1
   

Impeacheable? Bush?

 
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 06:57 am
englishmajor wrote:
Laughing Hey, you two, ceasefire! twinpeaks, I'd like your opinion on the article I posted above.

I agree with your statement concerning Congress not declaring war. They didn't. They appropriated funds for it, which is not the same thing as saying "yeah, let's go in and blast em" now, is it? That Bush unilaterally, with his minions help, did a preemptive strike doesn't mean Congress approved. No Congressmen seem to have the cojones to actually take a stand. I think they've all been castrated? :wink: They didn't want to wait for the weapons inspectors to say there were no WMD's because they KNEW there weren't. It's all a convoluted mess.

America is allowing torture to exist. They speak with forked tongue. How can they possibly even have the cojones to say democracy and freedom exists in America? What a laugh! Orwellian 1984 and Brave New World. Hope you guys are ready. What will happen when the idiots begin the draft? And they will, because no one, unless they are poor/desperate/stupid want to join up in this pathetic blood for oil 'war'. AWOL's are at over 5,000 and climbing. Then you'll see martial law declared, guaranteed! Hmmm....maybe that's what the idiots in Adm. want eh? Twisted Evil


Did you actually mean/i] to hit the submit button on this post?

I do not believe you have even one thing correct...

Congress does not declare war, WMD issue is done. We believed he had them, turns out we were wrong, so sorry. America does not allow torture. Individuals who go too far in interrogations are punished.

Orwell, 1984, Brave New World? Hardly.

I am dissappointed that you believe our soldiers, the best trained, most disciplined, toughest SOB's out there "are poor/desperate/stupid". I hope you never need their help...

Martial law...why would they declare martial law? Do you even know what the term means?
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 07:06 am
twin_peaks_nikki wrote:
woiyo wrote:
It is difficult to take someone seriously who has an avator that states I STILL HATE YOU....but let's press on.

What were the 20 reason Congress gave that compelled them to authorize the President to wage war with Iraq??

The answer is here....

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=61141&start=80

Tell us which of the 20 you have a problem with, with respect to the national security of the US.


What gave you the impression I wish to be taken seriously but while we are on the subject, it is rather hard to take seriously someone who claims to be native american who rails against equal rights for gays.


Looks like you will say ANYTHING to avoid answering a direct question that I even provided you the answers. That make you nothing more than a tout.

You call for the impeachment of BUSH based upon this war. Yet, the 20 reasons Congress gave that authorized the President to wage war are right in front of you and you can not even provide a valid reason why he should be impeached, based upon the conditions of the authorization.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 08:18 am
Chrissee/Harper Nicole wrote:
Anyway, I got a big, fun day and evening ahead of me, working in The Tenderloin sector today. Never a dull moment down there.

So I will probably check in tomorrow am...


I'm morbidly curious: ... Did you have fun working the "Tenderloin" section?



I crack myself up sometimes.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 08:20 am
englishmajor wrote:
... twinpeaks, I'd like your opinion on the article I posted above.


Were you seriously seeking critical assessment ... or were you just expecting the fawning acceptance you were assured?
0 Replies
 
twinpeaksnikki2
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 09:50 am
Ticomaya wrote:
Chrissee/Harper Nicole wrote:
Anyway, I got a big, fun day and evening ahead of me, working in The Tenderloin sector today. Never a dull moment down there.

So I will probably check in tomorrow am...


I'm morbidly curious: ... Did you have fun working the "Tenderloin" section?



I crack myself up sometimes.


So you are familiar with The Tenderloin...well, I should have known that.

I always have fun on my job, no matter where I work, and I only got hit on once. My boss took me to a real nice Thai restaurant afterwards up on Geary.

So how do you like the working "girls" there, maya? Laughing
0 Replies
 
twinpeaksnikki2
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 09:52 am
woiyo wrote:
twin_peaks_nikki wrote:
woiyo wrote:
It is difficult to take someone seriously who has an avator that states I STILL HATE YOU....but let's press on.

What were the 20 reason Congress gave that compelled them to authorize the President to wage war with Iraq??

The answer is here....

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=61141&start=80

Tell us which of the 20 you have a problem with, with respect to the national security of the US.


What gave you the impression I wish to be taken seriously but while we are on the subject, it is rather hard to take seriously someone who claims to be native american who rails against equal rights for gays.


Looks like you will say ANYTHING to avoid answering a direct question that I even provided you the answers. That make you nothing more than a tout.

You call for the impeachment of BUSH based upon this war. Yet, the 20 reasons Congress gave that authorized the President to wage war are right in front of you and you can not even provide a valid reason why he should be impeached, based upon the conditions of the authorization.


Where did I call for the impeachment of the President based on the war?
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 10:15 am
twin_peaks_nikki wrote:
Congress never voted to invade Iraq. That is a fact. Trying to shift the blame from the President who committed impeachable offenses by lying us into an unnecessary war to the Congess is pathetic.


Right here. THis is your quote, correct!!!
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 10:28 am
McGentrix wrote:

Congress does not declare war, WMD issue is done. We believed he had them, turns out we were wrong, so sorry.


I'm having a really hard time with this. Whoopsee, sorry, we invaded a country and started a war because we were mistaken. We didn't belch at the table or pick up the wrong coat from the coat check, 'so sorry' doesn't cut it. There was enough (unpublicized) doubt at the time to prevent the horrendous outcome. It's obvious that the war was not a mistake but an intended action with the wmd issue nothing but false justification.

Quote:
America does not allow torture. Individuals who go too far in interrogations are punished.


Clearly we not only allow but encourage it. Our CIA has been doing it and instructing others how to do it for years now. We have secret prisons. Why do we need secret prisons? Why do we send people to other countries for interrogation knowing that they will be tortured? Why do we craft memos and legal opinions that seek to free us of international obligations to abstain from it? Why does our vice president object to legislation that would help our soldiers in the field know where the boundaries are? If you have another plausible explanation I would truly love to hear it. I want to believe that we are a nation of laws and that we respect both the letter and intent of them. I really want to believe that we don't condone or practice torture. I'm having a hard time propping this belief up.
0 Replies
 
twinpeaksnikki2
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 10:29 am
woiyo wrote:
twin_peaks_nikki wrote:
Congress never voted to invade Iraq. That is a fact. Trying to shift the blame from the President who committed impeachable offenses by lying us into an unnecessary war to the Congess is pathetic.


Right here. THis is your quote, correct!!!


That quote in no way indicates an argument to impeach the president based merely on lying us into war. That was never in my thought process.

The broader picture is what was the President's role in obstructing justice in the coverup in the Plame outing. On the face of it, certainly there are sufficient grounds to look into the matter. An impeachment inquiry into the VP and the president's role in this matter would likely lead to Cheney, it is less clear that it would lead to the POTUS. One wonders how he could have been left out of the loop on all of this. It defies logic. If 2006 brings a Dem House, an impeachment inquiry will begin.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 12:24 pm
twin_peaks_nikki wrote:
woiyo wrote:
twin_peaks_nikki wrote:
Congress never voted to invade Iraq. That is a fact. Trying to shift the blame from the President who committed impeachable offenses by lying us into an unnecessary war to the Congess is pathetic.


Right here. THis is your quote, correct!!!


That quote in no way indicates an argument to impeach the president based merely on lying us into war. That was never in my thought process.

The broader picture is what was the President's role in obstructing justice in the coverup in the Plame outing. On the face of it, certainly there are sufficient grounds to look into the matter. An impeachment inquiry into the VP and the president's role in this matter would likely lead to Cheney, it is less clear that it would lead to the POTUS. One wonders how he could have been left out of the loop on all of this. It defies logic. If 2006 brings a Dem House, an impeachment inquiry will begin.


You're post is idiotic and you can not even be consistant with yourself.
0 Replies
 
englishmajor
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 03:48 pm
Thanks, FreeDuck, for your intelligent response, something lacking (other than twinpeaks and Coast Rat) on this thread.

The warmongers here will of course justify any war. Guess they like blood sport.....

The proof is there, if you can read (can you?) McGentrix and woiyo. Can you answer why these gulags/prisons won't let even the Red Cross in? Because--- they would see proof of torture. My God, open your eyes. If you love America, like you think you do, stand up and fight for your rights, which are fast disappearing. You are too lazy to search out the truth and would rather sit, beer in hand, on your couch and be spoonfed the 'news' according to american propanganda: corporation owned CNN, Fox, etc. Try BBC. You'll get a different perspective, like the world's view rather than just America, which is NOT the world. And don't give me bull about 'I'm not an American." My family has been in the US since before the Revolutionary War. I qualify for DAR which is Daughters of the Revolutionary War. Do you? They have fought in that war and the Civil War. For what? So all that they fought for could be systematically removed from the Bill of Rights per the "Patriot Act" which is anything BUT.

I am sad that America is going downhill. If the Dems have any cojones, maybe they will begin impeachment proceedings. My guess is that Bush Senior will save his little coke boy from that. You have a very dangerous Administration in power (see thread on PNAC), and yes, 1984 is a reality. What do you think will be the outcome if/when a draft is ordered? I predict the mothers of the US will have had enough of their children dying for oil. Then you'll see revolt. Cindy Sheehan is just the tip of the iceberg.

Happy I'm in the land of the free. Canada.
0 Replies
 
twinpeaksnikki2
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 09:04 pm
English Major, you are only in error one matter. The Dems CANNOT start impeachment proceedings, they do not have the votes.

Sadly for Americans, Canada is the land of the free. At least, I am in San Francisco.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 09:46 pm
englishmajor wrote:
Thanks, FreeDuck, for your intelligent response, something lacking (other than twinpeaks


I just can't get past that part in your post.
0 Replies
 
twinpeaksnikki2
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 09:50 pm
Watch out em. Once he becomes fixated, he becomes a real pest.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 09:54 pm
I saw the Gropenator's cigar went flaccid the other day. Saw it on the tv.
0 Replies
 
englishmajor
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 10:01 pm
Very Happy twinpeaks------so I noticed. What's up with that?

Hey I was born in SF. Haven't been there for years but next to Vancouver it's still the 2nd prettiest city in the world. As a kid I used to sit and watch the SF bay - and the giant 76 sign that is probably not there anymore. Foghorns every night, just about. The weather here in BC on the coast is not so different. Maybe a bit more snow! I love the rainy climate and the greeness here....quite beautiful.

Yes, you are right about the Dems. I know they basically have no power now, the Repubs being in Congress. I[m really pissed at what Bush et al has done to America in such a short time. Course, his predecessors didn't help either.
0 Replies
 
twinpeaksnikki2
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 10:08 pm
Well, I will have to get up there soon!
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 10:15 pm
Al-Libi's Tall Tales
By Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball
Newsweek

Thursday 10 November 2005

A CIA document obtained by NEWSWEEK provides further evidence that the US intelligence community had serious doubts about information from a high-level Qaeda detainee before the Iraq war.
A CIA document shows the agency in January 2003 raised questions about an al Qaeda detainee's claims that Saddam Hussein's government provided chemical and biological weapons training to terrorists - weeks before President George W. Bush and other top officials flatly used those same claims to make their case for war against Iraq.

The CIA document, recently provided to Congress and obtained by NEWSWEEK, fills in some of the blanks in the mysterious case of Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, a captured al Qaeda commander whose claims about poison-gas training for the Qaeda group by Saddam's government formed the basis for some of the most dramatic arguments used by senior administration officials in the run up to the invasion of Iraq.

As NEWSWEEK first reported last July, al-Libi has since recanted those claims. The new CIA document states the agency "recalled and reissued" all its intelligence reporting about al-Libi's "recanted" claims about chemical and biological warfare training by Saddam's regime in February 2004 - an important retreat on pre-Iraq war intelligence that has never been publicly acknowledged by the White House. The withdrawal also was not mentioned in last year's public report by the presidential inquiry commission headed by Judge Laurence Silberman and former Sen. Charles Robb which reviewed alleged Iraq intelligence failures.

The declassified CIA document about al-Libi was recently provided to Sen. Carl Levin, the Michigan Democrat who has been pressing for a more aggressive investigation by the Senate Intelligence Committee into the Bush Administration's handling of pre-war intelligence on Iraq. It has not been officially released because of Senate Intelligence Committee rules restricting public disclosure of information it receives as part of its inquires - even if the data has been declassified.

Levin did, however, release other material last weekend that he received through his membership on the Senate Armed Services Committee. This included declassified portions of a four-page February 2002 DIA Defense Intelligence Terrorism Summary (DITSUM) that strongly questioned al-Libi's credibility. The report stated it was "likely" al-Libi was "intentionally misleading" his debriefers and might be describing scenarios "that he knows will retain their interest." A DIA official confirmed to NEWSWEEK that the DITSUM report - which also questioned whether the "intensely secular" Iraqi regime would provide such assistance to an Islamic fundamentalist regime "it cannot control" - was circulated at the time throughout the US intelligence community and that a copy would have been sent to the National Security Council.

In addition to the new issues the latest al-Libi disclosure raises about the handling of pre-war Iraq intelligence, it also raises questions about the reliability of information gleaned from high-value al Qaeda detainees who have been incarcerated in secret CIA facilities or "rendered" to foreign countries where they are believed to have been subjected to harsh and even brutal interrogation techniques.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/111105Y.shtml
0 Replies
 
englishmajor
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 10:26 pm
check out the thread 'this will blow your mind', it will, too. Almost too much info, but you can pick and choose.

Good article here, blueflame.
0 Replies
 
twinpeaksnikki2
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 11:01 pm
I will check it out later. My
sweet little angel Asian beauty is coming over and a friend of mine made us some nice brownies. (actually muffins, but you catch my drift)
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
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 3.85 seconds on 12/24/2024 at 11:32:29