• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Wilson's full of crap.

DeeJayH said:
funny how nobody has commented on this one:roll:

oh they commented it went like this:

"It's fake next question."

not it's fake an here's why, but simply a refusal to acknoweldge that it could even possibly be true because if they do that the arguments they've been making for the last 2 years all turn into bullshit.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
That article was from November 6, 2005, yours was from April 2003 and it said might have been rocket fuel. Just because you don't want to believe the article he posted doesn't mean it's not true and posting an article that's two years older than his proves nothing just as your article from April 2003 does not trump my State Department, DOD, and CIA report from May 2003.

That article you posted was an Editorial. Do you not get that. It was a guys opinion that was obviously either very missinformed, or deliberately missleading. That evidence he cited had been completely refuted 2 years ago.
 
DeeJayH said:
funny how nobody has commented on this one:roll:

I did, I completely refuted the editorial in that link by posting links to CIA press releases and Associated Press Articles.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
I did, I completely refuted the editorial in that link by posting links to CIA press releases and Associated Press Articles.

no you didn't because I hit your link from April and trumped it with one from May from the Department of State that disagrees. May comes after April by the way.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
That article you posted was an Editorial. Do you not get that. It was a guys opinion that was obviously either very missinformed, or deliberately missleading. That evidence he cited had been completely refuted 2 years ago.

The one I posted was a Department of State outline of a CIA and Department of Defense report that disagrees with your findings.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
That article you posted was an Editorial. Do you not get that. It was a guys opinion that was obviously either very missinformed, or deliberately missleading. That evidence he cited had been completely refuted 2 years ago.

http://canberra.usembassy.gov/hyper/2003/0528/epf307.htm

notice that .gov in there? Then look at the date mine is newer than yours so nanana na na
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
The Democrats and the liberal media have been frothing at their mouths over Joe Wilsons claims that the president lied to get us into war, well finally somebody got the story right; Joe Wilson's full of **** and has no idea what he's talking about:

He's a liar, he is a proven liar, he and his wife tried to commit an intelligence fraud on the public aimed at the current leadership of our country.

Anyone who still believes he spoke the truth is either whoafully disinformed or highly disingenuous. The same goes for those who still claim the Bush adminsitration "lied" about WMD and the reasons to use force to remove Saddam. The WH seems to have finally gone on the counter-attack to the attacks the Democrats have incessantly levied against them. Let's hope the stick with it and set the record straight.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Either way, as history has shown, Wilson was right, the Bush Administration was wrong.

No it does not and the report Wilson gave to the CIA supported the intelligence that Iraq was sneaking around in Niger looking to make a deal.

No stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons.

Which had nothing to do with Wilson.

No programs to create any.

Nope and again nothing to do with Wilson.

And according to the CIA not even any attempts to acquire the uranium necessary for a nuclear weapons program.

And the CIA was in the dark about a lot of things.

I don't know how other than historical revision and intellection dishonesty that one can argue with that.

He already had enough yellow-cake to make several bombs, enough enriched to get a good start on one. The fact is Wilson's report and the British intelligence gave us good reason to believe he was looking around for a source and ALL reports confirm that with sanctions lifted he would have been going at it at full speed. THAT's why he had to be removed.

All you guys on the right are trying to do is shoot the messenger.[/quote]
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
The Democrats and the liberal media have been frothing at their mouths over Joe Wilsons claims that the president lied to get us into war, well finally somebody got the story right; Joe Wilson's full of **** and has no idea what he's talking about:

He's a liar, he is a pruven liar, he and his wife tried to commit an intelligence fraud on the public aimed at the current leadership of our country.

Anyone who still believes he spoke the truth is either whoafully disinformed or highly disingenuous. The same goes for those who still claim the Bush adminsitration "lied" about WMD and the reasons to use force to remove Saddam. The WH seems to have finally gone on the counter-attack to the attacks the Democrats have incessantly levied against them. Let's hope the stick with it and set the record straight.
 
Back
Top Bottom