P2P-Zone  

Go Back   P2P-Zone > Political Asylum
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Political Asylum Publicly Debate Politics, War, Media.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 21-06-04, 11:09 AM   #1
Repo
Registered User
 
Repo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 123
Exclamation The Bush Gang...

It has become pretty much obvious to anyone but the hardened Bush supporters that Bush and his administration whether intentionally or unintentionally and I happen to believe intentionally, misled the American public to believe there was a working relationship between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Countless times Bush, Cheney and the rest of the Bush gang twisted their words to imply that Saddam was somehow connected to the 9-11 attacks and used their twisted words and logic to gather public support for a war with Iraq. But anyone with the slightest understanding of Middle East history knows that Saddam Hussein's secular Iraq was no favorite of bin Laden; the two didn't particularly like each other and the myth that bin Laden and Saddam were working together is as believable as Pat Robertson working with Senator Kerry to overthrow George W. Bush. It makes no sense except for those ignorant of the Middle East...

The Bush gang and their supporters like to call the Iraq War part of the war on terror but in fact it only became part of the war on terror after Bush took out Saddam and Iraq's borders letting the rogue terrorists into Iraq. Saddam was a dictator and dictators don't let Islamic fundamentalists run around their country for the simple reason they don't want to be overthrown by them...

Now the 9-11 commission has come out and stated the obvious, that Saddam Hussein had no "collaborative relationship" with bin Laden's al-Qaeda in regards to 9-11. This little fact is lost on the Bush gang who continue to claim a relationship existed between Saddam and bin Laden if for no other reason than to save face in front of the American people. The reasons Bush went to war with Iraq was due to the imminent danger of weapons of mass destruction and his linkage of Saddam to al-Qaeda, both reasons a year later have yet to be proven. That on top of lying that Saddam "sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa," lying that Saddam Hussein had portable mobile biological labs, lying that Saddam had unmanned drones that could drop biological weapons on the continental United States. The Bush gang also mislead the country claiming that overthrowing Iraq would be simple because the Iraqis would greet the Americans as liberators with candies and flowers not the improvised explosive devices and gunfire that American troops have been greeted with in their ongoing liberation...

Absolutely everything the Bush gang has said was either a lie or just plain wrong. So the Bush gang has no choice but to continue their travesty of reason because to admit that Saddam Hussein had no "collaborative relationship" with al-Qaeda would be to admit the war with Iraq was an error. So Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell and the rest of their gang continue to do what they do best, mislead the American public and deny the truth while American soldiers die for their mistakes...

Bill Clinton may have left a DNA stain in the Oval Office but Bush left a bloodstain, the bloodstain of the dead American soldiers. Taking the country to war under false pretenses isn't an impeachable offence but lying about sex is, talk about twisted logic...
Repo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-04, 12:03 PM   #2
JackSpratts
 
JackSpratts's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 10,013
Default

Quote:
Bill Clinton may have left a DNA stain in the Oval Office but Bush left a bloodstain.
clinton's book is called "my life." when bush's comes out it'll be called "my lies."

- js.
JackSpratts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-04, 03:29 PM   #3
jcmd62
Alpha Male
 
jcmd62's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: In Limbo
Posts: 2,005
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSpratts
clinton's book is called "my life." when bush's comes out it'll be called "my lies."

- js.
No Clinton never lied. Can someone say "impeachment".
jcmd62 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-04, 03:43 PM   #4
JackSpratts
 
JackSpratts's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 10,013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcmd62
No Clinton never lied. Can someone say "impeachment".
can someone say "witch hunt"? can someone say "aquitted"? show me a man or woman who never lied about sex and i'll show you...a liar.

- js.
JackSpratts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-04, 12:17 AM   #5
legion
I took both pills.
 
legion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Where 'strange' is a prerequisite.
Posts: 1,165
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcmd62
No Clinton never lied. Can someone say "impeachment".
Wow a lie about a blow job or a lie about starting a war yeah you are right that is on the same level
__________________
Some people exist just to annoy me
legion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-04, 01:05 AM   #6
jcmd62
Alpha Male
 
jcmd62's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: In Limbo
Posts: 2,005
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSpratts
can someone say "witch hunt"? can someone say "aquitted"? show me a man or woman who never lied about sex and i'll show you...a liar.

- js.
So that makes it OK to lie to the country and a grand jury?Here we go again with the infantile " well everybody else" does it excuse. Hell it works for copyright infringement why not presidents lying to the country. And I'm sorry jack but your pathetic. You or I swearing we didn't commit adultery to our spouse is entirely different than the Leader of the most powerful nation in the free world admitting that he has so little integrity or self control that he couldn't stop himself from committing adultery and shoving his dick into some fat ugly interns mouth right in the damn Oval Office. Then to further prove his lack of morals and cowardice he lies about it not only to the nation, but to a grand jury.

I still chuckle daily at the ignorant liberals that still think Bin laden and Saddam signed receipts that stated "For Terrorist acts against USA", and then saved them in file cabinets for Tax purposes. Then there's the truly brain dead liberals that believe there is absolutely no way Saddam slipped a few million in cold hard untraceable CASH to Bin laden to help him in his attack. Since when do criminals leave paper trails? We will never know for sure if Saddan did or didn't because neither he nor Bin laden will ever admit to it, nor can we be sure what may be buried in that huge desert known as Iraq.

I did NOT have sexual relations with Miss Lewinski

WOW how quickly the libs dismiss their beloveds well documented LIE
jcmd62 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-04, 07:22 AM   #7
albed
flippin 'em off
 
albed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the real world
Posts: 3,231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSpratts
can someone say "witch hunt"? can someone say "aquitted"? show me a man or woman who never lied about sex and i'll show you...a liar.

- js.
It's understandable for him to lie to hide his shameful behaviour but the way he tried to smear Lewinski, portraying her as a psycho-stalker who was the one lying is what makes the man truly disgusting.

Hell, knowing Hillary I'd feel sympathy for the guy, but the way he treated what he thought was a helpless woman...that is until the "stain" turned the tables. I can imagine what he'd have done to her without the hard evidence that he was the lying scumbag. He'd still be repeating his famous phrase.
albed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-04, 08:22 AM   #8
JackSpratts
 
JackSpratts's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 10,013
Default

jc, instead of taking the most convoluted avenues possible in excusing his behaviour when you even begin to hold bush accountable for his lies i'll begin to take you seriously. until then it's just liberal bashing for bashings sake.

- js.
JackSpratts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-04, 11:58 AM   #9
pisser
Guv
 
pisser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Skynet, CA
Posts: 923
Cry

Would you liberals just please get over it. It wasn't about WMD's, or Al-Quada, It was about REVENGE! Plain and simple. We got hit on 9/11 and we decided to show the world that if you f**k with us, we will crush you. Saddam was just an excuse to flex our muscle.

Bush will NEVER and shouldn't apoligize. CLINTON is the one who should apoligize, after all, on his watch, he did nothing to prevent the lead-up to 9/11. That is where the FAULT truly lies.
pisser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-04, 01:26 PM   #10
jcmd62
Alpha Male
 
jcmd62's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: In Limbo
Posts: 2,005
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSpratts
jc, instead of taking the most convoluted avenues possible in excusing his behavior when you even begin to hold bush accountable for his lies I'll begin to take you seriously. until then it's just liberal bashing for bashings sake.

- js.
I'm not going to hold Bush accountable for something he didn't do. Bush only reported the info given him by the lousy and non existent intelligence gathered by what was left us by Mr. Clinton. Clinton not only pulled the plug on and then sat back while several of our best spies were executed. The SOB let terror attack after terror attack go unanswered for 8 years, totally weakened this countries ability to fend off such attacks and set us up for 9/11.

But of course you libs only deal in rhetoric and not FACTS. The ONLY people in this country excusing a presidents BEHAVIOR are you liberals excusing Clinton. Convoluted??? Hell you liberals took convoluted to a whole new level during Clinton's willful degrading of this country. Bush only reported the facts as they were given to him by what was left of our decimated intelligence field, and when this info turned out to be incorrect you blame the man trying to fix the problem and not the asshole who caused it.

I held Bush accountable, so much so all 16 of my aliases will vote for him AGAIN. I even talked all those dead people that voted for Gore last time to vote for Bush this time around. Yea I'm gonna lose a lot of sleep knowing ole jack refuses to take me seriously.

Bottom line is Bush could only report what he was told, he never set foot in Iraq and had no first hand knowledge if his info was correct or incorrect. He told the country what the Intelligence sources told him. Mr. Clinton did indeed have first hand or should I say first "mouth" knowledge where his own dick had been, then he flat out LIEDto the country and a Grand Jury.
jcmd62 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump






All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© www.p2p-zone.com - Napsterites - 2000 - 2024 (Contact grm1@iinet.net.au for all admin enquiries)