Discussion:
(fwd) If George W. Bush had..... Think About It
(too old to reply)
AnAmericanCitizen
2009-09-11 01:10:25 UTC
Permalink
Good points....AAC


On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 13:02:56 -0400, in alt.politics "Dionysus"
<***@never.net> wrote:

AN E-MAIL FROM A FRIEND

If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter to be
able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said
this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled
by smarter men behind the scenes?

If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura
Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved, all the while preaching
that America is in a Financial Crisis?

If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM
stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have
approved?

If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special
Olympics, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and
incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful
and historically significant gift, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing
videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly
narcissistic and tacky?

If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you
have approved?

If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the
non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor
slip?

If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with
people who cheat on their income taxes, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to
"Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the fourth
of May (Cuatro de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again,
would you have winced in embarrassment?

If George W. Bush had mis-spelled the word advice would you have
hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as proof of what
a dunce he is?

If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a
single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?

If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low
over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan
causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get
what happened on 9-11?

If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims
throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New
Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with
claims of racism and incompetence?

If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major
corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would
you have approved?

If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which
had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in only 3 months, would
you have approved?

If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10
years, would you have approved?

So, tell us again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant
and impressive? Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all this
in 9 months -- so you'll have three years and three months to come up with
an answer.
*****************
"Who would have believed that this politician celebrated, above all, for his
eloquence and capacity to connect with voters would end up as president
proving so profoundly tone deaf?"--Dorothy Rabinowitz

Dionysus
2009-09-11 18:42:00 UTC
Permalink
LOL! The desperation from your ballbags is incredible!

btw, all of these numbskull "points" can be refuted with one simple little
acronym.


.............................> WMD <........................
Post by AnAmericanCitizen
Good points....AAC
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 13:02:56 -0400, in alt.politics "Dionysus"
AN E-MAIL FROM A FRIEND
If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter to be
able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said
this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled
by smarter men behind the scenes?
If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura
Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved, all the while preaching
that America is in a Financial Crisis?
If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM
stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have
approved?
If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special
Olympics, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and
incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful
and historically significant gift, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing
videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly
narcissistic and tacky?
If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you
have approved?
If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the
non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor
slip?
If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with
people who cheat on their income taxes, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to
"Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the fourth
of May (Cuatro de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again,
would you have winced in embarrassment?
If George W. Bush had mis-spelled the word advice would you have
hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as proof of what
a dunce he is?
If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a
single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?
If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low
over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan
causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get
what happened on 9-11?
If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims
throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New
Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with
claims of racism and incompetence?
If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major
corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would
you have approved?
If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which
had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in only 3 months, would
you have approved?
If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within
10
years, would you have approved?
So, tell us again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant
and impressive? Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all this
in 9 months -- so you'll have three years and three months to come up with
an answer.
*****************
"Who would have believed that this politician celebrated, above all, for his
eloquence and capacity to connect with voters would end up as president
proving so profoundly tone deaf?"--Dorothy Rabinowitz
Dionysus
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-11 16:19:03 UTC
Permalink
What counts in the end is does it work.
Post by
LOL! The desperation from your ballbags is incredible!
btw, all of these numbskull "points" can be refuted with one simple little
acronym.
.............................> WMD
<........................
Post by AnAmericanCitizen
Good points....AAC
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 13:02:56 -0400, in alt.politics "Dionysus"
AN E-MAIL FROM A FRIEND
If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter to be
able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said
this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really
controlled
by smarter men behind the scenes?
If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura
Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved, all the while preaching
that America is in a Financial Crisis?
If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM
stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have
approved?
If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special
Olympics, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and
incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful
and historically significant gift, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing
videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly
narcissistic and tacky?
If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you
have approved?
If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the
non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor
slip?
If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with
people who cheat on their income taxes, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to
"Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the fourth
of May (Cuatro de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again,
would you have winced in embarrassment?
If George W. Bush had mis-spelled the word advice would you have
hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as proof of what
a dunce he is?
If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a
single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?
If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low
over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan
causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get
what happened on 9-11?
If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims
throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New
Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with
claims of racism and incompetence?
If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major
corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would
you have approved?
If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which
had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in only 3 months, would
you have approved?
If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within
10
years, would you have approved?
So, tell us again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant
and impressive? Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all
this
in 9 months -- so you'll have three years and three months to come up with
an answer.
*****************
"Who would have believed that this politician celebrated, above all, for his
eloquence and capacity to connect with voters would end up as president
proving so profoundly tone deaf?"--Dorothy Rabinowitz
Dionysus
2009-09-13 18:18:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.

bush got his own personal war to defend his "daddy".

So far nearly 5K dead US soldiers for that lie.


So yeah, it works.
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
LOL! The desperation from your ballbags is incredible!
btw, all of these numbskull "points" can be refuted with one simple
little acronym.
.............................> WMD <........................
Post by AnAmericanCitizen
Good points....AAC
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 13:02:56 -0400, in alt.politics "Dionysus"
AN E-MAIL FROM A FRIEND
If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter to be
able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said
this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really
controlled
by smarter men behind the scenes?
If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura
Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved, all the while preaching
that America is in a Financial Crisis?
If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM
stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have
approved?
If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special
Olympics, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and
incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful
and historically significant gift, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing
videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly
narcissistic and tacky?
If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you
have approved?
If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the
non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor
slip?
If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers
with
people who cheat on their income taxes, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to
"Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the fourth
of May (Cuatro de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again,
would you have winced in embarrassment?
If George W. Bush had mis-spelled the word advice would you have
hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as proof of what
a dunce he is?
If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a
single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?
If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low
over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan
causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get
what happened on 9-11?
If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims
throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New
Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with
claims of racism and incompetence?
If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major
corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would
you have approved?
If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which
had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in only 3 months, would
you have approved?
If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within
10
years, would you have approved?
So, tell us again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant
and impressive? Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all
this
in 9 months -- so you'll have three years and three months to come up with
an answer.
*****************
"Who would have believed that this politician celebrated, above all, for his
eloquence and capacity to connect with voters would end up as president
proving so profoundly tone deaf?"--Dorothy Rabinowitz
Dionysus
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-13 16:44:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.
bush got his own personal war to defend his "daddy".
So far nearly 5K dead US soldiers for that lie.
If you are so hung up on people who lie, then why aren't you complaining
about all the lies that Obama has told? And he has told a whole lot of
lies. Do you really want to go down that road...the list i have put
together does not even cover all of his lies, he has told so many of them, I
cannot keep track. And this guy as been in office for less than a year.
And the list keeps growing with each passing money.
2009-09-14 17:54:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.
bush got his own personal war to defend his "daddy".
So far nearly 5K dead US soldiers for that lie.
If you are so hung up on people who lie, then why aren't you complaining
about all the lies that Obama has told?
Such as?
Post by Jerry Okamura
And he has told a whole lot of lies. Do you really want to go down that
road.
Sure, go ahead.


..the list i have put
Post by Jerry Okamura
together does not even cover all of his lies, he has told so many of them,
I cannot keep track.
Gee, there's a surprise.
Post by Jerry Okamura
And this guy as been in office for less than a year.
And so far he hasn't launched an unnecessary war of choice that has cost 5
thousands kids' lives.

You must be so disappointed.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-14 18:31:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.
bush got his own personal war to defend his "daddy".
So far nearly 5K dead US soldiers for that lie.
If you are so hung up on people who lie, then why aren't you complaining
about all the lies that Obama has told?
Such as?
Thanks for asking. Here is just a partial list.

Would accept public financing. Went back on his word and did not accept
public financing. Public financing Obama replied "yes" in September 2007
when asked if he would agree to public financing of the presidential
election if his GOP opponent did the same.

The Cuba embargo In January 2004, Obama said it was time "to end the embargo
with Cuba" because it had "utterly failed in the effort to overthrow
Castro." Speaking to a Cuban American audience in Miami in August 2007, he
said he would not "take off the embargo" as president because it is "an
important inducement for change."

Decriminalization of Marijuana: While running for the U.S. Senate in January
2004, Obama told Illinois college students that he supported eliminating
criminal penalties for marijuana use. In the Oct. 30, 2007, presidential
debate, he joined other Democratic candidates in opposing the
decriminalization of marijuana.

Illegal immigration In a March 2004 questionnaire, Obama was asked if the
government should "crack down on businesses that hire illegal immigrants."
He replied "Oppose." In a Jan. 31, 2008, televised debate, he said that "we
do have to crack down on those employers that are taking advantage of the
situation."

Running for President or Vice President of the United States: On the January
22nd edition of “Meet the Press,” Tim Russert and Obama had the following
exchange:Russert: “When we talked back in November of ‘04 after your
election, I said, ‘There’s been enormous speculation about your political
future. Will you serve your six-year term as United States senator from
Illinois?’”Obama: “I will serve out my full six-year term. You know, Tim, if
you get asked enough, sooner or later you get weary and you start looking
for new ways of saying things. But my thinking has not changed.”Russert: “So
you will not run for president or vice president in 2008?” Obama: “I will
not.”


Single-Payer Healthcare: On January 22nd, the Hillary Clinton Campaign
releases a video that proves that Obama lied about his position on
“single-payer healthcare.”The video compares statements Obama made during
the January 21st Democratic debate with those he made to an AFL-CIO
conference in June 2003 while campaigning for the Senate. Contradicting what
Obama said at the debate, the old footage shows the senator saying, “I
happen to be a proponent of single-payer universal healthcare coverage. That’s
what I’d like to see.”At the debate, Obama stated: “I never said that we
should try to go ahead and get single-payer (healthcare).”Single-payer
healthcare is an euphemism for socialized medicine.

Donations from Lobbyists and Special Interest PACS: Obama say he doesn’t
take money from DC lobbyists and special interest PACS. This is the type of
double-talk “politics of the past” rhetoric Obama rails against.While his
claim is technically true, what he does do is take money from state
lobbyists and other big money contributors who have substantial lobbyist
machines in DC, like law firms and corporations.In April 2007, the LA Times
quoted the Campaign Finance Institute’s Stephen Weissman as pointing out
that the distinction Obama makes on lobbyist money is meaningless: “He gets
an asterisk that says he is trying to be different. … But overall, the same
wealthy interests are funding his campaign as are funding other candidates,
whether or not they are lobbyists.”The Capital Eye reported that
“[a]ccording to the Center for Responsive Politics, 14 of Obama’s top 20
contributors employed lobbyists this year, spending a total of $16.2 million
to influence the federal government in the first six months of 2007.”

(Source: Audacity of Hyprocisy)

Rev. Jeremiah Wright: Barack Obama repudiated what he called “inflammatory
and appalling remarks” made by his Chicago pastor.Obama said he had not been
present during the sermons in question.Obama told MSNBC, “Had I heard them
in church I would have expressed that concern directly to Rev. Wright.”Please
note, he says that he would have expressed concern, not repudiate, the
words. (Source: Audacity of Hypocrisy) Previously Obama had said "I can no
more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown
him than I can my white grandmother — a woman who helped raise me, a woman
who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she
loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of
black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion
has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe."

(Source: The Hill's Pundits Blog)

Jerusalem: "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain
undivided," Obama declared Wednesday, to rousing applause from the
7,000-plus attendees at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee policy
conference.

But a campaign adviser clarified Thursday that Obama believes "Jerusalem is
a final status issue, which means it has to be negotiated between the two
parties" as part of "an agreement that they both can live with."

(Source: Jerusalem Post)

Meeting with Foreign Leaders: Obama Now Claims That He Will Only Meet With
Foreign Leaders At A Time Of His Choosing If It Will Advance U.S. Interests,
But Previously Said He Would Meet With Rogue Leaders His First Year In
Office Without Preconditions:

In His Remarks To The AIPAC Conference, Obama Claimed That He Would Only
Meet With The "Appropriate Iranian Leaders At A Time And Place" Of His
Choosing. Obama: "Contrary to the claims of some, I have no interest in
sitting down with our adversaries just for the sake of talking. But as
President of the United States, I would be willing to lead tough and
principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leaders at a time and
place of my choosing - if, and only if - it can advance the interests of the
United States." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At The Annual AIPAC Policy
Conference, Arlington, VA, 6/4/08)

But At A July 2007 Debate, Obama Said He Would Meet With Hostile Leaders
During His First Year In Office. Question: "[W]ould you be willing to meet
separately, without precondition, during the first year of your
administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran,
Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that
divides our countries?"...Obama: "I would. And the reason is this, that the
notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them - which
has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration - is
ridiculous." (CNN/YouTube Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate,
Charleston, SC, 7/23/07)

At A September 2007 Press Conference, Obama Confirmed That He Would Meet
Specifically With Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Question: "Senator,
you've said before that you'd meet with President Ahmadinejad ..." Obama:
"Uh huh." Question: "Would you still meet with him today?" Obama: "Yeah,
nothing's changed with respect to my belief that strong countries and strong
presidents talk to their enemies and talk to their adversaries. I find many
of President Ahmadinejad's statements odious and I've said that repeatedly.
And I think that we have to recognize that there are a lot of rogue nations
in the world that don't have American interests at heart. But what I also
believe is that, as John F. Kennedy said, we should never negotiate out of
fear but we should never fear to negotiate." (Sen. Barack Obama, Press
Conference, New York, NY, 9/24/07)

(Source: RNC via Fox Business)

Legislation Labeling Iran's Revolutionary Guard A Terrorist Organization:
Obama Has Been Inconsistent In His Views On Labeling Iran's Revolutionary
Guard A Terrorist Organization. "Obama's campaign suddenly discovered that
their man -despite having spent the last nine months campaigning on his
opposition to Kyl-Lieberman - 'has consistently urged that Iran's
Revolutionary Guard be labeled what it is: a terrorist organization.' Well,
not that consistently. Senator Obama has been scrupulously careful not to
call explicitly for designation of the IRGC as a terrorist organization.
Now, however, with the Democratic nomination almost in hand, Obama feels
comfortable telling a pro-Israel audience what it wants to hear."(Danielle
Pletka, "Obama's Pander Pivot," Weekly Standard, 6/4/08)

"[T]he Audience At AIPAC Might Ask Why Senator Obama Has Pivoted From
Opposition To 'Lieberman-Kyl' To Support For The IRGC Designation His
Audience Demands. Is This Really Change They Can Believe In?" (Danielle
Pletka, "Obama's Pander Pivot," Weekly Standard, 6/4/08)

"Which Barack Obama Will Be The Democratic Standard-Bearer: The One Who
Vowed To 'Eliminate' The Iranian Nuclear Threat Two Days Ago, Or The One Who
Opposed Designating The Revolutionary Guards A Terrorist Organization?"
(Editorial, "Obama And Iran," The Washington Times, 6/6/08)

(Source: RNC via Fox Business)

Palestinian Elections In 2006: Obama Says That He Opposed Palestinian
Elections In 2006. Obama: "There is no room at the negotiating table for
terrorist organizations. That is why I opposed holding elections in 2006
with Hamas on the ballot. The Israelis and the Palestinian Authority warned
us at the time against holding these elections, but this administration
pressed ahead. And the result is a Gaza controlled by Hamas, with rockets
raining down on Israel." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At The Annual AIPAC
Policy Conference, Arlington, VA, 6/4/08)

But During His 2006 Trip To The Middle East, Obama Met With Palestinian
Authority President Mahmoud Abbas And Said The Election Represented An
"Opportunity...To Consolidate Behind A Single Government." "Illinois Senator
Barack Obama's journey to the Middle East took him to the West Bank Thursday
for a meeting with the man elected to replace Yasser Arafat. ... For a time
Thursday in the West Bank there was only the clatter of cameras as the newly
elected president of the Palestinian authority, Mahmoud Abbas, met with
Illinois Senator Barack Obama. At a meeting with Palestinian students
Thursday, Obama said the U.S. will never recognize winning Hamas candidates
unless the group renounces its fundamental mission to eliminate Israel, and
Obama told ABC7 he delivered that message to the Palestinian president.
'Part of the opportunity here with this upcoming election is to consolidate
behind a single government with a single authority that can then negotiate
as a reliable partner with Israel,' said Obama." (Chuck Goudie, "Obama Meets
With Arafat's Successor," ABC 7 News, http://obama.senate.gov, 1/12/06)

The Palestinian News Agency WAFA Reported That Obama Was Supportive Of The
Palestinian Elections Being Held At Their Scheduled Time. "President Mahmoud
Abbas met Thursday with the U.S. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL), in the
Presidential HQ in Ramallah...President briefed the U.S. Senator about the
latest developments in the Palestinian territories including the
preparations for the legislative elections.... Abbas and Obama discussed the
means of underpinning the American-Palestinian economic relations...Obama
asserted the US supports and eager that the Palestinian legislative
elections on its proposed time (January 25)." ("President Meets U.S. Senator
And Armenian Delegation," WAFA, http://english.wafa.ps, 1/12/06)

(Source: RNC via Fox Business)

Iraq War: “At a time when American casualties are down, at a time when the
violence is down, particularly affecting the Iraqi population, is that the
right time to try and set time tables for withdrawing all American troops? I
mean you talked about…the end of 2009,” Kroft remarked.

“Yeah, absolutely. I think now is precisely the time. I think that it is
very important for us to send a clear signal to the Iraqis that we are not
gonna be here permanently. We’re not gonna set up permanent bases. That they
are going to have to resolve their differences and get their country
functioning,” Obama said.

“And you pull out according to that time table, regardless of the situation?
Even if there’s serious sectarian violence?” Kroft asked.

“No, I always reserve as commander in chief, the right to assess the
situation,” Obama replied.

(Source: 60 Minutes via Dirty Harry's Place)

The Threat of Iran: Obama's comments in Oregon yesterday:
I mean think about it. Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, these countries are tiny
compared to the Soviet Union. They don't pose a serious threat to us the way
the Soviet Union posed a threat to us....You know, Iran, they spend one-one
hundredth of what we spend on the military. If Iran ever tried to pose a
serious threat to us, they wouldn't stand a chance.And we should use that
position of strength that we have to be bold enough to go ahead and listen.
That doesn't mean we agree with them on everything. We might not compromise
on any issues, but at least we should find out other areas of potential
common interest, and we can reduce some of the tensions that has caused us
so many problems around the world.
Today in Montana, Obama changed his tune:
Iran is a grave threat. It has an illicit nuclear program. It supports
terrorism across the region and militias in Iraq. It threatens Israel's
existence. It denies the Holocaust...

(Source: Weekly Standard)

North Korea: U.S. Democratic presidential frontrunner Senator Barack Obama
has recently indicated he no longer opposes the removal of North Korea from
a U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism. Obama in January 2005 came out
against the removal of the Stalinist nation from the list until it gives an
account of the kidnapping and death in the North of the Rev. Kim Dong-shik
in 2000.

(Source: ROK Drop)

PATRIOT Act: "Giving law enforcement the tools they need to investigate
suspicious activity is the right thing, and the Senate showed earlier this
year that it can be done with the oversight of our judicial system so we do
not jeopardize the rights of all Americans and the ideals America stands
for. We should not let the PATRIOT Act expire at the end of this year, but
instead extend the current law for three months so that we can come to an
agreement on these critical issues in Congress."

(Source: Obama's Senate site)

On the Issues FactCheck: Promised to repeal Patriot Act, then voted for it.

(Source: On the Issues)

Coal: Obama, whose support for coal-to-liquid has been widely criticized by
environmentalists, sent out a press release clarifying his position on
liquid coal:

Senator Obama supports research into all technologies to help solve our
climate change and energy dependence problems, including shifting our energy
use to renewable fuels and investing in technology that could make coal a
clean-burning source of energy…However, unless and until this technology is
perfected, Senator Obama will not support the development of any
coal-to-liquid fuels unless they emit at least 20% less life-cycle carbon
than conventional fuels.

This “clarification” is an important step for the Obama campaign in trying
to gain support from environmental organizations and voters. However, the LA
Times notes that his position change on this issue is even more significant
because it symbolizes “there’s a race to the top among the Democratic
candidates for the strongest position on how to solve the climate crisis.”

(Source: Carbon Coalition)

PAYGO: Obama promised to "restore a law that was in place during the Clinton
presidency—called Paygo—that prohibits money from leaving the treasury
without some way of compensating for the lost revenue." but now Obama says
he's not going to sacrifice his domestic priorities for deficit reduction.
Universal health care, renewable energy, and all he rest won't be sacrificed
on the altar of PAYGO.

(Source: Q and O)

Meeting with Ahmadinejad:"Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama
underscored his willingness to talk to leaders of countries like Iran that
are considered U.S. adversaries but said that does not necessarily mean an
audience with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad." (Caren Bohan, "Obama
Says Won't Guarantee Ahmadinejad A Meeting," Reuters, 5/26/08)

"'There's no reason why we would necessarily meet with Ahmadinejad before we
know he's actually in power. He's not the most powerful person in Iran,'
Obama told reporters while campaigning in New Mexico." (Caren Bohan, "Obama
Says Won't Guarantee Ahmadinejad A Meeting," Reuters, 5/26/08)

But in July 2007, Obama said he would meet with the leaders of hostile
foreign nations, including Iran:
At a July 2007 debate, Obama announced he would personally meet with leaders
Of Iran, North Korea, Syria and other hostile nations "without
precondition."

Question: "[W]ould you be willing to meet separately, without precondition,
during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere
else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in
order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?"

Obama: "I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not
talking to countries is punishment to them - which has been the guiding
diplomatic principle of this administration - is ridiculous." (CNN/YouTube
Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate, Charleston, SC, 7/23/07)

(Source: RNC via NewsMax)

Illegal Immigrants and Driver's Licenses: As a state senator in Illinois,
Obama voted to require illegal immigrants to get a driver's license. The
change? In the November 2007 CNN debate, he was asked what his stand was on
that issue and he said, "I am not proposing that's what we do."

I will provide a tax credit for businesses who hire a new worker.
TOOLBOX
Resize Text
Save/Share +
Digg
Newsvine
del.icio.us
Stumble It!
Reddit
Facebook
Print This
E-mail This
#ArticleCommentsWrapper {display:block};
COMMENT 
washingtonpost.com readers have posted 32 comments about this item.
View All Comments »
Comments are closed for this item.
Discussion Policy
Your browser's settings may be preventing you from commenting on and viewing
comments about this item. See instructions for fixing the problem.
Discussion Policy
CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate
comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries
that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual
author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who
violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or
any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules
governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the
content that you post.
Who's Blogging

» Links to this article

Monday, February 25, 2008; Page A04
Top Obama Flip-Flops
1. Special interests In January, the Obama campaign described union
contributions to the campaigns of Clinton and John Edwards as "special
interest" money. Obama changed his tune as he began gathering his own union
endorsements. He now refers respectfully to unions as the representatives of
"working people" and says he is "thrilled" by their support.
This Story
Democrats Equally Adept at Shifting Positions
Top Obama Flip-Flops
2. Public financing Obama replied "yes" in September 2007 when asked if he
would agree to public financing of the presidential election if his GOP
opponent did the same. Obama has now attached several conditions to such an
agreement, including regulating spending by outside groups. His spokesman
says the candidate never committed himself on the matter.
3. The Cuba embargo In January 2004, Obama said it was time "to end the
embargo with Cuba" because it had "utterly failed in the effort to overthrow
Castro." Speaking to a Cuban American audience in Miami in August 2007, he
said he would not "take off the embargo" as president because it is "an
important inducement for change."
4. Illegal immigration In a March 2004 questionnaire, Obama was asked if the
government should "crack down on businesses that hire illegal immigrants."
He replied "Oppose." In a Jan. 31, 2008, televised debate, he said that "we
do have to crack down on those employers that are taking advantage of the
situation."

5. Decriminalization of marijuana While running for the U.S. Senate in
January 2004, Obama told Illinois college students that he supported
eliminating criminal penalties for marijuana use. In the Oct. 30, 2007,
presidential debate, he joined other Democratic candidates in opposing the
decriminalization of marijuana.
Top Clinton Flip-Flops
1. NAFTA In a January 2004 news conference, Clinton said she thought that
"on balance [NAFTA] has been good for New York and good for America." She
now says she has "long been a critic of the shortcomings of NAFTA" and
advocates a "time out" from similar trade agreements.
2. No Child Left Behind Clinton voted in favor of the 2002 education bill
that focused on raising student achievement levels, hailing the measure as
"a major step forward." She now attacks the law at campaign rallies and
meetings with teachers, describing it as a "test, test, test" approach.
This Story
Democrats Equally Adept at Shifting Positions
Top Obama Flip-Flops
3. Ending the war in Iraq In June 2006, Clinton restated her long-standing
opposition to establishing timetables for withdrawing U.S. forces in Iraq.
In a Jan. 15, 2008, Democratic debate in Las Vegas, she proposed to "start
withdrawing" troops within 60 days of her inauguration, to bring out "one or
two brigades a month" and to have "nearly all of the troops out" by the end
of 2009.
4 . Driver's licenses for illegal immigrants In a campaign statement on Oct.
31, 2007, Clinton expressed support for a plan by New York Gov. Eliot L.
Spitzer (D) to offer limited driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, after
going back and forth on the matter in a televised debate. In a Nov. 15,
2007, televised debate from Nevada, she replied with a simple "no" when
asked if she approved the driver's license idea in the absence of
comprehensive immigration changes.
5. Florida and Michigan delegates In September 2007, the Clinton campaign
formally pledged not to participate in primary or caucus elections staged
before Feb. 5, 2008, in defiance of Democratic National Committee rules. She
now says delegates from Florida and Michigan should be seated at the
Democratic National Convention, despite their flouting of rules that all the
major Democratic candidates endorsed.

< Back 1 2



Obama flip-flops on almost everything...
With Obama's popularity dropping in the polls and in the hearts and minds of
likely voters, Barack Obama is changing his mind on amost every issue. I
don't suppose new poll results have anything to do with Obama changing his
tune? In the new poll, taken Friday through Sunday, McCain leads Obama by
54%-44% among those seen as most likely to vote.
Bush Tax Cuts: The Mother Of All Flip-Flops:
Is there no issue that Obamarxist flip-flops on. He flip-flips with such
frequency and flurry that I had to launch another site ObamaVsObama.com.
But this one is the mother of all flip-flops… Obama now says he won’t
rescind the Bush tax cuts on the so-called “rich”. This from the AP:
Obama: Recession could delay rescinding tax cuts
WASHINGTON - Democrat Barack Obama says he would delay rescinding President
Bush’s tax cuts on wealthy Americans if he becomes the next president and
the economy is in a recession, suggesting such an increase would further
hurt the economy. (Continue reading at The Conservative Post)

If the Bush Tax Cuts are good for people during a recession, Obama, could it
be that they are good for Americans all the time? And by the way Obama, we
are NOT in a recession.

Abortion: We all know Obama's views on abortion, even killing babies 'born
alive' is OK with him. Now he says he was 'too flip' on the abortion
question. He said, ""All I meant to communicate was that I don’t presume to
be able to answer these kinds of theological questions." (Kentucky Progress)
No Obama, you weren’t. You just don’t have the testicles it sometimes takes
to answer tough questions. It’s a conviction thing — a strong understanding
and belief in something. Not a strong belief in believing in nothing as is
the liberal code of intellect and morality. (The Partisan Report)

Military Service: He originally claimed that he did not have an opportunity
to join the military because Vietnam was over by the time he signed up for
selective service and that the draft was over, implying that the only way he
would have ever been in the military was if he was drafted. Now he says he
seriously considered military service.
... Following the law of the land and registering for the selective service
is not the same as considering entering the military. There is no record for
Obama so we have to listen to his words. In fact Obama says listen to his
words. I did listen today and his words rang hollow.

Broken promise No. 1: 'Sunlight Before Signing'

When Obama campaigned for the Democratic presidential nomination in
Manchester, N.H., on June 22, 2007, he announced his "Sunlight Before
Signing" promise.

"When there is a bill that ends up on my desk as the president, you the
public will have five days to look online and find out what's in it
before I sign it," he said.

He repeated that promise on his campaign website:

"Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before
the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will
not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an
opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five
days."

However, Obama signed his first bill, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay
Restoration Act, on Jan. 20 - only two days after its passage.

He signed a second bill expanding the State Children's Health Insurance
Program just three hours after Congress passed it.

Again, on Feb. 17, Obama signed his 1,000-page $787 billion stimulus
aimed at jolting the declining U.S. economy. He did so only one business
day after it passed through Congress - without allowing for five days of
public comment.

Broken promise No. 2: Capital gains tax elimination


According to his comprehensive tax plan released during his campaign,
Obama promised to "eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses."

Just weeks prior to the election, Obama advisers Austan Goolsbee and
Jason Furman told the Wall Street Journal that Obama planned tax cuts
that included "the elimination of capital gains taxes for small
businesses and start-ups."

People who invest in small businesses have only been allowed to exclude
50 percent of that gain from capital gains taxes. While Obama's $787
billion economic-stimulus package reduces that tax liability - raising
the exclusion to 75 percent - it does not eliminate it.

Broken promise No. 3: New American jobs tax credit

During his transition, Obama's promised to provide a $3,000 refundable
tax credit to existing businesses for every additional full-time U.S.
employee hired in 2009 and 2010.

"If a company that currently has 10 U.S. employees increases its
domestic full time employment to 20 employees, this company would get a
$30,000 tax credit - enough to offset the entire added payroll tax costs
to the company for the first $50,000 of income for the new employees,"
the transition website stated. "The tax credit will benefit all
companies creating net new jobs, even those struggling to make a
profit."

Obama's promise was never included in the stimulus package.

Broken promise No. 4: Hiatus on 401(k) penalties

Many unemployed and financially strapped Americans have considered early
withdrawals on 401(k) and retirement accounts to survive the current
recession. However, the IRS imposes strict penalties of up to 10 percent
plus federal, state and local income taxes on such advances.

Workers who have taken $10,000 in early withdrawals from retirement
plans have lost as much as 40 percent to taxes and penalties, depending
upon tax brackets.

In October 2008, Obama released his "Rescue Plan for the Middle-Class"
in which he promised to allow financially distressed Americans to
withdraw up to $10,000 from their 401(k) accounts and retirement savings
without having to pay penalties. They would only pay income taxes on the
amount.

"Since so many Americans will be struggling to pay the bills over the
next year, I propose that we allow every family to withdraw up to 15%
from their IRA or 401(k) - up to a maximum of $10,000 - without any fine
or penalty throughout 2009," Obama said. "This will help families get
through this crisis without being forced to make painful choices like
selling their homes or not sending their kids to college."

However, Obama's promise was never included in his recent stimulus
package.

(Story continues below)

Broken promise No. 5: 'No jobs for lobbyists'


William J. Lynn III

Obama promised America he would loosen the grip of lobbyists on
Washington.

In his Nov. 10, 2007, speech in Des Moines, Iowa, Obama declared:

I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of
setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more than any
other candidate in this race to take on lobbyists - and won. They have
not funded my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will
not drown out the voices of the American people when I am president.

During his campaign, Obama also said, "I have done more to take on
lobbyists than any other candidate in this race. I don't take a dime of
their money, and when I am president, they won't find a job in my White
House."

However, USA Today reported Obama's campaign fundraising team included
38 members of law firms that were paid $138 million in 2007 to lobby the
federal government.


William Corr

"Those lawyers, including 10 former federal lobbyists, have pledged to
raise at least $3.5 million" for Obama's campaign, the report states.
"Employees of their firms have given Obama's campaign $2.26 million."

It wasn't long before he allowed at least two dozen exceptions and broke
his promise.

Obama's own ethic rules barred officials of his administration from
lobbying their former colleagues "for as long as I am president." He
also said former lobbyists would be prohibited from working for agencies
they had lobbied within the past two years. President Obama later waived
his rules for at least two of his nominees - William J. Lynn III,
undersecretary at the Department of Defense and recent lobbyist for
Raytheon, and William Corr, deputy secretary for the Department of
Health and Human Services and anti-tobacco lobbyist for the Campaign for
Tobacco-Free Kids.

Broken promise No. 6: Earmark reform

As WND reports, at the first presidential debate in Oxford, Miss., Obama
declared, "[W]e need earmark reform. And when I'm president, I will go
line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely."

However, in February, Obama passed his $787 billion stimulus aimed at
jolting the declining U.S. economy. Before a joint session of Congress,
Obama declared: "Now, I'm proud that we passed a recovery plan free of
earmarks."

Some chuckled in amusement when he claimed the bill contained no pork.

"There was just a roar of laughter - because there were earmarks," Sen.
Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., told CNN.

U.S. News & World Report found at least eight earmarks in his stimulus
bill.

Obama also signed a $410 billion omnibus bill for 2009. More than 9,000
earmarks in the spending bill total an estimated $7.7 billion.

Even though the Democrat-controlled Congress crafted the bill after
Obama's election, the administration claims the added pork is just
"unfinished business" from last year.

The White House website states, "Obama and Biden will slash earmarks to
no greater than 1994 levels and ensure all spending decisions are open
to the public." However, watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense
reports that the omnibus pork alone already totals $7.7 billion - just
less than the total of $7.8 billion in earmarks in 1994 - and the figure
does not include $6.6 billion in earmarks contained in three previous
spending bills Congress passed amid the bailout crisis last year.

During his three years in the Senate, Obama requested more than $860
million in earmarks, according to the group. White House Chief of Staff
Rahm Emanuel has 16 earmarks - worth approximately $8.5 million - in the
bill.

Broken promise No. 7: Bring troops home in 16 months


On his campaign website, Obama promised he would "remove one to two
combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of
Iraq within 16 months."

His commitment to bring combat troops home by May 20, 2010, and end the
war gave him an edge among Democrats over candidate Hillary Clinton.

However, on Feb. 27, Obama declared, "Let me say this as plainly as I
can: By Aug. 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end."

If Obama adheres to his plan, combat troops will return home months
later than originally promised. The New York Times reports, Obama will
withdraw only two of the 14 brigades before December.

As part of a "new era of American leadership," he also said he would
leave behind a residual force of 35,000 to 50,000 troops and remove all
U.S. soldiers from Iraq by Dec. 31, 2011 - the same deadline the Bush
administration negotiated with the Iraqi government last year in its
Status of Forces Agreement.

Additionally, some combat units would remain in Iraq beyond Obama's
declared August 2010 withdrawal. Rather than returning home, they would
simply face reassignment as "advisory training brigades."

Even as combat troops are brought home, Pentagon officials have said
fresh units will continue deploying to Iraq.

Broken promise No. 8: Sign 'Freedom of Choice Act'

On July 17, 2007, Obama told the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, "The
first thing I'd do as president is, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.
That's the first thing that I'd do."

Obama expressed his support for the sweeping plan that would repeal all
national and state regulations of abortion passed over the last 35
years.

His agenda regarding "reproductive choice" is posted on the White House
website. It states, Obama "has been a consistent champion of
reproductive choice and will make preserving women's rights under Roe v.
Wade a priority in his Administration."

Obama chose radical pro-abortion Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to serve
as the Health secretary, moved to void job protections for health
workers who oppose abortion and repealed a ban on U.S. taxpayer funding
of foreign abortions. While many pro-life advocates consider it a
blessing that Obama has no fulfilled his promise to sign the Freedom of
Choice Act, he has made no mention of the legislation since he took
office.

Broken promise No. 9: $4,000 college credit

Obama pledged to make college "affordable for all Americans" when he
announced his American Opportunity Tax Credit.


His campaign promise read: "This universal and fully refundable credit
will ensure that the first $4,000 of a college education is completely
free for most Americans, and will cover two-thirds the cost of tuition
at the average public college or university and make community college
tuition completely free for most students. Recipients of the credit will
be required to conduct 100 hours of community service."

While the American Opportunity Tax Credit was included in the recent
stimulus bill, it offers a credit of only $2,500 for up to two years and
requires no commitment to community service.

Broken promise No. 10: Transparency

On the White House website, the Obama administration claims it will be
"the most open and transparent in history.

The administration released a memo on Jan. 21, stating:

My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of
openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust
and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and
collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote
efficiency and effectiveness in Government.

Government should be transparent. Transparency promotes
accountability and provides information for citizens about what their
Government is doing. .

However, Congress and the administration hurried the $787 billion,
1,027-page American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 to a vote
after allowing lawmakers just a few hours to read the bill. It was also
available online in a form that could not be keyword searched.

While former administrations immediately posted transcripts of
presidential speeches - including some remarks before delivery - the
White House website often waits until days or even weeks after an event
to release transcripts.

Also, some say recent reports of tax evasion by Obama nominees is
evidence that the administration is not as transparent as promised.


Timothy Geithner

Just before Obama named Timothy Geithner to be his treasury secretary,
the president of the New York Federal Reserve Bank quietly paid $26,000
in back taxes and interest due since 2001 and 2002.

Obama characterized the eight-year tax evasion as "an innocent mistake."

But as many as five of his picks defaulted on taxes, including former
nominee for health and human services secretary, Tom Daschle; former
nominee for chief performance officer, Nancy Killefer; U.S. trade
representative nominee Ron Kirk and Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis.

Furthermore, while the president posted his own weekly "fireside chats"
on YouTube during the campaign, many journalists report that he has a
history of being less than welcoming to the Fourth Estate.

Columbia Journalism Review noted Obama's treatment of the press: "During
the campaign, reporters' access to Obama was severely limited.
On-the-record conversations with the candidate were even more so.
Indeed, Obama's overall treatment of the press - not just in his general
rejection of the day-to-day news cycle, but also in his tendency to shun
his national traveling press corps ... created the impression that its
members were, to him, a buzzing nuisance. Instead of the voice of the
people."

WND's correspondent at the White House, Les Kinsolving, raised the issue
in February that most of the reporters recognized for questions in the
briefing room were among the same handful over and over again. Some of
them had been given four or even five opportunities for questions while
other reporters were not recognized at all.

Kinsolving, a senior journalist in the White House press corps, was not
allowed to voice his questions on issues on which millions of WND
readers have expressed an interest. There were also complaints about the
time of the November election that not only did Obama rely on a few key
reporters for questions, those reporters were chosen ahead of time.

And, finally, WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's
status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section
1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the
United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall
be eligible to the Office of President."


Obama's alleged Certification of Live Birth is not his original 1961
birth certificate

However, Obama has refused repeated calls to publicly release his
Hawaiian birth certificate, which would include the actual hospital that
performed the delivery. His campaign posted an alleged "Certification of
Live Birth" online, but it is not the same as a Hawaii birth
certificate. COLBs have been issued by Hawaii to parents whose children
are not born in the state.

Instead of providing the documentation to end the lawsuits, a series of
law firms have been hired on Obama's behalf around the nation to prevent
any public access to his birth certificate, passport records, college
records and other documents. - even after more than 320,000 people
signed a petition demanding that he live up to his promise of
transparency by releasing the certificate to the public.

Nonetheless, during his campaign and after he took office, Obama
maintained that his administration would have an unyielding commitment
to transparency.

"The American people want to trust in our government again - we just
need a government that will trust in us," he said in a campaign speech.
"And making government accountable to the people isn't just a cause of
this campaign - it's been a cause of my life for two decades."
2009-09-15 19:25:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.
bush got his own personal war to defend his "daddy".
So far nearly 5K dead US soldiers for that lie.
If you are so hung up on people who lie, then why aren't you complaining
about all the lies that Obama has told?
Such as?
Thanks for asking. Here is just a partial list.
Would accept public financing. Went back on his word and did not accept
public financing. Public financing Obama replied "yes" in September 2007
when asked if he would agree to public financing of the presidential
election if his GOP opponent did the same.
The Cuba embargo In January 2004, Obama said it was time "to end the
embargo with Cuba" because it had "utterly failed in the effort to
overthrow Castro." Speaking to a Cuban American audience in Miami in
August 2007, he said he would not "take off the embargo" as president
because it is "an important inducement for change."
Decriminalization of Marijuana: While running for the U.S. Senate in
January 2004, Obama told Illinois college students that he supported
eliminating criminal penalties for marijuana use. In the Oct. 30, 2007,
presidential debate, he joined other Democratic candidates in opposing the
decriminalization of marijuana.
Illegal immigration In a March 2004 questionnaire, Obama was asked if the
government should "crack down on businesses that hire illegal immigrants."
He replied "Oppose." In a Jan. 31, 2008, televised debate, he said that
"we do have to crack down on those employers that are taking advantage of
the situation."
Running for President or Vice President of the United States: On the
January 22nd edition of "Meet the Press," Tim Russert and Obama had the
following exchange:Russert: "When we talked back in November of '04 after
your election, I said, 'There's been enormous speculation about your
political future. Will you serve your six-year term as United States
senator from Illinois?'"Obama: "I will serve out my full six-year term.
You know, Tim, if you get asked enough, sooner or later you get weary and
you start looking for new ways of saying things. But my thinking has not
changed."Russert: "So you will not run for president or vice president in
2008?" Obama: "I will not."
Single-Payer Healthcare: On January 22nd, the Hillary Clinton Campaign
releases a video that proves that Obama lied about his position on
"single-payer healthcare."The video compares statements Obama made during
the January 21st Democratic debate with those he made to an AFL-CIO
conference in June 2003 while campaigning for the Senate. Contradicting
what Obama said at the debate, the old footage shows the senator saying,
"I happen to be a proponent of single-payer universal healthcare coverage.
That's what I'd like to see."At the debate, Obama stated: "I never said
that we should try to go ahead and get single-payer (healthcare)."Single-payer
healthcare is an euphemism for socialized medicine.
Donations from Lobbyists and Special Interest PACS: Obama say he doesn't
take money from DC lobbyists and special interest PACS. This is the type
of double-talk "politics of the past" rhetoric Obama rails against.While
his claim is technically true, what he does do is take money from state
lobbyists and other big money contributors who have substantial lobbyist
machines in DC, like law firms and corporations.In April 2007, the LA
Times quoted the Campaign Finance Institute's Stephen Weissman as pointing
out that the distinction Obama makes on lobbyist money is meaningless: "He
gets an asterisk that says he is trying to be different. . But overall,
the same wealthy interests are funding his campaign as are funding other
candidates, whether or not they are lobbyists."The Capital Eye reported
that "[a]ccording to the Center for Responsive Politics, 14 of Obama's top
20 contributors employed lobbyists this year, spending a total of $16.2
million to influence the federal government in the first six months of
2007."
(Source: Audacity of Hyprocisy)
Rev. Jeremiah Wright: Barack Obama repudiated what he called "inflammatory
and appalling remarks" made by his Chicago pastor.Obama said he had not
been present during the sermons in question.Obama told MSNBC, "Had I heard
them in church I would have expressed that concern directly to Rev.
Wright."Please note, he says that he would have expressed concern, not
repudiate, the words. (Source: Audacity of Hypocrisy) Previously Obama had
said "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I
can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother - a woman who
helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman
who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who
once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and
who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes
that made me cringe."
(Source: The Hill's Pundits Blog)
Jerusalem: "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must
remain undivided," Obama declared Wednesday, to rousing applause from the
7,000-plus attendees at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee
policy conference.
But a campaign adviser clarified Thursday that Obama believes "Jerusalem
is a final status issue, which means it has to be negotiated between the
two parties" as part of "an agreement that they both can live with."
(Source: Jerusalem Post)
Meeting with Foreign Leaders: Obama Now Claims That He Will Only Meet With
Foreign Leaders At A Time Of His Choosing If It Will Advance U.S.
Interests, But Previously Said He Would Meet With Rogue Leaders His First
In His Remarks To The AIPAC Conference, Obama Claimed That He Would Only
Meet With The "Appropriate Iranian Leaders At A Time And Place" Of His
Choosing. Obama: "Contrary to the claims of some, I have no interest in
sitting down with our adversaries just for the sake of talking. But as
President of the United States, I would be willing to lead tough and
principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leaders at a time and
place of my choosing - if, and only if - it can advance the interests of
the United States." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At The Annual AIPAC Policy
Conference, Arlington, VA, 6/4/08)
But At A July 2007 Debate, Obama Said He Would Meet With Hostile Leaders
During His First Year In Office. Question: "[W]ould you be willing to meet
separately, without precondition, during the first year of your
administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran,
Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that
divides our countries?"...Obama: "I would. And the reason is this, that
the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them -
which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration -
is ridiculous." (CNN/YouTube Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate,
Charleston, SC, 7/23/07)
At A September 2007 Press Conference, Obama Confirmed That He Would Meet
"Senator, you've said before that you'd meet with President Ahmadinejad
..." Obama: "Uh huh." Question: "Would you still meet with him today?"
Obama: "Yeah, nothing's changed with respect to my belief that strong
countries and strong presidents talk to their enemies and talk to their
adversaries. I find many of President Ahmadinejad's statements odious and
I've said that repeatedly. And I think that we have to recognize that
there are a lot of rogue nations in the world that don't have American
interests at heart. But what I also believe is that, as John F. Kennedy
said, we should never negotiate out of fear but we should never fear to
negotiate." (Sen. Barack Obama, Press Conference, New York, NY, 9/24/07)
(Source: RNC via Fox Business)
Obama Has Been Inconsistent In His Views On Labeling Iran's Revolutionary
Guard A Terrorist Organization. "Obama's campaign suddenly discovered that
their man -despite having spent the last nine months campaigning on his
opposition to Kyl-Lieberman - 'has consistently urged that Iran's
Revolutionary Guard be labeled what it is: a terrorist organization.'
Well, not that consistently. Senator Obama has been scrupulously careful
not to call explicitly for designation of the IRGC as a terrorist
organization. Now, however, with the Democratic nomination almost in hand,
Obama feels comfortable telling a pro-Israel audience what it wants to
hear."(Danielle Pletka, "Obama's Pander Pivot," Weekly Standard, 6/4/08)
"[T]he Audience At AIPAC Might Ask Why Senator Obama Has Pivoted From
Opposition To 'Lieberman-Kyl' To Support For The IRGC Designation His
Audience Demands. Is This Really Change They Can Believe In?" (Danielle
Pletka, "Obama's Pander Pivot," Weekly Standard, 6/4/08)
"Which Barack Obama Will Be The Democratic Standard-Bearer: The One Who
Vowed To 'Eliminate' The Iranian Nuclear Threat Two Days Ago, Or The One
Who Opposed Designating The Revolutionary Guards A Terrorist
Organization?" (Editorial, "Obama And Iran," The Washington Times, 6/6/08)
(Source: RNC via Fox Business)
Palestinian Elections In 2006: Obama Says That He Opposed Palestinian
Elections In 2006. Obama: "There is no room at the negotiating table for
terrorist organizations. That is why I opposed holding elections in 2006
with Hamas on the ballot. The Israelis and the Palestinian Authority
warned us at the time against holding these elections, but this
administration pressed ahead. And the result is a Gaza controlled by
Hamas, with rockets raining down on Israel." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks
At The Annual AIPAC Policy Conference, Arlington, VA, 6/4/08)
But During His 2006 Trip To The Middle East, Obama Met With Palestinian
Authority President Mahmoud Abbas And Said The Election Represented An
"Opportunity...To Consolidate Behind A Single Government." "Illinois
Senator Barack Obama's journey to the Middle East took him to the West
Bank Thursday for a meeting with the man elected to replace Yasser Arafat.
... For a time Thursday in the West Bank there was only the clatter of
cameras as the newly elected president of the Palestinian authority,
Mahmoud Abbas, met with Illinois Senator Barack Obama. At a meeting with
Palestinian students Thursday, Obama said the U.S. will never recognize
winning Hamas candidates unless the group renounces its fundamental
mission to eliminate Israel, and Obama told ABC7 he delivered that message
to the Palestinian president. 'Part of the opportunity here with this
upcoming election is to consolidate behind a single government with a
single authority that can then negotiate as a reliable partner with
Israel,' said Obama." (Chuck Goudie, "Obama Meets With Arafat's
Successor," ABC 7 News, http://obama.senate.gov, 1/12/06)
The Palestinian News Agency WAFA Reported That Obama Was Supportive Of The
Palestinian Elections Being Held At Their Scheduled Time. "President
Mahmoud Abbas met Thursday with the U.S. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL), in
the Presidential HQ in Ramallah...President briefed the U.S. Senator about
the latest developments in the Palestinian territories including the
preparations for the legislative elections.... Abbas and Obama discussed
the means of underpinning the American-Palestinian economic
relations...Obama asserted the US supports and eager that the Palestinian
legislative elections on its proposed time (January 25)." ("President
Meets U.S. Senator And Armenian Delegation," WAFA, http://english.wafa.ps,
1/12/06)
(Source: RNC via Fox Business)
Iraq War: "At a time when American casualties are down, at a time when the
violence is down, particularly affecting the Iraqi population, is that the
right time to try and set time tables for withdrawing all American troops?
I mean you talked about.the end of 2009," Kroft remarked.
"Yeah, absolutely. I think now is precisely the time. I think that it is
very important for us to send a clear signal to the Iraqis that we are not
gonna be here permanently. We're not gonna set up permanent bases. That
they are going to have to resolve their differences and get their country
functioning," Obama said.
"And you pull out according to that time table, regardless of the
situation? Even if there's serious sectarian violence?" Kroft asked.
"No, I always reserve as commander in chief, the right to assess the
situation," Obama replied.
(Source: 60 Minutes via Dirty Harry's Place)
I mean think about it. Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, these countries are tiny
compared to the Soviet Union. They don't pose a serious threat to us the
way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us....You know, Iran, they spend
one-one hundredth of what we spend on the military. If Iran ever tried to
pose a serious threat to us, they wouldn't stand a chance.And we should
use that position of strength that we have to be bold enough to go ahead
and listen. That doesn't mean we agree with them on everything. We might
not compromise on any issues, but at least we should find out other areas
of potential common interest, and we can reduce some of the tensions that
has caused us so many problems around the world.
Iran is a grave threat. It has an illicit nuclear program. It supports
terrorism across the region and militias in Iraq. It threatens Israel's
existence. It denies the Holocaust...
(Source: Weekly Standard)
North Korea: U.S. Democratic presidential frontrunner Senator Barack Obama
has recently indicated he no longer opposes the removal of North Korea
from a U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism. Obama in January 2005
came out against the removal of the Stalinist nation from the list until
it gives an account of the kidnapping and death in the North of the Rev.
Kim Dong-shik in 2000.
(Source: ROK Drop)
PATRIOT Act: "Giving law enforcement the tools they need to investigate
suspicious activity is the right thing, and the Senate showed earlier this
year that it can be done with the oversight of our judicial system so we
do not jeopardize the rights of all Americans and the ideals America
stands for. We should not let the PATRIOT Act expire at the end of this
year, but instead extend the current law for three months so that we can
come to an agreement on these critical issues in Congress."
(Source: Obama's Senate site)
On the Issues FactCheck: Promised to repeal Patriot Act, then voted for it.
(Source: On the Issues)
Coal: Obama, whose support for coal-to-liquid has been widely criticized
by environmentalists, sent out a press release clarifying his position on
Senator Obama supports research into all technologies to help solve our
climate change and energy dependence problems, including shifting our
energy use to renewable fuels and investing in technology that could make
coal a clean-burning source of energy.However, unless and until this
technology is perfected, Senator Obama will not support the development of
any coal-to-liquid fuels unless they emit at least 20% less life-cycle
carbon than conventional fuels.
This "clarification" is an important step for the Obama campaign in trying
to gain support from environmental organizations and voters. However, the
LA Times notes that his position change on this issue is even more
significant because it symbolizes "there's a race to the top among the
Democratic candidates for the strongest position on how to solve the
climate crisis."
(Source: Carbon Coalition)
PAYGO: Obama promised to "restore a law that was in place during the
Clinton presidency-called Paygo-that prohibits money from leaving the
treasury without some way of compensating for the lost revenue." but now
Obama says he's not going to sacrifice his domestic priorities for deficit
reduction. Universal health care, renewable energy, and all he rest won't
be sacrificed on the altar of PAYGO.
(Source: Q and O)
Meeting with Ahmadinejad:"Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama
underscored his willingness to talk to leaders of countries like Iran that
are considered U.S. adversaries but said that does not necessarily mean an
audience with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad." (Caren Bohan, "Obama
Says Won't Guarantee Ahmadinejad A Meeting," Reuters, 5/26/08)
"'There's no reason why we would necessarily meet with Ahmadinejad before
we know he's actually in power. He's not the most powerful person in
Iran,' Obama told reporters while campaigning in New Mexico." (Caren
Bohan, "Obama Says Won't Guarantee Ahmadinejad A Meeting," Reuters,
5/26/08)
But in July 2007, Obama said he would meet with the leaders of hostile
At a July 2007 debate, Obama announced he would personally meet with
leaders Of Iran, North Korea, Syria and other hostile nations "without
precondition."
Question: "[W]ould you be willing to meet separately, without
precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington
or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and
North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?"
Obama: "I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not
talking to countries is punishment to them - which has been the guiding
diplomatic principle of this administration - is ridiculous." (CNN/YouTube
Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate, Charleston, SC, 7/23/07)
(Source: RNC via NewsMax)
Illegal Immigrants and Driver's Licenses: As a state senator in Illinois,
Obama voted to require illegal immigrants to get a driver's license. The
change? In the November 2007 CNN debate, he was asked what his stand was
on that issue and he said, "I am not proposing that's what we do."
I will provide a tax credit for businesses who hire a new worker.
TOOLBOX
???Resize Text
?Save/Share +
Digg
Newsvine
del.icio.us
Stumble It!
Reddit
Facebook
Print This
E-mail This
#ArticleCommentsWrapper {display:block};
COMMENT ?
washingtonpost.com readers have posted 32 comments about this item.
View All Comments »
Comments are closed for this item.
?Discussion Policy
Your browser's settings may be preventing you from commenting on and
viewing comments about this item. See instructions for fixing the problem.
Discussion Policy
?CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate
comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries
that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual
author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who
violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or
any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules
governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the
content that you post.
Who's Blogging
?
» Links to this article
Monday, February 25, 2008; Page A04
Top Obama Flip-Flops
1. Special interests In January, the Obama campaign described union
contributions to the campaigns of Clinton and John Edwards as "special
interest" money. Obama changed his tune as he began gathering his own
union endorsements. He now refers respectfully to unions as the
representatives of "working people" and says he is "thrilled" by their
support.
This Story
Democrats Equally Adept at Shifting Positions
Top Obama Flip-Flops
2. Public financing Obama replied "yes" in September 2007 when asked if he
would agree to public financing of the presidential election if his GOP
opponent did the same. Obama has now attached several conditions to such
an agreement, including regulating spending by outside groups. His
spokesman says the candidate never committed himself on the matter.
3. The Cuba embargo In January 2004, Obama said it was time "to end the
embargo with Cuba" because it had "utterly failed in the effort to
overthrow Castro." Speaking to a Cuban American audience in Miami in
August 2007, he said he would not "take off the embargo" as president
because it is "an important inducement for change."
4. Illegal immigration In a March 2004 questionnaire, Obama was asked if
the government should "crack down on businesses that hire illegal
immigrants." He replied "Oppose." In a Jan. 31, 2008, televised debate, he
said that "we do have to crack down on those employers that are taking
advantage of the situation."
?
5. Decriminalization of marijuana While running for the U.S. Senate in
January 2004, Obama told Illinois college students that he supported
eliminating criminal penalties for marijuana use. In the Oct. 30, 2007,
presidential debate, he joined other Democratic candidates in opposing the
decriminalization of marijuana.
Top Clinton Flip-Flops
1. NAFTA In a January 2004 news conference, Clinton said she thought that
"on balance [NAFTA] has been good for New York and good for America." She
now says she has "long been a critic of the shortcomings of NAFTA" and
advocates a "time out" from similar trade agreements.
2. No Child Left Behind Clinton voted in favor of the 2002 education bill
that focused on raising student achievement levels, hailing the measure as
"a major step forward." She now attacks the law at campaign rallies and
meetings with teachers, describing it as a "test, test, test" approach.
This Story
Democrats Equally Adept at Shifting Positions
Top Obama Flip-Flops
3. Ending the war in Iraq In June 2006, Clinton restated her long-standing
opposition to establishing timetables for withdrawing U.S. forces in Iraq.
In a Jan. 15, 2008, Democratic debate in Las Vegas, she proposed to "start
withdrawing" troops within 60 days of her inauguration, to bring out "one
or two brigades a month" and to have "nearly all of the troops out" by the
end of 2009.
4 . Driver's licenses for illegal immigrants In a campaign statement on
Oct. 31, 2007, Clinton expressed support for a plan by New York Gov. Eliot
L. Spitzer (D) to offer limited driver's licenses to illegal immigrants,
after going back and forth on the matter in a televised debate. In a Nov.
15, 2007, televised debate from Nevada, she replied with a simple "no"
when asked if she approved the driver's license idea in the absence of
comprehensive immigration changes.
5. Florida and Michigan delegates In September 2007, the Clinton campaign
formally pledged not to participate in primary or caucus elections staged
before Feb. 5, 2008, in defiance of Democratic National Committee rules.
She now says delegates from Florida and Michigan should be seated at the
Democratic National Convention, despite their flouting of rules that all
the major Democratic candidates endorsed.
?
< Back 1 2
Obama flip-flops on almost everything...
With Obama's popularity dropping in the polls and in the hearts and minds
of likely voters, Barack Obama is changing his mind on amost every issue.
I don't suppose new poll results have anything to do with Obama changing
his tune? In the new poll, taken Friday through Sunday, McCain leads Obama
by 54%-44% among those seen as most likely to vote.
Is there no issue that Obamarxist flip-flops on. He flip-flips with such
frequency and flurry that I had to launch another site ObamaVsObama.com.
But this one is the mother of all flip-flops. Obama now says he won't
Obama: Recession could delay rescinding tax cuts
WASHINGTON - Democrat Barack Obama says he would delay rescinding
President Bush's tax cuts on wealthy Americans if he becomes the next
president and the economy is in a recession, suggesting such an increase
would further hurt the economy. (Continue reading at The Conservative
Post)
If the Bush Tax Cuts are good for people during a recession, Obama, could
it be that they are good for Americans all the time? And by the way Obama,
we are NOT in a recession.
Abortion: We all know Obama's views on abortion, even killing babies 'born
alive' is OK with him. Now he says he was 'too flip' on the abortion
question. He said, ""All I meant to communicate was that I don't presume
to be able to answer these kinds of theological questions." (Kentucky
Progress)
No Obama, you weren't. You just don't have the testicles it sometimes
takes to answer tough questions. It's a conviction thing - a strong
understanding and belief in something. Not a strong belief in believing in
nothing as is the liberal code of intellect and morality. (The Partisan
Report)
Military Service: He originally claimed that he did not have an
opportunity to join the military because Vietnam was over by the time he
signed up for selective service and that the draft was over, implying that
the only way he would have ever been in the military was if he was
drafted. Now he says he seriously considered military service.
... Following the law of the land and registering for the selective
service is not the same as considering entering the military. There is no
record for Obama so we have to listen to his words. In fact Obama says
listen to his words. I did listen today and his words rang hollow.
Broken promise No. 1: 'Sunlight Before Signing'
When Obama campaigned for the Democratic presidential nomination in
Manchester, N.H., on June 22, 2007, he announced his "Sunlight Before
Signing" promise.
"When there is a bill that ends up on my desk as the president, you the
public will have five days to look online and find out what's in it
before I sign it," he said.
"Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before
the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will
not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an
opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five
days."
However, Obama signed his first bill, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay
Restoration Act, on Jan. 20 - only two days after its passage.
He signed a second bill expanding the State Children's Health Insurance
Program just three hours after Congress passed it.
Again, on Feb. 17, Obama signed his 1,000-page $787 billion stimulus
aimed at jolting the declining U.S. economy. He did so only one business
day after it passed through Congress - without allowing for five days of
public comment.
Broken promise No. 2: Capital gains tax elimination
According to his comprehensive tax plan released during his campaign,
Obama promised to "eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses."
Just weeks prior to the election, Obama advisers Austan Goolsbee and
Jason Furman told the Wall Street Journal that Obama planned tax cuts
that included "the elimination of capital gains taxes for small
businesses and start-ups."
People who invest in small businesses have only been allowed to exclude
50 percent of that gain from capital gains taxes. While Obama's $787
billion economic-stimulus package reduces that tax liability - raising
the exclusion to 75 percent - it does not eliminate it.
Broken promise No. 3: New American jobs tax credit
During his transition, Obama's promised to provide a $3,000 refundable
tax credit to existing businesses for every additional full-time U.S.
employee hired in 2009 and 2010.
"If a company that currently has 10 U.S. employees increases its
domestic full time employment to 20 employees, this company would get a
$30,000 tax credit - enough to offset the entire added payroll tax costs
to the company for the first $50,000 of income for the new employees,"
the transition website stated. "The tax credit will benefit all
companies creating net new jobs, even those struggling to make a
profit."
Obama's promise was never included in the stimulus package.
Broken promise No. 4: Hiatus on 401(k) penalties
Many unemployed and financially strapped Americans have considered early
withdrawals on 401(k) and retirement accounts to survive the current
recession. However, the IRS imposes strict penalties of up to 10 percent
plus federal, state and local income taxes on such advances.
Workers who have taken $10,000 in early withdrawals from retirement
plans have lost as much as 40 percent to taxes and penalties, depending
upon tax brackets.
In October 2008, Obama released his "Rescue Plan for the Middle-Class"
in which he promised to allow financially distressed Americans to
withdraw up to $10,000 from their 401(k) accounts and retirement savings
without having to pay penalties. They would only pay income taxes on the
amount.
"Since so many Americans will be struggling to pay the bills over the
next year, I propose that we allow every family to withdraw up to 15%
from their IRA or 401(k) - up to a maximum of $10,000 - without any fine
or penalty throughout 2009," Obama said. "This will help families get
through this crisis without being forced to make painful choices like
selling their homes or not sending their kids to college."
However, Obama's promise was never included in his recent stimulus
package.
(Story continues below)
Broken promise No. 5: 'No jobs for lobbyists'
William J. Lynn III
Obama promised America he would loosen the grip of lobbyists on
Washington.
I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of
setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more than any
other candidate in this race to take on lobbyists - and won. They have
not funded my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will
not drown out the voices of the American people when I am president.
During his campaign, Obama also said, "I have done more to take on
lobbyists than any other candidate in this race. I don't take a dime of
their money, and when I am president, they won't find a job in my White
House."
However, USA Today reported Obama's campaign fundraising team included
38 members of law firms that were paid $138 million in 2007 to lobby the
federal government.
William Corr
"Those lawyers, including 10 former federal lobbyists, have pledged to
raise at least $3.5 million" for Obama's campaign, the report states.
"Employees of their firms have given Obama's campaign $2.26 million."
It wasn't long before he allowed at least two dozen exceptions and broke
his promise.
Obama's own ethic rules barred officials of his administration from
lobbying their former colleagues "for as long as I am president." He
also said former lobbyists would be prohibited from working for agencies
they had lobbied within the past two years. President Obama later waived
his rules for at least two of his nominees - William J. Lynn III,
undersecretary at the Department of Defense and recent lobbyist for
Raytheon, and William Corr, deputy secretary for the Department of
Health and Human Services and anti-tobacco lobbyist for the Campaign for
Tobacco-Free Kids.
Broken promise No. 6: Earmark reform
As WND reports, at the first presidential debate in Oxford, Miss., Obama
declared, "[W]e need earmark reform. And when I'm president, I will go
line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely."
However, in February, Obama passed his $787 billion stimulus aimed at
jolting the declining U.S. economy. Before a joint session of Congress,
Obama declared: "Now, I'm proud that we passed a recovery plan free of
earmarks."
Some chuckled in amusement when he claimed the bill contained no pork.
"There was just a roar of laughter - because there were earmarks," Sen.
Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., told CNN.
U.S. News & World Report found at least eight earmarks in his stimulus
bill.
Obama also signed a $410 billion omnibus bill for 2009. More than 9,000
earmarks in the spending bill total an estimated $7.7 billion.
Even though the Democrat-controlled Congress crafted the bill after
Obama's election, the administration claims the added pork is just
"unfinished business" from last year.
The White House website states, "Obama and Biden will slash earmarks to
no greater than 1994 levels and ensure all spending decisions are open
to the public." However, watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense
reports that the omnibus pork alone already totals $7.7 billion - just
less than the total of $7.8 billion in earmarks in 1994 - and the figure
does not include $6.6 billion in earmarks contained in three previous
spending bills Congress passed amid the bailout crisis last year.
During his three years in the Senate, Obama requested more than $860
million in earmarks, according to the group. White House Chief of Staff
Rahm Emanuel has 16 earmarks - worth approximately $8.5 million - in the
bill.
Broken promise No. 7: Bring troops home in 16 months
On his campaign website, Obama promised he would "remove one to two
combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of
Iraq within 16 months."
His commitment to bring combat troops home by May 20, 2010, and end the
war gave him an edge among Democrats over candidate Hillary Clinton.
However, on Feb. 27, Obama declared, "Let me say this as plainly as I
can: By Aug. 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end."
If Obama adheres to his plan, combat troops will return home months
later than originally promised. The New York Times reports, Obama will
withdraw only two of the 14 brigades before December.
As part of a "new era of American leadership," he also said he would
leave behind a residual force of 35,000 to 50,000 troops and remove all
U.S. soldiers from Iraq by Dec. 31, 2011 - the same deadline the Bush
administration negotiated with the Iraqi government last year in its
Status of Forces Agreement.
Additionally, some combat units would remain in Iraq beyond Obama's
declared August 2010 withdrawal. Rather than returning home, they would
simply face reassignment as "advisory training brigades."
Even as combat troops are brought home, Pentagon officials have said
fresh units will continue deploying to Iraq.
Broken promise No. 8: Sign 'Freedom of Choice Act'
On July 17, 2007, Obama told the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, "The
first thing I'd do as president is, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.
That's the first thing that I'd do."
Obama expressed his support for the sweeping plan that would repeal all
national and state regulations of abortion passed over the last 35
years.
His agenda regarding "reproductive choice" is posted on the White House
website. It states, Obama "has been a consistent champion of
reproductive choice and will make preserving women's rights under Roe v.
Wade a priority in his Administration."
Obama chose radical pro-abortion Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to serve
as the Health secretary, moved to void job protections for health
workers who oppose abortion and repealed a ban on U.S. taxpayer funding
of foreign abortions. While many pro-life advocates consider it a
blessing that Obama has no fulfilled his promise to sign the Freedom of
Choice Act, he has made no mention of the legislation since he took
office.
Broken promise No. 9: $4,000 college credit
Obama pledged to make college "affordable for all Americans" when he
announced his American Opportunity Tax Credit.
His campaign promise read: "This universal and fully refundable credit
will ensure that the first $4,000 of a college education is completely
free for most Americans, and will cover two-thirds the cost of tuition
at the average public college or university and make community college
tuition completely free for most students. Recipients of the credit will
be required to conduct 100 hours of community service."
While the American Opportunity Tax Credit was included in the recent
stimulus bill, it offers a credit of only $2,500 for up to two years and
requires no commitment to community service.
Broken promise No. 10: Transparency
On the White House website, the Obama administration claims it will be
"the most open and transparent in history.
My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of
openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust
and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and
collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote
efficiency and effectiveness in Government.
Government should be transparent. Transparency promotes
accountability and provides information for citizens about what their
Government is doing. .
However, Congress and the administration hurried the $787 billion,
1,027-page American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 to a vote
after allowing lawmakers just a few hours to read the bill. It was also
available online in a form that could not be keyword searched.
While former administrations immediately posted transcripts of
presidential speeches - including some remarks before delivery - the
White House website often waits until days or even weeks after an event
to release transcripts.
Also, some say recent reports of tax evasion by Obama nominees is
evidence that the administration is not as transparent as promised.
Timothy Geithner
Just before Obama named Timothy Geithner to be his treasury secretary,
the president of the New York Federal Reserve Bank quietly paid $26,000
in back taxes and interest due since 2001 and 2002.
Obama characterized the eight-year tax evasion as "an innocent mistake."
But as many as five of his picks defaulted on taxes, including former
nominee for health and human services secretary, Tom Daschle; former
nominee for chief performance officer, Nancy Killefer; U.S. trade
representative nominee Ron Kirk and Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis.
Furthermore, while the president posted his own weekly "fireside chats"
on YouTube during the campaign, many journalists report that he has a
history of being less than welcoming to the Fourth Estate.
Columbia Journalism Review noted Obama's treatment of the press: "During
the campaign, reporters' access to Obama was severely limited.
On-the-record conversations with the candidate were even more so.
Indeed, Obama's overall treatment of the press - not just in his general
rejection of the day-to-day news cycle, but also in his tendency to shun
his national traveling press corps ... created the impression that its
members were, to him, a buzzing nuisance. Instead of the voice of the
people."
WND's correspondent at the White House, Les Kinsolving, raised the issue
in February that most of the reporters recognized for questions in the
briefing room were among the same handful over and over again. Some of
them had been given four or even five opportunities for questions while
other reporters were not recognized at all.
Kinsolving, a senior journalist in the White House press corps, was not
allowed to voice his questions on issues on which millions of WND
readers have expressed an interest. There were also complaints about the
time of the November election that not only did Obama rely on a few key
reporters for questions, those reporters were chosen ahead of time.
And, finally, WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's
status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section
1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the
United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall
be eligible to the Office of President."
Obama's alleged Certification of Live Birth is not his original 1961
birth certificate
However, Obama has refused repeated calls to publicly release his
Hawaiian birth certificate, which would include the actual hospital that
performed the delivery. His campaign posted an alleged "Certification of
Live Birth" online, but it is not the same as a Hawaii birth
certificate. COLBs have been issued by Hawaii to parents whose children
are not born in the state.
Instead of providing the documentation to end the lawsuits, a series of
law firms have been hired on Obama's behalf around the nation to prevent
any public access to his birth certificate, passport records, college
records and other documents. - even after more than 320,000 people
signed a petition demanding that he live up to his promise of
transparency by releasing the certificate to the public.
Nonetheless, during his campaign and after he took office, Obama
maintained that his administration would have an unyielding commitment
to transparency.
"The American people want to trust in our government again - we just
need a government that will trust in us," he said in a campaign speech.
"And making government accountable to the people isn't just a cause of
this campaign - it's been a cause of my life for two decades."
LOL! Jerry that post was pathetic, even by your standards!

ROFLOLMFAO!!!
* US *
2009-09-14 16:32:46 UTC
Permalink
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-14 18:29:08 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
2009-09-15 19:24:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-15 16:48:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure. Was it a lie? Well, the UN Security Council members did not think it
was a lie. You do not have to "force" a country to accept inspectors to
look for WMD's, if you knew they did not have WMD's, you "force" a soveriegn
country to accept inspectors to look for WMD's because you believe they DO
have WMD's. Most memebers of the US Senate believed they had WMD's or they
would not have passed the Iraq War Resolution. Finally, here is what some
democrats said about the subject matter.....so who is "lying"?.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat
Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use
them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and
all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."
President Clinton - 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is
clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a
great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will
use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies
is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten
times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with
the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including,
if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to
respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its
weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom
Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region
and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear
programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In
addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is
doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-
range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and
others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible
to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as
Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course
to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein
because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction
in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear
weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have
alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and
destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity.
This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports
show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and
biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if
left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity
to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to
develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that
Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing
capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass
destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He
is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He
presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently
prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his
consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of
Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
2009-09-16 20:27:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure. Was it a lie?
Yes.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-16 16:38:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure. Was it a lie?
Yes.
Then all of these people also lied?

"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan
or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the
day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and
chemical weapons. Former President Bill Clinton During an interview on
CNN's "Larry King Live" July 22, 2003

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat
Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use
them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and
all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."
President Clinton - 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is
clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a
great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will
use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies
is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten
times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with
the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including,
if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to
respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its
weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom
Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region
and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear
programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In
addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is
doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-
range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and
others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible
to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as
Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course
to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein
because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction
in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear
weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have
alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and
destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity.
This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports
show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and
biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if
left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity
to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to
develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that
Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing
capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass
destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He
is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He
presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently
prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his
consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of
Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
2009-09-17 16:13:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure. Was it a lie?
Yes.
Then all of these people also lied?
No onecares about "those people" Gerry.

bush started an unesseccary war of choice based on a lie.

Period.

Now stop squirming and deal with it.
Post by Jerry Okamura
"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan
or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the
day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and
chemical weapons. Former President Bill Clinton During an interview on
CNN's "Larry King Live" July 22, 2003
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat
Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to
use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today,
Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened
tomorrow."
President Clinton - 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is
clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a
great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will
use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies
is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten
times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with
the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including,
if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to
respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its
weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom
Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region
and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear
programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In
addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is
doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-
range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and
others, Dec, 5, 2001.
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible
to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as
Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course
to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein
because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction
in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear
weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have
alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and
destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity.
This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports
show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and
biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if
left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity
to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to
develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that
Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing
capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass
destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He
is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He
presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently
prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his
consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of
Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
Harold Burton
2009-09-17 01:12:30 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@news.alt.net>,
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure. Was it a lie?
Yes.
Then all of these people also lied?
No onecares (sic) about "those people" Gerry.
bush started an unesseccary (sic) war of choice based on...
...approval by the DumboCRAPs in congress, and they and the President
are continuing to wage that "unnecessary" war.


snicker.
2009-09-17 18:35:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harold Burton
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure. Was it a lie?
Yes.
Then all of these people also lied?
No onecares (sic) about "those people" Gerry.
bush started an unesseccary (sic) war of choice based on...
...approval by the DumboCRAPs in congress,
All how were lied to by bush and co.

When are you morons going to get that?

I mean I know you're uneducated trailer trash and all, but really, even a
kid can understand that this was all based on a lies.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-17 17:45:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by
Post by Harold Burton
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure. Was it a lie?
Yes.
Then all of these people also lied?
No onecares (sic) about "those people" Gerry.
bush started an unesseccary (sic) war of choice based on...
...approval by the DumboCRAPs in congress,
All how were lied to by bush and co.
When are you morons going to get that?
I mean I know you're uneducated trailer trash and all, but really, even a
kid can understand that this was all based on a lies.
The "morons" as you put it, are the US Senators who bought Bush's so-called
lie and believed the lie, if that is what it was. And if they are "morons"
for believing Bush, then they are sill morons for believing what Obma is
proposing to do with healthcare.
2009-09-18 17:16:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Harold Burton
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure. Was it a lie?
Yes.
Then all of these people also lied?
No onecares (sic) about "those people" Gerry.
bush started an unesseccary (sic) war of choice based on...
...approval by the DumboCRAPs in congress,
All how were lied to by bush and co.
When are you morons going to get that?
I mean I know you're uneducated trailer trash and all, but really, even a
kid can understand that this was all based on a lies.
The "morons" as you put it, are the US Senators who bought Bush's
so-called lie and believed the lie, if that is what it was.
LOL! Gee, do you think you could equivocate just a little bit more?

btw, if you're unsure what "equivocate" means, please feel free to look it
up!
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-18 16:42:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Harold Burton
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure. Was it a lie?
Yes.
Then all of these people also lied?
No onecares (sic) about "those people" Gerry.
bush started an unesseccary (sic) war of choice based on...
...approval by the DumboCRAPs in congress,
All how were lied to by bush and co.
When are you morons going to get that?
I mean I know you're uneducated trailer trash and all, but really, even
a kid can understand that this was all based on a lies.
The "morons" as you put it, are the US Senators who bought Bush's
so-called lie and believed the lie, if that is what it was.
LOL! Gee, do you think you could equivocate just a little bit more?
Why do you think I was "equivocating"?
2009-09-19 16:28:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Harold Burton
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure. Was it a lie?
Yes.
Then all of these people also lied?
No onecares (sic) about "those people" Gerry.
bush started an unesseccary (sic) war of choice based on...
...approval by the DumboCRAPs in congress,
All how were lied to by bush and co.
When are you morons going to get that?
I mean I know you're uneducated trailer trash and all, but really, even
a kid can understand that this was all based on a lies.
The "morons" as you put it, are the US Senators who bought Bush's
so-called lie and believed the lie, if that is what it was.
LOL! Gee, do you think you could equivocate just a little bit more?
Why do you think I was "equivocating"?
Like I said, if you're unsure of the meaning and how it pertains to your
absurd statement above, then please feel free to look it up.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-20 17:30:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Harold Burton
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure. Was it a lie?
Yes.
Then all of these people also lied?
No onecares (sic) about "those people" Gerry.
bush started an unesseccary (sic) war of choice based on...
...approval by the DumboCRAPs in congress,
All how were lied to by bush and co.
When are you morons going to get that?
I mean I know you're uneducated trailer trash and all, but really,
even a kid can understand that this was all based on a lies.
The "morons" as you put it, are the US Senators who bought Bush's
so-called lie and believed the lie, if that is what it was.
LOL! Gee, do you think you could equivocate just a little bit more?
Why do you think I was "equivocating"?
Like I said, if you're unsure of the meaning and how it pertains to your
absurd statement above, then please feel free to look it up.
I would not ask the question if I knew what you meant. So, stick your neck
out and explating what you meant.
Harold Burton
2009-09-20 00:51:51 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@news.alt.net>,
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by
All how were lied to by bush and co.
You tell us "how" they were lied to.


Perhaps by KKKlintoon and Co:



"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That
is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998-Truth!
This was a quote from President Clinton during a presentation at the
Pentagon defending a decision to conduct military strikes against Iraq.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear.
We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass
destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998-Truth!
Bill Clinton went to the Pentagon on this occasion to be briefed by top
military officials about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction.
His remarks followed that briefing.

"Iraq is a long way from USA but, what happens there matters a great deal
here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear,
chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest
security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998-Truth!
This is a quote from Albright during an appearance at Ohio State
University
by Albright, who was Secretary of State for Bill Clinton.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times
since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998-Truth!
This was at the same Ohio State University appearance as Madeline
Albright.

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the
U.S.Constitution and Laws, to take necessary actions, (including, if
appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond
effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of
mass
destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle,
John
Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998-Truth!
According to the U.S. Senate website, the text of this letter was signed
by
several Senators, both Democrat and Republican, including Senator John
McCain and Joseph Lieberman.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and
he
has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998-Truth!
The text of this statement by Nancy Pelosi is posted on her congressional
website.

"Hussein has .. chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999-Truth!
This was from an appearance Albright made in Chicago.
She was addressing the embargo of Iraq that was in effect at the time and
criticism that it may have prevented needed medical supplies from getting
into the country. Albright said, "There has never been an embargo
against
food and medicine. It's just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend
his
money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building
weapons
of mass destruction, and palaces for his cronies."

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs
continue a pace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition,
Saddam
continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover
of a
licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten
the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others,
December 5, 2001Truth!
The only letter with this quote from December 5, 2001 that we could find
did
not include the participation of Senator Bob Graham, but it was signed
nine
other senators including Democrat Joe Lieberman.
It urged President Bush to take quicker action against Iraq.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandated
of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the
means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002-Truth!
These were remarks from Senator Levin to a Senate committee on that date.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth!
This and the quote below was part of prepared remarks for a speech in San
Francisco to The Commonwealth Club.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to
deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam
is in
power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth!

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002-Truth!
Part of a speech he gave at Johns Hopkins.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998.
We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical
and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to
build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence
reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002-Truth!
On the floor of the Senate during debate over the resolution that would
authorize using force against Iraq.
He was urging caution about going to war and commented that even though
there was confidence about the weapons in Iraq, there had not been the
need
to take military action for a number of years and he asked why there
would
be the need at that point.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority
to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe
that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a
real
and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002-Truth!
Senator Kerry's comments were made to the Senate as part of the same
debate
over the resolution to use force against Saddam Hussein.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively
to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within
the
next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass
destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Rockefeller's statements were a part of the debate over using
force
against Saddam Hussein.

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every
significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy
his
chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has
refused to do" Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Waxman's contribution to the Senate debate over going to war.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show
that
Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons
stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has
also
given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda
members.
It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will
continue
to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and
will
keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Clinton acknowledged the threat of Saddam Hussein but said she
did
not feel that using force at that time was a good option.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime He presents a
particularly
grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ...
And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit
and
his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction
So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real
..."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan.23.2003-Truth!
In a speech to Georgetown University.


Snicker.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-17 02:21:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure. Was it a lie?
Yes.
Then all of these people also lied?
No onecares about "those people" Gerry.
bush started an unesseccary war of choice based on a lie.
Period.
Yes, just pretend that democrats did not also think that Saddam had WMD's.
That democrats did not overwhelming voted in favor of the Iraq War
Resolution. Just pretend that the UN Security Council did not also think
Saddam had WMD's. Act like an ostrich, bury your head in the sand, then you
cannot see what is obvious to just about everyone else. By the way, what is
your definition of an unnecesary war? Was the Clinton war with Serbia a
"necessary war"?
Post by
Now stop squirming and deal with it.
I am not squriming at all, I have no reason to squirm, I gave you the facts.
Harold Burton
2009-09-17 02:25:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure. Was it a lie?
Yes.
Then all of these people also lied?
No onecares about "those people" Gerry.
bush started an unesseccary war of choice based on a lie.
Period.
Yes, just pretend that democrats did not also think that Saddam had WMD's.
That democrats did not overwhelming voted in favor of the Iraq War
Resolution. Just pretend that the UN Security Council did not also think
Saddam had WMD's. Act like an ostrich, bury your head in the sand, then you
cannot see what is obvious to just about everyone else. By the way, what is
your definition of an unnecesary war? Was the Clinton war with Serbia a
"necessary war"?
Or LBJ's Vietnam fiasco? 58,000 'Merkins dead who could have been
"still alive and with their families........ Think about it"


Snicker.
Harold Burton
2009-09-17 01:08:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure. Was it a lie?
Yes.
Then all of these people also lied?
"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan
or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the
day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and
chemical weapons. Former President Bill Clinton During an interview on
CNN's "Larry King Live" July 22, 2003
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat
Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use
them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and
all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."
President Clinton - 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is
clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a
great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will
use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies
is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten
times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with
the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including,
if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to
respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its
weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom
Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region
and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear
programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In
addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is
doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-
range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and
others, Dec, 5, 2001.
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible
to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as
Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course
to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein
because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction
in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear
weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have
alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and
destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity.
This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports
show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and
biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if
left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity
to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to
develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that
Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing
capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass
destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He
is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He
presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently
prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his
consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of
Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
there ya go confusin' stupid lefturds with facts.


Snicker.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-17 02:16:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harold Burton
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure. Was it a lie?
Yes.
Then all of these people also lied?
"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan
or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the
day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and
chemical weapons. Former President Bill Clinton During an interview on
CNN's "Larry King Live" July 22, 2003
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat
Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use
them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and
all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."
President Clinton - 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is
clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a
great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will
use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies
is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten
times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with
the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including,
if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to
respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its
weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom
Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region
and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear
programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In
addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is
doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-
range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and
others, Dec, 5, 2001.
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible
to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as
Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course
to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein
because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction
in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear
weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have
alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and
destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity.
This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports
show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and
biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if
left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity
to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to
develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that
Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing
capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass
destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He
is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He
presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently
prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his
consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of
Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
there ya go confusin' stupid lefturds with facts.
Snicker.
Sorry about that. But I do not like it when people use a lie to accuse
other people of lying. Those who do that are nothing but hypocrites who
should be shown to be what they are.
2009-09-17 21:28:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Sorry about that. But I do not like it when people use a lie to accuse
other people of lying.
Gerry, drop the self-righteous posing for a moment and answer the question.

i.e., Did bush lie about WMD, or did he not?

Yes or no.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-17 17:41:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Sorry about that. But I do not like it when people use a lie to accuse
other people of lying.
Gerry, drop the self-righteous posing for a moment and answer the question.
i.e., Did bush lie about WMD, or did he not?
Yes or no.
No, and you cannot prove he did lie. If you can try to prove that he lied,
take your best shot. A lie is when you know that what you said is not the
truth. Can you prove that he knew that Iraq had no WMD's? How many US
Seanators said at the time, Saddam had no WMD's? How many Senators
suspected he did have WMD's? Would the US Seante have given Bush the
authorization to use force, if they knew Saddam had no WMD's? Do you force
a sovereign country to accept inspectors to inspect for something that you
know they do not have?
2009-09-18 16:34:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Sorry about that. But I do not like it when people use a lie to accuse
other people of lying.
Gerry, drop the self-righteous posing for a moment and answer the question.
i.e., Did bush lie about WMD, or did he not?
Yes or no.
No, and you cannot prove he did lie
Sure I can.

Unless you can show us where the mass stores of WMD are/were/will be, then
it's a self evident lie.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-18 16:41:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Sorry about that. But I do not like it when people use a lie to accuse
other people of lying.
Gerry, drop the self-righteous posing for a moment and answer the question.
i.e., Did bush lie about WMD, or did he not?
Yes or no.
No, and you cannot prove he did lie
Sure I can.
I am waiting.... Prove he lied....
Post by
Unless you can show us where the mass stores of WMD are/were/will be, then
it's a self evident lie.
Ignoring the obvious. Who in the UN Security Council believed that they had
no WMD's? How many US Senators did not believe Saddam had any WMD's?
Believing that someone has something, does not mean they really had that
something you believed they had. If you believed they had the weapons, then
you are not a liar. You are a liar, if you knew they did not have the
WMD's, then said they had WMD's. Can you prove conclusively that Bush knew
there were no WMD's, when he made the statement? Don't tell me what we now
know about the WMD's in Iraq, what is important is what we knew before we
went to war with Iraq.
2009-09-19 16:29:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Sorry about that. But I do not like it when people use a lie to
accuse other people of lying.
Gerry, drop the self-righteous posing for a moment and answer the question.
i.e., Did bush lie about WMD, or did he not?
Yes or no.
No, and you cannot prove he did lie
Sure I can.
I am waiting.... Prove he lied....
Post by
Unless you can show us where the mass stores of WMD are/were/will be,
then it's a self evident lie.
Ignoring the obvious. Who in the UN Sec<SMAK!>
Its not about the UN or anyone else, gerry.

'tis about bush and his whopping WMD lie.

Its really that simple.

A lot like you.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-20 17:29:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Sorry about that. But I do not like it when people use a lie to
accuse other people of lying.
Gerry, drop the self-righteous posing for a moment and answer the question.
i.e., Did bush lie about WMD, or did he not?
Yes or no.
No, and you cannot prove he did lie
Sure I can.
I am waiting.... Prove he lied....
Post by
Unless you can show us where the mass stores of WMD are/were/will be,
then it's a self evident lie.
Ignoring the obvious. Who in the UN Sec<SMAK!>
Its not about the UN or anyone else, gerry.
'tis about bush and his whopping WMD lie.
Broken record. You keep calling someone a liar, and yet you cannot prove
that they lied, so I can only conclude that since you cannot prove that he
lied, that the liar is you not Bush. By the way if you want to talk about
Presidents who lie, Obama beats every other President by a mile on the
number of lies he has told and the list keeps getting bigger and bigger, and
the guy has not even been the President for a year yet. Do you really want
to go down that road?
Harold Burton
2009-09-20 00:53:06 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@news.alt.net>,
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by Jerry Okamura
Sorry about that. But I do not like it when people use a lie to accuse
other people of lying.
Gerry, drop the self-righteous posing for a moment...
...or you'll be mistaken for Nancy Pelosi.


Snicker.
* US *
2009-09-20 11:30:49 UTC
Permalink
Bush even lied about 9/11.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-20 17:31:22 UTC
Permalink
Oh my, another conspiracy theorist has joined us.
Post by * US *
Bush even lied about 9/11.
* US *
2009-09-23 11:17:32 UTC
Permalink
Bush even lied about 9/11.

Even his most desperate worshipper can't dispute that fact.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/bushlie.html
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-23 16:47:37 UTC
Permalink
And how many lies has Obama told in every month he has been in office?
Post by * US *
Bush even lied about 9/11.
Even his most desperate worshipper can't dispute that fact.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/bushlie.html
* US *
2009-09-24 18:15:48 UTC
Permalink
Bush even lied about 9/11.

Even his most desperate worshipper can't dispute that fact.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/bushlie.html

9/11 was an inside job.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-25 01:43:35 UTC
Permalink
Conspiracy theorist alive and well...
Post by * US *
Bush even lied about 9/11.
Even his most desperate worshipper can't dispute that fact.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/bushlie.html
9/11 was an inside job.
* US *
2009-09-27 09:26:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Conspiracy theorist alive and well...
You even believe it was somehow a guy on dialysis
in a cave in Afghanistan who stood down the US
air defense system, don't you, Jerry.

Bush lied about 9/11.

Even his most desperate worshipper can't dispute that fact.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/bushlie.html

9/11 was an inside job.
Hiccum Blurpaedius
2009-09-27 10:29:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by * US *
Post by Jerry Okamura
Conspiracy theorist alive and well...
You even believe it was somehow a guy on dialysis
in a cave in Afghanistan who stood down the US
air defense system, don't you, Jerry.
Bush lied about 9/11.
Even his most desperate worshipper can't dispute that fact.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/bushlie.html
9/11 was an inside job.
...And if Jesus did not die you would not be here.
...You would be there.


* US *
2009-10-02 15:37:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Conspiracy theorist alive and well...
You even believe it was somehow a guy on dialysis
in a cave in Afghanistan who stood down the US
air defense system, don't you, Jerry.

Bush lied about 9/11.

Even his most desperate worshipper can't dispute that fact.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/bushlie.html

9/11 was an inside job.

Bush and Cheney are still cashing in on it.
Jerry Okamura
2009-10-02 17:17:55 UTC
Permalink
Sure.
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 15:43:35 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
Post by Jerry Okamura
Conspiracy theorist alive and well...
You even believe it was somehow a guy on dialysis
in a cave in Afghanistan who stood down the US
air defense system, don't you, Jerry.
Bush lied about 9/11.
Even his most desperate worshipper can't dispute that fact.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/bushlie.html
9/11 was an inside job.
Bush and Cheney are still cashing in on it.
* US *
2009-10-13 15:50:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Sure.
You're certain that God speaks through
George W. Bush, aren't you.
Post by Jerry Okamura
Conspiracy theorist alive and well...
You even believe it was somehow a guy on dialysis
in a cave in Afghanistan who stood down the US
air defense system, don't you, Jerry.

Bush lied about 9/11.

Even his most desperate worshipper can't dispute that fact.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/bushlie.html

9/11 was an inside job.

Bush and Cheney are still cashing in on it.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-27 17:28:26 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 15:43:35 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
Post by Jerry Okamura
Conspiracy theorist alive and well...
You even believe it was somehow a guy on dialysis
in a cave in Afghanistan who stood down the US
air defense system, don't you, Jerry.
Another consipiracy theory?
Bush lied about 9/11.
Even his most desperate worshipper can't dispute that fact.
You mean those towers just came down on their own? What destroyed parts of
the Pentagon?
Day Brown
2009-09-30 17:10:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
You mean those towers just came down on their own? What destroyed parts
of the Pentagon?
When the planes hit the twin towers, the video shows that the holes fit
the size of the plane. The video of the Pentagon before the facade
collapsed show us a hole that is way to small to be an airliner.

I dunno what hit the Pentagon, but it was not a passenger jet. Ergo, the
government is lying. Which is consistent with what it is doing now, and
which it has done many times all the way back in its history.

At the very least, some in the system knew 9/11 was coming, and not only
turned a blind eye, but Swiss banking records found the short sales on
airline stock that made them very rich.

But all this deception begs the question of whether such a system, that
is so corrupt, can endure, or whether as the Founding Farmers suggested,
it is time for the tree of liberty to be fertilized by the blood of
patriots... as well as that of the bastards who've been lying to us.

Come on Jerry. If the system was as honest as you are trying to say, we
would not now have Obama as president.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-30 17:29:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Day Brown
Post by Jerry Okamura
You mean those towers just came down on their own? What destroyed parts
of the Pentagon?
When the planes hit the twin towers, the video shows that the holes fit
the size of the plane. The video of the Pentagon before the facade
collapsed show us a hole that is way to small to be an airliner.
An opinion that is not shared by structural engineers who looked into the
reason why the towers collapsed? How big a hole does a commercail airliners
make when it hits a building? How big a hole did that airliner that crashed
into the woods in Pennsylvania make?
Post by Day Brown
I dunno what hit the Pentagon, but it was not a passenger jet.
So, the picture of the plane headed for the Pentagon was fake?
Post by Day Brown
At the very least, some in the system knew 9/11 was coming, and not only
turned a blind eye, but Swiss banking records found the short sales on
airline stock that made them very rich.
Well, yes. The "systems" knew that a flight of planes were headed to Pear
Harbor on December 7th 1941 and it failed becuase the operators did not
believe what they saw.....so what? As for the short sales, that could also
be the result of someone knowing that the attacks would occur before they
occurred counldn't it?
Post by Day Brown
But all this deception begs the question of whether such a system, that is
so corrupt, can endure, or whether as the Founding Farmers suggested, it
is time for the tree of liberty to be fertilized by the blood of
patriots... as well as that of the bastards who've been lying to us.
One could have that question, if they believed in conspiracies, of couse
believing in conspiracies and proving conclusively that a consipracy did
exist in this case are two different things.
Post by Day Brown
Come on Jerry. If the system was as honest as you are trying to say, we
would not now have Obama as president.
Why not? I hate the fact that Obama is the President, but I have no doubts
that he won the Presidency based on how the system works today.
krp
2009-09-30 21:04:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Day Brown
Post by Jerry Okamura
You mean those towers just came down on their own? What destroyed parts
of the Pentagon?
When the planes hit the twin towers, the video shows that the holes fit
the size of the plane. The video of the Pentagon before the facade
collapsed show us a hole that is way to small to be an airliner.
An opinion that is not shared by structural engineers who looked into the
reason why the towers collapsed? How big a hole does a commercail airliners
make when it hits a building? How big a hole did that airliner that crashed
into the woods in Pennsylvania make?
Post by Day Brown
I dunno what hit the Pentagon, but it was not a passenger jet.
So, the picture of the plane headed for the Pentagon was fake?
I can't believe that there are STILL people stupid enough to be making
the argument that 9-11 was a fake. Breat out the tin foil hats, folks!!
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Day Brown
At the very least, some in the system knew 9/11 was coming, and not only
turned a blind eye, but Swiss banking records found the short sales on
airline stock that made them very rich.
They knew something was afoot, but not exactly what, where, when or who.
Post by Jerry Okamura
Well, yes. The "systems" knew that a flight of planes were headed to
Pearl
Harbor on December 7th 1941 and it failed because the operators did not
believe what they saw.....so what? As for the short sales, that could also
be the result of someone knowing that the attacks would occur before they
occurred counldn't it?
It wasn't the operators, it was the officer in charge. An asshole that
didn't know what radar was but had strident opinions anyway.
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Day Brown
But all this deception begs the question of whether such a system, that is
so corrupt, can endure, or whether as the Founding Farmers suggested, it
is time for the tree of liberty to be fertilized by the blood of
patriots... as well as that of the bastards who've been lying to us.
One could have that question, if they believed in conspiracies, of course
believing in conspiracies and proving conclusively that a consipracy did
exist in this case are two different things.
Well there ARE people who believe in Leprechauns. There are people who
believe that sex starved outer space aliencs are coming to Earth for a
little "Earth Pussy." Black helicopters, and that NOPBODY ever went to the
moon. There are crackpot conspiracy theories on almost anything.
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Day Brown
Come on Jerry. If the system was as honest as you are trying to say, we
would not now have Obama as president.
Why not? I hate the fact that Obama is the President, but I have no doubts
that he won the Presidency based on how the system works today.
I rather like Obama. I don't agree with him 100% but maybe 85%. I
certainly think the NUTS on the other side who are vilifying him need some
mental health intervention. Obama's main problem is some of his friends.
With some of the friends he has, he doesn't need enemies.
Hiccum Blurpaedius
2009-09-30 21:40:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Day Brown
You mean those towers just came down on their own?  What destroyed parts
of the Pentagon?
When the planes hit the twin towers, the video shows that the holes fit
the size of the plane. The video of the Pentagon before the facade
collapsed show us a hole that is way to small to be an airliner.
I dunno what hit the Pentagon, but it was not a passenger jet. Ergo, the
government is lying. Which is consistent with what it is doing now, and
which it has done many times all the way back in its history.
At the very least, some in the system knew 9/11 was coming, and not only
turned a blind eye, but Swiss banking records found the short sales on
airline stock that made them very rich.
But all this deception begs the question of whether such a system, that
is so corrupt, can endure, or whether as the Founding Farmers suggested,
it is time for the tree of liberty to be fertilized by the blood of
patriots... as well as that of the bastards who've been lying to us.
Come on Jerry. If the system was as honest as you are trying to say, we
would not now have Obama as president.
The Pentagon wanted to destroy evidence in that section of the
building.

If Bush handn't lied they would uv never named an airport after his
daddy. If his grandpa never got caught manufacturing ammunition for
the Nazis it would have been named after him.
Day Brown
2009-09-30 23:47:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hiccum Blurpaedius
The Pentagon wanted to destroy evidence in that section of the
building.
If Bush handn't lied they would uv never named an airport after his
daddy. If his grandpa never got caught manufacturing ammunition for
the Nazis it would have been named after him.
I would expect that. But note, Jerry has no reply. I know also that the
government which he says lies, didnt learn to do that since Obama got
elected. And do we see anyone in the Obama administration who says all
this should be looked into?

As for the thread, 9/11 is part of a much vaster global effort, in this
case using US troops to try to civilize a region that has never had rule
by law, but only tribal custom. The global free market also has a
problem with religions, like Christianity and Islam, that claim a
monopoly on truth, challenging the faith in the Almighty Dollar.

Bush I & II were the iron fist; WJC and HO are the velvet glove. In the
long history of empire, 5000 troops dying in this final mop up effort is
diddly squat. Afghanistan is like Germany, only this time the Legions
are much better equipped, far more mobile, and may figure out how to
adapt to the effort.
* US *
2009-10-03 15:20:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hiccum Blurpaedius
Post by Day Brown
You mean those towers just came down on their own?  What destroyed parts
of the Pentagon?
When the planes hit the twin towers, the video shows that the holes fit
the size of the plane. The video of the Pentagon before the facade
collapsed show us a hole that is way to small to be an airliner.
I dunno what hit the Pentagon, but it was not a passenger jet. Ergo, the
government is lying. Which is consistent with what it is doing now, and
which it has done many times all the way back in its history.
At the very least, some in the system knew 9/11 was coming, and not only
turned a blind eye, but Swiss banking records found the short sales on
airline stock that made them very rich.
But all this deception begs the question of whether such a system, that
is so corrupt, can endure, or whether as the Founding Farmers suggested,
it is time for the tree of liberty to be fertilized by the blood of
patriots... as well as that of the bastards who've been lying to us.
Come on Jerry. If the system was as honest as you are trying to say, we
would not now have Obama as president.
The Pentagon wanted to destroy evidence in that section of the
building.
If Bush handn't lied they would uv never named an airport after his
daddy. If his grandpa never got caught manufacturing ammunition for
the Nazis it would have been named after him.
Excellent points.

The part of the Pentagon that was hit housed those
attempting to investigate the missing $2.3 trillion ...
Day Brown
2009-10-04 00:06:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by * US *
Post by Hiccum Blurpaedius
Post by Day Brown
Come on Jerry. If the system was as honest as you are trying to say, we
would not now have Obama as president.
The Pentagon wanted to destroy evidence in that section of the
building.
If Bush handn't lied they would uv never named an airport after his
daddy. If his grandpa never got caught manufacturing ammunition for
the Nazis it would have been named after him.
Excellent points.
The part of the Pentagon that was hit housed those
attempting to investigate the missing $2.3 trillion ...
I dont claim to know. All I know is that we've been lied to, and I can
see there's no investigation of the lies. Which gets back to the
question of whether a system as deceptive as this can maintain....
Strabo
2009-10-05 04:56:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Day Brown
Post by * US *
Post by Hiccum Blurpaedius
Post by Day Brown
Come on Jerry. If the system was as honest as you are trying to say, we
would not now have Obama as president.
The Pentagon wanted to destroy evidence in that section of the
building.
If Bush handn't lied they would uv never named an airport after his
daddy. If his grandpa never got caught manufacturing ammunition for
the Nazis it would have been named after him.
Excellent points.
The part of the Pentagon that was hit housed those
attempting to investigate the missing $2.3 trillion ...
I dont claim to know. All I know is that we've been lied to, and I can
see there's no investigation of the lies. Which gets back to the
question of whether a system as deceptive as this can maintain....
Obviously the system cannot maintain itself. It will go its way and we
ours.
* US *
2009-10-13 15:50:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Day Brown
Post by * US *
Post by Hiccum Blurpaedius
Post by Day Brown
Come on Jerry. If the system was as honest as you are trying to say, we
would not now have Obama as president.
The Pentagon wanted to destroy evidence in that section of the
building.
If Bush handn't lied they would uv never named an airport after his
daddy. If his grandpa never got caught manufacturing ammunition for
the Nazis it would have been named after him.
Excellent points.
The part of the Pentagon that was hit housed those
attempting to investigate the missing $2.3 trillion ...
I dont claim to know. All I know is that we've been lied to, and I can
see there's no investigation of the lies. Which gets back to the
question of whether a system as deceptive as this can maintain....
It's continuing unabated.
Day Brown
2009-10-14 07:47:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by * US *
Post by Day Brown
I dont claim to know. All I know is that we've been lied to, and I can
see there's no investigation of the lies. Which gets back to the
question of whether a system as deceptive as this can maintain....
It's continuing unabated.
One of the lessons from Diamond's "Collapse" is that nobody seems to
have known the schitt would hit the fan, and when it did, it was often
over nite. But as you say, til then, it just keeps going on....
* US *
2009-10-18 00:32:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Day Brown
Post by * US *
Post by Day Brown
I dont claim to know. All I know is that we've been lied to, and I can
see there's no investigation of the lies. Which gets back to the
question of whether a system as deceptive as this can maintain....
It's continuing unabated.
One of the lessons from Diamond's "Collapse" is that nobody seems to
have known the schitt would hit the fan, and when it did, it was often
over nite. But as you say, til then, it just keeps going on....
Some people have seen the consequences of the process.

They're few and far between, though.
Ha-Emet
2009-10-15 13:39:52 UTC
Permalink
A few weeks back, Obama said America is not a Christian nation.

Now, in an interview with the French newspaper "Le Monde," Obama said,
"...I think that the United States and the West generally, we have to
educate ourselves more effectively on Islam," and claimed, "If you
actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest
Muslim countries in the world".

Naturally, the White House transcript of the interview omits this remark.

During a conference call in preparation for Obamas trip to Cairo, Egypt,
where he will address the Muslim world, deputy National Security Adviser
for Strategic Communications Denis McDonough said, "the President himself
experienced Islam on three continents before he was able to -- or before
hes been able to visit, really, the heart of the Islamic world -- you
know, growing up in Indonesia, having a Muslim father -- obviously Muslim
Americans (are) a key part of Illinois and Chicago."

Interesting choice of words -- "experienced"

In his April 6 address to the Turkish Parliament, Obama said "Americans
have Muslims in their families or have lived in a Muslim majority country.
I know, because I am one of them."

Al-Jazeera reported that Obama said he was a Muslim.

Then, in Strasbourg, Obama said, "I think it is important for Europe to
understand that even though I am president and George Bush is not
president, al-Qaeda is still a threat and that we cannot pretend somehow
that because Barack Hussein Obama got elected as president, suddenly
everything's going to be OK," he said.

These comments never would have been uttered during the primaries or
general election campaign, when Americans were labeled bigots and racists
even for mentioning Hussein's middle name. The candidate was even
offended when referred to by his initials "BHO," because he considered the
use of his middle name, "Hussein," an attempt to frighten voters.

Well, now it looks like Obama is finally coming out of the closet. Obama
says it loud and says it proud. The middle name that no one dared to
speak during the election campaign is now front and centre in Obama's
attempt to suck up to the Muslim world.



Of course those of us who have been well informed on this matter arent at
all surprised. After all, Obama only hid his past when he was running for
the Oval Office.

Is Obama's statement just a bold-faced lie or a wish? There are an
estimated 1.8 million Muslims in America. That's a scant 0.6% of the
population. Compared to other countries the U. S. doesn't even make the
list.

Another lie to add to Obama's impressive list of lies. Islam
6/3/09
Obama Ignores Soldier's Murder


The suspect, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, was charged with killing one
soldier and seriously wounding another in a shooting outside an Army
recruiting office in Little Rock, Ark. He was once detained in Yemen for
possessing a fake Somali passport and other counterfeit documents, law
enforcement officials said Tuesday.

The episode in Yemen prompted a preliminary inquiry by the Federal Bureau
of Investigation and other American law enforcement agencies into whether
the man had ties to extremist groups, the officials said. But that
investigation was inconclusive, leaving the bureau with insufficient
evidence to wiretap his phone or put him under surveillance.

But his travels to Yemen and possibly Somalia raise questions about
whether he met with any of the militant Islamic groups that are active in
both countries.

"Mr. Muhammad stated that he was mad at the U.S. military because of what
they had done to Muslims in the past," an arrest report filed by the
Little Rock police said. "Mr. Muhammad further stated that he would have
killed more soldiers if they had been on the parking lot."

It would be embarrassing to highlight his Muslim background. His jihad
would be inconvenient on the eve of Obama's big speech in Cairo to the
Ummah.

And so Obama is all too happy to ignore the outrageous murder of an
innocent soldier in America while, at the same time, condemning the
outrageous murder of an abortion doctor in a church.

The latter won't affect Obama's sucking up to Islam.

http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaLatest.htm
Day Brown
2009-10-15 18:17:19 UTC
Permalink
Read Machiavelli. "when a republic [the new world order] has a
distasteful task [station troops to get control of Persian Gulf oil], it
will find a man of flawed character [GW Bush], to do it for them.

But then, after the fait accompli, they will send him away, he taking
the guilt for the action away with him while they get to enjoy the
fruits of the new status quo.

Next, they will find a man of impeccable character [Obama], who will go
to the offended parties [Muslims], and say that he's sorry for what that
bad man [Bush] did, but maybe we can work something out."

First use the iron fist, but then use the velvet glove. If Obama now
wants to portray himself and the US as Muslim, that is eggzactly what is
needed to be done.

Get over it.
Escape_the_Cult_Now
2009-10-16 06:46:04 UTC
Permalink
Ha-emit wrote:

A few weeks back, Obama said America is not a Christian nation.

Now, in an interview with the French newspaper "Le Monde," Obama said,
"...I think that the United States and the West generally, we have to
educate ourselves more effectively on Islam," and claimed, "If you
actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest
Muslim countries in the world".

Naturally, the White House transcript of the interview omits this remark.

During a conference call in preparation for Obamas trip to Cairo, Egypt,
where he will address the Muslim world, deputy National Security Adviser
for Strategic Communications Denis McDonough said, "the President himself
experienced Islam on three continents before he was able to -- or before
hes been able to visit, really, the heart of the Islamic world -- you
know, growing up in Indonesia, having a Muslim father -- obviously Muslim
Americans (are) a key part of Illinois and Chicago."

Interesting choice of words -- "experienced"

In his April 6 address to the Turkish Parliament, Obama said "Americans
have Muslims in their families or have lived in a Muslim majority country.
I know, because I am one of them."

Al-Jazeera reported that Obama said he was a Muslim.

Then, in Strasbourg, Obama said, "I think it is important for Europe to
understand that even though I am president and George Bush is not
president, al-Qaeda is still a threat and that we cannot pretend somehow
that because Barack Hussein Obama got elected as president, suddenly
everything's going to be OK," he said.

These comments never would have been uttered during the primaries or
general election campaign, when Americans were labeled bigots and racists
even for mentioning Hussein's middle name. The candidate was even
offended when referred to by his initials "BHO," because he considered the
use of his middle name, "Hussein," an attempt to frighten voters.

Well, now it looks like Obama is finally coming out of the closet. Obama
says it loud and says it proud. The middle name that no one dared to
speak during the election campaign is now front and centre in Obama's
attempt to suck up to the Muslim world.



Of course those of us who have been well informed on this matter arent at
all surprised. After all, Obama only hid his past when he was running for
the Oval Office.

Is Obama's statement just a bold-faced lie or a wish? There are an
estimated 1.8 million Muslims in America. That's a scant 0.6% of the
population. Compared to other countries the U. S. doesn't even make the
list.

Another lie to add to Obama's impressive list of lies. Islam
6/3/09
Obama Ignores Soldier's Murder


The suspect, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, was charged with killing one
soldier and seriously wounding another in a shooting outside an Army
recruiting office in Little Rock, Ark. He was once detained in Yemen for
possessing a fake Somali passport and other counterfeit documents, law
enforcement officials said Tuesday.

The episode in Yemen prompted a preliminary inquiry by the Federal Bureau
of Investigation and other American law enforcement agencies into whether
the man had ties to extremist groups, the officials said. But that
investigation was inconclusive, leaving the bureau with insufficient
evidence to wiretap his phone or put him under surveillance.

But his travels to Yemen and possibly Somalia raise questions about
whether he met with any of the militant Islamic groups that are active in
both countries.

"Mr. Muhammad stated that he was mad at the U.S. military because of what
they had done to Muslims in the past," an arrest report filed by the
Little Rock police said. "Mr. Muhammad further stated that he would have
killed more soldiers if they had been on the parking lot."

It would be embarrassing to highlight his Muslim background. His jihad
would be inconvenient on the eve of Obama's big speech in Cairo to the
Ummah.

And so Obama is all too happy to ignore the outrageous murder of an
innocent soldier in America while, at the same time, condemning the
outrageous murder of an abortion doctor in a church.

The latter won't affect Obama's sucking up to Islam.

http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaLatest.htm
* US *
2009-10-18 00:32:32 UTC
Permalink
... impressive list of lies...
Tell us the one about WMD in Iraq, again.
Post by Day Brown
You mean those towers just came down on their own?  What destroyed parts
of the Pentagon?
When the planes hit the twin towers, the video shows that the holes fit
the size of the plane. The video of the Pentagon before the facade
collapsed show us a hole that is way to small to be an airliner.
I dunno what hit the Pentagon, but it was not a passenger jet. Ergo, the
government is lying. Which is consistent with what it is doing now, and
which it has done many times all the way back in its history.
At the very least, some in the system knew 9/11 was coming, and not only
turned a blind eye, but Swiss banking records found the short sales on
airline stock that made them very rich.
But all this deception begs the question of whether such a system, that
is so corrupt, can endure, or whether as the Founding Farmers suggested,
it is time for the tree of liberty to be fertilized by the blood of
patriots... as well as that of the bastards who've been lying to us.
Come on Jerry. If the system was as honest as you are trying to say, we
would not now have Obama as president.
The Pentagon wanted to destroy evidence in that section of the
building.
If Bush handn't lied they would uv never named an airport after his
daddy. If his grandpa never got caught manufacturing ammunition for
the Nazis it would have been named after him.
Excellent points.

The part of the Pentagon that was hit housed those
attempting to investigate the missing $2.3 trillion ...
Jerry Okamura
2009-10-18 01:32:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by * US *
... impressive list of lies...
Tell us the one about WMD in Iraq, again.
You mean like this?

"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan
or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the
day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and
chemical weapons. Former President Bill Clinton During an interview on
CNN's "Larry King Live" July 22, 2003

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat
Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use
them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and
all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."
President Clinton - 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is
clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a
great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will
use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies
is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten
times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with
the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including,
if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to
respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its
weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom
Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region
and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear
programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In
addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is
doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-
range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and
others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible
to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as
Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course
to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein
because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction
in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear
weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have
alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and
destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity.
This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports
show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and
biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if
left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity
to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to
develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that
Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing
capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass
destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He
is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He
presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently
prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his
consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of
Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
Sid9
2009-10-18 01:58:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by * US *
... impressive list of lies...
Tell us the one about WMD in Iraq, again.
You mean like this?
"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in
Afghanistan
or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the
day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and
chemical weapons. Former President Bill Clinton During an interview
on CNN's "Larry King Live" July 22, 2003
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of
threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass
destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we
fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his
footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."
President Clinton - 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is
clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a
great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will
use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies
is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten
times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with
the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions
(including,
if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to
respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its
weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom
Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region
and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his
weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear
programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In
addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is
doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-
range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and
others, Dec, 5, 2001.
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and
chemical
weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible
to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as
Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course
to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein
because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass
destruction
in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear
weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have
alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and
destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear
capacity.
This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports
show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and
biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if
left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his
capacity
to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to
develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that
Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing
capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass
destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He
is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He
presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so
consistently
prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his
consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of
Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
.
.
Another feeble attempt to divert the responsibility for the lies that
took us to war in Iraq.

bush.jr/ Cheney owns it.

Forever.

No revisionist history will change it.
No new lies can defend it
No diversion will change it
* US *
2009-10-19 02:05:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sid9
"People can ...
[Jerry's typical idiocy deleted]
Post by Sid9
Another feeble attempt to divert the responsibility for the lies that
took us to war in Iraq.
bush.jr/ Cheney owns it.
Forever.
No revisionist history will change it.
No new lies can defend it
No diversion will change it
Exactly.
Jerry Okamura
2009-10-18 17:00:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by * US *
... impressive list of lies...
Tell us the one about WMD in Iraq, again.
You mean like this?
"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan
or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the
day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and
chemical weapons. Former President Bill Clinton During an interview on
CNN's "Larry King Live" July 22, 2003
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of
threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction,
ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond
today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be
emboldened tomorrow."
President Clinton - 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is
clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a
great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will
use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies
is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten
times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with
the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including,
if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to
respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its
weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom
Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region
and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear
programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In
addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is
doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-
range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and
others, Dec, 5, 2001.
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible
to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as
Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course
to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein
because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction
in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear
weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have
alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and
destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity.
This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports
show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and
biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if
left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity
to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to
develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that
Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing
capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass
destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He
is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He
presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently
prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his
consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of
Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
.
.
Another feeble attempt to divert the responsibility for the lies that took
us to war in Iraq.
So, you are also saying that all of these democrats lied?
Sid9
2009-10-19 15:15:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Sid9
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:39:52 +0000, Ha-Emet
... impressive list of lies...
Tell us the one about WMD in Iraq, again.
You mean like this?
"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan
or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the
day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and
chemical weapons. Former President Bill Clinton During an
interview on CNN's "Larry King Live" July 22, 2003
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind
of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass
destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If
we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in
his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."
President Clinton - 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is
clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a
great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will
use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies
is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten
times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with
the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions
(including,
if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to
respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its
weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom
Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the
region
and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear
programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In
addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is
doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-
range missiles that will threaten the United States and our
allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and
others, Dec, 5, 2001.
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven
impossible
to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as
Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course
to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear
weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein
because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass
destruction
in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have
nuclear
weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have
alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and
destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear
capacity.
This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports
show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and
biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if
left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his
capacity
to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to
develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that
Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a
developing
capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass
destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam
Hussein. He
is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He
presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so
consistently
prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his
consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of
Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
.
.
Another feeble attempt to divert the responsibility for the lies
that took us to war in Iraq.
So, you are also saying that all of these democrats lied?
"So, you are also saying"......what follows are your words.

The following are my words:

Another feeble attempt to divert the responsibility for the lies that
took us to war in Iraq.
Jerry Okamura
2009-10-19 16:33:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sid9
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by Sid9
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by * US *
... impressive list of lies...
Tell us the one about WMD in Iraq, again.
You mean like this?
"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan
or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the
day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and
chemical weapons. Former President Bill Clinton During an interview on
CNN's "Larry King Live" July 22, 2003
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of
threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction,
ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond
today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be
emboldened tomorrow."
President Clinton - 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is
clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a
great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will
use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies
is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten
times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with
the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including,
if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to
respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its
weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom
Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region
and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear
programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In
addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is
doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-
range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and
others, Dec, 5, 2001.
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible
to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as
Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course
to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein
because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction
in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear
weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have
alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and
destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity.
This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports
show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and
biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if
left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity
to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to
develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that
Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing
capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass
destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He
is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He
presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently
prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his
consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of
Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
.
.
Another feeble attempt to divert the responsibility for the lies that
took us to war in Iraq.
So, you are also saying that all of these democrats lied?
"So, you are also saying"......what follows are your words.
Another feeble attempt to divert the responsibility for the lies that took
us to war in Iraq.
"It is impossible to deal honestly with a fool"
* US *
2009-10-19 02:03:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by * US *
... impressive list of lies...
Tell us the one about WMD in Iraq, again.
You mean ...
I mean what I typed.

Try learning how to read, Jerry.
... impressive list of lies...
Tell us the one about WMD in Iraq, again.
Post by * US *
You mean those towers just came down on their own?  What destroyed parts
of the Pentagon?
When the planes hit the twin towers, the video shows that the holes fit
the size of the plane. The video of the Pentagon before the facade
collapsed show us a hole that is way to small to be an airliner.
I dunno what hit the Pentagon, but it was not a passenger jet. Ergo, the
government is lying. Which is consistent with what it is doing now, and
which it has done many times all the way back in its history.
At the very least, some in the system knew 9/11 was coming, and not only
turned a blind eye, but Swiss banking records found the short sales on
airline stock that made them very rich.
But all this deception begs the question of whether such a system, that
is so corrupt, can endure, or whether as the Founding Farmers suggested,
it is time for the tree of liberty to be fertilized by the blood of
patriots... as well as that of the bastards who've been lying to us.
Come on Jerry. If the system was as honest as you are trying to say, we
would not now have Obama as president.
The Pentagon wanted to destroy evidence in that section of the
building.
If Bush handn't lied they would uv never named an airport after his
daddy. If his grandpa never got caught manufacturing ammunition for
the Nazis it would have been named after him.
Excellent points.

The part of the Pentagon that was hit housed those
attempting to investigate the missing $2.3 trillion ...
Jerry Okamura
2009-10-19 16:34:35 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:32:52 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
Post by * US *
... impressive list of lies...
Tell us the one about WMD in Iraq, again.
You mean ...
I mean what I typed.
Try learning how to read, Jerry.
Well yes, you meant what you said, it is that what you said was not the
truth, and one should not tell lies, to accuse someone else of lying.
AnAmericanCitizen
2009-10-19 06:41:30 UTC
Permalink
Just one more reason Hillary Clinton now leads Barack Obama in the polls....AAC
Post by Ha-Emet
A few weeks back, Obama said America is not a Christian nation.
Now, in an interview with the French newspaper "Le Monde," Obama said,
"...I think that the United States and the West generally, we have to
educate ourselves more effectively on Islam," and claimed, "If you
actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest
Muslim countries in the world".
Naturally, the White House transcript of the interview omits this remark.
During a conference call in preparation for Obamas trip to Cairo, Egypt,
where he will address the Muslim world, deputy National Security Adviser
for Strategic Communications Denis McDonough said, "the President himself
experienced Islam on three continents before he was able to -- or before
hes been able to visit, really, the heart of the Islamic world -- you
know, growing up in Indonesia, having a Muslim father -- obviously Muslim
Americans (are) a key part of Illinois and Chicago."
Interesting choice of words -- "experienced"
In his April 6 address to the Turkish Parliament, Obama said "Americans
have Muslims in their families or have lived in a Muslim majority country.
I know, because I am one of them."
Al-Jazeera reported that Obama said he was a Muslim.
Then, in Strasbourg, Obama said, "I think it is important for Europe to
understand that even though I am president and George Bush is not
president, al-Qaeda is still a threat and that we cannot pretend somehow
that because Barack Hussein Obama got elected as president, suddenly
everything's going to be OK," he said.
These comments never would have been uttered during the primaries or
general election campaign, when Americans were labeled bigots and racists
even for mentioning Hussein's middle name. The candidate was even
offended when referred to by his initials "BHO," because he considered the
use of his middle name, "Hussein," an attempt to frighten voters.
Well, now it looks like Obama is finally coming out of the closet. Obama
says it loud and says it proud. The middle name that no one dared to
speak during the election campaign is now front and centre in Obama's
attempt to suck up to the Muslim world.
Of course those of us who have been well informed on this matter arent at
all surprised. After all, Obama only hid his past when he was running for
the Oval Office.
Is Obama's statement just a bold-faced lie or a wish? There are an
estimated 1.8 million Muslims in America. That's a scant 0.6% of the
population. Compared to other countries the U. S. doesn't even make the
list.
Another lie to add to Obama's impressive list of lies. Islam
6/3/09
Obama Ignores Soldier's Murder
The suspect, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, was charged with killing one
soldier and seriously wounding another in a shooting outside an Army
recruiting office in Little Rock, Ark. He was once detained in Yemen for
possessing a fake Somali passport and other counterfeit documents, law
enforcement officials said Tuesday.
The episode in Yemen prompted a preliminary inquiry by the Federal Bureau
of Investigation and other American law enforcement agencies into whether
the man had ties to extremist groups, the officials said. But that
investigation was inconclusive, leaving the bureau with insufficient
evidence to wiretap his phone or put him under surveillance.
But his travels to Yemen and possibly Somalia raise questions about
whether he met with any of the militant Islamic groups that are active in
both countries.
"Mr. Muhammad stated that he was mad at the U.S. military because of what
they had done to Muslims in the past," an arrest report filed by the
Little Rock police said. "Mr. Muhammad further stated that he would have
killed more soldiers if they had been on the parking lot."
It would be embarrassing to highlight his Muslim background. His jihad
would be inconvenient on the eve of Obama's big speech in Cairo to the
Ummah.
And so Obama is all too happy to ignore the outrageous murder of an
innocent soldier in America while, at the same time, condemning the
outrageous murder of an abortion doctor in a church.
The latter won't affect Obama's sucking up to Islam.
http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaLatest.htm
* US *
2009-10-19 16:41:55 UTC
Permalink
... reason ...
If you could do that, you'd have objected
to all the Bush/Cheney crimes.
* US *
2009-10-02 14:12:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Another consipiracy theory?
You actually swallowed the one about "Tim Osman".
Post by Jerry Okamura
You mean those towers just came down on their own?
Why would you imagine that, Jerry? Are you really that stupid?
Post by Jerry Okamura
What destroyed parts of
the Pentagon?
Rumsfeld said it was a missile.
Post by Jerry Okamura
Conspiracy theorist alive and well...
You even believe it was somehow a guy on dialysis
in a cave in Afghanistan who stood down the US
air defense system, don't you, Jerry.

Bush lied about 9/11.

Even his most desperate worshipper can't dispute that fact.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/bushlie.html

9/11 was an inside job.
Jerry Okamura
2009-10-03 17:41:17 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 07:28:26 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
Post by Jerry Okamura
Another consipiracy theory?
You actually swallowed the one about "Tim Osman".
Who is Tim Osman?
Post by Jerry Okamura
You mean those towers just came down on their own?
Why would you imagine that, Jerry? Are you really that stupid?
Well, then how did they come down?
Post by Jerry Okamura
What destroyed parts of
the Pentagon?
Rumsfeld said it was a missile.
Was he right?
* US *
2009-10-13 15:50:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Who is Tim Osman?
Are you really too stupefied to do even a basic web search?
Post by Jerry Okamura
Another consipiracy theory?
You actually swallowed the one about "Tim Osman".
Post by Jerry Okamura
You mean those towers just came down on their own?
Why would you imagine that, Jerry? Are you really that stupid?
Post by Jerry Okamura
What destroyed parts of
the Pentagon?
Rumsfeld said it was a missile.
Post by Jerry Okamura
Conspiracy theorist alive and well...
You even believe it was somehow a guy on dialysis
in a cave in Afghanistan who stood down the US
air defense system, don't you, Jerry.

Bush lied about 9/11.

Even his most desperate worshipper can't dispute that fact.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/bushlie.html

9/11 was an inside job.
Harold Burton
2009-09-17 01:07:29 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@news.alt.net>,
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
um, does the term "WMD" have any resonance for you, Jerry?
Sure, and with the DumboCRAPs


"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That
is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998-Truth!
This was a quote from President Clinton during a presentation at the
Pentagon defending a decision to conduct military strikes against Iraq.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear.
We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass
destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998-Truth!
Bill Clinton went to the Pentagon on this occasion to be briefed by top
military officials about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction.
His remarks followed that briefing.

"Iraq is a long way from USA but, what happens there matters a great deal
here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear,
chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest
security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998-Truth!
This is a quote from Albright during an appearance at Ohio State
University
by Albright, who was Secretary of State for Bill Clinton.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times
since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998-Truth!
This was at the same Ohio State University appearance as Madeline
Albright.

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the
U.S.Constitution and Laws, to take necessary actions, (including, if
appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond
effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of
mass
destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle,
John
Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998-Truth!
According to the U.S. Senate website, the text of this letter was signed
by
several Senators, both Democrat and Republican, including Senator John
McCain and Joseph Lieberman.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and
he
has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998-Truth!
The text of this statement by Nancy Pelosi is posted on her congressional
website.

"Hussein has .. chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999-Truth!
This was from an appearance Albright made in Chicago.
She was addressing the embargo of Iraq that was in effect at the time and
criticism that it may have prevented needed medical supplies from getting
into the country. Albright said, "There has never been an embargo
against
food and medicine. It's just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend
his
money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building
weapons
of mass destruction, and palaces for his cronies."

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs
continue a pace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition,
Saddam
continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover
of a
licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten
the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others,
December 5, 2001Truth!
The only letter with this quote from December 5, 2001 that we could find
did
not include the participation of Senator Bob Graham, but it was signed
nine
other senators including Democrat Joe Lieberman.
It urged President Bush to take quicker action against Iraq.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandated
of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the
means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002-Truth!
These were remarks from Senator Levin to a Senate committee on that date.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth!
This and the quote below was part of prepared remarks for a speech in San
Francisco to The Commonwealth Club.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to
deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam
is in
power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth!

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002-Truth!
Part of a speech he gave at Johns Hopkins.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998.
We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical
and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to
build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence
reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002-Truth!
On the floor of the Senate during debate over the resolution that would
authorize using force against Iraq.
He was urging caution about going to war and commented that even though
there was confidence about the weapons in Iraq, there had not been the
need
to take military action for a number of years and he asked why there
would
be the need at that point.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority
to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe
that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a
real
and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002-Truth!
Senator Kerry's comments were made to the Senate as part of the same
debate
over the resolution to use force against Saddam Hussein.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively
to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within
the
next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass
destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Rockefeller's statements were a part of the debate over using
force
against Saddam Hussein.

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every
significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy
his
chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has
refused to do" Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Waxman's contribution to the Senate debate over going to war.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show
that
Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons
stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has
also
given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda
members.
It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will
continue
to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and
will
keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Clinton acknowledged the threat of Saddam Hussein but said she
did
not feel that using force at that time was a good option.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime He presents a
particularly
grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ...
And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit
and
his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction
So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real
..."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan.23.2003-Truth!
In a speech to Georgetown University.


Snicker
Harold Burton
2009-09-17 01:06:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
Probably these:


"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That
is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998-Truth!
This was a quote from President Clinton during a presentation at the
Pentagon defending a decision to conduct military strikes against Iraq.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear.
We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass
destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998-Truth!
Bill Clinton went to the Pentagon on this occasion to be briefed by top
military officials about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction.
His remarks followed that briefing.

"Iraq is a long way from USA but, what happens there matters a great deal
here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear,
chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest
security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998-Truth!
This is a quote from Albright during an appearance at Ohio State
University
by Albright, who was Secretary of State for Bill Clinton.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times
since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998-Truth!
This was at the same Ohio State University appearance as Madeline
Albright.

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the
U.S.Constitution and Laws, to take necessary actions, (including, if
appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond
effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of
mass
destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle,
John
Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998-Truth!
According to the U.S. Senate website, the text of this letter was signed
by
several Senators, both Democrat and Republican, including Senator John
McCain and Joseph Lieberman.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and
he
has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998-Truth!
The text of this statement by Nancy Pelosi is posted on her congressional
website.

"Hussein has .. chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999-Truth!
This was from an appearance Albright made in Chicago.
She was addressing the embargo of Iraq that was in effect at the time and
criticism that it may have prevented needed medical supplies from getting
into the country. Albright said, "There has never been an embargo
against
food and medicine. It's just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend
his
money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building
weapons
of mass destruction, and palaces for his cronies."

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs
continue a pace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition,
Saddam
continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover
of a
licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten
the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others,
December 5, 2001Truth!
The only letter with this quote from December 5, 2001 that we could find
did
not include the participation of Senator Bob Graham, but it was signed
nine
other senators including Democrat Joe Lieberman.
It urged President Bush to take quicker action against Iraq.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandated
of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the
means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002-Truth!
These were remarks from Senator Levin to a Senate committee on that date.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth!
This and the quote below was part of prepared remarks for a speech in San
Francisco to The Commonwealth Club.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to
deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam
is in
power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth!

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002-Truth!
Part of a speech he gave at Johns Hopkins.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998.
We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical
and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to
build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence
reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002-Truth!
On the floor of the Senate during debate over the resolution that would
authorize using force against Iraq.
He was urging caution about going to war and commented that even though
there was confidence about the weapons in Iraq, there had not been the
need
to take military action for a number of years and he asked why there
would
be the need at that point.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority
to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe
that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a
real
and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002-Truth!
Senator Kerry's comments were made to the Senate as part of the same
debate
over the resolution to use force against Saddam Hussein.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively
to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within
the
next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass
destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Rockefeller's statements were a part of the debate over using
force
against Saddam Hussein.

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every
significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy
his
chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has
refused to do" Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Waxman's contribution to the Senate debate over going to war.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show
that
Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons
stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has
also
given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda
members.
It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will
continue
to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and
will
keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Clinton acknowledged the threat of Saddam Hussein but said she
did
not feel that using force at that time was a good option.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime He presents a
particularly
grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ...
And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit
and
his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction
So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real
..."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan.23.2003-Truth!
In a speech to Georgetown University.



Snicker.
* US *
2009-09-17 04:13:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by * US *
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
Of course he lied. That you are too stupid to realize that
doesn't change it at all, Jerry.

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/03/07/22_lies.html
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-17 17:47:18 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 08:29:08 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
Post by Jerry Okamura
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:44:10 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
Of course he lied. That you are too stupid to realize that
doesn't change it at all, Jerry.
I noticed you avoided responding to Harold Burton's response and my
response, which listed the number of demcorats who believed Saddam had those
weapons. Why did you do that, so you could continue to tell a lie, about
someone else lying?
* US *
2009-09-23 11:17:32 UTC
Permalink
... demcorats who believed...
They were duped by or complicit with Bush/Cheney.

So what?

That doesn't exculpate Bush/Cheney.
Post by * US *
If you are so hung up on people who lie ...
Why don't you object when Bush's lies kill GIs?
Because he did not lie? What lies are you talking about?
Of course he lied. That you are too stupid to realize that
doesn't change it at all, Jerry.

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/03/07/22_lies.html
PreCog
2009-10-03 11:22:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.
bush got his own personal war to defend his "daddy".
So far nearly 5K dead US soldiers for that lie.
If you are so hung up on people who lie, then why aren't you complaining
about all the lies that Obama has told? And he has told a whole lot of
lies. Do you really want to go down that road...the list i have put
together does not even cover all of his lies, he has told so many of
them, I cannot keep track. And this guy as been in office for less than
a year. And the list keeps growing with each passing money.
OBAMA IS SO LAME HE DOESN'T KNOW HE IS LYING.
geo
2009-10-03 12:56:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by
Sure, the lie worked.
Post by
bush got his own personal war to defend his "daddy".
So far nearly 5K dead US soldiers for that lie.
and the bid for the OIL ?
How's that working out?
--
money; what a concept!
Strabo
2009-10-05 04:48:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by PreCog
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.
bush got his own personal war to defend his "daddy".
So far nearly 5K dead US soldiers for that lie.
If you are so hung up on people who lie, then why aren't you
complaining about all the lies that Obama has told? And he has told a
whole lot of lies. Do you really want to go down that road...the list
i have put together does not even cover all of his lies, he has told
so many of them, I cannot keep track. And this guy as been in office
for less than a year. And the list keeps growing with each passing money.
OBAMA IS SO LAME HE DOESN'T KNOW HE IS LYING.
Multiple identities will do that. Barry Soetoro has so many aliases and
birth places he doesn't know who he is.
PreCog
2009-10-05 11:18:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Strabo
Post by PreCog
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.
bush got his own personal war to defend his "daddy".
So far nearly 5K dead US soldiers for that lie.
If you are so hung up on people who lie, then why aren't you
complaining about all the lies that Obama has told? And he has told
a whole lot of lies. Do you really want to go down that road...the
list i have put together does not even cover all of his lies, he has
told so many of them, I cannot keep track. And this guy as been in
office for less than a year. And the list keeps growing with each
passing money.
OBAMA IS SO LAME HE DOESN'T KNOW HE IS LYING.
Multiple identities will do that. Barry Soetoro has so many aliases and
birth places he doesn't know who he is.
he is not sure which lie is the truth today
Harold Burton
2009-09-17 01:04:22 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@news.alt.net>,
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.
And the DumboCRAPs in Congress who approved it haven't gotten any
smarter. If anything, they've gotten dumber.


Snicker.
2009-09-17 18:36:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harold Burton
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.
And the DumboCRAPs in Congress who approved it haven't gotten any
smarter.
LOL! So you admit it was a lie.

Thanks, numbnuts!
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-17 17:48:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by
Post by Harold Burton
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.
And the DumboCRAPs in Congress who approved it haven't gotten any
smarter.
LOL! So you admit it was a lie.
Thanks, numbnuts!
No he is saying that if they were dumb enough to believe Bush, then they are
dumb enough to believe Obama.
2009-09-18 16:35:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by
Post by Harold Burton
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.
And the DumboCRAPs in Congress who approved it haven't gotten any
smarter.
LOL! So you admit it was a lie.
Thanks, numbnuts!
No <SMAK!>
Yes, gerry, that's exactly what he said.


Game over, you lose.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-18 16:43:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by
Post by
Post by Harold Burton
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.
And the DumboCRAPs in Congress who approved it haven't gotten any
smarter.
LOL! So you admit it was a lie.
Thanks, numbnuts!
No <SMAK!>
Yes, gerry, that's exactly what he said.
Game over, you lose.
It is not a "game". Besides, you responded to the wrong person, I did not
say that.
2009-09-19 16:27:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by
Post by Harold Burton
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.
And the DumboCRAPs in Congress who approved it haven't gotten any
smarter.
LOL! So you admit it was a lie.
Thanks, numbnuts!
No <SMAK!>
Yes, gerry, that's exactly what he said.
Game over, you lose.
It is not a "game".
Whack-a-doodling rightards Is a game!
Post by Jerry Okamura
Besides, you responded to the wrong person, I did not say that.
No matter, you zombies all share a brain so talking to one is the same as
talking to any other.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-20 17:57:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
Post by
Post by
Post by Harold Burton
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.
And the DumboCRAPs in Congress who approved it haven't gotten any
smarter.
LOL! So you admit it was a lie.
Thanks, numbnuts!
No <SMAK!>
Yes, gerry, that's exactly what he said.
Game over, you lose.
It is not a "game".
Whack-a-doodling rightards Is a game!
A response one would expect from a child.
Harold Burton
2009-09-20 00:53:47 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@news.alt.net>,
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by
Post by Harold Burton
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
Post by
Post by Jerry Okamura
What counts in the end is does it work.
Sure, the lie worked.
And the DumboCRAPs in Congress who approved it haven't gotten any
smarter.
LOL! So you admit it was a lie.
No more a lie than:



"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That
is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998-Truth!
This was a quote from President Clinton during a presentation at the
Pentagon defending a decision to conduct military strikes against Iraq.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear.
We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass
destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998-Truth!
Bill Clinton went to the Pentagon on this occasion to be briefed by top
military officials about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction.
His remarks followed that briefing.

"Iraq is a long way from USA but, what happens there matters a great deal
here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear,
chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest
security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998-Truth!
This is a quote from Albright during an appearance at Ohio State
University
by Albright, who was Secretary of State for Bill Clinton.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times
since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998-Truth!
This was at the same Ohio State University appearance as Madeline
Albright.

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the
U.S.Constitution and Laws, to take necessary actions, (including, if
appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond
effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of
mass
destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle,
John
Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998-Truth!
According to the U.S. Senate website, the text of this letter was signed
by
several Senators, both Democrat and Republican, including Senator John
McCain and Joseph Lieberman.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and
he
has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998-Truth!
The text of this statement by Nancy Pelosi is posted on her congressional
website.

"Hussein has .. chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999-Truth!
This was from an appearance Albright made in Chicago.
She was addressing the embargo of Iraq that was in effect at the time and
criticism that it may have prevented needed medical supplies from getting
into the country. Albright said, "There has never been an embargo
against
food and medicine. It's just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend
his
money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building
weapons
of mass destruction, and palaces for his cronies."

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs
continue a pace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition,
Saddam
continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover
of a
licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten
the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others,
December 5, 2001Truth!
The only letter with this quote from December 5, 2001 that we could find
did
not include the participation of Senator Bob Graham, but it was signed
nine
other senators including Democrat Joe Lieberman.
It urged President Bush to take quicker action against Iraq.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandated
of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the
means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002-Truth!
These were remarks from Senator Levin to a Senate committee on that date.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth!
This and the quote below was part of prepared remarks for a speech in San
Francisco to The Commonwealth Club.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to
deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam
is in
power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth!

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002-Truth!
Part of a speech he gave at Johns Hopkins.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998.
We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical
and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to
build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence
reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002-Truth!
On the floor of the Senate during debate over the resolution that would
authorize using force against Iraq.
He was urging caution about going to war and commented that even though
there was confidence about the weapons in Iraq, there had not been the
need
to take military action for a number of years and he asked why there
would
be the need at that point.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority
to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe
that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a
real
and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002-Truth!
Senator Kerry's comments were made to the Senate as part of the same
debate
over the resolution to use force against Saddam Hussein.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively
to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within
the
next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass
destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Rockefeller's statements were a part of the debate over using
force
against Saddam Hussein.

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every
significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy
his
chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has
refused to do" Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Waxman's contribution to the Senate debate over going to war.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show
that
Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons
stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has
also
given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda
members.
It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will
continue
to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and
will
keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Clinton acknowledged the threat of Saddam Hussein but said she
did
not feel that using force at that time was a good option.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime He presents a
particularly
grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ...
And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit
and
his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction
So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real
..."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan.23.2003-Truth!
In a speech to Georgetown University.



Snicker.
Harold Burton
2009-09-17 01:02:26 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@news.alt.net>,
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .>
LOL! The desperation...
...of lefturds...
...is incredible!
Snicker.
Jerry Okamura
2009-09-11 16:18:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by AnAmericanCitizen
Good points....AAC
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 13:02:56 -0400, in alt.politics "Dionysus"
AN E-MAIL FROM A FRIEND
If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter to be
able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said
this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled
by smarter men behind the scenes?
If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura
Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved, all the while preaching
that America is in a Financial Crisis?
If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM
stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have
approved?
If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special
Olympics, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and
incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful
and historically significant gift, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing
videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly
narcissistic and tacky?
If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you
have approved?
If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the
non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor
slip?
If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with
people who cheat on their income taxes, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to
"Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the fourth
of May (Cuatro de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again,
would you have winced in embarrassment?
If George W. Bush had mis-spelled the word advice would you have
hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as proof of what
a dunce he is?
If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a
single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?
If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low
over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan
causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get
what happened on 9-11?
If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims
throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New
Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with
claims of racism and incompetence?
If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major
corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would
you have approved?
If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which
had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in only 3 months, would
you have approved?
If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within
10
years, would you have approved?
If someone who opposed Bush thought these were good accusation to make to
try and discredit Bush, that is what they would do.
Möbius Pretzel
2009-09-14 16:44:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by AnAmericanCitizen
Good points....AAC
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 13:02:56 -0400, in alt.politics "Dionysus"
AN E-MAIL FROM A FRIEND
If George W.  Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter to be
able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said
this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really  controlled
by smarter men behind the scenes?
If  George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura
Bush to a play in NYC, would you have  approved, all the while preaching
that America is in a Financial Crisis?
      If  George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM
stock by  90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have
approved?
       If  George W.  Bush had made a joke at the expense of the  Special
Olympics, would you have  approved?
    If  George W. Bush had given Gordon  Brown a set of inexpensive and
incorrectly formatted DVDs, when  Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful
and  historically significant gift, would you  have approved?
    If  George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing
videos of  his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly
narcissistic and  tacky?
    If  George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you
have approved?
    If  George W. Bush had visited Austria  and made reference to the
non-existent "Austrian language," would you  have brushed it off as a minor
slip?
    If  George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers  with
people who cheat on their income taxes,  would you have approved?
      If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as  to refer to
"Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it  was the fourth
of May (Cuatro de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he  tried again,
would you have winced in  embarrassment?
     If George W.  Bush had mis-spelled the word advice would you have
hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and  potatoe as proof of what
a dunce he is?
    If George W.  Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a
single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?
     If George W.  Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low
over millions of  people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan
causing widespread  panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get
what happened  on 9-11?
     If George W.  Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims
throughout  the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New
Orleans ,  would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with
claims of  racism and incompetence?
    If  George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a  major
corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to  do so, would
you have  approved?
      If  George W. Bush  had proposed to double the national debt, which
had taken more than  two centuries to accumulate, in only 3 months, would
you  have approved?
    If  George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within  10
years, would you have approved?
    So, tell  us again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant
and  impressive? Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all  this
in 9 months -- so you'll have three years and three months  to come up with
an answer.
*****************
"Who would have believed that this politician celebrated, above all, for his
eloquence and capacity to connect with voters would end up as president
proving so profoundly tone deaf?"--Dorothy Rabinowitz
Dionysus
Fuck the the 20,000 dead Oil Nazis.

What about the 2 million dead Iraqis?

Anyone who whines about dead Oil Nazis
and fails mourn the people they slaughtered
has no shred of merit
with respect to being conscious or aware.
Jim Higgins
2009-09-14 17:01:26 UTC
Permalink
bupkis
I just love to plonk Pretzels, they are soooooooooooo worthles.
--
Civis Romanus Sum
Möbius Pretzel
2009-09-14 17:15:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Higgins
bupkis
I just love to plonk Pretzels, they are soooooooooooo worthles.
That's because Nazis such as yourself are ashamed to face up to your
handiwork.
Freedom Fighter
2009-10-13 16:04:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by AnAmericanCitizen
Good points....AAC
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 13:02:56 -0400, in alt.politics "Dionysus"
AN E-MAIL FROM A FRIEND
If George W.  Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter to be
able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said
this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really  controlled
by smarter men behind the scenes?
If  George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura
Bush to a play in NYC, would you have  approved, all the while preaching
that America is in a Financial Crisis?
      If  George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM
stock by  90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have
approved?
       If  George W.  Bush had made a joke at the expense of the  Special
Olympics, would you have  approved?
    If  George W. Bush had given Gordon  Brown a set of inexpensive and
incorrectly formatted DVDs, when  Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful
and  historically significant gift, would you  have approved?
    If  George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing
videos of  his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly
narcissistic and  tacky?
    If  George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you
have approved?
    If  George W. Bush had visited Austria  and made reference to the
non-existent "Austrian language," would you  have brushed it off as a minor
slip?
    If  George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers  with
people who cheat on their income taxes,  would you have approved?
      If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as  to refer to
"Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it  was the fourth
of May (Cuatro de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he  tried again,
would you have winced in  embarrassment?
     If George W.  Bush had mis-spelled the word advice would you have
hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and  potatoe as proof of what
a dunce he is?
    If George W.  Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a
single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?
     If George W.  Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low
over millions of  people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan
causing widespread  panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get
what happened  on 9-11?
     If George W.  Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims
throughout  the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New
Orleans ,  would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with
claims of  racism and incompetence?
    If  George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a  major
corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to  do so, would
you have  approved?
      If  George W. Bush  had proposed to double the national debt, which
had taken more than  two centuries to accumulate, in only 3 months, would
you  have approved?
    If  George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within  10
years, would you have approved?
    So, tell  us again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant
and  impressive? Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all  this
in 9 months -- so you'll have three years and three months  to come up with
an answer.
*****************
"Who would have believed that this politician celebrated, above all, for his
eloquence and capacity to connect with voters would end up as president
proving so profoundly tone deaf?"--Dorothy Rabinowitz
Dionysus
bush needs to be euthanized, so our America can have its closure, ffs!
Jim_Higgins
2009-10-13 17:19:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
nothing
Another multi-group poster-the groups could not care less.
Beam Me Up Scotty
2009-10-13 21:33:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Freedom Fighter
Post by AnAmericanCitizen
Good points....AAC
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 13:02:56 -0400, in alt.politics "Dionysus"
AN E-MAIL FROM A FRIEND
If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter to be
able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said
this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled
by smarter men behind the scenes?
If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura
Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved, all the while preaching
that America is in a Financial Crisis?
If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM
stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have
approved?
If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special
Olympics, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and
incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful
and historically significant gift, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing
videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly
narcissistic and tacky?
If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you
have approved?
If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the
non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor
slip?
If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with
people who cheat on their income taxes, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to
"Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the fourth
of May (Cuatro de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again,
would you have winced in embarrassment?
If George W. Bush had mis-spelled the word advice would you have
hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as proof of what
a dunce he is?
If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a
single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?
If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low
over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan
causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get
what happened on 9-11?
If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims
throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New
Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with
claims of racism and incompetence?
If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major
corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would
you have approved?
If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which
had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in only 3 months, would
you have approved?
If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10
years, would you have approved?
So, tell us again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant
and impressive? Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all this
in 9 months -- so you'll have three years and three months to come up with
an answer.
*****************
"Who would have believed that this politician celebrated, above all, for his
eloquence and capacity to connect with voters would end up as president
proving so profoundly tone deaf?"--Dorothy Rabinowitz
Dionysus
bush needs to be euthanized, so our America can have its closure, ffs!
That is who Liberals are.....


I expect no less of you.


Kill what ever you hate.


Hate everything not of your choosing.
--
*BE VERY CONCERNED*

The only persons that psych testing will stop from owning guns is the
Liberals that have an irrational fear of tools, they don't know how to
use a hammer or screwdriver or gun and as a result have a neurosis and
are also suffering (OCD) Obsessive Compulsive Disorder about their fear
and the existence of guns.

Liberals can't pass a story about a gun without pointing or touching it,
as if
to have all guns removed from their path will cure their fear and their
panic attacks
can no longer happen.

Like the typical OCD sufferer that fears stepping on a crack or flying
in an airplane and has panic attacks when ever they see planes or cracks
on the floor, The typical Liberal has a fear of tools. Guns and hearing
of guns sends
Liberals into a panic/anxiety attack.
* US *
2009-10-18 00:32:32 UTC
Permalink
Hitler and Stalin hated liberals.

So does their follower.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...