| Jul 15 @ 10:28 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
vinnytmd
Posts: 6,004
|
Lacy,
The Congress and Senate almost unanimously voted FOR the war.
This makes Kucinich appear to be absent of mind. He was there for the vote.
He is a kook.
|
|
  |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:28 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
Novalite
Posts: 3,093
|
Lacy (article) George W. Bush, as Commander in Chief, caused this country to go to war based on information which was false, and which he knew to be false.
One portion of the information was false (WMDs) and the rest, all the ceasefire conditions, adherence to the resolutions to do with WMDs, human rights, terrorism, reparations, repatriation were not adhered to. If you recall, WMDs and their threat were only one part of the case for action.
ArticleThere has been a breach of faith between the Commander in Chief and the troops. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 or with Al Qaeda’s role in 9/11.
True. It had everything to do with the war on Terror though.
LacyHe is supposed to surround himself with people who will make him look good -- by doing a good job and giving him reliable information. If his staff was incompetent, then he is incompetent. The jobs of all those who gave him bad information should be terminated -- and the buck stops with the President.
True. However, this is not Medieval Japan where Hari Kari is committed although some of his staff who screwed up (Tenet included) resigned after their errors were found. Bush has dealt with the mistakes of others and has done the best he could since then. 
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:28 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
onoudn
Posts: 4,266
|
Bush admits that Iraq Had Nothing To Do With 9/11
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:30 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
Novalite
Posts: 3,093
|
Bush never said Iraq had anything to do with 911 though.
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:33 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
onoudn
Posts: 4,266
|
Missile defense was his priority in terrorism of al Qaeda. $11 billion had been spent on counter terrorism which was twice as much that was spent on missile defense in 2000.
The FBI asked Attorney General Ashcroft ask for $588 million to beef up American efforts against terrorism just weeks before 9-11 and it was denied. Ashcroft did not rank fighting terrorism very high before the attack. Then there's all the warning the Bush Administration got from General Clark.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:34 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
onoudn
Posts: 4,266
|
Bush never said Iraq had anything to do with 911 though.
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:36 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
lacyvsq
Posts: 4,304
|
The Congress and Senate almost unanimously voted FOR the war.
This makes Kucinich appear to be absent of mind. He was there for the vote.
Congress -- the Senate and the House -- were not given facts and truth on which they could make a good decision on whether to support the war or not.
There can be no greater responsibility of a Commander in Chief than to command based on facts on the ground, and to command in fact and in truth. There can be no greater offense of a Commander in Chief than to misrepresent a cause of war and to send our brave men and women into harm’s way based on those misrepresentations.
He is a kook
Another professional diagnosis? Or more labeling?
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:40 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
Novalite
Posts: 3,093
|
Onoudn The FBI asked Attorney General Ashcroft ask for $588 million to beef up American efforts against terrorism just weeks before 9-11 and it was denied. Ashcroft did not rank fighting terrorism very high before the attack. Then there's all the warning the Bush Administration got from General Clark.
Woooo. A flank attack. Your point was Bush was trying to associate Iraq with 911 and now, you introduce a secondary front on the money side that Clinton should have allocated from his administration if the threat was foreseen and taken more seriously.
You're all over the map. Why not simply do a Garybama and say you simply hate Bush and then go watch some tv or go out for a beer?
LacyCongress -- the Senate and the House -- were not given facts and truth on which they could make a good decision on whether to support the war or not.
They read all the UN resolutions, got briefed by Tenet and saw the NIE. what on earth are you talking about?
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:43 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
vinnytmd
Posts: 6,004
|
Congress -- the Senate and the House -- were not given facts and truth on which they could make a good decision on whether to support the war or not.
Sure they were Lacy. That is absurd and reveals a complete lack of understanding of how our Government operates.
President Bush was in office less than one year before 9-11.
There are Senators and Congressman that served on intelligence committees for more than 20 years. President Clinton warned of the danger of Hussein as did Al Gore and a host of others including Hillary. You can list every Senator, including Biden, Hillary and Dodd that stood up and vocally urged that their colleagues vote for the war. The idea that the Senate and Congress was in a vacuum is naive at best. I am surprised that you have been duped into believing this.
This is a very stale argument and long past its expiration date.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:50 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
Novalite
Posts: 3,093
|
Vinny This is a very stale argument and long past its expiration date.
No doubt Vinny. WMDs were only one part of the reason and the rest can easily be referenced at Wilki but you know, not one of them will look as it will destroy their five year old rant.
The resolution cited many factors to justify the use of military force against Iraq:
* Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 cease fire, including interference with weapons inspectors.
* Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, and programs to develop such weapons, posed a "threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region."[citation needed]
* Iraq's "brutal repression of its civilian population."
* Iraq's "capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people".
* Iraq's hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the alleged 1993 assassination attempt of former President George H. W. Bush, and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War.
* Members of al-Qaeda were "known to be in Iraq."
* Iraq's "continu[ing] to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations," including anti-United States terrorist organizations.
* The efforts by the Congress and the President to fight terrorists, including the September 11th, 2001 terrorists and those who aided or harbored them.
* The authorization by the Constitution and the Congress for the President to fight anti-United States terrorism.
* Citing the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, the resolution reiterated that it should be the policy of the United States to remove the Saddam Hussein regime and promote a democratic replacement.
The resolution "supported" and "encouraged" diplomatic efforts by President Bush to "strictly enforce through the U.N. Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq" and "obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion, and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."
The resolution authorized President Bush to use the Armed Forces of the United States "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate" in order to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq."
Say, if any of you people forget this, let me know and I'll repost it. 
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:52 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
SensualGemini
Posts: 3,514
|
Lacy: Congress -- the Senate and the House -- were not given facts and truth on which they could make a good decision on whether to support the war or not.
...Then the responsible thing to do, was to vote to wait until there was valid information.
...The fact is, many members of Congress sat on a variety of committees, such as intelligence, foreign relations, military, etc., of which all surround where the "facts and truths" reside.
...Folks, give it up, as there will be no impeachment for the cause to war. Now, the cause and happenings for 9-11 will be theorized for the next 100 years and if any conspiracy took place, of which neglect itself would cause, those responsible will be long gone, or buried under the title of national security.
.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 10:55 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
vinnytmd
Posts: 6,004
|
nova, the idea that the Senate and Congress was in a vacuum is a sign of the brainwashing that the Democrats pulled on their ill informed constituents to get them off the hook once the going got tough.
It was like watching a bunch of grade school kids blame someone else for breaking a window. Then when Sadaam was captured they all tried to take credit.
Obama fits the mold. He opposed the surge and tried to thwart it in the Senate. Now he is singing the praise of the soldiers. Yet he still wants to retreat and be defeated.
A party of spineless low life losers.
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 11:09 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
lacyvsq
Posts: 4,304
|
The Congress relied in great part on the 10/02 NIE -- which was 10 (?) pages of a 93 page report that was classified.
Washington D.C., 9 July 2004 - The CIA has decided to keep almost entirely secret the controversial October 2002 CIA intelligence estimate about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction that is the subject of today's Senate Intelligence Committee report, according to the CIA's June 1, 2004 response to a Freedom of Information Act request from the National Security Archive.
The CIA's response included a copy of the estimate, NIE 2002-16HC, October 2002, Iraq's Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction, consisting almost entirely of whited-out pages. Only 14 of the 93 pages provided actually contained text, and all of the text except for the two title pages and the two pages listing National Intelligence Council members had previously been released in July 2003. At that time, CIA responded to the first round of controversy over the Niger yellowcake story by declassifying the "Key Findings" section of the estimate and a few additional paragraphs.
The CIA's censorship of the estimate mirrors its apparent treatment of the Senate's own report. The Senate Intelligence Committee had previously noted, in a 17 June 2004 press release, that "The Committee is extremely disappointed by the CIA's excessive redactions to the report." News accounts quoting Senate sources estimate that this excessive redaction amounted to 50% of the entire text. After a month of back-and-forth, not only did a number of Senators gain an education in the subjectivity of classification, but also the CIA retreated, to a final censorship level (by word-count) of 16%. Perhaps the most egregious example of the CIA's knee-jerk secrecy occurs on pages 49-50, when only one sentence survives censorship in the Committee's discussion of the British White Paper - and that sentence reports that the British had actually published the Paper. Large sections of blacked-out discussion following the Committee's Conclusions - such as the CIA's misleading of Secretary of State Colin Powell for his February 2003 United Nations speech (pages 253-257) and the CIA's misleading the public in its October 2002 white paper that left out the caveats, hedged language, and dissents in the underlying intelligence (pages 295-297) - are currently under declassification review by CIA. The Committee itself withheld these sections from the CIA's review until release of the report so as not to be scooped or spun.
The estimate has been the subject of multiple public speeches, statements and testimony by CIA and other intelligence community officials - even more of which is published in today's Senate report. These include public statements by CIA director George Tenet on 11 July 2003 and 11 August 2003, Tenet's Georgetown speech of 5 February 2004, and NIC vice-chairman Stuart Cohen's statement of 28 November 2003.
The Republican chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kansas) today summed up the committee's 511-page report as follows: "[T]oday we know these assessments were wrong. And, as our inquiry will show, they were also unreasonable and largely unsupported by the available evidence." National Security Archive director Thomas Blanton commented, "The CIA's continued secrecy claims on a document that has been widely and publicly discussed by top CIA officials, and now by the Senate, is wrong, unreasonable, and largely unsupported by the available evidence."
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 11:16 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
vinnytmd
Posts: 6,004
|
Lacy, do yourself a favor.
Read how the Senate Intelligence committee operates and who was on this committee.
http://intelligence.senate.gov/
Also read about the Congress Intelligence Committee
http://intelligence.house.gov/
These are .gov websites not YOU TUBE
The NIE means little. There are Senators and Congressmen that sit on these committees and are privy to deep intelligence information. Many have been sitting on these committees for many years.
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 11:22 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
Novalite
Posts: 3,093
|
No doubt Vinny. That traitor Rockerfeller was the second in command there and you want to know he was willing to do anything to screw Bush around. even wrote a memo to the effect to his fellow disgruntled Democrats. In any case, if there was anything he could do to screw Bush using his fellow Dems he would have done so.
On another note, as I said earlier, WMDs and the threat iraq posed to the US were only part of the equation Congress voted on yet it is 100% of the left's (and certain female conspiracy theorists) argument.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 11:29 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
SensualGemini
Posts: 3,514
|
Lacy: The Congress relied in great part on the 10/02 NIE -- which was 10 (?) pages of a 93 page report that was classified.
...I understand, but don't you believe, or at least think it was irresponsible for anyone to vote for war, when they were not allowed to view the other 83? pages, that were supposedly supporting said war?
...Having said repeatedly, Congress is asleep at the wheel, while blatantly pointing their finger at the President as a scapegoat for their gross negligence... the public then buys into this BS as acceptable representation.
...The point is easily proven by the Presidential election and how people construe their candidate has the power of God, or they would not believe 95% of the nonsense that comes out of Obama's mouth as he is going to do this or that as being some fact of actual happening.
.
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 11:31 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
Novalite
Posts: 3,093
|
Heck, even Kerry voted for it before he voted against it.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 11:38 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
lacyvsq
Posts: 4,304
|
...Having said repeatedly, Congress is asleep at the wheel, while blatantly pointing their finger at the President as a scapegoat for their gross negligence... the public then buys into this BS as acceptable representation.
Absolutely! But those few congressmen who are awake -- Ron Paul, who did not vote for financing the war, as an example -- are ridiculed and labeled as tin hats and kooks.
The NIE means little. There are Senators and Congressmen that sit on these committees and are privy to deep intelligence information. Many have been sitting on these committees for many years.
They wrote the report which I quoted above your post. They are the ones who got 14 pages of the NIE -- and that was four more pages than originally rec'd.
That traitor Rockerfeller was the second in command there and you want to know he was willing to do anything to screw Bush around. even wrote a memo to the effect to his fellow disgruntled Democrats. In any case, if there was anything he could do to screw Bush using his fellow Dems he would have done so.
Make no mistake...They are on the same team.
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 11:51 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America?
|
|
j_goose
Posts: 1,951
|
Make no mistake...They are on the same team.
That I actually agree with.
Why do you think there aren't any third party candidates in the debates?
Bilderburg.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 15 @ 11:53 PM |
More 9/11 Truth? Impeachment? War on America? |
|
vinnytmd
Posts: 6,004
|
Lacy, I am trying to be helpful. Why not read the info before posting. Here is what the NIE is. It does not come from Congress. There are many Intelligence sources.
You seem to have been brainwashed with talking points from the far left of the Democrat Party.
From wiki
NIEs are considered to be "estimative" products, in that they present what intelligence analysts estimate may be the course of future events. Coordination of NIEs involves not only trying to resolve any inter-agency differences, but also assigning confidence levels to the key judgments and rigorously evaluating the sourcing for them. Each NIE is reviewed and approved for dissemination by the National Intelligence Board (NIB), which comprises the DNI and other senior leaders within the Intelligence Community.
National Intelligence Estimates were first produced in 1950 by the Office of National Estimates. This office was superseded in 1973 by National Intelligence Officers. This group of experts became the National Intelligence Council in 1979. In the early years, the National Intelligence Council reported to the Director of Central Intelligence in his role as the head of the Intelligence Community; however, in 2005, the Director of National Intelligence became the head of the Intelligence Community.
|
| |
|
|
|
|