Strabo wrote:
In OT - Federalist on Sat, 13 Aug 2005 17:53:01 -0700, by
Stuart Grey, we read:


Strabo wrote:

In OT - Federalist on Mon, 8 Aug 2005 09:49:03 -0700, by Dan,
we read:



Amendment 5 to the U.S. Constitution:

"No person shall be... ...deprived of life, liberty, or property, without
due process of law;

nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just
compensation.


Cheers,

Dan


That used to be the case. The perennial national
emergencies declared by the president combined
with the Patriot Act nullifies the BOR.

Today, any American can be made to disappear at the
behest of government and there is no legal remedy.

How the hell did you come up with that?

I have a problem with the laws that say if you're ACCUSED of drug
smuggling that the government can take your property and sell it at a
profit. That's unconstitutional, and it started under Ronald Reagan.

This recent grant of power to the local governments to plunder the
wealth of their citizens is pure liberal, however.

And how do you figure that the Patriot act nullifies the Bill of Rights?
Give examples, cite specific cases, tell us of abuses. I've heard of
none. I've heard a lot of liberals blather about it, but they've never
been able to back up what they say.


You should download a copy and read it.

Here's some section descriptions.

SECTION 101 designates individual terrorists and strips them of
all rights under the “enemy combatant” designation.

Not all rights, just the right to habious corpus, per the constitution
and the GCs.

snip other distortions that I compared the original text against what
Strabo said, and found what strabo said to not be true.

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 19:51:29 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Strabo wrote:
In OT - Federalist on Sat, 13 Aug 2005 17:53:01 -0700, by
Stuart Grey, we read:


Strabo wrote:

In OT - Federalist on Mon, 8 Aug 2005 09:49:03 -0700, by Dan,
we read:



Amendment 5 to the U.S. Constitution:

"No person shall be... ...deprived of life, liberty, or property, without
due process of law;

nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just
compensation.


Cheers,

Dan


That used to be the case. The perennial national
emergencies declared by the president combined
with the Patriot Act nullifies the BOR.

Today, any American can be made to disappear at the
behest of government and there is no legal remedy.

How the hell did you come up with that?

I have a problem with the laws that say if you're ACCUSED of drug
smuggling that the government can take your property and sell it at a
profit. That's unconstitutional, and it started under Ronald Reagan.

This recent grant of power to the local governments to plunder the
wealth of their citizens is pure liberal, however.

And how do you figure that the Patriot act nullifies the Bill of Rights?
Give examples, cite specific cases, tell us of abuses. I've heard of
none. I've heard a lot of liberals blather about it, but they've never
been able to back up what they say.


You should download a copy and read it.

Here's some section descriptions.

SECTION 101 designates individual terrorists and strips them of
all rights under the “enemy combatant” designation.

Not all rights, just the right to habious corpus, per the constitution
and the GCs.

snip other distortions that I compared the original text against what
Strabo said, and found what strabo said to not be true.

Winger madness ...
--
Cliff

Cliff wrote:
SECTION 101 designates individual terrorists and strips them of
all rights under the “enemy combatant” designation.

Excellent, about time.

Winger madness ...


Yep, your side lost, and will continue to do so until
you have a better plan for the USA.
Screaming "Bush Lied" is not a plan that will work.
You did not learn that in 2000 and in 2004 the Dems lost again.
Just in case you missed it YOUR SIDE LOST.
Calling us names, and quoting people like Dean will not
CHANGE a thing.
So shut your pie hole and crawl back under your rock.
WE WON deal with it.
Mark
PS I will not waste my time researching the WMDs that have been found so
far, some has been found, just not the actual stock pile.

"Marc" wrote in message news:k1GNe.944$g47.208@trnddc07...
Cliff wrote:
SECTION 101 designates individual terrorists and strips them of
all rights under the “enemy combatant” designation.

Excellent, about time.

Winger madness ...


PS I will not waste my time researching the WMDs that have been found so far, some has been found, just not the actual stock pile.

What were they, when were they found ?

John

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 08:30:58 -0500, "John Scheldroup"
wrote:


"Marc" wrote in message news:k1GNe.944$g47.208@trnddc07...
Cliff wrote:
SECTION 101 designates individual terrorists and strips them of
all rights under the “enemy combatant” designation.

Excellent, about time.

Winger madness ...


PS I will not waste my time researching the WMDs that have been found so far, some has been found, just not the actual stock pile.

What were they, when were they found ?

John

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...2920-5897r.htm

Gunner

In article k1GNe.944$g47.208@trnddc07, Marc wrote:

Cliff wrote:
SECTION 101 designates individual terrorists and strips them of
all rights under the ³enemy combatant² designation.

Excellent, about time.

Winger madness ...


Yep, your side lost, and will continue to do so until
you have a better plan for the USA.
Screaming "Bush Lied" is not a plan that will work.
You did not learn that in 2000 and in 2004 the Dems lost again.
Just in case you missed it YOUR SIDE LOST.

with nigh on 1800 dead soldiers
18000 wounded and maimed
unknown number of innocent iraqis maimed and killed
and the entire world hostile to the usa

who has lost and who has won?

osama bin ladens plan is to make the mideast so expensive
that the usa will have to abandon it
and let him take over

how many more years do you think the usa
can stomach occupying iraq?

shrub is already looking for exit before november 2006 elections

is gasoline three dollars a gallon for you yet?
does your employer still provide health insurance?
do you still have have health insurance? dental insurance?
is the number of high paying jobs increasing or decreasing?
are droughts and hurricanes a precursor of the warmer earth?

will south america regard usa actions in columbia and venezula
as a good reason to align further with china against the usa?

running around saying i won i won
like some bloody child
meanwhile the world and country continue to disintegrate

who has lost and who has won?

PS I will not waste my time researching the WMDs that have been found so
far, some has been found, just not the actual stock pile.

good idea
the only one you can point to is one shell from the 1990 era

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

In article ,
"John Scheldroup" wrote:

"Marc" wrote in message
news:k1GNe.944$g47.208@trnddc07...
Cliff wrote:
SECTION 101 designates individual terrorists and strips them of
all rights under the “enemy combatant” designation.

Excellent, about time.

Winger madness ...


PS I will not waste my time researching the WMDs that have been found so
far, some has been found, just not the actual stock pile.

What were they, when were they found ?

there was one shell with degraded nerve agent found
originally from the 1990 era

it was thought to have been mislabeled
and misplaced

considering that the usa has lost a dozen hydrogen bombs over the years
perhaps we should be a little circumspect before getting too upset
over a single iraqi mistake

(the tritium decays to impotence in dozen years or so
but the fission starter bombs do not)

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 17:04:47 +0000, Gunner wrote:

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 08:30:58 -0500, "John Scheldroup"
wrote:


"Marc" wrote in message news:k1GNe.944$g47.208@trnddc07...
Cliff wrote:
SECTION 101 designates individual terrorists and strips them of
all rights under the “enemy combatant” designation.

Excellent, about time.

Winger madness ...


PS I will not waste my time researching the WMDs that have been found so far, some has been found, just not the actual stock pile.

What were they, when were they found ?

John

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...2920-5897r.htm

That is a 3rd party report of a dozen. I've heard of only one other than
what mariposa mentioned (and you snipped) above. That's two ancient,
overlooked chemical warheads that have been substantiated.

Bush lied. Powell lied. Cheney lied. Rove lied. Rice lied. Rumsfeld
lied. Wolfowitz lied. Perl lied. Not just minor mistakes, lies about a
blowjob, or lies of ommission but treasonous lies that killed Americans.

-- Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://curlysurmudgeon.com/blog/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Gunner" wrote in message news
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 08:30:58 -0500, "John Scheldroup"
wrote:


"Marc" wrote in message news:k1GNe.944$g47.208@trnddc07...
Cliff wrote:
SECTION 101 designates individual terrorists and strips them of
all rights under the "enemy combatant" designation.

Excellent, about time.

Winger madness ...


PS I will not waste my time researching the WMDs that have been found so far, some has been found, just not the actual stock
pile.

What were they, when were they found ?

John

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...2920-5897r.htm

Gunner


[
Charles Deulfer, the head of the CIA weapons inspection team, also said in a
television interview that weapons searchers so far have found as many as a
dozen chemical-filled bombs.
]

Clearly now, we have reasons for Bush/Cheney invading Iraq.
You think we best go and see what if Iran has 13 chemical bombs ?

BTW, Iran has steady recruits for insurgents to keep Bush/Cheney busy for 3 years or 13.

Wrong part of the hemisphere to start a war nor should we have got our asses
stuck between Iraq and hard place, but you are welcome to see things differently,
but it won't change my view that we should never have went in their even so
Saddam was a cruel leader to his people. If that were the case we should have
finished the job during the Gulf war, since it was known that Saddam was Gassing
the countries people.

It is highly unlikely that Bush/Cheney will ever be able to start another war over
in Iran, so just how much worse can they get over in Iraq, your guess is as good
as mine, I think Bush/Cheney are making the world more unsafe by the fact
Terrorist groups are popping up all over the place. Satellite intelligence, unmanned
drones, and precision missiles for the purpose of assassinating or forcing the
surrender of Saddam, at least he would have went into hiding which would actually
be good, but here again there would be retaliation for such attacks in the form
of more terrorist strikes upon US territory. Either way, these reinforcements
supplied by Iran should have been considered against foiling the plans to invade
Iraq, it is a difficult area to conquest to share in its spOils.

Removing Saddam from power, then finding 12 chemical-filled bombs, even
some munitions left over from the Gulf war, did they really believe they were
going to build a permanent military base for intelligence gathering in that
part of the world ? I'm afraid these delusions for grandeur will not be allowed
to take up residence in that part of the world, with these insurgents coming
in from Iran and what everything else, things may get worse before they get better,
I don't need question what I believe but others should, Was it worth the trip and
its daily loss of young American men and for what because Bush / Cheney said
go and get yourself killed today.


John

A .31 second search via Google found 294 stories..........
Try Iraq-WMD-found
Sheesh...... Did you ride the "Short" bus to school ?
Now pull your head out of your A** and do some homework.

While I don't believe everything our leaders tell me ....
President Bush, 2 degrees.
Rummy, has degree too, but I am to lazy to look it up.
Dr. Condi Rice PHd.
The list goes on and on.

I find it very hard to listen to liberals , for example ....Pick any
50 Hollywierd actor types and they will usually have at most 1 college
degree out of the 50 , and are high school grads, plus the drop-outs.
And I am supposed to base my info on them ?
Yes, they can read lines in a movie, so how does that make them
world experts on anything. They are ACTORS.

Then there is that screed ....Bush is stupid....
Grad of Harvard and Yale ( doesn't matter who your daddy is, might help
to get in( last I checked that is not against the law) , if you don't
do the class work, no grades and no diploma)

President Bush also got into the Tex ANG ( maybe some family connections
there, not against the law last time I checked, unfair maybe ) Only the
top 1% get to go to flight school, and the fly Jet fighters.
Kinda knocks the bottom out of that ............
Marc

John Scheldroup wrote:
"Marc" wrote in message news:k1GNe.944$g47.208@trnddc07...

Cliff wrote:

SECTION 101 designates individual terrorists and strips them of
all rights under the “enemy combatant” designation.

Excellent, about time.


Winger madness ...


PS I will not waste my time researching the WMDs that have been found so far, some has been found, just not the actual stock pile.


What were they, when were they found ?

John

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 13:14:56 GMT, Marc wrote:

Cliff wrote:
SECTION 101 designates individual terrorists and strips them of
all rights under the “enemy combatant” designation.

Excellent, about time.

Winger madness ...


Yep, your side lost, and will continue to do so until
you have a better plan for the USA.
Screaming "Bush Lied" is not a plan that will work.
You did not learn that in 2000 and in 2004 the Dems lost again.
Just in case you missed it YOUR SIDE LOST.
Calling us names, and quoting people like Dean will not
CHANGE a thing.
So shut your pie hole and crawl back under your rock.
WE WON deal with it.
Mark
PS I will not waste my time researching the WMDs that have been found so
far, some has been found, just not the actual stock pile.

Found those "WMDs" yet?

LOL .... he's hiding under his rock !!!
--
Cliff

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 10:57:15 -0700, Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...2920-5897r.htm

That is a 3rd party report of a dozen. I've heard of only one other than
what mariposa mentioned (and you snipped) above. That's two ancient,
overlooked chemical warheads that have been substantiated.

Bush lied. Powell lied. Cheney lied. Rove lied. Rice lied. Rumsfeld
lied. Wolfowitz lied. Perl lied. Not just minor mistakes, lies about a
blowjob, or lies of ommission but treasonous lies that killed Americans.

-- Regards, Curly

Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with
the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including,
if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to
respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its
weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe
Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John
Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors
last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam
Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that
biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be
back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine
delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile
program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the
United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter
signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among
others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement
between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by
failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and
refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations
inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction,
including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive
progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a
joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18,
2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while
retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs.
We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline
Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and
some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he
has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger,
Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all
weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up
to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course
to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability.
Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons,
but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October
2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has
chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But
the United States right now is on a very much different defensive
posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as
we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't
have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I
think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as
would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq
represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did
use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to
think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international
inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques
Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of
threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction,
ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond
today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be
emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports
show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and
biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no
evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11,
2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein
will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical
warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he
succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security
landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects
American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence
back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from
gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up
and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense
William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass
destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them
against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our
allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades,
Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every
available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons.
He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and
is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to
build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to
achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national
security. It should be clear that our national security requires
Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is
united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its
weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf
and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his
access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of
mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we
should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in
power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that
Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing
capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass
destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to
deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction."
-- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27,
2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger,
that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass
destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy,
Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the
authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein
because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction
in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F.
Kerry, Oct 2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is
real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end
of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after
Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has
continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years
to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the
interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and
the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous
dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his
offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so
consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating
America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp
for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the
United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding
that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of
Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not
new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." --
John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19,
2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological
weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for
the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and
biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N.
inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear
facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various
reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons
capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear
weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical
weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological
weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used
chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish
population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the
past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can
be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining
weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware
that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue
of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in
the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a
threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the
weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible
intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq
still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and
clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen
bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue
manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons
of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and
mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and
ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use
industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute
large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector
Scott Ritter in 1998

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear
weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he
can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources --
something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also
should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has
made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John
Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a
very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons
before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is
working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial
vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and
U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy
towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s
conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past
11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he
disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any
nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he
snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors;
and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the
just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security
Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the
facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:

Bush lied. Powell lied. Cheney lied. Rove lied. Rice lied. Rumsfeld
lied. Wolfowitz lied. Perl lied. Not just minor mistakes, lies about a
blowjob, or lies of ommission but treasonous lies that killed Americans.

-- Regards, Curly

Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats

you keep commenting on the failure of the congress
to properly control the cia
in the collection of intelligence

exactly when was the cia and other intelligence gathering operations
in the dod and state department and elsewhere
transfered from the executive branch to the legislative branch?

or perhaps as i expect
all these agencies giving intelligence to the congress
were actually still under the complete and absolute control of liars
like shurb and cheney and wolfowitz and rumsfield
whom we now know were deliberately cooking intelligence
to create a causi belli they knew to be lies

and they then fed these lies to congress to panic and deceive congress
and trick congress into authorizing its action


i suppose the real question for congress
is if they had been told the truth
would they still authorized an illegal invasion of iraq?


has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger,
Feb 18, 1998
emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998
against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998
weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector
Scott Ritter in 1998

this was during a lull in the inspections

prior to shrubs illegal invasion
the inspector were active and effective
and on the verge of proving there was no wmd
which is why shrub stopped the inspections

i note you dont include any recent quotes from scott ridder
subsequent to the renewed inspections and their results

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

On 22 Aug 2005 05:21:14 GMT, D Murphy wrote:

Guido wrote in news:de9rda$7a8$1$8302bc10
:

Gunner wrote:


Oh oh...seems that the British Gun Ban isnt working. So much for the
Uk being the model for Gun Control, eh wot?


Its working very well. Since the ban there hasn't been anyone bursting
into schools shooting the kids, nor into workplaces shooting their
colleagues.

The worst mass murders of that sort don't involve firearms. Bombs and fire
are the weapons of choice when you want to kill a lot of people.

The neocons know this well.

Unfortunately, it's probably only a matter of time.

The new nuclear arms races being a case in point.
But they can make a quick buck now ....

The US is the worlds largest arms dealer.
Pakistan & India are now both armed with Nukes. Others
too, no doubt.
The neocons are pleased.

Biologicals are probably cheaper ... someone will note this ...
--
Cliff

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 06:17:56 -0700, mariposas rand mair fheal
greykitten tomys des anges wrote:

In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:

Bush lied. Powell lied. Cheney lied. Rove lied. Rice lied. Rumsfeld
lied. Wolfowitz lied. Perl lied. Not just minor mistakes, lies about a
blowjob, or lies of ommission but treasonous lies that killed Americans.

-- Regards, Curly

Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats

you keep commenting on the failure of the congress
to properly control the cia
in the collection of intelligence

exactly when was the cia and other intelligence gathering operations
in the dod and state department and elsewhere
transfered from the executive branch to the legislative branch?


Are you referring to the CIA that was run by a Clinton appointee,
during the prior 8 yrs of the Clinton administration where 5 terrorist
attacks occured, and during which all the planning for the 9-11 event
occured? Of course...that was the same time during which the FBI
screwed the pooch as well. Something about the Clinton Seperation,
wasnt it?

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 06:17:56 -0700, mariposas rand mair fheal
greykitten tomys des anges wrote:


or perhaps as i expect
all these agencies giving intelligence to the congress
were actually still under the complete and absolute control of liars
like shurb and cheney and wolfowitz and rumsfield
whom we now know were deliberately cooking intelligence
to create a causi belli they knew to be lies

So during the 8 yrs of the Clinton Administration, during which 5
terrorist attacks occured, and which all the planning was done..Bush,
Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfield were cooking the intel?

Interesting. You do know by this time, you look like a complete putz.
Right?

Btw..read some of the dates of those quotes. Long long before Bush
ever thought about running for office.

So Flower..how are things in your rose garden?

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 06:17:56 -0700, mariposas rand mair fheal
greykitten tomys des anges wrote:


or perhaps as i expect
all these agencies giving intelligence to the congress
were actually still under the complete and absolute control of liars
like shurb and cheney and wolfowitz and rumsfield
whom we now know were deliberately cooking intelligence
to create a causi belli they knew to be lies

So during the 8 yrs of the Clinton Administration, during which 5

the clinton administration continued to 2002?

terrorist attacks occured, and which all the planning was done..Bush,
Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfield were cooking the intel?

downing street memo much?
why was clinton still making decisions in the 2001-2003 time frame?

Btw..read some of the dates of those quotes. Long long before Bush
ever thought about running for office.

you got two sets from 1998 and 2002

the 1998 quotes refer to the stalled inspection
and what was being risked by not resuming them

the inspection were resumed until terminated by shrub
because they were going to prove shrub was lying


the 2002 quotes were after shrub et al lied to the congress
about the nature of the threat

off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

you never bothered to answer if you have true self determination
if someone else is allowed to impose their own -play nice- rules on you

england was imposing play nice rules on the colonies until 1776
by letting them cross the apalachian hills
and grabbing land from the indians

those play nice rules were one of the reasons for the revolution

do you think the usa should apologize to uk and resume colonial status?

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

Are you referring to the CIA that was run by a Clinton appointee,

was clinton still president when shrub lied to congress about iraqi wmd?

occured? Of course...that was the same time during which the FBI
screwed the pooch as well. Something about the Clinton Seperation,

was clinton still president in september 2001?

at what point does shrub take responsibility for his own deceit?

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 05:37:34 +0000, Gunner Asch wrote:

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 10:57:15 -0700, Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...2920-5897r.htm

That is a 3rd party report of a dozen. I've heard of only one other than
what mariposa mentioned (and you snipped) above. That's two ancient,
overlooked chemical warheads that have been substantiated.

Bush lied. Powell lied. Cheney lied. Rove lied. Rice lied. Rumsfeld
lied. Wolfowitz lied. Perl lied. Not just minor mistakes, lies about a
blowjob, or lies of ommission but treasonous lies that killed Americans.

-- Regards, Curly

Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats

Who trusted the President and Executive office to tell the truth.
Congress, every last one of those who voted authorization to find WMD's,
should be impeached for avoiding their responibility too.

But Congress isn't in control of the intelligence sources that Bush,
CHeney, Powell, Rove, Rice, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Perl twisted to make
their case.

Yeah, nail Congress too but their failure was in dereliction of duty while
the White House is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors.

-- Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://curlysurmudgeon.com/blog/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let the record show that Gunner Asch wrote back on
Mon, 22 Aug 2005 18:06:54 GMT in misc.survivalism :
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 06:17:56 -0700, mariposas rand mair fheal
greykitten tomys des anges wrote:

In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:

Bush lied. Powell lied. Cheney lied. Rove lied. Rice lied. Rumsfeld
lied. Wolfowitz lied. Perl lied. Not just minor mistakes, lies about a
blowjob, or lies of ommission but treasonous lies that killed Americans.

-- Regards, Curly

Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats

you keep commenting on the failure of the congress
to properly control the cia
in the collection of intelligence

exactly when was the cia and other intelligence gathering operations
in the dod and state department and elsewhere
transfered from the executive branch to the legislative branch?


Are you referring to the CIA that was run by a Clinton appointee,
during the prior 8 yrs of the Clinton administration where 5 terrorist
attacks occured, and during which all the planning for the 9-11 event
occured? Of course...that was the same time during which the FBI
screwed the pooch as well. Something about the Clinton Seperation,
wasnt it?

The Clinton Separation had to do with bedroom.

The problem was in part the Gorelick Memo which applied the "wall of
separation" between Church and State to the situation between Spies and
Cops.

tschus
pyotr

p.s. Yes, I know there is no "wall of separation" between Church and State,
just as there is no grounds for separate cops and spies, unless you want to
keep the dots from being connected by not collecting the dots.
(It is amazing what doing away with reports of crimes will do for
officially lowering the crime rates.)
--
pyotr filipivich
"MTV may talk about lighting fires and killing children,
but Janet Reno actually does something about it." --Spy Magazine

In article ,
pyotr filipivich wrote:

hows that alzheimer going?

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 14:18:56 -0700, mariposas rand mair fheal
greykitten tomys des anges got double secret
probation because:

In article ,
pyotr filipivich wrote:

hows that alzheimer going?

What alzheimers?

Oh, look, a chicken

--

Pierre Salinger Hook, Line & Sinker - May, 2005

Hammer of Thor - July, 2005

In article ,
Aratzio wrote:

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 14:18:56 -0700, mariposas rand mair fheal
greykitten tomys des anges got double secret
probation because:

In article ,
pyotr filipivich wrote:

hows that alzheimer going?

What alzheimers?

Oh, look, a chicken

child children
cheek chicken
ox oxen

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 09:57:48 -0400, Cliff wrote:

Biologicals are probably cheaper ... someone will note this ...

Much cheaper...much easier to conceal...potentially much more lethal.

As long as the terrorists stick to just blowing things up, we can survive
them. Even a nuke or two.

But a single terrorist, already infected with, say, a long-incubation
airborne strain of Ebola takes a cruise on a huge luxury liner. The
passengers disembark and disperse throughout the world before the first
symptoms appear...

I only hope our bio research is well-funded and staffed.

--
Thomas

"Driven by fear, we have succumbed to the age-old temptation to sacrifice
liberty on the pretense of obtaining security. Love of security, unfortu-
nately, all too often vanquishes love of liberty." Rep. Ron Paul, R-TX

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 12:10:22 -0700, mariposas rand mair fheal
greykitten tomys des anges wrote:

In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 06:17:56 -0700, mariposas rand mair fheal
greykitten tomys des anges wrote:


or perhaps as i expect
all these agencies giving intelligence to the congress
were actually still under the complete and absolute control of liars
like shurb and cheney and wolfowitz and rumsfield
whom we now know were deliberately cooking intelligence
to create a causi belli they knew to be lies

So during the 8 yrs of the Clinton Administration, during which 5

the clinton administration continued to 2002?

all 5 of the terrorist attacks occured in 2002? All the planning was
done for 9-11 in 2002?


terrorist attacks occured, and which all the planning was done..Bush,
Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfield were cooking the intel?

downing street memo much?
why was clinton still making decisions in the 2001-2003 time frame?

He wasnt. But then..he hadnt been making much in the way of decisions
in the 8 yrs prior either...

Btw..read some of the dates of those quotes. Long long before Bush
ever thought about running for office.

you got two sets from 1998 and 2002

Ayup.

the 1998 quotes refer to the stalled inspection
and what was being risked by not resuming them

Ayup...and it was declared that Sodamn Insane was building and storing
WMD.

the inspection were resumed until terminated by shrub
because they were going to prove shrub was lying

Cites to the "proof"?


the 2002 quotes were after shrub et al lied to the congress
about the nature of the threat

Yes? Those quotes were by Democrats. And more than a few were on the
Intelligence cabinet. They got the intel every day.

off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

you never bothered to answer if you have true self determination
if someone else is allowed to impose their own -play nice- rules on you

Depends on if Im committing genocide and mass murder. Doesnt it?

england was imposing play nice rules on the colonies until 1776
by letting them cross the apalachian hills
and grabbing land from the indians

Actually..no..they were participants. The Brits were the ones who came
up with the idea of bounties on scalps too btw.

those play nice rules were one of the reasons for the revolution

Actually no.

do you think the usa should apologize to uk and resume colonial status?

Why? We imposed our own Play Nice rules on the Brits. And made it
stick.

arf meow arf -

Another brilliant comment by flower boy.

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 12:50:31 -0700, Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:

Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats

Who trusted the President and Executive office to tell the truth.
Congress, every last one of those who voted authorization to find WMD's,
should be impeached for avoiding their responibility too.

Including those Dems who were serving on the House Intelligence
Committe and were getting the raw intel every day?

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:

all 5 of the terrorist attacks occured in 2002? All the planning was
done for 9-11 in 2002?

youre right
shrub started planning to invade iraq before 2002
before september 2001

today iraq
tomorrow the middle east

lame attempt at diversion gearhead

downing street memo much?
why was clinton still making decisions in the 2001-2003 time frame?

He wasnt. But then..he hadnt been making much in the way of decisions
in the 8 yrs prior either...

does the downing street document clinton lies or shrub lies?
if clinton wasnt president then
why are jou trying to divert from shrubs lies?

the 1998 quotes refer to the stalled inspection
and what was being risked by not resuming them

Ayup...and it was declared that Sodamn Insane was building and storing
WMD.

did clinton invade iraq? if not it is irrelevant
diversion noted

the inspection were resumed until terminated by shrub
because they were going to prove shrub was lying

Cites to the "proof"?

wheres the wmd?

the 2002 quotes were after shrub et al lied to the congress
about the nature of the threat

Yes? Those quotes were by Democrats. And more than a few were on the
Intelligence cabinet. They got the intel every day.

given shrubs rabid partisanship
i didnt realize he had democrats running his intelligence cabinet

you would think he would be allowed to fire and hire people he wanted


you never bothered to answer if you have true self determination
if someone else is allowed to impose their own -play nice- rules on you

Depends on if Im committing genocide and mass murder. Doesnt it?

what is the cherokee view on this issue?

england was imposing play nice rules on the colonies until 1776
by letting them cross the apalachian hills
and grabbing land from the indians

Actually..no..they were participants. The Brits were the ones who came
up with the idea of bounties on scalps too btw.

evasion noted

those play nice rules were one of the reasons for the revolution

Actually no.

stupidity noted

do you think the usa should apologize to uk and resume colonial status?

Why? We imposed our own Play Nice rules on the Brits. And made it
stick.

what is the lakota view on this issue?

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 12:50:31 -0700, Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:

Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats

Who trusted the President and Executive office to tell the truth.
Congress, every last one of those who voted authorization to find WMD's,
should be impeached for avoiding their responibility too.

Including those Dems who were serving on the House Intelligence
Committe and were getting the raw intel every day?

were they controlling the collection of intelligence?

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges wrote:
In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:


Bush lied. Powell lied. Cheney lied. Rove lied. Rice lied. Rumsfeld
lied. Wolfowitz lied. Perl lied. Not just minor mistakes, lies about a
blowjob, or lies of ommission but treasonous lies that killed Americans.

-- Regards, Curly


Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats


you keep commenting on the failure of the congress
to properly control the cia
in the collection of intelligence

exactly when was the cia and other intelligence gathering operations
in the dod and state department and elsewhere
transfered from the executive branch to the legislative branch?

Oversight is what the congress does.

Now sit down and read you're 8th grade civics book.

In article ,
Stuart Grey wrote:

mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges wrote:
In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:


Bush lied. Powell lied. Cheney lied. Rove lied. Rice lied. Rumsfeld
lied. Wolfowitz lied. Perl lied. Not just minor mistakes, lies about a
blowjob, or lies of ommission but treasonous lies that killed Americans.

-- Regards, Curly


Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats


you keep commenting on the failure of the congress
to properly control the cia
in the collection of intelligence

exactly when was the cia and other intelligence gathering operations
in the dod and state department and elsewhere
transfered from the executive branch to the legislative branch?

Oversight is what the congress does.

interesting
so youre not denying the intelligence was cooked

but instead of blaming the cooks who cooked it
your blaming the health department for not catching it

i like this new era of responsibility

Now sit down and read you're 8th grade civics book.

so how does the congress order the cia what to do?

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:50:26 -0700, Stuart Grey
transparently proposed:

mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges wrote:
In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:


Bush lied. Powell lied. Cheney lied. Rove lied. Rice lied. Rumsfeld
lied. Wolfowitz lied. Perl lied. Not just minor mistakes, lies about a
blowjob, or lies of ommission but treasonous lies that killed Americans.

-- Regards, Curly


Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats


you keep commenting on the failure of the congress
to properly control the cia
in the collection of intelligence

exactly when was the cia and other intelligence gathering operations
in the dod and state department and elsewhere
transfered from the executive branch to the legislative branch?

Oversight is what the congress does.

Now sit down and read you're 8th grade civics book.

Oversight is not concurrent with analysis.

Now sit down and STFU.

--

Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?

mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges wrote:
In article ,
Stuart Grey wrote:


mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges wrote:

In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:



Bush lied. Powell lied. Cheney lied. Rove lied. Rice lied. Rumsfeld
lied. Wolfowitz lied. Perl lied. Not just minor mistakes, lies about a
blowjob, or lies of ommission but treasonous lies that killed Americans.

-- Regards, Curly


Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats


you keep commenting on the failure of the congress
to properly control the cia
in the collection of intelligence

exactly when was the cia and other intelligence gathering operations
in the dod and state department and elsewhere
transfered from the executive branch to the legislative branch?

Oversight is what the congress does.


interesting
so youre not denying the intelligence was cooked

Idiot. I didn't deny it because I didn't read all that stupid prattle.
The intelligence wasn't cooked. Only stupid loons think that.

The intelligence was there under Clinton as well as Bush, and was
similar to the intelligence gathered by many other countries.

IF your so stupid as to believe that your boogie man Bush was able to
"cook" all those intelligence sources, even before he took officee,
you're a damned loon.

Aratzio wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:50:26 -0700, Stuart Grey
transparently proposed:


mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges wrote:

In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:



Bush lied. Powell lied. Cheney lied. Rove lied. Rice lied. Rumsfeld
lied. Wolfowitz lied. Perl lied. Not just minor mistakes, lies about a
blowjob, or lies of ommission but treasonous lies that killed Americans.

-- Regards, Curly


Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats


you keep commenting on the failure of the congress
to properly control the cia
in the collection of intelligence

exactly when was the cia and other intelligence gathering operations
in the dod and state department and elsewhere
transfered from the executive branch to the legislative branch?

Oversight is what the congress does.

Now sit down and read you're 8th grade civics book.


Oversight is not concurrent with analysis.

Well, that's gibber.

Now sit down and STFU.

You wish. Only in your fascist socialist state will you be able to shut
up people telling the truth, you commie goon.

Now sit down and STFU.

You wish. Only in your fascist socialist state will you be able to shut
up people telling the truth, you commie goon.


does this qualify as godwin yet?

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

interesting
so youre not denying the intelligence was cooked

Idiot. I didn't deny it because I didn't read all that stupid prattle.
The intelligence wasn't cooked. Only stupid loons think that.

and the british government

The intelligence was there under Clinton as well as Bush, and was
similar to the intelligence gathered by many other countries.

and yet clinton did not invade iraq

IF your so stupid as to believe that your boogie man Bush was able to
"cook" all those intelligence sources, even before he took officee,
you're a damned loon.

do you often attack british allies?

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 05:37:34 +0000, Gunner Asch wrote:


On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 10:57:15 -0700, Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:


http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...2920-5897r.htm

That is a 3rd party report of a dozen. I've heard of only one other than
what mariposa mentioned (and you snipped) above. That's two ancient,
overlooked chemical warheads that have been substantiated.

Bush lied. Powell lied. Cheney lied. Rove lied. Rice lied. Rumsfeld
lied. Wolfowitz lied. Perl lied. Not just minor mistakes, lies about a
blowjob, or lies of ommission but treasonous lies that killed Americans.

-- Regards, Curly


Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats


Who trusted the President and Executive office to tell the truth.
Congress, every last one of those who voted authorization to find WMD's,
should be impeached for avoiding their responibility too.

I suppose they could all be liars.

I suppose you could be the liar.

(Which is more likely?)

But they all can't impeach themselves. They wouldn't have enough for the
vote. And if they are all liars, then the American people are at fault
for electing them.

And if they are liars, like you say, you need to be a better job of
making your case that they are, because you REALLY DO sound like a liar.

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 10:00:58 -0700, Stuart Grey
transparently proposed:

Aratzio wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:50:26 -0700, Stuart Grey
transparently proposed:


mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges wrote:

In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:



Bush lied. Powell lied. Cheney lied. Rove lied. Rice lied. Rumsfeld
lied. Wolfowitz lied. Perl lied. Not just minor mistakes, lies about a
blowjob, or lies of ommission but treasonous lies that killed Americans.

-- Regards, Curly


Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats


you keep commenting on the failure of the congress
to properly control the cia
in the collection of intelligence

exactly when was the cia and other intelligence gathering operations
in the dod and state department and elsewhere
transfered from the executive branch to the legislative branch?

Oversight is what the congress does.

Now sit down and read you're 8th grade civics book.


Oversight is not concurrent with analysis.

Well, that's gibber.

Do you always claim to not understand the incredibly obvious?


Now sit down and STFU.

You wish. Only in your fascist socialist state will you be able to shut
up people telling the truth, you commie goon.

WOO HOO
We hace ignition in one poast!

So do tell me cupcake, just how my pointing out you are a moron
confusing post operational congressional oversight with current
executive analysis would make me a *commie goon*.

--

Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?

Aratzio wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 10:00:58 -0700, Stuart Grey
transparently proposed:


Aratzio wrote:

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:50:26 -0700, Stuart Grey
transparently proposed:



mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges wrote:


In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:




Bush lied. Powell lied. Cheney lied. Rove lied. Rice lied. Rumsfeld
lied. Wolfowitz lied. Perl lied. Not just minor mistakes, lies about a
blowjob, or lies of ommission but treasonous lies that killed Americans.

-- Regards, Curly


Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats


you keep commenting on the failure of the congress
to properly control the cia
in the collection of intelligence

exactly when was the cia and other intelligence gathering operations
in the dod and state department and elsewhere
transfered from the executive branch to the legislative branch?

Oversight is what the congress does.

Now sit down and read you're 8th grade civics book.


Oversight is not concurrent with analysis.

Well, that's gibber.


Do you always claim to not understand the incredibly obvious?

concurrent: adj, happening or operating at the same time.

"Oversight is not happening at the same time with analysis".

Well, lets see... Oversight can happen at the same time as analysis, so
that's not true. Further, no one said anything about analysis, so that's
just a random word thrown in.

IT'S GIBBER!

And you're the idiot monkey that gibbered.

Now sit down and STFU.

You wish. Only in your fascist socialist state will you be able to shut
up people telling the truth, you commie goon.


WOO HOO
We hace ignition in one poast!

"hace"? "poast"?

So do tell me cupcake,

Okay, so you're a pervert. I'm not surprised.

just how my pointing out you are a moron

You gibber, and you're calling other people "moron"?

Pretty damn funny, but not expected from an ape.

confusing post operational congressional oversight with current
executive analysis would make me a *commie goon*.

You appear to be in a constant state of confusion.

Don't worry, it will pass... After you drop dead.

In article ,
Stuart Grey wrote:

Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 05:37:34 +0000, Gunner Asch wrote:


On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 10:57:15 -0700, Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:


http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...2920-5897r.htm

That is a 3rd party report of a dozen. I've heard of only one other than
what mariposa mentioned (and you snipped) above. That's two ancient,
overlooked chemical warheads that have been substantiated.

Bush lied. Powell lied. Cheney lied. Rove lied. Rice lied. Rumsfeld
lied. Wolfowitz lied. Perl lied. Not just minor mistakes, lies about a
blowjob, or lies of ommission but treasonous lies that killed Americans.

-- Regards, Curly


Odd..if they lied..so did these Democrats


Who trusted the President and Executive office to tell the truth.
Congress, every last one of those who voted authorization to find WMD's,
should be impeached for avoiding their responibility too.

I suppose they could all be liars.

how many of colin powells claims before the un were true?
downing street memo tells shrub was inventing facts to fit his bloodlust

I suppose you could be the liar.

my lies do not result in 1864 dead americans

But they all can't impeach themselves. They wouldn't have enough for the
vote. And if they are all liars, then the American people are at fault
for electing them.

i like this new era responsibility
the crime isnt lying
the crime is pointing out the lying

And if they are liars, like you say, you need to be a better job of
making your case that they are, because you REALLY DO sound like a liar.

doesnt matter since im not demanding you die in iraq

arf meow arf - dogs and cats living together

the erisian constancy - though chaos is transformed
but never lost to sea - grey ordered ranks are swarmed

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 10:19:40 -0700, mariposas rand mair fheal
greykitten tomys des anges transparently
proposed:

Now sit down and STFU.

You wish. Only in your fascist socialist state will you be able to shut
up people telling the truth, you commie goon.


does this qualify as godwin yet?


Hrmm, *fascist socialist state* sounds awful Godwinish. But then the
mixed signals in the *commie goon* sort of place it into the ranting
meltdown category rather than the Godwin Invoked.

--

Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?