Bush supporters' aftermath thread II

I can only assume you are referring to the spam brought to a2k by Possum R FartBubble massagatos et al, from what i can tell no one really cares how many different personas he/she/it uses because it remains the same old crappola, he/she/it is consistently reprehensible.

I am very much afraid you are wrong.

Hmm .... maybe the persona will evolve.

You'll be sure to tell me the moment he/she switches over from a conspiracy theory promoting, freedom4free loving, "Islam is a religion of peace" and the "Republicans are the root of all that is evil" believing, foaming-at-the-mouth Bushophobic leftist, won't you?

Mr. Ticomaya, you are a very well studied scholar and a notable lawyer who knows more than any of those communists here.

You really should not put such so easily aside I advise.

Perhaps you are right.

Never mind then. I do very much enjoy watching you folks denigrate one of your own for a change.

I'm quite sure that moderators weren't associated to names during the time you've been here.

I didn't notice or have ever heard of that someone "outed" the identy of a member during all the time I've been here.

I would certainly hope not. But Blatham did essentially say that Timber did just that.

So adding this to your previous post, Walter, are you saying Timber did it? Or that Blatham is talking through his hat?

I think I noticed on the very first day that MarionT showed up; similarity in names, plus an over-the-top assumed persona, plus a similar posting style.

Not to mention the fact that MarionT showed up a day after Bernard stopped posting...

Cycloptichorn

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2268375#2268375

After seven or eight plus years (abuzz before here) any sort of "evolving" looks likely to need a Designer doing some pretty serious omnipotating.

Report Rocks Bush Election Stance
Published on Sunday, September 24, 2006 by Agence France Presse
Leaked Intelligence Report Rocks Bush Election Stance


US spy agencies have dropped a political bombshell six weeks before national elections, with the leak of a classified report concluding that the war in Iraq has spawned a new wave of Islamic radicalism and increased the global threat of terrorism.

The intelligence document on Sunday rocked a central pillar of the Republican Party's campaign platform ahead of November elections: that the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the ouster of Saddam Hussein made America safer, not weaker.

With opinion polls showing President George W. Bush's party possibly losing control of both houses of Congress in the the mid-term polls, in large part due to unhappiness over the war in Iraq, the report stating categorically the opposite will make for painful reading at the White House.

Bush has argued repeatedly in pre-election speeches that Iraq is the central front in the war on terrorism and that demands for a US troop withdrawal from the country by the opposition Democrats underscores why the center-left party should not be trusted with the nation's security.

"The security of the civilized world depends on victory in the war on terror, and that depends on victory in Iraq," Bush said in one speech on August 31.

Such assertions were looking decidedly shaky Sunday after The New York Times and The Washington Post released details of the classified National Intelligence Estimate, the most comprehensive assessment yet of the war, based on analyses of all 16 of America's intelligence agencies.

The report, Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States, says "the Iraq war has made the overall terrorism problem worse," an official familiar with the document told The Times.

The Washington Post said the report described the Iraq conflict as the primary recruiting vehicle for violent Islamic extremists.

"While the US has seriously damaged Al-Qaeda and disrupted its ability to carry out major operations since the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington, it noted, radical Islamic networks have spread and decentralized.

Democratic leaders were quick to jump on the report's conclusions as clear evidence of the failure of Bush's policies.

"This intelligence document should put the final nail in the coffin for President Bush's phony argument about the Iraq war," Senator Edward Kennedy said in a statement Sunday.

"The fact that we need a new direction in Iraq to really win the war on terror and make Americans safer could not be clearer or more urgent -- yet this administration stubbornly clings to a failed 'stay-the-course' strategy," he said.

The White House, while reiterating its traditional stance of not commenting on classified reports, said The New York Times story "isn't representative of the complete document."

"We've always said that the terrorists are determined. Keeping the pressure on and staying on the offense is the best way to win the war on terror," a White House spokesman added.

But the leaked intelligence report is hardly good news for Bush and the Republicans, coming on top of a messy revolt by top Republican senators against a Bush plan for legitimizing how the US interrogates and prosecutes terrorist suspects.

The Senate rebels, who included possible candidates to succeed Bush in 2008, reached a compromise agreement with the White House late this week.

But the unseemly row already diverted attention away from Republican efforts to present a unified front on the issue of national security during the final stretch of the election campaign.

Republican leaders tried to brush aside the intelligence document, which they said they had not yet seen.

"If it wasn't Iraq it would be Afghanistan; if it wasn't Afghanistan it would be other (issues) that they would use as a method of continuing their recruitment," Senator John McCain, a leading potential presidential contender, said on CBS's Face The Nation.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist expressed confidence US voters would not be swayed by the intelligence report.

"I think the American people, when they read an article like that ... say, 'Listen, just keep me safe -- I just want to be safe in Nashville, Tennessee, I want to be safe in Memphis, New York City, Washington, DC,' that's what they want."

© Copyright 2006 AFP

Oh yeah....Americans are about as deep as a puddle; that's probably exactly what they'll think. Why in he** would they read an article like that and feel safer? What a false security.

So arresting criminals increases crime, so I guess lets get rid of all the police departments and DAs around the country, so crime will go away. Makes perfect sense.

Actually, I didn't read such. But might be, you got a better insight since it's a report by the 16 US secret agencies.

I didn't read such either. Read the article again okie. You are missing the point of the article. They are not saying let criminals go - they are saying that Bush's stubborn clinging to his 'stay the course' is actually causing more radical groups --rather than less.

I really wish Americans could extrapolate and analyze what they read. There seems to be a lot of difficulty in understanding anything other than the mindless killing that solves nothing.

"The security of the civilized world depends on victory in the war on terror, and that depends on victory in Iraq," Bush said in one speech on August 31.

'Such assertions were looking decidedly shaky Sunday after The New York Times and The Washington Post released details of the classified National Intelligence Estimate, the most comprehensive assessment yet of the war, based on analyses of all 16 of America's intelligence agencies. '

Hard to argue with 16 of America's intelligence agencies who happen to think that:

'the war in Iraq has spawned a new wave of Islamic radicalism and increased the global threat of terrorism. '

Thank you, DUH-BULL-YA.

I would like to vote Pachelbel off the island.

Bad strategy. A broad and less than secret cabal of others here note your motion and decide it is time for you to be handed the "water wings of sadness" and the little spray bottle of "Shark-Away".

BM.

The "broad cabal" solution to terror.

Let's give up.

Blatham, I understand why you're holding up a stick with your tighty whities on the end, but I don't really need to see the skid marks.