Harold Burton wrote:

In article <4AE7B934.FB9162DE at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com>,
RichTravsky <traRvEsky at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:

CB wrote:
"RichTravsky" <traRvEsky at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
Harold Burton wrote:
RichTravsky <traRvEsky at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
CB wrote:
"Sid9" <sid9 at (no spam) belsouth.net> wrote in message
"miles" <nope at (no spam) nopers.com> wrote in message
Sid9 wrote:

Obama, during the campaign, said we would have a
responsible
withdrawal
from Iraq.

He gave a date. A firm date with a promise to meet it. When
asked for a
plan as to how, he had none. He promised the closing of
Gitmo and
a firm
date. When asked for a plan as to how, he had none. Now we
see
he can't
even come close to meeting either campaign promise just as
those
who
asked him for a plan had predicted.

There is an agreement between the government of the United
States
and the
government of Iraq.
That is being followed.

The withdrawal is on schedule.

So the illusion continues

What illusion? That there were WMDs?

Ask KKKlinton and his yes men

Ask Powell:

Axe Fact Check loon
http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html
Two intelligence investigations show Bush had plenty of reason to
believe
what he said in his 2003 State of the Union Address.

That's from mid 2004! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

There were no WMDs, and we knew that in 2001. Both Powell and Rice said
so.

Pelosi lied people died, the CIA was prevented from telling of Mohammed
Attah's cell in NYC because of Jamie Gorelick and her memo. The CIA
team
called Able Danger could have foiled Attah's plot except for the
Clintonian
policy of NOT allowing communications between the CIA and the FBI.

Pelosi lied, Gorelick denied, Sandy Burger covered up and people died.

Snicker.

Duhbya lied and people died.

"Harold Burton" <hal.i.burton at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hal.i.burton-CF8F0C.21074428102009 at (no spam) news.newsguy.com...
In article <hcaist$2rk$1 at (no spam) news.eternal-september.org>,
"PC" <PC at (no spam) minneapolis.mn.us> wrote:

"CB" <CB at (no spam) PrayForMe.com> wrote in message
news:4ae8c889$0$5677$9a6e19ea at (no spam) unlimited.newshosting.com...

"PC" <PC at (no spam) minneapolis.mn.us> wrote in message
news:hca0es$j6h$1 at (no spam) news.eternal-september.org...

"Harold Burton" <hal.i.burton at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hal.i.burton-417E5A.20382726102009 at (no spam) news.newsguy.com...
In article <ute9e51ag4cebrh550s3ql53rs2fdg1pej at (no spam) 4ax.com>,
Laff at (no spam) alot.com
wrote:

On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 16:15:51 -0400, "CB"
CB at (no spam) PrayForMe.com> wrote:

Two intelligence investigations show Bush had plenty of reason to
believe
what he said in his 2003 State of the Union Address.

didn't

EVERY excuse bush used was PROVEN false by Jan 2003.


So why did the DemocRATs vote for the war?

They were given the same faulty intelligence by Bush. This should be
obvious to anyone beyond the 2nd grade.


Axe Fact Check loon
http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html
Two intelligence investigations show Bush had plenty of reason to
believe
what he said in his 2003 State of the Union Address.

snicker

Which does nothing to change the fact it was faulty.


So it wasn't President Bush's fault after all.


He made the decision. So yes, it was.

CB wrote:

"Harold Burton" <hal.i.burton at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hal.i.burton-D5AA90.20360626102009 at (no spam) news.newsguy.com...
In article <4ae4b233$0$4978$9a6e19ea at (no spam) unlimited.newshosting.com>,
"CB" <CB at (no spam) PrayForMe.com> wrote:


Pelosi lied people died, the CIA was prevented from telling of Mohammed
Attah's cell in NYC because of Jamie Gorelick and her memo. The CIA team
called Able Danger could have foiled Attah's plot except for the
Clintonian
policy of NOT allowing communications between the CIA and the FBI.

Pelosi lied, Gorelick denied, Sandy Burger covered up and people died.


I like it, OK if I use it?

By all means

Don't forget to include the facts

Harold Burton wrote:
RichTravsky <traRvEsky at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
Harold Burton wrote:
RichTravsky <traRvEsky at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
Harold Burton wrote:
RichTravsky <traRvEsky at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
CB wrote:
"Sid9" <sid9 at (no spam) belsouth.net> wrote in message
"miles" <nope at (no spam) nopers.com> wrote in message
Sid9 wrote:

Obama, during the campaign, said we would have a
responsible
withdrawal
from Iraq.

He gave a date. A firm date with a promise to meet it.
When
asked
for a
plan as to how, he had none. He promised the closing of
Gitmo
and a
firm
date. When asked for a plan as to how, he had none. Now we
see
he
can't
even come close to meeting either campaign promise just as
those
who
asked him for a plan had predicted.

There is an agreement between the government of the United
States
and
the
government of Iraq.
That is being followed.

The withdrawal is on schedule.

So the illusion continues

What illusion? That there were WMDs?

Ask KKKlinton and his yes men


Ask Powell:

Is Powell a KKKlinton "Yes man"?

Snicker

You don't know who Powell and Rice were?

You implied they were KKKlinton yes men.

snicker.

So you don't know who there are...

CB wrote:
"RichTravsky" <traRvEsky at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
Harold Burton wrote:
RichTravsky <traRvEsky at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
Harold Burton wrote:
RichTravsky <traRvEsky at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
CB wrote:
"Sid9" <sid9 at (no spam) belsouth.net> wrote in message
"miles" <nope at (no spam) nopers.com> wrote in message
Sid9 wrote:

Obama, during the campaign, said we would have a responsible
withdrawal
from Iraq.

He gave a date. A firm date with a promise to meet it. When
asked
for a
plan as to how, he had none. He promised the closing of Gitmo
and a
firm
date. When asked for a plan as to how, he had none. Now we
see he
can't
even come close to meeting either campaign promise just as
those who
asked him for a plan had predicted.

There is an agreement between the government of the United
States and
the
government of Iraq.
That is being followed.

The withdrawal is on schedule.

So the illusion continues

What illusion? That there were WMDs?

Ask KKKlinton and his yes men


Ask Powell:

Is Powell a KKKlinton "Yes man"?

Snicker

You don't know who Powell and Rice were?

SNICKER

You don't know who Slick Willy 'is'

You're even more stupid than...

Harold Burton wrote:
RichTravsky <traRvEsky at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
Harold Burton wrote:
RichTravsky <traRvEsky at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
Harold Burton wrote:
RichTravsky <traRvEsky at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
miles wrote:
Laff at (no spam) alot.com wrote:
On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 13:03:30 -0400, "CB"
CB at (no spam) PrayForMe.com> wrote:

It goes along with BO's Senate voting record in issues of
important.
He
votes 'Present'

But in your sleazy world, lying to start wars is okay.

What about repeating Democrats lies for the purpose of going to
war?
Oh
ya, the left dismisses everything their own ilk said for years
prior to
anything Bush said.

“It is incontestable that on the day I left office, there
[was]…a
substantial amount of biological and chemical material
unaccounted
for”
in Iraq." Bill Clinton July 2003

Every intelligence agency in the world -- French, British,
German,
Russian, Czech, Canada you name it all made statements saying
that
Iraq
had WMD's. Ya, I know. They were all puppets of Bush and just
went on
his word right? Sorry, they were saying this BEFORE Bush was
even
in
office.

Where are the WMDs?

Ask KKKlinton and his yes men

Ask Powell:

Is he a KKKlinton yes man?

snicker.

Powell is a republicon.

And worked for Duhbya.

so why do you "think" he's a KKKlinton yes man?

Snicker.

You're the one who thinks that...

"Harold Burton" <hal.i.burton at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hal.i.burton-417E5A.20382726102009 at (no spam) news.newsguy.com...
In article <ute9e51ag4cebrh550s3ql53rs2fdg1pej at (no spam) 4ax.com>, Laff at (no spam) alot.com
wrote:

On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 16:15:51 -0400, "CB"
CB at (no spam) PrayForMe.com> wrote:

Two intelligence investigations show Bush had plenty of reason to
believe
what he said in his 2003 State of the Union Address.

didn't

EVERY excuse bush used was PROVEN false by Jan 2003.


So why did the DemocRATs vote for the war?

They were given the same faulty intelligence by Bush.

You actually trying to claim the DemocRAT Congress hasn't been voting
for the war for almost three years now?

Duhbya lied and people died.


So did DemocRATs Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, and Johnson.

On Sun, 1 Nov 2009 07:41:54 -0500, "PLMerite"
stockade at (no spam) smokebombhill.com> wrote:

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass
destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them
against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

You keep citing OLD discredited evidence prior to March
2003

It's all bogus---all the OLD intel was proven
false---making Bush's excuses false

We know they were all false---the invasion proved the
they were.

"Sid9" <sid9 at (no spam) belsouth.net> wrote in message
"PLMerite" <stockade at (no spam) smokebombhill.com> wrote in message
smorgas at (no spam) board.com> wrote in message
On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 12:58:33 -0400, "PLMerite"
stockade at (no spam) smokebombhill.com> wrote:

Niger's economy is based upon two things: subsitance farming and Uranium
deposits.

Iraq sent a "trade delegation" there in 1998. Did they want to buy
turnips?

Niger has no contact with anything "uranium"

They issue PERMITS to UN approved consortiums---under
strict UN control

Supposedly. Iraq sent a "trade delegation" there in 1998. What else
could they have been in the market for ?

Supposedly?

Asshole bush,jr starts a war on "Supposedly"

bush,jr's a LIAR..

bush,jr is a life long incompetent....

He leaves that one war unfinished and screws up the other one

Supposedly "permists are issued to UN-approved consortiums" (if this is even
true), just like the oil contracts manipulated by Saddam to bribe western
politicians were under the control of the UN.

Yeah, I put a lot of faith in the UN, IAEA, etc.

Saddam is dead now, the left can stop shilling for him. Likewise, Bush

hasn't been president for nine months so everything belongs to Barack
Hussein Mohammed Obama II now.

Regards, PLMerite

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in
1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a
warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those
trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of
2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass
destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them
against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"RichTravsky" <traRvEsky at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
orionca at (no spam) earthlink.net wrote:
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 22:02:09 -0600, smorgas at (no spam) board.com wrote:

You stupid fuck

Bush claimed the UN was NOT the reason he attacked---

Bush said he attacked because Saddam was a "Clear and
present danger"---threat to America

Got a cite for that? If you do, the Democrat Party will love you -
they've been looking for one for 7 years and haven't found it. Except,
of course, on leftwing, "I-Hate-Bush!" websites, where lunatics like
you froth and spew their delusional ravings all day.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Presidential_Radio_Address_-_28_September_2002
...
The danger to our country is grave and it is growing.
...

Remember the mushroom cloud nonsense?

The potentual isn't there any longer thanks too President Bush

orionca at (no spam) earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:nqmoe5h3rupe5h039udtctf2tksao1ncs9 at (no spam) 4ax.com...
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 22:02:09 -0600, smorgas at (no spam) board.com wrote:

You stupid fuck

Bush claimed the UN was NOT the reason he attacked---

Bush said he attacked because Saddam was a "Clear and
present danger"---threat to America

Got a cite for that?

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/02/opinion/02weds1.html

"PC" <PC at (no spam) minneapolis.mn.us> wrote in message
news:hchnf4$bj6$1 at (no spam) news.eternal-september.org...

orionca at (no spam) earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:nqmoe5h3rupe5h039udtctf2tksao1ncs9 at (no spam) 4ax.com...
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 22:02:09 -0600, smorgas at (no spam) board.com wrote:

You stupid fuck

Bush claimed the UN was NOT the reason he attacked---

Bush said he attacked because Saddam was a "Clear and
present danger"---threat to America

Got a cite for that?

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/02/opinion/02weds1.html



The only quote in that article is from then "CIA director Tenet, then the
director of central intelligence, famously called "a slam-dunk" case?"

A poor try, liar

smorgas at (no spam) board.com> wrote in message
On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 08:47:28 -0700,
orionca at (no spam) earthlink.net wrote:

Bush said he attacked because Saddam was a "Clear and
present danger"---threat to America

Got a cite for that?

For what other reason would you pre-emptively attack
another nation?

There were a plethora of reasons to have thumped Saddamn and/ore his Evil

Sons who took their Christmas pistols into political prisons for target
practice on Saddamn's enemies. The one I like more than that or that Saddamn
was in material breach of 17 UNSC resolutions...is...(drum roll pleez),
Saddamn attempted to assassinate President Bush's daddy!

For what other reason would you concoct a series of
puffed up, false, misleading, and OLD intelligence to
the point you ask congress to sign off on an invasion

To be safe and sorry.

Dims would rather give Evil the benefit of every doubt just before saying,
"we should have taken him out" before the smoking gun went off.

Of course the damn excused were predicated on "clear
and present danger"---why else would bush have been so
adamant?

Like this?

...

Thursday, July 31, Dr. Kay reported to the US Senate Intelligence Committee
that his 1,400-strong team of American, British and Australian researchers
had found in just over a month's operation physical evidence of Iraqi
activity on weapons of mass destruction. Without going into detail, Kay told
the senators that the most progress had been made on biological weapons.