286 replies to this topic

[Bob Vila]

http://www.foxnews.c...,131912,00.html
I was kinda suprised that Bush is favored to win if the election was held today.

btw, did anyone see Bush's speech at the RNC?

[Andy.Davies]

no, but the politics critics on the news here said in a rating out of 10, his speech was better than Kerry's. i think bush got 8/10 but i dont know about Kerry, i think he was given 6/10

[CrimsonCasio]

yeah, bush support in the US is way better than kerry, but acording to polls the rest of the world thinks kerry is better (shows were doing something right huh )

[betoe]

Bush is a war emblem for the rest of the world, and we all think (rest of the world) that americans have better economy with this wars.

I was kinda suprised that Bush is favored to win if the election was held today.

I was surprised with that too.

[Bob Vila]

no, but the politics critics on the news here said in a rating out of 10, his speech was better than Kerry's. i think bush got 8/10 but i dont know about Kerry, i think he was given 6/10

yeah, it was definatley a good speech, some democratic protestor tried to rush him even, it was pretty funny the whole crowd was booing her

[Bob Vila]

what do you guys think about this?
http://linuxiso.org/...der=asc&start=0

[CrimsonCasio]

yeah... funny stuff

i started out this election thinking that kerry was probably overall a better candidate for normal times, I was going to vote for bush anyway as I believe he is the correct choice in time of war/conflict... since then ive been steadally more and more convinced that kerry would not make a good president under any circumstance.

another funny thing, ive been paying attention to the supposedly unbaised news lately, and then watching fox... its amazing whats not being reported (or mis-reported) by all the other channels. fox may be biased but so are all the others, just the other way. (anybody heard about the kitty kelly book debacle?)

[huhn_m]

yeah, bush support in the US is way better than kerry, but acording to polls the rest of the world thinks kerry is better (shows were doing something right huh )

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

yeah ... the rest of the world might think that the kerry, who might be worse for
your country, if you are one of the big ones in the big company, is better for the rest of the world. whle bush might be worse but better for your economy e.g. (oil companies, big companies ...).

You should really have read the books by michael more since I really doubt
that you know what bush has brought you. If haven't read the last one and I haven't seen the film (it was not in our cinema) but what makes the world worrie
is that you simply say he is lying ... there was another man in history who was
considdered perfect for his people and only very few spoke against him and nobody believed them ... Believe me ... I know .... t directly affects my country ...

Be aware that not everything that doesn't fit yoru needs is a lie.

[Bob Vila]

bush is not even close to hitler. bush is not slaying innocent people because he doesnt like where they come from or who their ancestors are. bush is a better leader than kerry is if only for the fact that he dosent change positions on anything. kerry on the other hand changes positions on something every five minutes, sounds like a great leader to me... (like Cheney said, "Kerry sees two Americas, and America sees two John Kerrys)

Be aware that not everything that doesn't fit yoru needs is a lie.

couldnt the same apply for you?

(anybody heard about the kitty kelly book debacle?)

nope, what is it about?

[CrimsonCasio]

huhn, the problem is that you all arnt hearing the other side of the story, I just recently got a job in a barnes and noble (bookstore) and ive had a chance to take a look at some michel moore stuff. try reading something by shawn hannity and see if you can believe moore. a big problem with moore is that he's a pundit, not a reall author, he uses that as an excuse to write whatever he wants (true or not). weather they know it or not kerry and moore would destroy america, they (like clinton) are in favor of quick fixes that will leave us suffering in the long term.

another thing, you may think that america becoming more powerfull hurts you? it doesnt. nearly every country in the world profits when america has money to spend.

now, about the kitty kelly book: first off nobody but really fanatical bush haters are going to beleive it somply because it was written by kitty kelly, but it shows how the media favors the democrats. she is going to be on the today show for 3 days talking about this book, but her primary source has come forward and said that kelly is lying about everything this person said. still, she will be on the today show with a book that is obviouly a total fabrication and i can gaureenty that not once in those 3 days will you hear anyting about the source that says none of it happened.

btw, huhn: do you get fox news in germany?

[megatroco]

I think that bush is a president that only use the war between Irak and EEUU for economics reasons it is necessary to be very idiot to think that a war against the terrorism can exist. What exists is a war by I refuel of Iraq. The reason which I say that a war against the terrorism is impossible is because the terrorism is a manifestation of much but deep causes. Therefore while it is not fought to eliminate the causes of the terrorism it is impossible to win the battle. In view of this I feel proud of which Chile does not find dice his aprovacion to invacion American to Iraq. American town clears the bandage of their eyes do not leave to Bush continue guiding by the way that brave American soldiers helped destroyed World War II.

[CrimsonCasio]

two points:
1) so.... your saying that since the war on terror cant be won in any traditional sense we shouldnt even try to fight it? great idea... lets just roll over and die why dont we.

2) saddam was evil, no doubt about that... why shouldnt we free iraq from oppression?

also, i dont understand the WWII refrence...

[betoe]

Well i think that sadam was evil, but bush isnt a good boy (an angel ). If you see Megatroco think in a similar way than me, we are from latin america and we have a very different life in comparison with the american life.

Here i born with the charge of the Adan&eva sin, and if this isnt enough, we have a debt with the US that we will never pay coz its enormous, but they will be able to do what they want with us.

[CrimsonCasio]

well, you have a diffrent life mostly (i think) because your government and police are extreamly corupt (btw, kerry said something about how the LA police should act more like the mexican police... ), but i agree with you that bush is no saint... but kerry is an idoit.

btw, the US debet is probably way higher than your debt... and if we keep electing ppl like kerry and clinton then we will never pay it off either.

[XF007]

i think the only thing that can stop the terror, is the peace, war can't stop terror, war only make more and more terror .....
So i think bush is not a good president, like i think chirac is not a good president in france (for other reasons, like stupid internet laws) ...

[CrimsonCasio]

you cant just declare peace and expect everyone to lay down their weapons, remember, the terrorists attacked us, not the other way around. there was peace before they decided to attack us. the only way to stop terror is to stamp it out, if you give in to it or try to ignore it the terrorists will only grow bolder and more pleantlyfull.

[Bob Vila]

[megatroco]

Remember that the terrorists of the 11 of September were not from irak.

[CrimsonCasio]

nope, they werent... the guys like saddam are more the stay-at-home kind of terrorists. so again, why shouldnt we take them out?

[megatroco]

Please we most think a litle more. The form to end the terrorists is to end the causes that impel them to so horrible actions. If single they are dedicated to kill them surely other would apear others that take their place and the cycle will happend again and againd.CrimsonCasio you are not so naif of thought tries to see the causes nonsingle the effects.
please pardon my english

[megatroco]

before they were the Communists, now are the terrorists. Pardon is not the terrorists, single are economicos interests derived from the obtaining of I refuel.

[2072]

Well I'm very disappointed to see that Bush will win the elections...

PLEASE ALL BUSH SUPPORTERS, PLAY THIS LITTLE GAME THAT WILL LEARN YOU WHAT BUSH REALLY DID TO YOUR COUNTRY.

http://www.emogame.com/bushgame.html
http://www.emogame.com/bushgame.html
http://www.emogame.com/bushgame.html
http://www.emogame.com/bushgame.html
http://www.emogame.com/bushgame.html
http://www.emogame.com/bushgame.html
http://www.emogame.com/bushgame.html
http://www.emogame.com/bushgame.html
http://www.emogame.com/bushgame.html
http://www.emogame.com/bushgame.html
http://www.emogame.com/bushgame.html

If you are part of the top 1% richest citizen of America you won't like this game................


Just take the time to play to this game

[megatroco]

And that passage with the supposed weapons of massive destruction of irak. Also i like to know that passage to me with the inspector of weapons who was assassinated because he knew that Iraq did not count on these weapons?

[megatroco]

please read this pages.
you can translate with google

http://www.geocities...olicos/irak.htm

http://www.eldiarion...44&Txtid=932871

http://www.noalaguer...alaguerra.shtml

http://www.univision...3117&cid=421368

[CrimsonCasio]

(tried to post this earlyer but forum went down this is to be considered before megatroco's second post after my last one)

well, lets think about that then, what exactly are the causes that inspire them to do these things? i'll tell you, hate is why they do this, and unthinking stupidity. fanatics cannot be reasoned with, and they dont need a vaild point to kill people. their justification in this case is that they are doing it for their god, yet ask any non-fanatical muslim if they think killing americans is a good thing and guess what they say... heck, ask mohamed what he thinks about these guys. they are evil in its purest form, using religion as an excuse to kill and opress, just like the christians in the crusades and the inquisition. do you think they were justified because they killed in the name of god? i sure dont and they were members of my religion... they were evil too.

now, if you think that apeasing the terrorists (which, by the way is impossible since every non-muslim would have to die, and then probably every non fanatic) will fix anything then you are dead wrong, think about hitler in WWII, europe tried apeasment with him and things only got worse. the same would be true of terrorist, apeasing them would only imbolden them to attack all the more. I can say this with absolute certinty because a terrorist leader in Iran was recently quoted as saying that he and his followers were encouraged to continue their attacks on the people of Iran because of the apeasment policies of the Iranian left wing party. the only way to stop terrorisim is to stomp it out so totally that it cannot spread.

[CrimsonCasio]

"the bush administration has caused a loos of more jobs since the great depression"

compleat lie, emplyment rates are up and rising.

"the a-team just cant afford to provide us with health care anymore"

did you know that under kerry's plan everyone would be able to get free health care? sounds great huh? to bad under that plan it would take 6 months for people to get an operation, they would be dead before they could get an opperation. its called comunisim/socialism (did you know that kerry is being endorsed by the US Comunist party? and ANSWER?)

only played up to the george and barbra bush part, at that point i became so discusted with it that i quit. i find the "game" to be totally unfounded (about most things, there were some valid points but they are nothing i didnt already know), much like michel moore this uses "humor" as an excuse to say whatever they want about bush.

and btw, im most certinly not rich. and i doubt bob is either.

now, as to the other links, unfortunately i cant seem to read them at 3am i'll try tomarrow.

[2072]

There isn't very much humor in last Moore's film...

If you had continued the game further, you'd have discovered (if you didn't already know it) that Bush laws and politic make rich people and bigest companies to save billions of dollars, in fact this game just tells you what Bush laws are really doing...

[Killer83Z]

they are evil in its purest form, using religion as an excuse to kill and opress, just like the christians in the crusades and the inquisition. do you think they were justified because they killed in the name of god? i sure dont and they were members of my religion... they were evil too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Isn't Bush a christian too? And doesn't he use God in every speech too? Makes him evil as well, or not?

[CrimsonCasio]

2072: ive heard it accused before and ive already said what i think about that: 1) its probably destorted to make it sound bad, and 2) helping big bussiness helps the little people too, who do you think the little people buy from? its called capatalism and its the only system that works.

Killer: good point! *claps* I would say that if he were going to war because he thought god wanted him to kill muslims then yeah, he would be as evil as them. as it is though he went to war because we were attacked, and then because saddam was evil and it happened to be convieniant to take him out right then (had troops in the area, etc...). thats still the best point Ive heard raised though

[megatroco]

The terrorists of the 9/11 do not have any connection with the irakies. In Iraq arms of massive destruction do not exist. If the U.S.A. wants to help to protect the human rights they do something in Guant?namo. Iraq is but poor much that their neighbors therefore as can get to be a threat for them.

The only reason by which Capitalism seems to be the only system that works is because the U.S.A. has been in charge to eliminate many the communist regimes. For example they planned and they carried out the overthrow of president Allende in Chile in 1973. Documents of the c.i.a. exist that demonstrate it. In view of the previous thing I fear for Cuba because unlike Korea of the North they do not have nuclear weapons to defend themselves.

Wake up the war of terrorism is more a war of oil.


extra data: the terrorism has been increased since the invacion from the U.S.A. to Iraq

[XF007]

an a war of oil is stupid, in 50year there will be no more oil ...

[CrimsonCasio]

The terrorists of the 9/11 do not have any connection with the irakies. In Iraq arms of massive destruction do not exist. If the U.S.A. wants to help to protect the human rights they do something in Guant?namo. Iraq is but poor much that their neighbors therefore as can get to be a threat for them.

I agree, they have nothing to do with Iraq, but that dosent mean that we should free iraq while we're in the area. Iraq is poor cause Saddam kept all the money to himself. mabey we'll get to other countries next, but i doubt it... the war on terror will last a lifetime.

The only reason by which Capitalism seems to be the only system that works is because the U.S.A. has been in charge to eliminate many the communist regimes. For example they planned and they carried out the overthrow of president Allende in Chile in 1973. Documents of the c.i.a. exist that demonstrate it. In view of the previous thing I fear for Cuba because unlike Korea of the North they do not have nuclear weapons to defend themselves.

im sorry, but thats one of the silliest things Ive ever heard. you think communisim is better than capitalisim? take a look at china if you want an example of what comunisim can do to a country, russia, vietnam! with comunisim everyone is at the same level, no matter how hard they try (and this is assuming that it actually works, witch it doesnt cause leaders are corrupt), the laziest slacker gets all the same rewards as the hardest worker and its the worker the suffers. you can not improve you life because there is no reward for working harder. I call that hell, what do you call it?

the war on terror is a war aginst evil, bush may or may not have an alternative purpose to fighting saddam but i really dont care (and i also have evidence suggesting aginst it), as long as saddam and the terrorists are eliminated the world will be a better place. what you saying is that we should not try to stop evil simply because some of bushes friends might proffit... good for them, thats a smart move on there part. still doesnt mean we shouldnt destroy the terrorists and saddam.

extra data: the terrorism has been increased since the invacion from the U.S.A. to Iraq

good, mabey more countries will join in the fight (ex: russia)

[2072]

Communism isn't working... unless with gulags.

It's easy to understand that communism cannot work: it's against the very human nature, it's in our instinct to possess to fill that we are better than our neighbours... :/


Yep Killer is right I forgot about this point, Bush justifies is action using God just like the terrorists

2) helping big bussiness helps the little people too, who do you think the little people buy from? its called capatalism and its the only system that works.

Well I thing that rich people don't need help :/ they are rich enough, aren't they? Anyway all Bush government are rich people... they are just 'helping' eachothers.

What I don't understand with american people: When Clinton and Monica had intimate relations, all america was shocked, wanted Clinton to resign. Now they have a president that obviously:
- stole his election
- lie about mass destructions weapon to justify a war who killed/is killing innocent people.
- makes laws that favor richest people exempting them to pay billions of taxes which means bilions of dollars that won't go to US --> people
- who proves he was stupid in many occasions...

and well... no it's OK, he can stay president, no problem, he can even be reelected...

Is american people blind?

[CrimsonCasio]

What I don't understand with americans people: When Clinton and Monica had intimate relations, all america was shocked, wanted Clinton to resign. Now they have a president that obviously:
- stole his election
- lie about mass destructions weapon to justify a war who killed/is killing innocent people.
- makes laws that favor richest people exempting them to pay billions of taxes which means bilions of dollars that won't go to US --> people
- who proves he was stupid in many occasions...

- stole his election

he didnt, ive shown that before.

- lie about mass destructions weapon to justify a war who killed/is killing innocent people.

didnt lie, nobody knew. even the democrats will admit that.

- makes laws that favor richest people exempting them to pay billions of taxes which means bilions of dollars that won't go to US --> people

mabey he did, never said hes a saint. but dont get me started on clinton.

- who proves he was stupid in many occasions...

hes not stupid, just not a good speaker. did you know that Chairman Mao (or was it stalin?) called democrats "usefull idiots", and thats comming from a communist...

[Bob Vila]

- lie about mass destructions weapon to justify a war who killed/is killing innocent people.

clinton (and the whole democratic party for that matter) have been claiming that iraq has wmd since the gulf war, i have the exact quotes if you want them...

[2072]

- stole his election

he didnt, ive shown that before.

I will never agree with that...

remember the ~15000 (i don't remember the exact member) black people they removed from the lists? Why was Bush's campaign director was also main supervisor of the elections?

- lie about mass destructions weapon to justify a war who killed/is killing innocent people.

didnt lie, nobody knew. even the democrats will admit that.

If you don't remember this was the only valid argument they had to start this war.
An argument they've build from nothing like you said nobody knew.

Bush is using the fear of terrorism to make people trust him... You should really watch Fahrenheit 9/11, you'll understand how dangerous he is.

From what I'm seeing Bush supporters don't want to watch this movie because they've been told it's all bullshit, they don't want to heve their own opinion, they let Bush government think for them...

You can found DVD rip of Fahrenheit 9/11 on the net easily (bittorent), so you have no excuses.

(Micael Moore doesn't care about people sharing his movie)

- makes laws that favor richest people exempting them to pay billions of taxes which means bilions of dollars that won't go to US --> people

mabey he did, never said hes a saint.

he did and he will continue

- who proves he was stupid in many occasions...

hes not stupid, just not a good speaker.

A president have to be a good speaker.

did you know that Chairman Mao (or was it stalin?) called democrats "usefull idiots", and thats comming from a communist...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't listen evil men words, how can you trust what your enemy is saying?

I'm not democratic or republican, I'm just against the evil Bush, anything but Bush, Bush will ruin your country.

[Bob Vila]

If you don't remember this was the only valid argument they had to start this war.
An argument they've build from nothing like you said nobody knew.

see my last post

[Bob Vila]

You should really watch Fahrenheit 9/11, you'll understand how dangerous he is.

Why do I want to pay to see liberal propaganda? I can turn on the TV and get that for free?

Kerry Met With Communists Illegally, Author Says
http://www.cnsnews.c...E20040520a.html
Quote:

According to Corsi, Kerry violated U.S. code 18 U.S.C. 953. "A U.S. citizen cannot go abroad and negotiate with a foreign power," Corsi told CNSNews.com.

By Kerry's own admission, he met in 1970 with delegations from the North Vietnamese communist government and discussed how the Vietnam War should be stopped.


Socialists back Kerry
Quote:

Aside from a failed economic theory what do the American Communist Party and Democratic Socialists of America have in common? Well for this election at least, it?s John Kerry. They are urging their followers to vote for the Democratic Party?s candidate. Frank Llewellyn, Director of the socialists says, ??the most important concern of our members now is to defeat Bush.? Up until now the socialists had backed Dennis Kucinich in his lackluster run for the Democratic nomination.


Castro Backs Kerry
Quote:

As we have previously reported, the regime has shown stolen (snicker!) copies of the Bush-hating fantasy film "Fahrenheit 9/11" in cinemas for weeks and broadcast it on dictatorship-run TV the night of Kerry's acceptance speech at the Democrat convention.


John Kerry's shifting stands
http://www.boston.co...hifting_stands/
Quote:
Confused? Don't feel bad. Trying to keep up with Kerry's shifting stands can be baffling even to those of us who have followed his career for decades. You'll be hearing a lot more about them before this campaign is over.


Teresa: John not qualified to be president
http://www.worldnetd...RTICLE_ID=40080
Quote:

She could be the next first lady of the United States, but the outspoken Teresa Heinz Kerry doesn't think her husband John ? or anyone for that matter ? is qualified to be president.

...

The less-than-ringing endorsement for her husband, the Democratic nominee for the White House, left the magazine in a strange position, writing that the "message she left hanging in the air" was "Vote for John. He's less poorly qualified than the other guy."


Kerry blaming Bush for Kerry's own Bill
http://www.worldnetd...RTICLE_ID=36072
Quote:
In a classic case of the political pot calling the kettle black, Democrat presidential candidate John Kerry blasted the Bush administration over failing to be accountable for the disastrous fallout of the use of a fuel additive deemed carcinogenic, without mentioning he was behind legislation that mandated its widespread use.

k here are the quotes of the democrats and WMD...
here's your buddy kerry,

OCT 2002, Senate Floor Speech:
"I believe the record of Saddam Hussein's ruthless, reckless breach of international values and standards of behavior which is at the core of the cease-fire agreement, with no reach, no stretch, is cause enough for the world community to hold him accountable by use of force, if necessary. The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons."

and here is the rest (couple more with kerry too)

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America?s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam?s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq?s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration?s policy towards Iraq, I don?t think there can be any question about Saddam?s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

and here is something else i've found...

1) The 2000 Presidential Election Results
Three Words: GET OVER IT. THe only thing worse than a LOSER is a Sore LOSER
1st Election results: Winner Bush
1st "Legal" Recount: Winner Bush
2nd "Legal" Recount: Winner Bush
3rd "Illegal" Recount: Winner Bush
4th "Illegal" Recount: Stopped by the U.S Supreme Court
2) The War in Iraq
It needed to be done. 12 Years of failing to Comply with UN resoultions. Finally with UN Resolution 1441: "which gave Iraq one last chance to rid itself of its chemical and biological weapons, ballistic missiles, and nuclear weapons program or face "serious consequences." "For 12 years, the international community has demanded the disarmament of Iraq but has settled for less, trying to limit the damage Saddam Hussein could inflict, while we sought to induce Iraqi compliance with its disarmament obligations"
Only one Man could have prevented this war, His name is: SADDAM HUSSEIN And as we all know he chose not to. Debriefs and Interrogations of Iraqi Commanders have made light that Saddam even had his Generals fooled. Each Commander thought the unit to their "right" or "Left" was the Unit that had the WMD. They knew only one certainty, Their Unit did not have it. ONLY ONE MAN COULD HAVE PREVENTED THE WAR! Not Prime Minister Tony Blair, Not President George W. Bush, Not Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar.
Among the "Liberals", be it an American or a Nosey Neighbor to the North, or an Anti-Capitalist European Country; This was the right War, Just the wrong Administration to conduct it. Hint: do a Google Search on Clinton and Iraq. You will find many, many simularties of the Current Presidents view of Iraq and that of Former President Clintons Views.
3) The Lies about President Bush and Cutting Veterans Benifets
Total spending on veterans has increased from $38-billion to $60-billion, or about 58 percent, over the past decade. That amounts to $2,400 per veteran in 2004, compared with $1,300 per veteran in 1995. The Republican-controlled Congress decided last year to begin phasing out the penalty veterans pay when they receive a disability check as well as military retirement pay. Previously, all retirement pay was reduced by the amount of the disability payments.

[CrimsonCasio]

I don't listen evil men words, how can you trust what your enemy is saying?

if you dont listen to your enemy you will never defeat him, you will only feel more and moer secure in yourself untill the day that evil overruns you, and you might find that you let it happen, worse you might be a part of it. the greatest evil is ignorance.

btw, John Kerry is considered a war hero by the comunist vietnam and they credit him with helping them win the war. also, by its definition Kerry is a traitor to the united states, he could have litterally been brought up on charges.

the only reason i havent see F911 is because I've heard its extreamly bloody and i have a problem with all bloody movies (only seen 3 rated R movies in my life)

btw bob, thats the best post you've ever done

[megatroco]

If as much you support to Bush enter to the army and go to fight in Irak. .
If you go to Irak maybe you will think more the stuff that you are saying.

try to read the Web pages that I put above