MasterCylinder

OH they already died because someone lied.
Sometimes it is that simple.

Drivinallnight

or sometimes the real lie was that saddam wanted everyone to believe he had these things, even Clinton's people thought it. "I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

MasterCylinder

And that proved what? Did that validate the killing of hundreds of thousands of people? This administration went out of its way to ignore any evidence that Iraq had no threatening weapons of mass destruction. Remember Tony Blair warning the British people that Saddam had remote controlled drones that could hit England in 30 minutes with Bio-weapons. After the invasion, they found one balsa wood plane that was more of a toy than a weapon. GW and Company walked away with serious egg on their faces regarding WMDs. It would be funny if so many people hadn't died.

Plainsman1963

Wasn't meaning passenger, think more in the line of cargo.
CNN.com - CNN probe finds weak link in air security - Aug 10, 2005

And securing our borders is inevitable? Really??? I wonder when that's going to happen.

And my choice between Noriega and Bush? Hmm...At least under Noriega cannabis and prostitution was legal.

Also, I would never refer to Bush as a nazi. My grandparents had experience with the real deal, so if you think I am starting to sound like that you need your hearing checked.

Andrew87

Thank you, Drivinallnight.

I love how you the rest of you guys can believe that just because we didn't find any WMD's, means that they never existed.

So then tell me what's going to happen when the area that used to be Iraq is taken over by terrorists? Implying that it 'isn't our business' won't cut it here.

If Bush is really the liar and tyrant you make him out to be, then why didn't he simply 'plant' WMD's? It would've been fairly easy for him, and would have certainly shut the mouths of people like you.


...whoops.

I agree with you, it should've happened a long time ago. But just like with illegal immigration, a 'secure' border cannot be the only factor when it comes to prevention.

I never said you would, I just thought it seemed like you were walking on a very fine line.


I don't know what point you are trying to make with that video you posted. I have never said nor believed that our primary goal in Iraq should be to hold their hand while they learn to walk again, that is merely a latent function of the objective. I believe the focus is in preventing the region from becoming further controlled by terrorists - which would be a highly probable scenario were we to withdraw.

MasterCylinder

Oh, I'm sure the idea crossed his mind but then he thought about all the conspirators that would have to keep their mouths shut because if it came out that he did plant WMDs to prove his point, his ass would have been fried.
Look, he couldn't even pull off the "Niger yellow cake scam". What would make you think he could pull something that big off?

Oh thats lame. The neocon battlecry of "THE TERRORISTS ARE COMING!!! THE TERRORISTS ARE COMING!!!"
Yep, lets pass some more great legislation like the Patriot Act so we can all feel safe and secure.

Andrew87

Oh, I'm sure the members of the tinfoil hat brigade are such an enormous threat to him . Grow up.

If people had asserted that he planted weapons in Iraq, they would be dismissed as irrational just like the ones who claim that 9/11 was an inside job.


Doesn't sound that difficult to me, at least not for someone with the authority of Commander-in-Chief .

It would simply entail that a small special-ops team drop off nuclear/bio/chemical weapons in a pre-disclosed location, essentially an entirely small-scale operation. To say that someone with command over the military, NSA, and CIA could not pull something like this off if they truly wanted to is simply asinine.



Yeah, I'm just a total right-wing conspiracy nut, aren't I? Do you actually believe that there is NO threat of further terrorist attacks?? Your approach of "let them work it out amongst themselves," is a bit too idealist, and considerably naive.

These things don't just work out on their own, you know.

Here we go again.

I challenge you to find me ONE instance where it has affected people who violate minor laws, such as marijuana use. Plains couldn't do it, and neither can you.

As I have already said, if the Patriot Act becomes the sort of 'slippery slope' that you allege, then I don't doubt it would be rebelled against at an absolutely overwhelming level.

__________________
The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants. -- Albert Camus

MasterCylinder

I'm sure Nixon felt the same way. After all it was a simple B and E.

I don't know. Are you?
Do you know what they do with all their wire tap information?

Not when a bunch of neocon nuts who think they know whats best for everyone is running the show.

troublemaker_42

I don't buy the "it doesn't affect you, so its not a big deal" attitude towards the Patriot Act. Fuck that man..... thatys just shortcutting common sense, IMO. It shouldn't matter if it has a direct affect on me or not. No matter HOW you look at the PA, its obvious that the legislation was rushed and voted on before people did the proper research. It opened up the doors for all kinds of abuses of power, and has created as many problems, if not more, than it created. It hasnb't affected me, that I KNOW OF, at this point, but thats irrelavent. Its poor legislation, and I fiund it unnecessary. Think back over the past 7 years. How many hearings, how many people's testimony, how many days and how many dollars have opur leaders wasted arguing varying aspects of the Patriot Act. How many millions of dollars have been flushed down the drain debating it? How much of that money, how much of that time would have been better off addressing REAL issues? The PA has created at least as many problems as it has prevented. OUr country survived 225 years without the Patriot Act. ONE event suddenly necessitates it? I'm not downplaying how grave of a situation 9/11 was, but more Americans have died fighting the "War on Terror" than died on 9/11. We've wasted countless days and dollars arguing over a very flawed piece of legislation. Quite frankly, our current state of affairs is a mess, and the argument could be made that our "solutions" to 9/11 are as much to blame as 9/11 itself. The Patriot Act has casued as many problems as it has provided solutions. Its easy to hide behind the "we have no idea HOW many attacks the PA has prevented" train of thought if you must, but....open your eyes. I've never worn a tin foil hat in my life, and laugh at most conspiuracy theories. However, I have no doubt our current government has no problem whatsoever lying to the American public to get what it wants and to justify its actions, no matter what those actions may include. Theres a reason Bush's approval rating hoever in the lower 30's and upper 20's.....most of America has come to the same conclusion, that George and Co aren't to be trusted. I wish I could go back to my childhood, where I looked up to the President as being a hero, the leader of the greatest country on earth. Sadly, those days are long gone. I still feel the same about our country, but the illusion of the leadership always having my best interests at heart are long gone. I look at our current leadership with disgust rather than the awe I felt as a child. I wish I had the respect I once had fopr our leaders, but they have continuially chipped away at it until it simply ceased to exist anymore. The Patriot Act wasn't the catalyst of this change, but its certainbly a shining example of the types of things that have driven a wedge between our leadership and the opinions of the common citizen

__________________
Ted Nugent: "To my mind it is wholly irresponsible to go into the world incapable of preventing violence, injury, crime, and death. How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic."


If total government control equals safety, why are prisons so dangerous?

Andrew87

True, but that was to occur on U.S. soil. The exact same operation would have been drastically easier in a foreign country controlled by the U.S. military.

Bush wouldn't have had to do much more than simply state that WMD's were found in Iraq, and manipulate certain reports. Very few people would be in any position to even contest it, considering the fact that it involved a foreign country and not some hotel in DC.

It was already widely suspected Iraq had WMD's anyways, it would not have aroused a great deal of suspicion if weapons actually had turned up.

Evidently the facial expression I used didn't indicate a detectable amount of sarcasm, by your standards.



I don't understand how/why you continue to believe that the powers granted by the Patriot Act are exploited and used to 'spy' on average citizens. I'm going to carefully, and slowly explain this to you: What does a federal investigator have to gain by tapping a relatively law-abiding citizen's communications lines? That they may discover some $50 pot deal being set up? Big deal. What they are looking for are people with connections to terrorist organizations - foreign or domestic. So logically, it would be a complete waste of time, money, and resources to spy on average citizens, with extremely rare exceptions.

As I have continually repeated throughout this thread, find me one instance where the Patriot Act has been used to prosecute someone for some seemingly minor crime, and I will concede. I think you would hear about it quite often if the Patriot Act was being (ab)used in the manner which you seem to believe.

Well then what do you propose in this situation, MasterCylinder? Please keep it realistic, I have already pointed out the various faults with "just leaving."


Trouble, I will get to your post later.