President of the world vs. criminal of the world

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rushfan2112. Show Rushfan2112's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    In Response to Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world:
    [QUOTE]Dear skeeter20, yes I freely admit that I hate Bush and his whole crowd, do I stew in it?..no. i watched the show last night and it was good nothing new there mostly a cheerleading event lead by Chris Mattews. I started this thread because of the tv show and the odd fact that there are arrest warrents out for Bush and company.  There was a great moment in the program showing Clinton and Bush walking as Bush was taking over the presidency and CM said "Clinton is leaving office with a 66% approval rating, a soaring stock market (though on the way down), no wars, and generally a good feeling across the country. Bush changed all that and we are still paying for it and I hate him for it. Let me ask you skeeter will your hate of Obama end when leaves the whitehouse?
    Posted by lawboy[/QUOTE]

    Oh this should be good.  How, exactly, did President Bush "change all that"?  Wait, are you one of those infowar fools that think he somehow orchestrated the attack on 9-11?  That would explain a lot.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    In Response to Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world : Call it what you want real men dont hide they confront. That beats any principle you can try to use.
    Posted by beKool[/QUOTE]

    So for you, the means don't matter...just the ends?  Throw out principles?

    That makes you no better than those you started the thread about.  Literally.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    In Response to Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world:
    [QUOTE]These are our bipartisan moderate Democrats.
    Posted by BobinVa[/QUOTE]

    If beKool and lawboy are moderate Democrats, RevWright and Rush Limbaugh are moderate Republicans.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from DamainAllen. Show DamainAllen's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    I am not in favor of US leaders being required to face judgement from any international body. 
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from WIIN12AM. Show WIIN12AM's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    In Response to Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world:
    In Response to Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world : Well that was predictable and amusing.  What exactly is "my type"?  This ought to be good for a chuckle.  Next thing you're probably going to say something bad about my dog.  The sad thing is that you have no idea the background of anyone you insult here and don't realize how ridiculous you sound when you throw out juvenile comments like that.
    Posted by Rushfan2112


    Like i said i cant get dumbed down enought to the level your type live on .


    LOL...the irony of your post is off the charts. Did the 3 yr old neighbor in your trailer park write that???
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    So, if the charges are against Bush, it's "anti-american",

    but if the charges are against Obama, it's "just desserts"...??


    Evil Knievel couldn't make that leap of logic....

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from lawboy. Show lawboy's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    Dear Rushbag~ Bush orchestrate 9-11? no he's not smart enough, ignore warnings beforehand yes because he was lazy. The "change" I speak of is the two wars, the Patriot Act, Scooter Libby, on and on and on....OH YEAH who start the bailouts of the banks again?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from WIIN12AM. Show WIIN12AM's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    Dear Rushbag~ Bush orchestrate 9-11? no he's not smart enough, ignore warnings beforehand yes because he was lazy.


    So wait...are you saying Bush told CIA/FBI to ignore the warnings? You have proof of this I assume?
    You do realize that the president isn't the one to do any of the actual work when it comes to protecting the US right? You do realize it's the military and the agents with CIA/FBI/Seret Service/Etc. So his "being lazy" is just hyperbole on your part. But you knew that.
    If you're going to bash Bush you could at least get it right and stop with the Left-wing talking points.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rushfan2112. Show Rushfan2112's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    In Response to Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world:
    [QUOTE]Dear Rushbag~ Bush orchestrate 9-11? no he's not smart enough, ignore warnings beforehand yes because he was lazy. The "change" i speak of is the the two wars, the Patriot Act, Scooter Libby, on and on and on....OH YEAH who start the bailouts of the banks again?
    Posted by lawboy[/QUOTE]

    And in your narrow minded world, you believe one man is responsible for everything you just mentioned?  You are somehow an expert and were there to witness "lazy"?  President Clinton received warnings for 8 years, and by many accounts, had opportunity to do something about it and didn't.  How would you characterize inaction?

    President Bush made two wars happen?  He made the Patriot Act?  Bank bailouts?  He just bypassed the house and senate and "poof" made all that happen?  Got it.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from lawboy. Show lawboy's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    Bush received a memo stating that terrorists were going attack via jet planes.
    Bush reportedly "thank you you've covered your a--" and ignored it.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from WIIN12AM. Show WIIN12AM's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    Bush received a memo stating that terrorists were going attack via jet planes.
    Bush reportedly "thank you you've covered your a--" and ignored it.


    LOL....the scary part is you actually believe that is how it all went down. I assume you have a link to the memo that stated terrorists would use jet planes to attack us? I assume the memo outlined when and where the attack would occur since that is kind of important info to have. And if they new all this why hadn't Clinton's admin done anything about it before leaving office? Did they just wash their hands of it and hope the next group might do something?
    And again, it's not really up to the president to ignore since it's not his actual job to do the work. It would be up to the CIA/FBI to ignore
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from lawboy. Show lawboy's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    Bush knew of terrorist plot to hijack US planes

    Terrorism crisis - Observer special

    George Bush received specific warnings in the weeks before 11 September that an attack inside the United States was being planned by Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network, US government sources said yesterday.

    In a top-secret intelligence memo headlined 'Bin Laden determined to strike in the US', the President was told on 6 August that the Saudi-born terrorist hoped to 'bring the fight to America' in retaliation for missile strikes on al-Qaeda camps in Afghanistan in 1998.

    Bush and his aides, who are facing withering criticism for failing to act on a series of warnings, have previously said intelligence experts had not advised them domestic targets were considered at risk. However, they have admitted they were specifically told that hijacks were being planned.

    The news comes as unease about prosecution of the war in Afghanistan grows. British troops deployed near the eastern Afghan city of Khost failed yesterday to locate any of the al-Qaeda fighters who, it is claimed, ambushed an Australian SAS patrol.

    Senior sources at the Ministry of Defence said yesterday that the al-Qaeda or Taliban fighters who were being pursued were numbered in 'tens'. Escape routes have been cut off by coalition forces, the sources said.

    'There has been no combat. We have established a forward operating base and are now clearing the area,' said Lt-Col Ben Curry, spokesman for the Royal Marines at Bagram air base.

    MoD sources also said that the mystery illness which has struck British troops at Bagram has been identified as the winter vomiting disease which swept Britain earlier this year. The disease is common around the world and is caused by poor sanitation and hygeine. One possibility is that food brought in by civilian contractors through Pakistan may be to blame.

    An American operation in the east of Afghanistan has also been criticised after hundreds of troops deployed after a series of missile attacks on US troops in Khost failed to find the enemy or to prevent new attacks.

    For the first time in the war on terrorism, which has pushed his popularity levels to almost unheard of heights, Bush and his administration are on the defensive. The White House has revealed that Bush asked for an intelligence analysis of al-Qaeda attacks within the US because most of the information presented to him over the summer focused on threats to targets overseas.

    However, there are growing demands for an independent investigation. The intelligence services have already been heavily criticised for failing to act on a series of clues that might have led them to the hijackers.

    Sources quoted by the Washington Post and ABC TV said that at least two names listed in a July 2001 FBI memo about an Arizona flight school had been identified by the CIA as having links to al-Qaeda. But the memo was not acted on or distributed to outside agencies.

    And, while administration officials have said repeatedly that intelligence analysts never imagined that terrorists would use planes in a suicide attack, a 1999 report for the National Intelligence Council warned that fanatics loyal to bin Laden might try to hijack a jetliner and fly it into the Pentagon.

    The memo received by Bush on 6 August contained unconfirmed information passed on by British intelligence in 1998 revealing that al-Qaeda operatives had discussed hijacking a plane to negotiate the release of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, the Muslim cleric imprisoned in America for his part in a plot to blow up the World Trade Centre in 1993.

    Plans for ousting the Taliban and dismantling the al-Qaeda network were already under way when the terrorists struck in New York and at the Pentagon. One option was to arm Afghanistan's Northern Alliance - a ploy eventually used successfully during the war last autumn.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world



    In Response to Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world:
    [QUOTE]Bush received a memo stating that terrorists were going attack via jet planes. Bush reportedly "thank you you've covered your a--" and ignored it.
    Posted by lawboy[/QUOTE]

    Right.  and I just got an email giving me tonight's lottery numbers.


     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from WIIN12AM. Show WIIN12AM's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    They didn't know where or when...like I said...kind of important. Why you ask? Well, what could authorities do with ONLY knowing terrorists MIGHT use planes to attack. Do you know how many airports are in the US? Do you know how many airports are overseas? Were we supposed to have agents camped out at every airport 24/7 365 days a year to prevent it? You do realize that isn't feasible right? So to say he "ignored" the intelligence is quite misleading. There wasn't much to the intelligence.
    Hell, Clinton's admin had info in 1998 and 1999 about plane hijacking yet it took years from that point to happen. Point being that Clinton didn't actively do anything to stop the eventual hijacking because there really wasn't any possible way to. If someone wants to attack this country they will find a way.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from lawboy. Show lawboy's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    Hmmmm? we have TSA in EVERY airport now......Why not then?  because they ignored it and were lazy.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    In Response to Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world:
    [QUOTE]Hmmmm? we have TSA in EVERY airport now......Why not then?  because they ignored it and were lazy.
    Posted by lawboy[/QUOTE]

    I'm one of the last people to defend Bush/Cheney, but come on.  The degree to which they can be blamed for failure to prevent is directly correlated with the specificity and veracity of the intelligence.

    Otherwise you might as well say that Deval Patrick is a criminal because he hasn't lined Boston's seafront with anti-tidal-wave walls.

    Chances are virtually zero of a 100 footer hitting us, but hey, we have information that it's possible if there's a meteor or earthquake in the wrong place. So....  we're forewarned.  Sort of.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    In Response to Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world:
    [QUOTE]Hmmmm? we have TSA in EVERY airport now......Why not then?  because they ignored it and were lazy.
    Posted by lawboy[/QUOTE]

    Right.  The good ole days ofthe Bush administration, when you could just walk right onto a plane, just like the Clinton administration.

    I think the problem was that the TSA wasn't unionized.  Getting them into a union makes them smarter, and they will do their job better.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rushfan2112. Show Rushfan2112's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    In Response to Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world:
    [QUOTE]Hmmmm? we have TSA in EVERY airport now......Why not then?  because they ignored it and were lazy.
    Posted by lawboy[/QUOTE]

    Wow, you just have a hard time with reality, don't you?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from WIIN12AM. Show WIIN12AM's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    In Response to Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world:
    [QUOTE]Hmmmm? we have TSA in EVERY airport now......Why not then?  because they ignored it and were lazy.
    Posted by lawboy[/QUOTE]

    TSA? Bwahahahahahahaha....THAT'S your answer to capturing terrorist? TSA? Bwahahahahahaha
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from lawboy. Show lawboy's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    19 terrorist boarded planes that day, if they ran the names and did the body search yes just maybe they stop them. 


    It's a better plan than just ignoring it.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    In Response to Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world:
    [QUOTE]Hmmmm? we have TSA in EVERY airport now......Why not then?  because they ignored it and were lazy.
    Posted by lawboy[/QUOTE]

    I know how we are goingto scare the terrorists right out of their underwear.

    We unionize the TSA.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from WIIN12AM. Show WIIN12AM's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    Lawboy wrote:
    19 terrorist boarded planes that day, if they ran the names and did the body search yes just maybe they stop them.
     


    You mean the body searches going on now that people like you are against? Uh huh....gotcha.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from lawboy. Show lawboy's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    Who said I was against them? You guys are idiots. Remember don't ASSume. What was the response to 9-11? Security at airports DUH!

    skeeter please stop posting it's painful to watch.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    In Response to Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world:
    [QUOTE]I won't mention the fact that Clinton and Co, were found GUILTY of war crimes by an international tribunal of 11 countries led by the, uhm, ever so conservative (yuk yuk), Ramsey Clark.  19 counts, guilty on all. Ah, but  I promised not to mention that.  My bad.
    Posted by GreginMeffa[/QUOTE]

    Ramsey Clark, the only Attorney General worse than Holder.  Carter appointed this commie, anti-american, person.  I think Obama is trying to top Carter in this area.


     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world

    In Response to Re: President of the world vs. criminal of the world:
    [QUOTE]Who said I was against them? You guys are idiots. Remember don't ASSume. What was the response to 9-11? Security at airports DUH! skeeter please stop posting it's painful to watch.
    Posted by lawboy[/QUOTE]

    you are probably an inch away from tryin gto tell us is is all Bush's fault.

    COME ON!! DO IT! DO IT!!  YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO!!!
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share