3
   

Bush supporters' aftermath thread II

 
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Aug, 2006 10:47 pm
Valerie Plame, of course. BTW, experts doubt that we could effectively destroy the nuke facilities with bombing because of not knowing where they all are. Had Plame not been outed, and her agents compromised, we might know this information.
0 Replies
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Aug, 2006 10:54 pm
Advocate- You are completely ignorant about Iraq and Valerie Plame. She had nothing to do with Iraq and she did not have anyone under her control( agents compromised) that were in Iraq.

Are you under the influence of some substance that is affecting your mind?

How can you make up such fantasies?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Aug, 2006 10:56 pm
Cycloptichorn says to the air,

Quote:
What a f*ckin' moron.


Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Aug, 2006 11:01 pm
Quote:
Advocate- You are completely ignorant about Iraq and Valerie Plame. She had nothing to do with Iraq and she did not have anyone under her control( agents compromised) that were in Iraq.


Advocate Said:
Quote:
What is more important in the area of security than secretly tracking the development of nukes in Iran?


Read accurately before you ridicule

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Aug, 2006 11:07 pm
Valerie Plame did not track the development of nukes in Iran, Iraq or Tibet! She had no agents under her control who were compromised in Iraq, Iran or Tibet.

Advocate is again, completely ignorant of the facts!!
0 Replies
 
pachelbel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Aug, 2006 11:38 pm
BernardR wrote:
Valerie Plame did not track the development of nukes in Iran, Iraq or Tibet! She had no agents under her control who were compromised in Iraq, Iran or Tibet.

Advocate is again, completely ignorant of the facts!!


Yup. BR, you are a complete FU**ING Moron!!
Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Aug, 2006 11:42 pm
Valerie Plame did not track the development of nukes in Iran, Iraq or Tibet! She had no agents under her control who were compromised in Iraq, Iran or Tibet.

Advocate is again, completely ignorant of the facts!!
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 01:05 am
Plame's identity as an undercover CIA officer was first disclosed to Russia in the mid-1990s by a spy in Moscow.

This is old news.

To put it bluntly, Plame and Wilson are frauds.

http://www.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/mccarthy200507180801.asp
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 03:31 am
Bernard and Okie are right on this one. It has been debated ad nauseum, and the evidence is overwhelming. Wilson lied. Plame was working in the area of weapons, but she had no authority re any nuke programs anywhere, she had not been 'covert' for years, and Wilson had 'outed' her on his own website and in "Who's Who in America" well before all this bruhaha about it ever broke. Even if she had been 'outed' by somebody (other than Wilson), she had a safe desk job at the CIA and any work she was doing on anything would not have been compromised in the least. This has been clearly stated by even the special prosecutor who is looking into that. No crime was committed. Nobody was compromised. (And, the one person indicted on this deal for perjury, not for outing Plame, will almost certainly be exhonerated.)
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 06:01 am
Ok, kids ... let's leave the personal slurs and attacks for other threads.

We have more class than that in this here part of A2K.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 06:05 am
Ticomaya wrote:
Ok, kids ... let's leave the personal slurs and attacks for other threads.

We have more class than that in this here part of A2K.


cough from back of room
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 06:11 am
blatham wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
Ok, kids ... let's leave the personal slurs and attacks for other threads.

We have more class than that in this here part of A2K.


cough from back of room


Yes, blatham .... I think you have more class than that too.

<strokes Bernie's fragile ego>
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 06:45 am
The kindness and womanly empathy of the world's footballers. Where would we be without it?
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 09:04 am
From Boortz:

One day a hunter saw a bear and was about to fire when the bear held up his paw and said, "After all, Mr. Hunter all you want is a fur coat, and all I want is a full stomach. Can't we use some diplomacy and sit down and negotiate this?"

So the hunter sat down to negotiate. The bear was right ... the hunter got a fur coat and the bear got a full stomach.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 09:26 am
Ticomaya wrote:
From Boortz:

One day a hunter saw a bear and was about to fire when the bear held up his paw and said, "After all, Mr. Hunter all you want is a fur coat, and all I want is a full stomach. Can't we use some diplomacy and sit down and negotiate this?"

So the hunter sat down to negotiate. The bear was right ... the hunter got a fur coat and the bear got a full stomach.


Another favorite story is the man, on a very cold morning, out for his morning walk. He sees a nearly frozen snake immobilized on the path. Pitying the creature, he picks it up and holds it in his bosom to warm it. The thawed out snake promptly struck the man over his heart. Just before the man lost consciousness he asked, "Why?" The snake replied, "Because I am a venomous snake who does what venomous snakes do."
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 01:08 pm
Foxfyre wrote:


Another favorite story is the man, on a very cold morning, out for his morning walk. He sees a ...


Ticomaya wrote:
From Boortz:

One day a hunter saw a bear and was about to fire when the bear held up his paw and said, "After all, ...


Simplistic stories for simplistic thinkers. Here's something that isn't a story meant to mislead with silly tangents. It addresses the actual issue, the aftermath of the selection.

Quote:


Katrina's Damage to Bush's Standing Still Haunts His Presidency

By Brendan Murray
Aug. 25 (Bloomberg) -- Hurricane Katrina's flood waters have long since receded. The human toll and political wreckage wrought by the killer storm continue to haunt George W. Bush almost a year later.

As the president and still-reeling Gulf Coast residents prepared to mark Katrina's anniversary, political experts say that dismay over Bush's response to the disaster continues to undermine public confidence in his managerial abilities.

``It was Katrina that broke the sense that the Republicans could govern well,'' former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said in an interview. Bush ``was still seen before Katrina as a relatively strong leader, and somewhere in this process there was a substantial erosion because Americans were shocked'' by the government's failure to perform.

Bush has never appeared comfortable talking about the catastrophe, and the storm's continuing ability to bedevil him makes it a domestic counterpart to the Iraq war -- a setback that fundamentally altered perceptions of a presidency.

The White House's Katrina relief effort seemed off-kilter from the start, said Gingrich, a Republican. Citing Bush's initial praise for then-Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Michael Brown, Gingrich said that ``from that point on, people just look at us and see `Brownie, you're doing a great job,' and they just think we're not in touch with reality.''



The rightwingnut posters in this thread, not in touch with reality; who would ever think such a thing?
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 04:05 pm
http://img77.imageshack.us/img77/5096/trollbutton145x86dezt2.jpg
0 Replies
 
pachelbel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 04:16 pm
JTT wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:


Another favorite story is the man, on a very cold morning, out for his morning walk. He sees a ...


Ticomaya wrote:
From Boortz:

One day a hunter saw a bear and was about to fire when the bear held up his paw and said, "After all, ...


Simplistic stories for simplistic thinkers. Here's something that isn't a story meant to mislead with silly tangents. It addresses the actual issue, the aftermath of the selection.

Quote:


Katrina's Damage to Bush's Standing Still Haunts His Presidency

By Brendan Murray
Aug. 25 (Bloomberg) -- Hurricane Katrina's flood waters have long since receded. The human toll and political wreckage wrought by the killer storm continue to haunt George W. Bush almost a year later.

As the president and still-reeling Gulf Coast residents prepared to mark Katrina's anniversary, political experts say that dismay over Bush's response to the disaster continues to undermine public confidence in his managerial abilities.

``It was Katrina that broke the sense that the Republicans could govern well,'' former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said in an interview. Bush ``was still seen before Katrina as a relatively strong leader, and somewhere in this process there was a substantial erosion because Americans were shocked'' by the government's failure to perform.

Bush has never appeared comfortable talking about the catastrophe, and the storm's continuing ability to bedevil him makes it a domestic counterpart to the Iraq war -- a setback that fundamentally altered perceptions of a presidency.

The White House's Katrina relief effort seemed off-kilter from the start, said Gingrich, a Republican. Citing Bush's initial praise for then-Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Michael Brown, Gingrich said that ``from that point on, people just look at us and see `Brownie, you're doing a great job,' and they just think we're not in touch with reality.''



The rightwingnut posters in this thread, not in touch with reality; who would ever think such a thing?



JTT, you gotta face it. Some people just don't want to know. Then they would have to get off their fat arses and actually do something. It's better to pretend things are ok.

I was going to address this to the posters here, but other than JTT and a very few others who can think for themselves and analyze reports, the rest of you wouldn't get it because it's actually fact based, and Fox TV hasn't spoon-fed it to you & watered it down so you can understand it. So I'll address this to JTT.

from WIKIPEDIA:

Several months after the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Joseph C. Wilson, IV, writing as an "Op-Ed Contributor" to the New York Times, alleged [1] that President George W. Bush had misrepresented intelligence suggesting that the Iraqi regime sought uranium in order to manufacture nuclear weapons. Eight days later, writing about Wilson's trip and findings, columnist Robert Novak revealed the CIA affiliation of Wilson's wife, and claimed that she (Plame) was the conduit through which he (Wilson) was selected for the trip. [2] Wilson and others have argued that the disclosure of Plame's identity was done purposely, was intended to punish Wilson for his criticism and did in fact illegally endanger both Plame herself and national security. According to Stanley M. Moscowitz, CIA Director of Congressional Affairs, after an internal inquiry into the matter, the CIA made a referral to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for investigation of "possible violation of criminal law concerning the unauthorized disclosure of classified information".
END

This issue is far from resolved.
0 Replies
 
pachelbel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 04:38 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Bernard and Okie are right on this one. It has been debated ad nauseum, and the evidence is overwhelming. Wilson lied. Plame was working in the area of weapons, but she had no authority re any nuke programs anywhere, she had not been 'covert' for years, and Wilson had 'outed' her on his own website and in "Who's Who in America" well before all this bruhaha about it ever broke. Even if she had been 'outed' by somebody (other than Wilson), she had a safe desk job at the CIA and any work she was doing on anything would not have been compromised in the least. This has been clearly stated by even the special prosecutor who is looking into that. No crime was committed. Nobody was compromised. (And, the one person indicted on this deal for perjury, not for outing Plame, will almost certainly be exhonerated.)



Excuse me? Are you a lawyer now? Where's your source? This is, as usual, your opinion and is not backed up by anything factual. This is a habit of you right leaning nuts......digest this, if you can, and try to keep your minds Rolling Eyes open:

QUOTE FROM WIKIPEDIA
During months of inspections, IAEA experts found no evidence of any nuclear program in Iraq. The official U.S. Duelfer Inspection Report found after the war that all nuclear production facilities in Iraq had been destroyed before 1991 and never reconstituted. In March 2003 the U.N. experts asked for a few more months of inspections to verify the chemical and biological weapons disarmament in Iraq, but the U.S. government denied more time for inspections, and invaded Iraq on March 19, 2003.

Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald. After the invasion of Iraq, Wilson publicly criticized the Bush administration in a New York Times opinion column.

Eight days later, Plame's identity as a CIA agent was exposed in conservative pundit Robert Novak's regularly syndicated column, along with an allegation that Plame had a role in sending Wilson to investigate the Iraq-Niger "yellowcake" claim.

The revelation of Plame's identity began a larger political scandal, and Wilson claimed that Rove had leaked Plame's identity as a CIA operative in retaliation for his public contradiction of Bush administration claims.

A subsequent special investigation was launched and placed under the direction of Patrick Fitzgerald. On October 28, 2005, a federal grand jury returned a 5-count indictment against Lewis Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff, on charges of perjury, obstruction of justice, and making false statements to the FBI and the grand jury investigating the matter. When the indictment was announced, Libby resigned his post as Chief of Staff to the Vice President.

The indictment alleges that Libby had informed several reporters about Ms. Wilson's employment at the CIA, that this information was classified, and that Cheney got the information from CIA sources and brought it to Libby's attention. Libby has been accused of perjury and obstruction of justice for lying about the disclosure to investigators, but has not been criminally charged for releasing Plame's name. Both Karl Rove and Lewis Libby had told reporters about the occupation of Joe Wilson's wife in CIA, but Lewis Libby did it first, according to the investigation, to reporter Judith Miller on June 23, 2003.
END QUOTE

Just to make it clear to those of you who have trouble digesting facts without pablum, Wilson is V. Plame's husband.

Of course, we all know that Libby, Rove and Cheney are innocent. They are honest politicians!
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Aug, 2006 04:41 pm
I use sources that are quite more reliable than Wikipedia. I suggest that you do so as well.
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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/18/2025 at 04:00:12