WarriorSpirit Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 1) Yeah, read the other thread. 2) Um, due process? Ever heard of that? 3) The due process thing aside, do you think that rewarding political contributors is exclusively the domain of Republicans? If you do, then you ARE devoid of reality. Ok, I'll read the other thread. Sorry, I'm not a regular here, so I didn't catch that discussion. I know about due process but I still don't understand what relevance that has to the issue of maliciously exposing an agent. Again, I think both parties are equally corrupt. I'm not a liberal, I am an old school conservative. Most of all though, I think for myself and I think W is the worst president that this nation has ever had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 Ok, I'll read the other thread. Sorry, I'm not a regular here, so I didn't catch that discussion.I know about due process but I still don't understand what relevance that has to the issue of maliciously exposing an agent. Again, I think both parties are equally corrupt. I'm not a liberal, I am an old school conservative. Most of all though, I think for myself and I think W is the worst president that this nation has ever had. (2) He's innocent until proven guilty. You are presuming guilt at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 Its all hearsay at this point.....why don't you just mosey on over to Syria and dig them up? Maybe. But it's more than you've got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LApunkrocker72 Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 I would love to see Bush get impeached. But because of a Republican controlled Congress, I'm not counting on it. The current war is based on Bush's lies. And that is far worse than what Bill Clinton ever did. The Republican party is so hypocritical. If a Monica Lewinsky-like incident were to happen to Bush, they would rush to his defense without thinking. Also, if it were President Gore doing nothing for 7 minutes after first hearing about 9/11, the Republicans would have ripped to shreds. But because it was Bush, they rush to his defense. Our country is in need of changes. Hopefully that could start with the 2006 mid-term elections. I am so sick of the Bush administration's incompetency and corruption. What the Bush supporters don't realize is that the administration is running this country on fear. More Americans need to see through that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altair4 Posted March 25, 2006 Author Share Posted March 25, 2006 Maybe. But it's more than you've got. Happy digging. Let me know when you find them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 I would love to see Bush get impeached. But because of a Republican controlled Congress, I'm not counting on it.The current war is based on Bush's lies. And that is far worse than what Bill Clinton ever did. The Republican party is so hypocritical. If a Monica Lewinsky-like incident were to happen to Bush, they would rush to his defense without thinking. Also, if it were President Gore doing nothing for 7 minutes after first hearing about 9/11, the Republicans would have ripped to shreds. But because it was Bush, they rush to his defense. Our country is in need of changes. Hopefully that could start with the 2006 mid-term elections. I am so sick of the Bush administration's incompetency and corruption. What the Bush supporters don't realize is that the administration is running this country on fear. More Americans need to see through that. You and CrazyHorse are kindred spirits. Maybe he can make some room in the time machine and you can both go back to Woodstock. :insane: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altair4 Posted March 25, 2006 Author Share Posted March 25, 2006 I would love to see Bush get impeached. But because of a Republican controlled Congress, I'm not counting on it.The current war is based on Bush's lies. And that is far worse than what Bill Clinton ever did. The Republican party is so hypocritical. If a Monica Lewinsky-like incident were to happen to Bush, they would rush to his defense without thinking. Also, if it were President Gore doing nothing for 7 minutes after first hearing about 9/11, the Republicans would have ripped to shreds. But because it was Bush, they rush to his defense. Our country is in need of changes. Hopefully that could start with the 2006 mid-term elections. I am so sick of the Bush administration's incompetency and corruption. What the Bush supporters don't realize is that the administration is running this country on fear. More Americans need to see through that. Hopefully they will lose seats...but with Diebold voting machines you can't even trust that elections in the US are fair anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 Happy digging. Let me know when you find them... Yep, and I am still waiting for your proof to the contrary. Until then, you have no legitimate basis to accuse Bush of being a liar. You can (and you probably will), but that doesn't count for squat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 Hopefully they will lose seats...but with Diebold voting machines you can't even trust that elections in the US are fair anymore. Make that three.... room for three on the time machine back to Woodstock. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altair4 Posted March 25, 2006 Author Share Posted March 25, 2006 I don't need to prove he is a liar. He needs to prove that he ISN'T a liar. He made the case, committed the troops, and is paying with blood. He has yet to prove that he did not lie. Your assertions otherwise are just toadyism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamingwolf Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 I really hope the DNC gets away from the altairs and the crazyhorses, when I was watching the dnc prez candidate speechs and the crowd booed liberman when he apollogized for not using drugs I really sighed deep that our system has dipped to a fight between extremists. I know its shocking, probably not even reported anywhere. You would have had to taken the time to watch the debates to have seen it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 I don't need to prove he is a liar. He needs to prove that he ISN'T a liar. He made the case, committed the troops, and is paying with blood. He has yet to prove that he did not lie. Your assertions otherwise are just toadyism. Wrong. You're accusing him of being a liar. The burden of proof is on you. Argumentum ad logicam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altair4 Posted March 25, 2006 Author Share Posted March 25, 2006 I really hope the DNC gets away from the altairs and the crazyhorses, when I was watching the dnc prez candidate speechs and the crowd booed liberman when he apollogized for not using drugs I really sighed deep that our system has dipped to a fight between extremists.I know its shocking, probably not even reported anywhere. You would have had to taken the time to watch the debates to have seen it. I am not affiliated with the DNC, They are just as sold out as the Repubs....the system is broken, and the country is being run by power crazed loons who prefer lies, even when the truth would do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamingwolf Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 I am not affiliated with the DNC, Thet are just as sold out as the Repubs....the system is broken, and the country is being run by power crazed loons who prefer lies, even when the truth would do. well there you go, nuff said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altair4 Posted March 25, 2006 Author Share Posted March 25, 2006 Wrong. You're accusing him of being a liar. The burden of proof is on you. Argumentum ad logicam. Wrong. Argumentum ad nauseam :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altair4 Posted March 25, 2006 Author Share Posted March 25, 2006 Make that three.... room for three on the time machine back to Woodstock. :laugh: No problem BushFanatic....see you on your way back to Pre WWII Germany. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altair4 Posted March 25, 2006 Author Share Posted March 25, 2006 You're missing the point - just because I can't prove that they were transferred doesn't mean that he lied. You stated that he lied when, in fact, there's at least circumstantial evidence that there was WMD. He is, at this point in time, a liar. You say that may change in the future, Maybe it will and maybe it won't. I don't have high hopes given his administrations abysmal performance in all areas... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 He is, at this point in time, a liar. You say that may change in the future, Maybe it will and maybe it won't. I don't have high hopes given his administrations abysmal performance in all areas... You said he's a liar What has he lied about? Lay out your case, with some facts please, not lathered leftist talking points Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorSpirit Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 Its funny how you get called a liberal, hippy, pot-smoker, whatever, when you question what Bush has done. Whatever, I don't think Bush should be impeached just like I was against the impeachment of Clinton. Let history be the judge and hopefully future generations will learn from this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altair4 Posted March 25, 2006 Author Share Posted March 25, 2006 (2) He's innocent until proven guilty. You are presuming guilt at this point. The unassailable facts in evidence are that he's an idiot. Birds of a feather, I guess....:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 The unassailable facts in evidence are that he's an idiot.Birds of a feather, I guess....:doh: One........more....tiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiime You said he's a liar What has he lied about? Lay out your case, with some facts please, not lathered leftist talking points Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altair4 Posted March 25, 2006 Author Share Posted March 25, 2006 One........more....tiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiimeYou said he's a liar What has he lied about? Lay out your case, with some facts please, not lathered leftist talking points I guess you missed the one..... "You remember when [secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons....They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two.* And we'll find more weapons as time goes on, But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong. We found them." (italics ours) --WP, "Bush: 'We Found' Banned Weapons. President Cites Trailers in Iraq as Proof, " May 31, 2003 "I don't believe anyone that I know in the administration ever said that Iraq had nuclear weapons." �Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, at a hearing of the Senate's appropriations subcommittee on defense, May 14, 2003 "We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." �Vice President Dick Cheney on NBC's Meet the Press, March 16, 2003 "President Bush has continued to say he has not yet decided whether to go to war. [Today Bush said, "If we go to war..."] But the message being conveyed in high-level contacts with other council governments is that a military attack on Iraq is inevitable, these officials and diplomats said. What they must determine, U.S. officials are telling these governments, is if their insistence that U.N. weapons inspections be given more time is worth the destruction of council credibility at a time of serious world upheaval....In meetings yesterday with senior officials in Moscow, Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton told the Russian government that "we're going ahead," whether the council agrees or not, a senior administration official said...."You are not going to decide whether there is war in Iraq or not," the diplomat said U.S. officials told him. 'That decision is ours, and we have already made it. It is already final. The only question now is whether the council will go along with it or not.'" --WP, 02.25.03 You want more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 Wrong.Argumentum ad nauseam :doh: Now that's a red herring if I ever saw one. :laugh: Man, it was strike three for you a long time ago. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 He is, at this point in time, a liar. You say that may change in the future, Maybe it will and maybe it won't. I don't have high hopes given his administrations abysmal performance in all areas... Where is the proof? You are an intellectually bankrupt or dishonest person. It's one or the other. :insane: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altair4 Posted March 25, 2006 Author Share Posted March 25, 2006 Now that's a red herring if I ever saw one. :laugh: Man, it was strike three for you a long time ago. :laugh: ."You remember when [secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons....They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two.* And we'll find more weapons as time goes on, But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong. We found them." (italics ours) --WP, "Bush: 'We Found' Banned Weapons. President Cites Trailers in Iraq as Proof, " May 31, 2003 *At the time of this statement, no such weapons were found, and no such weapons have been found to this day. On this point as well as the use of the captured trailers as biolabs, the WP said this in the above article: "U.S. authorities have to date made no claim of a confirmed finding of an actual nuclear, biological or chemical weapon. In the interview, Bush said weapons had been found, but in elaborating, he mentioned only the trailers, which the CIA has concluded were likely used for production of biological weapons." There was no statement of fact, there was no smoking gun. The CIA's finding was advanced as an opinion based on its own particular process of elimination, and it was immediately challenged by both U.S. and U.K. intelligence analysts who had seen the trailers. --Politex, 08.09.03 (italics ours) Now comes this..."Engineering experts from the Defense Intelligence Agency have come to believe that the most likely use for two mysterious trailers found in Iraq was to produce hydrogen for weather balloons rather than to make biological weapons, government officials say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.