Lifestyle > Train of Thought
Who won 2nite
Maradona:
--- Quote from: Machiavelli on July 27, 2004, 10:29:12 PM ---
--- Quote ---so what if bush was misinformed. what kind of fucking excuse is that? thats a poor excuse that shouldn't stand. If your son or daughter was killed in the war, would you accept that? I sure fuckin wouldn't. Bush is the President. That is a huge responsibility. Saying you are misinformed does not cut it in my book. you think that would ever hold up in court?
--- End quote ---
What would you do if the CIA, Brittan Intelligence, and Russian Intelligence were saying that there were WMDs in Iraq? Your the President of the United States of America, you would not act to go to Iraq?
--- Quote ---Oh, Judge, well I shot the man in the head and killed him, because everybody told me that he was out to kill me. I mean, he never personally threatened me, but all my best friends said that he wanted to kill me. So I just acted in my best interest and killed him. Its not my fault, I was just misinformed.
--- End quote ---
LOL..We are talking about the president here. Thats Apples and Oranges
Also I agree with you that Bush should go out in public and say that Iraq war to find WMDs was a mistake - due to bad intelligence from his sources.
--- End quote ---
Alright, so since Bush is so quick to take action, why the fuck didn't he take those terrorist attack warnings serious? Why did he ignore them?
Also, why the fuck did Bush tell his staff TO COME UP WITH AKA MAKE UP REASONS that would explain Iraq's involvement/ties to Al Qaeda? That's much worse than a liar. He fuckin told them to LIE so that he could give us a reasonable excuse to kill thousands of innocent people, remove Saddam, set a puppet government in place, and make his friends rich. The guy is scum and deserves to rot in hell.
Machiavelli:
--- Quote ---Alright, so since Bush is so quick to take action, why the fuck didn't he take those terrorist attack warnings serious? Why did he ignore them?
--- End quote ---
I guess because he wasn't aware of the warnings, only the CIA knew, which was so fucked up at the time, they probably ignored the warnings.
--- Quote ---Also, why the fuck did Bush tell his staff TO COME UP WITH AKA MAKE UP REASONS that would explain Iraq's involvement/ties to Al Qaeda? That's much worse than a liar. He fuckin told them to LIE so that he could give us a reasonable excuse to kill thousands of innocent people, remove Saddam, set a puppet government in place, and make his friends rich. The guy is scum and deserves to rot in hell
--- End quote ---
.
Do you have proof that he told his staff "TO COME UP WITH AKA MAKE UP REASONS that would explain Iraq's involvement/ties to Al Qaeda?"
Maradona:
--- Quote from: Machiavelli on July 27, 2004, 11:04:13 PM ---
--- Quote ---Alright, so since Bush is so quick to take action, why the fuck didn't he take those terrorist attack warnings serious? Why did he ignore them?
--- End quote ---
I guess because he wasn't aware of the warnings, only the CIA knew, which was so fucked up at the time, they probably ignored the warnings.
--- End quote ---
Actually several of them have already stated that they informed the President, so there goes another argument of yours.
--- Quote from: Machiavelli on July 27, 2004, 11:04:13 PM ---
--- Quote ---Also, why the fuck did Bush tell his staff TO COME UP WITH AKA MAKE UP REASONS that would explain Iraq's involvement/ties to Al Qaeda? That's much worse than a liar. He fuckin told them to LIE so that he could give us a reasonable excuse to kill thousands of innocent people, remove Saddam, set a puppet government in place, and make his friends rich. The guy is scum and deserves to rot in hell
--- End quote ---
.
Do you have proof that he told his staff "TO COME UP WITH AKA MAKE UP REASONS that would explain Iraq's involvement/ties to Al Qaeda?"
--- End quote ---
Sure, no problem
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/11/01/bushiraq021101
Vincent Cannistraro, a former CIA chief of counter-terrrorism, says the Bush administration is putting fierce pressure on the CIA to produce evidence about the Iraq al-Qaeda link that it doesn't have.
7even:
why ppl always get sonned and still wont learn from it is beyond me.
to me moore was the winner, but I dont give him credits, since Imo every dude with a least one pound of a brain can bash a dude that is supporting the actions of the bush administration. it doesnt take too much, it's fuckin clear and obvious and even most of the supportes know it, Im sure.
Jay ay Beee:
I thought Moore won, because the only argument O'Reilly had was the one about "he didn't lie".
He kept using the investigation reports as evidence but - the Russian one isn't worth talking about - they are shady.
The British reports were laughed at in this country because they were percieved at reports that were just trying to protect the establishment.
Bush lied about the Al Quaida connection - he deliberately tried to influence the public to think Saddam was involved in 9/11 and somehow - it worked because at one time a majority of Americans believed he was involved. The British plagiarised a 13 year old PHD essay and used that as their main evidence.
There is no direct moment when you can say "thats a lie". But Bush and Blair both knew the evidence was very, very shaky. Yet they still talked as if there was no doubt the weapons existed.
There is no doubt they mislead the public.
On a side note I was really impressed by Moore, I didn't think he would be any good but he mutilated O'Reilly. I loved it when O'Reilly wouldn't answer about sending kids to secure Fallujah and only said he would go himself and Moore was like "Quick when can we get him there!"
Moore wins.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version