The VISUAL-format!! (http://home.comcast.net/%7Ewizardofwhimsy/) :D :D

OMG, that's the funniest site that I've seen lately. I can't stop laughing. Thanks for sharing. :D :D :D

this site is about as valid as all of shamans other links.

The only thing flawed around here is shaman the parrot.

shaman want a cracker?

Easy Trav,

Keep in mind that the dems don't have any solid objections to Bush, so they make him look funny.

The UK intel folks sure nailed Tony with a bomb today and the way they did it was a classic 'don't mess with the spooks' statement. They waited until he took a possition from which he can't back-peddle and then BOOOOOM .... LOL

Buh-bye Tony.

Dop

I love how you liberals turn deadly serious matters into some sort of "see I told you so", "gotcha good" game. maybe if you were just a little serious about the whole thing, you may see its not always a game, and "winning" isnt always whats best for everyone, especially if you clowns win and get your way, its open season on Americans everywhere!

got to admit the pics on that site are pretty damn funny

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal
Easy Trav,

Keep in mind that the dems don't have any solid objections to Bush, so they make him look funny.

Here's a solid objection Darth. Why did Bush say in last years State of the Union address that he had evidence that Saddam was attempting to aquire uranium from Niger, when he knew that to be utterly false?

come onpagan, you know that story was debunked, he never said he had the evidence. and in he end it wasnt entirely false. why not just bring up the 25 year old DUI and be done with it?

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal
Easy Trav,

Keep in mind that the dems don't have any solid objections to Bush, so they make him look funny.
Oh for God's sakes.

*Worst environmental president in recent history.
*Started an illegitamate war by lying to the American public about WMDs.
*Has destroyed civil rights and has sights set on destroying more.
*Presided over the largest security failure in U.S. history (which was preventable).
*Has turned a surplus into a $500 billion deficit. Even with 9/11 that shouldn't happen.

And that's the short list!

what did you copy and paste that off of the DNC web site, or did you come up with that bullshit all by yourself borg?

Bush also said something about Aids in Africa in his las State of the Union address, when is he going to have a follow- up on that?

Borghunter,

In reply to your recent post about Bush's flaws,

Worst environmental record in recent history?
Are you referring to the way Clinton lowered the standards for arsenic in our water to such a point that it would be impossible to have any drinking water at all? Of course when Bush "raised" the amount arsenic allowable, the dems nailed him on that. Is that part of his environmental record? Or do you refer to the Kyoto Treaty? Which basically blames the U.S. for all of the carbon dioxide emmisions and to lower said emmissions, the hardworking citizens here in the U.S. should shell out money to other countries. I was on a NASA website a while back and it showed that the worst plumes of CO2 came from South Africa when farmers slashed and burned fields in spring to prepare for planting crops. Of course we here in the U.S. have cash, the farmers in South Africa have pigs, the nations of the world would rather have the cash, so they aren't going after South African farmers. I've been somewhat confused about the world's nashing of teeth over our driving of SUVs. They claim to hate us over it, yet every major foreign manufactoring makes SUVs for us to drive. Maybe you can explain it.

The illegitimate war thing.
As a general rule of them, I consider any war in which we attempt to spread our ideas and customs of liberty, freedom and oppurtunity to be pretty damn legitimate. As for the WMDs, Clinton had the same intelligence that Bush had, and both said that Saddam was in possession of WMDs. Then there is also the thing where Saddam had an entire year in the run up to Gulf War II to hide/disperse his WMDs. Then there was this thing in Lybia where Gadaffi decides to come clean and give up HIS WMDs, and inspectors find that Lybia was something of a Wal-Mart for nuclear material. Of course Gadaffi wouldn't have admitted to having WMDs before the second Gulf War because he knew damn good and well that the UN and the Euroweenies wouldn't have done a damn thing about it. Would they?

But that isnt' the point, is it? You just don't like Bush being Comander In Chief. Someone, I doubt that you questioned Clinton's decision to bomb that aspirin factory in the Sudan on the eve of Lewinski scandal breaking open, and I doubt you said anything about the legallity of intervention when Clinton decided to have his little war in Kosovo.

Destorying of the civil rights baloney.
Bush merely expanded the PRESENT laws we have on the books for going after criminals/organized crime to go after terrorists. But then, you REFUSE to see it that way. Also, I'm somewhat in favor keeping better track of foreigners, especially after that one terrorist manage to get his green card from the INS a couple of weeks after he flew a passenger jet into one of the buildings that was attacked on 9/11. I'd sleep better knowing that the feds were keeping track of foreigners, who they are, where they're at, and most importantly, what they're up to. Call it a personal quirk.

Largest security failure in U.S. history.
This was after nearly a decade of Clinton hamstringing our intelligence services and cutting the Intelligence budgets to rags. Is that right?

The surplus thing.
Gee, let's see. Dems were in power for what 30 years? And we had 30 years of deficits. Then Clinton became president and I remember seeing in time magazine that the deficit was projected to go to the moon! Of course, after two years of Clinton shenanigans, the voters elected a Republican Congress and the deficits disapeared. Keep in mind that it's the congress that makes up the Budget, not the Prez. Care to explain that one? Back to the point, we were in a small recesssion in 2000, and then there was the 9/11 flap, which did tend to dry up revenue somewhat. So I wouldn't put the Budget Deficit all on Bush's head. Dammit.

Originally posted by Travh20
come onpagan, you know that story was debunked, he never said he had the evidence. and in he end it wasnt entirely false. why not just bring up the 25 year old DUI and be done with it?

Debunked? He used an intelligence report from the british that was a forgery. Is it OK because it was only mostly false?

Where did the idea that intelligence gathering produces the kinds of information that will stand up in a court of law? That certainly seems to be the expectation of many posting to these forums. Intelligence gathering - spying for one's country - is not a pretty business. Forget James Bond, or Mission Impossible, or Tom Clancy movies. Folks get captured, tortured, and killed doing this kind of stuff. Yes, plenty of them never leave their desks as well.
Spies use anything & everything they can get their hands on to gather intelligence. Be that phone tapping, cute little cameras, bottles of booze, satellite photos, $100.00 bills and anything else that works. Remember, they're trying to find out what the bad guys are up to. The bad guys are trying to catch our guys, and at the same time, keep our guys from finding out what they're up to. The results are channeled back so the information can be compiled and an attempt made to make some sense out of it. Rarely is the public going to be shown photos like the ones JFK used to support his blockade of Cuba during the Cuban Missle Crisis in 1960 or 61. Intelligence agencies don't talk about their capabilities. Somehow, during the past couple of years it appears that many folks want intelligence information that will withstand the rigors of evidence in a courtroom. That's just not going to happen. It's a very murky world out there, and the bad guys just aren't playing by our rules. It doesn't matter which political party is running the show, either.
Remember - "loose lips sink ships".

You are right about Intelligence, ES 347.
That is precisely why GWB should not have used this so called report in his speech. To do so while knowing the report was likely to be wrong was either manipulation or extreme stupidity, maybe both.
That is also why rather investigating the "bad intelligence" about WMD in Iraq, it would be necesary to question the political use of this intelligence.
If the decision of going to war in spite of the absence of hard evidence has been taken, the responsibility is not to be found in the CIA but in the White House.

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal

Largest security failure in U.S. history.
This was after nearly a decade of Clinton hamstringing our intelligence services and cutting the Intelligence budgets to rags. Is that right?

Keep in mind that it's the congress that makes up the Budget, not the Prez. Care to explain that one?

Let's see... Clinton destroyed the intelligence services because he controlled their budget, but bush isn't responsible for the deficit because the Prez isn't responsible for the budget...sounds like double-speak to me...Care to explain that one?

cutting the budget of a government agency and controlling the free market are 2 different things pagan. The prez can say how much money each agency gets, and clinton bled the intelligencce agencys dry. Bush is responsible for the deficit though, through outrageous spending on stupid crap. But bush isnt responsible for the loss of jobs and the economy, bcasue really, how many jobs can the president create? besides some FDR type projects, none.

Pagan,

Trav explianed it best, the prez can dictate how much money a governmental organization can get. So the military and the CIA's budget got cut to rags. Also Trav is right that Bush DID add to the budget. Presidents can do that. Which does contribute to the deficit. But it would've been smaller had 9/11 not happened. Dammit!

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal
Easy Trav,

Keep in mind that the dems don't have any solid objections to Bush, so they make him look funny.
As long as Lil' Dumbya's doing the voice-overs, he keeps everyone rolling in the aisles!!!!!!!! (http://slate.msn.com/id/76886/) :D :D :D

The purse strings of all government are held by congress who works for the people.

The pres can't dish out anything to anyone. Not legally anyway.

Dop

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal
Keep in mind that the dems don't have any solid objections to Bush, so they make him look funny.
Holy crap, where the hell have you been?
No solid objections? Have you lost your mind?!?
You must be new here, but you should read up on the lil princess GB.
Of course when Bush "raised" the amount arsenic allowable, the dems nailed him on that.
What was that act called again? I believe 'Clean Water Act'
Please explain why laxing the regulations makes it clean?
What about the Clean Air Act? Laxing on plant emmission standards!
Thats called being two faced
Bush merely expanded the PRESENT laws we have on the books for going after criminals/organized crime to go after terrorists. But then, you REFUSE to see it that way.
Do you realize that you are, in fact, outright lying?
And yes I do refuse to see it that way because I know my facts.
Then Clinton became president and I remember seeing in time magazine that the deficit was projected to go to the moon!
Lets have a little history lesson shall we?
After Clinton's shenanigans the deficit was gone, he gave us a surplus.
Bush took office and now we have a 477 BILLION deficit.
Unless you are blind, deaf and otherwize incapable of perception you will notice that we still have this deficit, it has not 'disapeared'. It really does not matter what Time magazine predicted when we already know what happened

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal
Borghunter,

In reply to your recent post about Bush's flaws,

Worst environmental record in recent history?
Are you referring to the way Clinton lowered the standards for arsenic in our water to such a point that it would be impossible to have any drinking water at all?

Whoops!!!!!

You forgot to post any proof, of that! :rolleyes:


The surplus thing.
Gee, let's see. Dems were in power for what 30 years? And we had 30 years of deficits. Then Clinton became president and I remember seeing in time magazine that the deficit was projected to go to the moon!
.......Yeah.....projected by the same Republicans who'd just been jettisoned from the Whitehouse!!!!!! :p

Then........they magically turned-into paying-down-the-Reagan/Bush-deficit fans!!!!! (http://www.businessweek.com/1999/99_32/b3641059.htm)

Originally posted by astrapol2
If the decision of going to war in spite of the absence of hard evidence has been taken, the responsibility is not to be found in the CIA but in the White House.
How conveniently that conservatives insisted.....well....at least, during the Clinton-years......that the President is always responsible, for ALL things, during his watch.......but, it's all different, now. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Vilepagan
Let's see... Clinton destroyed the intelligence services because he controlled their budget, but bush isn't responsible for the deficit because the Prez isn't responsible for the budget...sounds like double-speak to me...Care to explain that one?
Like conservatives say........especially since 9/11....it's different, now :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Travh20
cutting the budget of a government agency and controlling the free market are 2 different things pagan. The prez can say how much money each agency gets, and clinton bled the intelligencce agencys dry.
More rhetoric......without (your preference for the) numbers????? :eek:

Where are those numbers to support your allegations??????? :confused:

BTW, Mr. Science.........that's a-g-e-n-c-i-e-s. :rolleyes:

I will give you credit for enough c's, in intelligencce, though!! :D

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal
Also Trav is right that Bush DID add to the budget. Presidents can do that. Which does contribute to the deficit. But it would've been smaller had 9/11 not happened. Dammit!
Ah, yes.......because massive tax-cuts (like Lil Dumbya's) improve our economy (http://www.nwcitizen.com/usa/voodoo.html), right?????? :D

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!