More on BHO & Benghazi

[grimmie 177]

from 2003.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-06-17-turner-usat_x.htm

recently this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93Fxjup53z8&noredirect=1


Yes, Bush lied.

[rushmc 18]

billvon

>Now you post the Bush lied bull shit??

Yep, because he did.

Now you can start the standard RushMC twist:

BVN:Bush lied.
R:No he didn't!
BVN:Here's the proof.
R:But . . . but . . . . they were just untrue and misleading statements, not lies. Besides, democrats lied too!

So we will just skip all that and assume you've said it again. Yes, other people lied too. Obama lied. So far his lies were to try to cover up 4 American deaths. Bush lied. His lies led to 4000 American deaths.

Wrong? Yes

Lied
left wing bullshit

and you are waist deep in it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[RonD1120 58]

No, please see billvon's post #1607 above.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[DanG 1]

Quote

No

Well, rest assured. The rest of us have no trouble seeing your hypocrisy.

- Dan G

[RonD1120 58]

See edit above.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[RonD1120 58]

Well, not the greatest, however, I think he would be easy for the conservatives to manipulate.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[DanG 1]

What part of billvon's post are you talkiing about? Do you believe Bush orchestrated 9/11, or are you greeing that our best intel at the time said that Saddam had no WMD's? Either way, your support of the Iraq war makes no logical sense, unless all you cared about was killing a bunch of Muslims.

- Dan G

[RonD1120 58]

I need to help you as well as the prof. Feelings, beliefs and fantasies, what is the difference and which is more important in life? In the SC?

At any rate, it appears that Trey Gowdy is getting to the truth about Behghazi. That is what is important now.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/04/the-benghazi-bonanza-a-bipartisan-scandal/

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[DanG 1]

Quote

Feelings, beliefs and fantasies, what is the difference and which is more important in life?

In an individual's life? Who knows? I guess it depends on the individual.

In US foreign and war policy? None of them matter at all. Since that's what we are talking about, your feelings, beliefs, and fanasies have no relevence.

- Dan G

[rushmc 18]

DanG

Quote

Feelings, beliefs and fantasies, what is the difference and which is more important in life?

In an individual's life? Who knows? I guess it depends on the individual.

In US foreign and war policy? None of them matter at all. Since that's what we are talking about, your feelings, beliefs, and fanasies have no relevence.

That fact that you might even believe what you just posted is very funny

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[DanG 1]

Quote

That fact that you might even believe what you just posted is very funny

I completely believe that people's feelings, beliefs, and fanatasies have no place in determining US foreign policy. The fact that you apparetly disagree says a lot about you.

- Dan G

[billvon 2,470]

>Lied

Yes. He lied when he justified the war. Even a former CIA director stated he was "overstretching the facts" to justify the war. Here's a direct quote from Bush:

=======
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide. The dictator of Iraq is not disarming. To the contrary, he is deceiving."
========

Three lies in there. He lied about the tubes, even though the DOE said they could not be used for nuclear weapons production, and the state department said that's not why Hussein got them. He lied about the uranium, as has been well documented. He lied about Hussein not disarming; he had the reports from the UNSCOM and IAEA teams showing that they could find no indication of any WMD programs.

Here's a few more:

======
"We're getting additional information that, in fact, Hussein is reconstituting his biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons programs."
======
Lie. No such information existed.

=====
"The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons, is rebuilding the facilities to make more."
=====
Lie. We had no such intelligence.

====
"We made it clear to the dictator of Iraq that he must disarm. And we asked other nations to join us in seeing to it that he would disarm and he chose not to do so, so we disarmed him."
====
Two lies there. There is no way you can claim "we disarmed him" when no weapons were ever found.

If you'd like a few more, the Center for Public Integrity did a study in 2008 and listed 232 false claims Bush made about Iraq and Hussein's WMD's and 28 false claims about Iraq's links to al Qaeda.

(This is your cue to say "but . . . . but . . . were they really lies if they were just known-false information that MIGHT be true? And democrats lied too!")

[rushmc 18]

DanG

Quote

That fact that you might even believe what you just posted is very funny

I completely believe that people's feelings, beliefs, and fanatasies have no place in determining US foreign policy. The fact that you apparetly disagree says a lot about you.

If you think none of these come into play every time a decision is made concerning foreign policy. You are delusional

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

My earlier post stands

you BDS is showing

Why do you hate Bush so badly?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,470]

>Why do you hate Bush so badly?

I don't. He's gone and can no longer get US soldiers killed based on lies. I am perfectly content to let him paint his pictures and clear brush on his ranch; that's a much better use of his time.

It does, however, make me laugh that conservatives think that a lie about 4 American deaths is reprehensible, but lies that resulted in 4000 dead American soldiers are heroic. And they're not even lies, just intentionally false statements! And besides, Clinton did it first.

[billvon 2,470]

> You are delusional

And your one warning.

[DanG 1]

Quote

If you think none of these come into play every time a decision is made concerning foreign policy. You are delusional

Well, we are all human, so of course they have some influence, but that doesn't mean they are the most important things, like Ron thinks they should be.

- Dan G

[rushmc 18]

DanG

Quote

If you think none of these come into play every time a decision is made concerning foreign policy. You are delusional

Well, we are all human, so of course they have some influence, but that doesn't mean they are the most important things, like Ron thinks they should be.

Ok, agreed

I guess I did not get that position from his posts

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

billvon

>Why do you hate Bush so badly?

I don't. He's gone and can no longer get US soldiers killed based on lies. I am perfectly content to let him paint his pictures and clear brush on his ranch; that's a much better use of his time.

It does, however, make me laugh that conservatives think that a lie about 4 American deaths is reprehensible, but lies that resulted in 4000 dead American soldiers are heroic. And they're not even lies, just intentionally false statements! And besides, Clinton did it first.

Of course you do

You use this very same standard when someone talks against Obama
You therefore hate Bush

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,470]

>You therefore hate Bush

Well, at least your reasoning is consistent. "It's not a lie, it's just saying something known to be false." "You don't hate Bush, therefore you hate Bush." "The climate isn't warming, it's just getting warmer for some other reason."

[cvfd1399 0]

billvon

>Lied

Yes. He lied when he justified the war. Even a former CIA director stated he was "overstretching the facts" to justify the war. Here's a direct quote from Bush:

=======
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide. The dictator of Iraq is not disarming. To the contrary, he is deceiving."
========

Three lies in there. He lied about the tubes, even though the DOE said they could not be used for nuclear weapons production, and the state department said that's not why Hussein got them. He lied about the uranium, as has been well documented. He lied about Hussein not disarming; he had the reports from the UNSCOM and IAEA teams showing that they could find no indication of any WMD programs.

Here's a few more:

======
"We're getting additional information that, in fact, Hussein is reconstituting his biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons programs."
======
Lie. No such information existed.

=====
"The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons, is rebuilding the facilities to make more."
=====
Lie. We had no such intelligence.

====
"We made it clear to the dictator of Iraq that he must disarm. And we asked other nations to join us in seeing to it that he would disarm and he chose not to do so, so we disarmed him."
====
Two lies there. There is no way you can claim "we disarmed him" when no weapons were ever found.

If you'd like a few more, the Center for Public Integrity did a study in 2008 and listed 232 false claims Bush made about Iraq and Hussein's WMD's and 28 false claims about Iraq's links to al Qaeda.

(This is your cue to say "but . . . . but . . . were they really lies if they were just known-false information that MIGHT be true? And democrats lied too!")

You read a different report that I did. Although they did not find WMD, almost every section stated that Hussein still kept the information, and could quickly reconfigure existing chemical plants to weaponize WMD, was actively seeking and making chemicals that only needed a slight alteration to be chemicals in WMD and the CIA report stated his intention was to wait out the investigations then restart.

https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd/Iraq_Oct_2002.htm#key%20judgemetns%201

Quote

Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade.

Quote

Iraq's aggressive attempts to obtain proscribed high-strength aluminum tubes are of significant concern. All intelligence experts agree that Iraq is seeking nuclear weapons and that these tubes could be used in a centrifuge enrichment program. Most intelligence specialists assess this to be the intended use, but some believe that these tubes are probably intended for conventional weapons programs.
Based on tubes of the size Iraq is trying to acquire, a few tens of thousands of centrifuges would be capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a couple of weapons per year.

Quote

In the absence of inspectors, Baghdad's already considerable ability to work on prohibited programs without risk of discovery has increased, and there is substantial evidence that Iraq is reconstituting prohibited programs. Baghdad's vigorous concealment efforts have meant that specific information on many aspects of Iraq's WMD programs is yet to be uncovered. Revelations after the Gulf war starkly demonstrate the extensive efforts undertaken by Iraq to deny information.

Is this the information given to Bush? If so I dont see how he was lying, everything bush stated to americans is in this report as far as I can tell.

If this was the information given to Bush, then the CIA, or the specific team that made this report should be the ones to blame.

[billvon 2,470]

>You read a different report that I did. Although they did not find WMD, almost every
>section stated that Hussein still kept the information, and could quickly reconfigure
>existing chemical plants to weaponize WMD

Agreed. But that's not what he SAID. If you see someone looking at a store with a crowbar in his hand, and call the cops and say "I saw him break into the store" that's still a lie. Even if you want really badly to get him arrested, and you think he might do it, and you are really just looking out for the store owner.

If he had stuck to what you had said above, and said "we can't find any evidence that he is building WMD's, but we know he knows how to do it, and we are worried that he will start" then we'd be in a whole different place today. It's likely he would not have gotten the support he did for the war, and would have gotten enough pressure to delay the start of the war until the UN inspections were completed. And if they had completed those inspections, it is likely that 4000 US soldiers would now be alive, 100,000 Iraqis would still be with us, and today a conventionally armed Saddam Hussein would be busily trying to crush ISIS as he crushed all the other religious uprisings in his country.

But he didn't. He lied. He said Hussein WAS building chemical, nuclear and biological weapons. (Even after the war, even after there was no doubt at all about the lack of WMD's, he claimed that Hussein had them, and that we disarmed him.) Those are lies, and they led directly to a war that killed thousands of our soldiers.

[cvfd1399 0]

Point taken, I challenge others here to read that report in the link I posted, and judge for themselves. The information was fed to him from the CIA and although they never stated "the WMD are parked at 11235 Baghdad blvd in a warehouse". It's pretty much what anyone would have needed to take it to the next level.


It point blank states iraq is actively seeking, procuring, testing, and has all the knowledge it needs to enable WMD, along with nuclear weapons, and is even planning on hiding it until the inspections are over and ramping up to full production.

[jakee 1,279]

Quote

and is even planning on hiding it until the inspections are over and ramping up to full production.

Dude, freakin' seriously?

Apply your own standard of VERIFICATION [sic] and explain how anyone could know or claim what Saddam was going to do after that round of inspections?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[billvon 2,470]

>The information was fed to him from the CIA

Here's the CIA report:
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2015/03/cia-iraq-bush-wmd-report

Note it claims no firm evidence of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons programs at the time of the report. For its many conjectures it says, several times, that "evidence is limited." Here's an example:

Hussein has "probably has renovated a [vaccine] production plant" to manufacture biological weapons "but we are unable to determine whether [biological weapons] agent research has resumed."

And keep in mind that even those weasely statements came after Bush used all the pressure he could to get the CIA to tell him that Hussein had WMD's. Paul Pillar, the CIA officer who led the effort to write it, said that "the atmosphere in which they were working, in which a policy decision clearly had already been made, in which intelligence was being looked to to support that decision rather to inform decisions yet to be made, was a very important part of the atmosphere."

If a mutual fund manager ever produced a report with such bias and lack of substance, and a corporate investor invested in it based on that report, both would be in jail when the mutual fund collapsed - especially if the corporate investor pressured the manager to alter the report to let him get the go-ahead to invest.

>It point blank states iraq is actively seeking, procuring, testing, and has all the
>knowledge it needs to enable WMD, along with nuclear weapons, and is even planning
>on hiding it until the inspections are over and ramping up to full production.

And again, if he had said that Iraq was in danger of GETTING WMD's, rather than claiming he had them and was an imminent threat, he would not be remembered as the president who lied to get us into a war.