View Full Version : Bush deserves to be impeached
richardben23
07-20-2003, 11:02 AM
http://www.canoe.ca/Columnists/margolis_jul20.html
Piccolo
07-20-2003, 12:04 PM
Presidents lie, get over it. JFK wouldn't have come to office if he hadn't cheated on vote counts (IE take the names of dead persons and add them to his voter list). It's really just the nature of politics. It is a service routed in lies and deception. I personally like Bush a far deal better then I did Clinton. Not to say I think he is the best President, I believe John Mccain should run.
Splinter26
07-20-2003, 01:18 PM
I think Arnold should be the president p-)
warchild1/27scout
07-20-2003, 01:25 PM
i think people who know a little about intellegence know the president did'nt lie. when you get all the intel you put it together and dicifer what you believe are the facts. it is very sketchy and what the president said was by no means a lie. and when a democrat that knows better comes out and says that, it shows a sinister agenda. either they don't know any better or they are intentionaly decieving the people. either way they should'nt be president. the british stand by thier intel and that forged document has nothing to do with the intel they got. even if cia sent that ambasador to africa and the guy came back and said whatever, they would'nt take his word as gospel but add it to the other intel they already had. i mean it's not a great stretch the iraqis bought the stuff before in 91 and i think people don't know all the facts and the liberal press accidentally left out that little tidbit that they already done it once. you think that might figure in someones opinion?oh, maybe not. ;)
Seiyuuki
07-20-2003, 01:34 PM
:cantbeli: The man didn't lie...get over it...IF HE KNEW 100% SURE THE INFORMATION HE HAD WAS FALSE AND PROCEEDED TO MADE THE STATEMENT...then he lie, but he did not.
Bush TRUSTED what the CIA and other intelligence services provided for him...after all, you are to some faith in your own intelligence services.
And whose job is it to sort through all the information, deciding what is suitable to be use, what is true, what is false and what the President can or cannot use?...the President himself? If it's his job, what's the point of having the CIA?
Seiyuuki
07-20-2003, 02:06 PM
Thanx for the reply, I understand where you stand much better now.
IronHeart_26
07-20-2003, 02:07 PM
I too was dissapointed when John McCain dropped out of the presidential race. He was who I had planned to vote for, even though I normally vote Replublcan. The man has a great sense of honor and strength about him. I feel that he would have made a great president. If he ever does run again I will probably vote for him. As for Bush, I voted for him and I support him. He has strang morals and doesn't back down when push comes to shove. While I don't think he'll ever be as great as The Gipper, I do think he is a good president. He certainly hasn't been a walking scandal and I doubt any parents would be afraid to let him near their daughters.
Seiyuuki
07-20-2003, 02:22 PM
McCain!!! Thinking about him and seeing the replies of several on this thread...He would definitely make a good president, I mean, me included, WE'RE PRACTICALLY WISHING, HOPING, BEGGING HIM TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT!!!
Merik
07-20-2003, 03:27 PM
I always thought that Clinton should be taken out back and shot for what he did to the military and intelligence community. Morons like him should never be able to run for President.
California Joe
07-20-2003, 04:41 PM
Bush hyped the danger to justify the rapid deployment. He knew the intelligence was bad. He's the President for Chrissakes. Jesus Christ do you really believe the CIA falsified intelligence? Be serious here for a minute. Bill Clinton lies and his wife gets pissed and America learns a new use for cigars, George finishes what Daddy started because it's what God told him to do and every ****ing day I hear about another brave American soldier doing his duty getting shot by the assholes that we liberated. I was seriously pulling for McCain once. I have a signed copy of his book even. I have a great deal of respect for him.
a. enders
07-20-2003, 05:29 PM
I always thought that Clinton should be taken out back and shot for what he did to the military and intelligence community. Morons like him should never be able to run for President.
........He activated the military more times than anyother Prez in something like 30 years.Something often overlooked in zealous anti-Democrat/Clinton statements about his "mistreatment" of the US military.
Beowulf
07-20-2003, 05:41 PM
....He activated the military more times than anyother Prez in something like 30 years.Something often overlooked in zealous anti-Democrat/Clinton statements about his "mistreatment" of the US military.
by "he" do you mean clinton or bush?
a. enders
07-20-2003, 06:58 PM
Clinton.Sorry on being unclear.That's based on quite a few statements I've read,of course,anything could be incorrect.
As for whoever said "President's lie,get over it."I'm willing to wager you were screaming for Clinton's scrotum when he lied about gettin' some head from a fat chick.
Piccolo
07-20-2003, 08:24 PM
Clinton.Sorry on being unclear.That's based on quite a few statements I've read,of course,anything could be incorrect.
As for whoever said "President's lie,get over it."I'm willing to wager you were screaming for Clinton's scrotum when he lied about gettin' some head from a fat chick.
That was me, and no, I wasn't. I could think of many more dirty deeds Clinton has done then crying about his infidelity.
Mortimer
07-20-2003, 09:08 PM
LOL why is CLinton always going around and doing speaches and stuff?
He was at the Nelson Mandela birthday and the media was saying he was the biggest guest....and he always does stupid speaches!
hes annoying
James
07-20-2003, 11:11 PM
Back to the article at hand - the CIA told the British that the intell re: uranium was bogus last September. Bush used the information 4 MONTHS LATER in his State of the Union speech. If that wasn't lying, it was grossly negligent.
So, someone tell me, why have 200+ Americans died in Iraq? To liberate them? They don't seem to appreciate it. To remove an imagined threat to the United States? Where are the WMDs?
I don't think the war in Iraq should have ever happened. I had no problem with the war in Afghanistan, but I was completely against this one from the beginning.
budanski
07-21-2003, 10:15 AM
Here's what President Bush actually said in his SOTU: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
Precisely which part of that statement isn't true? The British government did say that it believed Saddam had sought African uranium.
WMDs were one of many reasons listed for the liberation of Iraq. Only the very foolish would claim otherwise. Additional reasons stated by the US and its allies and on record are regime change, removing a threat to the US and its allies, removing a major supporter of international terrorism, 13 years of violation UNSC resolutions and the cease fire agreement signed in 1991.
40 nations believe and support the US and the coalition to this day. The fact is simple Iraq was a major threat to US national interests and those of its allies. To deny this is just plain willful ignorance. The fact is that the US and any nation for that matter will work in its own national interests.
For those who implied that Bush knowingly lied...Prove it, prove that he knew for a fact that the information was inaccurate and give sources, official sources. There is no proof or evidence of that. The only known fact is one of hundreds reports was a forgery.
gaboki
07-21-2003, 01:06 PM
just remember, bush needed congress to go to war, so blame the congress :backhand:
budanski
07-21-2003, 01:15 PM
True. Congress properly authorized the war last fall when the State of the Union was in January.
He219
07-21-2003, 01:24 PM
Yellow Cake (http://japan.indymedia.org/newswire/display/400/index.php), procured from Africa as a source of Uranium by Iraq.
http://web.greenpeace.org/multimedia/download/gallery-2?id=284860&actionval=org
Greenpeace radiation expert takes measurments outside the Al-Majidat school for girls next to the Al-Tuwaitha nuclear facility.
http://web.greenpeace.org/multimedia/download/gallery-2?id=284864&actionval=org
Girl standing outside the Al-Majidat school. We found levels of radioactivity up to 3.000 times higher than background.
http://web.greenpeace.org/multimedia/download/gallery-2?id=284866&actionval=org
A frightened villager brings the lid of a barrel that contained uranium oxide (yellowcake) taken from the Tuwaitha nuclear facility. The family used this radioactive barrel to store water and are complaining of rashes and skin problems.
http://web.greenpeace.org/multimedia/download/gallery-2?id=284868&actionval=org
Greenpeace scientist Dr. Rianne Teule measures radioactive levels of a device abandoned on a roadside. It contained yellow powder 1.000 times more radioactive than background. The Tuwaith plant was left unsecured when coalition forces invaded Iraq. Equipment and materials were looted.
http://web.greenpeace.org/multimedia/download/gallery-2?id=284874&actionval=org
Greenpeace activists mark a highly radioactive site outside a school with warnings in Arabic. The site registed 3000 times higher than background.
Much of the 1.8 tonnes of "yellow cake" (http://chemcases.com/2003version/nuclear/nc-06.htm) and 500 tonnes of natural
uranium (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2972668.stm)has gone missing.
The term "proliferation" (http://news.lycos.com/news/story.asp?section=World&storyId=764142) refers to the possibility of a country or group using these uranium compounds to make nuclear weapons.
People can debate the source of these known uranium products, but it is rediculous to disavow that Saddam was actively seeking to develop the means and methods to produce his own nuclear weapons program.
Royal
07-21-2003, 01:25 PM
First and foremost - the Niger uranium. The info came from France to the UK - the UK Int community could not release the source because of France's anti-war stance.
McCain for prez? I know I'm a Brit, and I have great respect for his record and fortitude, but, a good officer does not necessarily make a good politician. Paddy Ashdown (ex-SBS) being a prime example.
All politicians (and their spokespeople) are ecconomical with the truth, it's the nature of the beast. Intelligence is never black and white, it's usually very grey and murky. This has to be clarified/explained/sexed up for public consumption. **** happens. They all lie, we obay (legal) orders and hopefully things turn out better in the long run.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.10 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.