1
   

Rice answers with the TRUTH...

 
 
Heywood
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2004 01:40 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Maybe you need to go back for further education as the united States has no emperor. we have an elected president. and he wears suits pretty regularly. Sheesh.


"the emperors clothes" is an old Aesop's tale. I don't know if you were serious or not but here it is anyway.
http://www.pacificnet.net/~johnr/cgi/aesop1.cgi?hca&a26

McGentrix wrote:
IT'S A TITLE! Get over it. Did you read the article? Do you have a comment regarding the article? Can you provide any evidence proving what Condoleezza says in the article? we have enough threads on this forum discussing people's dislike of Bush. Most people get it. It's not neccessary to infect each and every thread with this disgusting behavior.


Yep, its a title. It just flies directly in the face of the argument you were trying to put across in the thread, so I pointed it out. Yes, there are a few half-truths and misleading statements in Rice's words. Maybe if I have the time to research it, I will, but I'm in the final 2 weeks before spring break, and my education comes first. Maybe someone else can take care of that for ya for now.

McGentrix wrote:
Now, can ANYONE prove Condi is lying? If not, it must be the TRUTH!


What? Ok then... I have a statment to make: "The planet pluto is really made out of bananna smoothies and toothpaste".

If no one can prove to me that I am lying, then it must be the TRUTH!
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2004 01:54 pm
Heywood


Actually, I would like to argue about if Pluto is really a planet or not.

But that wasn't a point here.


The banana smoothies and toothpaste are certainly the THRUTH!

(Aesop sounds very much like old Europe, was a Commie, Muslim or even a Muslim Commie, I suppose.)
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2004 02:06 pm
That's a goofy statement to make. It's far to far from the tropics to be made of bananna smoothies. Now had you said raspberry, maybe I'd of believed you, but you said bananna, so i must point out the fact that we have photo's of Pluto that clearly sho no evidence of any such bananna smoothies.
0 Replies
 
Letty
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2004 02:06 pm
Walter is getting saucy!

There is no way to discern the truth any more, since it's always the first casuality of war.

However: It seems that Hans Christian Anderson plagiarized Aesop. What's fairy land coming to. Razz
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2004 02:32 pm
McGentrix wrote:
That's a goofy statement to make. It's far to far from the tropics to be made of bananna smoothies. Now had you said raspberry, maybe I'd of believed you, but you said bananna, so i must point out the fact that we have photo's of Pluto that clearly sho no evidence of any such bananna smoothies.


If they had used my photoshop experiences, you certainly would get another opinion!
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2004 02:49 pm
What is truth?

Is it true that the Straussians and neocons were devising a strategy to capitalise on America's window of opportunity since the demise of the Soviet Union?

Is it true that item 1 of cabinet meeting 1 of Bush 2's presidency was "how do we take over Iraq"?

Is it true that Bush placed little weight on warnings from foreign governments about impending terrorist attacks using hijacked aircraft?

Surely it is not true that the F16s at Andrews Airforce base sat on the ground until after the 3rd plane flew into the Pentagon. And surely it is true that there are standing operating procedures to be followed in the case of aircraft deviating from their flight plan.

Can it be true that all at Andrews were so engrossed in watching the WTC fall, that they missed the hijacked plane flying towards the District of Columbia? Mission statement AFB: "to protect the District of Columbia....bla blah

And of course it is true that Bush said to Clark "pin this on Iraq for me"

And did Bush and co exploit the tragedy of 911 and cynically use it as a cover to do a little geopolitical re arranging in the middle east? No never.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2004 02:51 pm
Steve, I would think you have truly shown what is not truth so we can now compare what we now know are falsehoods against Condi's truths. Thanks!
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2004 03:13 pm
I was just asking some questions McG, not supplying answers.

And illustrating that it is difficult to know these days what truth is.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2004 03:17 pm
Oh, accept my apology then.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2004 03:37 pm
No need to apologise.

But there were 60-odd Brits killed that day, so I think we've all got a right to ask some questions.

Dont get me wrong, I'm not saying the Republicans did it! It was bin Laden and his merry men. But I really can't get out of my mind the strange and terrifying events of that day.

If there is a straightforward answer, some matter of fact that I've got wrong, or some simple explanation to explain what happened at Andrews Airforce base, I would love to hear it (truly), and sleep better.

If I wrote a fictional tale about the near simultaneous hijacking of 3 aircraft in Finland, 2 flying to St Petersburg and crashing, the third flying on towards Moscow, past a Russian air base (mission statement...to protect the Russian government district of Moscow), before smashing into the Kremlin, I don't think any publisher would touch it as being too incredible. Yet something not too dissimilar happened in your country that fateful day.
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2004 03:41 pm
The Emporer
It is not true that Kiing Goerge has not clothes. Here is the truth: The Emporer has no brains.

If I get ambitous I will point out the lies of Condisleeza.

In the meantime:

Is it true that all who apply for positions with the Bush Crime Syndicate must take a lie detector test.? If they can fool the machine by at least 80% they get the job?
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2004 07:31 pm
If she is telling the truth then she should have no trouble repeating the same thing under oath.
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2004 07:51 pm
Not gonna happen
She won't testify under oath or in public because she's a bit smarter than Martha.

In my view the 911 Commission is going to be WhiteWash. Wonder if they will use Tide or Cheer?
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2004 08:02 pm
Context is everything.
I thought the title of this thread referred to
Quote:
... To find out if the spirits have accepted the invitation, one of the priests carries out a divination. He takes a few grains of rice in one hand without looking to see how many he has taken. He then opens his hand and counts the grains. If there are an even number of pairs up to a maximum of twelve the spirits are considered to have answered the invitation. If there are more even pairs than twelve the spirits have not yet come. If, on the other hand there are an uneven number of grains they are definitely not coming, which is considered unlucky. The sacrificial priest succeeded this time; if he had not I do not know what would have happened. If the number of grains had been an even number over twelve, the prayer and divination could possibly have been repeated.


Couldn't figure out what it was doing in politics.

The Sacrifice to Phi Muong

<sigh>

rice tells the truth
0 Replies
 
Letty
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2004 08:14 pm
Have to smile. When I heard tonight that Dick Clark has betrayed the white house, I thought that they were referring to American Band Stand. Well, maybe they were.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2004 07:25 am
Clark had apparently submitted his book to the white House required vetting process. He said that he did this sometime in early 2003. The White House didnt return its ok until recently. So, timing was partly in their hands
0 Replies
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2004 07:44 am
But the White House can vet the manuscript only for classified information. He could have been presenting his thesis in limited form in op-ed pieces, articles and even as a talking head so that his main points were out there prior to the White House approval. As it is he is getting slammed as an opportunist. The Bush machine is composed of very slick operators and Clark is increasingly getting painted as a nieve "tell all" opportunist trying to make a splash and a buck. It is only if you look at the body of charges made by others that his book now makes an impact. It is the same scenario of a detached, incurious, and obsessed President repeated over and over by a number of insiders. If Clark had thought a little about who he was dealing with he could have made a much more effective impact.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2004 07:48 am
ya got a point there judge.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/12/2021 at 08:24:27