Pledge Allegiance to the Flag....

[Ken King (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Yes absolutely and as I have posted ....the data and reports were filled with incorrect trumped up charges and mistruths given out by our agencies at the behest of the President and all the presidents men ....and women.

You have read or have access to where the President directed the agencies to do this.? Seems the information in the IWR was no different then what had been circulating since the early 1990s.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Ken King

You have read or have access to where the President directed the agencies to do this.? Seems the information in the IWR was no different then what had been circulating since the early 1990s.

LOL...No I have not read where the President directed any agencie,all I have is what is posted on the internet and what I have read and seen and heard with my own eyes an ears.CNN does better research than I as does 60 mins.I will say I have not read where anyone said he did'nt.Look if you want me to say I was in the room and saw a smoking gun....sorry but it still does'nt mean it did'nt happen,all I'm saying there seems to more proof that he did than did'nt.

[Ken King (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Giantone

LOL...No I have not read where the President directed any agencie,all I have is what is posted on the internet and what I have read and seen and heard with my own eyes an ears.CNN does better research than I as does 60 mins.I will say I have not read where anyone said he did'nt.Look if you want me to say I was in the room and saw a smoking gun....sorry but it still does'nt mean it did'nt happen,all I'm saying there seems to more proof that he did than did'nt.

No, there is just more speculation and innuendo claiming that he did, not proof. I suspect next you will say that he forced the UN Security Council to enact resolution 1441 by spreading lies against the peaceful nation of Iraq.

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Giantone

LOL...No I have not read where the President directed any agencie,all I have is what is posted on the internet and what I have read and seen and heard with my own eyes an ears.CNN does better research than I as does 60 mins.I will say I have not read where anyone said he did'nt.Look if you want me to say I was in the room and saw a smoking gun....sorry but it still does'nt mean it did'nt happen,all I'm saying there seems to more proof that he did than did'nt.

Then perhaps you will accept the research 60 Minutes provided in this piece:

After his capture, Saddam met every day with one man, an American he knew as "Mr. George." George is FBI agent George Piro, who was the front man for a team of FBI and CIA analysts who were trying to answer some of the great mysteries of recent history. What happened to the weapons of mass destruction?...

... That June 2000 speech was about weapons of mass destruction. In talking casually about that speech, Saddam began to tell the story of his weapons. It was a breakthrough that had taken five months.

"Oh, you couldn't imagine the excitement that I was feeling at that point," Piro remembers.

"And what did he tell you about how his weapons of mass destruction had been destroyed?" Pelley asks.

"He told me that most of the WMD had been destroyed by the U.N. inspectors in the '90s. And those that hadn't been destroyed by the inspectors were unilaterally destroyed by Iraq," Piro says.

"So why keep the secret? Why put your nation at risk, why put your own life at risk to maintain this charade?" Pelley asks.

"It was very important for him to project that because that was what kept him, in his mind, in power. That capability kept the Iranians away. It kept them from reinvading Iraq," Piro says.

Before his wars with America, Saddam had fought a ruinous eight year war with Iran and it was Iran he still feared the most.

"He believed that he couldn't survive without the perception that he had weapons of mass destruction?" Pelley asks.

"Absolutely," Piro says.

"As the U.S. marched toward war and we began massing troops on his border, why didn't he stop it then? And say, 'Look, I have no weapons of mass destruction.' I mean, how could he have wanted his country to be invaded?" Pelley asks.

"He didn't. But he told me he initially miscalculated President Bush. And President Bush's intentions. He thought the United States would retaliate with the same type of attack as we did in 1998 under Operation Desert Fox. Which was a four-day aerial attack. So you expected that initially," Piro says.

Piro says Saddam expected some kind of an air campaign and that he could he survive that. "He survived that once. And then he was willing to accept that type of attack. That type of damage," he says.

"Saddam didn't believe that the United States would invade," Pelley remarks.

"Not initially, no," Piro says.

In other words the entire WMD ruse was created by Saddam. He propagated the false intel. Saddam was the one that lied and manipulated the intel. Not Bush.

[Go G-Men]

Originally Posted by Giantone

To answer you #1 and #2...I have alread done just that.

I have responded with links that you can verify,a lie is a lie does'nt matter who says it.What I have posted is up to you to verify...you can all it left wing whatever .Funny thing is you and your freinds think I'm left wing anti American ......and you could not be more wrong.I am as American as you and when my President needs to lie to get things done then it's my job as a American to question it.I'ts our responsability to question our leadership....it's our duty!Bush is a liar.

PROOF he is liar... CNN (Clinton News Network) is in no way an unbiased news source. Nor is the NY Times, MSNBC...

I never in any of my post ever said you were Anti-American or called you a liberal. I just wanted to know how so many democratic leaders could get the same intel as George Bush and vote for the war and yet Bush was the liar? It would seem more likely that decisions were made based on bad intel rather than intentional deception. I agree that as an American I have a responsibility to acknowledge when our leaders are deceiving it's citizens and do my best to point that out and hopefully help to solve the problem. While George Bush may have started down this path to war without thinking about the end game I believe he thought it was in the best interest of America and was a righteous cause. As far as allowing diplomacy to run it's course in Iraq that is and always was a joke.

Now a lie would be swearing under oath, in a court of law and committing perjury... That is a lie. If I am not mistaken that was proven to be the case for Bill Clinton...

Just thought I should point that out.

Originally Posted by Vince

We don't need someone that won't even put his hand over his heart when he says the Pledge of Allegiance.

[Giantone]

PsyOps,I accept that but that does'nt have a thing to do with the fact Bush made up reasons to go to war.He lied,he was told there were no more weapons of MD and he ignored it.

[Ken King (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Giantone

PsyOps,I accept that but that does'nt have a thing to do with the fact Bush made up reasons to go to war.He lied,he was told there were no more weapons of MD and he ignored it.

Really, you know this for a fact? The truth is that this is what was provided to the President in the October 2002 NIE - Key Judgments: Iraq's Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction use of that estimate does not make a lie.

November 2002 UN SCR1441 was issued telling Iraq to fully disclose or face consequence.

Iraq failed to fully comply with that requirement.

Faulty intelligence or not Iraq could have prevented military action. The world (UN) made it their burden, they shunned it like all of the other imposed mandates against them.

[Giantone]

Ken , what I believe to be true is this ....notice the dates.



http://www.salon.com/opinion/blument...9/06/bush_wmd/


Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction
Salon exclusive: Two former CIA officers say the president squelched top-secret intelligence, and a briefing by George Tenet, months before invading Iraq.

By Sidney Blumenthal

Sept. 6, 2007 | On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam's inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.

Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD. No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Go G-Men

PROOF he is liar... CNN (Clinton News Network) is in no way an unbiased news source. Nor is the NY Times, MSNBC...

I never in any of my post ever said you were Anti-American or called you a liberal. I just wanted to know how so many democratic leaders could get the same intel as George Bush and vote for the war and yet Bush was the liar? It would seem more likely that decisions were made based on bad intel rather than intentional deception. I agree that as an American I have a responsibility to acknowledge when our leaders are deceiving it's citizens and do my best to point that out and hopefully help to solve the problem. While George Bush may have started down this path to war without thinking about the end game I believe he thought it was in the best interest of America and was a righteous cause. As far as allowing diplomacy to run it's course in Iraq that is and always was a joke.

Now a lie would be swearing under oath, in a court of law and committing perjury... That is a lie. If I am not mistaken that was proven to be the case for Bill Clinton...

Just thought I should point that out.

G-men,you can't find 1 post of mine backing anything Clinton,never said I like the man.