www.devilfinder.com He Cooked The Books! The 'Board' Will Oust bush
As A Bad Manager

Some of y'all might remember I told y'all about that almost a year ago.
bush is NOT a Republican,he is a liberal.
cuhulin

From: Beerbarrel
Organization: Cox Communications
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:45:30 -0500
Subject: the church of bush

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:39:33 -0500, dxAce
wrote:



Greg wrote:

From: Beerbarrel
Organization: Cox Communications
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:28:30 -0500
Subject: the church of bush

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 23:17:13 GMT, Greg wrote:



From: Beerbarrel
Organization: Cox Communications
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:03:00 -0500
Subject: the church of bush

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:46:55 GMT, Greg wrote:



From: clifto
Organization: Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:00:52 -0600
Subject: the church of bush

John Barnard wrote:
The war started with lies

Repeating that lie hasn't made it true yet, and it won't. But just for
entertainment purposes, why not cite us one of those lies?

All of this comes just as former Marine Corps General and former CENTCOM
commander Anthony Zinni has begun to speak out about the war in Iraq.
Zinni
is the subject of a multiple page article in the Washington Post in
which
he
says "If I'm ever in a position to say what I think is right, I will. .
. .
I don't care what happens to my career."

Zinni is indeed telling it like it is. To quote the Post:

"Iraq is in serious danger of coming apart because of lack of planning,
underestimating the task and buying into a flawed strategy," he says.
"The
longer we stubbornly resist admitting the mistakes and not altering our
approach, the harder it will be to pull this chestnut out of the fire."

Apparently the time that Zinni turned against the Bush Administration
(he
endorsed Bush in the 2000 election) was when he saw Vice President Dick
Cheney speak to a VFW convention.

"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of
mass destruction," Cheney said. "There is no doubt that he is amassing
them
to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us."

Cheney's certitude bewildered Zinni. As chief of the Central Command,
Zinni
had been immersed in U.S. intelligence about Iraq. He was all too
familiar
with the intelligence analysts' doubts about Iraq's programs to acquire
weapons of mass destruction, or WMD. "In my time at Centcom, I watched
the
intelligence, and never -- not once -- did it say, 'He has WMD.' "

That's right. Zinni says that "never ‹ not once ‹ did [the intelligence]
say, 'He has WMD.'" It was uncertain. It was always uncertain. Once
Cheney
left the stage Zinni was conviced of two things: first, that the Bush
Administration was determined to invade and occupy Iraq. And, second,
"These
guys don't understand what they are getting into."

(http://www.warblogging.com/archives/000781.php

Greg



Why does it always have to be WMD's with you guys? You all seem to
forget the other hundred reasons that we should have kicked his butt!

The subject is Bush's lies. Try to keep up.

Greg



Why don't you just answer the question instead of avoiding it?


Are you drunk?

Another 'Classic' 'tard boy response.

LMAO

dxAce
Michigan
USA




I love these guys that just post links to some obscure news story. Do
they actually have the ability to think critically for themselves.
Barnard, Mike, Greg, David, and others they are all cut from the same
mold I think. They remind me of a big turd swirling down the toilet.
Do you think they make up this stuff as they are swirling side by side
on the way down?


Beerbelly, you're not funny and you're not too bright. What else have you
got?

Greg

John Barnard wrote:
clifto wrote:
Repeating that lie hasn't made it true yet, and it won't. But just for
entertainment purposes, why not cite us one of those lies?

Here goes:

In August 2002, Cheney insisted: "Simply stated, there is no doubt that
Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction."

In a March 2003 address to the nation, Bush said: "Intelligence gathered by
this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to
possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."

In April 2003, Fleischer claimed: "But make no mistake--as I said
earlier--we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction.
That is what this war was about and it is about."

In February 2003, Powell said: "We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to
keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more."

On July 21, 2003, Bill Clinton said on the Larry King Show, "People
can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan
or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that
on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of
biological and chemical weapons."

Same day, same show, same Clinton, actually defending Bush: "You know,
everybody makes mistakes when they are president. I mean, you can't
make as many calls as you have to make without messing up once in
a while."

I don't believe that Hussein was able to go on a WMD after the Powell/Rice
statements and managed to obtain a huge aresenal between then and 2003.

Even if I were to take your Powell quotes, and disregard that he's a
flaming Bush-bashing liberal, your Powell quotes are a good sample in
that they show how often Powell contradicts himself. In any event, I
trump your flaming liberal Powell with a flaming liberal Clinton.


And even if all your quotes and materials were 100% true and factual,
we still don't have a lie, only bad intelligence relayed to the public.

So keep on chanting about how Bush lied. Just don't do it around
thinking people or people who are affected by reality or facts.

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

From: Beerbarrel
Organization: Cox Communications
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 19:19:42 -0500
Subject: the church of bush

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 00:18:21 GMT, Greg wrote:



From: Beerbarrel
Organization: Cox Communications
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:37:06 -0500
Subject: the church of bush

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 23:26:20 GMT, Greg wrote:



From: dxAce
Organization: The Listener at the Gates of Dawn
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:17:42 -0500
Subject: the church of bush



Greg wrote:

From: clifto
Organization: Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:00:52 -0600
Subject: the church of bush

John Barnard wrote:
The war started with lies

Repeating that lie hasn't made it true yet, and it won't. But just for
entertainment purposes, why not cite us one of those lies?

The Associated Press
PANAMA CITY, Panama Nov 7, 2005 ‹ President Bush vigorously defended U.S.
interrogation practices in the war on terror Monday and lobbied against a
congressional drive to outlaw torture.
"There's an enemy that lurks and plots and plans and wants to hurt
America
again," Bush said. "So you bet we will aggressively pursue them but we
will
do so under the law."
He declared, "We do not torture."

'Tard boy liberals such as yourself would rather give the terrorists some
milk,
cookies and a pat on the head.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Actually, I would prefer to have seen Osama killed or captured and Al Qaeda
destroyed in Afghanistan. But, like you, our commander-in-chief has a
small
attention span. As to operating torture camps - isn't that what we're
supposed to be opposed to?

Greg


Actually, I don't think making people pose naked is torture,

Nope, that's just good kids having a little fun, eh? Makes the US really
look good.

liberal media got the attention of all the bleeding heart liberals.

...and the entire world.

It was the only way they had to fight back. They whined about some naked
pictures.

The media should protect us from the ugly truth?

What happened to the Jews at the hands of the Nazis, that
was torture.

You're starting to sound like a bleeding heart liberal. Torture is what
Bush want to legalize. He thinks it would make his job so much easier.
He's wrong, as usual.

Greg


Do you actually think before you post?


Confused? Go have that beer now. Everything will be okay.

Greg

From: Beerbarrel
Organization: Cox Communications
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:39:21 -0500
Subject: the church of bush

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 23:36:17 GMT, Greg wrote:



From: Beerbarrel
Organization: Cox Communications
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:28:30 -0500
Subject: the church of bush

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 23:17:13 GMT, Greg wrote:



From: Beerbarrel
Organization: Cox Communications
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:03:00 -0500
Subject: the church of bush

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:46:55 GMT, Greg wrote:



From: clifto
Organization: Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:00:52 -0600
Subject: the church of bush

John Barnard wrote:
The war started with lies

Repeating that lie hasn't made it true yet, and it won't. But just for
entertainment purposes, why not cite us one of those lies?

All of this comes just as former Marine Corps General and former CENTCOM
commander Anthony Zinni has begun to speak out about the war in Iraq.
Zinni
is the subject of a multiple page article in the Washington Post in which
he
says "If I'm ever in a position to say what I think is right, I will. . .
.
I don't care what happens to my career."

Zinni is indeed telling it like it is. To quote the Post:

"Iraq is in serious danger of coming apart because of lack of planning,
underestimating the task and buying into a flawed strategy," he says.
"The
longer we stubbornly resist admitting the mistakes and not altering our
approach, the harder it will be to pull this chestnut out of the fire."

Apparently the time that Zinni turned against the Bush Administration (he
endorsed Bush in the 2000 election) was when he saw Vice President Dick
Cheney speak to a VFW convention.

"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of
mass destruction," Cheney said. "There is no doubt that he is amassing
them
to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us."

Cheney's certitude bewildered Zinni. As chief of the Central Command,
Zinni
had been immersed in U.S. intelligence about Iraq. He was all too
familiar
with the intelligence analysts' doubts about Iraq's programs to acquire
weapons of mass destruction, or WMD. "In my time at Centcom, I watched
the
intelligence, and never -- not once -- did it say, 'He has WMD.' "

That's right. Zinni says that "never ‹ not once ‹ did [the intelligence]
say, 'He has WMD.'" It was uncertain. It was always uncertain. Once
Cheney
left the stage Zinni was conviced of two things: first, that the Bush
Administration was determined to invade and occupy Iraq. And, second,
"These
guys don't understand what they are getting into."

(http://www.warblogging.com/archives/000781.php

Greg



Why does it always have to be WMD's with you guys? You all seem to
forget the other hundred reasons that we should have kicked his butt!

The subject is Bush's lies. Try to keep up.

Greg



Why don't you just answer the question instead of avoiding it?


Are you drunk?

Greg


I guess I made my point with you. You have no answer.


The answer: It doesn't. See my other posts.

Greg

Local Soldier makes big find in Iraq. www.wnep.com Sergeant
Brian Packer of the Pennsylvania National Guard's 109th Mechanized
Infantry (he is probally one of those guys whom trained at Camp Shelby
near Hattiesburg,Mississippi before they shipped out to Iraq a few
months ago.Hey,I have to get my dig in there too,ya know) found a big
cache of weapons in Iraq.Good on yer,Sergeant Brian Packer.
cuhulin

clifto wrote:

Same day, same show, same Clinton, actually defending Bush: "You know,
everybody makes mistakes when they are president. I mean, you can't
make as many calls as you have to make without messing up once in
a while."

Yeah, I guess 2000+ American kids dead, 19,000 American kids mutilated
and tens of thousands of dead innocent civilians is just a little "once
in a while mess up". Shame on us for being so critical of Bunnypants' lies.

Greg wrote:

Keep dreamin' Drakeman.

Does the Drake Company know that their name is being asociated with such
a paragon of public relations for the hobby?

clifto wrote:

John Barnard wrote:
clifto wrote:
Repeating that lie hasn't made it true yet, and it won't. But just for
entertainment purposes, why not cite us one of those lies?

Here goes:

In August 2002, Cheney insisted: "Simply stated, there is no doubt that
Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction."

In a March 2003 address to the nation, Bush said: "Intelligence gathered by
this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to
possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."

In April 2003, Fleischer claimed: "But make no mistake--as I said
earlier--we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction.
That is what this war was about and it is about."

In February 2003, Powell said: "We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to
keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more."

On July 21, 2003, Bill Clinton said on the Larry King Show, "People
can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan
or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that
on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of
biological and chemical weapons."

Same day, same show, same Clinton, actually defending Bush: "You know,
everybody makes mistakes when they are president. I mean, you can't
make as many calls as you have to make without messing up once in
a while."

I don't believe that Hussein was able to go on a WMD after the Powell/Rice
statements and managed to obtain a huge aresenal between then and 2003.

Even if I were to take your Powell quotes, and disregard that he's a
flaming Bush-bashing liberal, your Powell quotes are a good sample in
that they show how often Powell contradicts himself. In any event, I
trump your flaming liberal Powell with a flaming liberal Clinton.

Take a look where Rice says that Iraq and WMDs weren't an issue. Does that make
Rice a "flaming liberal" as well? Does anyone that disagrees with the
Chimp-in-Chief make them a "flaming liberal" in your eyes? No way in hell is
Powell a "flaming liberal". You might want to check out the part where Tenet told
Powell a load of bull**** with regards to the WMD issue and that caused a large
rift between the two. Powell, much to his credit, was intelligent to leave the
current ship of fools.



And even if all your quotes and materials were 100% true and factual,
we still don't have a lie, only bad intelligence relayed to the public.

Sorry to bring reality to your attention but Bush took the intel available and
treated it as a menu. In other words, he cherry-picked the intel. If this were a
sports match it would be akin to fixing the outcome and he would have been turfed
a long time ago. Too bad that the Chimp-in-Chief didn't inherit Bush, Sr's
intelligence who appears to have a greater insight into the folly of trying to
remove Saddam (Time, 2 March 1998).



So keep on chanting about how Bush lied. Just don't do it around
thinking people or people who are affected by reality or facts.

So when would you like me to begin reinforcing that the Chimp-in-chief lied
through his teeth around you? If you believe that Powell is a "flaming liberal"
then you aren't thinking at all!

You name wouldn't happen to be Clifto Clavin, would it?

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

JB

Beerbarrel wrote:

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:46:55 GMT, Greg wrote:



From: clifto
Organization: Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:00:52 -0600
Subject: the church of bush

John Barnard wrote:
The war started with lies

Repeating that lie hasn't made it true yet, and it won't. But just for
entertainment purposes, why not cite us one of those lies?

All of this comes just as former Marine Corps General and former CENTCOM
commander Anthony Zinni has begun to speak out about the war in Iraq. Zinni
is the subject of a multiple page article in the Washington Post in which he
says "If I'm ever in a position to say what I think is right, I will. . . .
I don't care what happens to my career."

Zinni is indeed telling it like it is. To quote the Post:

"Iraq is in serious danger of coming apart because of lack of planning,
underestimating the task and buying into a flawed strategy," he says. "The
longer we stubbornly resist admitting the mistakes and not altering our
approach, the harder it will be to pull this chestnut out of the fire."

Apparently the time that Zinni turned against the Bush Administration (he
endorsed Bush in the 2000 election) was when he saw Vice President Dick
Cheney speak to a VFW convention.

"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of
mass destruction," Cheney said. "There is no doubt that he is amassing them
to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us."

Cheney's certitude bewildered Zinni. As chief of the Central Command, Zinni
had been immersed in U.S. intelligence about Iraq. He was all too familiar
with the intelligence analysts' doubts about Iraq's programs to acquire
weapons of mass destruction, or WMD. "In my time at Centcom, I watched the
intelligence, and never -- not once -- did it say, 'He has WMD.' "

That's right. Zinni says that "never ‹ not once ‹ did [the intelligence]
say, 'He has WMD.'" It was uncertain. It was always uncertain. Once Cheney
left the stage Zinni was conviced of two things: first, that the Bush
Administration was determined to invade and occupy Iraq. And, second, "These
guys don't understand what they are getting into."

(http://www.warblogging.com/archives/000781.php

Greg

Why does it always have to be WMD's with you guys? You all seem to
forget the other hundred reasons that we should have kicked his butt!

Usenet'Hole List
---------------------------------
chicken little and his mom!,

It wasn't the other reasons that the Chimp-in-Chief used as the premise to
invading Iraq. The US can't claim the Human Rights card as it didn't do much to
curb those crimes while they were happening. It isn't the 9/11 terrorist angle as
Powell was saying that he didn't see any evidence of a connection (20/20
interview, 9 Sept. 2005). One of Ahmed Chalabi's (remember him?) associates gave
unreliable evidence as to the an Iraq-Al Qaeda connection but it was never
corroborated by NSA, CIA or FBI.

You may also want to take a look at the Downing Street memo which states "...Bush
wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of
terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the
policy..." The British gov't doesn't dispute the authenticity of the memo.

The Chimp pulled a cruel one on you.

JB