

GATOR591957 wrote:

On a side note I just read today that the unit assigned to find Bin Laden who is the real criminal in 9/11 was disbanded some months back.  Why?  There's just so many things in this administration that don't add up.
I heard this as well, probably because his location is known, or he was killed.
Wouldn't it be convenient if he were still alive and producing tapes?  Did you notice how Bin Laden wasn't actually in the last tape?


Anyway, Darth:  if Clinton got impeached for lying on the record, what should be done with Bush?
I agree.  He is most likely cornered where they can get him at any time, or on ice somewhere where he can miraculously be killed just before the elections.
That wouldn't surprise me, too.  He'll be "caught" in summer of 2007.
2006-07-05 12:20:49
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6576
WHat's the point in impeaching him? He'll just be replaced by another tyrannical christ-fascist oligarch.
2006-07-05 12:43:46
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|6858

CameronPoe wrote:

WHat's the point in impeaching him? He'll just be replaced by another tyrannical christ-fascist oligarch.
oh please..
2006-07-05 13:14:13
GATOR591957
Member
+84|6647

CameronPoe wrote:

WHat's the point in impeaching him? He'll just be replaced by another tyrannical christ-fascist oligarch.
Cameron, I'll ask you this question because I believe you have a unique perspective on our problems.  If we sit back and do nothing how would your react?  It is my belief that in order for the USA to restore our good name and reputation as a fair country, which has been lost in this administration , the people of the USA need to speak out and act against this.

In your response of replacing Bush, I hope you are referring to Mr. Cheney.  To which I would agree, but if he repeats the mistakes of his predecessor, he will also face the same fate.

 

Pages: 1 … 13 14 15 16 17 … 20

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard