Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: militarymuscle69 on March 14, 2007, 10:37:51 AM
-
I knew that would get your attention!!! FOOLS! I figured it out! I know why you all skim read! You skip over the facts people liek me and Beach put in our posts because you can't argue with them. You just look for the opinion parts and argue them because that is all you guys have, opinions and CT theories. ZERO FACT!!!!
-
lol. Made me look. :D
-
Well, actually, Bush is a liar... that's already been proven.
http://www.bushwatch.com/bushlies.htm
Hope this helps.
-
Well, actually, Bush is a liar... that's already been proven.
http://www.bushwatch.com/bushlies.htm
Hope this helps.
I thought this one was pretty funny. Bush took the quote from a student who embellished the quote. ;D
What the hell is Bush doing using a Dartmouth Undergraduate student as a reference?
Today's Bush Lie
"[Castro] welcomes sex tourism," Bush told a room of law enforcement officials in Florida, according to the Los Angeles Times. "Here's how he bragged about the industry," Bush said. "This is his quote: 'Cuba has the cleanest and most educated prostitutes in the world.'"
"As it turns out, Bush had lifted that quotation not from an actual Castro speech but rather from a 2001 essay written by then Dartmouth University undergraduate Charles Trumbull. In the essay, Trumbull did appear to quote a Castro speech about prostitution. Sadly, the student made the quotation up.
"According to officials, the actual quotation from Castro's 1992 speech reads as follows: 'There are hookers, but prostitution is not allowed in our country. There are no women forced to sell themselves to a man, to a foreigner, to a tourist. Those who do so do it on their own, voluntarily. We can say that they are highly educated hookers and quite healthy, because we are the country with the lowest number of AIDS cases.'"
"...And this isn't the first time the Internet has baffled Bush. Back in 2003, the President cited another student's thesis when making a case to go to war. The student's [plagiarized and "sexed up"] work ended up in a government document describing Iraq's weapons capability. Not exactly the kind of hard intelligence needed to justify an attack on another country." The Register, 07.28.04
-
I knew that would get your attention!!! FOOLS! I figured it out! I know why you all skim read! You skip over the facts people liek me and Beach put in our posts because you can't argue with them. You just look for the opinion parts and argue them because that is all you guys have, opinions and CT theories. ZERO FACT!!!!
you're a neotaint. hope this "heps".
-
No integrity.
That's what this Presidency is about.
-
The Bush Presidency is a mix of 'strategic vision' and 'strategic opportunism'.
The % assigned to each of these will determine if it was very good for America, or very bad.
'Strategic Vision' = America has gained control over iraqi oil and established a military foothold in the region which will allow us to influence everything that happens in the region for a long time. China and Russia (our future world adversaries) are weaker due to our presence there.
'Strategic Opportunism' = Haliburton, KBR, and the military industrial complex has received a trillion dollars during the Bush administration from borrowing for these wars. Haliburton will leave America at the end of the Bush Administration with a great deal of our money and large contorl over Iraq's development. China is stronger from their things we buy, with money we borrow from them.
NEITHER can be denied - both have taken place over the last 6 years.
However, we won't know for a decade which was their true (or larger) intent - growing America thru imperialism, growing their own wealth thru spending, or both.
Which do you think is the main focus of this White House?
-
I knew that would get your attention!!! FOOLS! I figured it out! I know why you all skim read! You skip over the facts people liek me and Beach put in our posts because you can't argue with them. You just look for the opinion parts and argue them because that is all you guys have, opinions and CT theories. ZERO FACT!!!!
::) I happen to look at every thread posted fool ::)
-
OMG facts................MM6 9 your GOD lied!
hahahahahahah
-
I knew that would get your attention!!! FOOLS! I figured it out! I know why you all skim read! You skip over the facts people liek me and Beach put in our posts because you can't argue with them. You just look for the opinion parts and argue them because that is all you guys have, opinions and CT theories. ZERO FACT!!!!
no offense bro but your military is run just like a wacky cult. In fact it is one...They break you all down and then build you up with their propaganda..And you can never 2nd guess what they are doing or your fcked...
-
they're fcked either way.
If the bullets or IEDs don't get them, ...the PTSD does once they're out, and the programming starts breaking down.
-
they're fcked either way.
If the bullets or IEDs don't get them, ...the PTSD does once they're out, and the programming starts breaking down.
dude, there are 200k military people that are going to be so pissed when they find out aobut 9/11... "I lost my legs for THAT"?
-
no offense bro but your military is run just like a wacky cult. In fact it is one...They break you all down and then build you up with their propaganda..And you can never 2nd guess what they are doing or your fcked...
You watched full metal jacket to many times
-
I knew that would get your attention!!! FOOLS! I figured it out! I know why you all skim read! You skip over the facts people liek me and Beach put in our posts because you can't argue with them. You just look for the opinion parts and argue them because that is all you guys have, opinions and CT theories. ZERO FACT!!!!
LOL! Man, I was hoping it was a hoax! Good one, MM69! ;D
-
LOL! Man, I was hoping it was a hoax! Good one, MM69! ;D
Wait, did you just say you were hoping Bush caught lying was a hoax.......
BWWAAAAAAAAhahahhahahahh ahahhahhahahahahaha (http://www.imagedonkey.com/out.php?i=19756_lol.gif)
-
LOL! Man, I was hoping it was a hoax! Good one, MM69! ;D
I know...ask one of these guys to PROVE he was lied.
Lying: a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood
See, since all they can do is make assumptions on Bush's intent they can't PROVE he lied. Oh they will come with all kinds of information that was presented and say he cherry picked info in order to decieve the public but again they can't prove it. You will quickly find that proof isn't required here until you blow up one of their arguments.
-
I know...ask one of these guys to PROVE he was lied.
Lying: a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood
See, since all they can do is make assumptions on Bush's intent they can't PROVE he lied. Oh they will come with all kinds of information that was presented and say he cherry picked info in order to decieve the public but again they can't prove it. You will quickly find that proof isn't required here until you blow up one of their arguments.
For the record, mm69:
Do you believe George W Bush has EVER lied to the American people?
-
For the record, mm69:
Do you believe George W Bush has EVER lied to the American people?
no, I don't believe he INTENTIONALLY decieved the American people
-
no, I don't believe he INTENTIONALLY decieved the American people
Which cases do you believe he misled us unintentionally?
-
Which cases do you believe he misled us unintentionally?
As soon as I posted that i knew what your next question would be. I believe that he was given intelligence that he thought was credible. He relayed that intell. If the intell in the end was wrong that doesn't mean he lied about it.
-
As soon as I posted that i knew what your next question would be. I believe that he was given intelligence that he thought was credible. He relayed that intell. If the intell in the end was wrong that doesn't mean he lied about it.
OK, what about when he told the public he had stopped drinking and hadn't had a drop in so many years...
then the video surfaced of him shitfaced drunk at that wedding, he was slurring his words so bad and had to be propped up.
Do you claim the supposed length of his time on the wagon was faulty intelligence from the CIA?
-
As soon as I posted that i knew what your next question would be. I believe that he was given intelligence that he thought was credible. He relayed that intell. If the intell in the end was wrong that doesn't mean he lied about it.
The Bush White House changed the EPA findings on 9/11 toxicity in NY air.
Now, Bush took the stage and said it was safe.
The EPA scientists blew the whistle and said that document was false and had been changed.
Bush told people to go back to work - that it was safe - when the scientsits said it was not. Isn't that a lie?
You can argue whether he changed it, or someone else did, forever. Hell, he can deny accountability for everything (and has) on every issue. I guess there comes a point where "the buck stops here". Well, it should. But it doesn't.
-
I know...ask one of these guys to PROVE he was lied.
BWWAAAAAAAAhahahhahahahh ahahhahhahahahahaha When does he not lie...(http://www.imagedonkey.com/out.php?i=19756_lol.gif)
Lies lies lies: http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/whycare.html
CLAIM vs. FACT
Pre-War Assertions
PRE-WAR INTELLIGENCE HYPE
CLAIM: "I expected to find the weapons [because] I based my decision on the best intelligence possible...The evidence I had was the best possible evidence that he had a weapon."
FACT - WHITE HOUSE REPEATEDY WARNED BY INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY: The Washington Post reported this weekend, "President Bush and his top advisers ignored many of the caveats and qualifiers included in the classified report on Saddam Hussein's weapons." Specifically, the President made unequivocal statements that Iraq "has got chemical weapons" two months after the DIA concluded that there was "no reliable information on whether Iraq is producing and stockpiling chemical weapons." He said, "Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production" three months after the White House received an intelligence report that clearly indicated Department of Energy experts concluded the tubes were not intended to produce uranium enrichment centrifuges. He said, "Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa," three months after "the CIA sent two memos to the White House in October voicing strong doubts about" the claim. [Sources: WP, 2/7/04; Bush statement, 11/3/02; DIA report, 2002; Bush statement, 1/28/03; NIE, October 2002; WP, 7/23/03; Bush statement, 10/7/02; WP, 9/26/03]
IGNORING INTELLIGENCE
CLAIM: "We looked at the intelligence."
FACT – WHITE HOUSE IGNORED INTELLIGENCE WARNINGS: Knight Ridder reported that CIA officers "said President Bush ignored warnings" that his WMD case was weak. And Greg Thielmann, the Bush State Department's top intelligence official, "said suspicions were presented as fact, and contrary arguments ignored." Knight Ridder later reported, "Senior diplomatic, intelligence and military officials have charged that Bush and his top aides made assertions about Iraq's banned weapons programs and alleged links to al-Qaeda that weren't supported by credible intelligence, and that they ignored intelligence that didn't support their policies." [Knight-Ridder, 6/13/03; CBS News, 6/7/03; Knight Ridder, 6/28/03]
IGNORING INTERNATIONAL INTELLIGENCE WARNINGS
CLAIM: "The international community thought he had weapons."
FACT – INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY TOLD WHITE HOUSE THE OPPOSITE: The IAEA and U.N. both repeatedly told the Administration it had no evidence that Iraq possessed WMD. On 2/15/03, the IAEA said that, "We have to date found no evidence of ongoing prohibited nuclear or nuclear-related activities in Iraq." On 3/7/03 IAEA Director Mohamed ElBaradei said nuclear experts have found "no indication" that Iraq has tried to import high-strength aluminum tubes for centrifuge enrichment of uranium. At the same time, AP reported that "U.N. weapons inspectors have not found any 'smoking guns' in Iraq during their search for weapons WMD." AP also reported, "U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix said his teams have not uncovered any WMD." [Source: WP, 2/15/03; NY Times, 3/7/03; AP, 1/9/03; AP, 2/14/03]
INFORMING CONGRESS OF INTELLIGENCE CAVEATS
CLAIM: "I went to Congress with the same intelligence. Congress saw the same intelligence I had, and they looked at exactly what I looked at."
FACT – CONGRESS WAS OUTRAGED AT PRESENTATION BY THE WHITE HOUSE: The New Republic reported, "Senators were outraged to find that intelligence info given to them omitted the qualifications and countervailing evidence that had characterized the classified version and played up the claims that strengthened the administration's case for war." According to Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-PA), many House members were only convinced to support the war after the Administration "showed them a photograph of a small, unmanned airplane spraying a liquid in what appeared to be a test for delivering chemical and biological agents," despite the U.S. Air Force telling the Administration it "sharply disputed the notion that Iraq's UAVs were being designed as attack weapons." [Source: The New Republic, 6/30/03; Wilkes Barre Times Leader, 1/6/04; WP, 9/26/03]
CLAIM vs. FACT
Pre-War Assertions
PRE-WAR "IMMINENT THREAT" ASSERTION
CLAIM: "I believe it is essential that when we see a threat, we deal with those threats before they become imminent. It's too late if they become imminent."
FACT – ADMINISTRATION REPEATEDLY CLAIMED IRAQ WAS AN "IMMINENT THREAT": The Bush Administration repeatedly claimed that Iraq was an imminent threat before the war – not that it would "become imminent." Specifically, White House communications director Dan Bartlett was asked on CNN: "Is [Saddam Hussein] an imminent threat to US interests, either in that part of the world or to Americans right here at home?" Bartlett replied, "Well, of course he is." Similarly, when White House spokesman Ari Fleischer was asked whether America went to war in Iraq because of an imminent threat, he replied, "Absolutely." And White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the reason NATO allies – including the U.S. - should support the defense of one of its members from Iraq was because "this is about an imminent threat." Additionally, the Administration used "immediate," "urgent" and "mortal" to describe the Iraq threat to the United States. [Source: American Progress list, 1/29/04]
BUSH'S THREAT RHETORIC BEFORE THE WAR
CLAIM: "I think, if I might remind you that in my language I called it a grave and gathering threat, but I don't want to get into word contests."
FACT – BUSH MADE FAR MORE DIRE STATEMENTS BEFORE THE WAR: While the President did call Iraq a "grave and gathering" threat, that was not all he said. On 11/23/02, he said Iraq posed a "unique and urgent threat." On 1/3/03 he said "Iraq is a threat to any American." On 10/28/02 he said Iraq was "a real and dangerous threat" to America. On 10/2/02 he said, "The Iraqi regime is a threat of unique urgency" and that Iraq posed "a grave threat" to America. [Bush, 11/23/02; Bush; 1/3/03; Bush, 10/28/02; Bush, 10/2/02; Bush, 10/2/02]
SADDAM-AL QAEDA-WMD CONNECTION
CLAIM: "Iraq had the capacity to make a weapon and then let that weapon fall into the hands of a shadowy terrorist network."
FACT – ASSERTION BELIES PREVIOUS INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENTS: This assertion belies the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate which told the White House that Iraq would most likely only coordinate with Al Qaeda if the U.S. invaded Iraq. As the NYT reported, "[A] CIA assessment said last October: 'Baghdad for now appears to be drawing a line short of conducting terrorist attacks' in the United States." The CIA added that Saddam might order attacks with WMD as 'his last chance to exact vengeance by taking a large number of victims with him.'" Previously, the CIA had told the White House that Iraq "has not provided chemical or biological weapons to Al Qaeda or related terrorist groups." And David Kay himself said, " I found no real connection between WMD and terrorists" in Iraq. [Source: NIE, 2002; NY Times, 1/29/03; NY Times, 2/6/02; NBC News, 1/26/04]
DAVID KAY'S REPORT
CLAIM: "And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out."
FACT – KAY ACTUALLY SAID WMD HAD BEEN DESTROYED AFTER 1991: David Kay didn't say we haven't found the stockpiles of chemical weapons because they are destroyed, hidden or transported to another country. Kay said that they were never produced and hadn't been produced since 1991. As he said, "Multiple sources with varied access and reliability have told ISG that Iraq did not have a large, ongoing, centrally controlled CW program after 1991. Information found to date suggests that Iraq's large-scale capability to develop, produce and fill new CW munitions was reduced - if not entirely destroyed - during Operations Desert Storm and Desert Fox, 13 years of U.N. sanctions and U.N. inspections." [Kay Testimony, 2004] - The entire Progress Report
-
Lies Lies Lies by Bush, around Bush, for Bush under Bush, over Bush... Bush is the prince of lies!
If you can't find at least one major lie in all this MM69 :-\
Justice Dept. Terrorism Statistics Distorted (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/20/AR2007022001566.html) Federal prosecutors
routinely count cases involving drug trafficking, marriage fraud and other
unrelated crimes as part of anti-terrorism efforts[/b]
2/20/07 Karl
Rove Received '03 Iranian Peace Proposals (http://www.alternet.org/story/48238/) who else in Administration
covered up peace overtures? awash in arrogance?
2/16/07 Bush
Administration Lie Factory in Taters (http://www.alternet.org/story/48083/) Feith, Libby, Cheney, Republican
Congress echo chamber, few now drink the neocon Kool-Aid
2/15/07
NEWSWEEK
details Feith's lies promotion of war (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17154137/site/newsweek/)
2/4/07
Cheney's Shadow Hangs Over Trial (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/03/AR2007020301344.html)testimony points out Cheney role in
trying to cover up exposure of lies about Iraq uranium
Trial Spotlights Cheney Power and Methods (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/20/washington/20cheney.html?ex=1172638800&en=f6a34b91e99533ef&ei=5070&emc=eta1) NY Times --running his own
government
2/5/07 4th
Anniversary of Gen. Powell's Lies - Speech to UN (http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/020507.html) Very detailed
analysis of lies, what he knew, what he doubted -- not so innocent
2/4/07 Cheney's
Fingers All Over Libby's Actions (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16967179/) Trial of accused liar shows White
House operations, lies, cover ups
2/1/07
Details
on how Iran is years away from developing a single nuclear bomb (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070131/ap_on_re_eu/iran_nuclear)
esteemed British Think Tank analysis
2/1/07 Bush
Claim of 4 Thwarted Terrorist Attacks in State of Union Speech (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16893899/page/2/) as if he
doesn't know or doesn't care when he's lying
1/24/07
President's State of the Union Portrayal of The Enemy Very Distorted (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/NewsSearch?sb=-1&st=glenn kessler&)
lumps together Al-Qaeda with Iran, Sunnis and Shias, terrorists with guerrillas
= lies or confusion in his own mind
1/17/07
Iraq War
Lies on Trial (http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,459824,00.html)Lewis Libby case starts
11/19/06
Embittered Insiders Turn Against Bush (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/18/AR2006111801076.html) Neocons jump ship, blaming
Bush-Rumsfeld incompetence (after they held the inside jobs, e.g. ordering
dismissal of all civil servants and soldiers)
11/02/06 The
Best War Ever (http://www.prwatch.org/tbwe/index.html) great video showing Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld saying their
lies - new rules for politics, past statements on video
10/11/06
Study Claims Iraq's 'Excess' Death Toll Has Reached 655,000 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442_pf.html) Bush has
repeatedly said Iraq deaths were about 30,000
10/5/06 Lie
by Lie (http://www.motherjones.com/bush_war_timeline/)A very large data base, listed month by month categorizing and
sourcing Bush Administration lies
10/1/06
Bush Cheney Lies (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2006/10/01/GR2006100100022.html) Seven statements on Iraq compared to
intelligence reports
Intelligence Reports Dispute White House Optimism (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/30/AR2006093000293.html) Garner on
dismissal of all Iraq government officials and soldiers
9/11/06
More
Cheney Lies exposed and detailed (http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?bid=3&pid=120112)-- Cheney on Meet the Press also Search
Google for
Cheney Lies (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B2GGGL_enUS177&q=cheney+lies)
9/8/06
9/11 Conspiracy Theories
Multiply (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14723997/) 36 percent suspect the U.S. government promoted the attacks
or intentionally sat on its hands-- of New York City residents two years ago
found 49.3 percent believed the government consciously failed to act. (We at
AAWE believe the attacks were unexpected and real, but were indeed wanted and
provoked by TheWarParty to encourage America into invading Iraq, See
Was It All Planned? (http://antiwar.com/utley/?articleid=2189), Ed)
7/30/06
Report on Prewar Intelligence Lagging (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/29/AR2006072900608.html)Information Democrats Want Most
Might Not Come Out Until After Election
7/26/06
50% of
Americans Still Believe the Lies About Iraq (http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20060725/cm_huffpost/025802) after Republican counter
offensive to justify the war
6/27/06
Hyping the Threat (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/26/AR2006062600974.html)Miami 7 nobodies --example of exaggerations, Bush
claimed over 200 convictions against 39 actual cases --by Richard Cohen
6/25/06
Clarifying Curveball's Bio-Weapons Lab Lies (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/24/AR2006062401081.html) Almost all CIA source
information in Powell speech to UN was false. Tenet denies being warned of
lies, all info from Curveball, German intel warned C unreliable, Wilkerson,
Powell aide, confirms lies, info from Silverman-Robb report
6/23/06 Some
Congressional Republicans exaggerate findings of pre '91 gas to justify war (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13480264/)
6/20/06
Cheney Tries to Defend Past Lies (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/19/AR2006061900699.html)For more search
Cheney Lies (http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=cheney+lies&ei=UTF-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&fr=moz2) on Yahoo.com
5/7/06
Detailing Several
Bush Lies (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,192069,00.html)on war and wiretapping
4/25/06
Details on Recent Bush Lies (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,192069,00.html)--exactly what he said,
when and how --shows total irrelevance of truth (even on Fox News website)-- a
greater purpose??
4/12/06
Lacking Biolabs, Trailers Carried Case for War (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/11/AR2006041101888.html)
actually produced hydrogen for weather balloons
Administration pushed notion of mobile
biological laboratories for anthrax despite evidence to contrary -- used in
Powell UN speech for war--Administration hides experts' report
White House denies that Bush-Cheney intentionally lied (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/12/AR2006041201789.html)
4/12/06
Al-Jazeera on Bush Administration Lies (http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=11069) --- how the issue is reported
to the Arab and Muslim -- Bush, whose foreign policies are dictated by the
Christian Right and the Israeli lobby,..... how Muslim world views
America
4/10/06
Details on how Cheney
Fabricated the Lie (http://www.antiwar.com/mcgovern/?articleid=8837)about guy uranium
4/9/06
Prosecutor Describes Cheney, Libby as Key Voices Pitching Iraq-guy (Uranium)
Story (http://Prosecutor%20Describes%20Cheney,%20Libby%20as%20Key%20Voices%20Pitching%20Iraq-guy%20Story)
concerted effort to
discredit Bush critic - details on selecting questionable lies from deep
inside intelligence reports - calculating using word uranium would mean
bombs and scare American voters
3/30/06
Bush Knew That
His Accusations on Tubes and Uranium Were Possibly Untrue (http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/0330nj1.htm)
before using them in State of the Union speech. New evidence-- Karl Rove
warned staffers to keep secret that Bush knew
3/21/06
Old Forecasts Haunt Bush Team (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/20/AR2006032000341.html)
2/15/06
Bush Team Cherry Picked Intelligence to Promote Lies (http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20060301faessay85202/paul-r-pillar/intelligence-policy-and-the-war-in-iraq.html?mode=print)former
CIA intelligence chief for Mid-East in Foreign Affairs
2/11/06
CIA's Top Mid-East Analyst (http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=8535)writes intelligence distorted, cherry picked by
Bush-Cheney staff to justify war
1/18/06
State Department Declared
guy Uranium Sale to Iraq “Unlikely” in March 2002 (http://www.judicialwatch.org/5690.shtml)
12/24/05
News of April Glaspie (http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/dec2005-daily/25-12-2005/world/w2.htm)-former U.S.
Ambassador to Iraq still kept under wraps - the original set up for
invasion in 1990
12/21/05
Detailed Answers to Bush Latest Speech (http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/121905.html) Dates and points
11/27/05
Details of CIA
report on WMD (http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/areynolds.htm)truthful, but with fabricated
conclusions--$44 billion intelligence budget
(http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/areynolds.htm)odci.gov/cia/reports
(http://odci.gov/cia/reports)
11/22/05
Cheney Attacks Critics (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/21/AR2005112101375.html) but refuses questions from friendly audience
Detailing some Cheney lies (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/21/AR2005112101233.html)
11/21/05
Clarification of
Powell's Lies in UN Speech (http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news2/latimes935.html) -- CIA Director Tenet guaranteed false evidence
from Curveball --German intelligence warned CIA of lies
11/14/05
Frank Rich (NYT) Details the Lies (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/111305Z.shtml)
CBS News found that 53
percent believed Saddam had been personally involved in 9/11; other polls
showed that a similar percentage of Americans had even convinced themselves that
the hijackers were Iraqis. All lies put out by Bush
Administration
11/14/05
Details on Information Provided to Congress For War (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/11/AR2005111101832.html) Mis-statements
and hidden information --what White House hid and/or distorted
11/14/05
Neoconned Neoconned Again (http://www.lewrockwell.com/woods/woods51.html)Collection of Writings including interview
with Jude Wanniski on all the lies
10/29/05 A
Chronology of Cheney Lies (http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=9301)
10/27/05 Growing Discredit for Colin Powell (http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=10493)-- his UN speech -did he know he
was lying?
Lowest Point in My Life says Powell aide about speech to UN (http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/19/powell.un/)
10/27/05
Col. Wilkerson
Speech (http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news5/latimes7v'.htm) Cheney's top aide on Cheney-Rumsfeld Cabal-- lies and war
10/22/05 Karen
Hughes Repeats Lies in Indonesia (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9777092/) - says Saddam
gassed 300,000 of his own people confusing gassed (5,000) with numbers killed
in other actions --maintains (in Wash. Post print edition 10-22) that's
something I said every day in the course of the campaign.... {This is person
Bush chose to direct American information campaign abroad. Ed.}
10/21/05 Quotes and
Dates of Various Specific Lies (http://www.byethetimes.com/id1.html)
10/20/05
Rove and Libby (top neocon aide to Cheney) (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/19/AR2005101902431.html) in thick of
lies and cover-up about Iraq
9/22/05 It
should be no surprise that one of the first programs targeted for post-Katrina
cuts by fiscal conservatives in the House was the Medicare prescription drug
plan set to go into effect later this year. Back in 2003, the administration
estimated the drug add-on would cost an estimated $400 billion over 10 years—a
figure that prompted opposition from many Republicans who feared the White House
had underestimated costs. Yet after a major lobbying push from GOP leadership
and the White House—which included 4 a.m. phone calls from Bush to wavering
lawmakers—many fiscal conservatives voted for the plan in spite of its hefty
price tag. A few months later, the administration revised the cost estimate to
$534 billion. Yet the real outcry among Republicans didn’t happen until last
February, when the administration revised the cost again—upping the cost to $724
billion. It was “total sticker shock,” said Rep. Mike Pence, who chairs the
Republican Study Committee, an influential caucus of fiscal conservatives.
They Lie
About Domestic Policies Too --Newsweek (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9429978/site/newsweek/page/2/)
10/18/05
Cheney Caught Up in Web of Lies (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/17/AR2005101701888_pf.html) trying to cover up earlier lies about
Africa uranium for Iraq
Listing
some past Cheney lies (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_10/004860.php)
And more lies (http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/04/10/ale04059.html)
8/21/05
Former Aide to
Powell (http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/19/powell.un/)--specifies lies from CIA and White House fed to Powell for UN
Speech
9/08/05
Powell Admits to Falsehoods in UN Speech (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-09-08-powell-iraq_x.htm)says a blot on his record
says CIA fed him lies
8/1/05
Another
Former CIA officer (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/01/politics/01weapons.html?ex=1123646400&en=6a08912f09b29362&ei=5070&emc=eta1)says defector's showing that Saddam ended nuke
efforts in 2000, was ignored hidden away -- NY TIMES
7/28/05
What Did Bush Know? (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2005/07/25/BL2005072500724.html) --about campaign to discredit exposure of his uranium
speech untruths --details of who said what--discrepancies in testimony of
Scooter Libby (Cheney top man) and Karl Rove
7/27/05
Prosecutor In CIA Leak Case Casting A Wide Net (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/26/AR2005072602069.html)[/span]
White House effort to discredit critic
examined in detail
7/16/05
Details on Rove (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/16/AR2005071601364.html)--speaking to Grand Jury while denying connections --
report on major smear campaign to protect President's lies about guy uranium
7/15/05
Stalled Spin on Rove (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/14/AR2005071401696.html)Criminal case curtails defense -Administration
tries to put blame on Ambassador Wilson who exposed lies
7/4/05
57% of Americans Now Believe that Bush intentionally misled (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050628/pl_afp/usiraqbushpoll)American
people -56% disapprove of Bush War management
6/26/05
U.S.
General Admits Advance Extensive Bombing (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1669640,00.html)
before the war to soften up Iraqi
defenses
5/16/05
The Downing Street Memo (http://downingstreetmemo.com/)
Bush Planned War from Beginning
--no connection to 9/11
6/23/05
Dems Demand Data on Feith Lies (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/22/AR2005062201989.html) -- about Saddam-Al Qaeda connection used to
start war
5/28/05
Analysts Who Provided Fake Intelligence Given Awards (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/27/AR2005052701618_pf.html) cash bonuses
5/26/05
Bolton Confirmation
Would Shatter Intelligence Analysts' Morale (http://www.antiwar.com/mcgovern/?articleid=6072) of those
who did not go along with lies
5/26/05
The Tillman Lies - (http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/columns/pressingissues_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000930844)-compared to Newsweek report
5/22/05
New Findings on Bush Administration Lies (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/21/AR2005052100474_pf.html)
Pre-war intelligence agencies warned White
House on lies before Bush Powell speeches
More Details from British Intelligence (http://www.juancole.com/2005/05/secret-british-memo-shows-bush.html)
4/26/05 Report
Finds No Evidence Syria Hid Iraqi Arms (http://href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/25/AR2005042501554.html)
4/7/05 Who Forged the guy Documents? (http://href=http://www.alternet.org/story/21704)
4/7/05 Bolton Faces Hurdles for
Nomination to UN (http://href=http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0407-05.htm) --CIA agent testifies on his lies, efforts to get CIA agent removed
for questioning his lies
4/3/05 Washington
Ignored Info. of U.N. Arms Inspectors (http://href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21854-2005Apr2.html)
[small]inspectors provided key information on Iraq but challenged Bush
Admin lies --also provide info on Iran[/small]
4/2/05 692 Page Report
(http://href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17211-2005Mar31.html)-Bush Admin. ignored truths, promoted fabrications, exaggerations, lies
Iraq Data Dead Wrong, Panel finds
3/31/05 Intelligence
Report Whitewashes White House (http://href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15778-2005Mar31.html) puts blame on agencies, ignores Administration
officials distortions and knowing lies --many links to reports
3/30/05
Intelligence
Commission Report (http://href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14104-2005Mar30.html) Bush info riddled with errors,
worthless, misleading, most damaging failure in recent U.S. history
3/26/05 CIA
Doubts Warnings to Powell Dismissed by Administration Hawks (http://href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17211-2005Mar31.html?nav=headlines)
3/20/05 Administration Misled Allies about North
Korean (http://href=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7245019/) lied that exported nuke material to Libya when it was to Pakistan
12/14/04 In Battle for
Credibility, U.S. Injures its Cause (http://href=http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20041214/edit14.art.htm) USA TODAY Editorial about Lies put forth by
Army spokesmen about Pat Tillman Jessica Lynch
12/7/04 Army Lied About
Pat Tillman (http://href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37679-2004Dec5.html) --football hero killed from friendly fire Army Consciously
Lied (http://href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37679-2004Dec5.html) --Was it Civilian PR people, just like they lied about Jessica
Lynch? (http://href=http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32410) but Iraqi commander of unit which saved Lynch was beaten and tortured to
death by U.S. captors
10/28/04
Reality to George W. Bush is not about facts, but about higher
meta-truths. (http://href=http://nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/nicholasdkristof/index.html)...For this Bush harnesses facts, both true and false-- Nick
Kristof
10/28/04 Comparing Iraq
Invasion to Crusades (http://href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3933-2004Oct27.html) power of ideas (and lies) to persuade public opionion
10/23/04 More Feith Lies Disclosed (http://href=http://www.iht.com/articles/2004/10/21/news/intel.html)
Senate report
-
mm69,
Bush has lied. Every president tells lies.
I just wish you'd step up and say "yeah, he has, nobody's perfect". Even Mr Intenseone, a big bush supporter, has admitted that bush has lied.
Why can't you?
-
mm69,
Bush has lied. Every president tells lies.
I just wish you'd step up and say "yeah, he has, nobody's perfect". Even Mr Intenseone, a big bush supporter, has admitted that bush has lied.
Why can't you?
Because it's the caliber of lies he can't admit to. He'd be popular as hell if we were just talking about Bush lying over an extramartial affair. but what Bush has lied about, well... :-X
-
I know...ask one of these guys to PROVE he was lied.
Lying: a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood
See, since all they can do is make assumptions on Bush's intent they can't PROVE he lied. Oh they will come with all kinds of information that was presented and say he cherry picked info in order to decieve the public but again they can't prove it. You will quickly find that proof isn't required here until you blow up one of their arguments.
I completely agree.
-
BWWAAAAAAAAhahahhahahahhahahhahhahahahahaha When does he not lie...(http://www.imagedonkey.com/out.php?i=19756_lol.gif)
Lies lies lies: http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/whycare.html
CLAIM vs. FACT
Pre-War Assertions
PRE-WAR INTELLIGENCE HYPE
CLAIM: "I expected to find the weapons [because] I based my decision on the best intelligence possible...The evidence I had was the best possible evidence that he had a weapon."
FACT - WHITE HOUSE REPEATEDY WARNED BY INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY: The Washington Post reported this weekend, "President Bush and his top advisers ignored many of the caveats and qualifiers included in the classified report on Saddam Hussein's weapons." Specifically, the President made unequivocal statements that Iraq "has got chemical weapons" two months after the DIA concluded that there was "no reliable information on whether Iraq is producing and stockpiling chemical weapons." He said, "Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production" three months after the White House received an intelligence report that clearly indicated Department of Energy experts concluded the tubes were not intended to produce uranium enrichment centrifuges. He said, "Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa," three months after "the CIA sent two memos to the White House in October voicing strong doubts about" the claim. [Sources: WP, 2/7/04; Bush statement, 11/3/02; DIA report, 2002; Bush statement, 1/28/03; NIE, October 2002; WP, 7/23/03; Bush statement, 10/7/02; WP, 9/26/03]
IGNORING INTELLIGENCE
CLAIM: "We looked at the intelligence."
FACT – WHITE HOUSE IGNORED INTELLIGENCE WARNINGS: Knight Ridder reported that CIA officers "said President Bush ignored warnings" that his WMD case was weak. And Greg Thielmann, the Bush State Department's top intelligence official, "said suspicions were presented as fact, and contrary arguments ignored." Knight Ridder later reported, "Senior diplomatic, intelligence and military officials have charged that Bush and his top aides made assertions about Iraq's banned weapons programs and alleged links to al-Qaeda that weren't supported by credible intelligence, and that they ignored intelligence that didn't support their policies." [Knight-Ridder, 6/13/03; CBS News, 6/7/03; Knight Ridder, 6/28/03]
IGNORING INTERNATIONAL INTELLIGENCE WARNINGS
CLAIM: "The international community thought he had weapons."
FACT – INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY TOLD WHITE HOUSE THE OPPOSITE: The IAEA and U.N. both repeatedly told the Administration it had no evidence that Iraq possessed WMD. On 2/15/03, the IAEA said that, "We have to date found no evidence of ongoing prohibited nuclear or nuclear-related activities in Iraq." On 3/7/03 IAEA Director Mohamed ElBaradei said nuclear experts have found "no indication" that Iraq has tried to import high-strength aluminum tubes for centrifuge enrichment of uranium. At the same time, AP reported that "U.N. weapons inspectors have not found any 'smoking guns' in Iraq during their search for weapons WMD." AP also reported, "U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix said his teams have not uncovered any WMD." [Source: WP, 2/15/03; NY Times, 3/7/03; AP, 1/9/03; AP, 2/14/03]
INFORMING CONGRESS OF INTELLIGENCE CAVEATS
CLAIM: "I went to Congress with the same intelligence. Congress saw the same intelligence I had, and they looked at exactly what I looked at."
FACT – CONGRESS WAS OUTRAGED AT PRESENTATION BY THE WHITE HOUSE: The New Republic reported, "Senators were outraged to find that intelligence info given to them omitted the qualifications and countervailing evidence that had characterized the classified version and played up the claims that strengthened the administration's case for war." According to Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-PA), many House members were only convinced to support the war after the Administration "showed them a photograph of a small, unmanned airplane spraying a liquid in what appeared to be a test for delivering chemical and biological agents," despite the U.S. Air Force telling the Administration it "sharply disputed the notion that Iraq's UAVs were being designed as attack weapons." [Source: The New Republic, 6/30/03; Wilkes Barre Times Leader, 1/6/04; WP, 9/26/03]
CLAIM vs. FACT
Pre-War Assertions
PRE-WAR "IMMINENT THREAT" ASSERTION
CLAIM: "I believe it is essential that when we see a threat, we deal with those threats before they become imminent. It's too late if they become imminent."
FACT – ADMINISTRATION REPEATEDLY CLAIMED IRAQ WAS AN "IMMINENT THREAT": The Bush Administration repeatedly claimed that Iraq was an imminent threat before the war – not that it would "become imminent." Specifically, White House communications director Dan Bartlett was asked on CNN: "Is [Saddam Hussein] an imminent threat to US interests, either in that part of the world or to Americans right here at home?" Bartlett replied, "Well, of course he is." Similarly, when White House spokesman Ari Fleischer was asked whether America went to war in Iraq because of an imminent threat, he replied, "Absolutely." And White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the reason NATO allies – including the U.S. - should support the defense of one of its members from Iraq was because "this is about an imminent threat." Additionally, the Administration used "immediate," "urgent" and "mortal" to describe the Iraq threat to the United States. [Source: American Progress list, 1/29/04]
BUSH'S THREAT RHETORIC BEFORE THE WAR
CLAIM: "I think, if I might remind you that in my language I called it a grave and gathering threat, but I don't want to get into word contests."
FACT – BUSH MADE FAR MORE DIRE STATEMENTS BEFORE THE WAR: While the President did call Iraq a "grave and gathering" threat, that was not all he said. On 11/23/02, he said Iraq posed a "unique and urgent threat." On 1/3/03 he said "Iraq is a threat to any American." On 10/28/02 he said Iraq was "a real and dangerous threat" to America. On 10/2/02 he said, "The Iraqi regime is a threat of unique urgency" and that Iraq posed "a grave threat" to America. [Bush, 11/23/02; Bush; 1/3/03; Bush, 10/28/02; Bush, 10/2/02; Bush, 10/2/02]
SADDAM-AL QAEDA-WMD CONNECTION
CLAIM: "Iraq had the capacity to make a weapon and then let that weapon fall into the hands of a shadowy terrorist network."
FACT – ASSERTION BELIES PREVIOUS INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENTS: This assertion belies the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate which told the White House that Iraq would most likely only coordinate with Al Qaeda if the U.S. invaded Iraq. As the NYT reported, "[A] CIA assessment said last October: 'Baghdad for now appears to be drawing a line short of conducting terrorist attacks' in the United States." The CIA added that Saddam might order attacks with WMD as 'his last chance to exact vengeance by taking a large number of victims with him.'" Previously, the CIA had told the White House that Iraq "has not provided chemical or biological weapons to Al Qaeda or related terrorist groups." And David Kay himself said, " I found no real connection between WMD and terrorists" in Iraq. [Source: NIE, 2002; NY Times, 1/29/03; NY Times, 2/6/02; NBC News, 1/26/04]
DAVID KAY'S REPORT
CLAIM: "And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out."
FACT – KAY ACTUALLY SAID WMD HAD BEEN DESTROYED AFTER 1991: David Kay didn't say we haven't found the stockpiles of chemical weapons because they are destroyed, hidden or transported to another country. Kay said that they were never produced and hadn't been produced since 1991. As he said, "Multiple sources with varied access and reliability have told ISG that Iraq did not have a large, ongoing, centrally controlled CW program after 1991. Information found to date suggests that Iraq's large-scale capability to develop, produce and fill new CW munitions was reduced - if not entirely destroyed - during Operations Desert Storm and Desert Fox, 13 years of U.N. sanctions and U.N. inspections." [Kay Testimony, 2004] - The entire Progress Report
You still never proved he lied. Face it, if he gets intell from 2 people, he can't follow both. You claim ignoring intell because he didn't choose the side you liked. If he had ignored the other side you would still calim ignore intell. YOU CAN"T PROVE HE LIED!!! Ignoring intell isn't even in the same realm.
-
You still never proved he lied. Face it, if he gets intell from 2 people, he can't follow both. You claim ignoring intell because he didn't choose the side you liked. If he had ignored the other side you would still calim ignore intell. YOU CAN"T PROVE HE LIED!!! Ignoring intell isn't even in the same realm.
::) Oh brother....
-
::) Oh brother....
Well? You didn't
-
Well? You didn't
apparently not for the deaf dumb and blind ::)
(http://www.imagedonkey.com/out.php?i=19764_cluepon.jpg)
-
apparently not for the deaf dumb and blind ::)
(http://www.imagedonkey.com/out.php?i=19764_cluepon.jpg)
Way to avoid the FACT you can't prove Bush lied. I still think you and OzmO are the same person. Everytime you both are proven wrong (alot) you just throw insults.
-
Way to avoid the FACT you can't prove Bush lied. I still think you and OzmO are the same person. Everytime you both are proven wrong (alot) you just throw insults.
I don't think there's any question that Bush did in fact Lie... the real question that you should be asking is, "Was it intentional?".
-
I don't think there's any question that Bush did in fact Lie... the real question that you should be asking is, "Was it intentional?".
The difference between a "lie" and an untrue statement is intent.
-
The difference between a "lie" and an untrue statement is intent.
Perhaps, but most people will not make a distinction... and in reality, when you're the leader of the free world... perhaps you must be held to a higher standard... intent or not, you have told an untruth, and it has turned out to have grave consequencees.
-
Perhaps, but most people will not make a distinction... and in reality, when you're the leader of the free world... perhaps you must be held to a higher standard... intent or not, you have told an untruth, and it has turned out to have grave consequencees.
I agree leaders should be held to a higher standard, but there is no ambiguity in my mind about how you define a "lie." You either intended to mislead someone or you didn't. Mistakes don't = lies.
-
I agree leaders should be held to a higher standard, but there is no ambiguity in my mind about how you define a "lie." You either intended to mislead someone or you didn't. Mistakes don't = lies.
I agree leaders should be held to a higher standard, but there is no ambiguity in my mind about how you define a "lie." You either intended to mislead someone or you didn't. Mistakes don't = lies.
While I agree with you... The dictionary definition does also define a lie as "an inaccurate or false statement".
Either way... Bush is still a retard... Actually, he makes retarded people everywhere look bad.
-
While I agree with you... The dictionary definition does also define a lie as "an inaccurate or false statement".
Either way... Bush is still a retard... Actually, he makes retarded people everywhere look bad.
Not my dictionary. From Webster's: "a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive."
-
Not my dictionary. From Webster's: "a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive."
1. a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.
2. something intended or serving to convey a false impression; imposture: His flashy car was a lie that deceived no one.
3. an inaccurate or false statement.
4. the charge or accusation of lying: He flung the lie back at his accusers.
–verb (used without object)
5. to speak falsely or utter untruth knowingly, as with intent to deceive.
6. to express what is false; convey a false impression.
–verb (used with object)
7. to bring about or affect by lying (often used reflexively): to lie oneself out of a difficulty; accustomed to lying his way out of difficulties.
—Idioms
8. give the lie to,
a. to accuse of lying; contradict.
b. to prove or imply the falsity of; belie: His poor work gives the lie to his claims of experience.
9. lie in one's throat or teeth, to lie grossly or maliciously: If she told you exactly the opposite of what she told me, she must be lying in her teeth. Also, lie through one's teeth.
Random House Unabridged Dictionary.
At least you're not denying he's a retard.
-
1. a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.
2. something intended or serving to convey a false impression; imposture: His flashy car was a lie that deceived no one.
3. an inaccurate or false statement.
4. the charge or accusation of lying: He flung the lie back at his accusers.
–verb (used without object)
5. to speak falsely or utter untruth knowingly, as with intent to deceive.
6. to express what is false; convey a false impression.
–verb (used with object)
7. to bring about or affect by lying (often used reflexively): to lie oneself out of a difficulty; accustomed to lying his way out of difficulties.
—Idioms
8. give the lie to,
a. to accuse of lying; contradict.
b. to prove or imply the falsity of; belie: His poor work gives the lie to his claims of experience.
9. lie in one's throat or teeth, to lie grossly or maliciously: If she told you exactly the opposite of what she told me, she must be lying in her teeth. Also, lie through one's teeth.
Random House Unabridged Dictionary.
At least you're not denying he's a retard.
lol. :) He's not a retard. Graduated from Harvard and Yale. Helped build one of the best stadiums in the country as a minority owner of the Texas Rangers. Took down one of the most popular governors in the country. Leader of the free world. I'd say he has done okay for a "retard." :)
And we'll have to agree to disagree on the definition of a lie. I think the law requires intent. Most people require intent. I do as a parent when I'm dealing with my kids. One of the lone exceptions is the group of people who talk about Bush and WMDs.
-
lol. :) He's not a retard. Graduated from Harvard and Yale. Helped build one of the best stadiums in the country as a minority owner of the Texas Rangers. Took down one of the most popular governors in the country. Leader of the free world. I'd say he has done okay for a "retard." :)
And we'll have to agree to disagree on the definition of a lie. I think the law requires intent. Most people require intent. I do as a parent when I'm dealing with my kids. One of the lone exceptions is the group of people who talk about Bush and WMDs.
Well said, bro.
-
Well said, bro.
I agree...
-
lol. :) He's not a retard. Graduated from Harvard and Yale. Helped build one of the best stadiums in the country as a minority owner of the Texas Rangers. Took down one of the most popular governors in the country. Leader of the free world. I'd say he has done okay for a "retard." :)
And we'll have to agree to disagree on the definition of a lie. I think the law requires intent. Most people require intent. I do as a parent when I'm dealing with my kids. One of the lone exceptions is the group of people who talk about Bush and WMDs.
I never said retards couldn't be beneficial to society... I just said they were retards.
I find it interesting that of all of the things you mention about how he's done this and that... It's pretty obvious that if his name wasn't George Bush... he wouldn't have been able to do any of it.
It's not like he picked himself up from nothing to become something... as a matter of fact, most people would say he's actually done just the opposite.
-
Well said, bro.
Thank you sirs. :)
-
Thank you sirs. :)
U R welcome, Sir
-
I never said retards couldn't be beneficial to society... I just said they were retards.
I find it interesting that of all of the things you mention about how he's done this and that... It's pretty obvious that if his name wasn't George Bush... he wouldn't have been able to do any of it.
It's not like he picked himself up from nothing to become something... as a matter of fact, most people would say he's actually done just the opposite.
Sure his name and family background helped him. No question. But if you're saying he underachieved, I have to laugh at that Tu. He went from a graduate of two IVY League schools to part owner of a professional sports franchise to Governor of Texas to two-time President of the United States. What more could the man have possibly accomplished with this life? You expect him to be elected Pope or something? Given the fact he is not very articulate and probably won't be getting his MENSA card anytime soon, his accomplishments are nothing short of remarkable. I'd say he overachieved.
-
Sure his name and family background helped him. No question. But if you're saying he underachieved, I have to laugh at that Tu. He went from a graduate of two IVY League schools to part owner of a professional sports franchise to Governor of Texas to two-time President of the United States. What more could the man have possibly accomplished with this life? You expect him to be elected Pope or something? Given the fact he is not very articulate and probably won't be getting his MENSA card anytime soon, his accomplishments are nothing short of remarkable. I'd say he overachieved.
Oh I can agree with that... I would have never thought a retard would have done any of those things.
Certainly shows that retards are people too.
;)
-
And we'll have to agree to disagree on the definition of a lie. I think the law requires intent.
You "think"?
Can you please back that up with something other than your "think"ing? Source? thanks in advance.
-
You "think"?
Can you please back that up with something other than your "think"ing? Source? thanks in advance.
Look it up yourself. ::) It's too elementary for me to waste my time. And all you do is run from the facts (or change the subject) anyway.
-
Look it up yourself. ::) It's too elementary for me to waste my time. And all you do is run from the facts (or change the subject) anyway.
I'm supposed to look up what you "think"?
Okay, is there a book where I can find it? "My Pet Goat", maybe?
-
I'm supposed to look up what you "think"?
Okay, is there a book where I can find it? "My Pet Goat", maybe?
Let's back up.
1. I wasn't talking to you.
2. I didn't ask you to look up anything.
3. Hope that helps. :)