Jump to content

Dick Cheney shoots a man!


cityboi

Recommended Posts

^ Keep getting your information from the liberal spun media. I find it pointless to argue with you as You apparently have Your mind already made! You choose your informational outlets and i will choose mine and that IS what are country is all about. I respectfully disagree with your disdain abd opinion of current events. :w00t::w00t::w00t:

There is no such thing as the "liberal spun media". I admit this sounds good coming out of the entertainer Rush Limbaugh's mouth, but there is no such thing. This is another myth being spun by those in support of the President's policies because, as we see on this forum, there is no defense for his actions, so the obvious answer is to attack the messenger. In this case the media. With very few exceptions of minor news outlets, all media in the USA is ultimately controlled by a few corporate heads and they are very un-interested in changing the status quo. They will continue to report news in a fashion that keeps the real truth out of the hands of the American people.

That is why you don't see the caskets coming home, the maimed and injured soldiers, the devastated families (both here and in Iraq) destroyed by this unnecessary war, the horrors in the prisons that WE are running, etc etc. They don't want to rock the boat. I was around when the Vietnam war was raging, when the media was truely independant, and war coverage was much much different. And that was a liberal president they were going after. We even have republican heads of local news outlets that refuse to show memorials to the dead soldiers on their outlets. How liberal is that?

If the media was so liberal as was being charged, we would not have been treated to two straight years of whether Bill Clinton got a BJ from Monica. My my how times change when you get a bunch of neo-conservative chicken hawk people elected to office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Diplomocy was working with N. Korea, Iraq and Iran before Bush showed up. Relations where thawing with Tehran, N. Korea had given up bomb development, and Iraq had completely given up all WMD and Nuclear development.

We were told Iraq was an immediate threat to the USA by Bush, we went to war and found that wasn't the case. It was a big lie.

Now we are told that Iran is a big threat. Why should I believe a President that has already lied about this?

And co-incidently we are also told by this President that N. Korea is not a threat to the USA despite having the bomb now. Why is that? Because we won't invade them as that will put us up against his banker, China. And the Chinese won't have an invasion by the USA on the Korean penn.

The rhetoric about fighting a war now that is completely different is just that, rhetoric. A war on terror, which is nothing because you can't have a war on against an emotion, is really just a license to do anything including violating the constitution. If it is infact a war on Terrorists then lets see some numbers on how many terrorists have been captured, how many real plans that have been stopped, how many masterminds have been captured. etc etc. In otherwords declare war against something real, have some real measurable objectives, and a plan for meeting them.

The Bush administration has done none of this. Instead we are occupying a country that we illegally conquered, we have no plan for getting out, we are wasting $240,000,000/day there, and we are killing both americans and innocent Iraqis in the process. And we are beginning the 4th year of this madness next month. All in a country that has been proven, prior to the war, to not only not have any connection to the 9/11 terrorists, but also was never a threat to the USA or its allies. The Iraqi war (which Bush never mentions by name now) is all about War Profits, Vendettas, and Insane Neo-Conservative ideals.

Bush, and the Republican congress behind him are negligent of their duties to the people who elected them and should be expelled from office. And some should go to jail for lying to the people because the result were that lives were lost. Lives were Lost.

dpbaker, read the rules on quoting posts

Metro, I did read the rules just now. My apologies for the breach in quoting protocol! Now I know. That said,

if you really believe those three countries had given up weapons development, you are misguided. And the whole Bush lied thing, O.K. he lied unknowingly based on the intelligence as posessed by the former Clinton admin, France, Russia, Germany, Italy, Israel, Britain.......

You don't believe Iran is a big threat? So, you don't believe what the Europeans are saying now? Are not the Russians involved here for a reason? Do you actually believe the nut in control of Iran claiming their program is for peace while at the same time threatening to wipe Israel off the map and denying the holocaust? And just a few days ago holding a rally at a Tehran university about the merits of suicide-martytdom with an option to "sign-up" afterwards? Priorities?

If the president has indeed said N.Korea is no threat as you claim, then he is an idiot by that count. N.Korea is a threat on multiple fronts, nukes aside.

Terrorist attacks have been thwarted in Spain, Italy, England, the U.S.A., to name a few....I do agree with you; there needs to be a formal declaration that encompasses open war against any terrorist, related group, entity, or country that supports terrorists, not limited to radical Islamic groups.

Illegally conquered Iraq? According to who? The U.N.? Now there's a credible institution......yes, lives are lost in war, that is part of its nature. I guess the democrats that supported it too should also be held accountable and jailed. But let's remember, the innocents in Iraq are being killed by their fellow countrymen and other terrorists from abroad. Better that they do this there than here. Last time I checked, the American military was not indiscrimiately killing women and children with car bombs...

Metro, it's clear that we will never see eye to eye on this. You believe your sources, I believe mine, and we respectfully agree to disagree!!! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still believe lies were told to the American People to get us to support the war in Iraq which was planned as soon as Bush took office in 2000. 911 was used as an excuse to attack Iraq.

I use emotion for the many and reserve reason for the few.

By means of shrewd lies, unremittingly repeated, it is possible to make people believe that heaven is hell -- and hell heaven. The greater the lie, the more readily it will be believed.

How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.

-- Adolph Hitler

"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism ..."

- Hermann Goering, Nazi Reichsmarschall

"The great mass of people...will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one." ~ Mein Kampf

"I think party afiliations makes it even easier for the masses to believe lies because if you are republican you will believe everything the Bush administraion tells you. Of course that works both ways with democrats as well. When leaders pit parties against parties using social issues or religion, it makes it much easier to distract Americans from the real issues that matters to everyday people and for leaders to put to the forefront their own personal agendas." -- Cityboi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the first time I really re-thought my position on the war in Iraq (I used to be as Republican and pro-war and anti-liberal as the best of 'em) was when my friend came back from Iraq after 7 months of hell including breaking down doors in Fallujah and watching 5 of his friends die in a week, and told me that it wasn't worth it.

He said that what little progress was being made was by the soldiers themselves and that little support was coming from above. The only outreach they did was giving candy to children to "keep them from shooting us"

He said that people in Fallujah all had their houses destroyed in the operation there and then were given minimal supplies to rebuild. They were expected to rebuild their own houses after our military destroyed them. And you wonder why people aren't very receptive of our policies there?

I guess what I'm not sold on.. just what is this war all about? Why did we go? Is it WMDs? Freedom and democracy in the middle east? Oil? What is it? It changes week to week at the white house.

And what about 9/11? Who was behind that? Whatever happened to Osama bin Laden? I heard the other day, as Bush's secret spying was being attacked, he came out told us that there had been an attack on L.A's "Liberty" tower thwarted thanks to his program.. and he accused some Al Shiehk something guy of being behind 9/11... WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO BIN LADEN!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!!??!!??!?!?!?! Does Bush honestly think that we're just going to forget about him? If so, what an idiot.

First of all, it was Library tower, not Liberty tower. He never let L.A officials know about the attack plan. The mayor didn't know about it until he saw the statement on TV.

It was all a big lie. Bush is the master of spin. He spins EVERYTHING. He's so addicted to spinning things that he even spins spin.

I think what made me so fast in my beliefs now, however, came from my father. The man is a dyed-in-the-wool republican. I told him what my marine friend had said about Iraq, and his response was this: "Well, that's the opinion of a 20 year old."

tsk tsk.. it's too bad. Really, it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As another sign the war on terror is a really a war on american taxpayers to put money in certain people's projects, The Bush Administration has announced they are turning over control of a number of large USA ports to the United American Emierites. Forgetting the fact that we are supposed to be fighting a war "that is different" now but yet we don't care about turning over out ports to a foreign government, this is the same country where two 9/11 terrorists hailed from.

The UAE is not a democratic government and people there have few rights and the country served as a base for the hijackers who took part in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. They also argue the UAE was one of only three countries that recognized the Taleban as Afghanistan's legitimate government. The Bush process to select this country is yes, you guess it, "Secret".

If the Bush plan is approved, the UAE will own controll of the flowing ports:

  • New York

  • Newark

  • Baltimore

  • New Orleans

  • Miami

  • Philadelphia.

There was a time when we fought "wars" that we protected our ports from potential enemy sources instead of selling them these valuable resources. I hope by the time this man leaves office the permanent damage to this country can be fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As another sign the war on terror is a really a war on american taxpayers to put money in certain people's projects, The Bush Administration has announced they are turning over control of a number of large USA ports to the United American Emierites. Forgetting the fact that we are supposed to be fighting a war "that is different" now but yet we don't care about turning over out ports to a foreign government, this is the same country where two 9/11 terrorists hailed from.

The UAE is not a democratic government and people there have few rights and the country served as a base for the hijackers who took part in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. They also argue the UAE was one of only three countries that recognized the Taleban as Afghanistan's legitimate government. The Bush process to select this country is yes, you guess it, "Secret".

If the Bush plan is approved, the UAE will own controll of the flowing ports:

  • New York

  • Newark

  • Baltimore

  • New Orleans

  • Miami

  • Philadelphia.

There was a time when we fought "wars" that we protected our ports from potential enemy sources instead of selling them these valuable resources. I hope by the time this man leaves office the permanent damage to this country can be fixed.

monsoon, Our government is corrupt. Its just that plain and simple. Lets just hope social security will be around after I become a senior citizen in about 25 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As another sign the war on terror is a really a war on american taxpayers to put money in certain people's projects, The Bush Administration has announced they are turning over control of a number of large USA ports to the United American Emierites. Forgetting the fact that we are supposed to be fighting a war "that is different" now but yet we don't care about turning over out ports to a foreign government, this is the same country where two 9/11 terrorists hailed from.

The UAE is not a democratic government and people there have few rights and the country served as a base for the hijackers who took part in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. They also argue the UAE was one of only three countries that recognized the Taleban as Afghanistan's legitimate government. The Bush process to select this country is yes, you guess it, "Secret".

If the Bush plan is approved, the UAE will own controll of the flowing ports:

  • New York

  • Newark

  • Baltimore

  • New Orleans

  • Miami

  • Philadelphia.

There was a time when we fought "wars" that we protected our ports from potential enemy sources instead of selling them these valuable resources. I hope by the time this man leaves office the permanent damage to this country can be fixed.

What's the point of this department of homeland security if they are going to play games like this? This is so disappointing. Congress must put a halt to this, but I am not too optimistic about that happening. Outrageous is the only word that fits here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As another sign the war on terror is a really a war on american taxpayers to put money in certain people's projects, The Bush Administration has announced they are turning over control of a number of large USA ports to the United American Emierites. Forgetting the fact that we are supposed to be fighting a war "that is different" now but yet we don't care about turning over out ports to a foreign government, this is the same country where two 9/11 terrorists hailed from.

The UAE is not a democratic government and people there have few rights and the country served as a base for the hijackers who took part in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. They also argue the UAE was one of only three countries that recognized the Taleban as Afghanistan's legitimate government. The Bush process to select this country is yes, you guess it, "Secret".

If the Bush plan is approved, the UAE will own controll of the flowing ports:

  • New York

  • Newark

  • Baltimore

  • New Orleans

  • Miami

  • Philadelphia.

There was a time when we fought "wars" that we protected our ports from potential enemy sources instead of selling them these valuable resources. I hope by the time this man leaves office the permanent damage to this country can be fixed.

Something else too, a LOT of the money that financed 9/11 passed through U.A.E. banks in Dubai.

Metro, I'm totally with you on this. This is an OUTRAGE, plain and simple. Apparently there is some rapid-fire legislation going down soon to reverse this stupidity that will be finalized sometime in March I think. If anyboyd here is really passionate about this or gives a damn, then contact your representative and let them know!!! :angry::angry::angry::angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wrote all three of my representatives in congress on this issue. I think it's very important that our biggest ports are not in the control of a foreign government that harbors terrorists dollars.

Does our president care about national security? Or does he do everything that he does only to line the pockets of his friends.. be them oil barons, defense contracter, or otherwise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.