NO NUKES IN IRAN! NO WWIII.

[JustMissed]

UNCLE DICK.....WHAT DO WE DO NOW?

snipped from breitbart.com--AP Wire story:

"It comes one day after a new national intelligence estimate found that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003, largely because of international scrutiny and pressure. That finding is in stark contrast to the comparable intelligence estimate of just two years ago, when U.S. intelligence agencies believed Tehran was determined to develop a nuclear weapons capability and was continuing its weapons development program. "

BUSHCO heard saying: "So much oil to steal and so little time left to steal it".

JM :)

[Light]

Makes you wonder where the Bushies get their intelligence from. They wouldn't make this stuff up now would they? Ya think?

[JustMissed]

Makes you wonder where the Bushies get their intelligence from. They wouldn't make this stuff up now would they? Ya think?

Uncle Dick Cheney was heard to say: "You can't believe our intelligence people, look how they lied to us about Iraq."

JM :lol: :lol: :lol:

[delayjf]

The Intel report came out last week, previous reports dating back to 03 said the opposite. If your going to believe the the validity of them now than you have to assume they were accurate in 2003. You also have to ask the question, would they still be pursuring nuclear weapons had President Bush not put the Political pressure on Iran for two years.

In reality, this is a victory for Bush. :jump: :jump:

[Greyfox]

They have either stopped pursuing a nuclear weapon or they haven't.

I would think that anyone who sought to develop a nuclear weapon would only stop very reluctantly. Personally I'm from Missouri on this one. They've just become more covert or reached a road block in their anticipated timeline that they'll continue to work around. I wouldn't believe one word emanating from Iran. Not one. Continued hypervigilance is needed here.

[Tom]

Both France and Israel have been saying the same thing. The NEW French leader - a real person, not a criminal like Jacque Cirrac was - stated Iran would have to give up it's bomb or risk being bombed.

Yet the blinders are out in force today as the Bush=Bad crown type with one hand while they.......:eek:......with the other.

[icebak]

Both France and Israel have been saying the same thing. The NEW French leader - a real person, not a criminal like Jacque Cirrac was - stated Iran would have to give up it's bomb or risk being bombed.

Yet the blinders are out in force today as the Bush=Bad crown type with one hand while they.......:eek:......with the other.


Lemme get this straight? Chiraq is a criminal for trying to prevent an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation in direct defiance of the laws of the United Nations, and Bush is a hero for slaughtering innocent children, and padding the coffers of his frat buddies' and his daddy's friends' frat buddies' companies at the expense of of the soul of America? You are obviously a Republican 'cuz no one else could possibly swallow a load like that.

God this country is polarized. I made a decision a few years back not to be nice to Christo-publicans anymore. Not even civil. They are the cause of most things wrong with this world. They and their whacko funamentalist counterparts in the rest of the world. Their poisonous ethos is corrupting the cause of human decency. What's next? They think cuz they stole a few elections they are right.

They don't even believe in the most basic fundemental principles of diplomacy. For example, they see no contradiction in the assertion that Pakistan, India, Israel et al can own, develop, test, stockpile, even use nuclear weapons while Iran and any other country who disagrees with them (cuz they're a different breed of religious zealot, I guess) can't. That would be like saying: "You can't own a gun cuz we say so and we already own guns?" Really stupid sounding isn't it?

Being nice to these guys is doing us no good. They do not deserve our respect. They do not deserve decency. Perhaps pity, but it's getting harder every day to pitty them. Some of them actually believe in something called "the rapture." Any of you non-religious types may not know what this? It's the absurd belief that they, the Christians, the chosen ones, are going to ascend to heaven while the rest of the universe is going to burn in hell. Nice, huh. No wonder religion is the source of so much hatred and pain.

Anyway, just thought I'd add my opinion. Don't really pay attention to the news anymore, cuz it seems to be a farce. And don't think the dems are saviors, they are not. There are some intelligent people out there running for office (like Gravel and Paul - Kucinich?) but they have no chance. We are doomed to the same thing from whatever group they put in office.

Bush is a special case. The load of crap he's been dishing his entire career is actually bought by some people. I kid you not. There are people out there, functioning in our world, walking among us, who believe it. They believe the reasons for war. They believe the "faulty intellingence" garbage. They believe that we are fighting for Iraq's freedom. I'm not kidding. They believe that America somehow stands for something good in the world. They believe they are the chosen ones. They actually believe they are right.

Look at the so-called republican base. Well the real base of the republican party, as we all know, are the multi-national corporations. The repubs have convinced the christains that they are the party of god. All they had to do is say it and the christians swallowed in hook, line and sinker. No matter that they break every single commandment daily. For christians, keeping nipples off television is more important than universal health care or world peace. I'm not kidding, ask them this question: If you could have world peace, but it meant that your children would have to see nipples on television, they would choose no nips.

I rant. I'm tired of wasting my breath. I'm done.

[Show Me the Wire]

So icebak,

Is the democratic party beholdin' to the tuna canning industry or bought and paid for by Soros? Maybe both corporations and wealthy individuals?

[Greyfox]

I rant. I'm tired of wasting my breath. I'm done.

Iran's has threatened to annihilate Israel and the U.S.
Keeping nuclear stock piles limited to the current club is necessary.
While it may not be totally just and fair to say because we say so,
that's just the way it is. "Walk softly and carry a big stick."
And as we have the stick, we shouldn't be letting Iran have any part of it.

Quote from:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/04/15/wiran15.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/04/15/ixnewstop.html
"President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran appeared to threaten Israel with a nuclear attack yesterday when he described it as a "rotten, dried tree" that would be annihilated by "one storm".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/04/15/wiran15.jpgPresident Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
In his most vitriolic and anti-semitic attack to date, Mr Ahmadinejad warned that Israel faced imminent destruction."

[GaryG]

I rant. I'm tired of wasting my breath. I'm done.Amen.

[Light]

previous reports dating back to 03 said the opposite.

That wouldn't have anything to do with manipulation,suppression and cherry picking would it?mmm,love those cherries.

[betsall]

UNCLE DICK.....WHAT DO WE DO NOW?

snipped from breitbart.com--AP Wire story:

"It comes one day after a new national intelligence estimate found that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003, largely because of international scrutiny and pressure. That finding is in stark contrast to the comparable intelligence estimate of just two years ago, when U.S. intelligence agencies believed Tehran was determined to develop a nuclear weapons capability and was continuing its weapons development program. "

BUSHCO heard saying: "So much oil to steal and so little time left to steal it".

JM :)

***BUSHCO heard saying: "So much oil to steal and so little time left to steal it". ***

Actually I don't see anything wrong will stealing oil or even down right taking it and killing them all...eventually that is.

[Show Me the Wire]

My opinion, if U.S. intelligence assessments about Iraq having nuclear wmd capabilities were faulty, I have to assume intelligence about a Iran, a closed society, not having nuclear wmd is erroneous too. I believe it is better to err on the side of caution.

[Tom]

That wouldn't have anything to do with manipulation,suppression and cherry picking would it?mmm,love those cherries. This is a NEW report we are talking about, as in not availabe before.

[Tom]

[QUOTE=icebak]Lemme get this straight? Chiraq is a criminal for trying to prevent an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation

[QUOTE/]

Learn to read. Where did I say that? In your mind maybe.

First off, Chiraq is a criminal for his role in the illegal oil transactions with Iraq during a legal blockade. Secondly, who says Iraq was a sovereign nation? Sadaam took power by brute force and murder. This is a legal governement? If so, then we are now the legal government. Can't have it both ways. If taking over by force qualified as being sovereign, then it applies to us as well.

We liberated the Iraqis in spite of whatever else you read here by the grossly uninformed and biased left, who desperately need a defeat to further thier own agendas.

[icebak]

So icebak,

Is the democratic party beholdin' to the tuna canning industry or bought and paid for by Soros? Maybe both corporations and wealthy individuals?

The dems are cut from the same cloth. Every time you guys defend the repubs you point at the dems. That's not good enuf. That is not what I said. I said: Gravel, Paul and Kucinich were decent people. Note that one of them is a repiblican, whatever that means.

I mean to say that Bush is criminally absurd and anyone who believe his crap is not very bright.

[icebak]

Iran's has threatened to annihilate Israel and the U.S.
Keeping nuclear stock piles limited to the current club is necessary.
While it may not be totally just and fair to say because we say so,
that's just the way it is. "Walk softly and carry a big stick."
And as we have the stick, we shouldn't be letting Iran have any part of it.

Quote from:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/04/15/wiran15.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/04/15/ixnewstop.html
"President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran appeared to threaten Israel with a nuclear attack yesterday when he described it as a "rotten, dried tree" that would be annihilated by "one storm".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/04/15/wiran15.jpgPresident Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
In his most vitriolic and anti-semitic attack to date, Mr Ahmadinejad warned that Israel faced imminent destruction."

I don't remeber them threatening to destroy the us and israel. I think he said something like "Israel cannot survive " or "should be destroyed." I may be wrong. I think he is referring to the criminal injustice that is the illegal occupation of Palestinne that has gone on (thanks entirely to the US) for 60 years.

Oh yeah, and tho the stick is big, since when does the US "walk softly?"

[icebak]

My opinion, if U.S. intelligence assessments about Iraq having nuclear wmd capabilities were faulty, I have to assume intelligence about a Iran, a closed society, not having nuclear wmd is erroneous too. I believe it is better to err on the side of caution.

Do you honestly believe that? Really? Funny, we all knew it was a lie from day one. Didn't you?

[icebak]

Amen.

Seriously, is that a confederate flag? Why do u have it there if it is? Please, I'd like to know?

[icebak]

[QUOTE=icebak]Lemme get this straight? Chiraq is a criminal for trying to prevent an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation

[QUOTE/]

Learn to read. Where did I say that? In your mind maybe.

First off, Chiraq is a criminal for his role in the illegal oil transactions with Iraq during a legal blockade. Secondly, who says Iraq was a sovereign nation? Sadaam took power by brute force and murder. This is a legal governement? If so, then we are now the legal government. Can't have it both ways. If taking over by force qualified as being sovereign, then it applies to us as well.

We liberated the Iraqis in spite of whatever else you read here by the grossly uninformed and biased left, who desperately need a defeat to further thier own agendas.

What agenda: world peace. Yeah, guilty as charged. As for my statement, then you would a least agree that we are AS guilty of crimes as the french, right? Is that a fair assessment. You can't have it both ways either!

And as for the force thing, then u are saying what exactly? That the us occupation is illegal, or that Saddam was legit? Which is it? Or is it that we choose which evil dictator is good and which is unacceptable?

[Greyfox]

I don't remeber them threatening to destroy the us and israel. I think he said something like "Israel cannot survive " or "should be destroyed." I may be wrong. I think he is referring to the criminal injustice that is the illegal occupation of Palestinne that has gone on (thanks entirely to the US) for 60 years.

Oh yeah, and tho the stick is big, since when does the US "walk softly?"

Hmm? Were you cut off from daily news for a period of time or is your memory that poor?
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/101999


Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad reiterated Iran's goal of "wiping Israel off the map." Speaking at a conference of visiting heads of Arab terrorist groups operating in areas under Palestinian Authority control, Ahmadinejad said, "Whether you like it or not, the Zionist regime is on the road to being eliminated."

and http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-03-08-iran-nuclear_x.htm
Iran threatens U.S. with 'harm and pain'
VIENNA (AP) — Iran threatened the United States with "harm and pain" Wednesday if the U.S. tries to use the U.N. Security Council — which has the power to impose sanctions — as a lever to punish Tehran for its suspect nuclear program.

[Show Me the Wire]

The dems are cut from the same cloth. Every time you guys defend the repubs you point at the dems. That's not good enuf. That is not what I said. I said: Gravel, Paul and Kucinich were decent people. Note that one of them is a repiblican, whatever that means.

I mean to say that Bush is criminally absurd and anyone who believe his crap is not very bright.


Illustrating you paint with too broad of a brush, when you mean to say something specific.

BTW if Israel "should be destroyed" is the correct statement whom do you think Pres. Mahmoud Whackjack is referring to that should be the destroyer? Are you really that naive or do you subscribe to the whackjack's philosophy that Israel should be destroyed?

[icebak]

Illustrating you paint with too broad of a brush, when you mean to say something specific.

BTW if Israel "should be destroyed" is the correct statement whom do you think Pres. Mahmoud Whackjack is referring to that should be the destroyer? Are you really that naive or do you subscribe to the whackjack's philosophy that Israel should be destroyed?

Let me ask you a hypothetical that may explain my position. IF Mexico was illegally occupied and brutally violated by Venezuela for 60 years do you think you'd be hearing the same kind of rhetoric over here? Hell, you hear that crap here now about Castro's Cuba!

I do not think Israel shoud be destroyed but I think a lot of Palestinians do. It comes from generation of dead brothers, sisters, fathers and mothers. I do think Israel should withdraw from the occupied territories. To bad if it's inconvenient. You should watch the film: "Peace, Propaganda and the Priomised Land" for some much needed perspective.

[kenwoodallpromos]

SO no ICBM's being built today- Appearantly Russia's Putin thinks the fact that Iran is as of today still enriching Uranium to weapons grade is dangerous even without the missles to deliver a nuke. Personally I do not like the idea of terrorists (a PA terrorist lived in Alameda) being able to bicycle around the Bay Area with enriched Uranium either!!
"Russia Offers Iran Nuclear Fuel to Halt Enrichment (Update2)

By Henry Meyer

Dec. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Russia is offering to supply fuel for Iran's first nuclear power station with the aim of persuading the country to suspend uranium enrichment, President Vladimir Putin's spokesman said.

Putin called on Iran to ensure its nuclear activities are ``open and transparent'' during a meeting today at his residence near Moscow with the top Iranian nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, the Interfax news service reported.

Russia is considering sending fuel for Bushehr, a Russian- built nuclear power plant in southern Iran that is close to completion, Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov said by telephone. ``The sooner we ship it, the less they will have a need for their own program.''
BTW, wasn't Mr. goofup (slam dunk) Tenant in charge of intel in 2003?

[icebak]

I think some things need to be said. Comparing Clinton to Bush is like comparing Goebels (spelling okay?) to Hiltler. Do you think anyone can get to the top of the totally corrupt US political system and be a nice guy? It's absurd. These guys (and I include Hillary) sold their souls years ago. Would anyone of you trust anyone of these people with your children. There's a great line from Good Morning Vietnam, referring to Richard Nixon: "I wouldn't buy an apple from the son of a bitch and I consider him to be a close personal friend of mine."

These people ar ethe absolute dreggs of humanity. Watching Clinton associate with the hideous Bush Sr. is enough to confirm that. This country, all countries need real democracy under the watchful eye of a powerful media and administered by an informed electorate. This ain't gonna happen in America in my lifetime.

I know it's good to be on the winning side, but at some point you have to take responsibility for the actions of your country. Bush punished those who attacked us on 911 by slaughtering tens of thousands of innocent people and thousand of our own citizens. They caused the crisis. They created Bin Laden and they expect us to forget it.

[icebak]

Do you think that those in the Middle East view America as a terrorist nation? Of course they do. The average people are just pawns to these maniacs. We need to take control of our country, and they theirs. That is the only real answer.

And don't listen to the game on tv. It's all lies and bs. The truth is out there but you have to dig like a badger to find it.

[Show Me the Wire]

Let me ask you a hypothetical that may explain my position. IF Mexico was illegally occupied and brutally violated by Venezuela for 60 years do you think you'd be hearing the same kind of rhetoric over here? Hell, you hear that crap here now about Castro's Cuba!

I do not think Israel shoud be destroyed but I think a lot of Palestinians do. It comes from generation of dead brothers, sisters, fathers and mothers. I do think Israel should withdraw from the occupied territories. To bad if it's inconvenient. You should watch the film: "Peace, Propaganda and the Priomised Land" for some much needed perspective.


I understand, full well the hatred the Palestinians harbor against Israel. That is why there is no easy or long-term solution at the moment for peace in the middle east. Hatred stands in the way. Maybe if the Palestinians could forgive their enemies, instead of carrying on a blood feud some real progress could be made.

As far as the illegality, I am not sure about what you are referring too. Wasn't the land occupied after Israel's military victory against the Arab aggressors? Israel's control is the results of the spoils of war. An illegal and unjust war waged by the Arab nations in the region.

[kitstroh]

amen icebak, amazing to see how people can have the wool pulled over their eyes so easy,

[icebak]

I understand, full well the hatred the Palestinians harbor against Israel. That is why there is no easy or long-term solution at the moment for peace in the middle east. Hatred stands in the way. Maybe if the Palestinians could forgive their enemies, instead of carrying on a blood feud some real progress could be made.

As far as the illegality, I am not sure about what you are referring too. Wasn't the land occupied after Israel's military victory against the Arab aggressors? Israel's control is the results of the spoils of war. An illegal and unjust war waged by the Arab nations in the region.

Regardless, there is no such think as the "spoils of war" from a legal standpoint. Don't you think the occupation has gone on long enuf. But I do agree, there is no easy solution. But attempts need to be made. If not for the US and the US alone, Isreal would have been forced from the occupied territories years ago. I guarantee that the solution is not the invasion of Iraq or the bombing or Iran.

We can't just bomb any country when we feel like it with no repercussions. Oh wait, we can, sorry.

[Show Me the Wire]

Icebak:

Did not Israel withdraw start to withdraw some settlements from the west bank?
Was the Arab response peace gestures towards Israel or increased violence towards Israel?

The answer to the above question is your answer. The Palestinians and the Arab world have to let go of their hate, you reap what you sow.

[Show Me the Wire]

amen icebak, amazing to see how people can have the wool pulled over their eyes so easy,

Yes it is amazing, isn't it. It makes it very easy when people have no historical reference because they do not know history and they want to believe nice slogans.

[Show Me the Wire]

Do you honestly believe that? Really? Funny, we all knew it was a lie from day one. Didn't you?

Yes, strangely I believed President Clinton. I did not think he had any reason to lie.

[delayjf]

Chiraq is a criminal for trying to prevent an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation in direct defiance of the laws of the United Nations,No actually he’s a crook for violating UN sanctions buy purchasing oil illegally from Saddam – is it any wonder the French, Russians etc didn’t want the US to invade Iraq. I’m constantly amazed at the lefts willingness to apply its figurative “man-pleaser” to anything European.
to be nice to Christo-publicans anymore. Not even civil.
No need to be civil, give us your best shot.
For example, they see no contradiction in the assertion that Pakistan, India, Israel et al can own, develop, test, stockpile,
Since when is possessing nuclear weapons a basic fundamental of Diplomacy? Remember 9/11, had Al Qaeda got their hands on nuclear weapon, where do you think they would use it?
That would be like saying: "You can't own a gun cuz we say so and we already own guns?" Really stupid sounding isn't it?
Agreed, comparing a gun to a nuclear bomb does sound stupid.
They actually believe they are right.
We are. Bad news, you view is in the minority – move to Europe or get used to it.
No matter that they break every single commandment daily.I would think this would be something you’d endorse.
For christians, keeping nipples off television is more important than universal health care or world peace. I'm not kidding, ask them this question: If you could have world peace, but it meant that your children would have to see nipples on television, they would choose no nips.
Let me guess, you feel you have a Constitutional right to view Janet Jackson’s nipples?
Normally I try to discuss the issues but while were not being civil.
I rant.
Your deranged.
I'm tired of wasting my breath.
You’re a waste of breath.
I'm done.
I wish.

[Marshall Bennett]

Recreational ski lodges were once abundant in northern Iran . From what I understand , few remain . Wonder what those ski lifts are moving now ??

[JustMissed]

Regardless, there is no such think as the "spoils of war" from a legal standpoint.


Just wait til January '08 or later to see who gets the development contract for the southern Iraqi oil field. 11 billion barrels, yes that's right, 11 billion barrels of oil.

I tried to multiply $100 times 11 billon and my calculator blew.

Whenever you find yourself confused about U.S. politics or worldwide politics as far as that goes--just follow the $$$$$MONEY$$$$$.

I'm sure there is a deal working right now or already worked out between BUSCHO, Putin, Billary, et al to share in the "spoils of war".

If that nut case Chavez had played his cards right, hell he would be sleeping in Lincoln's bedroom already.

Trust me, both political parties are going to get what they want right along with Big Business and you know what we'll get? We'll get it right up the ass just like we always have and always will.

Have a wonderfull day,

JM :(

[Greyfox]

Time Ragazine's reaction:

"The real story behind this NIE is that the Bush administration has finally concluded Iran is a bridge too far."

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1690696,00.html

[Show Me the Wire]

JustMissed:

You are spot on about globally following the money. This is what I desire. That the U.S. bashers understand all the countries of the world base their foreign policies on increasing their own economic gains, which leads to conflicts.

[Tom]

Time Ragazine's reaction:

"The real story behind this NIE is that the Bush administration has finally concluded Iran is a bridge too far."

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1690696,00.html


Opinions vary.
I would not wipe my.......grill.....with Time Mag - a very biased, agenda driven excuse for news.

[icebak]

No actually he’s a crook for violating UN sanctions buy purchasing oil illegally from Saddam – is it any wonder the French, Russians etc didn’t want the US to invade Iraq. I’m constantly amazed at the lefts willingness to apply its figurative “man-pleaser” to anything European.

No need to be civil, give us your best shot.

Since when is possessing nuclear weapons a basic fundamental of Diplomacy? Remember 9/11, had Al Qaeda got their hands on nuclear weapon, where do you think they would use it?

Agreed, comparing a gun to a nuclear bomb does sound stupid.
.
We are. Bad news, you view is in the minority – move to Europe or get used to it.
I would think this would be something you’d endorse.

Let me guess, you feel you have a Constitutional right to view Janet Jackson’s nipples?
Normally I try to discuss the issues but while were not being civil.

Your deranged.

You’re a waste of breath.

I wish.

Told ya. There's no reasoning with you peeps. Like I said, I have given up on the christocans. And by the way, you guys are a tiny little silly minority with a loud voice. You guys are the ones who used to burn witches in the middle ages. I have had enuf of your silly archaic beliefs to last a lifetime. No comment on the existance of god, I just know that you guys need to apply a little common sense and decency to your hurtful rhetoric and horrific actions. I generalise but the good people of the world know exactly what i am talking about. No decent human being, let alone a christian, supports war. I know it's a shock but it's true. And no it's not my consTITutional right to view nipples, I just enjoys it.

I am a decent guy with a "two sides to every story" mentality, but when it comes to christocans, I can't just abide anymore.

[icebak]

Opinions vary.
I would not wipe my.......grill.....with Time Mag - a very biased, agenda driven excuse for news.

What are you wiping your grill with these days, Fox news? Ouch.

Do u guys really think there is a single liberal institution left in today's media. Man you guys are really drinking the Koolaid. If there was, the headlines would be calling for an uprising. Please. Time, Liberal? Lemme guess, you listen to Rush and his gang. Why is it that every single spokesperson for the right are loudmouths? Wouldn't you expect at least one considerate, decent, soft-spoken human being on TV or radio waving the christain flag? One!

[JustMissed]

I looked it up. A billion is a thousand million.

So at $100 a barrel times 1,000 would be 100,000.

So that southern Iraqi oil field is worth today $100,000 million-my, that's a lot of money, huh.

I wonder how they will split it up, maybe:

$1 for operating expense
$4 for little Mohamed and the other Iraqi citizens
$15 for George and family and friends
$25 for Dick and family and friends
$15 for Vladimir and other payoffs
$40 for Exxon-Mobil/Haliburton

In case you missed the news story, I snipped this from this from the International Herald Times:

"Iraq confirms cancellation of Russian oil contract
By Andrew E. Kramer Published: November 4, 2007

BAGHDAD: Guided by U.S. legal advisers, the Iraqi government has canceled a controversial development contract with the Russian company Lukoil for a vast oil field in Iraq's southern desert, freeing it for potential international investment in the future.

In response, the Russian authorities have threatened to revoke a 2004 deal among the Paris Club of creditor nations to forgive $13 billion in Iraqi debt, a senior Iraqi official said.

The field, West Qurna, has estimated reserves of 11 billion barrels, the equivalent of the worldwide proven oil reserves of ExxonMobil, the largest U.S. oil company. Hussain al-Shahristani, the Iraqi oil minister, said in an interview that the field would be opened to new bidders, perhaps as early as next year.

The contract, which had been signed and later canceled by Saddam Hussein's government, had been in legal limbo since the U.S. invasion. But the Kremlin remained hopeful it could be salvaged until September, when Shahristani traveled to Moscow to inform officials there that the decision to cancel it was final, he said.

The Russian government, newly emboldened in international affairs by its expanding oil wealth, is still backing Lukoil's claim and protesting what it considers selective enforcement of contracts in Iraq."[End of article]

As a side note, it has been reported that Putin and Bushco were in negotiation about that contract prior to the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. Seems like Putin agreed to go along with the invasion with a promise the contract would hold up. Oh well, that is just the way those things work out.


JM :bang:

Would be nice if that set aside some of that oil money to help out those poor soldiers that have gotten their arms and legs blown off. I guess they will be covered under that new comprehensive health care plan the Dems keep promising and you and I will have to pay for. :(

[delayjf]

That wouldn't have anything to do with manipulation,suppression and cherry picking would it?mmm,love those cherries.
If that were the case, why would the Illuminati, ops I mean, President Bush allow the current NIE to be released now.

[Show Me the Wire]

..........................

I am a decent guy with a "two sides to every story" mentality, but when it comes to christocans, I can't just abide anymore.

There certainly is at least two sides to every story, sometimes three or more. Here is the catch only one is the truth. I take your statement at face value about your mentality meaning you empathize with or understand the parities reasons for acting a certain way. However, understanding the reason why some acts a certain way should not mean you believe the action is morally correct or justifiable.

Wrong behavior is wrong behavior no matter how much you empathize with or understand the wrong doers motivation. To sum it up, it is good you are compassionate and you are open to learning the truth, but you must recognize truth or your compassion is for naught.

[delayjf]

Do u guys really think there is a single liberal institution left in today's media. Man you guys are really drinking the Koolaid. If there was, the headlines would be calling for an uprising. Please. Time, Liberal? Lemme guess, you listen to Rush and his gang. Why is it that every single spokesperson for the right are loudmouths? Wouldn't you expect at least one considerate, decent, soft-spoken human being on TV or radio waving the christain flag? One!
I guess if would depend on what your definition of liberal is. Who out there speaks for you. Ever hear of Al Frankin?

[The Judge]

a guy who thought his hunting Companion was a QUAIL.

[Marshall Bennett]

What are you wiping your grill with these days, Fox news? Ouch.

Do u guys really think there is a single liberal institution left in today's media. Man you guys are really drinking the Koolaid. If there was, the headlines would be calling for an uprising. Please. Time, Liberal? Lemme guess, you listen to Rush and his gang. Why is it that every single spokesperson for the right are loudmouths? Wouldn't you expect at least one considerate, decent, soft-spoken human being on TV or radio waving the christain flag? One!
Today's media IS a liberal institution in this country !! Always has been At least in my opinion when you gather the 3 major television networks , the New York Times , probibly 95% of all other major news outlets . Thats a liberal base ... plain & simple !!

[delayjf]

a guy who thought his hunting Companion was a QUAIL.
Maybe we could get Dick and Al to go hunting. :ThmbUp:

[The Judge]

No ones dumb enough to go hunting with Dick. He shot a guy he liked a campaig contributor quess he didn't give enough ,hey! business is business.

[Robert Goren]

Seriously, is that a confederate flag? Why do u have it there if it is? Please, I'd like to know? That flag never flew over the confederacy. It is a mixure of several flags used by the confederacy. I asked him about it once and he said I was clueless. He was right I haven't clue why anyone would use it.

[Robert Goren]

Today's media IS a liberal institution in this country !! Always has been At least in my opinion when you gather the 3 major television networks , the New York Times , probibly 95% of all other major news outlets . Thats a liberal base ... plain & simple !! I saw Lou Dobbs last night acused the LA Times of being liberal.

[ljb]

Easy does it gentlemen,
The neo-nazi flag, an obvious political symbol, is the only political symbol allowed as an avatar on this board by the biased moderator. You may be stepping on the wrong toes here. Ya piss off the boss man and you can get in mucho trouble here abouts. ;)

[Show Me the Wire]

That flag never flew over the confederacy. It is a mixure of several flags used by the confederacy. I asked him about it once and he said I was clueless. He was right I haven't clue why anyone would use it.


I will give you a clue. If you knew history you would understand what area, of the world, most of the settlers of the southern part of the U.S. migrated from.

Now you are not clueless.

[delayjf]

That flag never flew over the confederacy. It is a mixure of several flags used by the confederacy. I asked him about it once and he said I was clueless. He was right I haven't clue why anyone would use it.
It’s the Confederate Battle Flag which is a version of the St. Andrew Cross. It was used to differentiate southern troops as the Confederate National flag (similar to the Texas state flag) was often confused with the stars and stripes in Battle.
There were two versions - a square version adopted by the Army of Northern Virginia and a rectangular version adapted by the Army of the Tennessee.
GaryG is flying the 2nd version also refered to the 2nd Confederate Naval Jack. Today it is a symbol of southern pride

[hcap]

There have been claims on the right that we scared Libya and Iran by our invasion of Iraq.

http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2004/0309middleeast_indyk.aspx

The Iraq War did not Force Gadaffi's Hand
March 09, 2004

"The implication is clear. Get rid of one dictator because of his supposed WMD programmes and others will be so afraid that they will voluntarily abandon their weapons programmes. Therefore, even if no WMDs were found in Iraq, we still made the world a safer place. The perfect comeback.

In Muammer Gadaffi's case, this proposition is questionable. In fact, Libyan representatives offered to surrender WMD programmes more than four years ago, at the outset of secret negotiations with US officials. In May 1999, their offer was officially conveyed to the US government at the peak of the "12 years of diplomacy with Iraq" that Mr. Bush now disparages. Back then, Libya was facing a deepening economic crisis produced by disastrous economic policies and mismanagement of its oil revenues. United Nations and US sanctions that prevented Libya importing oilfield technology made it impossible for Mr. Gadaffi to expand oil production. The only way out was to seek rapprochement with Washington."

.................................................. ..........................

Don't be quick to assume diplomacy and methods other than outright war will not work. According to the current NIE, there is no indication that invading Iraq swayed the Iranians

[JustRalph]

I wonder what would have happen in 2003 that could have given them an incentive to stop trying to obtain' wmds???.......hhmmmmmm..........thinking really hard..................... thinking..........thinking............?????? :bang:

I bet Machmood IamadinnerJacket had his own spider hole already picked out

[delayjf]

Gadaffi's son was quoted as saying he was scared to death he was next. If he was having economic trouble as the article claims why didn't he just abandon his WMD programs on his own? Nobody was twisting his arm.

[hcap]

One more time......

The Iraq War did not Force Gadaffi's Hand
March 09, 2004

"The implication is clear. Get rid of one dictator because of his supposed WMD programmes and others will be so afraid that they will voluntarily abandon their weapons programmes. Therefore, even if no WMDs were found in Iraq, we still made the world a safer place. The perfect comeback.

In Muammer Gadaffi's case, this proposition is questionable. In fact, Libyan representatives offered to surrender WMD programmes more than four years ago, at the outset of secret negotiations with US officials. In May 1999, their offer was officially conveyed to the US government at the peak of the "12 years of diplomacy with Iraq" that Mr. Bush now disparages.

More

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3338713.stm

delayjf Gadaffi's son was quoted as saying he was scared to death he was next.Provide the link. I just tried tracking down a link from Haaretz saying negotiations were concluded before the invasions. Could not find it. However found this interview with Saif Gaddafi. You show me where he says what you claim

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4014147.stm

[delayjf]

Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi, a supporter of the Iraq War, was quoted as saying that Gaddafi had privately phoned him, admitting as much.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muammar_al-Gaddafi

My bust, it was the Italian Premier not Gaddafi son to whom he confessed.

[delayjf]

Keep in mind, the US interdicted centrifuge parts on their way to Libya in Oct of 03. Does this sound the acts of a Nation that is abandoning their WMD program???

[hcap]

I have a question for both you and Ralph.
Along the lines of my question about Iraqi WMDs

If WMDs were really smuggled out to say Syria, and you gentlemen have evidence supporting this, why hasn't the bush administration played this to their advantage and used the so-called evidence to prop their case for invading Iraq?

Well here's the question reworked.....

"If the Iraq invasion convinced Iran to surrender it's nukes, why didn't Steven Hadley say that at the news conference yesterday or why didn't bush say so today?" Think about it. He could have taken credit for at least something somewhat positive to come out of the Iraqi invasion.

So where is the crowing from the administration?
Or is that left to the right wing echo chamber to make that flimsy case:lol:

[hcap]

Keep in mind, the US interdicted centrifuge parts on their way to Libya in Oct of 03. Does this sound the acts of a Nation that is abandoning their WMD program???The invasion itself, the most successful phase of the war was over well before Oct 2003. Militarily, an easy and quick apparent regime change. Troops had been established. Government agencies were in American control. The insurgency was in it's infancy. If Muammer Gadaffi had been scared enough by the US invasion to give up his WMDs, why not before Oct? Why didn't he say to himself right after the invasion.....

"Holy shit, they knocked 'em off like fish in a barrel, maybe I should hand over my WMDs immediately an plead for mercy. Damn I'm next"

More was going on in continuing years long negotiations.
In fact when Saddam was captured, Gadaffi almost refused to negotiate and sign-not wanting to look weak to the rest of the Arab world. The ongoing occupation almost scuttled the deal.

[hcap]

Rand Beers...

The NIE concluded with "high confidence in the fall of 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program." Not only does this throw cold water on the efforts of those urging military confrontation with Iran, but it also indicates that diplomacy has the possibility of yielding real progress. The findings indicate that the Iranians are not as hell-bent on developing nuclear weapons as many previously believed and decided to put their nuclear weapons program on hold based on a rational cost-benefit analysis. In other words, the claims by the Bush administrations and many of its supporters that one could not negotiate with Iran because they were crazed fanatics irrationally focused on confronting the United States and its allies, has been proven incorrect. As the NIE concludes:


Our assessment that Iran halted the program in 2003 primarily in response to international pressure indicates Tehran's decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic, and military costs.

Diplomatic engagement is now a must. The NIE assessed that:

Some combination of threats of intensified international scrutiny and pressure, along with opportunities for Iran to achieve its security, prestige, and goals for regional influence in other ways, might--if perceived by Iran's leaders as credible--prompt Tehran to extend the current halt to its nuclear weapons program.

[46zilzal]

Incompetent would be the BEST answer to the saber rattler.
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1690696,00.html

[PaceAdvantage]

Yeah, nuttin' but right wing republicans dominating off-topic 'round here....a far-lefty can hardly get a word in edgewise, from what I can see....:rolleyes:

So, who was it that was arguing lately that this board is dominated by right-wingers?
Come on...show your face!

[Tom]

What are you wiping your grill with these days, Fox news? Ouch.

Wouldn't you expect at least one considerate, decent, soft-spoken human being on TV or radio waving the christain flag? One!


Duh....hard to wipe your grill with a CABLE CHANNEL.

.....Christian Flag????????

You mean this one?

[Robert Goren]

It’s the Confederate Battle Flag which is a version of the St. Andrew Cross. It was used to differentiate southern troops as the Confederate National flag (similar to the Texas state flag) was often confused with the stars and stripes in Battle.
There were two versions - a square version adopted by the Army of Northern Virginia and a rectangular version adapted by the Army of the Tennessee.
GaryG is flying the 2nd version also refered to the 2nd Confederate Naval Jack. Today it is a symbol of southern pride It is neither of those two verisons, but a mixure them of them and a several other battle flags. His verison came into existence in the early to mid twentieth century. There are some people who claim it is symbol of southern pride. Others view it as symbol of racism. I am still clueless as for GaryG reason for using it. :bang:

[Tom]

He likes it.
What else matters?

[Suff]

You guys are the ones who used to burn witches in the middle ages. I have had enuf of your silly archaic beliefs to last a lifetime. No comment on the existance of god, I just know that you guys need to apply a little common sense and decency to your hurtful rhetoric and horrific actions.about. No decent human being, let alone a christian, supports war. I know it's a shock but it's true. And no it's not my consTITutional right to view nipples, I just enjoys it.

.

All that can be said about these Republicans is how far and fast America has fallen?.

We are now a country where your considered unelectable for opposing torture.

[46zilzal]

People have a set of beliefs. They belong to that individual. If those beliefs mimic another's, all that means is that they agree.

A great psychologist knew the answer: "Once you label me, you limit me." Being unique bothers some others until they HAVE to pigeon-hole you into some classification they can handle.

Screw 'em if they are that narrow minded. People have beliefs independent of one another. Always have, always will.

Lyndon Johnson was just as big a liar for all out war as the cabal that is in office today. The MAN stood for that: trumping up a "fake" attack to sell HIS war. The individual did that regardless of what political party he was aligned with. That view is not left, right or central, but just a belief.

[riskman]

delayjf said-"Let me guess, you feel you have a Constitutional right to view Janet Jackson’s nipples"

I beleive Janet thinks so !!!!

[riskman]

The Intel report came out last week, previous reports dating back to 03 said the opposite. If your going to believe the the validity of them now than you have to assume they were accurate in 2003. You also have to ask the question, would they still be pursuring nuclear weapons had President Bush not put the Political pressure on Iran for two years.

In reality, this is a victory for Bush. :jump: :jump:


How about we just give Shrub and Cheney their Medals of Freedom right now and let them ride out into the sunset?

[Greyfox]

Hmnn?

Does Icebak = I's back?

Maybe. Maybe not.
If so Who's back?

[Greyfox]

A great psychologist knew the answer: "Once you label me, you limit me.".

Maybe so.
But in many instances on this forum, you've given us the labels,...me thinks.
Doc,....Zen...Camera man....Furniture mover....widower..remarried...
Vancouverite,.... lover of horse racing, .... and on it goes.
Maybe a man places his own limits on??

[PaceAdvantage]

It is neither of those two verisons, but a mixure them of them and a several other battle flags. His verison came into existence in the early to mid twentieth century. There are some people who claim it is symbol of southern pride. Others view it as symbol of racism. I am still clueless as for GaryG reason for using it. :bang:Not according to USFlag.org:

http://www.usflag.org/history/images/scross.gif
Confederate Navy Jack: Used as a navy jack at sea from 1863 onward. This flag has become the generally recognized symbol of the South.

My official stance on this avatar is that when WARNER BROS. takes this flag off the GENERAL LEE, I will take it off of this board. Until then, if it's good enough for WARNER BROS., it's good enough for me....

[PaceAdvantage]

Told ya. There's no reasoning with you peeps. Like I said, I have given up on the christocans. And by the way, you guys are a tiny little silly minority with a loud voice. You guys are the ones who used to burn witches in the middle ages. I have had enuf of your silly archaic beliefs to last a lifetime. No comment on the existance of god, I just know that you guys need to apply a little common sense and decency to your hurtful rhetoric and horrific actions. I generalise but the good people of the world know exactly what i am talking about. No decent human being, let alone a christian, supports war. I know it's a shock but it's true. And no it's not my consTITutional right to view nipples, I just enjoys it.

I am a decent guy with a "two sides to every story" mentality, but when it comes to christocans, I can't just abide anymore.So here's an idea. Why don't you go and "take out a few" of these christocans, if you know what I mean. Sounds like you're worked up pretty good, so this is the next logical step, if you're a "true believer"....do the world a favor....and make sure you videotape it and put it on YouTube, along with your address and social security number....you INTOLERANT fruitcake.....:lol:

[JustRalph]

Being nice to these guys is doing us no good. They do not deserve our respect. They do not deserve decency. Perhaps pity, but it's getting harder every day to pitty them. Some of them actually believe in something called "the rapture." Any of you non-religious types may not know what this? It's the absurd belief that they, the Christians, the chosen ones, are going to ascend to heaven while the rest of the universe is going to burn in hell. Nice, huh. No wonder religion is the source of so much hatred and pain.

Something called the rapture? What a scholar you are? Give me a break.

Have you heard of that other thing some of them believe in? It's called the ten rules, You know? The Ten Commandments? How about that loony idea of doing unto others? What a bunch of Wingnuts huh? Oh yeah, those crazy Christo-publicans you speak of believe in other crazy ideals like "common laws" and universal rights. You know? The ones that allow them to whip your ass if you screw with them? It all goes back to that "do unto others" bit. It is really kind of fascinating. The fact that these rubes have survived for 2k years. Amazing......... :bang:

[The Judge]

Whip your ass even if you don't screw with them. Whip your ass even if you try to avoid them. Ask any country that tried to isolate themselves from the West who showed up armed to the teeth.

The Gun Ships thats what. Open up or we will fire! Ask Japan (I not talking about the bomb either) ask China, ask Africa about the good King Leopold Chirstians all.

[hcap]

The news that Iran ended its nuclear program in 2003 was briefed to George Bush in the Presidential Daily Brief. He has known about this, I am told, for at least one year. George Bush is lying when he insists he had no inkling, until last week, that the intelligence community believed Iran halted its nuke program in 2003.

This is the kind of earthshaking intel that analysts rarely get to see. What is remarkable about the NIE is the consensus in the intelligence community about the validity of this info. Compare this to the execrable 2002 NIE on Iraq. There was no consensus in the intelligence community about Iraq’s efforts to acquire nukes. The”true believers” held the day and their position was prominently featured in the final draft. Dissenters–State’s Intelligence and Research Bureau and the Department of Energy–were relegated to footnotes and comments separated from the claim.

When you do an NIE it is incumbent on the writers to clearly state whether there is consensus or dissent. And if there is disagreement then that should be reflected in the text. In the case of the October 2002 abortion, the NIC editors should have noted that there was disagreement in the intelligence community about Iraq’s efforts to rebuild its nuclear program. They should have written something like, “analysts at the CIA and DIA believe Saddam is trying but analysts at INR and DOE believe the evidence points to non-nuclear activity”. Instead, the NIC editors let stand the misleading notion that Iraq was rebuilding a nuclear weapons program even though all agreed that Iraq was not trying to acquire yellowcake uranium from Niger. The senior NIC officials failed to do their duty in 2002.

Not the case today. The NIC stepped up and refused to budge despite repeated efforts by Dick Cheney and his minions to gut the effort. This happened thanks to the convergence of several factors. First, most of the Bush neocon ideologues are gone–Wolfowitz, Feith, Bolton, Wurmser, Libby, etc. Second, the Democrats control the House and Senate Intelligence committee and were receiving reports from analysts about the bullying by Cheney and others who were trying to sandbag the conclusions. Third, senior intelligence officers learned the lesson of 2002 and returned to the tradition of telling the President the truth, no matter how unpopular or unpalatable. And finally, this Administration’s days are numbered and the analysts can read the tea leaves. They know there is no percentage in pandering to power by serving up half-truths and wishful thinking.

.....Larry Johnson

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/dec/04/neocons_go_ballistic_on_iran_nie

[hcap]

From Seymour Hersh's November 27, 2006 piece in the New Yorker:

"The C.I.A. found no conclusive evidence, as yet, of a secret Iranian nuclear-weapons program running parallel to the civilian operations that Iran has declared to the International Atomic Energy Agency. (The C.I.A. declined to comment on this story.)"

..."A current senior intelligence official confirmed the existence of the C.I.A. analysis, and told me that the White House had been hostile to it. The White House’s dismissal of the C.I.A. findings on Iran is widely known in the intelligence community. Cheney and his aides discounted the assessment, the former senior intelligence official said. “They’re not looking for a smoking gun,” the official added, referring to specific intelligence about Iranian nuclear planning. “They’re looking for the degree of comfort level they think they need to accomplish the mission.”

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2007/12/seymour_hersh_bush_admin_has_k.php

[hcap]

Mr Bush said about Iran....

Hitler
Nazi Germany
WWIII
Evildoers

NEVER MIND

http://bp3.blogger.com/_5IWl-cAPUIs/R1T9-5SucLI/AAAAAAAAAV0/E9u7ojDf7lk/s400/Emily+LaBusha+2.jpg

[ljb]

Well even Joe Scarborough is ragging on Bush this morning. Willie Geist said. "the intelligence community decided they were not going to be the fall guy this time like they were in the Iraq situation."

[PaceAdvantage]

This is the kind of earthshaking intel that analysts rarely get to see. What is remarkable about the NIE is the consensus in the intelligence community about the validity of this info. Compare this to the execrable 2002 NIE on Iraq. There was no consensus in the intelligence community about Iraq’s efforts to acquire nukes. The”true believers” held the day and their position was prominently featured in the final draft.True believers?

You mean, like these "ordinary Christo-cans?"

ePb6H-j51xE

[delayjf]

The invasion itself, the most successful phase of the war was over well before Oct 2003. Militarily, an easy and quick apparent regime change. Troops had been established. Government agencies were in American control. The insurgency was in it's infancy. If Muammer Gadaffi had been scared enough by the US invasion to give up his WMDs, why not before Oct? Why didn't he say to himself right after the invasion.....
The negotiations started prior to the invasion on or about March 02. I don’t know if the Bush administration took their offer any more seriously than the Clinton administration – intel reports in 98 down-graded the WMD threat so they didn’t take it seriously. Fast forward to 03, after secretly approaching the US WRT their WMDs program ( they in fact used them in Chad) they get caught with nuclear centrifuges parts in Oct of 03, two months later they come clean to the world.

You don’t think watching what happened to Iraq plus get caught red-handed with nuclear enrichment equipment provided Gadaffi with a “O Shit” moment?
In fact when Saddam was captured, Gadaffi almost refused to negotiate and sign-not wanting to look weak to the rest of the Arab world. The ongoing occupation almost scuttled the deal.
And risk reinstating UN sanctions which were lifted in 2000 (US sanctions continued), if Gadaffi said that, he was bluffing, the cat was already out of the bag. Besides, Libya supported Iran in it’s war with Iraq, he had no great affinity towards Saddam.

Fast forward to 07, now the same intelligence that underestimated Libya’s WMD program in 98 is making similar claims with regards to Iran. Given their track record with regards to Iraq, Libya, what is the basis for your trust in US Intel - that it now supports your political view?

[delayjf]

A current senior intelligence official confirmed
Sounds like a something out of a Woodward novel.

[betsall]

Seriously, is that a confederate flag? Why do u have it there if it is? Please, I'd like to know?

One thing is certain. You asked him a direct question about the flag and his reasons and he stayed silent.

[Greyfox]

Gary has previously answered the question in other threads and doesn't have to stand up for the avator to every newbie who pops in. There is a search function. Utilise it. Also, some Americans died under that flag.

[betsall]

Gary has previously answered the question in other threads and doesn't have to stand up for the avator to every newbie who pops in. There is a search function. Utilise it. Also, some Americans died under that flag.

He remained silent, repeat repeat, he remained silent.

Too bad your not a nice person or you would have told what he has already said.

[Light]

Bush is scrambling. Yesterday spent the whole day downplaying the report. Today has Condi barking and he is telling Iran to "come clean"? Come again? He handpicked the director of the NIE. He is embarrased and is trying his pathetic best to cover up his lame(duck)ness.

[Greyfox]

Condy said:

"It is the very strong view of the administration that the Iranian regime remains a problematic and dangerous regime and that the international community must continue to unite around the Security Council resolutions that have passed," she said.
"Iran needs to stop enrichment and reprocessing activities because those enriching and reprocessing activities permit, if they are perfected, a state to acquire fissile material for a nuclear weapon," Rice said.

[Tom]

One thing is certain. You asked him a direct question about the flag and his reasons and he stayed silent.

Maybe he only replies to adults?

[Robert Goren]

[QUOTE=PaceAdvantage]Not according to USFlag.org:

http://www.usflag.org/history/images/scross.gif
Confederate Navy Jack: Used as a navy jack at sea from 1863 onward. This flag has become the generally recognized symbol of the South.

You may be right. It is not worth fighting over.

[Greyfox]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071205/D8TBAJ300.html

"TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - A new U.S. intelligence review concluding Iran stopped developing an atomic weapons program in 2003 is a "declaration of victory" for Iran's nuclear program, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Wednesday."

[betsall]

Maybe he only replies to adults?

I'm sure he's not in the least ashamed of his reasons etc but like i said he remains silent, repeat, he stands mute on a reasonable question asked.

Starting to find it funny that no one is offering the reasons why even though they know or should know.

repeat, remains silent, repeat, remains mute.:kiss:

[Greyfox]

Starting to find it funny that no one is offering the reasons why even though they know or should know.



The Thread is about Iran and WWIII. That is the theme of the thread.
Asking a question about your mothers favorite cake mix is a reasonable question, but not for this thread.

[betsall]

love the name of the sire.:lol:


http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/12/03/countdown-bushs-nukyular-credibility-meltdown/

[betsall]

The Thread is about Iran and WWIII. That is the theme of the thread.
Asking a question about your mothers favorite cake mix is a reasonable question, but not for this thread.

Thats sensible.

[ljb]

Maybe he only replies to adults?
Maybe he has the intelligence community on iggy !!! :lol:

[betsall]

Maybe he has the intelligence community on iggy !!! :lol:

I don't do it much but have noticed you guys stroke each other like there is no tomorrow. Get a room and be done with it. :kiss: :kiss:

Kinda feels like you do that cause your scared to post to me directly but find another way by responding to your buddies. Don't worry, post to me. Be a man for once in your life.

[Tom]

I'm sure he's not in the least ashamed of his reasons etc but like i said he remains silent, repeat, he stands mute on a reasonable question asked.

Starting to find it funny that no one is offering the reasons why even though they know or should know.

repeat, remains silent, repeat, remains mute.:kiss:

Most of us aleady know - it is up to newbies to do the work to search answers for themsleves. It is here , on this forum, somewhere. Anyone interested should do a search.

[delayjf]

Bush is scrambling. Yesterday spent the whole day downplaying the report

Two years ago (two years AFTER Iran supposedly halted their pursuit of nuclear weapons), the NIE claimed Iran was still intent on acquiring a nuclear weapon. So today's NIE is four years behind.

President Bush is wise to view it with skepticism .

[betsall]

Most of us aleady know - it is up to newbies to do the work to search answers for themsleves. It is here , on this forum, somewhere. Anyone interested should do a search.

how wonderfully helpful you aren't.:kiss:

I dropped this argument when Greyfox said this didn't belong on this thread, as you would have known if you read the other posts.

It is up to you older posters to read what others have posted first, on this forum, a few posts ago. Anyone interested in knowing that should just read them before bringing back something that was dropped.

Be an example old poster, not a negative to newbies and such.:kiss:

[JustRalph]

I don't do it much but have noticed you guys stroke each other like there is no tomorrow. Get a room and be done with it. :kiss: :kiss:

Kinda feels like you do that cause your scared to post to me directly but find another way by responding to your buddies. Don't worry, post to me. Be a man for once in your life.

What are you a kindergartner?

[betsall]

What are you a kindergartner?

That's funny coming from someone who can't defend himsself or won't. Be a man, tell us what that flag does for your mind as a man living in the south.:kiss:

[betsall]

When people obviously drape themselves in a particular avatar now a days when it's fully known to have a reactionary flow to it deserves to be questioned all the time by new people who have no idea why you would display it. If you ain't man enough to answer each and everytime then you will have to except the burdon of fighting all the time or to refer them to the exact thread where you explain yourself.


Get used to it.

[Show Me the Wire]

When people obviously drape themselves in a particular avatar now a days when it's fully known to have a reactionary flow to it deserves to be questioned all the time by new people who have no idea why you would display it. If you ain't man enough to answer each and everytime then you will have to except the burdon of fighting all the time or to refer them to the exact thread where you explain yourself.


Get used to it.


What happened to the nice fuzzy trait of tolerance? I don't think it is any body's right to demand an explanation why another uses a particular avatar.

Do you belong to ljb's secret police or the thought police. It seems you want to police peoples thoughts or opinions and that is not your right or your privilege.

[JustMissed]

When people obviously drape themselves in a particular avatar now a days when it's fully known to have a reactionary flow to it deserves to be questioned all the time. If you ain't man enough to answer each and everytime then you will have to except the burdon of fighting all the time or to refer them to the exact thread where you explain yourself.


Get used to it bobby joe.

Hey Bet, Try following the thread.

Ralph often changes his avatar. I presume to make a statement or just because he likes to change his avatar.

If you had been following the thread you would have seen where Icebak hopped GaryC for his confederate flag. Then there was a brief discussion of the Confederate and Ralph changed his avatar to that of GaryC.

Best advice for you is to try and understand the following:

Confucious say: "Better to be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

JM :cool:

p.s. The word is 'accept', not 'except'.

[Light]

Who cares about WWIII? Its all about ICE. You know the last time I was on the hotseat,people wanted a response in 44 and change.Relax. Maybe the guy's got a life.

President Bush is wise to view it with skepticism .

The difference between me and you is you believe what you just wrote. I believe he is ACTING that he is viewing it with skepticism. He did that with WMD's and he's doing it now. He ACTED that he believed in WMD's when his intelligence agencies said otherwise. Then Cheney backstabbed someone who told the truth.Valerie's hubby. Fooled you once shame on him. Fooled you twice,shame on you.

[betsall]

Hey Bet, Try following the thread.

Ralph often changes his avatar. I presume to make a statement or just because he likes to change his avatar.

If you had been following the thread you would have seen where Icebak hopped GaryC for his confederate flag. Then there was a brief discussion of the Confederate and Ralph changed his avatar to that of GaryC.

Best advice for you is to try and understand the following:

Confucious say: "Better to be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

JM :cool:

p.s. The word is 'accept', not 'except'.

Maybe if you paid attention you would know i wasnt talking about ralph, but to gary. I read it all and have responded just like i have wanted.

Confucious say also : beter to kep your teching about speling to yourslf or you wil have to tech whole forum. Get it sherlock? all of us make the speeling, punkuations mistakes.

Would you like me to call you and poiint everyone's mistakes out so yyou can correwct them?? huh? what ya say? you can get everyone corrected and we can have a better forum, right? want me to let ya know thern?

[Tom]

OK, youre now the afficial spel chicker.:cool:

[JustMissed]

Maybe if you paid attention you would know i wasnt talking about ralph, but to gary. I read it all and have responded just like i have wanted.

Confucious say also : beter to kep your teching about speling to yourslf or you wil have to tech whole forum. Get it sherlock? all of us make the speeling, punkuations mistakes.

Would you like me to call you and poiint everyone's mistakes out so yyou can correwct them?? huh? what ya say? you can get everyone corrected and we can have a better forum, right? want me to let ya know thern?

Geez, I thought I was trying to be helpfull.

Too bad you have turned out to be a first rate ASSHOLE.

JM

p.s. Big difference between typos/spelling and poor grammar.

[betsall]

Geez, I thought I was trying to be helpfull.

Too bad you have turned out to be a first rate ASSHOLE.

JM

p.s. Big difference between typos/spelling and poor grammar.

LOL.TY, i try.

Why do you need to teach. We don't need no stinkin education.

Once read that the importance in language is to comminuicate. now iffy i dontssknb ow to do tangs wright butt u could understood wass I said then I's comminucated to u anbd thats all thats inmportant, get it??

Stop trying to be superior. I know I have bad grammer and spel badly at times, don'tneed no stinkin elist trying to teach me sht.

[JustMissed]

LOL.TY, i try.

Why do you need to teach. We don't need no stinkin education.

Once read that the importance in language is to comminuicate. now iffy i dontssknb ow to do tangs wright butt u could understood wass I said then I's comminucated to u anbd thats all thats inmportant, get it??

Stop trying to be superior. I know I have bad grammer and spel badly at times, don'tneed no stinkin elist trying to teach me sht.

Your on IGNORE:

JM :D

[delayjf]

He ACTED that he believed in WMD's when his intelligence agencies said otherwise.
Regardless of whether Bush is acting or not, Everybody should view the NIE with skepticism, because they have been wrong before. Two years after Iran supposedly halted their nuclear program, the NIE said they were still going strong, now two years later (4 years after they supposedly stopped) the NIE now claims they have stopped. THEY ARE FOUR YEARS BEHIND THE TIMES, HOW DO WE KNOW IT HAS'NT BEEN RESTARTED AGAIN??
Then Cheney backstabbed someone who told the truth.Valerie's hubby.
I didn't know they were buddies, maybe we can hook the two up on a little hunting trip. :D Wilson's been proven a liar and is probably more responsible than anyone for outing his wife - How much did they make on their two book deals any way??

[JustRalph]

Hey Bet, Try following the thread.

Ralph often changes his avatar. I presume to make a statement or just because he likes to change his avatar.

If you had been following the thread you would have seen where Icebak hopped GaryC for his confederate flag. Then there was a brief discussion of the Confederate and Ralph changed his avatar to that of GaryC.

Best advice for you is to try and understand the following:

Confucious say: "Better to be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

JM :cool:

p.s. The word is 'accept', not 'except'.


:ThmbUp:

I have a feeling this is a previous frequent flyer.............. he doesn't know who he is talking to anymore. PA fill us in?

[Secretariat]

Thank goodness the intelligence agencies are developing a spine since the Iraq disaster.

Despite the fear drumbeats without substance of Cheney, Kristol, and the other neocons, some sanity has been revealed. This places GW in a difficult place as his own intelligence agencies refute his WW 3 fears.

The most frightening thing is when GW states this doesn't change anything. He still stubbornly will follow his policy regardless of his own intelligence agencies.

I've stopped being angry about the man as he's just a sad desperate lameduck at this point. I suppose my only question is who's running this dog and pony show? You gotta figure the guy wants to go home for Christmas and sleep or clear brush. Why does he still fight to make the same mistakes all over again. You gotta beleive somebody else is running this show and GW is a glorified Press Secretary for this guy.

.....................................

"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." - FDR

[betsall]

Your on IGNORE:

JM :D

I wactually fel honered sincsay it wass tou whoo drawed first blood.:kiss: :kiss:

[delayjf]

Thank goodness the intelligence agencies are developing a spine since the Iraq disaster.
The agency that puts together the NIE is only one of many intel agencies.

Below are comments from a former CIA agent who worked on NIE:
"Okay, the NIEs are really puff pieces. They are, by design, low-level classification releases of information, and the material that goes in is classified at a low level. It's "confidential" or "secret." So, really, it's garbage in, garbage out. The actionable intelligence that's real-time, of value, has a much higher classification. So, for example, anything that the NSA does is top secret and code word. By that nature it can't be revealed or utilized or discussed, for an NIE estimate."

[The Judge]

If the President is correct it "should be all hands on deck". Why isn't Cheney the attack dog out calling people un-patriotic, what's going on. the Republicans that are runnig for office have given the White House the word? Now they won't Cheney out anymore?

If he is not on T.V tonight I think it will mean that its all over for the man ,at least in public politics. He has been relagated to the back room.

[The Judge]

O.K now we know that the NIE are cream-puffs that' s valuable information.
So now its Shot the Messenger! What about the message? What about the Germans report that backs the NIE's old report ? How can this just be jumped over?

[hcap]

Whether or not you agree with the latest NIE, it is major news-Except if
you are a Faux sheeple.

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/13816.html

How Fox News covers the NIE — or in this case, doesn’t

" How long does it take you to find a mention of the Iran NIE at Foxnews.com?

At the time, it took quite a while, but it got me thinking about the network’s coverage. We know Fox News has made a conscious, editorial decision to downplay news from Iraq, which certainly contributes to conservative confusion about the war, but given the network’s interest in promoting a confrontation with Iran — Fox News recently ran a special report called, “Iran: The Ticking Bomb” — would kind of coverage would this week’s news receive?

I decided to search Nexis to find out. I focused on Fox News’ four prime-time political shows: Special Report with Brit Hume, The Big Story (John Gibson), The O’Reilly Factor, and Hannity & Colmes. I then checked Monday’s transcripts, reflecting the news the day the NIE conclusions were announced, and Tuesday’s transcripts, following the president’s press conference on the NIE.........

Read the rest. Fair and balanced? :D

[delayjf]

So now its Shot the Messenger
I never insulting anyone, I simply pointed out that the NIE is not based on real time intelligence - which is Top-Secret. I just read that other countries are not as confident in the NIE as some on this board are. I would feel more confident if the IAEA were to inspect Iran.

[riskman]

delayjf--Thanks for bringing this thread back on topic.

[riskman]

With very rare exceptions, the intelligence agencies always get it wrong. That they got it wrong with Iraq, and possibly with Iran (either earlier, or now, or both) is not news: that is what they do.

This latest NIE makes it more difficult for the administration to use this argument to justify an act of aggression against a non-existent threat. But if the administration is determined to attack Iran, they have plenty of other arguments to use, and many of those arguments have the full and enthusiastic support of the Democrats.The most likely way in which a conflict with Iran may still occur in the very near future: is the direct result of the continuing occupation of Iraq.

Even if the number of American troops is reduced to 50,000 or 70,000 in the next few years, we will be there for decades into the future; no prominent politician, Democrat or Republican, opposes that plan, which was the plan from the outset. As a number of knowledgeable people predicted prior to the Iraq invasion, Iran has been the primary victor in this imperial disaster. The episode with the British sailors recently demonstrated, as have any number of other incidents, that the longer we remain in Iraq, the greater the likelihood that some incident, real or manufactured, will lead to open conflict with Iran, and to the attack on Iran that every leading politician seems to long for. Our ruling pols are determined to effect "regime change" in Iran in any case, but a border incident or one of some other kind might hasten the schedule, and make a U.S. attack easier to "sell" to a gullible American public.
Remember this story:
"The United States has decided to designate Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, the country's 125,000-strong elite military branch, as a "specially designated global terrorist," according to U.S. officials, a move that allows Washington to target the group's business operations and finances.The Bush administration has chosen to move against the Revolutionary Guard Corps because of what U.S. officials have described as its growing involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as its support for extremists throughout the Middle East, the sources said. The decision follows congressional pressure on the administration to toughen its stance against Tehran, as well as U.S. frustration with the ineffectiveness of U.N. resolutions against Iran's nuclear program, officials said."

One of the major purposes of this designation is to bring an attack on Iran within the 2002 Authorization of Military Force against Iraq. But what many people miss is that the "terrorist" designation also brings an Iran attack within the language of the 2001 AUMF. Moreover, while the specific language in the final sections of both AUMFs is relevant, no one seems to pay attention to the critical prefatory statements.

The final introductory paragraph of the 2001 AUMF states:
Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States...

The Senate approved -- by a vote of 97 to nothing -- an amendment that accuses Iran of committing acts of war against the United States. Thus, if we were to attack to Iran, we would purportedly only be acting defensively, and in response to what Iran has already done. This resolution was pushed in large part by Lieberman. Democrats may condemn the former Democrat all they wish: the fact remains that every Democratic Senator who voted on this measure voted for it. When the wider war begins, they will have no serious basis on which to object.(sound familiar)

In a similar manner, the House approved a resolution -- by a vote of 411 to 2 -- that contained this language:
Whereas Iran has aggressively pursued a clandestine effort to arm itself with nuclear weapons....

More scenarios--Perhaps Israel is attacked. Again, the calls for retribution would be universal, and not a single major voice would be raised in opposition. Probably the government of Pakistan is toppled; that is close to happening even today. And then we would need to worry about actual nukes getting into the hands of those who might genuinely wish to attack us. The possibilities are many, but they all lead to the same end: widening war, war, and more war.

Got it ? This intelligence report means --NOTHING !!!! Bush has a policy--It is WAR ON IRAN--Does he have enough time and reasons real and imagined to do it?

[The Judge]

Makes sense to me.

[Light]

The agency that puts together the NIE is only one of many intel agencies.


Wrong. The NIE's findings are considered the ultimate documents because they comprise information from ALL 16 U.S. intelligence agencies including the FBI,CIA and NSA.

FYI,the NIE had come out with a similar report one year ago. Apparently Dick Cheney did not like it's findings on Iran back then and asked them to work harder on their intelligence. This was right before the 2006 elections.

[46zilzal]

The rutabaga who tries to roar knew in August but kept beating the war drums, maybe looking for another reason to bomb them.....Warmongering fool.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/05/bush.iran/index.html

[The Judge]

From The CNN article by 46...In October, the president told reporters, "If you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be preventing [Iran] from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon."

Does this mean that they don't know how to make a bomb without someones help? Sounds that why to me.

[JustRalph]

From The CNN article by 46...In October, the president told reporters, "If you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be preventing [Iran] from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon."

Does this mean that they don't know how to make a bomb without someones help? Sounds that why to me.


That is exactly true........and there are several scientists that would be willing to show them for the right money...............see Pakistan.............for reference. The further along in the program you get.........the more you learn. The easier it gets to duplicate the process. Denying them the tools on a regular basis can set them back by years.

[hcap]

"Second, the fact that the main conclusions of the report were known in top policy circles since at least last summer, if not well before then, helps explain why the administration’s hawks (and their neo-con allies) — culminating in Cheney’s late October speech to the Washington Institute on Near East Policy (WINEP) — started hyping Iran’s alleged direction of attacks on U.S. soldiers and marines in Iraq in August. It was clear by then that the nuclear pretext for war would suffer a serious setback whenever the NIE would be published, so that a new pretext needed to be pressed hard. Of course, the senior ranks of the Pentagon, including Gates, have since pushed back pretty hard against Cheney’s allegations, as I pointed out in this space most recently one month ago, although that particular pretext — and the opportunity for an “incident” in Iraq that could quickly escalate into a major U.S. attack — remains a distinct possibility. (Al Qaeda has probably been trying to figure out how to arrange such an incident for some time.)"--Jim Lobe

[lsbets]

I asked a friend of mine in the intel business his thoughts on Iran. His basic points were:

- he feels Chuck Hagel has the most common sense policy ideas vis a vis Iran
- Iran is still developing ICBMs - why? No need without nukes
- developing weapons was never Iran's top priority, they wanted to raise oil prices and prop up the hardliners
- although developing weapons was never the top priority, it more than likely remains a goal which will be pursued in the coming years

This guy is definately not a "neocon" or a Republican. He left his job for four months to volunteer on Democrat campaigns during the 06 election cycle. But, as much as he thinks Bush is an idiot, he also thinks the Democrats are just as bad because of their obsession with making Bush look bad rather than doing what's right.

[delayjf]

Second, the fact that the main conclusions of the report
ARE FOUR YEARS OLD.

According to USA Today the president had not seen the report as of Aug.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-08-23-intel-iran_N.htm?csp=34

Interesting article about the Three who aurthored the NIE:
"The three main authors of this report are former State Department officials with previous reputations that should lead one to doubt their conclusions. All three are ex-bureaucrats who, as is generally true of State Department types, favor endless rounds of negotiation and 'diplomacy' and oppose confrontation. These three officials, according to the Wall Street Journal, have 'reputations as hyper-partisan anti-Bush officials.' 'They are Tom Fingar, formerly of the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research; Vann Van Diepen, the National Intelligence Officer for WMD; and Kenneth Brill, the former U.S. Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)' Tom Fingar was a State Department employee who was an expert on China and Germany -- he has no notable experience, according to his bio in the Middle East and its geopolitics. Vann Van Diepen is also a career State Department bureaucrat, who, according to the New York Sun, is one of the State Department bureaucrats who want 'revenge' for having their views regarding Iran ignored by the Bush Administration. He is now seeking to further his own agenda.

"As the Sun wrote in their editorial yesterday: 'Vann Van Diepen, one of the estimate's main authors, has spent the last five years trying to get America to accept Iran's right to enrich uranium. Mr. Van Diepen no doubt reckons that in helping push the estimate through the system, he has succeeded in influencing the policy debate in Washington. The bureaucrats may even think they are stopping another war.' Vann Diepen also shares a lack of experience in dealing with Iran or the region. The third main author comes in for particular criticism in the Wall Street Journal editorial. Kenneth Brill served as the US Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency (the IAEA). This is an agency that has served to enable Iranian's quest for nuclear weapons. The head of the IAEA, Mohamed ElBaradei, has even been called a friend by the Iranian regime. As he should be, for he has been an enabler of its nuclear weapons program and has stiff-armed European Union diplomats who have worked to restrain Iran. ElBaradei and the IAEA have over-reached and now seek to control diplomatic negotiations with Iran -- a function that is beyond its mandate. Brill was apparently unwilling to stop this mission creep and put an end to ElBaradei's efforts to help Iran. Or, as the Wall Street Journal hints, maybe he was just incompetent. This hint comes from former US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton's (who headed counter-proliferation efforts in the State Department previous to his UN posting)," and he has a book out, you've heard what he said about all this on Fox last night.

Bottom line, they need to examine the evidense supporting their conclusions.

[delayjf]

"Second, the fact that the main conclusions of the report were known in top policy circles since at least last summer,
What is your source for the above. NPR link below shows a timeline that is different from yours.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16962491&ft=1&f=1003

[The Judge]

Iran can't make a bomb on their own. Yet they are to be bombed thats insane! I must assume pressure was placed on those that had the knowledge and they either stopped, which means the program stopped or they kept going until Iran abandoned the bomb program altogether.

Therefore I must say there is no country on the face of this planet that the United States could not get to stop (thru talk ) providing assistance too Iran for bomb making. This includes China, Russia, India, Pakistan, or any of the other countries with nuclear knowledge enough to make a bomb.

Bombing Iran when they can't even make a bomb on their own is crazy.

Why would any of these countries want Iran to have a bomb ? They wouldn't, hoever was over there was more then likely spying on Iran and giving them the run around on the technology. I am sure if that is the case the UNited States shared in all knowledge gained thru the spying . Its the only thing that makes sense.

[Tom]

Jeff, it is my understanding that this report is markedly different than one in July. Also, a carrer intelligence writer said yesterday that the language of this report is a departure from normal protocal - akin to CNN not only reporting the news as they wish it were, but inserting commentary into it as well.

From USA Today, Mordechai Kedar, former Israeli military intelligence officer for 25 years and currently a researcher for the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies doens't agree with the NIE report at all. His comments: "This is a matter of interpretaion of data.........Only a blind man cannot see thier efforts to put a hand on a nuclear weapon. They are threatening the world."

[ArlJim78]

Its clear the wording at the beginning of the report is politically motivated. In particular the judgement with high confidence that the reason for halting the weaponization aspect of the project was due to "international scrutiny and pressure". why are they so certain that it had nothing to do with the US taking over Iraq looking for WMD's? when have these guys ever cared about international scrutiny.

In total the report really doesn't say much for certain, and Bush is right that we should stay the course and keep the pressure on.

its laughable how the left seems to want to pick and choose which Intelligence reports to believe. the ones that showed WMD's in Iraq where made up lies, this current one is like gospel.

[ddog]

none of this matters now.

Condi is running the show , Bush is going for the diplomatic track to burnish the old legacy.

The mil doesn't want any part of Iran now.

it's over .

[delayjf]

Jeff, it is my understanding that this report is markedly different than one in July.
Here are some quotes from One of the Authors of the recent NIE back in July.
Deputy Director of Analysis Thomas Fingar," one of the three authors of the NIE, "gave the following testimony before the House Armed Services Committee: 'Iran and North Korea are the states of most concern to us. The United States' concerns about Iran are shared by many nations, including many of Iran's neighbors. Iran is continuing to pursue uranium enrichment and has shown more interest in protracting negotiations and working to delay and diminish the impact of UNSC sanctions than in reaching an acceptable diplomatic solution. We assess that Tehran is determined to develop nuclear weapons -- despite its international obligations and international pressure. This is a grave concern to the other countries in the region whose security would be threatened should Iran acquire nuclear weapons.'"
It was clear by then that the nuclear pretext for war would suffer a serious setback whenever the NIE would be published, so that a new pretext needed to be pressed hard.So Hcap tell me again how Cheney knew of this weeks report about a year ago when one of its Authors was telling the opposite story only this past summer.

[JustRalph]

Here are some quotes from One of the Authors of the recent NIE back in July.

So Hcap tell me again how Cheney knew of this weeks report about a year ago when one of its Authors was telling the opposite story only this past summer.

amazing how f'ed up our intelligence is now. The intel community testifies to one thing and writes a report that causes a war on the whitehouse. Intel has been against this whitehouse for the last 7 years.......but this was just too bold............I suggest the SOB be prosecuted for perjury in front of congress

[Light]

its laughable how the left seems to want to pick and choose which Intelligence reports to believe.

What was the evidence presented for WMD's? A picture of a couple of deserted Falafel stands. If they have viable evidence of anything they need to show it or prove it. The president and vice presidents word is not proof of crap.It is crap.

[The Judge]

Deleted bvuy the Judge posted below

[The Judge]

AlJIM, the reason we don't want to believe that report is that it has been proven to be a lie! At some point you have to stop believing in lies! The new report isn't new and it's report's not report, by two seperate countries reaching the same conclusion. One of the Agencies is yours that you chose. Why wouldn't you believe that report.

There is only one logical reason . The report that said there were WMD's that allow you to plung the country into WAR you liked and the one to stop you from going to WAR you didn't like, so it was hid. Simple not complex at all

[ddog]

Its clear the wording at the beginning of the report is politically motivated. In particular the judgement with high confidence that the reason for halting the weaponization aspect of the project was due to "international scrutiny and pressure". why are they so certain that it had nothing to do with the US taking over Iraq looking for WMD's? when have these guys ever cared about international scrutiny.

In total the report really doesn't say much for certain, and Bush is right that we should stay the course and keep the pressure on.

its laughable how the left seems to want to pick and choose which Intelligence reports to believe. the ones that showed WMD's in Iraq where made up lies, this current one is like gospel.

VP said today HE had no reason to doubt it.
He was one of the guys in the sit room that the Intel guys had to convince.
He said they did it.
I am going with him on this one at this point.

[Tom]

What was the evidence presented for WMD's? A picture of a couple of deserted Falafel stands. If they have viable evidence of anything they need to show it or prove it. The president and vice presidents word is not proof of crap.It is crap.

Add to those two virtually EVERYONE else......did you miss PA's video?
Amazing how selective some minds are.

[Tom]

AlJIM, the reason we don't want to believe that report is that it has been proven to be a lie! At some point you have to stop believing in lies! The new report isn't new and it's report's not report, by two seperate countries reaching the same conclusion. One of the Agencies is yours that you chose. Why wouldn't you believe that report.

There is only one logical reason . The report that said there were WMD's that allow you to plung the country into WAR you liked and the one to stop you from going to WAR you didn't like, so it was hid. Simple not complex at all


Go watch PA's video.
It really is that simple.

[Greyfox]

.
It really is that simple.

Agreed. No nukes is good nukes.
Or was that no news is good news...
Or was that no nudes is good nudes...
Agreed.

[PaceAdvantage]

Go watch PA's video.
It really is that simple.It really does shut people up, or so I've noticed....no reaction at all to something that is truly a site to behold....I'll post it again:

ePb6H-j51xE

[ArlJim78]

great video, it illustrates one of the reasons why Americans are loathe to turn over the responsibility for national security to this bunch. being a political opportunist is not leadership. being a leader is having a vision of what is right and staying the course even when it might appear unpopular and like political suicide. Most people don't want someone with a moistened finger for president and commander in chief.

[ljb]

Ok,
I watched the video put out by the GOP. Now I have two questions.
1. They have a title screen "TODAY" and then show a clip of Bush giving a speech in 2005. ?
2. Isn't Saddam dead ?

[ljb]

Well now I know why Mr. Paceadvantage posted the video. and in order to be "fair and balanced" I will repost the link that so stirred him up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgfzqulvhlQ
This video from youtube should also be watched by all don't you think ?
Respectfully re-submitted by ljb
Thank you

[JustRalph]

Well now I know why Mr. Paceadvantage posted the video. and in order to be "fair and balanced" I will repost the link that so stirred him up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgfzqulvhlQ
This video from youtube should also be watched by all don't you think ?
Respectfully re-submitted by ljb
Thank you


What the hell does that video have to do with the individuals in PA's video being lying hypocrites?

[JustMissed]

It really does shut people up, or so I've noticed....no reaction at all to something that is truly a site to behold....I'll post it again:

ePb6H-j51xE

Boy Mike, that was a dandy.

You got Madaline Albright, when disclosed that she was Jewish,at age 70, claimed she did not know her background.

You got an impeached President who lost his law license for lying to a grand jury. He just days ago claimed he never supported Bush's invasion of Iraq. Was he lying then or is he lying now.

You have Sandy Berger, a convicted felon, who stole top secrets from the U.S. Government archives by stuffing them into his socks and underpants.

Then you got mobbed up Harry Reed from Las Vegas.

Then you got Nancy Pelosi who represents San Francisco, I believe that is the city that has outlawed Boy Scouts.

Then you got Hillary Clinton of WhiteWaterGate, Vince Foster, TravelGate fame who stole the furniture, china and everything else she could get her hands on when she left the Whitehouse. Not to mention her brother took thousands of dollars from Clinton pardonees. Gee, I bet he gave her and Bill a real nice Christmas present that year.

Mike, it is a strange bed you have chosen to lay in. I would have thought much better of you than that.

JM :(

[Light]

That video does not excuse any of the crimes the Bush administration has done.

[JustRalph]

That video does not excuse any of the crimes the Bush administration has done.

It wasn't posted to excuse anything. It was posted to point out the hypocrites of the Left/Dems. They started the ball rolling and when somebody actually pulled the trigger........they acted like they never heard of the cause.

[Light]

ALL politicians lie. But the ones that can admit their mistakes seem more honest.

[Greyfox]

ALL politicians lie. But the ones that can admit their mistakes seem more honest.


Light

Have you ever told a lie?

[Greyfox]

That video does not excuse any of the crimes the Bush administration has done.


Light,

I don't know about that. I did say on another thread that the videos
brought me to think that:

Military Intelligence is an Oxymoron.

[Light]

Light

Have you ever told a lie?

Yes. But lying only hurts me. A lying politician hurts alot of people.

[Greyfox]

Yes. But lying only hurts me. A lying politician hurts alot of people.

Sorry Light

But "Lying only hurts me."

....a logic not possible for me to follow.
Lying hurts everyman.

[hcap]

I suspect more batteries are required

http://www.bartcop.com/brainless-monkey.JPG

[hcap]

Maybe this why the NIE was updated.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-usiran9dec09,0,3638197.story?page=1&coll=la-home-center

1CIA has recruited Iranians to defect

Porter J. Goss was the CIA director when the agency launched the defector program in 2005. The secret campaign was launched two years ago to undermine Tehran's nuclear program. It has persuaded a 'handful' of key officials to leave.



2White House reversal

"The administration's decision to step up intelligence collection on Iran in 2005 was a reversal from a position the White House took after President Bush was first elected. Former CIA officials said that the agency had built up a large Iran Task Force, made up of nearly 100 officers and analysts at headquarters, by the end of the Clinton administration. But that office shrank to fewer than a dozen officers early in the Bush administration, when the White House ordered resources shifted to other targets.

"When Bush came in, they were totally disinterested in Iran," said a former CIA official who held a senior position at the time. "It went from being a main focus to everything being switched to Iraq."

....Some of that reduced task force capacity has been restored, former CIA officials said. Two years ago, the agency created an Iran division within its overseas spying operations, applying to a single country resources and emphasis usually reserved for multinational regions.

OK, bring on the CLINTONDIDITTTOOs

[hcap]

White House Press conference on Dec. 4th.

Q Mr. President, Iraq's WMD turned out not to be there, and now Iran halted its nuclear program in 2003. Are you concerned that the United States is losing credibility in the world, and now may be seen as the boy who cries -- who called wolf?

THE PRESIDENT: Actually, I am -- I want to compliment the intelligence community for their good work. Right after the failure of intelligence in Iraq, we reformed the intel community so that there was a lot of serious considerations of NIEs in a way that would give us confidence.


Right after? That was back in 2003.
Bush caught with his tongue in the pickle jar.
George W. Churchill. :lol:

[46zilzal]

They don't cry wolf, they just "make up" what they want and pass it off as fact.

But then one should really question a clown who continually talks like this: "By the way, nothin' finer than bein' a New York City fire fighter. He rushed to the scene of the World Trade Center on September the 11th, 2001. While others were leavin', he's a bunch of 'em that went in."
-White House, Nov. 16, 2007

[Tom]

Frankly, 46, one would have to be pretty much of a simpleton not to get the message he was sending out. After all is said and done, isn't the the purpose of communication? You should try listneing to more messages and stop wasting your time trying to atttack the messengers. It is the mark of a small, unintelligent men.

[46zilzal]

Frankly, 46, one would have to be pretty much of a simpleton not to get the message he was sending out. After all is said and done, isn't the the purpose of communication? You should try listneing to more messages and stop wasting your time trying to atttack the messengers. It is the mark of a small, unintelligent men.
The rutabaga, in thought word and deed is the second to none in a list of idiots who has done irreversible harm to the planet, his country, and diplomacy.

A fool of the most overt type: a clueless moron with power, out of touch with reality with a "God message" that does not come close to what is happening.

A burnt out alcholic who really needs a drink

A fool

[Tom]

Thak you for proving my point. You never came close to addressing any real facts or points. Only the messenger. As always.

[delayjf]

with a "God message" that does not come close to what is happening.

Please post the satanic message that you feel reflects reality...I can hardly wait.

[46zilzal]

Thak you for proving my point. You never came close to addressing any real facts or points. Only the messenger. As always.
Both the message and the messenger are brain dead when it comes to the rutabaga.

[Tom]

Aren't you violating your oath by making a diagnosis without seeing the patient and then releasing it to the public?