RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


NorthernGent -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/10/2007 5:27:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Sure here is a link to a wikipedia page( which has links to the primary sources)  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Shifa_pharmaceutical_factory  
Here is an excerpt,   "Nontheless, Clinton's Secretary of State William Cohen, testified to the 9/11 Commission in 2004, characterizing Al Shifa as a "WMD-related facility", which played a "chemical weapons role" such as to pose a risk that it, with the help of the Iraqi chemical weapons program connections he also testified to, might help Al Qaeda get chemical weapons technology. Page 9 ( of the 911 commision report...sworn testimony).

Now I do not know if he was lying or not.  Most of the world seems to think he was.  At the time I was very suspicious because there was no follow through, and the timing( coinciding with Clintons testimony in the Puala Jones sexuall harrassment case).  But it is an uncontestable fact that the reason given for bombing Sudan was the Bin laden/Iraq/Nerve gas connection.  It was a lie  or it was the truth right?  If it was a lie it was the cold blooded murder of innocnet muslims correct?


I've had a few glasses of wine and beer, but will be reading it in the morning. What is your conclusion, they were both lying and are both as bad as each other, or something entirely different?




Sinergy -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/10/2007 5:30:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

That aside, if Bush hasn't done anything wrong, what's he got to fear from testifying under oath for a Grand Jury?



Of course, if he is a pathological liar, narcissistic personality type, and sociopath, what does he have to fear about lying under oath before a Grand Jury?

Sinergy




KenDckey -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/10/2007 5:50:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

Exactly, so being foolish isn't the same as sending an army into Iraq.


Clinton's blow job sent an army into iraq?   Huh?   I thought all he did was lie about it in court.   Very foolish to me




marsman -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/10/2007 7:19:39 PM)

quote:


puella wrote:

Here is the appropriate thread to discuss the former president getting oral sex from a chick besides his wife.


Clinton had sex with Monica, but Bush has screwed America:

Roleplay on glumbert.com




dcnovice -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/10/2007 8:33:15 PM)

quote:

Nontheless, Clinton's Secretary of State William Cohen,


FWIW, I don't think Cohen was ever Secretary of State.




luckydog1 -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/10/2007 9:02:24 PM)

You know you are right, Dc Novice.  Wikipedia got it wrong..he was Secratary of Defense.  But that doesnt change anything does it?




BradleytheKajiru -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/10/2007 9:06:39 PM)

In reply to "ferryman777"

I think I need to point out that the media has got it in it's head, "Bash Bush = More ratings."  This isn't true, however, because FOX News is the most watched news channel on television.  I could have misunderstood your "government sanctioned media disclosures" comment, though.

As for Reagan, back in the day, the times were very different.  Democrats were much stronger back then.  If I'm not mistaken, Teddy was a demo pres, and he was known for "walking softly, and carrying a big stick."  Not a single democrat these days would be known for that.  Not a single one.

I can understand your concern for those veterans, though.  I would have felt the same way.  I'm not a Bush worshipper, or a Clinton basher, I just call it like I see it.  Like I see it.  Not like the news sees it, or somebody on the internet sees it.  Not how some guy I've never met, who could be aiming at some politically motivated agenda or another sees it.  My view on politics is completely self contained, and when anyone pulls out a number about how many Iraqis are dead, or how many soldiers have died, I laugh.

I laugh because they fight SO hard against Bush, even though it's doing absolutely no good.  They consume their lives with hatred for Bush.  At the end of 2008, what in the WORLD will they do then?  Don't say have a huge party; It will be the last thing that they want to do.  They're going to feel a very large emptyness.  I was once consumed with a similar hatred.  When the person in question was gone, I was at a loss with what to do with my life...

So, they all make me laugh, but I do try to stick a nugget of truth in the arguments every now and again.




dcnovice -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/10/2007 9:07:46 PM)

quote:

Wikipedia got it wrong..he was Secratary of Defense.  But that doesnt change anything does it?


Well, it makes me wonder what else they got wrong.




dcnovice -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/10/2007 9:09:05 PM)

quote:

If I'm not mistaken, Teddy was a demo pres, and he was known for "walking softly, and carrying a big stick."  Not a single democrat these days would be known for that.  Not a single one.


You are mistaken. Theodore Roosevelt was a Republican. Franklin was the Democrat.




farglebargle -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/10/2007 9:10:48 PM)

No more hatred than the hatred felt for any alleged criminal by any Law and Order Traditional Conservative when he sees Justice not being carried out.




dcnovice -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/10/2007 9:11:27 PM)

quote:

when anyone pulls out a number about how many Iraqis are dead, or how many soldiers have died, I laugh.


Oh my. I imagine that's a unique reaction.




puella -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/10/2007 9:29:25 PM)

My brother is in the Army.  He got back from Iraq in late October.

He will not speak about much in Iraq, for many reasons.

Once, he told me about the children.  He used to gather up some of the local children, and bring them to his trailer and play video games with them.  One day, when one of the boys had beat him in some game with guns and what not, he turned in utter fear to my brother and asked " Nice Mister, you will not kill me, too?"  Floored, my brother looked at him and asked him what he meant. "You are nice, Mister, but your people kill my family."   My brother asked him about this, and the boy told him that his father, grandfather and uncles had all been killed.  He asked the other boys huddled in his trailer who had stories like this and 7 out of 9 boys admitted that most of their male relatives had been killed.

My brother, though very right wing, at that point only wanted to get out of there.  He is still haunted, and nothing we as his family can do for him alleviates that.  More Iraqis are dying than we either document or give a damn about.




NorthernGent -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/11/2007 4:28:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

But as I have pointed out a few times, Clinton did say that Iraq and Alqueda were making Nerve Gas together in Sudan, and that is why he bombed and killed people.  It was testifyied to in the 911 hearings.  So was Iraq and Al queda connected in the manufacture of Nerve gas(WMD), or was Clinton lying and murdering  people? 



quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Sure here is a link to a wikipedia page( which has links to the primary sources)  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Shifa_pharmaceutical_factory  
Here is an excerpt,   "Nontheless, Clinton's Secretary of State William Cohen, testified to the 9/11 Commission in 2004, characterizing Al Shifa as a "WMD-related facility", which played a "chemical weapons role" such as to pose a risk that it, with the help of the Iraqi chemical weapons program connections he also testified to, might help Al Qaeda get chemical weapons technology. Page 9 ( of the 911 commision report...sworn testimony).



Perhaps you have the evidence to support your claim emboldened in your first paragraph, but what you have posted in your second paragraph is not it. "Might help Al Quaeda" is not the same as "making nerve gas together".

For argument's sake, let's say you do have the evidence. What conclusion are you drawing?....this gives credence to bush's administration?, they're both guilty as charged? or something entirely different?




Sinergy -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/11/2007 6:49:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BradleytheKajiru

I laugh because they fight SO hard against Bush, even though it's doing absolutely no good.  They consume their lives with hatred for Bush.  At the end of 2008, what in the WORLD will they do then?  Don't say have a huge party; It will be the last thing that they want to do.  They're going to feel a very large emptyness.  I was once consumed with a similar hatred.  When the person in question was gone, I was at a loss with what to do with my life...



Hello A/all,

Might want to read American Theocracy, BradleytheKajiru.  After Nixon, the Republican party lost most of the power they held in our country, with a few exceptions (electing Republican presidents like Reagan and Bush Sr.) where those elected had the support of the "Southern Democrats."  However, without having party support in Congress these Presidents were hamstrung in their ability to do much.

So the Republicans went searching for more voters.  They ended up courting the Religious Right, who had historically voted Democratic in a bloc known as the Southern Democrats.  In the past 30 years, the Republican party has become made up of approximately 40% of these theocratic millenarians.

So the problem the Republicans are going to have in 2008 is that the country (to a greater or lesser degree) has become so disenchanted with the Republican congress and their inability to do things like protect us from slow moving intercontinental airplanes running into buildings, standing water soaking a city, etc., as well as their desire to invade sovereign nations and torture their citizens, etc.

Faced with the results of the Yer Fired election, and trying to find somebody in their party untainted by scandal and with a level of popularity which might be acceptable, the Republicans have had to fall back on the popularity of Giuliani, or the political savvy and machine of McCain, etc.  The problem is that all of the Republican candidates who could theoretically defeat almost anybody the Democratic party nominates, is that the Religious Right wont support them.  Without that support, the Republicans cannot elect a next president.  Nominating somebody acceptable to the Religious Right will be somebody that 60% of the party probably wont support, and who will probably not win anyway.

The party is over for the Republicans.  When 40% of their people leave that party and form their own theological party, there will be one major party and a host of small parties in our country.

Where this becomes interesting is (the names escape me, see Rolling Stone magazine 2 issues ago if you are interested) that several of the Religious Right leaders have announced that if the Republican party does not nominate somebody acceptable to them, they will stay home and not vote.

When Gore prematurely announced that Shrub had won, many in the western states where polls had not closed stayed home and didnt vote.  The results were a surprising number of Republican school board people, mayors, supported bills, were passed.

Do the math about the results of the next election if 40% of the Republicans refuse to vote.

Sinergy

p.s.  As far as your comments about Bush bashing.  I endlessly malign his idiotic policies, but I dont particularly have any feelings one way or the other about the person.




NorthernGent -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/11/2007 7:04:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

Exactly, so being foolish isn't the same as sending an army into Iraq.


Clinton's blow job sent an army into iraq?   Huh?   I thought all he did was lie about it in court.   Very foolish to me


Aren't we adults here, Ken?




KenDckey -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/11/2007 7:16:40 AM)

Sure we are.   I just don't understand the implication that you made relative to Clinton's blow job causing troops to be sent to Iraq.   I always thought that the BJ was lied about in court and the lie was what the impeachement was about - I mean who cares who was blow by whom.   And the Troops were sent to Iraq by Bush with the permission of Congress.




Sinergy -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/11/2007 9:45:15 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

Sure we are.   I just don't understand the implication that you made relative to Clinton's blow job causing troops to be sent to Iraq.   I always thought that the BJ was lied about in court and the lie was what the impeachement was about - I mean who cares who was blow by whom.   And the Troops were sent to Iraq by Bush with the permission of Congress.



You have to take it full circle, KenDckey, the Bush administration presented doctored and and known fraudulent evidence to a congress traumatized by 9/11 and convinced them to agree to let him invade Iraq.

Additionally, the Bush administration was already planning the invasion of Iraq long before 9/11, and Al Qaeda presented him with the perfect opportunity to put his plans into action.

I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I would not be remotely surprised to discover there was one.

Who is the bigger liar?

Sinergy




KenDckey -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/11/2007 10:11:17 AM)

Aww Sinergy.   I know that part of what you are saying is true enough.   We did have war plans for the invasion of Iraq, and just about any other country that you can think of, except possibly the Vatican and other city states.  That is a part of what the military does.   And they do it in all administrations and always have.  

As for what was presented to Congress, I am sure that someone knew it wasn't correct, I am not convinced it was Bush.   But that is OK   we can agree to disagree.

What I didn't understand was the relationship of a blow job to Clinton to sending troops to Iraq.  Still don't.   Deliberately telling a lie to a court of law and what I believe to unknowingly telling one is way different.  Clinton's impeachment was over the lie not the blow job.   Hell who cares if he had a blow job?  It is the lie to the court.   If, as I believe you believe that Bush knew every fact (that is 100% of every fact) known and knowingly lied, I would be just as upset.  But knowing the system, having worked in the system, I just can't believe it.  I will agree that it is within the realm of possibility but I just don't think it happened.  I don't think even the leadership in the Democratic Party actually believe that.  but those are my beliefs.




farglebargle -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/11/2007 11:56:52 AM)

quote:


As for what was presented to Congress, I am sure that someone knew it wasn't correct, I am not convinced it was Bush. But that is OK we can agree to disagree.



"lies, half-truths, material omissions, and statements made with reckless indifference to their truth or falsity," is the legal standard.

Bush calling Iraq a UNIQUE threat w.r.t. WMD when the State Department issued a report just days before with the information the North Korea HAD DEVELOPED NUKES is an example of a statment made with reckless indifference to their truth or falsity"



NOT Knowing, when you SHOULD HAVE KNOWN is just as much an abrogation of your responsibility.





luckydog1 -> RE: Clinton got a blowjob! (3/11/2007 1:15:35 PM)

Ng, the links were strong enough for them to kill people.  Now are you saying Clinton was murderous liar?  That certainly runs against the "no one died when Clinton lied", that has been put out and agreed to by many on this thread.  And if it was a lie was it not a terrible evil thing to destroy a plant making medicine in Africa?  I am not making a conclusion, I am asking for opinions on these not widley discussed FACTS.




Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
3.076172E-02