Firearms Talk banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello all, from down on the farm in Western Oklahoma. Pack a SKYY CPX-1 9mm and hunt with a Norinco SKS and many shotguns but 22's are my favorites (ammos cheap and lightweight). Enjoy tearing up anything I can get my hands on or foot into. Jeeps and guns, what a good combo. Throw in a blonde bimbo and some gewd beer and call me happy slappy :D

But seriously, it's nice to see others here who are aware of the current state of our countries condition and knowledgable in the art of survival. That knowledge WILL be needed.

Interesting that some of Bush's speeches are word for word identical to that of Hitler's. :eek: Don't you think?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,964 Posts
Hello all, from down on the farm in Western Oklahoma. Pack a SKYY CPX-1 9mm and hunt with a Norinco SKS and many shotguns but 22's are my favorites (ammos cheap and lightweight). Enjoy tearing up anything I can get my hands on or foot into. Jeeps and guns, what a good combo. Throw in a blonde bimbo and some gewd beer and call me happy slappy :D

But seriously, it's nice to see others here who are aware of the current state of our countries condition and knowledgable in the art of survival. That knowledge WILL be needed.
Welcome to the forum!

Interesting that some of Bush's speeches are word for word identical to that of Hitler's. :eek: Don't you think?
Can you elaborate on that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Can you elaborate on that?
"An evil exists that threatens every man, woman and child of this great nation. We must take steps to ensure our domestic security and protect our homeland." - Adolf Hitler when announcing the Gestapo to the people. - George W. Bush when announcing the creation of "Homeland Security". :confused:

Look into the similarities of actions taken by both Hitler and Bush - very unnerving info to learn. :(

Another interesting note:
CNN reported 935 false statements made about Iraq by the Bush Administration in the 2 years following 911. :eek:
youtube.com/watch?v=4Ef3C7h52Cs
--------------------------------------------------------------
Waking up the masses and preparing for survival.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,964 Posts
"An evil exists that threatens every man, woman and child of this great nation. We must take steps to ensure our domestic security and protect our homeland." - Adolf Hitler when announcing the Gestapo to the people. - George W. Bush when announcing the creation of "Homeland Security". :confused:
I'll look into that. It's a line, not a speech, but would certainly be interesting if it were word-for-word the same.

Look into the similarities of actions taken by both Hitler and Bush - very unnerving info to learn. :(
You see what you want to see. Bush pisses me off for many legitimate reasons, but acting like Hitler isn't one of them because he doesn't.

Another interesting note:
CNN reported 935 false statements made about Iraq by the Bush Administration in the 2 years following 911. :eek:
youtube.com/watch?v=4Ef3C7h52Cs
Actually Bush Didn't Lie
By Dinesh D'Souza
Monday, January 28, 2008

Two leftist organizations have released a study that claims that the Bush administration lied about Iraq. Somehow I think we've heard that one before. Well, the two groups--the Center for Public Integrity and the Fund for Independence in Journalism--managed to secure major media attention by making the claim that the Bush administration released 935 false statements. Clearly no one was in the mood to read all 935, so the leftist groups boiled them down to 532. We hear that on 532 occasions the Bush administration claimed that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. So the claim is not that Bush told 532 lies, but that he told the same lie 532 times.

But consider this: If Bush actually knew that Iraq didn't possess weapons of mass destruction, and yet repeatedly told the American people that Iraq had them, didn't Bush expect that following the Iraq invasion his deception would be found out? When I raise this point with liberals on campus, they typically say, "Well, we're not saying that Bush knew for sure that there were no such weapons. We are saying that his administration stacked the data." But this is another way of saying that Bush actually believed that there were those weapons, and he mobilized whatever evidence he could muster to make his case. This may reflect prejudice against Saddam Hussein's motives or even imprudent decision making but it is hardly proof of lying.

Consider a similar decision made by President Roosevelt. In the period leading up to World War II, a group of refugee German scientists warned Albert Einstein that the Germans were building an atomic bomb. The project was headed by that country's greatest scientist, Werner Heisenberg. Acutely aware of the dangers of Hitler getting such a weapon, Einstein took this information in the fall of 1939 to President Roosevelt, who commissioned the Manhattan Project. America built the bomb, and later dropped two of them on Japan.

Many years later, Americans discovered that the Germans were nowhere close to building an atomic bomb. Their project was on the wrong track, and it seems to have stalled in its infancy. Some historians believe Heisenberg was trying to thwart the project from the inside. Be that as it may, in retrospect we now know that the intelligence that led to the Manhattan Project was wrong. But no one goes around saying, "Einstein lied" or "FDR lied." They didn't lie. They used the information they had to make a tough decision in a very dangerous situation.

The same is true of Bush. As a statesman, he had to act in the moving current of events. He didn't have the luxury of hindsight. To those leftist pundits who say, "Knowing what we know now, President Bush, why did you do what you did then?" Bush's answer is, "Obviously I didn't know what we know now." Acting against the somber backdrop of 9/11, Bush made a hard call based on an assessment of the intelligence provided to him.

He may have acted in haste, and he may have acted in error. But even this is not so clear. Do you recall recent reports from the CIA that Iran stopped working on its nuclear program in 2003? The reports were interpreted as a reversal for the Bush administration, because Bush has allegedly been trying to raise public concerns about Iran’s nuclear program. But many people forgot to ask why Iran’s mullahs decided to suspend their nuclear program in 2003. That happens to be the time that America invaded Iraq. So it’s quite possible that the Iranian mullahs were deterred from their nuclear ambitions because of the fear that the U.S. military might call on them next.

Whatever you think of this analysis, there is no evidence that Bush made his decision about the Iraq war in bad faith. Therefore the claim that Bush lied is itself a lie.





Waking up the masses and preparing for survival.
You might find you get more traction citing irrefutable fact rather than spreading emotional leftist pap. Just my $0.02.

Bush is a big spender and absolutely not a fiscal conservative. He is ignoring Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution and not defending this country from invasion. He has signed into law gun control legislation that has no merit vis a vis the Constitution. Out of fear, he refuses to name fundamentalist Islam as the ideology and those who follow it as our enemy, and instead focuses on fighting a tactic: terror.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts
Welcome gunky.

...

Wow.

it didn't take you long to get into the thick of things here, did it?


.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,964 Posts
Welcome gunky.

...

Wow.

it didn't take you long to get into the thick of things here, did it?


.
Actually, he's fine -- we could use someone to stir the pot a little bit. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts
Actually, he's fine ...
I never meant to imply otherwise...


just noting that gunky isn't afraid to step in with both feet. I, of course, agree with you bkt... That's a Good Thing tm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
You see what you want to see. Bush pisses me off for many legitimate reasons, but acting like Hitler isn't one of them because he doesn't.
31 Similarities Between Hitler and President Bush

by Edward Jayne

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles3/Jayne_Hitler-Bush.htm
August 29, 2004
(revised from an earlier version posted March 29, 2003)

When President Bush decided to invade Iraq, his spokesmen began comparing Saddam Hussein to Adolph Hitler, the most monstrous figure in modern history. Everybody was therefore shocked when a high German bureaucrat turned the tables by comparing Bush himself with Hitler. As to be expected, she (the bureaucrat) was forced to resign because of her extreme disrespect for an American president. However, the resemblance sticks--there are too many similarities to be ignored, some of which may be listed here.

Like Hitler, President Bush was not elected by a majority, but was forced to engage in political maneuvering in order to gain office.


Like Hitler, Bush began to curtail civil liberties in response to a well-publicized disaster, in Hitler's case the Reichstag fire, in Bush's case the 9-11 catastrophe.


Like Hitler, Bush went on to pursue a reckless foreign policy without the mandate of the electorate and despite the opposition of most foreign nations.


Like Hitler, Bush has increased his popularity with conservative voters by mounting an aggressive public relations campaign against foreign enemies. Just as Hitler cited international communism to justify Germany's military buildup, Bush has used Al Qaeda and the so-called Axis of Evil to justify our current military buildup. Paradoxically none of the nations in this axis--Iraq, Iran and North Korea--have had anything to do with each other.


Like Hitler, Bush has promoted militarism in the midst of economic recession (or depression as it was called during the thirties). First he used war preparations to help subsidize defense industries (Halliburton, Bechtel, Carlyle Group, etc.) and presumably the rest of the economy on a trickle-down basis. Now he turns to the very same corporations to rebuild Iraq, again without competitive bidding and at extravagant profit levels.


Like Hitler, Bush displays great populist enthusiasm in his patriotic speeches, but primarily serves wealthy investors who subsidize his election campaigns and share with him their comfortable lifestyle. As he himself jokes, he treats these individuals at the pinnacle of our economy as his true political "base."


Like Hitler, Bush envisages our nation's unique historic destiny almost as a religious cause sanctioned by God. Just as Hitler did for Germany, he takes pride in his "providential" role in spreading his version of Americanism throughout the entire world.


Like Hitler, Bush promotes a future world order that guarantees his own nation's hegemonic supremacy rather than cooperative harmony under the authority of the United Nations (or League of Nations).


Like Hitler, Bush quickly makes and breaks diplomatic ties, and he offers generous promises that he soon abandons, as in the cases of Mexico, Russia, Afghanistan, and even New York City. The same goes for U.S. domestic programs. Once Bush was elected, many leaders of these programs learned to dread his making any kind of an appearance to praise their success, since this was almost inevitably followed by severe cuts in their budgets.


Like Hitler, Bush scraps international treaties, most notably the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, the Biological Weapons Convention, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the Convention on the Prohibition of Land Mines, the Chemical Weapons Convention, the Kyoto Global Warming Accord, and the International Criminal Court.


Like Hitler, Bush repeats lies often enough that they come to be accepted as the truth. Bush and his spokesmen argued, for example, that they had taken every measure possible to avoid war, than an invasion of Iraq would diminish (not intensify) the terrorist threat against the U.S., that Iraq was linked with Al Qaeda, and that nothing whatsoever had been achieved by U.N. inspectors to warrant the postponement of U.S. invasion plans. All of this was false. They also insisted that Iraq hid numerous weapons it did not possess since the mid-190s, and they refused to acknowledge the absence of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq since the early nineties. As perhaps to be expected, they indignantly accused others of deception and evasiveness.


Like Hitler, Bush incessantly shifted his arguments to justify invading Iraq--from Iraq's WMD threat to the elimination of Saddam Hussein, to his supposed Al Qaeda connection, to the creation of Iraqi democracy in the Middle East as a model for neighboring states, and back again to the WMD threat. As soon as one excuse for the war was challenged, Bush advanced to another, but only to shift back again at another time.


Like Hitler, Bush and his cohorts emphasize the ruthlessness of their enemies in order to justify their own. Just as Hitler cited the threat of communist violence to justify even greater violence on the part of Germany, the bush team justified the invasion of Iraq by emphasizing Hussein's crimes against humanity over the past twenty-five years. However, these crimes were for the most part committed when Iraq was a client-ally of the U.S. Our government supplied Hussein with illegal weapons (poison gas included), and there were sixty U.S. advisors in Iraq when these weapons were put to use (see NY Times, Aug. 18, 1992). U.S. aid to Iraq was actually doubled afterwards despite disclaimers from Washington that our nation opposed their use. President Reagan's special envoy Donald Rumsfeld personally informed Hussein of this one hundred percent increment during one of his two trips to Iraq at the time. He also told Hussein not to take U.S. disclaimers seriously.


Like Hitler, Bush takes pride in his status as a "War President," and his global ambition makes him perhaps the most dangerous president in our nation's history, a "rogue" chief executive capable of waging any number of illegal preemptive wars. He fully acknowledges his willingness to engage in wars of "choice" as well as wars of necessity. Sooner or later this choice will oblige universal conscription as well as a full-scale war economy.


Like Hitler, Bush continues to pursue war without cutting back on the peacetime economy. Additional to unprecedented low interest rates bestowed by the Federal Reserve, he has actually cut federal taxes twice by substantial amounts, especially for the top one percent of U.S. taxpayers, while conducting an expensive invasion and an even more expensive occupation of a hostile nation. As a result, President Clinton's $350 billion budget surplus has been reduced to a $450 billion deficit, comprising an unprecedented $800 billion decline in less than four years. At the same time the U.S. dollar has steadily dropped against currencies of both Europe and Japan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Like Hitler, Bush possesses a war machine much bigger and more effective than the military capabilities of other nations. With the extra financing obliged by the defeat and occupation of Iraq, Bush now relies on a "defense" budget well in excess of the combined military expenditures of the rest of the world. Moreover, the $416 billion defense package passed last week by Congress will probably need to be supplemented before the end of the year.


Like Hitler, bush depends on an axis of collaborative allies, which he describes as a "coalition of the willing," in order to give the impression of a broad popular alliance. These allies include the U.K. as compared to Mussolini's Italy, and Spain and Bulgaria, as compared to, well, Spain and Bulgaria, both of which were aligned with Germany during the thirties and World War II. As a result of their cooperation, Prime Minister Blair's diplomatic reputation has been ruined in England, and a surprising election defeat has produced an unfriendly government in Spain. The Philippines have withdrawn their troops from Iraq to save the life of a hostage, and other defections can be expected in the near future.


Like Hitler, Bush is willing to go to war over the objections of the U.N. (League of Nations). His Iraq invasion was illegal and therefore a war crime as explained by Articles 41 and 42 of the U.N. Charter, which require two votes, not one, by the Security Council before any state takes such an action. First a vote is needed to explore all possibilities short of warfare (in Iraq's case through the use of U.N. inspectors), and once this has been shown to be fruitless, a second vote is needed to permit military action. U.S. and U.K. delegates at the Security Council prevented this second vote once it was plain they lacked a majority. This was because other nations on the Security Council were satisfied with the findings of U.N. inspectors that no weapons of mass destruction had yet been found. Minus this second vote, the invasion was illegal. Bush also showed in the process that he has no qualms about bribing, bullying, and insulting U.N. members, even tapping their telephone lines. This was done with undecided members of the Security Council as well as the U.N. Secretary General when the U.S.-U.K. resolution was debated preceding the invasion.


Like Hitler, Bush launches unilateral invasions on a supposedly preemptive basis. Just as Hitler convinced the German public to think of Poland as a threat to Germany in 1939 (for example in his Sept. 19 speech), Bush wants Americans to think of Iraq as having been a "potential" threat to our national security--indeed as one of the instigators of the 9-11 attack despite a complete lack of evidence to support this claim.


Like Hitler, Bush depends on a military strategy that features a "shock and awe" blitzkrieg beginning with devastating air strikes, then an invasion led by heavy armored columns.


Like Hitler, Bush is willing to inflict high levels of bloodshed against enemy nations. Between 20,000 and (more probably) 37,000 are now estimated to have been killed, as much as a ro-1 kill ratio compared to the more than 900 Americans killed. In other words, for every U.S. fatality, probably as many as forty Iraqi have died.


Like Hitler, Bush is perfectly willing to sacrifice life as part of his official duty. This would be indicated by the unprecedented number of prisoners executed during his service as governor of Texas. Under no other governor in the history of the United States were so many killed.


Like Hitler, Bush began warfare on a single front (Al Qaeda quartered in Afghanistan), but then expanded it to a second front with Iraq, only to be confronted with North Korea and Iran as potential third and fourth fronts. Much the same thing happened to Hitler when he advanced German military operations from Spain to Poland and France, then was distracted by Yugoslavia before invading the USSR in 1941. Today, bush seems prevented by the excessive costs of the Iraqi debacle from going to war elsewhere if reelected, but not through any lack of desire.


Like Hitler, Bush has no qualms about imposing "regime change" by installing Quisling-style client governments backed by a U.S. military occupation with both political and economic control entirely in the hands of Americans. It is no surprise that Iyad Alawi, Iraq's current temporary prime minister, was once affiliated with the CIA and has been reliably reported by the Australian press to have executed six hooded prisoners with a handgun to their heads just a day or two before his appointment a couple weeks ago.


Like Hitler, Bush curtails civil liberties in captive nations and depends on detention centers (i.e., concentration camps) such as a Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, and any number of secret interrogation centers across the world. Prisoners at the camps go unidentified and have no legal rights as ordinarily guaranteed by the Geneva Conventions. They have also been detained indefinitely (for 2 ½ years already at Guantanamo Bay), though there is mounting evidence that many are innocent of what they have been charged--some, for example, having been randomly seized by Northern Alliance troops in Afghanistan for an automatic bounty from U.S. commanders. Moreover, many Iraqi prisoners have been tortured, in many instances just short of death. Recent U.S. documents disclose that as many twenty have died while being tortured, and twenty others have died under unusual circumstances yet to be determined.


Like Hitler, Bush uses the threat of enemies abroad to stir the fearful allegiance of the U.S. public. For example, he features public announcements of possible terrorist attacks in order to override embarrassing news coverage or to crowd from headlines positive coverage of Democratic Party activities. He also uses the threat of terrorism to justify extraordinary domestic powers granted by the Patriot Act. Even the books we check out of public libraries can be kept on record by federal agents.


Like Hitler, Bush depends on a propaganda machine to guarantee sympathetic news management. In Hitler's case news coverage was totally dominated by Goebbels; in Bush's case reporters have been almost totally "imbedded" by both military spokesmen and wealthy media owners sympathetic with Bush. The most obvious case is the Fox news channel, owned and controlled by Rupert Murdoch. Not surprisingly, recent polls indicate that the majority of Fox viewers still think Hussein played a role in the 9-11 attack.


Like Hitler, Bush increasingly reduces the circle of aides he feels he can trust as his policies keep boomeranging at his own expense. Just as Hitler ended up isolated in his headquarters, with few individuals granted access, Bush is now said to be limiting access primarily to Attorney General Ashcroft (who also talks with God on a regular basis) as well as Karl Rove, the Vice President, Karen Hughes, and a few others. Both Secretary of State Powell and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld are now said to be out of the loop.


Like Hitler, Bush has become obsessed with his vision of conflict between good (U.S. patriotism) and evil (anti-Americanism. Many in contact with the White House are said to be worried that he is beginning to lose touch with reality--perhaps resulting from the use of medication that seriously distorts his judgment. Possibly symptomatic of this concern is the increasing number of disaffected government officials who leak embarrassing documents.


Like Hitler, bush takes pleasure in the mythology of frontier justice. As a youth Hitler read and memorized the western novels of Karl May, and Bush retains into his maturity his fascination with simplistic cowboy values. He also exaggerates a cowboy twang despite his C-average elitist education at Andover, Yale, and Harvard.


Like Hitler, Bush misconstrues Darwinism, in Hitler's case by treating the Aryan race as being superior on an evolutionary basis, in Bush's case by rejecting science for fundamentalist creationism.

Of course countless differences may be listed between Hitler and President Bush, most of which are to the credit of Bush. Nevertheless, the resemblances listed here are striking, especially since Bush's first term in office must be compared with Hitler's performance as German Chancellor through the year 1937, preceding the chain of events immediately preceding World War II. In any case, George W. Bush seems the worst and most dangerous U.S. president in recent memory (for me since Roosevelt)--if not in the entire history of the United States.

You might find you get more traction citing irrefutable fact rather than spreading emotional leftist pap. Just my $0.02.
There is no left or right, right or wrong, democrats or republicans. Just informed and aware or uninformed and delusional. Just my $0.02. However I would never expect most sheep to ever understand such a simple concept as this.:eek:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,964 Posts
31 Similarities Between Hitler and President Bush

by Edward Jayne

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles3/Jayne_Hitler-Bush.htm
August 29, 2004
(revised from an earlier version posted March 29, 2003)

When President Bush decided to invade Iraq, his spokesmen began comparing Saddam Hussein to Adolph Hitler, the most monstrous figure in modern history. Everybody was therefore shocked when a high German bureaucrat turned the tables by comparing Bush himself with Hitler. As to be expected, she (the bureaucrat) was forced to resign because of her extreme disrespect for an American president. However, the resemblance sticks--there are too many similarities to be ignored, some of which may be listed here.
What a foreigner says about my President doesn't matter to me.

Like Hitler, President Bush was not elected by a majority, but was forced to engage in political maneuvering in order to gain office.
That's revisionist crap. In 2000 it was Gore who engaged in political maneuvering in order to get the Florida count to favor him. He failed. Recount after recount after the SCOTUS put an end to Gore's shenanigans showed Bush won by an even wider margin. Bush unquestionably beat Kerry in '04.

Clinton didn't win by a majority, either, by the way.


Like Hitler, Bush began to curtail civil liberties in response to a well-publicized disaster, in Hitler's case the Reichstag fire, in Bush's case the 9-11 catastrophe.
What civil liberties have you lost as a result of 9/11 and, say, the passing of the Patriot Act?

I'm no fan of the Act. But I am curious to know how you can compare what Hitler did -- total firearm confiscations, forcing Jews to wear yellow Stars of David, segregation, destroying and stealing property of Jews, etc. -- to the hardships you have faced since 9/11.

Like Hitler, Bush went on to pursue a reckless foreign policy without the mandate of the electorate and despite the opposition of most foreign nations.
More revisionist horse****. The electorate was most certainly behind Bush in both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Endless Democrat and media harping on "Where are the WMDs?" is what turned favor against the Iraq war.

First, we do not need permission of other countries to defend ourselves. Second, the United Nations along with those countries most against our going to Iraq -- France, Germany, Russia and China -- were breaking international law by circumventing U.N. resolutions and selling Hussein weapons material in exchange for oil certificates all under the guise of bringing food to those starving in Iraq (particularly, the Kurds).

Like Hitler, Bush has increased his popularity with conservative voters by mounting an aggressive public relations campaign against foreign enemies. Just as Hitler cited international communism to justify Germany's military buildup, Bush has used Al Qaeda and the so-called Axis of Evil to justify our current military buildup. Paradoxically none of the nations in this axis--Iraq, Iran and North Korea--have had anything to do with each other.
I'm a conservative and I can't stand Bush. His P.R. campaign sucks out loud! ****, look at MichaelYon-online.com and milblogs and what you'll read there is very different -- and usually a lot better news -- than anything you'll see on the conventional news sources. If Bush were like Hitler, he'd have employed someone like Goebbels. Obviously, he hasn't. Iraq (until Hussein was removed), Iran and DPRK all have one thing in common: they hate the United States.

Like Hitler, Bush has promoted militarism in the midst of economic recession (or depression as it was called during the thirties). First he used war preparations to help subsidize defense industries (Halliburton, Bechtel, Carlyle Group, etc.) and presumably the rest of the economy on a trickle-down basis. Now he turns to the very same corporations to rebuild Iraq, again without competitive bidding and at extravagant profit levels.
Hitler promoted militarism to bring Germany up and out of a severe economic depression suffered as as result of paying WWI reparations. Spending on the military today is not causing a recession, or it's certainly not the only cause.

Like Hitler, Bush displays great populist enthusiasm in his patriotic speeches, but primarily serves wealthy investors who subsidize his election campaigns and share with him their comfortable lifestyle. As he himself jokes, he treats these individuals at the pinnacle of our economy as his true political "base."
Bush can't utter a pair of sentences without butchering the grammar or mispronouncing a word, and that's with a prepared speech. Bush has none of the charisma Hitler enjoyed.

Bush is a globalist and does cater to large international businesses. Hitler wanted to make Germany "über alles". Their goals were far apart.

Like Hitler, Bush promotes a future world order that guarantees his own nation's hegemonic supremacy rather than cooperative harmony under the authority of the United Nations (or League of Nations).
No, not at all. He embraces a system where corporations control wealth, political power and military might. That has nothing to do with this country or our Constitution.

Like Hitler, Bush quickly makes and breaks diplomatic ties, and he offers generous promises that he soon abandons, as in the cases of Mexico, Russia, Afghanistan, and even New York City. The same goes for U.S. domestic programs. Once Bush was elected, many leaders of these programs learned to dread his making any kind of an appearance to praise their success, since this was almost inevitably followed by severe cuts in their budgets.
I'm thinking that's a load of crap. Bush may have reneged on deals, but they need to be put into context. What have past presidents done? What percentage of deals have fallen through versus the number that have not?

Like Hitler, Bush repeats lies often enough that they come to be accepted as the truth. Bush and his spokesmen argued, for example, that they had taken every measure possible to avoid war,
Like negotiations with Hussein, applying pressure on Iraq's neighbors and wasting 14 months with the U.N. trying to get a resolution passed that had consequences for Hussein failing to abide by the resolutions.

than an invasion of Iraq would diminish (not intensify) the terrorist threat against the U.S.,
I guarantee you the recidivism rate for all AQ killed in Iraq and Afghanistan is 0. If you're lamenting the death toll of Americans, some 3900 since the war began and as of this writing, you might also consider lamenting the deaths of over 4000 unarmed, innocent Americans every year at the hands of illegal aliens.

that Iraq was linked with Al Qaeda,
And the 9/11 Commission confirmed that. What is important to note is that no one in the Bush administration ever said, even once, that Iraq had a hand in 9/11. They did say 9/11 was an obvious act of terror and that Hussein was known to have had WMDs and that he actively supports terrorism. All of those statements are true.

and that nothing whatsoever had been achieved by U.N. inspectors to warrant the postponement of U.S. invasion plans.
The role of the U.N. was to go to Iraq to learn about past WMD programs and to ascertain how, when and where WMD stockpiles had been destroyed. Their charter was NOT to find a needle in a haystack. Absolutely no progress had been made by the U.N. teams.

All of this was false.
Well, it seems that way when you revise history the way you've done.

They also insisted that Iraq hid numerous weapons it did not possess since the mid-190s, and they refused to acknowledge the absence of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq since the early nineties. As perhaps to be expected, they indignantly accused others of deception and evasiveness.
The day Bush and Powell first spoke at the U.N. General Assembly to request a new resolution against Iraq, Hans Blix also spoke. He said that as of 1998, his team has visually cataloged 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin, 25,000 liters of anthrax, and material for sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.

All we wanted was confirmation these known stockpiles had been destroyed and to verify no new WMD programs had been started.

Even yesterday, the Wall Street Journal had an article in which George Piro, the Lebanese-born FBI interrogator for Hussein confirmed that "He wanted to pursue all of WMD. So he wanted to reconstitute his entire WMD program." at his earliest opportunity: once eyes were off Iraq and sanctions were mostly ignored.


I'm not going to reply just now to your other page. What's written here is easily refuted, and I expect Page 2 is more of the same.

There is no left or right, right or wrong, democrats or republicans. Just informed and aware or uninformed and delusional. Just my $0.02. However I would never expect most sheep to ever understand such a simple concept as this.
And if you agree with that article, you, my friend, appear to be the one who has slammed down a big, ice-cold glass of Bush Derangement Syndrome Kool-Aid.

We agree Bush is not a good president. You have your reasons, which I personally believe are mostly if not completely unfounded. I have my own reasons. We can work together to get a better person in the Oval Office, or we can argue about recent history and who-said-what-when.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
BKT, I won't bother to quote all of that, but Bravo Zulu to you! Well said! That article might have had a little more credibility if it hadn't started out with the "Selected, not elected" pity-party crap! :rolleyes:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,964 Posts
Thanks, sgnellett. Each one of those comments in the article could have rebuttals pages long to show in what ways they are wrong.

That's the thing about propagandist lies: keep them short and easy to remember, plausible (particularly when they build on one another), and make sure the accusations are terrible so you can rally support. That works fine if the people you're telling the lies to don't know the truth or don't have an inclination to dig to confirm the truth.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Kinda looks quiet today, but I have not looked around much yet.
Hi to whoever is out there. I'm among the working retired, and used to be into handguns way back, and have decided to take them up again. There are a number of supporting rationalizations to that, including that my wife has expressed the desire to up-gun and begin personal carry due to street risks increasing where she works and where we live. First shooting ever near us was just last week with new neighborhood. This all was farmland and most still is.

Happy Super Bowl Sunday and no, I'm not going to be on very long today.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,964 Posts
Welcome, yumarick. Sorry to hear about the decline of your neighborhood. Hopefully, the good guys can take it back before it gets too bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,888 Posts
Old thread and I've never heard of the crap the bump caused. Me thinky they need to be ousted by a mod for fear they are codes for something we need to quell. If I were a mod, both the coded messages would be axed no questions asked, but I am not a mod.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top