Lying Presidents

J

JC

Registered
Joseph C. Wilson, the retired US ambassador whose CIA-directed mission to Niger in early 2002 helped debunk false allegations that Iraq had tried to obtain uranium there for nuclear weapons, has said for the first time publicly that US and British officials ignored his findings and exaggerated the case against Iraq. “It really comes down to the administration misrepresenting the facts on an issue that was a fundamental justification for going to war.” Wilson said Saturday, “It begs the question, what else are they lying about?”

Thank god Bush isn’t lying about getting a BJ from an intern! That would get him impeached.

Before some of you get your bowels in an uproar let me state that I supported Bush in the last election, I support our troops, and I think our attack on Saddam was the right thing to do. What really irritates me is the hypocrisy of people who consider it a great crime for a married man to lie about getting sex outside his marriage but think it’s OK to lie about matters that justify a war that costs thousands of lives. Fortunately most of the people killed were not Americans.
 
RE: Lying Presidents

So because they didn't try to get uranium from Niger, they didn't have any WMD's? Last time i checked, you didn't need uranium for chemical or biological weapons. Keep in mind, we already beat Iraq in war once. Saddam was supposed to be our bitch. The onus was on him to prove that he didn't have WMD's, and he failed miserably to do so. If he didn't have them, why did he throw out the weapons inspectors? What was up with all the secrecy?

I don't think that bush lied, or knowingly misrepresented anything. Just because we didn't find a nuke sitting in the closet at every palace, doesn't mean bush lied, stretched the truth, misrepresented the intelligence, etc.

And i don't care who gets a ##### in the white house. Maybe the media should have been more concerned about Clinton selling nuclear secrets to the Chinese than about a little beejer action.
 
RE: Lying Presidents

You are right Jack. I see no difference in a President going on national TV and pounding his fist repeated telling us (challenging us to catch him, I might add) how he didn't do something and then turns 180 a couple weeks later when confronted with the overwhelming evidence. Compare that to a President faced with the challenge of stopping terrorists who will someday drop a nuke on us, and yes, Saddam is one of the biggest threats, forcing the U.S. to take pre-emptive action, no matter what the cost. Everybody knows Saddam had the weapons. Everybody knows they are still there or in Syria/Iran. Everybody knows he would have taken a stab at the U.S. if given the chance. Everybody knows this had to be done to set an example to the rest of the world. Everybody knows...but a few.

You're right, I see no difference.

'93 MonsterMark Project Car
Bryan
 
RE: Lying Presidents

Joseph C. Wilson, the retired US ambassador whose CIA-directed mission to Niger in early 2002 helped debunk false allegations that Iraq had tried to obtain uranium there for nuclear weapons, has said for the first time publicly that US and British officials ignored his findings and exaggerated the case against Iraq. “It really comes down to the administration misrepresenting the facts on an issue that was a fundamental justification for going to war.” Wilson said Saturday, “It begs the question, what else are they lying about?”

I guess it depends on who you would rather put your trust in. A retired US ambassador or your President along with the Prime Minister of our number 1 ally.

I still believe former President Clinton when he said they had WMD when he ordered cruise missiles into Iraq in 1998 in retaliation for Saddam throwing the weapons inspectors out. [link:www.defenselink.mil/news/Dec1998/n12171998_9812171.html|Click To Read, Saddam Abused His Last Chance, Clinton Says]


Thank god Bush isn’t lying about getting a BJ from an intern! That would get him impeached.


No, but lying under oath in a courtroom about it, would for sure.

What really irritates me is the hypocrisy of people who consider it a great crime for a married man to lie about getting sex outside his marriage but think it’s OK to lie about matters that justify a war that costs thousands of lives. Fortunately most of the people killed were not Americans.

Again. It was not about him cheating on his wife. It was about him lying about it after swearing not to in a court of law. That's also why he was disbarred in Arkansas.

I'd like to add that my former employer (now retired) would not have given it a second thought in firing my a$$ if I was caught in my office getting a BJ from a subordinate though.

And, what's fortunate about anybody getting killed even when they are not Americans. I don't get it. It all sucks. Too bad there are so many evil people in the world, and thank God for some that are willing to stand up to these EVIL people.

http://members.tccoa.com/lastmrk/Images/lastmrk2.jpg
 
RE: Lying Presidents

The president has to go by the the information he receives from his advisors as he doesn't micro manage.This is all tied in to tracking down terroists in third world countries before we have more losses over here. The world has changed and will never be as it was in the past.
He is doing an almost impossible job.It's tough and is in unchartered territory...but has to be done for our survival.








http://www.markviii.org/~woof/MK_VIII_woof.JPG

93 MarkVIII 123K miles
98 MarkVIII 60K miles
 
RE: Lying Presidents

Dang Paul, I love your arguments. They are always well thought out, articulate, not at all condescending, and most of all, very persuasive. Hopefully, someday, as I gracefully age, I will come to the same type of wisdom you show on this board. I just wanted you to know I appreciate your efforts to inform.

'93 MonsterMark Project Car
Bryan
 
RE: Lying Presidents

We should have formed an alliance with Iraq and used them to take over Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Yemman, Israel, Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, Algeria, Chad, Ethiopia, Morocco, France, Belgium, Germany, Russia, Chechnya, Bosnia, Albania, Turkenstan, Armenia, Georgia, Greece, Cypress, North Korea, China, Tawaiin, Indonesia, Thailand, Singapore, Maylasia, Liberia, Canada, Mexico, Venezuala, Columbia, Peru, Panama, Mexico, India, Yugoslavia, Malta, Italy, Sweden, The Netherlands, Luxumburg, Japan, Denmark (Damned Danes!) Finland, Estonia, Cuba, Haiti, Jamaica, South Africa, The Congo, Madagascar, Britain, Scotland, The Irelands, Wales, Spain, Portugal,Switzerland, California, Italy, Argentina, Bahamas, Rhodesia, Iceland, Greenland, Australia, New Zealand, New Guinea, South Korea, Nepal, Tibet, Kashmir, etc so on and so forth.....

Who would really want his job anyway?!!

te
96
LM8
80k miles

This world is FUBAR....we dont have a chance....
 
RE: Lying Presidents

Go see T-3. That is pretty much the point!

'93 MonsterMark Project Car
Bryan
 
RE: Lying Presidents

I heard an excellent discussion the other day about an angle to the Iraq war I hadn't thought of, but makes tons of sense.

A long time Republican (sorry, don't recall the name :( ) said that although he support the Troops in Iraq, he simply could not accept the pre-emptive First Strike policy.

"Doing so" he said "would force me to legitimize what the Japanese did in Pearl Harbour, and I'm not prepared to do that."

Never thought of it that way, but man, he's hit the nail on the head. I guess if everyone supports striking first, then you all approve of Pearl Harbour?? Food for thought...
 
RE: Lying Presidents

That might be a good argument RRocket except for one thing. We were (are) enforcing the peace agreement that Saddam and his henchmen agreed to in 1991.

He invaded his neighbor (our ally) Kuwait. We put him in a "Full Nelson" when we kicked him out, he agreed to behave if we let him out of the "Full Nelson", we said OK. He then decided to not live by the agreement he signed onto. I'm sure he never intended to so we tried to get him to do so again and again (read what Clinton did above link) so eventually we were forced to go back in to remove him for good, and we did.

This is the same false arguement used before.

Oh. Quit spelling Pearl Harbor (Harbour) like a Canadian. LOL :)


http://members.tccoa.com/lastmrk/Images/lastmrk2.jpg
 
RE: Lying Presidents

I should have explained more thoroughly. The topic was also about the feasibility of future first strikes against other countries too. It was a long topic, but I paraphrased....sorry!!

But you have to agree, in the time leading up to the war, your Pres. was REALLY beating on the WMD angle and "threat to America" angle...which would have you believe the US should strike them before they get you..silly..
 
RE: Lying Presidents

Right, and we rightly demanded to know where the weapons were or what happened to them. Bush simply was enforcing the UN resolutions. Iraq would not comply. Action HAD to be taken. After 8 years of Clinton, the world needed to know that the U.S. still the resolve and the backbone to make the world a safer place for all of us.

After 9/11, I don't think Bush was in the mood to hear how there were massive deaths in subways or sporting events by chemical attack, and then have that material traced back to Iraq. I could just hear the screaming from the left then. """Bush knew about the weapons, Clinton warned him about them and he did nothing about it.""" Blah, blah, blah. With the left, you can never win. They will simply twist the truth until it sounds good.

Ron, what you are saying is the U.S. was about to attack Japan without provocation? Interesting historical re-writing. I know that is not what you mean but you are really reaching here.

'93 MonsterMark Project Car
Bryan
 
RE: Lying Presidents

The molotov cocktail would still be there when the cop's arrived. And the cop's would not accept a story that there was broken glass on the sidewalk, a gas can in your neighbor's house, and a match in the bad guy's pocket as proof that he had a molotov cocktail.

As for a hummer in the white house, what would you say if one of your local cop's was cuaght getting blown in his police car? I would say fire his butt.
 
RE: Lying Presidents

Bryan,

Please don't dump the "US was enforcing UN Resolutions" argument on me. If the UN meant anything, the US would not have IGNORED the UN with respect to going to war with Iraq.

And no..I'm not saying the US was about to attack Japan. I repeating what a Rep. said and that is that if you agree with "acting first against your enemy", then you can't be pissed at Japan, since in their eyes, the US was their enemy. I know that you know that Japan didn't attack the US "just because". In their eyes, they had a legitimate reason for doing so. (economic sanctions against them, oil boycott, US supplying aid to China, "meddling" in Asian affairs, etc..) So they struck first. It parallels a bit with the US, in that the US accused Iraq of aiding terrorism, and that ultimately Iraq was a threat to the US.


Paul,

Well let's look at it another way. If you kill him because you think HE MIGHT throw it, you would go to jail, no? It would be illegal. If everyone killed/attacked someone who they thought MAY do something bad, it would be chaos. Imagine the police: "Well we didn't see a gun, but we heard rumours he may have had one at one time, so we killed him just to be safe". That would not fly..just ask Flamark!!
 
RE: Lying Presidents

Actually Ron, the law's in the U.S. are a little different. If you have reason to believe that a person poses and immediate threat you can take action. I have not seen case law to show if starting a structure fire to an unoccupied dwelling is cause for lethal force. If he perceived that his family may be in the house it would be legal.

Example: Riot trianing. If a person pick's up a molotov cocktail and cocks their arm back to throw it I can shoot them. We have had cop's and civillian's shoot unarmed people and it was legal. If you are in fear for your life you are clear for the most part.

A few year's back we recieved a burglary alarm to a business. As an officer was checking the door's and window's he heard a bang and the window next to where he was standing shattered. He thought he was being shot at so he returned fire to where he thought the bad guy was. He shot and killed the 17 year old kid inside. Turn's out that the kid knew the alarm had gone off and threw a coffee mug at the window to break the window for an exit. The cop was cleared. He was in fear for his life and perceived that he was being shot at.

We have also had cop's shoot unarmed men that were beating them in a fight. It is fair to say that if a person is going to fight with a cop that he will kill the cop if given the oportunity. Same hold's true for civillian's. In a civillian's case the only thing that would be looked at was if the fight was avoidable. Ex. If somebody pissed you off, you confronted them, got into a mutual combat fight, then shot the guy when you were losing. You would be spending time in the clink.
 
RE: Lying Presidents

You didn't answer my hypothetical question. You just danced around it. :) I didn't say about to not throw it now did I?

If I was confronted with that dilemma, I'd have to take my chances with the court system to determine if it was justified or not. If they determined against me, at least my loved ones would still be alive, and I could live with that.

Tough decisions are made by strong people.


http://members.tccoa.com/lastmrk/Images/lastmrk2.jpg
 
RE: Lying Presidents

I usually stay out of these arguments. President Bush did not decide to attack Iraq, Rumsfeld did. He decided in 1997 along with the other members of the PNAC that Saddam needed to be removed. It had nothing to do with our being attacked on Sept. 11th. I have a long list of items the public knows very little about, but most members of this board would come up with reasons why they disagree, and I don't care what their views are. If you don't agree with me it doesn't bother me. I don't agree with alot of what I read on here, and if "support our troops or get out of the US" comes from someone who has never worked for the US gov't or the armed forces, then to me it doesn't count. Shut up and enlist if you want to make a difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top