RE: HR635 = Bush investigation/impeachment

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: HR635 = Bush investigation/impeachment

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: HR635 = Bush investigation/impeachment

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: HR635 = Bush investigation/impeachment - 9/19/2006 10:51:36 AM

bills944

Posts: 122
Joined: 9/26/2004
Status: offline

Record high gas prices plus Alaska pipeline repair divided by mid-term
elections equals huge drop in gas prices....?

Now try and convince me that gas prices are not manipulated.

Wrong, Again!!!
http://www.comics.com/editoons/holbert/archive/images/holbert2040718060912.gif

http://www.comics.com/editoons/holbert/archive/images/holbert2040718060912.gif

(in reply to bills944)

Profile

Post #: 21

RE: HR635 = Bush investigation/impeachment - 9/19/2006 10:53:09 AM

bills944

Posts: 122
Joined: 9/26/2004
Status: offline

NEWS QUOTE OF THE DAY

Congressman Harold Ford Jr.: "I watched Dick Cheney on Meet The Press with Russert over the weekend, I guess it was last Sunday, everyday seems like Wednesday to me, but last Sunday, and you know he drank the Kool Aid in full and he may have made that Kool Aid, so he fully believes it. The sad part about what he said the other day and this is where you begin to think that maybe as much as they believe it they've become almost, you can't reason with them, they've become almost fanatical. When Russert asked a question 'would you have done everything the same way knowing what you know now' and he shared that he would, he said that we wouldn't have changed a thing."
Imus: "That's insane," Congressman Harold Ford Jr.: "In your right mind. No one in their right mind can seriously make that statement if you were, if he worked for you, if Dick Cheney were an employee at your company and he made that statement before a national audience of people in your industry you would probably demote him if not remove him all together from the company. How on earth can you make a comment like that in light of all that's happening, in light of all the facts we know. It's obvious intelligence was flawed. There was not the WMD that we thought was there. The President himself has shared pointedly that Iraq has very little if anything to do with 9/11. So for him to make that comment, it's clear that they believe it, but the question you really have to ask is do they still possess the capacity to be reasonable? Do they posses the capacity to have logic and apply logic to the situation? If he honestly can say, I mean maybe he is just too stubborn to say it or unwilling to say, whatever the motivation was, it's a remarkable thing when a man can't admit, or a woman can not admit we were wrong and we're going to fix it. They can't even admit that they were wrong, or maybe not that they were wrong but that some of the information they had was flawed and mistaken. So I think they believe it and I think voters have a clear choice in this election, if you think we need the balance up here to counter, not to weaken our defense as the republicans like to suggest about democrats, but you just need a little balance on how you get this thing right. It's not cut and run or stay the course the real strategy should be lets win and get on out of there. Again that's what concerned me a little bit about his comments over the weekend."

(in reply to bills944)

Profile

Post #: 22

RE: HR635 = Bush investigation/impeachment - 9/19/2006 10:54:15 AM

bills944

Posts: 122
Joined: 9/26/2004
Status: offline

Experts Easily Reverse Diebold Results & No One Would Know

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwWP-N1HqT0

(in reply to bills944)

Profile

Post #: 23

RE: HR635 = Bush investigation/impeachment - 9/19/2006 10:56:24 AM

bills944

Posts: 122
Joined: 9/26/2004
Status: offline

George Bush is trying to change the law now to make torture legal before the elections. He is doing it because he thinks it will help him to get Republicans elected in November and because he is worried he has a problem because he violated the Geneva conventions. I think he wants to change the law and make it retroactive so he will not have any problem for committing war crimes. He’s also trying to blackmail everyone by saying if we don’t agree to do what he wants the program will not go forward. He’s implying they won’t do anything to stop terrorists if they don’t get what they want. That’s blackmail.

(in reply to bills944)

Profile

Post #: 24

RE: HR635 = Bush investigation/impeachment - 9/19/2006 11:45:00 AM

philosophy

Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline

"George Bush is trying to change the law now to make torture legal before the elections."

....i'm tempted to ask for a link, but i don't want to wade through 14 pages of posts.........

(in reply to bills944)

Profile

Post #: 25

RE: HR635 = Bush investigation/impeachment - 9/19/2006 11:46:59 AM

bills944

Posts: 122
Joined: 9/26/2004
Status: offline

If Bush was black

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIPWYNyDUe8&mode=related&search

(in reply to philosophy)

Profile

Post #: 26

RE: HR635 = Bush investigation/impeachment - 9/19/2006 11:51:02 AM

bills944

Posts: 122
Joined: 9/26/2004
Status: offline

I already posted it above but here:

Olbermann: Bush's 'rush' to redefine Geneva Conventions may be mostly about 'covering his own backside'
David Edwards
Published: Saturday September 16, 2006

   Keith Olbermann's Friday broadcast on MSNBC featured a long look at the President's contentious Rose Garden press conference on Friday, dubbing it the "Roast Garden," and then pondered whether Bush's urgency to redefine the Geneva Convention had more to do with "covering his own backside" than anything else.
At a Friday press conference, an animated President Bush tells reporters that the U.S. program to interrogate terrorist suspects will not continue unless Congress creates new legal definitions for Common Article 3 or the Geneva Conventions -- a move that has alarmed some GOP senators and former Secretary of State Colin Powell.

   Bush also devoted his Saturday radio address to the issue.
In video of the Friday presser, a visibly angry President raises his voice as responds to reporters' questions.

NBC White House Correspondent David Gregory asks the President how he would react if American officers were interrogated based on another country's own re-interpreted version of the Geneva Conventions. Without answering the question, Bush says, "We can debate this issue all we want but the practical matter is if our professionals do not have clear standards in the law, the program will not go forward."

Further pressed by Gregory for an answer, Bush raises his voice and says, "You can ask this question all you want but the bottom line is -- and the American people have got to understand this -- that this program won't go forward... if there are vague standards applied like those in Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. It's just not going to go forward. Now, perhaps some in Congress don't think the program is important. That's fine."

Afterward, Georgetown University Constitutional Law Professor Jonathan Turley joined Keith Olbermann for a discussion on why the president was in such a hurry to get the legislation passed "his way."
Turley agreed with Olbermann that Bush's primary motive might be in "covering his own backside."

   Turley noted that the 14 high level detainees recently transferred to Guantanamo Bay are due to be interviewed by the Red Cross, and that "most people believe that they will reveal that they were subject to water boarding - held under water until you think that you are going to drown - that is undeniably torture under the international standard."

"I think that the Administration senses that there is a lot of trouble coming down the mountain," said Turley.
See the video from Keith Olbermann's "Countdown" show on MSNBC: Watch Videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ag3QsL2hbXI and    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FPZNue2bYg    http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Video_Bush_rants_at_reporters_in_0916.html

(in reply to philosophy)

Profile

Post #: 27

RE: HR635 = Bush investigation/impeachment - 9/19/2006 3:58:12 PM

swtnsparkling

Posts: 1738
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

quote:

bills944

Oh damn Not Another one

_____________________________

Never make anyone a priority who treats you as an option 2003

Walk in Peace

A "No" uttered from deepest conviction is better than a "Yes" uttered merely to please

(in reply to bills944)

Profile

Post #: 28

RE: HR635 = Bush investigation/impeachment - 9/19/2006 4:25:50 PM

KenDckey

Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline

I have a suggestion why not post the link with an executive summary then if we want to read it word for word we can. Because I definately don't and won't read all that. I am more interested in the gist. Then if I have a problem with the gist I can choose to read it but to just post it with no real substance like your opinion is, in my humble opinion, a waste of time

(in reply to swtnsparkling)

Profile

Post #: 29

RE: HR635 = Bush investigation/impeachment - 9/19/2006 9:09:16 PM

Lordandmaster

Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline

SOMEONE knew that they were manipulating the intelligence they were getting about Saddam Hussein and his weapons capabilities. Powell claims he didn't know that his information was bad when he made that infamous speech before the U.N., but the buck has to stop somewhere. Maybe Bush didn't know that he was lying because he was too stupid to understand what his handlers were telling him, but if you're the President of the United States of America, I think you're the fucker who has to take responsibility for things like this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

I think the difference hinges on actual knowledge. We know that Clinton knew whether or not he got a blow job. I have never seen actual evidence that Bush had first hand knowledge that he was lying. I have heard the alligations and the conjecture and appreciate them. But for actual proof, I haven't seen a thing. Should he have had actual knowledge? Hard to say. probably. but that too is conjecture regardless of ones position.

(in reply to KenDckey)

Profile

Post #: 30

RE: HR635 = Bush investigation/impeachment - 9/19/2006 9:34:59 PM

Sinergy

Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

but if you're the President of the United States of America, I think you're the fucker who has to take responsibility for things like this.

Harry Truman had a little placard on his desk which stated

"The Buck Stops Here."

Perhaps we should get one for Monkeyboy so he can start taking his responsibilities seriously.

Sinergy

_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle

(in reply to Lordandmaster)

Profile

Post #: 31