CIA investigating whether there EVER were WMDs

PornoDoggy · 05-31-2003

Why do I think this Administration has lied to the American people?

For one thing, I think Mike is probably correct in his assessment of the relationship of oil to the decision to invade Iraq. The Administration went to great lengths to call anyone who suggested such a relationship a liar, question their motivation and their patriotism, and quite possibly their relationship with their mother. Some of the very same bobble-headed webmasters who are nodding in approval of such a policy nowdays were quite incensed when Europeans suggested the same thing on GFY, or the few liberals who poke their heads up around here suggested it.

There is also the embarassing performance of Powell at the United Nations when he presented the U.S. case. Fraudlent documents and ripped off disertation analysis don't make a compelling case. Rather than performing like Adli Stevenson, he came off like Ari Fleischer - the President said it, and he wouldn't lie. I think the absence of a discovery by this point in time indicates that there was no evidence withheld due to national security concerns.

Now, as far as "Being wrong (and that's yet to be proven....) isn't the same as lying." - you are probably on to something there. I think the deniability was built into the process. IF the WMD, like the alQaida connections, turn out to be smoke, mirrors, and spin, there will be another Whitewash at the Whitehouse. I'm beginning to think I need to get me a job selling white paint to the government. As long as I can sell it to Justice and DoD, the deficit is not a discouraging factor, and I suspect they're gonna need it.

h34r: Maybe computer databases to snop, er, detect terrorist indiclinations weren't the only thing that ADM John Pointexter was consulting on.

h34r: (please note - that is a Republican-landslide joke (52%).

Ulfie - when in doubt, invoke Clinton? Puuuuu-leaze. Could be that Clinton - or any Democrat in the office - would have made a GENUINE effort to establish a truly international coalition (as opposed to Britian, Australia, Spain, Poland, and a who's-who of the fifth world) to depose Saddam. Kinda like the Bush Administration is doing with Korea? Could be we would have focused more efforts on alQaida, or making Afghanistan genuinely secure.

05-31-2003	#11
PornoDoggy Cramming 3 people in a Room to Attend Show Want to see your own Advertising Here! Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Amid the Cornfields of Illinois Posts: 5,366	Why do I think this Administration has lied to the American people? For one thing, I think Mike is probably correct in his assessment of the relationship of oil to the decision to invade Iraq. The Administration went to great lengths to call anyone who suggested such a relationship a liar, question their motivation and their patriotism, and quite possibly their relationship with their mother. Some of the very same bobble-headed webmasters who are nodding in approval of such a policy nowdays were quite incensed when Europeans suggested the same thing on GFY, or the few liberals who poke their heads up around here suggested it. There is also the embarassing performance of Powell at the United Nations when he presented the U.S. case. Fraudlent documents and ripped off disertation analysis don't make a compelling case. Rather than performing like Adli Stevenson, he came off like Ari Fleischer - the President said it, and he wouldn't lie. I think the absence of a discovery by this point in time indicates that there was no evidence withheld due to national security concerns. Now, as far as "Being wrong (and that's yet to be proven....) isn't the same as lying." - you are probably on to something there. I think the deniability was built into the process. IF the WMD, like the alQaida connections, turn out to be smoke, mirrors, and spin, there will be another Whitewash at the Whitehouse. I'm beginning to think I need to get me a job selling white paint to the government. As long as I can sell it to Justice and DoD, the deficit is not a discouraging factor, and I suspect they're gonna need it. h34r: Maybe computer databases to snop, er, detect terrorist indiclinations weren't the only thing that ADM John Pointexter was consulting on. h34r: (please note - that is a Republican-landslide joke (52%). Ulfie - when in doubt, invoke Clinton? Puuuuu-leaze. Could be that Clinton - or any Democrat in the office - would have made a GENUINE effort to establish a truly international coalition (as opposed to Britian, Australia, Spain, Poland, and a who's-who of the fifth world) to depose Saddam. Kinda like the Bush Administration is doing with Korea? Could be we would have focused more efforts on alQaida, or making Afghanistan genuinely secure. __________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...