OT: Poll: Bush Regime Most Corrupt in History?

[GZsound]

Well again the "war for oil" mantra pops up.

 

Telling our soldiers to protect the oil wells at all costs somehow makes the liberal community angry.

 

These are the same folks who supported the destruction of 75 million barrels of oil a day when Saddam lit the oil wells on fire during the first gulf war..I guess.

 

These are the same environmentally sensitive folk who wanted another conflagration like the thousands of wells that were burning in 1991.

 

These are the same folks who claimed the military was directed to protect the oil wells instead of the museum's that were being looted.. of course, they found most of the "looted" treasures. And of course, we all know you have to guard treasures that might be looted instead of guarding against environmental disaster.

 

These are the same folk who claim "war for oil" even though we are pumping millions of gallons of oil right now with no profit going to the United States but rather back to the Iraq's.

 

I wonder why the Sierra Club, etc. aren't congratulating Mr. Bush for saving the environmental disaster in Iraq by directing troops to protect the oil wells?

[alcohol_]

Chuck,

 

Maybe you should read the newspapers or watch tv or do something to keep yourself informed, because the reported explanation was that the WMD were destroyed during the 91 war. Of course that isn't satisfying, so even though we claimed to have surveillance that could detect the WMD we lack the surveillance to detect their transfer to other countries. Even though we believed Saddam had them and used them "on his own people" he had grown morally and refrained from using them against US soldiers. I mean that really makes sense. He has them but he won't use them against us, because ..............

 

 

Yes, there were a multitude of reasons for getting rid of Saddam, but the reason given for why we couldn't wait was the WMD. That was the main reason. The main reason turned out to be a lie.

 

There's a moral lesson here. It's an ancient belief that the ends don't justify the means. That using nefarious means to get to your goals is corrupting. That's the problem with the critic, the invasion of Iraq is morally corrupt. The invasion of Iraq was justified on lies and the main purpose, to find WMD, has been a failure at a tragic cost.

 

Of course, if you championed an action that turned out to have tragic consequences you're facing a dilemma. Can you admit that your decisions were wrong and came at the cost of thousand of lives? I can see the motive to be less than truthful to others and yourself.

 

So I'm off to Mont Tremblant, Canada and I won't be around to keep you all focussed on the facts.

 

see ya!

[Philter]

Like I thought, sourmash turned out to be a one trick pony. Conservative arguments sound good until you actually have to try supporting them! It's always a position coming from the basest human instincts- me first, hurt the other guy worse than he hurt me. Straight out of the animal kingdom.

 

Mark, did you forget about the 100% markup that Halliburton was taking on that oil you're talking about? How about all the no-bid contracts awarded to friends of the administration? there's no end to the war profiteering going on here, and almost all of it is by companies directly related to the administration, who started the war by telling lies. For Christ's sake, Dick Cheney was on the board at Halliburton. How can you fail to see the corruption? It's plain as day.

[Saint Johnny B]

Right! Bush and Cheney committ the biggest political crimes of the century, lie, steal, cheat, and kill, and the conservatives defend him by saying "We are doing it for their own good." About as believable as the "Boy who cried wolf."

 

No Nukes and No Missles = Lies, death, oil, and no bid contracts.

[Griffinator]

Now you're just banging your head on a brick wall, Alc.

 

Mark will never acknowledge the obvious conclusion in this situation. He's too wrapped up in the idea that somehow, Republican is right and Democrat is wrong, despite the middle ground, where people are right and people are wrong, no matter what party they belong to.

 

G Dubya is every bit as wrong in this situation as Teddy Kennedy was at Chappaquidik (sp?). No matter. He won't see Dubya's wrongs any sooner than the Dems saw Teddy's wrongs.

 

(edit)

 

Actually, I'm wrong. Mark is already on record as stating that he thought Reagan was a buffoon.

 

Chuck, OTOH...

[Saint Johnny B]

No doubt Teddy scewed up, but he was young and probably drunk and it was more like a stupid accident that got covered up. But Bait and Switch Bush and the Big Dick C., now they are old and have many advisors to help them, trouble is the magnitude of the crimes far exceed anything Teddy may have done. The motives are also far different, one was embarassment and other possible personal consequences, whereas, with Bait and Switch Bush, it is about greed. And Bush's greed has negative worldwide consequences, death and destruction which are orders of magnitude larger. Plus, Bush and Cheney's mismanagement have resulted in Billions and Trillions of Dollars being wasted on fraudulent schemes.

 

Bait and Switch Bush's Administration has to be the most corrupt in history.

[Saint Johnny B]

Billions and Trillions of Taxpayer Dollars Wasted on Fraud and Abuse!

[Chuck Moore]

Maybe you should read the newspapers or watch tv or do something to keep yourself informed, because the reported explanation was that the WMD were destroyed during the 91 war.

First, just because someone reaches different conclusions than you, it does not mean they are uninformed. Thanks for giving an answer though, as thats more than most of the left will attempt. It's usually more like "Bush lied, no WMD, 'what do you think happened to the WMD?'......... uhhhhhhhh .............. silence..... Bush lied !!" As far as all the WMD's beeing destroyed in '91, that is not what people in both parties here, in Both of the past administrations, in the UN, and most every other source for more than a decade were saying. It also doesn't match the actions of the Regime, as they spent a lot of time and effort thwarting the efforts of Blix and his merry band of inspectors, and refusing access to sites and interviews with scientists. But hey, ya never know, Sadamm may have only been ACTING like he was hiding them in order to draw us into a war...

 

Of course, if you championed an action that turned out to have tragic consequences you're facing a dilemma.

Well Most people don't consider the liberation of 25 million people and the removal of a brutal dangerous tyrant as "tragic". At least most Americans anyway, by a 2 to 1 margin according to latest polling data.

[Mr.WOW]

just banging your head on a brick wall

[Philter]

Originally posted by Chuck Moore:

Maybe you should read the newspapers or watch tv or do something to keep yourself informed, because the reported explanation was that the WMD were destroyed during the 91 war.

First, just because someone reaches different conclusions than you, it does not mean they are uninformed. Thanks for giving an answer though, as thats more than most of the left will attempt. It's usually more like "Bush lied, no WMD, 'what do you think happened to the WMD?'......... uhhhhhhhh .............. silence..... Bush lied !!" As far as all the WMD's beeing destroyed in '91, that is not what people in both parties here, in Both of the past administrations, in the UN, and most every other source for more than a decade were saying. It also doesn't match the actions of the Regime, as they spent a lot of time and effort thwarting the efforts of Blix and his merry band of inspectors, and refusing access to sites and interviews with scientists. But hey, ya never know, Sadamm may have only been ACTING like he was hiding them in order to draw us into a war...

 

Of course, if you championed an action that turned out to have tragic consequences you're facing a dilemma.

Well Most people don't consider the liberation of 25 million people and the removal of a brutal dangerous tyrant as "tragic". At least most Americans anyway, by a 2 to 1 margin according to latest polling data.

You forget that before the war, Blix had two conclusions... the Iraqis were showing a new willingness to cooperate, and he couldn't find any WOMD's.

 

We had the information before the war, but Bush chose to hype a lot of false data in order to get the war he wanted.

 

And now all his buddies are profiting from it, while the US deficit spirals out of control and thousands of US soldiers come home injured or dead.

[Chuck Moore]

You forget that before the war, Blix had two conclusions... the Iraqis were showing a new willingness to cooperate, and he couldn't find any WOMD's.

No, I remember Sadamms last ditch attempt at stalling and trying to delay, which fooled noone but Blix and the UN. Well maybe some radical left wingers bought it here too. Interesting they would believe Sadamm and call Bush a liar...............

[Saint Johnny B]

Saddam was a weak little wastrel from the get go, he could not even mount a defense of his country which would rise to the level of "war." Thus, what Bush and Cheney ordered can only be considered a slaughter, a genocidal attack on an undefended people who happen to occupy land that contains vast resources of oil.

 

Why?

Money and oil.

Money and oil.

Money and oil.

 

And,

No Bid Contracts.

No Bid Contracts.

No Bid Contracts.

 

Why?

Money. Lots of it.

Money. Lots of it.

Money. Lots of it.

[Saint Johnny B]

Bait and Switch Bush is the most corrupt criminal to occupy the White House!

[Chuck Moore]

so........didja manage to get a hold of any of those straws your grasping at?

[Saint Johnny B]

No, and I did not get my hands on a single dollar of the 160 Billion Bush and Cheney are seeing go into certain friendly pockets.

 

BTW, did anybody find any Nukes or Missles today?

No??? I'm shocked. It's still just those forged and fake documents that Bush and Cheney knowingly tried to pass off as the real thing.

 

But, hey, those "No Bid Contracts," now those things are the real deal.

 

All according to the old neocon plan, eh?

[Chuck Moore]

You didn't get any of it????? Man, no wonder your so pissed. Hell Bush sent me about a quarter million in kickbacks in return for that 50 bucks I gave his campaign in 2000. And he's syphoning off a hundred grand for me every time I stick up for him in a post too!!!!........I wonder if this one counts...........

[GZsound]

Originally posted by Philter:

Mark, did you forget about the 100% markup that Halliburton was taking on that oil you're talking about?

 

No.. I didn't forget about it because we are talking about two different things. Haliburtom is not "taking a markup" on the oil we are pumping from Iraq to Turkey. Iraq is getting the money from their own oil, not Halliburton.

 

Haliburton is accused of "marking up" fuel costs to the coalition. However, I really suggest you read what is going on in that investigation and who set the prices and if indeed Haliburton did something wrong. I won't defend Haliburton, but conversely I am not going to simply bash with no proof like you guys. Wait for the investigation.

 

How about all the no-bid contracts awarded to friends of the administration? there's no end to the war profiteering going on here, and almost all of it is by companies directly related to the administration, who started the war by telling lies. For Christ's sake, Dick Cheney was on the board at Haliburton. How can you fail to see the corruption? It's plain as day.

 

First off, I have never, ever, said this administration was not corrupt. You must have me confused with someone else. I have said repeatedly that ALL administrations are corrupt. That has been the main point of most of my posts. Those of you who hate Bush seem to act like corruption suddenly showed up in the White House when he was elected. Sorry to burst your bubble, but our government is saturated with corruption and has been since it was founded. This is the main reason I am strongly against more government funded social programs.. over half the money is lost in fraud and corruption.

 

And the rebuilding in WWII was done by no bid contracts. the rebuiling in Kosovo was done by no bid contracts. There are some specialist companies like Haliburton. The company that was contracted to put out the oil well fires during the first gulf war was a specialist company that was hired under no bid contracts.

 

I'm not defending the practice of having no bid contracts. But every administration in history has done it. I'm suggesting you guys might want to find another subject that actually matters.

 

And finding the WMD and the Iraq/Al Queda discussions.

 

No matter what information is printed. No matter what connection between the Iraqi government representatives and the Al Queda group, no matter what reasons are given for where the WMD are, where they were (remember in 1998 Clinton had proof they existed..thus the unilateral bombing), it simply does not matter.

 

The people who repeat over and over "Bush Lied" will accept no reports, no publications, no intelligence reports, etc. that go against their inbred mantra.

 

Any information that has been found and reported that shows strong links between Iraq and Al Queda, WMD programs, hidden WMD, etc. is instantly discarded as right wing garbage.

 

Why should we bother to respond when the extreme left accepts nothing that counters the mantra?

 

The National Review has reported about links. Husseins own scientists have given us information regarding the WMD.. But the extreme left seems to know better than anyone. Why argue?

[Saint Johnny B]

You know it is a little strange to say you will wait for an investigation and its results before concluding that Halibuton and Cheney are commiting fraud, but you were entirely ready to have Bush start dropping the big ones on the innocent civilans well before the investigation provided any proof of a current threat by way of Nukes and Missles. Double standard?

 

The reasons that people are quick to point out that Bush and Cheney lied is because they did lie. Off the top, it is beyond credulity to suggest that Saddam had these things and then refused to use them when the invaders came and occupied his country. Further, I don't think he would have been found hiding in a hole if had any thing of consequence. He would have used them to bargain for his own freedom. Didn't happen. Thus, he had nothing approaching a threat to the entire USA to begin with, and Bush and Cheney knew, or should have known it. And that my friend makes Bush and Cheney unethical, immoral, liars who deliberately decided to lie in order to begin their program of mass genocide on a people to displace them from their land and steal their oil.

Bush and Cheney are criminals, no different from Stalin, Hitler, Mengele, and host of other bad actors the world has seen throughout history.

 

To now say, "We only did it for their own good, we wanted to give them a democratic form of government," is sort of like the hue and cry raised when certain individuals decided to make excessive profits when they spread similar lies and propaganda to attempt to justify their decision to commit genocide on American Indians.

 

I am, however, glad that you admit that the Bush/Cheney Regime is corrupt.

[Philter]

That's a good point Johnny made about a double standard! Now we should wait and see? Then WTF where we doing when we started dropping bombs and invading?

 

I'll tell you Mark, right now I'm feeling the Washington Post to be pretty much down-the-middle as far as reporting goes. They supported the war, so you can't call them left-wing. They ditch on Howard Dean non-stop. And when they actually report on anything supporting Bush's prewar claims, I'll be the first to notice.

 

But they haven't.

[Mr.WOW]

our government is saturated with corruption and has been since it was founded. This is the main reason I am strongly against more government funded social programs.. over half the money is lost in fraud and corruption.

[Saint Johnny B]

Sorry, it's an established fact that Bush and Cheney are documented liars, however, Saddam sure appears to have been a strawman in the twisted, fraudulent argument that Bush and Cheney attempted to pass off.

[GZsound]

Originally posted by Johnny B:

You know it is a little strange to say you will wait for an investigation and its results before concluding that Halibuton and Cheney are commiting fraud, but you were entirely ready to have Bush start dropping the big ones on the innocent civilans well before the investigation provided any proof of a current threat by way of Nukes and Missles. Double standard?

 

I realize you have no capacity for common sense but.. I did not support the war in Iraq. I had a very hard time understanding why we had to go when we did. I was more hoping for a global assault on terrorist camps, hideouts, command posts, etc. everywhere they existed.

 

I also have been dismayed at the lack of WMD hard evidence. It makes me wonder what happened to the WMD? He had them..that is proven. Clinton had intelligence he had them and bombed Iraq..proven. So the question is what happened to them? Iraqi scientists say they transferred them, burried them and destroyed some. I think we will find out.

 

The reasons that people are quick to point out that Bush and Cheney lied is because they did lie. Off the top, it is beyond credulity to suggest that Saddam had these things and then refused to use them when the invaders came and occupied his country.

 

As I just said, obviously the CIA thought he had the WMD. Obviously Clinton thought he had them..so I'm not sure who's credulity you are questioning? Your's perhaps?

 

Further, I don't think he would have been found hiding in a hole if had any thing of consequence. He would have used them to bargain for his own freedom. Didn't happen. Thus, he had nothing approaching a threat to the entire USA to begin with, and Bush and Cheney knew, or should have known it. And that my friend makes Bush and Cheney unethical, immoral, liars who deliberately decided to lie in order to begin their program of mass genocide on a people to displace them from their land and steal their oil.

 

So your suggestion of a double standard doesn't count when it's a democratic administration that bombs because of WMD?

 

And you throw out these unbelievable words with no concept of the truth.. Mass Genocide? Displacing people?

 

What are you smoking? Nobody left Iraq. There were hardly any refugees. And what constitutes a genocide? Have you looked up the word?

 

Bush and Cheney are criminals, no different from Stalin, Hitler, Mengele, and host of other bad actors the world has seen throughout history.

 

This is where you loose me completly. To make statements like this show you to be completely taken over with hate and totally blinded to reality.

 

To now say, "We only did it for their own good, we wanted to give them a democratic form of government," is sort of like the hue and cry raised when certain individuals decided to make excessive profits when they spread similar lies and propaganda to attempt to justify their decision to commit genocide on American Indians.

 

Discussing this with you is a huge waste of time.

 

I am sorry you hope for the continued use of torture chambers, rape, mass murder and, yes, your new favorite word..genocide, in Iraq.

 

I feel sorry for anyone that would hope for more grief being brought against the people of Iraq by Saddam. I'm sorry you seem to support him and his actions while condemning our administration.

 

I have no words for your lack of sympathy for the torture victims we have liberated.

 

You support the wrong side again. Pretty much says it all.

 

I am, however, glad that you admit that the Bush/Cheney Regime is corrupt.

 

And I am glad that at least one of us can see and understand the reality of our political world and our political forefathers. You and your tunnelvision become laughable in your lack of understanding.

 

You are such a sad small mind...

[Saint Johnny B]

Hey, I never once said Saddam was a saint, but is it not possible that some of those buried in the mass graves where killed in Gulf War I?

 

Anyway, what Bait and Switch Bush did is indefensible. He should have gone after OBL and caught him, esp. as Saddam had no current ability to even defend himself, let alone send some missles or nukes to my city. Bush and Cheney used the public's natural outrage over 9/11 to go after the wrong guy. As far as I'm concerned, there has been no justice for my cousin's untimely death. No justice at all. OBL is still on the loose, and btw, he and most of his cohorts came from Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. OBL and his family do "business" with the Bush Crime Family. There is a book you can buy at Amazon.com entitled "The Bush Crime Family," it is written by a former Brig. General of the US Armed Services.

 

Futhermore, it's not the USA's job to make unilaterial decisions to kill people all over the world, even if their leaders are bad. That's a local problem which the local citizens should handle. I understand that many, many Iraqi citizens are, and were, well-armed. To say that the local populace cannot band together and topple an evil or corrupt governement is to simply ignore history.

 

Now if you want to say it was an international problem involving international crimes, then the UN and the World Criminal Courts are the proper mechanisims to effectively deal with these kinds of issues. The Bush Regime just decided to go rushing in to carry out the Neocons Long-Term Plan for the region, they decided to act and begin the killing without any justifiable provocation and Bait and Switch Bush and Cheney made false claims knowing they were false to purposefully deceive the public, the world, and the US Congress. And the reason is the oil and the no bid contracts.

 

What "Bait and Switch Bush" did then, and is now doing, is the very essence of the definition of corruption.

[Chuck Moore]

Catch any of those straws yet.....thats Olympic caliber grasping there

[Mr.WOW]

Catch any of those straws yet.....thats Olympic caliber grasping there

[shniggens]

Now they're looking for the missing $40 billion that Saddam fessed up to having "displaced".

 

Hmmmmmmmm . . . is it possible that some of that went to terrorist sponsorhip?

 

I don't know, that's probably too far-fetched.

[Saint Johnny B]

Hey, I hear Asscroft disqualified himself from the CIA agent disclosure prosecution. That's a felony you know. So someone in the White House has committed a felony by the revelation, and covering it up is also a felony. It looks bad for Karl Rove and others in the corrupt Bush Regime.

[Chuck Moore]

Ashcroft's recusal can mean a couple of things.... could mean there is no leak, and he wants an independant investigator to determine that to avoid looking like any sort of coverup is occuring. Could also mean that he knows who the leak is, and wants to make sure proper procedures are followed regarding the disclosure of thier identity. Also bear in mind that the leak may or may not be a crime depending on the degree of knowledge and intent of the leaker. It is WAY to early to assume there has been a felony commited with no facts beeing yet disclosed. Then again facts aren't always neccessary to start hollering "felony" "crime family" "cover up" etc etc etc.

[pseudonym]

http://www.hermes-press.com/evolution_next.htm

[Funk Jazz]

Military Ending Halliburton Iraq Oil Deal