Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on January 03, 2007, 10:10:34 AM
-
Will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Effect of Obama's Candor Remains to Be Seen
Senator Admitted Trying Cocaine in a Memoir Written 11 Years Ago
By Lois Romano
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 3, 2007; Page A01
Long before the national media spotlight began to shine on every twist and turn of his life's journey, Barack Obama had this to say about himself: "Junkie. Pothead. That's where I'd been headed: the final, fatal role of the young would-be black man. . . . I got high [to] push questions of who I was out of my mind."
The Democratic senator from Illinois and likely presidential candidate offered the confession in a memoir written 11 years ago, not long after he graduated from law school and well before he contemplated life on the national stage. At the time, 20,000 copies were printed and the book seemed destined for the remainders stacks.
Today, Obama, 45, is near the top of polls on potential Democratic presidential contenders, and "Dreams From My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance" has regularly been on the bestseller lists, with 800,000 copies in print. Taken along with his latest bestseller, "The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream," Obama has become a genuine publishing phenomenon.
Obama's revelations were not an issue during his Senate campaign two years ago. But now his open narrative of early, bad choices, including drug use starting in high school and ending in college, as well as his tortured search for racial identity, are sure to receive new scrutiny.
As a potential candidate, Obama has presented himself as a fresh voice offering a politics of hope. Many say he offers something new in American politics: an African American with a less-than-traditional name who has so far demonstrated broad appeal. What remains to be seen is whether the candor he offered in his early memoir will be greeted with a new-style acceptance by voters.
It was not so long ago that such blunt admissions would have led to a candidate's undoing, and there is uneasiness in Democratic circles that "Dreams From My Father" will provide a blueprint for negative attacks.
Two decades ago, Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was forced to withdraw as a nominee for the Supreme Court after reports surfaced that he had used marijuana while he was a law professor. As a presidential candidate, Bill Clinton thought marijuana use could be enough of a liability in 1992 that he felt compelled to say he had not inhaled. And President Bush has managed to deflect endless gossip about his past by acknowledging that he had an "irresponsible" youth but offering no details.
Through his book, Obama has become the first potential presidential contender to admit trying cocaine.
"I believe what the country is looking for is someone who is open, honest and candid about themselves rather than someone who seems endlessly driven by polls or focus groups," said Robert Gibbs, Obama's spokesman. Gibbs said yesterday that Obama was not available for an interview.
Presidential aspirants tend to write more sanitized books for use as campaign tools. "Faith of My Fathers" by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) depicts his family's history of military service. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) has reissued "It Takes a Village," which offers her views about child-rearing in contemporary society. In fact, Obama's latest book, "Audacity of Hope," lays out his policy positions.
But "Dreams From My Father" is not like that. Obama wrote the highly personal book when he was in his early 30s, after being approached by a publisher when he became the first black person elected editor of the Harvard Law Review.
"This is not the kind of book you would ever expect a politician to write," said GOP consultant Alex Vogel. "Anyone who has a career in politics has to be concerned with what's in their past, but there is no question that Americans have an appetite for redemption."
. . .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/02/AR2007010201359.html
-
And he smokes.
-
who gives a shit, it's all out the window after bush ::)
-
Cool, him and George W have something in common then. ;D
-
Cool, him and George W have something in common then. ;D
not quite, Obama admits it, Bush does not officially admit it... He's still in the denial stage of addiction. :-\
-
He used pot too. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,240992,00.html
Obama is now Camel Jockey's favorite candidate. ;D
-
i got high wiht Obama once.
-
He's black.. does that surprise you?
-
He's half white, so the fact he used cocaine doesn't surpise me. :)
-
He's half white, so the fact he used cocaine doesn't surpise me. :)
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
-
Bush is a bigger druggie than Obama.. To me this is a non-issue and it should be the same way with the american people.
The way they are trying to rip on this dude is just unfair. First up was the Obama=Osama bullshit, then his smoking habit and now this. ::) Honestly, who gives a shit? For the opposition to attack this man because of his drug use is bullshit. Look at out current commander in chief, the guy's a fuckin dope fiend, and no I don't believe Bush has cleaned up for a second. ::)
-
Bush is a bigger druggie than Obama.. To me this is a non-issue and it should be the same way with the american people.
The way they are trying to rip on this dude is just unfair. First up was the Obama=Osama bullshit, then his smoking habit and now this. ::) Honestly, who gives a shit? For the opposition to attack this man because of his drug use is bullshit. Look at out current commander in chief, the guy's a fuckin dope fiend, and no I don't believe Bush has cleaned up for a second. ::)
Please. Liberals rip on bush/conservatives on all kinds of personal issues that shouldn't even be bothered. Why would you expect the same to not happen to Obama?
-
LOL liberals used to rip on Bush for personal shit.
Now he has a nice resume of screwed up professional shit they can rag on him for.
Have it your way.. but if a liberal had been pres. we'd be in a whole different shit storm.
-
240 you hate bush this much but you voted for him twice? tell me why you voted for him the second time. you couldnt fiqure this guy out in the first 4 years, when most of the shit you hate about him went down? or are you just really dumb?
prediction to your reply- "new evidence has come out this year"
-
240 you hate bush this much but you voted for him twice? tell me why you voted for him the second time. you couldnt fiqure this guy out in the first 4 years, when most of the shit you hate about him went down? or are you just really dumb?
prediction to your reply- "new evidence has come out this year"
You're kidding with the question right? Everyone, and I mean everyone on this board knows the answer to this ::)
-
Why?
More terror at home.... Undercutting the military.... Weak and appeasment oriented foreign policy.
If we hadn't gone back to Iraq we'd be back in another 10 years to do it all over again. No democrat seemed to realize the danger in Saddams regime.
oh yeah one more...
Would a dem have let 120 Saudis and some member of the bin laden family escape the USA without a single conversation on 9/13/01? ;)
More conspiracy? There was probably a lot of security holes still open in the days following the attack. Of course, Clinton let them get in the country in the first place and refused to grab Bin Laden when he had the chance(s).
-
Cool, him and George W have something in common then. ;D
Yeah, no shit. I'd like to think that the jerk-weeds over at Fux News would take that into consideration before they commence with their "fair and balanced" reporting on Obama. Doubtful, though--very doubtful.
-
Nice prediction. But no.
I woke up to the lies of 911 and the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan.
You will too, probably around 2020.
It will take that long to realize all the dumb shit you would have been spouting for 19 years.
-
Wow, great opportunity to pick fights with both sides!
- To think if the dems were in power during 9/11 that things would be worse is stupid beyond belief. Chances are everything would be the same except for the port authority thing and iraq. If you believe things would have be that different then you are not being very objective about how this country works.
- It's a sad thing 240, but EVEN if it's all true, what you say about 9/11, the leaders of this country will never let that out in any future administration. All those "classified" documents willb e destroyed long before they released anyway.
-
Just about every president, governor, senator, etc has used illegal drugs. It's like asking if we shouldn't vote for someone because they cheated on their girlfriend in high school or like to go 10 mph over the speed limit when going to work. WGAF?
-
Wow, great opportunity to pick fights with both sides!
- To think if the dems were in power during 9/11 that things would be worse is stupid beyond belief. Chances are everything would be the same except for the port authority thing and iraq. If you believe things would have be that different then you are not being very objective about how this country works.
What was Clintons response when Al Queda committed thier attacks under HIS admin? Oh yeah, I'll just lob a tomahawk at em and leave. Pfft. Don't be stupid.
- It's a sad thing 240, but EVEN if it's all true, what you say about 9/11, the leaders of this country will never let that out in any future administration. All those "classified" documents willb e destroyed long before they released anyway.
Actually as more facts reveal themselves 240 will start to lose his arguement over the years. Right now it's too easy to take advantage of turmoil.
-
What was Clintons response when Al Queda committed thier attacks under HIS admin? Oh yeah, I'll just lob a tomahawk at em and leave. Pfft. Don't be stupid.
There's a big idffernce in what Osama was doing during the clinton admin......... Versus.......... What he did under the Bush admin.
It seems you may be confusing the 2.
-
There's a big idffernce in what Osama was doing during the clinton admin......... Versus.......... What he did under the Bush admin.
It seems you may be confusing the 2.
Blowing up Khobar towers in Saudi? Blowing up hotels in Africa? Yep BIG difference there.
-
Blowing up Khobar towers in Saudi? Blowing up hotels in Africa? Yep BIG difference there.
yeah very big difference:
3000+ dead on american soil.
VERY BIG DIFFERENCE.
try again.
-
yeah very big difference:
3000+ dead on american soil.
VERY BIG DIFFERENCE.
try again.
Still terrorism by the same org. aimed at americans and westerners alike.
Only difference is severity.
Your downplaying it just to try and win an argument without taking it for what it is.
-
Security holes? LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
The plane to which Carter refers was an aircraft chartered by the Saudi government in the days after the terrorist attacks. The individuals were two dozen members of Osama bin Laden's extended family who had been living in the United States. Saying they were afraid that family members might suffer retribution in the U.S., the Saudis asked for American assistance in getting them out of the country. With the help of the FBI, the Saudis and the bin Laden family chartered an aircraft to pick up family members in Los Angeles, Orlando, and Washington, D.C. The bin Laden plane then flew the relatives to Boston, where — one week after the attacks — the group left Logan Airport bound for Jeddah.
But the bin Ladens did not have to worry about that. While FBI agents looked into bin Laden family members in the Boston area immediately after September 11, it appears that the agents' first chance to interview them — or other family members who lived elsewhere in the country — came on the day they left the U.S. Each family member was given the all-clear on the basis of a single, day-of-departure interview — conducted, in Bill Carter's words, "at the airport, as they were about to leave."
So he let his family leave... any profiler can see they weren't fucking terrorists. I wonder how long it had been since he had even spoken with his family.
Even in a worst case mistakes will be made. Big difference between mistakes and blind ignorance.
-
osama's family had disowned him decades ago.. plus the cia new exactly who osama was before the attacks,, they new exactly who his family was.. they didnt need to interrogate the family when they had been watching them in the past.
-
osama's family had disowned him decades ago.. plus the cia new exactly who osama was before the attacks,, they new exactly who his family was.. they didnt need to interrogate the family when they had been watching them in the past.
There you have it folks.
-
what the hells your point,, if they wanted to leave the country they have the right to do that,, you cant arrest somebody with no evidence. besides that the fbi and the cia are completely different organizations.
-
This won't hurt him at all but when everyone finds out he has a couple children with 2 different white mothers, that may be a different story... At the very least, he will lose the female black vote...
-
Still terrorism by the same org. aimed at americans and westerners alike.
Only difference is severity.
Your downplaying it just to try and win an argument without taking it for what it is.
No i'm not doing that at all.
Saddam wasn;t a terrorist. He was a aggressive dictator. There's a differnce.
By your standards we should be in about 6 wars invading 6 countries right now because of potential threats.
You have to seperate the dregree of each threat and deal with it accordingly.
Hitler had already over ran europe and was on the door step to moscow.
Where was saddam? In his hole.
Monster difference.
Aghanistan openingly supported Al Queda and Terrorists..... appropiate action was to do what we did.
Saddam was just a 2-bit dictator in a poor run down country with a outdated incompetent army.
-
Saddam wasn;t a terrorist. He was a aggressive dictator. There's a differnce.
This might be the most telling thing of all.
My only argument there, oz, is about afghanistan - the taleban reportedly warned us on Sept 8. (Taleban were religious pricks - but not terrorists.)
Then, immediately after 9/11 when bush started his "anyone who harbors evildoers will die too" rants, the Taleban offered up OBL, if the US could give evidence. Or, they would give him to the Hauge or a world court, if the US had no evidence, to make sure they weren't just sending him to his death for something he couldn't logistically pull off.
The US - which openly wanted to put a pipeline in afg. but were refused by taleban 2 months earlier, decided it would be ... um... more fun? .... to start a 5 year war there, instead of letting Osama be tnred over to the world courts. Alternatively, he would have been turned over to the FBI - if the US would show evidence which we claimed we had.
Ok some questions about this.
The taliban had to know the US was hungry for vengence. Why not just offer up Osama to save their asses for the greater good?
Also too, weren;t the taliban already openly supporting terrorism with camps all over their country in years prior?
Wouldn't it have been politcally savy to offer Osama up as a gesture of good will in helping the US and challange/spin the teorror camps in the world stage of politics?
-
The CIA or FBI are under no obligation to tell any reporter how they do business or whether they had the Bin Laden family under investigation/surveillance prior to 911. I think some of u guys would like to have evything this government does out in the open. YOu all complain about wire taps and intrusive law enforcement but how about nut bag Janet Reno and Ruby Ridge/Waco..The dems are much more a threat to our guns then the Repubs.....The average leftist moron thinks anybody who owns a gun is to stupid to own one.
-
Well we're all back to proof..who was on the plane...are the hijackers alive.. I of course think ur nuts but I'm not arguing that again. We don't tell the press what our SOF units are doing. We're not going to be forthcoming with the media especially right after 911.
-
Obama Used Cocaine AND Marijuana
So what? So have I. So has our current President. As long as Obama's not snorting lines off some 16-year-old page's ass on the Senate floor, who gives a fucck? ::)
-
No i'm not doing that at all.
Saddam wasn;t a terrorist. He was a aggressive dictator. There's a differnce.
How bout harboring terrorism? Duh.
By your standards we should be in about 6 wars invading 6 countries right now because of potential threats.
You have to seperate the dregree of each threat and deal with it accordingly.
We did. We are.
Hitler had already over ran europe and was on the door step to moscow.
Where was saddam? In his hole.
You wanna wait until he completely re-armed and then invaded another country? Or until the terrorists he was supporting murdered a few more thousand people?
-
Saddam wasn;t a terrorist. He was a aggressive dictator. There's a differnce.
This might be the most telling thing of all.
He was a murderous tyrant.
My only argument there, oz, is about afghanistan - the taleban reportedly warned us on Sept 8. (Taleban were religious pricks - but not terrorists.)
Sure they did. We get thousands of "warnings" all the time from all kinds of whackos.
Then, immediately after 9/11 when bush started his "anyone who harbors evildoers will die too" rants, the Taleban offered up OBL, if the US could give evidence. Or, they would give him to the Hauge or a world court, if the US had no evidence, to make sure they weren't just sending him to his death for something he couldn't logistically pull off.
Intel overwhelmingly pointed to him. We don't answer to the Taliban. Nor can we depend on them to do what we want or act in our best interests. Supposing this scenario you present is even remotely true.. do you honestly think we can trust the fucking taliban? Lol.
The US - which openly wanted to put a pipeline in afg. but were refused by taleban 2 months earlier, decided it would be ... um... more fun? .... to start a 5 year war there, instead of letting Osama be tnred over to the world courts. Alternatively, he would have been turned over to the FBI - if the US would show evidence which we claimed we had.
Yeah we went to war for fun. okay.
Osama didn't attack the "world" so why would he have to answer to the "world." If we left anything to this "world" our interests would go down the fucking toilet.
-
wrong. Allow me to own you:
Asked by National Review whether the FBI had conducted a full and thorough investigation of all the family members before allowing them to go, Carter repeated his earlier statement: "The FBI had an opportunity to interview the individuals on that plane, and we were satisfied with the information they provided." Asked again, he said the same thing. "Unless you have evidence to stop them from leaving the country, they have every right to do that," Carter explained. "The bin Laden family is very large, and for the most part are involved in legitimate enterprises. The fact of the matter is that because of September 11, some of these individuals felt it would be better to leave the country. They have every right to do that."
But some law-enforcement experts found the abbreviated investigation puzzling. "That's highly unusual, and they could not have done a thorough and complete interview," said John L. Martin, the former chief of internal security for the Justice Department. "It was obvious at the time that the Bureau did not have the kind of intelligence to know who was behind [the September 11 attacks], how they were financed, and what the U.S. connections might have been." Also, Martin said, "It is an absolute rule of law enforcement that the agent or officers conducting the interviews control the interview, and that the persons of interest, suspects, or prospective defendants do not set the ground rules for the interview."
In addition, it is a routine law-enforcement practice to question — sometimes repeatedly and in great detail — family members of suspects in murder cases. Investigators do not usually presume that a relative has no connection or knowledge of a crime; instead, they usually conduct an investigation to make sure the relatives can be eliminated as suspects or witnesses. While that is going on, the instincts of law enforcement are normally to freeze all potential suspects and witnesses in place until the investigation has reached some conclusions.
What raises even more questions about the FBI's handling of the bin Ladens is that in the days immediately after the attack, law-enforcement agencies were nearly overwhelmed by the task of unraveling the plot and uncovering al Qaeda's complex worldwide financial network. Investigators were still trying to retrace the hijackers' steps and learn who might have assisted them along the way. They were also facing the enormous job of trying to uncover any other terrorist cells that might be in the country. The FBI in particular was almost back on its heels, suffering from (it was revealed later) a lack of communication between its various offices about key evidence in the case.
And the bin Ladens seemed an obvious choice for intensive investigation. Most press accounts of the family state flatly that the relatives are estranged from Osama bin Laden and condemn his work. But bin Laden has more than 50 siblings, and it is perhaps overly optimistic to think that every single one of them not only does not approve of his actions but also has no knowledge of his support and financing. Besides, there are several published reports that suggest otherwise.
In October 2001, ABC News interviewed a sister-in-law of Osama bin Laden, who was asked whether bin Laden family members had given money to Osama. "I don't know that," Carmen bin Laden answered, "but my opinion is yes . . . I think they would say, okay, this is — for Islam they would give. You know, for Islam they would give." Carmen bin Laden is the estranged wife of Osama bin Laden's brother Yeslam, who runs the Saudi Investment Company in Switzerland. Family friends have contradicted her account, but in March of this year, French police searched Yeslam bin Laden's villa in Cannes, reportedly looking for evidence of terrorism-related money laundering involving the Saudi Investment Company. Swiss police also searched other properties connected to the firm
What is this source from?
-
LOL liberals used to rip on Bush for personal shit.
Now he has a nice resume of screwed up professional shit they can rag on him for.
I like how you empisized the word "used" to rip on Bush, like I said yesterday, they lied to win the election, now that they are in....no more ripping, now this is where I have a problem with the Republican party, the crap they ripped us for makes the republican party look like boy scouts, our problem is we never called them out on anything and I promise if we would have called them out on issues we would have won damn near by a landslide war or not, but since we didn't stoop to their mudslinging level...we lost, they didn't win on issues, they won on lies!!
-
I like how you empisized the word "used" to rip on Bush, like I said yesterday, they lied to win the election, now that they are in....no more ripping, now this is where I have a problem with the Republican party, the crap they ripped us for makes the republican party look like boy scouts, our problem is we never called them out on anything and I promise if we would have called them out on issues we would have won damn near by a landslide war or not, but since we didn't stoop to their mudslinging level...we lost, they didn't win on issues, they won on lies!!
I agree. Repubs consistently failed to play the game of politics that liberals used against them. They fail to do what is necassary.
-
And, since some of the hijackers have turned up alive in Europe - well - I sure am curious about who all was on that flight ;)
Bwahahahahahahahaha! ;D The 240 comedy hour. Coming to a stage near you. ;D
-
Bwahahahahahahahaha! ;D The 240 comedy hour. Coming to a stage near you. ;D
Wow. 240.. you don't honestly believe that do you?
-
the head of the FBI said we may never know the true identities of some of the terrorists.
Wow, I wish you would do your research before you mocked me.
Some of the terrorists have been interviewed by newspapers over there, holding up the same passports the FBI said were used to board those planes. One guys is a saudi pilot, said 9/11 nearly ruined his career and the FBI has no interest in clearing up the confusion.
Wait, your CO didn't tell you that? ;)
Ok lemme "research" baloney.
you're a rediculus person and I honestly think you're borderline retarded for believing this shit
-
The BBC interviewed a few of the guys. FBI responded by saying they didn't know who all the terrorists were, and will probably never know.
You haven't researched this, but it's pretty common knowledge. Despite the "ironclad intel and DNA" we had on 9/12, turns out a few of the blokes are happily living overseas.
I'm not making this up - and the FBI confirmed it.
Sure they are... and the FBI only confirmed that there were more guys involved. The official story still stands.
-
I like how you empisized the word "used" to rip on Bush, like I said yesterday, they lied to win the election, now that they are in....no more ripping, now this is where I have a problem with the Republican party, the crap they ripped us for makes the republican party look like boy scouts, our problem is we never called them out on anything and I promise if we would have called them out on issues we would have won damn near by a landslide war or not, but since we didn't stoop to their mudslinging level...we lost, they didn't win on issues, they won on lies!!
What issue would they win for you idiot? They're supposed to be fiscally conservative, which they're not. They're supposed to be for limited government involvement, which they're not.
-
I wanna know just how repubs could have won in a landslide but didn't....
seemed like they tried every trick they had.
weird they would honorably give up congress.
what ISSUES did they avoid which would have convinced a landslide of Americans to change their anti-war opinions?
They didn't adopt the same cutthroat tactics of charachter smearing to the degree that the dems did. That's a big one.
If they had released some classified information that would have had a drastic effect... but you can't do that.
There's so much more they could've done and didn't. They sat and just assumed residual effects from the attacks would carry them.
All in all, they were stupid and didn't get thier asses in gear.
-
No, I want some fvcking examples.
What "cutthroat" tactics did the dems use?
Have you missed the daggers heaved at the conservatives (esp. Bush) by the dems since Clinton? Name calling, personal slander, and character assasination are tools used much more commonly and effectively by the left. They've only gotten worse, of course. Not to mention a very effective use of the media against conservatives.
-
Have you missed the daggers heaved at the conservatives (esp. Bush) by the dems since Clinton? Name calling, personal slander, and character assasination are tools used much more commonly and effectively by the left. They've only gotten worse, of course. Not to mention a very effective use of the media against conservatives.
The Dems are Repubs use the same lowlife tactics. Foley, Delay, Abramoff and company put the nail in the coffin for the repubs.
What ever happened to running on principals and how you would solve the countries problems?
Now it is better to mudsling on both sides.
TEQ
-
I'm asking you, again, for specific examples.
"Cutthroat tactics" - please list.
The last few are the best. And the next time I ask you some direct questions you owe me the answers next time.
http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2004/11/psychology-of-bush-hatred.html
http://archive.democrats.com/display.cfm?id=320
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15537
http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200408130813.asp
http://neo-neocon.blogspot.com/2005/06/on-bush-hatred-and-its-causes.html
http://atheism.about.com/b/a/087227.htm
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,485769,00.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/23/opinion/main631543.shtml
http://www.democracyforums.com/showthread.php?tid=1368
And check out this site... very eye opening.
http://www.mediaresearch.org/
-
I am FLOORED that people believe the republicans lost because 'they didn't play dirty like the dems did'.
I mean, floored.
I'm floored by 90% of what you must have been ignoring for the last 7 years.
Please list the cutthroat tricks that repubs didn't use that dems did.
Also, please tell us why the population cited iraq as the #1 reason they voted dem.
Because the american people have the attention span of a flea and the backbone of an ant. Because if a democrat had been in office and not bush we probably would have been attacked many more times and everyone would be crying for revenge. Apparently we need constant reminders that we actually have to fight people that want to kill us but when a president is successful at responding to an attack and ALSO successful at preventing many more everyone seems to forget that there are murderous people out there.
-
Another good thing to point out.
http://www.mediaresearch.org/realitycheck/2006/fax20061031.asp
-
Because the american people have the attention span of a flea and the backbone of an ant. Because if a democrat had been in office and not bush we probably would have been attacked many more times and everyone would be crying for revenge. Apparently we need constant reminders that we actually have to fight people that want to kill us but when a president is successful at responding to an attack and ALSO successful at preventing many more everyone seems to forget that there are murderous people out there.
Unfortunately having the attention of a flea is too true for most americans. Backbone of an ant, being military personnel, I find it disturbing for you to include servicemen and women who have and continue to die for this country everyday.
There are heroic americans who are unheralded everyday, so you should fall back on that misconception.
Since the birth of this country, other countries and governments have been trying to murder us. That is nothing new.
Bush IS NOT successful at getting the people who attacked us on 9/11. I do believe he states that Bin laden is of no concern to him. Also, we will be in Iraq long after his presidency. American lives are being lost in these wars.
It took years between the first attempt on the towers and the second success to bring the towers down.
These people have patience if nothing else. Most analysts say it isn't a question of IF the terrorists will strike again, but when.
Sandra
-
Since the birth of this country, other countries and governments have been trying to murder us. That is nothing new.
Bush IS NOT successful at getting the people who attacked us on 9/11. I do believe he states that Bin laden is of no concern to him. Also, we will be in Iraq long after his presidency. American lives are being lost in these wars.
Sandra
So true. Bush has been more worried about securing resources at the cost of lives, rather than fighting terrorism. The arguement that the Iraq war was a response to 9/11 is not even valid anymore, when you consider all the shocking facts that have come out since. I don't want to disrespect US servicemen, but the military has failed in Iraq in what was really a meaningless and bogus war to begin with. What's worse is that the leaders of this country wont tell its citizens that fact, and worse they'll continue to stir up youngsters to serve by lying to them.
-
Unfortunately having the attention of a flea is too true for most americans. Backbone of an ant, being military personnel, I find it disturbing for you to include servicemen and women who have and continue to die for this country everyday.
There are heroic americans who are unheralded everyday, so you should fall back on that misconception.
Since the birth of this country, other countries and governments have been trying to murder us. That is nothing new.
Bush IS NOT successful at getting the people who attacked us on 9/11. I do believe he states that Bin laden is of no concern to him. Also, we will be in Iraq long after his presidency. American lives are being lost in these wars.
It took years between the first attempt on the towers and the second success to bring the towers down.
These people have patience if nothing else. Most analysts say it isn't a question of IF the terrorists will strike again, but when.
Sandra
Being military personnel...How would you feel if you were lied to about who actually brought the towers down? If in 25 years someone proves without a doubt that people in the U.S. government were actually the ones that brought the buildings down, what would serving in the military mean to you?
I know its kind of off topic but i just wondered what someone in the military would actually think of serving for such a government if such a thing came out?...
-
Being military personnel...How would you feel if you were lied to about who actually brought the towers down? If in 25 years someone proves without a doubt that people in the U.S. government were actually the ones that brought the buildings down, what would serving in the military mean to you?
I know its kind of off topic but i just wondered what someone in the military would actually think of serving for such a government if such a thing came out?...
They wouldn't mind, hell they don't mind now knowing that the Iraq war is a bunch of bullshit. I guess they just want to follow blindly because they think uncle sam can do no wrong.
-
Unfortunately having the attention of a flea is too true for most americans. Backbone of an ant, being military personnel, I find it disturbing for you to include servicemen and women who have and continue to die for this country everyday.
There are heroic americans who are unheralded everyday, so you should fall back on that misconception.
Since the birth of this country, other countries and governments have been trying to murder us. That is nothing new.
Bush IS NOT successful at getting the people who attacked us on 9/11. I do believe he states that Bin laden is of no concern to him. Also, we will be in Iraq long after his presidency. American lives are being lost in these wars.
It took years between the first attempt on the towers and the second success to bring the towers down.
These people have patience if nothing else. Most analysts say it isn't a question of IF the terrorists will strike again, but when.
Sandra
Sandra .. it is inspiring to hear a women so astute.
-
Being military personnel...How would you feel if you were lied to about who actually brought the towers down? If in 25 years someone proves without a doubt that people in the U.S. government were actually the ones that brought the buildings down, what would serving in the military mean to you?
I know its kind of off topic but i just wondered what someone in the military would actually think of serving for such a government if such a thing came out?...
I would feel horrible. Everything would change for me. But we'll see.
I already have doubts but it is more from the people that hate this country and yet live here an benefit from the US's prosperity. We have it so good here compared to most parts of the world.
-
So true. Bush has been more worried about securing resources at the cost of lives, rather than fighting terrorism. The arguement that the Iraq war was a response to 9/11 is not even valid anymore, when you consider all the shocking facts that have come out since. I don't want to disrespect US servicemen, but the military has failed in Iraq in what was really a meaningless and bogus war to begin with. What's worse is that the leaders of this country wont tell its citizens that fact, and worse they'll continue to stir up youngsters to serve by lying to them.
The shocking facts aren't what you have seen. You've seen the result of mass media hatred of this administration. And a populace that is not only ignorant but all but deprived of quality and unbiased information.
Our military wins the battles but lack of support from home both emotionally and politically will eventually cost us this war.
-
How can those statements mean anything?
We know the FBI delivered the explosives that were used in 93 - the mastermind made recordings with the FBI snitch he worked with. Then, the FBI covered up their involvement until the tapes came out. The tapes were then gagged and the guy sent to prison.
We know that Bush completely fought a 9/11 investigation, then crippled the final one with budget and time limitations. We know that the FAA destroyed tapes, NORAD lied about their timeline on the stand, and Bush lied about knowing there was a hijacking by 45 minutes.
How can you seriously fear terrorists, when the FBI supplied the bombs in 93, and Bush lied then helped cripple the 9/11 investigation? Seriously, this shit is all easily provable, so call me on anything or google it yourself.
infowars and your other "sources" are far from unbiased in any regard.
you are full of nonsense... ill stick with reality
-
Being military personnel...How would you feel if you were lied to about who actually brought the towers down? If in 25 years someone proves without a doubt that people in the U.S. government were actually the ones that brought the buildings down, what would serving in the military mean to you?
I know its kind of off topic but i just wondered what someone in the military would actually think of serving for such a government if such a thing came out?...
Good question...based on 14 years of military service..my answer would be...whatever....I would never believe it. Not because its the govenment but because nobody is capable of pulling this off and keeping their mouth shut.
-
That's a nice excuse. however, if you need strangers in America to give you "emotional" support for a war, and not more armor, forces, or better battle plans, you should re-evaluate things.
Excuse?? lol
you'd be surpised how much that kind of support can have such an effect... vietnam is a similar example.
we are FAR superior in all of those examples
-
Good question...based on 14 years of military service..my answer would be...whatever....I would never believe it. Not because its the govenment but because nobody is capable of pulling this off and keeping their mouth shut.
VERY true... leaks would be everywhere.
-
240 all ur proof is from CT sites...this is all crap. Ever met an FBI agent..regular guys doing their job. Stop watching the X-Files.
-
911 Commission: FAA had a hotline set up with Secret Service, NORAD, CIA, Pentagon, and FBI within 60 seconds of receiving word that a plane had been hijacked, 8:16 AM
Bush, 9:00 AM - "that must be a terrible pilot", as 3 hijacked planes were in the air and the fourth was taking off.
So um, did Bush sit in his limo for 45 minutes without being told that three planes in the air had been hijacked?
Google "FBI 1993 WTC tapes" and you can listen to the FBI snitch discussing the delivery, exact bombing time, location, etc.
Come on, dude. You're calling me names and insulting my sources - this shit is real.
could be faked with zero effort
-
He's killing me
-
We support our troops but not the war. Do you not hear me on here every single day, bitching about the fact that 3 or 4 of you die every day, for a fooking lie?
I support the troops and value American lives greatly. But the war is bullshit, plain and simple.
No you don't. Not supporting us is not supporting the war. We ALL believe in what we do.
Your arguments are the largest pile of shit I've ever seen.
-
headhunter and brix,
you guys are serving and if you realized this shit was true, you would suddenly question why you're there. Don't do that.
Everyone else,
Look this stuff up. See for yourself. FBI gave them the explosives in 93, called it a drill, and said they were fake. Bush straight up lied about what he knew on 911. These are facts. learn about it.
We do... and no reputable news agency (even the liberal ones) will go for your arguments. Even they think you guys are off the reservation.
-
He's killing me
Cmon.... Im a navy boy and even I can stick this douche out.
We've got this. Check his research... none of it is credible.
-
Actually fuck that....
use some common sense and put years of gov't work to the test... his story is completely off the charts.
-
I understand your being pissed. Close the thread. you don't wanna know this stuff.
The NY Times reported on the 1993 WTC tape, then the story, the tape, the snitch, all of it was gagged under nat'l security. Look up the NY Times story. FBI fore-knowledge and supplying the explosives would have been the story of the year, no? Disappeared instantly. nat'l security, sure. Can't make the FBI look like it killed americans.
The 911 Bush statements - look them up. Bush said it must be a bad pilot. FAA found out at 8:16 about 1st hijacking and got Sec Srvc on the line. This is all public record, dude.
Hmmm... a quick retraction. Smells like they knew bullshit when they saw it regardless of thier politics.
A comment? It's not like he's known for his articulation.
-
That is a garbage argument, and you know it.
Nope... its the liberal line to "support the troops and not the war" as not to appear un american... but it's hard to hide hatred.
War, force, military, power, strength, freedom.... liberals hate these words.
Well.. maybe not power.
-
Brix,
You still don't think the war is about oil, do you?
Another motive that was obvious from the start... this coutry runs on oil pure and simple.
But there are so many reasons 240.
-
Do you seriously believe that "liberals hate freedom"?
I mean, are you even listening to the rhetoric you're repeating?
liberals are closet socialists... only they believe THEY should be the ruling class
I sure am
-
Well, if you believe that the neocons willing to let 4 ofyou die a day care about your "freedom", but the liberals who want you back home alive "hate freedom"....
then carry on!
ok
its not just hating freedom... it's hating MY freedom
-
You have a lot more freedom if you're back in the USA, on a local base or back at your job (if reservist).
You have a lot less freedom if you have the unpleasant experience of meeting a bullet over there.
Now I understand, you're fighting for economic reasons, which benefit all Americans. But please don't get all noble with the 'liberation' BS. We saw an "in", we took it. We led their leader to the gallows, put a puppet govt in, and now our companies are moving in and we're building bases along the oil pipeline. it's theft, simply enough. So be it.
And if I don't believe my tax dollars or american lives should be spent on this pilferage of a soverign nation which didn't attack us - suddenly that means I'm anti- American Soldier?
nope. wrong.
Being in the military isn't about having freedom.. it's about defending it for others at home.
we're fighting for a lot more than economics but no one can convince a bush hater otherwise. theft my ass. more like prolonged security, defeat of a growing threat and access to a terror stronghold. but the economics will definitely be taken advantage of... as it should.
Would you rather have waited until they did attack us? you actually think they wouldn't have hurt us bad if they were far more powerful? your side avoids responsibility, plain and simple.
People like yourself who work against this nation in wartime, this nations soldiers and this nations securty are anti- everything this nation stands for.
Nothing is more important than this nations right to exist as a population... no matter what your beliefs/background are.
-
If any of what the CT's are saying ever becomes truth, the word freedom will be meaningless in this country...
-
who gives a shit, it's all out the window after bush ::)
Difference is that Obama admitted it, which is always the better PR strategy. His drug use would've surfaced, just as Bush's did. By bringing it up himself, writing about it, Obama sets the agenda, and comes across as a fair and honest guy.
Whatever happens, he won't lose because he's a liar.
-Hedge
-
i don't understand how using my first amendment right to speak is 'working against the nation in wartime'.
are ya saying everyone in the USA should just nod and agree with Bush, on everything war-related?
Come on.
There's nothing wrong with using your right to speak feely.. but I think spreading lies, misinformation, and invented truths is working against this country.
No but I DO think supporting a political party that wants to extend already over extended tours of duty, and even send personnel back after they just returned home from multiple tours, instead of committing to the troops levels or funding necessary to get the job done (Murtha). They want to undercut the war effort. They want us to lose. They want it all to be for nothing just so they can shift whatever blame comes at them for sabotaging a war effort we're already committed to at bush. It's all politics for dems, not patriots.
It's one thing to disagree with policy. It's quite another to f**k over the DOD and ultimately the whole country just to increase thier chances of getting re-elected.
-
to f**K over the DOD? LOL I want the DoD to tell me where that missing 2.3 TRILLION dollars is. THose bastards f'ked over america.
Those bastards are what stands between you and jihad. Or have you forgotten that like evryone else did?
Also - spearding lies, misinformatoin, invented truths - I am perfectly willing so source everything I write. last night you called my assertion that Bush lied about what he knew that morning made up - it's all public record. You said the 1993 WTC tapes didn't exist, then when shown them, you said they must be fake. You call things made-up because they don't match the official story that you are being shot at to defend.
Youre right... and your sources are mostly CT sites, far from credible, with the occasional snippet page 10 blurb out of the ultra left side of mainstream media.
I said they COULD be faked.. easily. But no, no one would do that, would they? Please. i call things made up when it's obvious you people go off the deep end scratching for anything you can because you hate bush SO much. And everytime I bring up a point you can't defend you run and disappear from the said thread all of a sudden.
Fact of the matter is, if every american just shut up and supported whatever bush wanted, he would be in iran and syria right now, you know this. Bush is programmed to start wars and spand military $ in the name of american imperialism. this is his funciton. He is an extremist. And people on the other end are required to ensure this abuse does not go unchecked.
Bush is programmed... now he's a robot. Lol. American imperialism? Wow dude you're starting to quotes hardline socialists and third world dictators. I could tell that people who seriously defend the ludacris ideas you have are beyond anti american. I can now fully label you as that.
man, you're gonna be so f'king pissed when you get home from war and learn some truths. THings like the Downing street memo... you know what that is?
Hey dummy I've been home back and forth for years and slugging it out with traitors like yourself.
Link? And what about all those links I posted about cut throat tactics and seething hatred? you never responded, care to? And the thread where I asked you to find some real legit mainstream sources to get behind your "theories." Funny, why don't they take your arguments? Hmm...
-
(waiting for excuses)
(highly anticipating some hypocrisy to follow)
-
Oh yeah?
Is the 911 Commission a CT site?
Bush's own words on 9/11 - CT?
Downing street memo- actually the minutes of a meeting, transcribed during a gathering many of the British Prime Minister's senior ministers on July 23, 2002, showing Iraq was built on a lie.
I know you LOVE resorting to the "any facts you have are wrong because I don't trust the source!" but the truth is, I am citing official sources here.
Rarely. And your official sources only show that there are still things unexplained. All the "other" stuff comes from CT's that like to fill in the holes with horse dung. And you ate every bite of it.
-
you just called me a traitor because i'm more informed about things than you are. Nice comeback.
Yeah.... that's what happened, lol.
you don't understand history, do you? We do employ inperialism. We did it in S. America, we did it in vietnam, we're doing it in the middle east now.
Yes and our foreign policy and strategic history is far from imperialism.
i never denied there were jihadist fucks that needed dealt with. but you use that as a blanket to borrow 400 billion and want to give bush a blank permission slip - then label anyone a traitor who disagrees... well guess what - that would make 75+% of americans traitors.
Bullshit and you know it. I never thought you were even close to a traitor up until now and you know how much we've gone back and forth. 75% of Americans aren't traitors... they are gravely mislead by people like you who get in positions to reach great numbers.
get a clue, dude. you bought a suckers bid and now youre starting to find out the facts. close your computer and go have a beer. the truth is too much for you right now.
It is... but not for what it is but for how hard it is for people like you to see it. It will take an act of God, I guess.
-
Right - and when something is unexplained or shown to be contradictory by the first investigation, a second investigation is warranted. Wouldn't you agree?
Unless of course you want lies about 9/11 out there. You wouldn't do something treasonous like that.
Would you?
Nope ... and I would be completely supportive of a bi partisan investigation just to prove the official story and make you clown shut the fuck up and start supporting this country.
-
"just to prove the official story"? Or, "to answer the unanswered questions and contradictions"?
I'm saying another investigation would PROVE the official story by answering those holes. But another investigation I can completely agree with.
-
No i'm not doing that at all.
Saddam wasn;t a terrorist. He was a aggressive dictator. There's a differnce.
...
Aghanistan openingly supported Al Queda and Terrorists..... appropiate action was to do what we did.
Saddam was just a 2-bit dictator in a poor run down country with a outdated incompetent army.
The only thing Saddam and Osama had in common was that they were both built up to what they became by the West (US and Europe). One of them when he was fighting Iran, the other one when he was fighting the Soviets. Both are examples that "the enemies of my enemies are my friends" isn't such a great strategy...
-
Bump for Blacken