[Mo Noyz]

Originally Posted by Superdave

I truly believe that history will uncover the entire "truth" about our President

I **** you not when I tell you that my father said these exact same words about Clinton after he left office. I told him he was paranoid and crazy. and that was my dad, so imagine how I see you..........

Who knows, in another hundred years there may be peace and stability in Iraq.

How many provinces in Iraq are stable right now? I won't give you the answer, you'll have to look it up. nd once you find it, you'll realize what a badly misinformed statement this is.

Besides, I'm the only sane person left in this world that saw Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfy's plan with little Georgey reading the tele-prompter and drumming up support to protect America and free the world from nuclear holocaust of Saddam, the 911 mastermind.

And here I thought your other statement was insane.

Amazing how you liberlas hear things the way you want to hear them.

[jaim]

Originally Posted by sheepofblue

I did post one example (limited) Jaim. They are led by a JORDANIAN. Also check the list of 'leaders' as claimed by the terrorists and you will find very few Iraqi's.

I looked back and only saw some editorializing by you. No links to anything.

Does anyone have anything that proves the insurgents are not mostly Iraqi?

[luvtolean]

Well, I don't have exact numbers, and you don't have them either. But it is well known that there is an international effort by the Islamic network to recruit people to go fight the allied American/Iraqi people in Iraq.

3 Frenchmen caught

"Elsewhere, Iraqi officials said al-Qaida-linked foreign fighters had taken control of large areas of a strategic city on the Syrian border after weeks of fighting between an Iraqi tribe that supports the insurgents and one that opposes them."

"Where do the foreign fighters in Iraq come from?"


There's more...on just the first page I got on Yahoo. It's pretty much common knowledge that large numbers of the people facing American troops are not Iraqis. Majority? I doubt anybody truly knows.

[Mo Noyz]

Originally Posted by jaim

I looked back and only saw some editorializing by you. No links to anything.

Does anyone have anything that proves the insurgents are not mostly Iraqi?

[jaim]

Originally Posted by Mo Noyz

Oh really, well you force me to respond with...

[jaim]

Originally Posted by luvtolean

Well, I don't have exact numbers, and you don't have them either. But it is well known that there is an international effort by the Islamic network to recruit people to go fight the allied American/Iraqi people in Iraq.

3 Frenchmen caught

"Elsewhere, Iraqi officials said al-Qaida-linked foreign fighters had taken control of large areas of a strategic city on the Syrian border after weeks of fighting between an Iraqi tribe that supports the insurgents and one that opposes them."

"Where do the foreign fighters in Iraq come from?"


There's more...on just the first page I got on Yahoo. It's pretty much common knowledge that large numbers of the people facing American troops are not Iraqis. Majority? I doubt anybody truly knows.

Now this is a major problem with a lot of things going on in the world right now. Who the hell is actually telling the truth? I have a few sources I trust and I am sure you and others have yours. So then it become a debate on who has better sources of information. And of course my sources are better than yours.

[sheepofblue]

Originally Posted by jaim

I looked back and only saw some editorializing by you. No links to anything.

Does anyone have anything that proves the insurgents are not mostly Iraqi?

Umm I didn't think you needed a link to verify that the leader is Jordanian, maybe Matt232 can help me with a link. I did not say my editorializing provided proof of the majority just reason to question your source (while Americans and Englishman helped even the French resistance was led by a Frenchman)

[luvtolean]

Jaim, it is widely, and I mean WIDELY, reported in the news. Across all the networks, including those that seem to have an anti-war bent.

Al-Jazeera even reports it!

[ccwilli3]

back to the original vote.

Dem rep from PA wanted to withdraw 'Immediately'. They wanted to vote on this resolution. With lack of support, they ammended this resolution with the timeline/statement 'as soon as its possible'. Uhhhhh, last time I checked, we ALL want to be out as soon as its possible! Seeing this as a political tactic to gain democratic 'votes' to go on record that they said 'yeah, in late 2005 I voted for us to get out as soon as possible!", house republicans called for an up or down vote to get everyone on record, right then, right there on whether they wanted to really get out of Iraq 'immediately', well, as sheep pointed out, 3 voted for it...

3. Because no one REALLY wants us to leave right now. No one, well, '3' do... To vote on a resolution like that would purely be political because of the amendment stating "as soon as possible" to the original resolution of "get out of iraq immeidately..."

Classic and text book backfire... When the politics of politics just go wrong...

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by ccwilli3

back to the original vote.

Dem rep from PA wanted to withdraw 'Immediately'. They wanted to vote on this resolution. With lack of support, they ammended this resolution with the timeline/statement 'as soon as its possible'. Uhhhhh, last time I checked, we ALL want to be out as soon as its possible! Seeing this as a political tactic to gain democratic 'votes' to go on record that they said 'yeah, in late 2005 I voted for us to get out as soon as possible!", house republicans called for an up or down vote to get everyone on record, right then, right there on whether they wanted to really get out of Iraq 'immediately', well, as sheep pointed out, 3 voted for it...

3. Because no one REALLY wants us to leave right now. No one, well, '3' do... To vote on a resolution like that would purely be political because of the amendment stating "as soon as possible" to the original resolution of "get out of iraq immeidately..."

Classic and text book backfire... When the politics of politics just go wrong...

Good post. Better not to say anything as a politician or risk the rest of your political history as a "flip/flop".

Sort of like Bush asking for support to invade Iraq to save the World from WMDs, then when everyone has voted patriotically they find out Bush's evidence was falsified and they tried to get back out. Too late buddy, you're now a flip flopper even though you voted with bad information (lies). It just doesn't matter that you would have voted this way knowing all the evidence was bull ****, you're on record for voting for war. Sick politics.

[BDA116]

Tell us what exactly was a lie. Just one lie. Come on, you have all the left wing extremist talking points down, so tell us just one actual lie.
You know, something that was known to be false but represented as fact?
And what B.S. evidence? The same evidence that they ALL had access to, as well as the background of that evidence? The evidence that was the exact same, actually much of it from the previous administration? The evidence much of which was from foreign sources, including the U.N.'s own gathered evidence?
You know, the same evidence that multiple commissions have gone through and shown the polar opposite of your extremist garbage?

[Baketech]

I've been asking the libbies in my family to "name just one lie" as well....never get an answer...

Thanksgiving conversation should be fun around my place, it's about a 50/50 split of rabid right and limpy left....

[phobiaphobe]

Originally Posted by Baketech

I've been asking the libbies in my family to "name just one lie" as well....never get an answer...

Thanksgiving conversation should be fun around my place, it's about a 50/50 split of rabid right and limpy left....

At least you don't have to compete with the "rabid left" NDP contingent like my family get-togethers.

[jaim]

Originally Posted by luvtolean

Jaim, it is widely, and I mean WIDELY, reported in the news. Across all the networks, including those that seem to have an anti-war bent.

Al-Jazeera even reports it!

So give me a URL already. I gave you one to the contrary.

[Baketech]

Originally Posted by jaim

So give me a URL already. I gave you one to the contrary.

Ahh....the oh-so-artful dodge of the question...

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by BDA116

Tell us what exactly was a lie. Just one lie. Come on, you have all the left wing extremist talking points down, so tell us just one actual lie.
You know, something that was known to be false but represented as fact?
And what B.S. evidence? The same evidence that they ALL had access to, as well as the background of that evidence? The evidence that was the exact same, actually much of it from the previous administration? The evidence much of which was from foreign sources, including the U.N.'s own gathered evidence?
You know, the same evidence that multiple commissions have gone through and shown the polar opposite of your extremist garbage?

OK, one lie.

The supposed material that was confiscated was analyzed by experts. This material was said to have been ordered by Saddam in his effort to create a nuclear missile, well that's what Bush, Cheney, Wolfiwitz wanted everyone to believe.

The experts all concluded that this "tube's" material makeup could NOT support nuclear use. It was more than likely going to be used a short range missle. These experts passed on their conclusions to the Administration and were shocked when their results were read ass-backwards in front of the United Nations (Powell). Apparently their original conclusion was so obvious that other world experts immediately questioned the report that was material could in fact support a nuclear weapon. The original experts were interviewed (once) and I listened to them and the world experts all state that the evidence presented by Powell (on behalf of Bush/Cheney) to the UN & the World was falsified, a complete contradicting reversal of what the experts submitted.

We can go on and on with the satellie photos supposedly indentifying chemical warfare transport vehicles that were actually water trucks, or the hundreds of bio-chemical manufacturing "blurs" on satellite that apparently disappeared upon our invasion. Tricky bastards those Iraqis, making all those factories disappear so quickly under our noses (satellite surveillance).

Now you can say they (Bush, Cheney, and Wolfy) had bad intel or there must have been some "miscommunications", but I saw that interview and listened to those men who in no misleading comments, stated "that was not the conclusions we gave the President, we stand by our reports that the material could not be nuclear capable what so ever, period!" Not their actual quote, but you get the drift.

I will never understand how you people or so disbelieving, it's freaking documented that Cheney & Wolfy had already planned to invade Iraq and start their Middle East Democracy Pilot program years before 911. And this is fact as well, if not for Powell, Bush would have attacked Iraq the day following 911, even though they knew Saddam had nothing to do with the attack. Powell asked for a private meeting with the President (no Cheney, no Wolfy), and he talked Bush into at least waiting for UN Support and outlining their reasons for invading a country that had nothing to do with the 911 terrorist attack. And he warned Bush about the mess of occupying Iraq after the invasion (one of his reasons of not following through on the original gulf war).

Yep, discredit everything I've read and seen as conspiracy, yet all your Republican smoke screening is 100% legit.

How many times did Bush change the "objective" name for the Iraq invasion and occupation?

[BDA116]

Again, where is the lie in there?
More left wing smoke and mirrors, not answering a question.
That was intel all members of Congress had access to, and originated prior to Bush taking office.
Go back to your talking points memo for the day and try again.

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by BDA116

Again, where is the lie in there?
More left wing smoke and mirrors, not answering a question.
That was intel all members of Congress had access to, and originated prior to Bush taking office.
Go back to your talking points memo for the day and try again.

Where is the lie? The lie is that your President stated in his State of the Union Address, that Saddam must be taken out because we confiscated "nuclear capable" weapons and Saddam was building this device to destroy America!!@!@! Where is the lie?

THERE NEVER WAS NUCLEAR CAPABLE MATERIAL

[Baketech]

I wasn't convinced until you put it all in CAPS...that seals it, I'm hopping to the other side of the fence now...

[BDA116]

What statement are you talking about? What was the EXACT statement that was a lie, not the B.S. AirAmerica is giving out as talking points?

Oh, and for your last line? That itself is a lie. YOU are a liar. YOU have lied about Iraq and Nuclear capable materials confiscated inside Iraq.
How does that make you feel, liar?
We confiscated 500 tons - yeah TONS - one million pounds - of yellowcake uranium from Saddam's nuclear weapons facility. Nuclear material, could be immediately used in a "dirty bomb", and when enriched makes atomic weapons.
Of that 1.8 tons were already partially enriched. Nuclear material, another step towards an atomic weapon.
And what of the centrifuge parts and blueprints buried in one of Saddam's nuclear weapons scientists' flower bed?

Try again. No lie there, not on any level.
Well, except yours.

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by Baketech

I wasn't convinced until you put it all in CAPS...that seals it, I'm hopping to the other side of the fence now...

AFLACK! AFLACK! AAAAFFFFLLLLLAKKKKK!!!!




Welcome to the Dark Side Anakin. I have much to teach you.

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by BDA116

What statement are you talking about? What was the EXACT statement that was a lie, not the B.S. AirAmerica is giving out as talking points?

Oh, and for your last line? That itself is a lie. YOU are a liar. YOU have lied about Iraq and Nuclear capable materials confiscated inside Iraq.
How does that make you feel, liar?
We confiscated 500 tons - yeah TONS - one million pounds - of yellowcake uranium from Saddam's nuclear weapons facility. Nuclear material, could be immediately used in a "dirty bomb", and when enriched makes atomic weapons.
Of that 1.8 tons were already partially enriched. Nuclear material, another step towards an atomic weapon.
And what of the centrifuge parts and blueprints buried in one of Saddam's nuclear weapons scientists' flower bed?

Try again. No lie there, not on any level.
Well, except yours.

Ahhh, the old Saddam nuclear blueprint in his scientist' flower bed. Ninenty Nine, you've out done yourself this time, hand me my shoe phone, I'm calling the Chief!

You've hurt my feeling now by calling me a liar, Baketech and I are leaving this thread! Come on Bake, let's go...