What Lincon said

[fantasticsound]

Or you could just ignore his posts entirely. ;)

[Jotown]

[quote]Originally posted by fantasticsound: [b]Or you could just ignore his posts entirely. ;) [/b][/quote]Thats what I've always done with your posts fantasticsound. :D And it seems to be working. :)

[fantasticsound]

[quote]Originally posted by Jotown: [b] [quote]Originally posted by fantasticsound: [b]Or you could just ignore his posts entirely. ;) [/b][/quote]Thats what I've always done with your posts fantasticsound. :D And it seems to be working. :) [/b][/quote]See, Super8? Another forum member, at peace with his environment by ignoring that which he can't change and doens't really matter to his world. Now, if he could only ignore [i]your[/i] posts. :D Love you too, Jotown. ;)

[Jotown]

Is this the part where we do the group hug thingie? :eek:

[fantasticsound]

Sure... just remember, no pinchin' my ass! Well, exceptions can be made for Valky, Lee, Anifa, etc... but I really don't expect them to [i]want[/i] to pinch it... so hands off!

[Skip_dup1]

[quote]Originally posted by Duhduh: [b]Well, it seems the Iraqi people are pretty happy. Cheering in the streets, knocking down his statue, etc. Thats got to be worth something...?[/b][/quote]I don`t wanna get too into this because it was discussed in an earlier thread...but it`s important to note that there is serious, credible evidence that the statue-bashing event was [i]staged[/i]. There is no doubt that the people pulling the statue down were not Iraquis at all but U.S. marines. But moreover, the `crowd` that was doing all the cheering was in fact composed of members of the Iraq National Congress, led by Mohammed (?) Chalabi, Jordanian bank fraud convict and Rumsfeld`s pick to be the U.S. man in Iraq. The INC people were assembled by the Pentagon, over the objections of both the C.I.A. and State Dept, and are part of a pattern of increasing Pentagon incursion into foreign policy. This is all from reliable sources. Once the editorial is in the archives, you can check it out at [url=http://www.japantimes.com]www.japantimes.com[/url] look for ted rall`s editorial from 4/20. I also read in the same paper this week, in an editorial from an Arab-American worried about telling his children that no, people aren`t sent to prison and tortured because this is America, that in fact some officials recently admitted that some detainees from Guantanamo and elsewhere have been transferred abroad, to places where the process of interrogation is more...open to interpretation.

[Jotown]

Sadly Skip, there are many here who will not believe anything they read in an international news source. They are very comfortable with the pseudo facts that they are spoon fed with sugar by the American media. After 9/11, everyone was asking; "Why do they hate us so much?" If you tried to illustrate some of the roots of the hatred, that can readily be found by reading news from all over the world, most asking the question will accuse you of being un-American. Again thanks for the link, and the international perspective. Sorry that it will be lost on many here.

[Skip_dup1]

[quote]Originally posted by Jotown: [b]Sadly Skip, there are many here who will not believe anything they read in an international news source. They are very comfortable with the pseudo facts that they are spoon fed with sugar by the American media. After 9/11, everyone was asking; "Why do they hate us so much?" If you tried to illustrate some of the roots of the hatred, that can readily be found by reading news from all over the world, most asking the question will accuse you of being un-American. Again thanks for the link, and the international perspective. Sorry that it will be lost on many here.[/b][/quote]you know, that`s just hard to believe. you`re telling me that we go to war against dictators who supress information from their people, and here`s America with the information staring people in the face, and they go off on the same tangent as the dictators and the religious loonies-it`s un(insert your nationality/religion here)? so the logcal conclusion is, that politicians-mostly but not all democrats-who are camapigning by saying that `the people deserve honest government, the people want a real international community, the people want a just society` are wasting their time, because that`s not what the people want. They want their lollipops and their SUVs and their cheap gas and the moral high ground too, and they`ll kill anyone who gets in their way.

[Jotown]

Its called denial. Most people will believe whatever makes them feel safe. Thats how dictators rise, and stay in power. Thats why people stay in bad relationships. It is very hard for most humans to rise above their cultural programing and look at what is really happening. Thats why I think that movies like the Matrix are so popular. They are metaphors for what is happening right under your nose. Even people who totally support the government somehow find a way to really dig these kinds of stories because something in them knows that the metaphor is true. My pathological optimism gives me hope that enough people in this great land can rise above their own rhetoric and dogma and partisan programing in time to salvage this great republic before it is too late.

[fantasticsound]

[quote]Originally posted by Jotown: [b]Its called denial... ...My pathological optimism[/b] gives me hope that enough people in this great land can rise above their own rhetoric and dogma and partisan programing in time to salvage this great republic before it is too late.[/quote]You're absolutely right... it is called denial.

[GZsound]

Well, the news is reporting the find of the mobile chemical labs in Iraq that the government has been saying all along they had. The UN guys are saying it looks and smells like the "smoking gun", although I know several of you die hard anti government folks won't believe it and wouldn't accept it as fact if they found a warehouse full of anthrax. I have a question none of you, Dan, Jotown, Alcohol, etc. have answered in all of your Bush bashing posts and maybe one of you could give it a try now... If Bush and the entire government is made up of liars, if Bush is a criminal, if Bush is telling the American people we went to war because of WMD instead of the real reason which was to control the oil, then please answer me this: Why hasn't this sneaky bastard, lying, cheating, dirty president simply had the CIA plant a half gallon of anthrax in some Iraqi home's basement and conveniently have the special ops folks find it? It would certainly shut up the likes of you all.. According to you guys, the president is capable of the most egregious lies, conduct, buyoffs, bribes, etc. So why hasn't he done the most simple thing he can do to quelch the inane babble from the left? Remember the "big" news that the Jessica Lynch rescue was all faked? Why not fake a chemical or bio hazard find? What would it take, a couple of guys sworn to secrecy? Maybe he could send his "puppets" Ms. Rice and Mr. Powell to do it... Come on kids, help me understand why such a devious administration has not done this one simple thing...

[StoneinaPond]

[quote] Why hasn't this sneaky bastard, lying, cheating, dirty president simply had the CIA plant a half gallon of anthrax in some Iraqi home's basement and conveniently have the special ops folks find it? [/quote]You answered your own question in the first paragraph of your post. :confused:

[michael c]

CBS reported last night that a U.S. Army Colonel in charge of inspecting key sites in Baghdad said that the bunker that the U.S. said it bombed on the opening day of the Iraq war in a bid to kill Saddam Hussein never existed. All he saw were giant holes ; no bodies, underground facility, no bunker. This according to Col. Tim Madere. They were looking for DNA traces. The palace of Hussein remained standing next door. Anyone in the building would have survived the blasts according to the U.S. Colonel. Shortly after the attack, Rumsfeld (who is no Lincoln BTW) told reporters "There was no question but the strike on the leadership headquarters was successful. We have photographs of what took place." Hhmmm........ So much for truth telling eh. This and the Kelly Lynch Hollywood story fabrication makes you have to question Bush & his cronies' truthfulness a little don't you think Super 8 and GZsound? :eek:

[Dylan]

There are many of us here who don't hate Bush or his administration. I for one hope they do find WMD's, otherwise, we're going to look like bully's to the entire international community. I hope that Bush can win my trust back by showing me and my country that Irag was an immediate threat to us all. But for now, I'm not biting with the information I've been given. It has nothing to do with how liberal or conservative I am. I was just as vocal about Clinton when he was in office if not more so. I'm still fuming about several things Clinton did.

[Philter]

Statements by the administration before the war claimed that Iraq had [i]tons[/i] of chemical & biological stocks. Two vehicles that may possibly have been intended to produce biological armaments is not the kind of proof that we need; we need proof to back up the claim that Iraq was a threat to our security! In addition, the question remains: why did we fail to secure both alleged WMD sites and nuclear power plants until weeks after hostilities had ended? Where are the alleged weapons now? How are we safer, now that they are scattered to the wind? Two of the results of this war are an increase in motivation and recruiting for Al Qaeda, and the certain disbursement of radioactive materials and possibly chemical or biological weapons, which are now completely unaccounted for thanks to our failure to move quickly to secure them, and also due to our faulty intelligence, which was basically hand-picked by Rumsfeld, who was hearing only what he wanted to hear. These are both results that run completely counter to the original objectives of our invasion and give reason to question just how successful this venture has been in terms of US security.

[Philter]

From United Press International, 5/29/03: [quote][b]U.K. dossier on Iraq weapons 'unreliable'[/b] Britain's dossier on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction was rewritten on orders from Prime Minister Tony Blair's government to make it look more dramatic in the months leading up to the U.S.-led war against Baghdad, a top intelligence official said Thursday. Blair's office rejected the British Broadcasting Corp.'s report, which cited an intelligence source. "Not one word of the dossier was not entirely the work of the intelligence agencies," it said in a statement. An unidentified expert in Britain's intelligence network told the BBC the 50-page document contained unreliable information and was "transformed" on instructions from Blair's office in the week before its release last September, to make it "sexier." "The classic example," the BBC quoted the intelligence officer as saying, "was the statement that weapons of mass destruction were ready for use (by Iraq) within 45 minutes." In the dossier, Blair had warned that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein could activate a chemical and biological arsenal in that time -- a suggestion that became a pillar of Britain's rationale for going to war alongside the United States against Baghdad. "That information was not contained in the original draft" that had been prepared for the prime minister, he said. "It was included in the dossier against our wishes because it wasn't reliable."[/quote] [url=http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030529-102724-2960r]Complete Report[/url] We have already seen that the US administration was relying on forged documents for evidence of Iraqi weapons programs. News of British manipulations should come as no suprise to anyone at this point.

[Yuri T.]

Positives : Removal of Saddam's Regime Negatives: Complete collapse of Iraqi economy, industry and social-political stucture. A lot of these people have no jobs, no money etc. Even the oil wells can't produce enough for domestic needs. So far there's no inkling of when this will change. It will take years. Completely inadaquate security for both people and property. The US admin rushed into this impatiently and arrogantly. We could end up with bigger problems there than Saddam. International political fallout with longtime allies. Sure the jury is still out on a lot of things. But if there isn't substantial improvement there will be big trouble ahead. I'll try to remain optomistic about the future. However there is little doubt in my mind that Bush & co. manipulated and distorted some facts to play upon the emotional strings of the US public to speed the invasion. Unfortunatly so many of the premises were wrong that we are playing a huge game of catch up.

[Salyphus]

[quote] "The classic example," the BBC quoted the intelligence officer as saying, "was the statement that weapons of mass destruction were ready for use (by Iraq) within 45 minutes."[/quote]The fact that Hussein didn't use them when attacked [b]proves[/b] without a doubt that, not only is this a complete lie, but that he did not have ready access to WMD at all. Period. If he had nothing left to lose and he didn't use them, and if he was truly as bad as he was described in order to justify the attack, the fact that none were used shows that he did not have them and was never an immediate threat. Actions always speak louder than words.

[alcohol]

Well GZ Bush used forged documents to prove that Iraq had a nuclear weapons program. That backfired. Maybe even Dubya isn't dumb enough to try that again. "Why hasn't this sneaky bastard, lying, cheating, dirty president simply had the CIA plant a half gallon of anthrax in some Iraqi home's basement and conveniently have the special ops folks find it? " Then again he might. And the mobile chemical lab claims might be false to!