Jump to content

the perpetual excuse


Guest Paul

Recommended Posts

However, the vast majority of Americans did just fine all those years. As a nation, we remained secure. But why should the facts matter to someone who has his mind made up in advance?

79853[/snapback]

Yeah, you're right. Who cares about the people that died in the two U.S.

Embassies, on the USS Cole, the Khobar Towers and the WTC. It's more

important that we show the terrorists that we're really nice people and we love

them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 448
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That's doing surveillance without a warrant, like I said.

If the suspect changes cell phones every 48 hours then you tell me how having the warrant after 72 hours does any good.  Then you can try claiming that I was wrong.  'Til then, it looks like you have no relevant point.

79904[/snapback]

If you had read what I posted, they can start surveillance without a warrant as long as they apply for a warrant within 72 hours. Now I know you can read, so obviously you're being purposely dishonest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was too busy chasing interns to retaliate against the terrorists. Because

  of that, Bin Laden is quoted as saying the U.S. was a paper tiger, which led

  directly to 9/11.  Clinton also gave missle technology to the Chinese and gave

  nuclear generation technology to the N. Koreans. Putting Clinton back in the

  White House may just kill us all.

79916[/snapback]

The CIA reported that N Korea had enough fuel to make 2 nuke bombs by the end of 1992. The fuel was made under Bush senior's watch. When the Clinto admin found out they prepared for military action against N Kore, letting the N Koreans know that. This stopped the N Koreans from additional development until 2002, when under Bush junior's watch they resumed.

I find it amazing the Bush jr let them develop their nuke technology and ignored them while concentrating on Iraq. You can't get any dumber than that.

Clinton did not give missile technology to China. Two US companies may have leaked some technology in 1998. If that were the case, why didn't the Bush admin prosecute them when they took over?

At this point they don't need our technology. They now have the best computer scientists in the world and are quite capable of creating their own. They also have access to the Asian semi conductor factories needed for advanced weapons technology.

Its amazing how you Bushbots twist history and then try to divert from Bush with your but, but, but Clinton bs.

Give it up. This but, but, but Clinton bs only works on 25% of the population (brain dead).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, being an idiot, shining lasers at an airplane should be allowed as a right???

It shouldn't be declared TERRORISM, that's for F**KING sure. Didn't Bush say the reason for the PATRIOT Act was to deal with terrorism?

Interesting!!!  If you choose to defend this individual, so be it; to use him as the basis for an argument against the Patriot Act is moronic.

79934[/snapback]

That guy wasn't a terrorist, therefore pointing out the fact that the PATRIOT Act was abused on him is not moronic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you had read what I posted, they can start surveillance without a warrant as long as they apply for a warrant within 72 hours. Now I know you can read, so obviously you're being purposely dishonest.

79990[/snapback]

:lol:

About what?

Starting surveillance without a warrant is warrantless surveillance, isn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, you're right. Who cares about the people that died in the two U.S.

  Embassies, on the USS Cole, the Khobar Towers and the WTC.  It's more

  important that we show the terrorists that we're really nice people and we love

  them.

79965[/snapback]

None of ewhich were the doings of Iraq, too bad we don't have a President who actually went after the real enemy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Patriot
Maybe you should define what you feel is doing something about and incident. Should it be done with prudence and justification or should we just react and flail wildly at anyone within arms reach?

79847[/snapback]

"Prudence" ??? Yeah right, we should kill the terrorists with prudence. Go

back under your bed, cupcake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CIA reported that N Korea had enough fuel to make 2 nuke bombs by the end of 1992. The fuel was made under Bush senior's watch. When the Clinto admin found out they prepared for military action against N Kore, letting the N Koreans know that. This stopped the N Koreans from additional development until 2002, when under Bush junior's watch they resumed.

What?

What make you think that North Korea was stopped from further development? Is that what they told you?

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/east...meline.nuclear/

Oh, you probably got your info from here:

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/200...a_timeline.html

("North Korea freezes nuclear production for the next eight years.")

What Bern appears to miss is that North Korea started up an enrichment program, most likely while Weise is claiming the "freeze." If you blame George H. W. Bush for letting the N. Koreans obtain plutonium, then it seems tough to get Clinton off the hook for allowing the uranium enrichment program to get rolling.

The thing you need to remember about North Korea is that they tend to negotiate in bad faith. They'll probably cheat on the deal they recently cut with the U.S. just like they did with the "Agreed Framework" disaster brokered by Carter.

I find it amazing the Bush jr let them develop their nuke technology and ignored them while concentrating on Iraq. You can't get any dumber than that.

Maybe you could, though. :lol:

Seriously, it's likely that the North Korean announcement had something to do with the Iraq War. Perhaps the war effort made the announcement seem like a good idea for advancing N. Korea's political goals, or perhaps they figured they'd be sold out by the Libyans when Libya dismantled its WMD programs. It's almost certainly not a matter of the Iraq War providing N. Korea with the opportunity to produce nuclear weapons via uranium enrichment (and if they have weapons using plutonium that material may well be left over from the Agreed Framework, for the material was never accounted for under that agreement).

There are various U.S. government sources that provide clues as to when North Korea began its uranium-enrichment program, but disagreement among the sources makes it difficult to determine the exact start of the program. Most information, however, indicates it began between 1997 and 1999.

http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2003_05/ura...hment_may03.asp

Clinton did not give missile technology to China. Two US companies may have leaked some technology in 1998. If that were the case, why didn't the Bush admin prosecute them when they took over?

If this happened under the current Bush administration you'd probably call it a scandal:

http://www.washingpost.com/wp-srv/politics...llite120598.htm

http://www.washingpost.com/wp-srv/politics...ughes072798.htm

http://www.washingpost.com/wp-srv/politics...loral052598.htm

At this point they don't need our technology.

Sure they do. And that's why they continue to aggressively seek it.

They now have the best computer scientists in the world and are quite capable of creating their own. They also have access to the Asian semi conductor factories needed for advanced weapons technology.

Its amazing how you Bushbots twist history and then try to divert from Bush with your but, but, but Clinton bs.

There are plenty of mistakes to go around, and Clinton had his share or more. I agree that it's pointless to try to excuse the mistakes of Republicans based on the mistakes of Clinton--but it's also pointless to try to burnish Clinton's history. Pointless in terms of the truth, anyway. There are plenty of liberals willing to believe that Slick Willy did no wrong, and perhaps that counts for something.

Give it up. This but, but, but Clinton bs only works on 25% of the population (brain dead).

80050[/snapback]

Clinton was bad for foreign policy on the whole. The military actions in Bosnia and Kosovo were probably his high points (even though there were drawbacks).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol:

About what?

Starting surveillance without a warrant is warrantless surveillance, isn't it?

80068[/snapback]

So you don't see a difference between "in an emergency, go ahead and start surveillance without a warrant-just make sure to get a warrant within 72 hours" and the true warrantless surveillance the administration wants? Okay, now I understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol:

About what?

Starting surveillance without a warrant is warrantless surveillance, isn't it?

80068[/snapback]

Must be easy to think you always win if you just ignore what the other person says.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of ewhich were the doings of Iraq, too bad we don't have a President who actually went after the real enemy

80078[/snapback]

Tell you what...Have the balls to say that to someone who's served in Iraq fact to face...somehow i think you'd rather hide behind your computer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol:

About what?

Starting surveillance without a warrant is warrantless surveillance, isn't it?

80068[/snapback]

Spoken like a true absolutist. As usual, Bryan completely misses the point, which is: what measures are necessary to check unreasonable government surveillance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, being an idiot, shining lasers at an airplane should be allowed as a right??? Interesting!!!  If you choose to defend this individual, so be it; to use him as the basis for an argument against the Patriot Act is moronic.

79934[/snapback]

YOU are moronic AND sheeplike, or you're some shyster looking to increase billable hours.

To allow this type of prosecutioin is ludicrous, it's giving the prosecution the power to charge anyone's actions they don't like with charges that DO NOT APPLY. You may not be convucted and the lawyers just roll up the hours. What a crock of BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell you what...Have the balls to say that to someone who's served in Iraq fact to face...somehow i think you'd rather hide behind your computer.

80150[/snapback]

. . . said the anonymous guest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Radagast
Tell you what...Have the balls to say that to someone who's served in Iraq fact to face...somehow i think you'd rather hide behind your computer.

80150[/snapback]

I have said it to at least five Marines who have returned from Iraq. Two agree that the war is pointless. All of them think Bush is an AH. The most popular reason for going back is to cover the backs of their fellow Marines even if they don't agree with the war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you don't see a difference between "in an emergency, go ahead and start surveillance without a warrant-just make sure to get a warrant within 72 hours" and the true warrantless surveillance the administration wants? Okay, now I understand.

80117[/snapback]

Where's your evidence of the "true warrantless surveillance the administration wants"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Must be easy to think you always win if you just ignore what the other person says.

80125[/snapback]

"Guest" comes through with another piece of magnificent unintended irony.

I ask on what point I was supposedly dishonest, and "Guest" completely ignores it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell you what...Have the balls to say that to someone who's served in Iraq fact to face...somehow i think you'd rather hide behind your computer.

80150[/snapback]

I've had people who have served in Iraq say the same to me so put your head back up your butt and go back to sleep. Or keep watching the scripted statements on FAUZ News and believing they're true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Keith-Marshall,Mo
"Prudence"  ???  Yeah right, we should kill the terrorists with prudence.  Go

  back under your bed, cupcake.

80106[/snapback]

God, your an idiot!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Patriot
Spoken like a true absolutist. As usual, Bryan completely misses the point, which is: what measures are necessary to check unreasonable government surveillance.

80165[/snapback]

I have yet to see any unreasonable government surveillances, so this is all

Kool-aid hysteria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What?

What make you think that North Korea was stopped from further development?  Is that what they told you?

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/east...meline.nuclear/

Where in the time-line does it say the N Koreans were developing nukes under Clinton's watch?

The time-line that you quoted does not invalidate what I stated. Actually, it tends to confirm my statement.

But I did not use the CNN time-line for my info. I get my sources from really reliable SOG acquaintances. In this instance I can quote what they said and what we talked about because this info is public and not restricted.

I'm done replying to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where in the time-line does it say the N Koreans were developing nukes under Clinton's watch?

It doesn't say they were developing nukes under any president's watch at all. It says in 1994 that the N. Koreans pledged to stop developing nuclear weapons (it says in 1993 that they were suspected of developing them).

You want me to spell out each word as I read it for you?

The time-line that you quoted does not invalidate what I stated. Actually, it tends to confirm my statement.

:lol:

But I did not use the CNN time-line for my info. I get my sources from really reliable SOG acquaintances.

Heh. And how do you know they are reliable in this?

In this instance I can quote what they said and what we talked about because this info is public and not restricted.

It might still be restricted in North Korea. ;)

I'm done replying to you.

80211[/snapback]

Perhaps less dodging in our future, then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YOU are moronic AND sheeplike, or you're some shyster looking to increase billable hours.

To allow this type of prosecutioin is ludicrous, it's giving the prosecution the power to charge anyone's actions they don't like with charges that DO NOT APPLY.  You may not be convucted and the lawyers just roll up the hours.  What a crock of BS.

80166[/snapback]

Oh NO, you just called me a name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...