Unbelievabl-2 & 3

Voted Worlds #1 Most Loonatic Fanbase

Moderator: Andrew

Postby Rockindeano » Wed Mar 26, 2008 1:57 am

AlteredDNA wrote:
Rockindeano wrote:I don't really care if Hillary lied or not. That is trivial bullshit. Who knows, there may have been the possibility of sniper fire, I mean Hell, it is Iraq you know. But seriously,I guess lying about a sniper fire landing in Baghdad, is much worse than breaching passports, outing CIA agents, and going to war, based on lies. Gotcha. Fuck, my priorities are all fucked up.


1) I believe she was / wasn't taking sniper fire in Bosnia, not Iraq, but I'm sure you just misspoke

2) Breaching FBI files >= breaching passports

3) Who was it that "outed" a CIA agent again? Oh yeah, that neo-con Richard Armitage

4) "Going to war based on lies..." - sigh


Are you Sean Hannity in full spin mode?

Cheney outed Plame and everyone with a fucking brain knows that. They blamed it on Libby, fined him 400K, paid his fine, and commuted his sentence. Brilliantly played I must say. Quell the dissenting voice, shuffle and muddy up the blame; no harm no foul.

Yes, Berger did breach FBI files, no argument here.

Um, hate to break it you, but Iraq is a lie.

Yes, I did misspeak. Believe it or not, McCain last week was tripping up all over himself, calling the Sunnis Shiites and saying Iraq when he should have said Iran. It took Leiberman to lean in and correct him. I know McCain knows who's on the ground. It happens (misspeaks) to everyone.
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby AlteredDNA » Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:07 am

Rockindeano wrote:
AlteredDNA wrote:
Rockindeano wrote:I don't really care if Hillary lied or not. That is trivial bullshit. Who knows, there may have been the possibility of sniper fire, I mean Hell, it is Iraq you know. But seriously,I guess lying about a sniper fire landing in Baghdad, is much worse than breaching passports, outing CIA agents, and going to war, based on lies. Gotcha. Fuck, my priorities are all fucked up.


1) I believe she was / wasn't taking sniper fire in Bosnia, not Iraq, but I'm sure you just misspoke

2) Breaching FBI files >= breaching passports

3) Who was it that "outed" a CIA agent again? Oh yeah, that neo-con Richard Armitage

4) "Going to war based on lies..." - sigh


Are you Sean Hannity in full spin mode?

Cheney outed Plame and everyone with a fucking brain knows that. They blamed it on Libby, fined him 400K, paid his fine, and commuted his sentence. Brilliantly played I must say. Quell the dissenting voice, shuffle and muddy up the blame; no harm no foul.

Yes, Berger did breach FBI files, no argument here.

Um, hate to break it you, but Iraq is a lie.

Yes, I did misspeak. Believe it or not, McCain last week was tripping up all over himself, calling the Sunnis Shiites and saying Iraq when he should have said Iran. It took Leiberman to lean in and correct him. I know McCain knows who's on the ground. It happens (misspeaks) to everyone.


Sorry - don't listen to Sean Hannity

You couldn't be more wrong about the Plame issue. Libby was not found guilty of "outing" Valerie Plame. The facts are clear that Armitage is the one that gave Bob Novak the name

Misspeaking is understandable. Hillary stating on more than one occassion that she took sniper fire in Bosnia is not misspeaking - it's called a lie...
I Love Pineapple!!!
User avatar
AlteredDNA
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 2171
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:08 am
Location: Baton Rouge

Postby Saint John » Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:07 am

Rockindeano wrote:
Fact Finder wrote:Btw Hill, a million words a day works out to 695 words a minute. That's without sleep. At 16 hours in a working day that is 1042 words per minute. I know she talks alot and most of those words are "well, you, know, and I, it just seems impossible. She's gotta eat sometime.


Dude, I can do that. Ask Dan.


Yes, Dean can do this...if not more!!! :lol: :P
User avatar
Saint John
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 21723
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 1:31 pm
Location: Uranus

Postby Rockindeano » Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:09 am

PS- Only Lie Finder would actually do the fucking math on that! Jesus Christ :roll: :twisted: 8)
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby Rockindeano » Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:12 am

AlteredDNA wrote:
Rockindeano wrote:
AlteredDNA wrote:
Rockindeano wrote:I don't really care if Hillary lied or not. That is trivial bullshit. Who knows, there may have been the possibility of sniper fire, I mean Hell, it is Iraq you know. But seriously,I guess lying about a sniper fire landing in Baghdad, is much worse than breaching passports, outing CIA agents, and going to war, based on lies. Gotcha. Fuck, my priorities are all fucked up.


1) I believe she was / wasn't taking sniper fire in Bosnia, not Iraq, but I'm sure you just misspoke

2) Breaching FBI files >= breaching passports

3) Who was it that "outed" a CIA agent again? Oh yeah, that neo-con Richard Armitage

4) "Going to war based on lies..." - sigh


Are you Sean Hannity in full spin mode?

Cheney outed Plame and everyone with a fucking brain knows that. They blamed it on Libby, fined him 400K, paid his fine, and commuted his sentence. Brilliantly played I must say. Quell the dissenting voice, shuffle and muddy up the blame; no harm no foul.

Yes, Berger did breach FBI files, no argument here.

Um, hate to break it you, but Iraq is a lie.

Yes, I did misspeak. Believe it or not, McCain last week was tripping up all over himself, calling the Sunnis Shiites and saying Iraq when he should have said Iran. It took Leiberman to lean in and correct him. I know McCain knows who's on the ground. It happens (misspeaks) to everyone.


Sorry - don't listen to Sean Hannity

You couldn't be more wrong about the Plame issue. Libby was not found guilty of "outing" Valerie Plame. The facts are clear that Armitage is the one that gave Bob Novak the name

Misspeaking is understandable. Hillary stating on more than one occassion that she took sniper fire in Bosnia is not misspeaking - it's called a lie...


You can tell me I'm wrong on the Plame ordeal, but that's because it was orchestrated to muddy up the waters. I guarantee you Armitage wil be fine, as is Libby and of course your brilliant VP will have smooth sailing right into the sunset of his evil fucking life. I hate that motherfucker. I wish he would fly one of those John Denver planes into the Enchanted Forest one dark moon less evening.
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby Saint John » Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:31 am

Going over a few articles and I was reminded about some old findings (I'll get back to Dean's original question later):

Former President Bill Clinton has stated on several occasions that he did not take advantage of opportunities to capture Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and bring him to the US because he had no legal authority to do so. According to Clinton, bin Laden had not committed any crime for which he could be arrested. However, Clinton's statement is either a lapse in memory or his statement is an out-and-out fabrication.

FACT: On November 5, 1998, A federal grand jury in New York City delivered an indictment against Osama bin Laden accusing him of engaging in a long-term conspiracy to attack US facilities overseas and to kill American citizens whenever possible. The federal indictment alleged that Al-Qaeda, Bin Laden's international terrorist group had allied itself with the National Islamic Front in Sudan, with the government of Iran, and with the Iranian created terrorist group Hezbollah to "work together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States."

In addition, the indictment describes Al-Qaeda's agreement with Iraq not to work against the regime of Saddam Hussein and that they would work cooperatively with Iraq, particularly in weapons development.

Bin Laden should have been hunted down then and there. A federal indictment allows two police officers or 50,000 Marines to make an arrest.

The United States had an indictment against Osama bin Laden and for more than two years during the Clinton Administration and eight months during the Bush Administration no serious attempt was made to capture the Al-Qaeda leader. However, Clinton claims he turned over a detailed counterterrorism strategy to the Bush White House which he says they ignored. But in a press conference in 2002, Richard Clark, whom Clinton cites as someone who knew he was serious about fighting terrorism, told reporters that there was never any strategy transfer from Clinton to Bush.

Also, the Director of the FBI under Clinton, Louis Freeh, maintains that Clinton's dealings with the Saudi's — dealings that should have been about terrorists — were more about garnering donations for the Clinton Library.
User avatar
Saint John
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 21723
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 1:31 pm
Location: Uranus

Postby Tomulator » Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:40 am

Fact Finder wrote:
love that CNN dont you... if it were from FOX News, Dean would call you a liar.. :wink:



Yeah, I love the way the libs ignored this Hillary episode yesterday. Now that it's all over the News they try an end run with distortions and half-truths. (ie..scumbag State Dept.. read Bush)

I wear the Lie Finder tag proudly today Deano. I found Hills lies and posted them here for you guys. Consider it a public service. :lol:


As always Fact Finder...you are my HERO!

:lol:
"I was merely probing the patient for muscle tone and skeletal girth. We mock what we don't understand."
User avatar
Tomulator
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 10:37 am
Location: Anywhere I happen to be...

Postby Tomulator » Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:48 am

Rockindeano wrote:I don't really care if Hillary lied or not. That is trivial bullshit. Who knows, there may have been the possibility of sniper fire, I mean Hell, it is Iraq you know. But seriously,I guess lying about a sniper fire landing in Baghdad, is much worse than breaching passports, outing CIA agents, and going to war, based on lies. Gotcha. Fuck, my priorities are all fucked up.



Yeah...we all know the Clintons think LYING is a TRIVIAL thing and just standard operating procedure.

:roll:

Dean...come on over to the RIGHT...it won't hurt!

:lol:
"I was merely probing the patient for muscle tone and skeletal girth. We mock what we don't understand."
User avatar
Tomulator
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 10:37 am
Location: Anywhere I happen to be...

Postby conversationpc » Wed Mar 26, 2008 3:44 am

Saint John wrote:Going over a few articles and I was reminded about some old findings (I'll get back to Dean's original question later):

Former President Bill Clinton has stated on several occasions that he did not take advantage of opportunities to capture Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and bring him to the US because he had no legal authority to do so. According to Clinton, bin Laden had not committed any crime for which he could be arrested. However, Clinton's statement is either a lapse in memory or his statement is an out-and-out fabrication.

FACT: On November 5, 1998, A federal grand jury in New York City delivered an indictment against Osama bin Laden accusing him of engaging in a long-term conspiracy to attack US facilities overseas and to kill American citizens whenever possible. The federal indictment alleged that Al-Qaeda, Bin Laden's international terrorist group had allied itself with the National Islamic Front in Sudan, with the government of Iran, and with the Iranian created terrorist group Hezbollah to "work together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States."

In addition, the indictment describes Al-Qaeda's agreement with Iraq not to work against the regime of Saddam Hussein and that they would work cooperatively with Iraq, particularly in weapons development.

Bin Laden should have been hunted down then and there. A federal indictment allows two police officers or 50,000 Marines to make an arrest.

The United States had an indictment against Osama bin Laden and for more than two years during the Clinton Administration and eight months during the Bush Administration no serious attempt was made to capture the Al-Qaeda leader. However, Clinton claims he turned over a detailed counterterrorism strategy to the Bush White House which he says they ignored. But in a press conference in 2002, Richard Clark, whom Clinton cites as someone who knew he was serious about fighting terrorism, told reporters that there was never any strategy transfer from Clinton to Bush.

Also, the Director of the FBI under Clinton, Louis Freeh, maintains that Clinton's dealings with the Saudi's — dealings that should have been about terrorists — were more about garnering donations for the Clinton Library.


And a hush falls over the left-wing audience. :lol:
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Postby AlteredDNA » Wed Mar 26, 2008 3:47 am

conversationpc wrote:And a hush falls over the left-wing audience. :lol:


It did get awful quiet, didn't it...

They must be all out signing their Democrat Loyalty Pledges...
I Love Pineapple!!!
User avatar
AlteredDNA
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 2171
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:08 am
Location: Baton Rouge

Postby Rockindeano » Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:03 am

AlteredDNA wrote:
conversationpc wrote:And a hush falls over the left-wing audience. :lol:


It did get awful quiet, didn't it...

They must be all out signing their Democrat Loyalty Pledges...


LOL, I told you all I was into reading erotica books.

Jesus, give a boy a break.
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby AlteredDNA » Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:07 am

Rockindeano wrote:
AlteredDNA wrote:
conversationpc wrote:And a hush falls over the left-wing audience. :lol:


It did get awful quiet, didn't it...

They must be all out signing their Democrat Loyalty Pledges...


LOL, I told you all I was into reading erotica books.

Jesus, give a boy a break.


Democrat Loyalty Pledges=erotica books? :)

Appears that they do in New York, New Jersey and Detroit... :wink:
I Love Pineapple!!!
User avatar
AlteredDNA
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 2171
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:08 am
Location: Baton Rouge

Postby conversationpc » Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:09 am

Rockindeano wrote:
AlteredDNA wrote:
conversationpc wrote:And a hush falls over the left-wing audience. :lol:


It did get awful quiet, didn't it...

They must be all out signing their Democrat Loyalty Pledges...


LOL, I told you all I was into reading erotica books.

Jesus, give a boy a break.


I hope you washed up before you started typing again. :lol: :wink:
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Re: Unbelievabl-2 & 3

Postby BobbyinTN » Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:11 am

Rockindeano wrote:Unbelievable-2

I see Lie Finder is all over a piece in which Hillary fucked up and misspoke.

What Lie Finder should be entitling is the blatant scumbag way the State Dept breached the Passports of Obama, Clinton and McCain. But no, no comment on that episode.

Unbelievable-3.

How about asshole Rush Limbaugh directing his minions(brain dead followers), to vote for Hillary in Ohio. One problem. Once you sign up for the Democratic Party, you promise to take on their ideals and convictions. People lied and laughed it off. What exactly is this? Well, it's typical scumbag GOP tactics but more importantly it's possibly and probably voter fraud. Congratulations Rush.

That's what's truly UNBELIEVABLE.


Man, they're scared to DEATH of Hillary. They have to dog her so they feel better.

If we took on every lie or even embellishment by candidates throughout history, we'd never finish typing.
User avatar
BobbyinTN
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1431
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 2:12 am

Re: Oh Shit!

Postby Gin and Tonic Sky » Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:32 am

Fact Finder wrote:Ha! I found out what the moonbats are up to....lookout....fire in the hole!!!

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/03/21/politics/horserace/entry3957522.shtml


Group Looks To Re-Create Bloody 1968 Chicago Democratic Convention In Denver

Will Denver '08 bring up memories of Chicago '68?

It will if a group called Re-create 68 have anything to say about it. The group is promising "demonstrations that will rival those at the bloody 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago" at the August's Democratic National Convention in Denver, according to the Rocky Mountain News.

The Re-create 68 Alliance is upset that a permit for the Civic Center, a "spacious plaza" that "has been used for major public events and celebrations representing the diversity and cultural heritage of Colorado and Denver," according to the city of Denver's Web site, went to the Denver 2008 Convention Host Committee following a redraw for permits during the convention.

"When things blow up because the police have to enforce a permit that the Democrats got, don’t blame us for that," Glenn Spagnuolo, an organizer for the group, told the News.

The Host Committee points out that it is not the same as the Democratic National Committee, but Re-create 68 says Democrats are "trying to silence dissent in the city of Denver."

The group, which claims 50,000 protesters will join them in August, has vowed to march from Civic Center to the Pepsi Center (where the convention is being held) on August 24th, permit or no



I guess some of us hippies grew up. Others are still lost in the past.

Time for some

Image


Re-Create 68- :?: Its actually a secret crack team which is being formed to save Hillary from Obama.
Re Create 68 is just a cover name Its real name is the R.R.R.R.R (Rescue Rodham in the Rockies from her Recent Rodding) :D
Matt
User avatar
Gin and Tonic Sky
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1926
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:46 am
Location: in a purple and gold haze

Postby RossValoryRocks » Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:45 am

Ok...I give up...I can't support any major party candidate now...

I think I will just write in Deano's name.

Or hell...I am old enough...I will write in my own name.
User avatar
RossValoryRocks
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 4:47 pm

Postby AlteredDNA » Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:52 am

Fact Finder wrote:Anybody want a real good laugh. Check out this video from 60 Minutes when the first lady said....

"voters are tired of people that lie to them", "You know, there are ten commandments, not one. And one of them is, ‘Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.’"


Video linked here: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham ... o-lie-them


And the hits just keep on coming. Who knew that Hilliary could provide this much entertainment? It's better than TV! :lol:


It's HLTV...
I Love Pineapple!!!
User avatar
AlteredDNA
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 2171
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:08 am
Location: Baton Rouge

Postby Gin and Tonic Sky » Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:57 am

AlteredDNA wrote:
Fact Finder wrote:Anybody want a real good laugh. Check out this video from 60 Minutes when the first lady said....

"voters are tired of people that lie to them", "You know, there are ten commandments, not one. And one of them is, ‘Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.’"


Video linked here: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham ... o-lie-them


And the hits just keep on coming. Who knew that Hilliary could provide this much entertainment? It's better than TV! :lol:


It's HLTV...


Is there any porno's on HLTV?. God Id hate to think what them videos would look like. You'd have to pay people to watch.... Oh Ick!!, forget I mentioned it.
Last edited by Gin and Tonic Sky on Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
Matt
User avatar
Gin and Tonic Sky
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1926
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:46 am
Location: in a purple and gold haze

Postby Gin and Tonic Sky » Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:03 am

Fact Finder wrote:Oh hell, the Daily Presidential Tracking poll.....

Looking ahead to the General Election in November, John McCain continues to lead both potential Democratic opponents. McCain leads Barack Obama 50% to 41% and Hillary Clinton 49% to 42%.

On Monday, McCain is viewed favorably by 55% of voters nationwide and unfavorably by 42%. Obama’s reviews are 46% favorable and 52% unfavorable. For Clinton, those numbers are 42% favorable, 55% unfavorable (see recent daily results).


No suicides on the board gang. It's all in fun. All will be ok. :wink:

Anyone seen Enigma and Brywool and TNC? I swear I saw them running around here recently. Maybe they just missed these threads. :lol:


Ah, well it looks like the libs are hiding, all out gunned. Hey guys, for a price (a big one, Im an evil capitalist sympathiser u know) , I do a Benedict Arnold and help you guys out. I can do this , really. Alls you need is wildly emotional, romanticised arguments, a distain for cold hard facts, anger , bitterness, and a healty dose of class warfare! To paraphrase your hero B.O - "I can do it"! Yes I can

I can do this if you need me. Just one condition. I dont get involved in dogging out Ronald Reagan or Jesus. I love them guys! Thats it, anything else goes ! :D
Call me if you need me !
Last edited by Gin and Tonic Sky on Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
Matt
User avatar
Gin and Tonic Sky
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1926
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:46 am
Location: in a purple and gold haze

Postby MJM1959 » Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:05 am

For Your Reading Pleasure. Five Years of John McCain and Iraq! A Reign of Error.

On the Run-Up to War

"Look, we're going to send young men and women in harm's way and that's always a great danger, but I cannot believe that there is an Iraqi soldier who is going to be willing to die for Saddam Hussein, particularly since he will know that our objective is to remove Saddam Hussein from power."
John McCain, September 15, 2002.

"But the fact is, I think we could go in with much smaller numbers than we had to do in the past. But any military man worth his salt is going to have to prepare for any contingency, but I don't believe it's going to be nearly the size and scope that it was in 1991."
John McCain, September 15, 2002.

"He's a patriot who has the best interests of his country at heart."
John McCain, on Ahmed Chalabi, 2003.

On Saddam's Weapons of Mass Destruction

"Proponents of containment claim that Iraq is in a "box." But it is a box with no lid, no bottom, and whose sides are falling out. Within this box are definitive footprints of germ, chemical and nuclear programs."
John McCain, February 13, 2003.

"I remain confident that we will find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq."
John McCain, June 11, 2003.

On Being Greeted as Liberators

"Absolutely. Absolutely."
John McCain, asked by Chris Matthews, "you believe that the people of Iraq or at least a large number of them will treat us as liberators?" March 12, 2003.

"Not only that, they'll be relieved that he's not in the neighborhood because he has invaded his neighbors on several occasions."
John McCain, asked by Chris Matthews, "And you think the Arab world will come to a grudging recognition that what we did was necessary?" March 12, 2003.

"There's no doubt in my mind that we will prevail and there's no doubt in my mind, once these people are gone, that we will be welcomed as liberators."
John McCain, March 24, 2003.

On a Rapid Victory and Mission Accomplished

"I think the victory will be rapid, within about three weeks."
John McCain, January 28, 2003.

"It's clear that the end is very much in sight...It won't be long. It, it'll be a fairly short period of time."
John McCain, April 9, 2003.

"Well, then why was there a banner that said mission accomplished on the aircraft carrier?"
John McCain, responding to assertion by Fox News' Neil Cavuto that "many argue the conflict isn't over," June 11, 2003.

"I have said a long time that reconstruction of Iraq would be a long, long, difficult process, but the conflict -- the major conflict is over, the regime change has been accomplished, and it's very appropriate."
John McCain, June 11, 2003.

"I'm confident we're on the right course."
John McCain, March 7, 2004.

"We're either going to lose this thing or win this thing within the next several months."
John McCain, November 12, 2006.

"My friends, the war will be over soon, the war for all intents and purposes although the insurgency will go on for years and years and years."
John McCain, February 25, 2008.

On the Safe Streets of Baghdad

"[There] there "are neighborhoods in Baghdad where you and I could walk through those neighborhoods, today."
John McCain, after touring a Baghdad market wearing a bulletproof vest and guarded by "100 American soldiers, with three Blackhawk helicopters, and two Apache gunships overhead, April 1, 2007.

"There's problems in America with safe neighborhoods as we well know."
John McCain, March 8, 2008.

On President Bush and His Team

"We are very fortunate that our president in these challenging days can rely on the counsel of a man who has demonstrated time and again the resolve, experience, and patriotism that will be required for success and the hard-headed clear thinking necessary to prevail in this global fight between good and evil."
John McCain, on Dick Cheney, July 16, 2004.

"I think he strengthened our national defenses. I think he has a good team around him."
John McCain, on President Bush, September 3, 2004.

"I said no. My answer is still no. No confidence."
John McCain, on whether he had confidence in Bush Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, December 15, 2004.

On a Permanent American Military Presence in Iraq

"We cannot keep our forces indefinitely staged in the region. Were we to attempt again to contain Saddam, we would eventually have to withdraw them. The world is full of dangers and, more likely than not, we will need some of those brave men and women to face them down."
John McCain, February 13, 2003.

"We have had troops in South Korea for 60 years and nobody minds."
John McCain, June 7, 2007.

"Make it a hundred."
John McCain, told that President Bush had said American troops could remain in Iraq for 50 years, January 3, 2008.

"I asked McCain about his 'hundred years' comment, and he reaffirmed the remark, excitedly declaring that U.S. troops could be in Iraq for 'a thousand years' or 'a million years,' as far as he was concerned."
David Corn, January 3, 2008.

"The U.S. could have a military presence anywhere in the world for a long period of time."
John McCain, February 20, 2008.
MJM1959
Ol' 78
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 2:31 am

Postby conversationpc » Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:10 am

MJM1959 wrote:For Your Reading Pleasure. Five Years of John McCain and Iraq! A Reign of Error.

On the Run-Up to War...


Have you seen the list of inaccurate statements about the war, WMDs, and other related items from the likes of Bill & Hillary, John Kerry, and other leading libs?
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Postby Rockindeano » Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:29 am

Looking ahead to the General Election in November, John McCain continues to lead both potential Democratic opponents. McCain leads Barack Obama 50% to 41% and Hillary Clinton 49% to 42%.

On Monday, McCain is viewed favorably by 55% of voters nationwide and unfavorably by 42%. Obama’s reviews are 46% favorable and 52% unfavorable. For Clinton, those numbers are 42% favorable, 55% unfavorable (see recent daily results).


No suicides on the board gang. It's all in fun. All will be ok. :wink:

Anyone seen Enigma and Brywool and TNC? I swear I saw them running around here recently. Maybe they just missed these threads. :lol:


LOL, it's all Electoral Math dickweeder.
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby MJM1959 » Wed Mar 26, 2008 6:10 am

conversationpc wrote:
MJM1959 wrote:For Your Reading Pleasure. Five Years of John McCain and Iraq! A Reign of Error.

On the Run-Up to War...


Have you seen the list of inaccurate statements about the war, WMDs, and other related items from the likes of Bill & Hillary, John Kerry, and other leading libs?

And that makes is better.... how? The problem is that McCain continues to make innaccurate statements. All that matters to him is that he continues to follow that GWB tradition of cowboy diplomacy that is so popular with the Barcalounger Patriot set. The American Presidency has been turned into a poor John Wayne caricature. Swagger and false bravado have replaced sound policy and good judgment. The fact that we maintain an open ended commitment with no clear mission or exit strategy does not matter as long as they continue to appear to be "tough on terror."

Frankly, the fact that McSame has been so wrong so often scares me. What is he going to be wrong about next? He STILL does not know the difference between Shia and Sunni? (But then again, neither did Dubya and neither does the majority of Americans.) I guess knowing the facts about who your enemy is, is insignificant as long as you come off sounding tough while you are doing it.
MJM1959
Ol' 78
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 2:31 am

Postby MJM1959 » Wed Mar 26, 2008 7:51 am

More BS from Johnny Mac.

When asked yesterday how he is offering a different path forward in Iraq than Bush, McCain dodged the question, instead saying he had “no confidence” in Bush until the President implemented the surge in 2007:

I’m offering them the record of having objected strenuously to a failed strategy for nearly four years. That I argued against and fought against and said that the secretary of defense of my own party, and my own president, I had no confidence in. That’s how far I went in advocating the new strategy that is succeeding.

McCain’s statement stretches the truth. As late as August 2006, McCain declared that he did have “confidence” in Bush’s leadership in Iraq:

Q: Do you, do you have confidence in the president and his national security team to lead the war at this stage?
McCAIN: I do. I do. I have confidence in the President and I believe that he is well aware of the severity of the situation. [Meet The Press, 8/20/06]

McCain told reporters yesterday he “objected strenuously to a failed strategy for nearly four years.” If this were the case, why would he also praise Bush’s “stay the course” message over that time?

– “I was heartened to hear the President say that we cannot cut and run in Iraq.” [Press Release, 11/5/03]

– “I’m confident we’re on the right course.” [ABC News, 3/7/04]

– “And what the president did tonight is the most important thing. He laid out an articulate vision for victory in Iraq and why we need to stay the course.” [Fox, 6/28/05]

McCain can try as much as he wants to distance himself from Bush on Iraq, but as the President observed just weeks ago, “he’s not going to change when it comes to taking on the enemy.”
MJM1959
Ol' 78
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 2:31 am

Postby MJM1959 » Wed Mar 26, 2008 7:54 am

Fact Finder wrote:
For Your Reading Pleasure. Five Years of John McCain and Iraq! A Reign of Error.



I don't have too much a problem with most of those quotes. Some are over the top and some were said so early into this conflict that upon reflection neither the Dems or Pubs clearly knew the facts on the ground. I don't see any outright/bold faced lies in these quotes.
[/quote]I have a MAJOR problem with taking a country to war because you do not have the facts. There was no justification for invading a soverign country that posed absolutely no imminent threat to us. Especially when it had no ties to 9/11 and especially when we were already engaged in Afghanistan.
MJM1959
Ol' 78
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 2:31 am

Postby Gin and Tonic Sky » Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:05 am

MJM1959 wrote:
conversationpc wrote:
MJM1959 wrote:For Your Reading Pleasure. Five Years of John McCain and Iraq! A Reign of Error.

On the Run-Up to War...


Have you seen the list of inaccurate statements about the war, WMDs, and other related items from the likes of Bill & Hillary, John Kerry, and other leading libs?

And that makes is better.... how? The problem is tMcCain continues to make innaccurate statements.
Frankly, the fact that McSame has been so wrong so often scares me. What is he going to be wrong about next? He STILL does not know the difference between Shia and Sunni? .


I've seen McCain speak live several time in the past year, a few times standing no farther than fifteen feet away from him. Theres nothing incoherent or confused, or seemingly in accurate about what he says. I find it hard to believe given his apparent clear command of the facts.

I presume you are refferring to the Al Qaeda / Iran "mis statement". Im not so sure that it was a misstatement. I think hes in fact way far out ahead of everybody on this issue, and the real issue is that no one in Washington is telling the truth about it. He should stick by these statements and raise the issue, but I presume his retractions may have do to with the fact that its official diplomatic policy not to currently make an issue of all this stuff (no inside knowledge here by the way just my opinon) BUT , I bet you find out that Mac is right again

These are the facts :
In compiling that exhaustive report, the 9/11 Commission interviewed over 1,000 people from at least 10 countries. Among the conclusions that they reached regarding Iran and al-Qaeda:

2) In late 1991 or early 1992, in meetings held in Sudan, Iran agreed to train al-Qaeda operatives. Not long afterwards, al-Qaeda terrorists traveled to Iran and received training in explosives. Subsequent to this, al-Qaeda terrorists also traveled to Lebanon’s Bekaa Valley, where they received training from Iranian Revolutionary Guards.

3) Once Osama Bin Laden moved from Sudan to Afghanistan and established terrorist training camps there, Iran facilitated the transit of jihadists to al-Qaeda training camps via Iran. Among other things, Iran did not stamp their passports when they passed through Iran on their way to Afghanistan. This made it impossible for countries to know when someone had attended a training camp in Afghanistan because there was no record. This policy particularly benefited Saudi members of al-Qaeda, and the Commission reported that 8 to 10 of the Saudi 9-11 hijackers had transited through Iran.

4)The Commission said that intelligence reports indicated continued contacts between al-Qaeda and Iranian officials after Bin Laden had moved back to Afghanistan and it recommended that the U.S. government further investigate the ties between al-Qaeda and Iran.

5) Other reports have reinforced the 9/11 Commission’s findings of al-Qaeda/Iran cooperation in Iraq:

6) In November 2006, England’s Telegraph newspaper reported Western intelligence agencies as saying that Iran was training al-Qaeda operatives in Tehran and also that Iran had “always maintained close relations with al-Qaeda” despite differences between their Shiite and Sunni philosophies.

7) In January 2007, Eli Lake reported in the New York Sun that U.S. forces had captured documents detailing Iranian activities in Iraq, including the fact that Iran’s infamous Revolutionary Guards Quds Force was working with al-Qaeda there.

8)In May 2007, as reported by Bill Roggio at The Weekly Standard’s website, coalition forces captured a courier carrying messages from al-Qaeda in Iraq leaders to senior al-Qaeda leaders who have long been in safe haven in Iran, including Osama Bin Laden’s son, Said Bin Laden.

9)Also in May 2007, England’s Guardian newspaper reported that Iran was secretly forging ties with al-Qaeda elements in Iraq in an attempt to launch a summer offensive that would prompt Congress to vote for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq.

10) In July 2007, the Financial Times reported that “western officials” said that Iranian territory was being used as a base by al-Qaeda for terrorist operations in Iraq.

In October 2007, the Dallas Morning News reported on warnings from Kurds in northern Iraq of Iranian support for an al-Qaeda affiliate, Ansar al-Islam, in their region of Iraq.

In February 2008, Muhamad Abdullah al-Shahwani, the chief of the Iraqi Intelligence Service, and Tamir Al-Tamimi, an advisor to the Iraqi Awakening Councils (a key component in the success of the U.S. counterinsurgency strategy), told the Iraqi news service, Azzaman, that Iran was targeting the Awakening Councils with al-Qaeda.

Most of the skepticism over Iranian involvement with al-Qaeda has centered around the fact that Iran is ruled by a Shia Islamic theocracy, whereas al-Qaeda is a Sunni Wahhabi Islamic group. Many are under the mistaken belief that Shiites and Sunnis are irreconcilable arch enemies and will never work with each other. This quaint notion flies in the face of reality.

There are at least three other major examples of Iranian cooperation with militant Sunni organizations besides al-Qaeda:

Hamas is a Sunni Palestinian jihadist terrorist organization. Both Hamas and Iran have acknowledged publicly that, at the very least, Iran funds Hamas. The most recent reports out of Israel indicate that Hamas has personnel training in Iran.

In January 2007, Iran and Sudan, a mostly Sunni nation, exchanged military delegations and subsequently announced a military accord for mutual training, education, and technical cooperation. At the signing ceremony, the speaker of the Iranian parliament, Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, said that Iran’s and Sudan’s mutual enemies were “focused on a strategy of disintegrating the Islamic states by stirring up sectarian conflict between Shiite and Sunni Muslims” and that "the only way to foil the satanic plot is strengthening unity among Muslim nations.”

The Sudanese delegate, Sudanese defense minister Abdelrahim Mohamed Hussein, responded that he appreciated Iran’s role in helping foster solidarity among Muslim nations and said that the Islamic Revolution under leadership of the late Imam Khomeini was the greatest event of the century in the Islamic history, because it opened the way for unity between Shiite and Sunni Muslims.

Finally, in November of 2006, a United Nations report included information that Iran had provided the Sunni Islamic Courts in Somalia — a group that has since been linked to al-Qaeda — with “shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles, grenade launchers, machine guns, ammunition, medicine, uniforms and other supplies.” The U.N. report also said that Iran may have sought uranium in Somalia.

So as not to plagarise this is my source
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OG ... jJjNzMwOGY all these facts are verifiabel independently.

THESE are the facts. Much better McCain than the Carter redux Obama. Remeber that administration, where the only person with his head screwed on foreign policy wise was Zginew Brezininski and had to daily put up with the incompetent nonsence of Carter, Hamilton Jordan, Cyrus Vance and Dr Harold Brown. Only this time well get incompetents like General McPeak (who EVERYONE in the Air Force Detested) and a cast of dimwits to be named later
Matt
User avatar
Gin and Tonic Sky
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1926
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:46 am
Location: in a purple and gold haze

Re: Unbelievabl-2 & 3

Postby 7 Wishes » Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:06 pm

Gin and Tonic Sky wrote:imply because -although I dislike Hillary immensely , shes not a total danger to the country - if Obama were to get get elected, it would be worse then James Buchanan, Jimmy Carter, and Ulysses B Grant's presidencies combined and multiplied 25 times over.


Fuck you, you arrogant, self-congratulating asshole. I am so tired of ignoramuses such as you attempting to influence people's opinions with ridiculous assertions such as these.

There is no way in HELL any President could ever again be HALF as bad as W. EVER.

In late 1991 or early 1992, in meetings held in Sudan, Iran agreed to train al-Qaeda operatives. Not long afterwards, al-Qaeda terrorists traveled to Iran and received training in explosives. Subsequent to this, al-Qaeda terrorists also traveled to Lebanon’s Bekaa Valley, where they received training from Iranian Revolutionary Guards.

And this is ALL that can be said that in ANY WAY CONNECTS HUSSEIN TO AL-QUAIDA PRIOR TO THE INVASION.

Of course Al-Quaida has a presence in Iraq POST 9/11. That's because the invasion allowed them to move into and influence a country where they had NO PRESENCE AND INFLUENCE PRIOR TO BUSH'S INVASION.

You are SUCH a dumbass.
But around town, it was well known...when they got home at night
Their fat and psychopathic wives
Would thrash them within inches of their lives!
User avatar
7 Wishes
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4305
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:28 pm

Postby squirt1 » Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:25 pm

Saint John- you get it. Alqueda should have been grabed when the Sudanese offered him on the old silver platter and Clinton looked at it as a legal matter. Now on to MOST politicians. They suffer from OCD and are compulsive liars. You would think by now with all the networks and radio and maybe some papers they could watch their every word corrected by evening. Many countries are having Muslim attacks. That inclues Russia and China. They have threatened the Pope a week ago and see this as a new Crusades. I worry about Europe.
squirt1
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 10:47 am

Re: Unbelievabl-2 & 3

Postby conversationpc » Wed Mar 26, 2008 11:24 pm

7 Wishes wrote:Fuck you, you arrogant, self-congratulating asshole. I am so tired of ignoramuses such as you attempting to influence people's opinions with ridiculous assertions such as these.


Like your side never does this. Get over yourself.

{edit}

OK...That was probably a bit unnecessarily harsh on my part. However, I do find it rather interesting that the liberal side of the political spectrum in this country does the same thing you're getting upset about. If it's okay for your side to do that, why castigate the other side for doing the same thing?
Last edited by conversationpc on Wed Mar 26, 2008 11:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Postby Michigan Girl » Thu Mar 27, 2008 9:10 am

AlteredDNA wrote:
Rockindeano wrote:
AlteredDNA wrote:
conversationpc wrote:And a hush falls over the left-wing audience. :lol:


It did get awful quiet, didn't it...

They must be all out signing their Democrat Loyalty Pledges...


LOL, I told you all I was into reading erotica books.

Jesus, give a boy a break.


Democrat Loyalty Pledges=erotica books? :)

Appears that they do in New York, New Jersey and Detroit... :wink:


And don't forget our colorful and horny LA. politicians...hell, they even make movies about some of them!!! :wink:
Michigan Girl
MP3
 
Posts: 13963
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 8:36 am

PreviousNext

Return to Journey

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests