Ivoted for Bush in 00 and 04!

[rushmc 23]

>Are you Rushmc under an alias?

No, but if you feel the need to insult him I like him already.

Oh, and once again, WMDs were not the only justification, SH was keeping his nuclear and WMD program alive even if he did not have any at the time.

Oh, and Wilson flat lied and the 911 comission said as much.

Just needed to throw that in there for good measure

But you can keep trying to rewrite history to fit your world veiw if you like......it is fun to watch

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

Apparently yes, in NYC -- case in point: Amadou Diallo. Cops got off.

See if you can spot the glaring difference between Bilvon's scenario:

"But if you say "I don't have a gun!" don't show a gun, and have no proof that you don't have a gun, and the cop shoots you - think he's in the right?"

and this Wikipedia bit on Amadou Diallo:

"As the suspect reached into his jacket, Officer Carroll believed Diallo was drawing a firearm and yelled "Gun!" to alert his colleagues. The officers opened fire on Diallo and during the burst Officer McMellon fell down the steps, appearing to be shot."

Still think you have a valid "case in point"?

. . =(_8^(1)

[kallend 2,038]

Quote

Quote

Apparently yes, in NYC -- case in point: Amadou Diallo. Cops got off.

See if you can spot the glaring difference between Bilvon's scenario:

"But if you say "I don't have a gun!" don't show a gun, and have no proof that you don't have a gun, and the cop shoots you - think he's in the right?"

and this Wikipedia bit on Amadou Diallo:

"As the suspect reached into his jacket, Officer Carroll believed Diallo was drawing a firearm and yelled "Gun!" to alert his colleagues. The officers opened fire on Diallo and during the burst Officer McMellon fell down the steps, appearing to be shot."

Still think you have a valid "case in point"?

Yes.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,038]

Quote

>Are you Rushmc under an alias?

No, but if you feel the need to insult him I like him already.

Oh, and once again, WMDs were not the only justification, SH was keeping his nuclear and WMD program alive even if he did not have any at the time.

Pie in the sky wishes for the future are not, repeat NOT, the same as "imminent threat", "immediate danger", and "will be able to attack the US with only 45 minutes notice". "Threat of unique urgency"...

Sadly for you revisionists, the Administration's statements are on-the-record. There's the 2003 SOTU, the Powell speech to the UN, and:

"This is about imminent threat."
• White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 2/10/03

Iraq is "a serious threat to our country, to our friends and to our allies."
• Vice President Dick Cheney, 1/31/03

Iraq poses "terrible threats to the civilized world."
• Vice President Dick Cheney, 1/30/03

Iraq "threatens the United States of America."
• Vice President Cheney, 1/30/03



"Well, of course he is.”
• White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett responding to the question “is Saddam an imminent threat to U.S. interests, either in that part of the world or to Americans right here at home?”, 1/26/03

"Saddam Hussein possesses chemical and biological weapons. Iraq poses a threat to the security of our people and to the stability of the world that is distinct from any other. " Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 1/20/03

"The Iraqi regime is a threat to any American. ... Iraq is a threat, a real threat."
• President Bush, 1/3/03

"The world is also uniting to answer the unique and urgent threat posed by Iraq ."
• President Bush, 11/23/02

"I would look you in the eye and I would say, go back before September 11 and ask yourself this question: Was the attack that took place on September 11 an imminent threat the month before or two months before or three months before or six months before? When did the attack on September 11 become an imminent threat? Now, transport yourself forward a year, two years or a week or a month...So the question is, when is it such an immediate threat that you must do something?"
• Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 11/14/02



"There is real threat, in my judgment, a real and dangerous threat to American in Iraq in the form of Saddam Hussein."
• President Bush, 10/28/02

"The Iraqi regime is a serious and growing threat to peace."
• President Bush, 10/16/02

"There are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists."
• President Bush, 10/7/02

"The Iraqi regime is a threat of unique urgency."
• President Bush, 10/2/02

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

>Are you Rushmc under an alias?

No, but if you feel the need to insult him I like him already.

Oh, and once again, WMDs were not the only justification, SH was keeping his nuclear and WMD program alive even if he did not have any at the time.

Pie in the sky wishes for the future are not, repeat NOT, the same as "imminent threat", "immediate danger", and "will be able to attack the US with only 45 minutes notice". "Threat of unique urgency"...

Sadly for you revisionists, the Administration's statements are on-the-record. There's the 2003 SOTU, the Powell speech to the UN, and:

"This is about imminent threat."
• White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 2/10/03

Iraq is "a serious threat to our country, to our friends and to our allies."
• Vice President Dick Cheney, 1/31/03

Iraq poses "terrible threats to the civilized world."
• Vice President Dick Cheney, 1/30/03

Iraq "threatens the United States of America."
• Vice President Cheney, 1/30/03



"Well, of course he is.”
• White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett responding to the question “is Saddam an imminent threat to U.S. interests, either in that part of the world or to Americans right here at home?”, 1/26/03

"Saddam Hussein possesses chemical and biological weapons. Iraq poses a threat to the security of our people and to the stability of the world that is distinct from any other. " Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 1/20/03

"The Iraqi regime is a threat to any American. ... Iraq is a threat, a real threat."
• President Bush, 1/3/03

"The world is also uniting to answer the unique and urgent threat posed by Iraq ."
• President Bush, 11/23/02

"I would look you in the eye and I would say, go back before September 11 and ask yourself this question: Was the attack that took place on September 11 an imminent threat the month before or two months before or three months before or six months before? When did the attack on September 11 become an imminent threat? Now, transport yourself forward a year, two years or a week or a month...So the question is, when is it such an immediate threat that you must do something?"
• Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 11/14/02



"There is real threat, in my judgment, a real and dangerous threat to American in Iraq in the form of Saddam Hussein."
• President Bush, 10/28/02

"The Iraqi regime is a serious and growing threat to peace."
• President Bush, 10/16/02

"There are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists."
• President Bush, 10/7/02

"The Iraqi regime is a threat of unique urgency."
• President Bush, 10/2/02

Add these names to every quote above.
John Kerry
Ted Kennedy
Bill Clinton
Hillary Clinton
Harry Ried
Chuck Schumer
and on and on and on

Oh, and did I tell you that most of these guys said all of this befor GWB was even running for the nomination

And I never said they did not speak of WMDs all I have said WMDs were not the ONLY reason.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Gravitymaster 0]

Presidents Speech on the Eve of War.

President Bush Addresses the Nation
The Oval Office




President's Remarks

10:16 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: My fellow citizens, at this hour, American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger.

On my orders, coalition forces have begun striking selected targets of military importance to undermine Saddam Hussein's ability to wage war. These are opening stages of what will be a broad and concerted campaign. More than 35 countries are giving crucial support -- from the use of naval and air bases, to help with intelligence and logistics, to the deployment of combat units. Every nation in this coalition has chosen to bear the duty and share the honor of serving in our common defense.

To all the men and women of the United States Armed Forces now in the Middle East, the peace of a troubled world and the hopes of an oppressed people now depend on you. That trust is well placed.

The enemies you confront will come to know your skill and bravery. The people you liberate will witness the honorable and decent spirit of the American military. In this conflict, America faces an enemy who has no regard for conventions of war or rules of morality. Saddam Hussein has placed Iraqi troops and equipment in civilian areas, attempting to use innocent men, women and children as shields for his own military -- a final atrocity against his people.

I want Americans and all the world to know that coalition forces will make every effort to spare innocent civilians from harm. A campaign on the harsh terrain of a nation as large as California could be longer and more difficult than some predict. And helping Iraqis achieve a united, stable and free country will require our sustained commitment.

We come to Iraq with respect for its citizens, for their great civilization and for the religious faiths they practice. We have no ambition in Iraq, except to remove a threat and restore control of that country to its own people.

I know that the families of our military are praying that all those who serve will return safely and soon. Millions of Americans are praying with you for the safety of your loved ones and for the protection of the innocent. For your sacrifice, you have the gratitude and respect of the American people. And you can know that our forces will be coming home as soon as their work is done.

Our nation enters this conflict reluctantly -- yet, our purpose is sure. The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder. We will meet that threat now, with our Army, Air Force, Navy, Coast Guard and Marines, so that we do not have to meet it later with armies of fire fighters and police and doctors on the streets of our cities.

Now that conflict has come, the only way to limit its duration is to apply decisive force. And I assure you, this will not be a campaign of half measures, and we will accept no outcome but victory.


My fellow citizens, the dangers to our country and the world will be overcome. We will pass through this time of peril and carry on the work of peace. We will defend our freedom. We will bring freedom to others and we will prevail.

May God bless our country and all who defend her.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How many times did he mention freeing the Iraqi people and how many times did he mention WMDs?

[narcimund 0]

Quote

How many times did he mention freeing the Iraqi people and how many times did he mention WMDs?

You've got to hand it to th guy; he's got clever propagandists.

Keep it vague, mix up the messages, repeat the day's emotion words endlessly, and lastly, hide in a lot of weasel words just in case.

Top notch!

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[GTAVercetti 0]

This merry-go-round is delightful but I wanted a horsy that moves up and down!

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[kallend 2,038]

The eve of the invasion. Ha Ha.

He'd no further need to persuade anyone by then. The invasion was a done deal at that point. The lies were only needed to get public opinion to support the invasion in the first place. He'd badmouthed Blix and el Baradei (who were proven correct in the end).

You might wish to re-read the claptrap that YOU and other Bush apostles wrote here in early 2003 indicating that you'd swallowed the story lock stock and barrel.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

The eve of the invasion. Ha Ha.

He'd no further need to persuade anyone by then. The invasion was a done deal at that point. The lies were only needed to get public opinion to support the invasion in the first place. He'd badmouthed Blix and el Baradei (who were proven correct in the end).

You might wish to re-read the claptrap that YOU and other Bush apostles wrote here in early 2003 indicating that you'd swallowed the story lock stock and barrel.

Because as best ANYONE knew, it was true

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,038]

Quote

Quote

The eve of the invasion. Ha Ha.

He'd no further need to persuade anyone by then. The invasion was a done deal at that point. The lies were only needed to get public opinion to support the invasion in the first place. He'd badmouthed Blix and el Baradei (who were proven correct in the end).

You might wish to re-read the claptrap that YOU and other Bush apostles wrote here in early 2003 indicating that you'd swallowed the story lock stock and barrel.

Because as best ANYONE knew, it was true

No, there were MANY skeptics, including some of us right here. Pretty much everything Billvon, myself, and Phillykev wrote in the spring of 2003 turned out to be correct. Pretty much everything written by the Bush supporters that spring turned out to be incorrect.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[hairyjuan 0]

has anyone ever read the nuremburg indictment from wwII?

we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively


wishers never choose, choosers never wish

[rushmc 23]

>Pretty much everything written by the Bush supporters that spring turned out to be incorrect

I love the way you generalize.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,038]

Quote

>Pretty much everything written by the Bush supporters that spring turned out to be incorrect

I love the way you generalize.

Go back and read the threads from late 2002 and early 2003. It's all archived. YOU are the guy who tries to reinvent history.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

>Pretty much everything written by the Bush supporters that spring turned out to be incorrect

I love the way you generalize.

Go back and read the threads from late 2002 and early 2003. It's all archived. YOU are the guy who tries to reinvent history.

Hey, I am not disputing you were saying (in this forum) here you were against the war a disputed the reasons. But saying Bush and company's "only" reason to go in Iraq was WMD's is a complete fabrication. Never will be case no matter how many times you say it.

You also can't be honest saying Bush lied about the WMD's when evey other polition in the country and many others countries intelligance orgs (long before Bush was ever recognized as a canidated) had been saying the same thing for what, 10 years.

Say those all you want to try and convince your self but it still will never be true

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[LyraM45 0]

Hopefully more people will think twice before they vote in the 08' election.

I don't want to say a bunch because if I listed all that I didn't like about Bush I would need a A LOT more space to write. Basically, I really hope the constitution is still standing by the time this man is out of office. It's like none of it matters to him. Seperation of church and state for instanc; Once you take away one thing, then the rest of what this country has been founded by can be torn down in a hot new york minute. I just see it all crumbling and I'm scared to death.... I'm getting ready to graduate college and enter into a very unstable situation; the reality market, economy, jobs... I just feel like the bottom is going to fall out soon, no thanks to this butthead.

Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

I just feel like the bottom is going to fall out soon, no thanks to this butthead.

Ohhh, woe is me . . . . . . everything is bad . . . Bush is evil . . . . . . the sky is falling . . . we are all doomed . . . . . .


(theme borrowed from GM

. . =(_8^(1)

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Hopefully more people will think twice before they vote in the 08' election.

I don't want to say a bunch because if I listed all that I didn't like about Bush I would need a A LOT more space to write. Basically, I really hope the constitution is still standing by the time this man is out of office. It's like none of it matters to him. Seperation of church and state for instanc; Once you take away one thing, then the rest of what this country has been founded by can be torn down in a hot new york minute. I just see it all crumbling and I'm scared to death.... I'm getting ready to graduate college and enter into a very unstable situation; the reality market, economy, jobs... I just feel like the bottom is going to fall out soon, no thanks to this butthead.

It seems to me liberal activists judges are the danger. Bush is trying to fix that.

You had better read the church and state thing over again if you think it is headed the wrong way because it was taken an unconstituional way along time ago.

Roe v Wade, is another example. (and I don't want to debate Roe v Wade as all I am talking about it taking power from the states which in this case was against the constitutional process)

Read the Federalist Papers (all of them not just the parts supporting your side) and really take a look at the intentions. If you think the Constitution is a "living breathing " document then you are a danger to the intent of that great document and US.
(I do not know or claim to know you beliefs about this supject)

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,038]

Quote

Quote

Hopefully more people will think twice before they vote in the 08' election.

I don't want to say a bunch because if I listed all that I didn't like about Bush I would need a A LOT more space to write. Basically, I really hope the constitution is still standing by the time this man is out of office. It's like none of it matters to him. Seperation of church and state for instanc; Once you take away one thing, then the rest of what this country has been founded by can be torn down in a hot new york minute. I just see it all crumbling and I'm scared to death.... I'm getting ready to graduate college and enter into a very unstable situation; the reality market, economy, jobs... I just feel like the bottom is going to fall out soon, no thanks to this butthead.

It seems to me liberal activists judges are the danger. Bush is trying to fix that.

Right - we are well on the way to a government that has only a single branch.

And as for your comments about a living breathing document, I suppose you really liked this bit the way it was before those uppity slaves got freed:


Article. IV.

Section. 2.
...

No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,038]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Pretty much everything written by the Bush supporters that spring turned out to be incorrect

I love the way you generalize.

Go back and read the threads from late 2002 and early 2003. It's all archived. YOU are the guy who tries to reinvent history.

Hey, I am not disputing you were saying (in this forum) here you were against the war a disputed the reasons. But saying Bush and company's "only" reason to go in Iraq was WMD's is a complete fabrication. Never will be case no matter how many times you say it.

You also can't be honest saying Bush lied about the WMD's when evey other polition in the country and many others countries intelligance orgs (long before Bush was ever recognized as a canidated) had been saying the same thing for what, 10 years.

Say those all you want to try and convince your self but it still will never be true

The primary excuse for the war was WMDs. The secondary excuse was the purported connection of Iraq with 9/11 (mostly by innuendo). All other reasons were so far down the list as to be invisible.

There is NO WAY ON EARTH that the American and British public would have gone to war just because SH was a nasty SOB. The world has plenty of nasty SOB leaders and we have no history of getting all upset about that to the point of going to war with them.

How do you justify killing tens of thousands of Iraqi cilivians if the purpose of the exercise were to free them from tyranny? Only a complete moron could think that way. We know Bush is not a moron because Canadian prime minister Jean Chretien told us: "President Bush is a friend of mine. He's not a moron at all."

Did you ever read "The Downing Street Memos"?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 3,013]

>If you think the Constitution is a "living breathing " document then you
>are a danger to the intent of that great document and US.

Agreed. So let's look at some sections that should NOT live and breathe:

---------------------
The Congress shall have Power . .
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
(note that's CONGRESS, not the president)

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted
--------------------------

The only way one could think that this administration is protecting the constitution is if one has never read the constitution.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>If you think the Constitution is a "living breathing " document then you
>are a danger to the intent of that great document and US.

Agreed. So let's look at some sections that should NOT live and breathe:

---------------------
The Congress shall have Power . .
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
(note that's CONGRESS, not the president)

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted
--------------------------

The only way one could think that this administration is protecting the constitution is if one has never read the constitution.

Except for your last sentence ....thanks for making my point.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[narcimund 0]

Quote

....thanks for making my point.

Said like someone who craves confrontation rather than acknowledging agreement.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Pretty much everything written by the Bush supporters that spring turned out to be incorrect

I love the way you generalize.

Go back and read the threads from late 2002 and early 2003. It's all archived. YOU are the guy who tries to reinvent history.

Hey, I am not disputing you were saying (in this forum) here you were against the war a disputed the reasons. But saying Bush and company's "only" reason to go in Iraq was WMD's is a complete fabrication. Never will be case no matter how many times you say it.

You also can't be honest saying Bush lied about the WMD's when evey other polition in the country and many others countries intelligance orgs (long before Bush was ever recognized as a canidated) had been saying the same thing for what, 10 years.

Say those all you want to try and convince your self but it still will never be true

The primary excuse for the war was WMDs. The secondary excuse was the purported connection of Iraq with 9/11 (mostly by innuendo). All other reasons were so far down the list as to be invisible.

There is NO WAY ON EARTH that the American and British public would have gone to war just because SH was a nasty SOB. The world has plenty of nasty SOB leaders and we have no history of getting all upset about that to the point of going to war with them.

How do you justify killing tens of thousands of Iraqi cilivians if the purpose of the exercise were to free them from tyranny? Only a complete moron could think that way. We know Bush is not a moron because Canadian prime minister Jean Chretien told us: "President Bush is a friend of mine. He's not a moron at all."

Did you ever read "The Downing Street Memos"?

Down the list? Feeble but at least for the first time I can remember you have admited there were other reasons no mater what you think of them.

As for this comment you made,

">How do you justify killing tens of thousands of Iraqi cilivians if the purpose of the exercise were to free them from tyranny? <"

A very hollow point at best seeing you have never made a comment (or seemed to care) about these people when SH was killing them.

Fact, last week the Iraqi government (the Interior Minister) identified the 200th mass grave. The 198th one is estimated to have the remains of over 10,000 bodies. (big number huh!)

Hmm, it is political gotha that makes the deaths of the Iraqi people important today?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

....thanks for making my point.

Said like someone who craves confrontation rather than acknowledging agreement.

bill and I have gone back and forth before on certin topics within the post (of which you might not be aware)

I think you are the one that missed his meaning, not I.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln