1
   

He knew. He lied. 2,749 people died.

 
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Mar, 2006 01:47 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
woiyo, You wouldn't understand what it meant if your life depended on it. But for the others, I'm sure no explanation is needed.


You are correct as I do not think much of you and your silly opinions.

You can sit your little candy a$$ out in LA LA land and criticize the efforts of all our dead civilians who died for no reason and military people for having the courage to take a stand.

But please... do chirp on, little one.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Mar, 2006 02:13 pm
woiyo wrote:
"...BLAH, BLAH, BLAH...and criticize the efforts of all our dead civilians who died for no reason and military people for having the courage to take a stand."

Logic is completely missed by this one sentence. You wouldn't understand why, but most people reading your post understands clearly why you're the one making "silly" statements. A serious question for you. Are you a teenager?
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Mar, 2006 04:17 pm
Are you looking for somebody to look up to?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Mar, 2006 04:48 pm
At my age? Get serious.
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Mar, 2006 05:03 pm
woiyo wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
woiyo, You wouldn't understand what it meant if your life depended on it. But for the others, I'm sure no explanation is needed.


You are correct as I do not think much of you and your silly opinions.

You can sit your little candy a$$ out in LA LA land and criticize the efforts of all our dead civilians who died for no reason and military people for having the courage to take a stand.

But please... do chirp on, little one.


When will you EVER learn? LA LA land is LA, and Hollywood. If you look at the map as to what parts of the state are "Blue", and what parts of the state are "Red", you will notice that the decided "Red" parts of the state are through the central valley and through what you refer to as "LA LA LAND". So you just called your Republican brothers candy assees!! You should be ashamed of yourself Woiyo, calling your brothers in arms names like that Shocked Laughing

Anon
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Mar, 2006 05:06 pm
Intrepid wrote:
Are you looking for somebody to look up to?


Intrepid,

I'm starting to think you're seriously in love with William Shatner!!

Anon
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Mar, 2006 05:13 pm
woiyo wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
woiyo, You wouldn't understand what it meant if your life depended on it. But for the others, I'm sure no explanation is needed.


You are correct as I do not think much of you and your silly opinions.

You can sit your little candy a$$ out in LA LA land and criticize the efforts of all our dead civilians who died for no reason and military people for having the courage to take a stand.

But please... do chirp on, little one.


It's interesting how some here wrap themselves in the shroud of 9/11 and act as if that this gives them a credibility that others lack. And this one is based on living in or near NY?
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Mar, 2006 09:25 pm
Anon-Voter wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
Are you looking for somebody to look up to?


Intrepid,

I'm starting to think you're seriously in love with William Shatner!!

Anon


Well, it was either that or the Grim Reaper. You seemed to have that one all tied up. Bill ain't so bad.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Mar, 2006 09:27 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
At my age? Get serious.


The irony seems to have been missed on you. Cool
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Mar, 2006 09:28 pm
I miss irony all the time; so what's your point?
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 07:07 am
Never mind. It would almost certainly be lost anyhow.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 11:05 am
You're the one that's lost if you can't even explain what you mean. At least I offered to listen.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 07:50 pm
Congressman Conyers Calls on the President to Publish the Hadley Memo

RAW STORY
Published: Thursday March 30, 2006

Conyers Calls on the President to Publish the Hadley Memo

Congressman John Conyers today called on president Bush to make publicly available a memo submitted to him by Stephen Hadley in October 2002. This memo clearly explained to the president that the Departments of State and Energy both rejected White House claims that Iraq was seeking materials to build a nuclear weapon. This is a very important document revealing the administration's efforts to build a case for war based on Iraq's nuclear threat to our country when overwhelming evidence disputed this claim. The text of the letter follows:

Dear Mr. President:

I write to ask that you release publicly an October 2002 memorandum that informed you that the Energy Department and State Department disagreed with assessments that Iraq was seeking to acquire nuclear weapons materials. The memorandum was submitted to you by then-Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley.

Throughout the past several years, you have claimed frequently that Saddam Hussein had been attempting to acquire the materials necessary to build nuclear weapons. In fact, during your 2003 State of the Union Address, you stated, "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production." Shortly after this speech, the United States invaded Iraq, but no nuclear weapons materials have been located.

According to National Journal, you were aware prior to the 2003 State of the Union that Iraq did not possess such materials. In summarizing a National Intelligence Estimate for you in October 2002, Mr. Hadley noted that, while many agencies believed the aluminum tubes were "related to a uranium enrichment effort," the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research and the Energy Department's intelligence branch "believe that the tubes more likely are intended for conventional weapons." In short, these two intelligence agencies disagreed with your State of the Union assertion.

I am certain you would agree that, as we enter the fourth year of the invasion, it is important for the American people to understand exactly what set of circumstances led to your authorization of military action. For that reason, I ask that you release Mr. Hadley's memorandum.

Sincerely,

John Conyers, Jr.
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Mar, 2006 09:27 pm
Blue,

Oh yea,

He's gonna publish that one alright!!

Anon
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Mar, 2006 03:12 pm
Quote:
Moussaoui seeks death

Should Zacarias Moussaoui be sentenced to death for his role in the 9/11 terrorist attacks? Or should he instead be made to spend the rest of his life in a small cell because death is precisely what he wants?
Moussaoui's testimony this week seemed to remove any lingering doubts about his preference. It elated prosecutors seeking his death and frustrated defense lawyers trying to save his life.

Prosecutors say the admitted al-Qaeda agent should be executed because he withheld information after his 2001 arrest that could have derailed the attacks. Moussaoui told the truth, they argue, when he testified Monday that he and would-be "shoe bomber" Richard Reid were to fly a fifth plane into the White House on 9/11.

His defense lawyers agree he's a contemptible liar but argue he wasn't part of the hijacking plot. He, they say, is an al-Qaeda "hanger-on and nuisance" who now wants "to write a role for himself into history."

Moussaoui, 37, has pleaded guilty to conspiracy charges and, on Thursday, a federal jury in Alexandria, Va., was deliberating whether he will be executed. The smart choice seems obvious.

An execution would make Moussaoui what he longs to be, a martyr. It would fulfill his sick view of Americans as "spending millions of their evil money to kill me."

To the contrary, the government has provided him with able defense lawyers and every protection the Constitution promises. He benefited from a prosecution blunder involving the coaching of witnesses — a piece of due process in a legal system for which he has nothing but contempt.

Yet on the world stage, an execution would aid America's enemies, perhaps as an al-Qaeda recruiting tool. It also could make nations that have abolished the death penalty less willing to turn over terrorism suspects.

For some time, Moussaoui's actions have suggested that, for him, life in prison is more horrible than death. At one point, he offered to testify for prosecutors in exchange for better prison conditions. His testimony might as well have been a request to die.

Revenge may be sweet. But for a man with a death wish and delusions of an awaiting paradise, decades in a dismal prison cell, not a quick execution, is the way to achieve it.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Mar, 2006 04:37 pm
bookmark
0 Replies
 
astromouse
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Mar, 2006 06:04 pm
We can't expect the terrorists to tell the truth.
So how can we expect Moussaoui to be telling the truth?
By my last recollection he is a terrorist.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Mar, 2006 06:48 pm
Or he could be a nut case.
0 Replies
 
camlok
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 8 Sep, 2018 08:55 pm
Quote:
He knew. He lied. 2,749 people died.


2,996 died. And yup, GWB knew because his government planned it.
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
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/25/2018 at 08:50:05