+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 17 to 26 of 26

  1. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Nunya
    Posts
    996

    Re: Can Anyone Justify THIS?

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee1965
    Grim,

    I have heard liberal political groups say the President went to Iraq for oil. I do not remember, a legislator, or public offical making this statement. If you please, enlighten me.

    DeeDee1965
    Please indroduce yourself to howie dean and al gore. Your thread topic is one that is about to get obliterated by Grim. Be careful when you challenge him. He has fact on his side and will squash your arguement fairly quickly. I notice that you didn't answer his question but expect to be answered.......hmmmm, interesting! :cool:

  2. #18
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Can Anyone Justify THIS?

    Quote Originally Posted by Raider
    Please indroduce yourself to howie dean and al gore. Your thread topic is one that is about to get obliterated by Grim. Be careful when you challenge him. He has fact on his side and will squash your arguement fairly quickly. I notice that you didn't answer his question but expect to be answered.......hmmmm, interesting! :cool:
    Thanks Raider, I was about to do exactly what you stated. Instead though, I will throw it back to Dee Dee and ask her this.

    Dee Dee, if in fact a legislator, or public official made public statements that the president went to Iraq for oil, without any evidence what so ever to substantiate this, would you consider that wrong?

    .

  3. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    14,663

    Re: Can Anyone Justify THIS?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    Thanks Raider, I was about to do exactly what you stated. Instead though, I will throw it back to Dee Dee and ask her this.

    Dee Dee, if in fact a legislator, or public official made public statements that the president went to Iraq for oil, without any evidence what so ever to substantiate this, would you consider that wrong?

    .
    Isn't this cute...A couple of gibbering Monkeys sucking each other's butts. They've set up a little mutual admiration society here to help obscure their own wanton, willful ignorance and psychotic criminality. They are willing to say and do anything in their degenerate, deluded and hopeless campaign to deflect criticism of the Flying Monkey and the Bush Crime Gang....except one thing.You guessed it: Enlist

  4. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    14,663

    Re: Can Anyone Justify THIS?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    Dee Dee, there is a big difference between questioning or criticizing our leaders and making unproven accusations.

    Questioning:

    Did the president manipulate the intelligence to gain support for the war in Iraq?


    Criticizing:

    I think the presidents war plan for Iraq sucked. He should have planned it out better.

    Accusing:

    The president lied about the intelligence to lead the country into a war that is for the purpose of stealing Iraq's oil.



    You see Dee Dee, there is a big difference between them, and I support anyone who questions or criticizes the actions of our government. When someone accuses our government of the things the democrats have, without any proof or hard evidence, and to top it off, four investigations have cleared the administration of manipulating the intelligence that led to the war, I have a major problem with that. It is not only unfair, but it hurts this country and makes it more dangerous for our troops fighting on the ground in Iraq.

    Like I have said, what ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

    .

    Cornered by their critics, overwhelmed by massive antiwar sentiment, and pursued by the relentless Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the War Party is in full retreat, hiding behind the ramparts of an elaborate edifice of lies. The administration's defenders are shooting blindly, averring – per Norman Podhoretz – that, since "everybody" believed what the administration was claiming about Iraq's alleged WMD prior to the invasion, we're all living in the same alternate universe. In the Bizarro World of the neocons, if we all believe a lie, that makes it true.

    We are supposed to believe that critics of the war who see a pattern of deception in the administration's pre-invasion pronouncements are deluding themselves into believing a "conspiracy theory," as the Weekly Standard's new blog puts it. In an effort to calm the "frenzy" created by my piece unmasking the authors of the Niger uranium forgeries, they cite the FBI's detrmination that "financial gain, not an effort to influence U.S. policy, was behind the forged documents." Why the two motivations – financial gain and a desire to manipulate the making of policy – are mutually exclusive is a mystery known only to the editors of the Weekly Standard. As we have seen, neocons have been experts at profiting from the policies they advocate: the name of Richard Perle comes to mind. In any event, the efforts of the Italians to cash in don't quite measure up in terms of entrepreneurial acuity. As one ex-CIA officer put it to me: "If the objective was to make money, it's curious that the documents were dumped on Panorama after the request for a payment was refused."

    The boys over at the Standard are real sensitive to jabs from us on this issue because the Niger uranium forgeries are, for the Peace Party, the gift that never seems to stop giving. This is the weakest link in the chain of deception forged by the neocons in the run-up to war, and it is visibly falling to pieces as news of yet another break in the story of Niger-gate blows in on an Italian wind.

    La Repubblica writers Carlo Bonini and Giuseppe d'Avanzo are back with another scoop, unraveling a particularly thorny knot in the Niger uranium forgery mystery that has, until now, proved most baffling. The mystery is this: how is it that the U.S. government was taken in by such crude forgeries?

    After all, names of Niger officials who were supposed to be overseeing the transaction with Iraq were flat out wrong, as were certain dates and other telling details. That's why it was only a few hours before International Atomic Energy Agency scientists had unmasked the original documents as fraudulent. So how come the U.S. government – with so many intelligence analysts, experts, and other resources at its command – was so easily fooled? The answer is that the "intelligence" supposedly contained in the forgeries was filtered – laundered – through various foreign intelligence agencies, including the Italians and the British.

    By comparing what the Senate report says about the transcriptions with the actual forgeries, we can see that the errors are cleaned up. But who were the janitors? A key signature, substituting the name of one Niger official for another, was forged: but who were the forgers? Who suppressed the evidence that the Niger uranium claims were based on forgeries, and who made sure that the doctored transcriptions were given the most weight? The Italians were pushing this story for all it was worth, but who on the inside greased the skids? Was it, perchance, the same crew that channeled Ahmed Chalabi's fabrications, and those of his fellow "heroes in error," into administration policy papers and the front page of the New York Times? The same cabal that went after Ambassador Joe Wilson and his wife, CIA agent Valerie Plame, because they were drawing too much attention to the Niger uranium scam.

    The big-but-overlooked story of the past few months has been how much of the phony "intelligence" that corrupted U.S. intelligence-gathering mechanisms is being sourced back to our foreign "allies." The Brits, after all, took the brunt of the credit – or blame – in the beginning when a compromise was reached between the contending factions in the administration, who were fighting over the veracity of the Niger uranium claims. In the end, it was decided to attribute the African uranium claim to the Brits – who, it turns out, had received the same "intelligence" via the Italians. Yet this cacophony of "reports" – coming from the Brits and the Italians – consisted only of echoes reverberating from the original source, which remains hidden, though not for long. Because whoever corrected the errors in the "authentic" forgeries and passed them on for American consumption is at the very center of the conspiracy to lie us into war.

    The Senate Committee on Intelligence is well aware of these discrepancies between the "real" forgeries and the transcriptions received via whomever, and if the much-vaunted second "phase" of their investigation into prewar intelligence doesn't cover this topic in public hearings – or even closed sessions – we'll know there's a bipartisan cover-up in progress.

    Once we lift this rock, I can guarantee you it won't just be a bunch of Italian con artists and their enablers in SISMI who scuttle away – and Scooter Libby won't be the only U.S. government official in prosecutors' sights. This may be an incentive for the Democrats, but there are plenty of issues here that may also make them wary. I won't go into that now, but for a hint of what I'm talking about, check out Julian Borger's piece on the Office of Special Plans. According to La Repubblica, it was this mysterious entity – which, as Seymour Hersh says, called itself only half-mockingly "the cabal" – that reportedly funneled the Italian transcriptions to Washington policymakers. Borger, like Karen Kwiatkowski and Robert Dreyfuss, makes the connection to a certain foreign intelligence agency, and from this my readers are free to draw their own conclusions as to why the Democrats, as much as the Republicans, are not too eager to uncover the real source of the Niger uranium forgeries.

    Justin Raymundo http://antiwar.com/justin/
    Last edited by dchristie; 11-14-2005 at 04:07 PM.

  5. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    586

    Re: Can Anyone Justify THIS?

    Mr. Raider,

    I do not have a problem asking questions I do not know the answer to. That is how I learn things. Given the information, I make up my own mind. To me, that is how things get done.

    Are you suggesting I should not start threads because people will challenge what I write?? I thought that was the point of political message boards, to share, and learn. Was I wrong??

    DeeD1965

  6. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    586

    Re: Can Anyone Justify THIS?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    Thanks Raider, I was about to do exactly what you stated. Instead though, I will throw it back to Dee Dee and ask her this.

    Dee Dee, if in fact a legislator, or public official made public statements that the president went to Iraq for oil, without any evidence what so ever to substantiate this, would you consider that wrong?

    .

    Grim,

    Without evidence, yes I would.

    However, would I consider it treasonous, or an open invitation to attack our President or a major city? The answer to that important distinction is, NO.

    DeeDee1965

  7. #23
    umdkook Guest

    Re: Can Anyone Justify THIS?

    all you keep saying is people should keep their mouths shut , when its clear some **** is going down inside the white house that shouldnt, just so we dont look bad.

  8. #24
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Can Anyone Justify THIS?

    Quote Originally Posted by umdkook
    all you keep saying is people should keep their mouths shut , when its clear some **** is going down inside the white house that shouldnt, just so we dont look bad.
    Prove it!

    If you can't, then you suck!!!

  9. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,866

    Re: Can Anyone Justify THIS?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    Prove it!

    If you can't, then you suck!!!
    LOL, that was sure a mature and intelligent response.

    Lady Mod

  10. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    14,663

    Re: Can Anyone Justify THIS?

    Quote Originally Posted by sojustask
    LOL, that was sure a mature and intelligent response.

    Lady Mod
    Actually, even that was more intelligent than the usual retarded drivel he posts.

Similar Threads

  1. How Do Liberals Justify THIS Policy?
    By pwrone in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-20-2010, 09:15 PM
  2. Do you believe President Bush's actions justify im
    By Phinnly Slash Buster in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-04-2008, 12:07 PM
  3. How do Catholic priest justify being called Father?
    By Born2Serve in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-29-2006, 09:07 AM

Tags for this Thread

Add / Edit Tags
000, actions, administration, advance, advocate, afraid, africa, african, age, agency, agenda, ahmed, aint, allegations, alleged, ambassador, american, another, answer, anyone, are, art, artists, ation, attention, authentic, authors, ava, aware, away, back, bad, based, basically, beats, better, big, bill, bit, blame, boards, bombing, break, british, brun, bunch, but, butts, called, calling, calm, campaign, can, cannot, cards, career, careful, cash, center, chain, challenge, cheap, citizens, claiming, claims, clear, cleared, closed, coming, comments, commit, committing, common, con, connection, consisted, context, continue, country, court, cover, crack, credit, crew, criminals, crumbling, cute, damage, dangerous, day, dea, deal, dean, decided, democratic, democrats, des, designed, desire, destruction, did, didn, difference, doctored, documents, doesn, don, dont, dow, due, dumped, easily, ebook, echoes, elaborate, elected, eme, end, enemy, enter, envelope, essence, event, exclusive, experts, fair, favorite, financial, fla, flat, flying, focus, fooled, forgery, forgot, formal, fra, france, fraudulent, front, future, gain, gas, giuseppe, giving, good, goose, great, greater, grim, ground, groups, guarantee, guess, guns, guy, had, happened, hard, hasn, hear, heard, held, help, hey, hidden, hiding, high, him, his, hopeless, hose, hours, house, howie, ice, idiots, ignorance, ignorant, illegally, ime, important, inc, influence, information, ing, intelligence, inter, investigations, ion, islamic, issue, issues, its, jerk, joe, jose, jour, journalism, julian, just, justify, kind, know, law, leaders, led, less, liberal, liberals, lied, likes, lis, listen, living, log, lol, long, long run, loose, lot, make, makes, making, many, massive, mea, measure, mind, misleading, monkeys, more, most, movie, mystery, need, never, new york times, nice, niger, now, office, officer, official, officials, ones, only, open, opportunity, order, org, original, our, out, page, paper, party, pas, passed, patrick, patriot, payment, peace, people, perle, person, piece, place, planned, plans, play, playing, plenty, point, policies, policy, pos, posts, presiden, pretty, prior, prisoners, private, process, progress, prophetic, prove, proved, proven, provoke, public, pure, question, questions, quickly, quote, raining, rea, reaction, real, reason, reasons, received, recruiting, red, refused, reilly, religious, remains, remember, removed, represent, response, rest, results, retarded, richard, rick, rio, risk, robert, rock, route, run, sad, safe, san, say, scientists, scoop, scu, secret, seem, sen, senate, sending, sensitive, serve, sessions, set, seymour, seymour hersh, shoo, shooting, shouldn, shut, sick, side, silent, sink, soldiers, son, sorry, speak, speaking, special, standard, star, start, state, stated, steal, stealing, stole, stop, story, stupid, subs, such, suck, sucking, suppressed, sure, take, taken, talking, tas, taste, terms, terrible, testing, tex, text, than, the, the new york times, themselves, theory, they, thing, this, thought, thread, threads, throw, til, time, times, ton, top, tor, torture, total, treason, tribute, troops, tune, u.s. government, une, uni, universe, uranium, url, usual, voted, war, warned, wary, watch, watching, well, when, white, white house, will, wilson, wind, wome, won, world, worshipper, worth, write, wrong, years, york, you, your

View Tag Cloud

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •