|
![]() |
|
|
[1] Posted by Laughing at Bush 07-16-2003, 02:19 AM |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 04:55:37 GMT, "Roger R."
<jayraynospam21@hotmail.com> wrote: >Look at this report: >http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6310763.htm > > >"WASHINGTON - In a new dispute over interpreting intelligence data, the CIA >and other agencies objected vigorously to a Bush administration assessment >of the threat of Syria's weapons of mass destruction that was to be >presented Tuesday on Capitol Hill. > >After the objections, the planned testimony by Undersecretary of State John >R. Bolton, a leading administration hawk, was delayed until September. > >U.S. officials told Knight Ridder that Bolton was prepared to tell members >of a House of Representatives International Relations subcommittee that >Syria's development of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons had >progressed to such a point that they posed a threat to stability in the >region. > >The CIA and other intelligence agencies said that assessment was >exaggerated." > >We all know that the Bush people have been - let's put it charitably - >rather loose with the truth. We also know that they have gone way beyond >what the CIA, DIA, and State Department Intelligence professionals have >considered that the evidence they have prooves. > >Why should we believe them about Syria? > Why should we believe them about anything unless they're admitting they're liars. Now that I can believe. Just think, the asshole that runs this country said in one of his drunken stupors..... "You fucking son of a *****. I saw what you wrote. We're not going to forget this." A drunken George W., storming into a Mexican diner in Dallas, and approaching Al Hunt (Wall Street Journal editor) .. Al was dining with his wife and 4 year old son, when Dubya interrupted cursing for several minutes in front of everyone. ----------------------------------------------------- "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." --Teddy Roosevelt (Kansas City Star, 7 May 1918) |
|
|
| Sponsored Links | ||
|
|
|
[2] Posted by Mr Wizzard 07-16-2003, 03:15 AM |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote
"Laughing at Bush" <BushSucks@Bigtime.com> wrote in message news:air9hv4625r2uehqlpkla8klnq8a8348ab@4ax.com... > On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 04:55:37 GMT, "Roger R." > <jayraynospam21@hotmail.com> wrote: > > >Look at this report: > >http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6310763.htm > > > > > >"WASHINGTON - In a new dispute over interpreting intelligence data, the CIA > >and other agencies objected vigorously to a Bush administration assessment > >of the threat of Syria's weapons of mass destruction that was to be > >presented Tuesday on Capitol Hill. > > > >After the objections, the planned testimony by Undersecretary of State John > >R. Bolton, a leading administration hawk, was delayed until September. > > > >U.S. officials told Knight Ridder that Bolton was prepared to tell members > >of a House of Representatives International Relations subcommittee that > >Syria's development of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons had > >progressed to such a point that they posed a threat to stability in the > >region. > > > >The CIA and other intelligence agencies said that assessment was > >exaggerated." > > > >We all know that the Bush people have been - let's put it charitably - > >rather loose with the truth. We also know that they have gone way beyond > >what the CIA, DIA, and State Department Intelligence professionals have > >considered that the evidence they have prooves. > > > >Why should we believe them about Syria? > > > Why should we believe them about anything unless they're admitting > they're liars. Now that I can believe. Where is the actual "lie" ?? As I hear it, Bush said that Britian has learned of Iraq's seeking to obtain yellow cake. That is not a "lie" - Britian *did* learn that by their intelligence report. Turns out that Britians intelligence wasn't good, but Bush's statement was still true. Don't be twisting symantics here. > > > > > Just think, the asshole that runs this country said > in one of his drunken stupors..... > > "You fucking son of a *****. I saw what you wrote. > We're not going to forget this." > A drunken George W., storming into a Mexican diner > in Dallas, and approaching Al Hunt (Wall Street Journal editor) > . Al was dining with his wife and 4 year old son, > when Dubya interrupted cursing for several minutes > in front of everyone. > > ----------------------------------------------------- > "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that > we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic > and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." > > --Teddy Roosevelt (Kansas City Star, 7 May 1918) |
|
|
|
[3] Posted by Herb 07-16-2003, 08:48 AM |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote
"Laughing at Bush" <BushSucks@Bigtime.com> wrote in message news:nfhahv4ethf4dcpenrlg346isjo68sudcv@4ax.com... > On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 07:15:25 GMT, "Mr Wizzard" <wiz@muffy-mail.com> > wrote: > > > > >"Laughing at Bush" <BushSucks@Bigtime.com> wrote in message > >news:air9hv4625r2uehqlpkla8klnq8a8348ab@4ax.com.. . > >> On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 04:55:37 GMT, "Roger R." > >> <jayraynospam21@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> >Look at this report: > >> >http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6310763.htm > >> > > >> > > >> >"WASHINGTON - In a new dispute over interpreting intelligence data, the > >CIA > >> >and other agencies objected vigorously to a Bush administration > >assessment > >> >of the threat of Syria's weapons of mass destruction that was to be > >> >presented Tuesday on Capitol Hill. > >> > > >> >After the objections, the planned testimony by Undersecretary of State > >John > >> >R. Bolton, a leading administration hawk, was delayed until September. > >> > > >> >U.S. officials told Knight Ridder that Bolton was prepared to tell > >members > >> >of a House of Representatives International Relations subcommittee that > >> >Syria's development of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons had > >> >progressed to such a point that they posed a threat to stability in the > >> >region. > >> > > >> >The CIA and other intelligence agencies said that assessment was > >> >exaggerated." > >> > > >> >We all know that the Bush people have been - let's put it charitably - > >> >rather loose with the truth. We also know that they have gone way beyond > >> >what the CIA, DIA, and State Department Intelligence professionals have > >> >considered that the evidence they have prooves. > >> > > >> >Why should we believe them about Syria? > >> > > >> Why should we believe them about anything unless they're admitting > >> they're liars. Now that I can believe. > > > >Where is the actual "lie" ?? As I hear it, Bush said that Britian > >has learned of Iraq's seeking to obtain yellow cake. That is not > >a "lie" - Britian *did* learn that by their intelligence report. Turns > >out that Britians intelligence wasn't good, but Bush's statement > >was still true. Don't be twisting symantics here. > > Then stop doing it. How is knowingly repeating a lie NOT a lie? The > identical false information had been removed from a Bush speech in > October because it was known then to be false. If you know that the > statement "all blue eyed people are insomniacs" is false, and I tell > you "all blue eyed people are insomniacs" would you go out tell > everyone that all blue eyed people are insomniacs? No. Why, because > you know I told you something that was not true. Bush and his handlers > knew that the information the British had was false, and knowingly > chose to use it to their advantage to start an unjustified war. > > > > > > > > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Just think, the asshole that runs this country said > >> in one of his drunken stupors..... > >> > >> "You fucking son of a *****. I saw what you wrote. > >> We're not going to forget this." > >> A drunken George W., storming into a Mexican diner > >> in Dallas, and approaching Al Hunt (Wall Street Journal editor) > >> . Al was dining with his wife and 4 year old son, > >> when Dubya interrupted cursing for several minutes > >> in front of everyone. > >> > >> ----------------------------------------------------- > >> "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that > >> we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic > >> and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." > >> > >> --Teddy Roosevelt (Kansas City Star, 7 May 1918) > > > > > > > > Just think, the asshole that runs this country said > in one of his drunken stupors..... > > "You fucking son of a *****. I saw what you wrote. > We're not going to forget this." > A drunken George W., storming into a Mexican diner > in Dallas, and approaching Al Hunt (Wall Street Journal editor) > . Al was dining with his wife and 4 year old son, > when Dubya interrupted cursing for several minutes > in front of everyone. > > ----------------------------------------------------- > "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that > we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic > and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." > > --Teddy Roosevelt (Kansas City Star, 7 May 1918) |
|
|
|
[4] Posted by Roger R. 07-16-2003, 10:47 AM |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote
"Mr Wizzard" <wiz@muffy-mail.com> wrote in message news:hY6Ra.75537$N7.9209@sccrnsc03... > > "Laughing at Bush" <BushSucks@Bigtime.com> wrote in message > news:air9hv4625r2uehqlpkla8klnq8a8348ab@4ax.com... > > On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 04:55:37 GMT, "Roger R." > > <jayraynospam21@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > >Look at this report: > > >http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6310763.htm > > > > > > > > >"WASHINGTON - In a new dispute over interpreting intelligence data, the > CIA > > >and other agencies objected vigorously to a Bush administration > assessment > > >of the threat of Syria's weapons of mass destruction that was to be > > >presented Tuesday on Capitol Hill. > > > > > >After the objections, the planned testimony by Undersecretary of State > John > > >R. Bolton, a leading administration hawk, was delayed until September. > > > > > >U.S. officials told Knight Ridder that Bolton was prepared to tell > members > > >of a House of Representatives International Relations subcommittee that > > >Syria's development of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons had > > >progressed to such a point that they posed a threat to stability in the > > >region. > > > > > >The CIA and other intelligence agencies said that assessment was > > >exaggerated." > > > > > >We all know that the Bush people have been - let's put it charitably - > > >rather loose with the truth. We also know that they have gone way beyond > > >what the CIA, DIA, and State Department Intelligence professionals have > > >considered that the evidence they have prooves. > > > > > >Why should we believe them about Syria? > > > > > Why should we believe them about anything unless they're admitting > > they're liars. Now that I can believe. > > Where is the actual "lie" ?? As I hear it, Bush said that Britian > has learned of Iraq's seeking to obtain yellow cake. That is not > a "lie" - Britian *did* learn that by their intelligence report. Turns > out that Britians intelligence wasn't good, but Bush's statement > was still true. Don't be twisting symantics here. > > > > Let's see - Bush made a statement that he knew was untrue, but then attributed it to the Intelligence from the British instead of our own intelligence agencies because they didn't think it was supportable. The effect of that is a lie. He clearly intended to lie to convince the nation to ~preemptively~ invade Iraq and this falsehood was his only real hook to hand the idea that Iraq was an "imminent threat" to the US. His only other evidence was the aluminum tubes that had already been publicly discredited. He presented information he knew to be untrue or unsupportable to convince that nation to take a really serious action that we would not otherwise accept. It is you who are twisting symantics here. Bush presented a lie. It doesn't matter who he attributes it to. RR |
|
|
|
[5] Posted by Brooks Gregory 07-16-2003, 11:06 AM |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote
"Roger R." <jayraynospam21@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:LzdRa.1216$Lq1.913@newssvr24.news.prodigy.com ... > > "Mr Wizzard" <wiz@muffy-mail.com> wrote in message > news:hY6Ra.75537$N7.9209@sccrnsc03... > > > > "Laughing at Bush" <BushSucks@Bigtime.com> wrote in message > > news:air9hv4625r2uehqlpkla8klnq8a8348ab@4ax.com... > > > On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 04:55:37 GMT, "Roger R." > > > <jayraynospam21@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > >Look at this report: > > > >http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6310763.htm > > > > > > > > > > > >"WASHINGTON - In a new dispute over interpreting intelligence data, the > > CIA > > > >and other agencies objected vigorously to a Bush administration > > assessment > > > >of the threat of Syria's weapons of mass destruction that was to be > > > >presented Tuesday on Capitol Hill. > > > > > > > >After the objections, the planned testimony by Undersecretary of State > > John > > > >R. Bolton, a leading administration hawk, was delayed until September. > > > > > > > >U.S. officials told Knight Ridder that Bolton was prepared to tell > > members > > > >of a House of Representatives International Relations subcommittee that > > > >Syria's development of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons had > > > >progressed to such a point that they posed a threat to stability in the > > > >region. > > > > > > > >The CIA and other intelligence agencies said that assessment was > > > >exaggerated." > > > > > > > >We all know that the Bush people have been - let's put it charitably - > > > >rather loose with the truth. We also know that they have gone way > beyond > > > >what the CIA, DIA, and State Department Intelligence professionals have > > > >considered that the evidence they have prooves. > > > > > > > >Why should we believe them about Syria? > > > > > > > Why should we believe them about anything unless they're admitting > > > they're liars. Now that I can believe. > > > > Where is the actual "lie" ?? As I hear it, Bush said that Britian > > has learned of Iraq's seeking to obtain yellow cake. That is not > > a "lie" - Britian *did* learn that by their intelligence report. Turns > > out that Britians intelligence wasn't good, but Bush's statement > > was still true. Don't be twisting symantics here. > > > > > > > > > Let's see - Bush made a statement that he knew was untrue, but then > attributed it to the Intelligence from the British instead of our own > intelligence agencies because they didn't think it was supportable. The > effect of that is a lie. > > He clearly intended to lie to convince the nation to ~preemptively~ invade > Iraq and this falsehood was his only real hook to hand the idea that Iraq > was an "imminent threat" to the US. His only other evidence was the aluminum > tubes that had already been publicly discredited. > > He presented information he knew to be untrue or unsupportable to convince > that nation to take a really serious action that we would not otherwise > accept. It is you who are twisting symantics here. Bush presented a lie. It > doesn't matter who he attributes it to. > > RR > > It won't make a dime's worth of difference. It is not what the majority of voters will ask themselves in the voting booth. -- A lot of little boys never grow up. They just change the name of their game from "Cowboys and Indians" to "Democrats and Republicans" Brooks Gregory |
|
|
|
[6] Posted by John Starrett 07-16-2003, 12:04 PM |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote
Mr Wizzard wrote:
> <snip> > Where is the actual "lie" ?? As I hear it, Bush said that Britian > has learned of Iraq's seeking to obtain yellow cake. That is not > a "lie" - Britian *did* learn that by their intelligence report. Turns > out that Britians intelligence wasn't good, but Bush's statement > was still true. Don't be twisting symantics here. <snip> I have learned that you are married to a goat. Sure, the report is flawed, but I didn't lie! That is indeed what I learned. -- John Starrett "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." Samuel Adams |
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Re: The Raw Truth About Jr's Military Desertion | Joe S. | Politics | 42 | 07-14-2003 09:57 AM |
| Re: The Son of Man demands Mr. bush's immediate arrest or execution! - Wow eh?! | Justice for All | Politics | 0 | 07-11-2003 02:50 PM |
| Re: The Raw Truth About Jr's Military Desertion | Thom | Politics | 5 | 07-05-2003 01:49 PM |
| Re: The Raw Truth About Jr's Military Desertion | AD | Politics | 15 | 07-05-2003 01:43 PM |
| Impeach the wimpy asshole! | Harry Hope | Politics | 1 | 07-03-2003 01:29 PM |