• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

This Is Absolutely Amazing

I'm sorry, how is this different that lying to congress about WMD to start a war that killed 4500 of our brave soldiers? How do you draw a parallel between justifying a war and a failed diplomatic security issue? Unreal!

Who lied? If you are taking the information from the majority of your intelligence agencies, which dovetails nicely with the information you are getting from your allies intelligence agencies and you make a decision based on that...and are wrong, that is not a lie my friend, that is a mistake.

A failed diplomatic security issue is just one of the issues. That the Obama administration mounted no effort to rescue our fellow countrymen during the long hours of the two various incidents involving diplomatic personnel is far different and is not how American presidents are suppose to react. There should never have been any question that we would do whatever necessary to come to the aid of fellow Americans. Some of the the only valid questions to be asked were how, how big a rescue effort is necessary and how fast can we get there. That is how true Americans are suppose to do this... and this president and his entire administration were a complete embarrassing failure. We do not know to this day what the heck Obama was doing in those hours.
 
Who lied? If you are taking the information from the majority of your intelligence agencies, which dovetails nicely with the information you are getting from your allies intelligence agencies and you make a decision based on that...and are wrong, that is not a lie my friend, that is a mistake.

A failed diplomatic security issue is just one of the issues. That the Obama administration mounted no effort to rescue our fellow countrymen during the long hours of the two various incidents involving diplomatic personnel is far different and is not how American presidents are suppose to react. There should never have been any question that we would do whatever necessary to come to the aid of fellow Americans. Some of the the only valid questions to be asked were how, how big a rescue effort is necessary and how fast can we get there. That is how true Americans are suppose to do this... and this president and his entire administration were a complete embarrassing failure. We do not know to this day what the heck Obama was doing in those hours.


Study: Bush, aides made 935 false statements in run-up to war - CNN.com

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush and his top aides publicly made 935 false statements about the security risk posed by Iraq in the two years following September 11, 2001, according to a study released Tuesday by two nonprofit journalism groups.
 
Who lied? If you are taking the information from the majority of your intelligence agencies, which dovetails nicely with the information you are getting from your allies intelligence agencies and you make a decision based on that...and are wrong, that is not a lie my friend, that is a mistake.

It would be, if that is what happened. But there is not one factual element in your paragraph. The initial intelligence reports gave a much different picture than the later "intelligence" reports. Why, because Team B was put into play, just as they were in 1974-80. During this time Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz convinced Ford to set up an "independent" analyst team to review CIA intel and deliver a different assessment of Soviet strength. Sound familiar?

This was to counter Kissinger's detente policies and move to an aggressive militarized foreign policy favored by Wohlstetter and the RAND corporation, who sponsored and mentored most of the key players, Rummy, Wolfie and Cheney. While Team B conducted it's intelligence "reassessment", their findings would be "leaked" to the media. Instead of the failing Russian economic and technology unable to compete with a capitalist war machine which was already double Russia's forces, they "found" that Russia had a vast and highly advanced military machine that dwarfed ours. The CIA argued that there was zero evidence for this view.. and Team B actually replied that they were so advanced, we couldn't see them, and that's how we know they're there.

In later years, when it was outed that Team B deliberately delivered false information to congress, the conspirators were completely unapologetic. In fact, they boasted that because of their noble lie that ramped up our weapons industry, we bankrupted Russia through military spending in a race they had already lost. They were caught lying, they admitted to lying and they said they'd do it again to accomplish their goals.

Prior to 9-11, the CIA intelligence clearly stated that Saddam Hussein was not a threat to the US or it's interests. The intelligence you refer to was actually the work of Team B and only later, after an unprecedented 21 private meetings at CIA HQ between Cheney and the director, did it become the CIA reassessment. No one in their right minds would toss out the previous five years of intelligence assessments on Iraq for the ridiculous sources presented, especially men that have been at or near those positions of power for 16 years (76-92), conspired in the halloween massacre of 76, and conspired with Team B to deliver false intelligence to congress in 74-80..

Men like this are not incompetent. They don't make these kinds of "mistakes". They have a well documented history of deceiving congress and the people in order to advance an agenda of global scope.

Or in short... LMAO.. Mistakes my ass.

By the way, each of the facts listed above is incredibly well documented. Before you go asking me for links... just google it first. It'll be good for you to get the intellectual exercise.
 
Study: Bush, aides made 935 false statements in run-up to war - CNN.com

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush and his top aides publicly made 935 false statements about the security risk posed by Iraq in the two years following September 11, 2001, according to a study released Tuesday by two nonprofit journalism groups.

Hmmm...Center for Public Integrity, this "investigative" journalism group [ and the other one is just an affiliate of the same group so its really not two at all] as per Wikipedia = CPI describes itself as an organization that is "nonpartisan and does no advocacy work. but others describe CPI as being characterized as "progressive"and a "liberal group"... so how about we come up with some better journalism than those? We know having lived through that period, progressive groups had it in for GWB... is that too much to ask?

A great number of the statements, while the title of the article makes it seem like they, the 935, are all independent and an accumulation of separate lies, were specifically about the very same thing, the possession and manufacture of WMDs by Iraq... which as stated before, if your intelligence tells you this is occurring and it is not actually occurring, that is a mistake and not a lie... what can you folks not get about that?
 
It would be, if that is what happened. But there is not one factual element in your paragraph. The initial intelligence reports gave a much different picture than the later "intelligence" reports. Why, because Team B was put into play, just as they were in 1974-80. During this time Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz convinced Ford to set up an "independent" analyst team to review CIA intel and deliver a different assessment of Soviet strength. Sound familiar?

This was to counter Kissinger's detente policies and move to an aggressive militarized foreign policy favored by Wohlstetter and the RAND corporation, who sponsored and mentored most of the key players, Rummy, Wolfie and Cheney. While Team B conducted it's intelligence "reassessment", their findings would be "leaked" to the media. Instead of the failing Russian economic and technology unable to compete with a capitalist war machine which was already double Russia's forces, they "found" that Russia had a vast and highly advanced military machine that dwarfed ours. The CIA argued that there was zero evidence for this view.. and Team B actually replied that they were so advanced, we couldn't see them, and that's how we know they're there.

In later years, when it was outed that Team B deliberately delivered false information to congress, the conspirators were completely unapologetic. In fact, they boasted that because of their noble lie that ramped up our weapons industry, we bankrupted Russia through military spending in a race they had already lost. They were caught lying, they admitted to lying and they said they'd do it again to accomplish their goals.

Prior to 9-11, the CIA intelligence clearly stated that Saddam Hussein was not a threat to the US or it's interests. The intelligence you refer to was actually the work of Team B and only later, after an unprecedented 21 private meetings at CIA HQ between Cheney and the director, did it become the CIA reassessment. No one in their right minds would toss out the previous five years of intelligence assessments on Iraq for the ridiculous sources presented, especially men that have been at or near those positions of power for 16 years (76-92), conspired in the halloween massacre of 76, and conspired with Team B to deliver false intelligence to congress in 74-80..

Men like this are not incompetent. They don't make these kinds of "mistakes". They have a well documented history of deceiving congress and the people in order to advance an agenda of global scope.

Or in short... LMAO.. Mistakes my ass.

By the way, each of the facts listed above is incredibly well documented. Before you go asking me for links... just google it first. It'll be good for you to get the intellectual exercise.

Wow, now that is a load... I probably have more books on history and politics in my personal library than you have ever read in your life, so do not start giving me the "intellectual exercise" fertilizer that you are spreading so thickly but with which you are growing so little.

Give me the links, I do not even have time to explore all my fantasies...much less yours.
 
Wow, now that is a load... I probably have more books on history and politics in my personal library than you have ever read in your life, so do not start giving me the "intellectual exercise" fertilizer that you are spreading so thickly but with which you are growing so little.

Give me the links, I do not even have time to explore all my fantasies...much less yours.

Books on a shelf do not impart knowledge or understanding. Ya have to read 'em, sparky!

I don't have time to learn all the things I want to learn, I don't have time to teach you well documented, easily researched information.

Here's a hint... start with TEAM B
 
What do you think Clinton should have done in order to not regret it? What would you have done (assuming you get time off to assume the Presidency) about Rwanda?

...and if 9/11 never occurred, do you think Iraq would have occurred and if Iraq never occurred would Obama have occurred?

You are starting to do nothing but ask questions instead of engageing in real debate which is a cheap trick libs in here do, I think better of you than that. Maybe you're just having a bad day.
 
Books on a shelf do not impart knowledge or understanding. Ya have to read 'em, sparky!

I don't have time to learn all the things I want to learn, I don't have time to teach you well documented, easily researched information.

Here's a hint... start with TEAM B

"Books on a shelf do not impart knowledge or understanding"...you are the poster child for that complaint, apparently.

So how, if Iraq and Saddam were not any threat to our interests [ how silly is that idea... for multiple reasons ], how do you account for the The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 under Bill Clinton... let me guess, Bill was mentored by the Rand Corp under the tutelage of Wolfie and Rummy, right? And the UN kept passing resolutions [16 of them] against Saddam because they what, just didn't like the cut of his uniform, or it was that goofy mustache that really got to them, wasn't it?

No, the arrogance with which you state your position on this whole mess seems a bit too partisan and convenient and, as stated previously, lacks sourcing. Just does not spark any interest on my part... so I guess that might just make you unsparky, eh?

Hint...read more, comprehend more, think about it all more....
 
Yes, I'm guilty of philosophizing instead of debating. It's just curiosity, not meant to be off topic. No harm meant. I'll be more careful in the future.





You are starting to do nothing but ask questions instead of engageing in real debate which is a cheap trick libs in here do, I think better of you than that. Maybe you're just having a bad day.
 
Hmmm...Center for Public Integrity, this "investigative" journalism group [ and the other one is just an affiliate of the same group so its really not two at all] as per Wikipedia = CPI describes itself as an organization that is "nonpartisan and does no advocacy work. but others describe CPI as being characterized as "progressive"and a "liberal group"... so how about we come up with some better journalism than those? We know having lived through that period, progressive groups had it in for GWB... is that too much to ask?

A great number of the statements, while the title of the article makes it seem like they, the 935, are all independent and an accumulation of separate lies, were specifically about the very same thing, the possession and manufacture of WMDs by Iraq... which as stated before, if your intelligence tells you this is occurring and it is not actually occurring, that is a mistake and not a lie... what can you folks not get about that?

If you don't watch all six minutes of this you don't want the truth:

US War Criminals - The Bush Lies Montage - YouTube
 
Qatar and Illinois Senator Obama, were you lying too?
 
If you don't watch all six minutes of this you don't want the truth:

US War Criminals - The Bush Lies Montage - YouTube

I thought you folks on that side don't believe in torture... I persisted through that tedious mind numbing video and would have to say it almost created an involuntary response, like one might achieve by water boarding, to spill my cookies.

How silly are you folks? Starts off with a comedian that your side uses for your best political commentary [at least he had some higher education, however not in politics but chemistry ] and then, besides the rabid heckling by lefties disrupting civil and calm conversations by the subjects of this video with the audiences, the only other left wing commentator is the great and knowledgeable Sean Penn... I guess we should be glad that old Sean at least finished high school, fast times...

Wow bad. Why don't you pull any one, or any myriad, of the accusations from that clip and lets explore them, I am quite familiar with most ...and lets us just battle it out, see who has the better facts, eh? That video was just a drive by hit job signalling no proof, no evidence nor any logic for all the insinuations...and oftentimes cut the person off just as they were about to answer the silly question some lib had posed... cut and then edited sufficient only to prove the bias of the editor... but who cares, as long as all his buddies, Campbell, could clap him on the back for giving it to Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Condi, Paul, et al showing the finger, eh... done so poorly and with such prejudice as to almost illicit the gagging response recited above.

Why waste an intelligent person's time with such utter nonsense?
 
I thought you folks on that side don't believe in torture... I persisted through that tedious mind numbing video and would have to say it almost created an involuntary response, like one might achieve by water boarding, to spill my cookies.

How silly are you folks? Starts off with a comedian that your side uses for your best political commentary [at least he had some higher education, however not in politics but chemistry ] and then, besides the rabid heckling by lefties disrupting civil and calm conversations by the subjects of this video with the audiences, the only other left wing commentator is the great and knowledgeable Sean Penn... I guess we should be glad that old Sean at least finished high school, fast times...

Wow bad. Why don't you pull any one, or any myriad, of the accusations from that clip and lets explore them, I am quite familiar with most ...and lets us just battle it out, see who has the better facts, eh? That video was just a drive by hit job signalling no proof, no evidence nor any logic for all the insinuations...and oftentimes cut the person off just as they were about to answer the silly question some lib had posed... cut and then edited sufficient only to prove the bias of the editor... but who cares, as long as all his buddies, Campbell, could clap him on the back for giving it to Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Condi, Paul, et al showing the finger, eh... done so poorly and with such prejudice as to almost illicit the gagging response recited above.

Why waste an intelligent person's time with such utter nonsense?

Accusations?????

Are you ****tin me? There's absolute video proof. That's the problem with modern Republicans.....the truth never interferes with their agenda. They live in a hermetically sealed bubble. I was a Republican for the first thirty years of my voting life then I went 20 years without even going to the polls. After Reagan I saw through their bull****.
I voted for Eisenhower, Goldwater, Nixon three times....even Reagan one time. I'll never vote for another one if I live to 100.
 
Last edited:
Accusations?????

Are you ****tin me? There's absolute video proof. That's the problem with modern Republicans.....the truth never interferes with their agenda. They live in a hermetically sealed bubble. I was a Republican for the first thirty years of my voting life then I went 20 years without even going to the polls. After Reagan I saw through their bull****.
I voted for Eisenhower, Goldwater, Nixon three times....even Reagan one time. I'll never vote for another one if I live to 100.

Are you calling this video the very proof of which you speak? I hope not. If so, this conversation abruptly ends. If not, give me one instance and its "proof" in video. Video complete and not editing out the chance to respond within context.

I can teach good lessons well, I can even be semi-persuasive at times. However, I cannot be expected nor have I even the capacity to resurrect, much less the desire or the talent to revive the flat-liners of the left.

Be that the diminished case, I want to wish you at least that life until at least that ripe old age of a hundred.
 
Are you calling this video the very proof of which you speak? I hope not. If so, this conversation abruptly ends. If not, give me one instance and its "proof" in video. Video complete and not editing out the chance to respond within context.

I can teach good lessons well, I can even be semi-persuasive at times. However, I cannot be expected nor have I even the capacity to resurrect, much less the desire or the talent to revive the flat-liners of the left.

Be that the diminished case, I want to wish you at least that life until at least that ripe old age of a hundred.

935 documented bare faced lies is enough for me. Kinda amazing that folks who believe a 2000 year old fairy tale about a man who could walk on water and heal leprosy by touching can't look at a live video and come to the proper conclusion.
 
I feel pretty much the same way. The Clinton era was a good one. Was it because he was so perfect? No, but he was extremely intelligent and I appreciate that quality. Was he kind of slimy? Yes, that he was. Bush and Obama, while different in some ways, are both way in over their heads. Getting the job and doing the job are 2 very different things.

Our political process has always been peculiar. What kind of personality leads someone to choose a career in politics instead of architecture, for example. I think you have to be bent in order to have this desire. These careers are chosen, not accidental. Now, in the age of TV and internet and instant bulk texting, this is even more so, an extreme choice. These are not populist heros that arise in time of need. These are cunning, somewhat feral people who are our only offerings. Add to that our propensity for extreme positions, how can we possibly pick a "winner".?

I don't think there is any doubt about it. Politicians choose politics because of a greed for power and control. I don't think a reasonable human being would go through the process for any other reason. This results in our giving power to the wrong people. We need professional managers in government but professional managers, for the most part, want nothing to do with it. Those professional managers who do get into politics face a system that doesn't really allow for professional management but rather the taking and exercise of power and control. A good example is Mayor Bloomberg of New York. He was a very successful entrepreneur and professional manager. I assume he did a decent job managing the New York organization but his fame has come from his propensity to try to impose his life style preferences on the citizens of the city. Power and control.
 
The hell we didn't. We went over there when the average education there was about the equivalent of fourth grade and nearly all of them didn't have that. Big oil companies have had a presence there and we've been very sure of a presence there for 80 years. Iraq is a strategic position for oil in the middle east and we couldn't stand it when Saddam Hussein invaded Qatar and you think it was a coincidence that when we ran Saddam out of there in the Gulf war that he set most of their oil wells afire? Come on....get real if you're gonna try to argue.

So you are suggesting that oil companies weren't in Iraq prior to the war?
 
in 2010 over 200 presidential scholars ranked Obama 15th and W in the mid or high 30s ... we'll see where the experts put him by the time he's done ... my guess is that he will drop a few notches ...

I wonder if they checked the party affiliation of the scholars.
 
I wonder if they checked the party affiliation of the scholars.

If he does drop a few the right wing T party assholes in the house of representatives who have tried to block everything he wanted to do will be responsible.
 
If he does drop a few the right wing T party assholes in the house of representatives who have tried to block everything he wanted to do will be responsible.

What on earth are you talking about? I was just wondering what the party affiliation of the scholars who did the ranking is. But I'm led to believe from your comment that the efficacy of a president is based on what the congress does?
 
935 documented bare faced lies is enough for me. Kinda amazing that folks who believe a 2000 year old fairy tale about a man who could walk on water and heal leprosy by touching can't look at a live video and come to the proper conclusion.

Dude, you are no Sherlock are ya? You get all the rest of your deductive logic all fouled up and then you go all Australian on me with your kangaroo logic jumping to the false conclusion that I am a Christian... wow, where did you pull that out of, Campbell?

How about naming me 35 of those 935 of the lies documented on GWB, et al...just cut and paste them, you dont have to do anything like type all those... would just like to see what the actuality of what you base your opinion upon just might be... if its all fluff and thus bluff... pretty sure its the former and the latter.
 
Just curious....if it was about lying why the Republicans release a 30,000 page report about the investigation which mentioned oral sex, sex toys like a cigar etc. Not only that the day they arrest a politician for lying you might find a few very poor people that remain electable in this country. The two groups which contain the biggest liars in the world are the congress and the church. Thank goodness church membership is on a steep decline in this country. It would be an even greater decline if it were not for poor Mexican catholics coming into the country by the million. Most youngsters are wising up to the GAWD, JEEZUS story.

To prove he was lying.
 
To prove he was lying.

Yeah....like a bunch of reckless political pricks who never took the first thought about all that porn being on the Internet. The Republican party has evolved into a bunch of criminals who care for nothing except their agenda and their goals. That's why I quit their asses after thirty years of supporting them.

They are almost antiques. The 47% that they don't even worry about will vote their asses all the way out of office. Voters aren't as stupid as Republicans think they are.
 
Wow! Easy picins 4 me.
To the OP.
Put on your turbans and burkas and bow down to your God, obama. Wash his feet and kiss his ring. He can do no wrong.

This "Your side let Americans die and your complaining about my glorious obama in all his reverence allowing just four measly American Patriots get murdered. You should be ashamed you pit bulls." Crap just shows how much of a mindless follower you truly are.
You are so insipid minded that you can't see past your living room window w/ the etching of his reverence, obama, to realize that they are ALL politicians and they ALL do pretty screwed up sh** while in power. Just because Bush (Mr. I really know how to make the Government bigger w/o any help from the Dems.) Declared war and sent troops into battle does not negate oblaima for refusing aid and allowing those men to die. I guess you believe that Bundy killed a lot more people so the Boston Bomber should just be let go.

Your sides line of thinking shows the statistical reality true that Liberals, on average have the lowest I.Q.'s of all party members.

Do us all a favor please; Next time you "FEEL" like posting some tripe like that type it out, print it and take it into the bathroom and wipe your a** w/ it because those four American Patriots who gave the ultimate deserve a hell of a lot better.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom