The Scandal That Will Bring Obama Down

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

What I find fascinating is that I posted this back in September as one possible theory as why what happened happened. The dissembling of the White House, the persecution of the film maker, the motive of the blind sheik, and Egypt's Morrisey. I guess there is more to this than meets the eye. As former Speaker of the House Jim Wright said, the serious of the charge demands an investigation.

What YOU find fascinating is a lava lamp!

You're no closer to the truth now then back when you shocked the world with your theory!

[CJ7]

As former Speaker of the House Jim Wright said, the serious of the charge demands an investigation.



you sure Wright said that? ... sounds like words spoken by George "our children is learning" Bush ..

[essence]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I haven't told any lies, so no apology was necessary.

CoG, why can't you be more closely related to facts and stop lying?

I never said you 'told' lies.

I said you 'spread' lies.

Very different, to any of us who put any value on precision (which of course you do not).

So, in your statement above you lie about the accusation I made against you. You lied that I accused you of telling lies. Geddit? Probably not, from past experience.

So, again, CoG, you spread lies, why don't you apologise for the lies you (not doubt unwittingly) spread?

Note - I say 'his original lies' because in your original post, by spreading lies, you took at least partial ownership of those lies, even if they did not find their birth in your mushy brain.

When will you learn I am precise and am always, always correct?

While I am at it, did you ever learn about perfect, pluperfect, present, and subjunctive?

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by essence

CoG, why can't you be more closely related to facts and stop lying?

I never said you 'told' lies.

I said you 'spread' lies.

Very different, to any of us who put any value on precision (which of course you do not).

So, in your statement above you lie about the accusation I made against you. You lied that I accused you of telling lies. Geddit? Probably not, from past experience.

So, again, CoG, you spread lies, why don't you apologise for the lies you (not doubt unwittingly) spread?

Note - I say 'his original lies' because in your original post, by spreading lies, you took at least partial ownership of those lies, even if they did not find their birth in your mushy brain.

When will you learn I am precise and am always, always correct?

While I am at it, did you ever learn about perfect, pluperfect, present, and subjunctive?

You certainly like to accuse people of lying. It's sort of an obsession with you. You say you like to be "precise." You're really just nitpicking. Saying that there's a difference between spreading a lie as opposed to actually lying, is a distinction without a difference. You're being passive aggressive.

You remind me of Bill Clinton and his famous parsing of words. Using words with precision can increase the clarity of a message. It can also be used as a devise to deceive, as in the case of Bill Clinton. "It depends on what the meaning of the word is of is."

[Doove]

Sometimes i can only wonder if COG throws this shit out there, not to laugh at those of us who refute it, but to laugh at those of you who run with it.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

You certainly like to accuse people of lying. It's sort of an obsession with you. You say you like to be "precise." You're really just nitpicking. Saying that there's a difference between spreading a lie as opposed to actually lying, is a distinction without a difference. You're being passive aggressive.

."

There is a huge difference between those two distinctions.

Remember GW Bush lying about WMD's. Was he spreading lies or lying. I thought you righties said he was spreading lies that the CIA told him. Not actually lying.

Is there now no distinction between those two?

[Whirlaway]

GW Bush was neither spreading lies, nor lying....at the time the best assessment was that Iraq had WMDs.....almost every intelligence source believed it, including Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, John Kerry, and many many others in the US and around the world.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

GW Bush was neither spreading lies, nor lying....at the time the best assessment was that Iraq had WMDs.....almost every intelligence source believed it, including Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, John Kerry, and many many others in the US and around the world.

Maybe because George Bush kept telling them that.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

GW Bush was neither spreading lies, nor lying....at the time the best assessment was that Iraq had WMDs.....almost every intelligence source believed it, including Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, John Kerry, and many many others in the US and around the world.

Just because you believe something to be true does not mean it isn't a lie.

According to your way of thinking the Tooth Fairy is real. Children believe that shit, not adults.

Bush spread wtf turned out to be a lie. Of course you might be one of the people that believes that WMD's were moved to Syria, so for you , Bush not only did not tell a lie, he did not spread one.

[Whirlaway]

So Hillary Clinton and these other Democrats were spreading lies too?

Democrat Quotes on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction


"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 Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 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 Bill 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:
-- Democratic Senators 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 th! e 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 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

"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 always 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."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"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

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by WTF

There is a huge difference between those two distinctions.

Remember GW Bush lying about WMD's. Was he spreading lies or lying. I thought you righties said he was spreading lies that the CIA told him. Not actually lying.

Is there now no distinction between those two?

Bush didn't lie nor did he spread lies. The intelligence information about WMD's turned out to be inaccurate. That doesn't mean that it a was lie.

If a doctor misdiagnoses an illness because of an inaccurate lab report, he's not lying or spreading a lies. Being wrong doesn't necessarily mean you're lying. If my watch is running slow and I'm not aware of it, I may tell someone the wrong time; that doesn't mean I'm lying. Lying requires deliberate deception.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Doove

Maybe because George Bush kept telling them that.

So now you want to argue that your hero, Slick Willie the Perjuring Sexual Predator, was nothing more than a meat-puppet for W, Doofus?



"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.



"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.



And these were the same arguments used by Bill Clinton when he initiated his attack against Iraq, "Operation Desert Fox", in December of 1998.

"Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.

"Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world. . . .

"Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons. . . .

"And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them." President Clinton, Dec. 16, 1998
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stori...s/clinton.html

[fetishfreak]

The only Scandal that will bring Obama down is the 2016 election.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

Bush didn't lie nor did he spread lies. The intelligence information about WMD's turned out to be inaccurate. That doesn't mean that it a was lie.

If a doctor misdiagnoses an illness because of an inaccurate lab report, he's not lying or spreading a lies. Being wrong doesn't necessarily mean you're lying. If my watch is running slow and I'm not aware of it, I may tell someone the wrong time; that doesn't mean I'm lying. Lying requires deliberate deception.

Are you saying that a lie isn't a lie if the person telling it does not know it is a lie?

If I told Miss Texas I had a ten inch pecker and she told Miss Mississippi that I had a ten inch pecker and Miss Mississippi fuc'd me because she thought I had a ten inch pecker...you think Miss Mississippi wouldn't think that Miss Texas was spreading lies!

[fetishfreak]

Originally Posted by WTF

Are you saying that a lie isn't a lie if the person telling it does not know it is a lie?

If I told Miss Texas I had a ten inch pecker and she told Miss Mississippi that I had a ten inch pecker and Miss Mississippi fuc'd me because she thought I had a ten inch pecker...you think Miss Mississippi wouldn't think that Miss Texas was spreading lies!

Or she would think that Miss Texas doesn't know what 10 inches is!