Farenheit 911

[EnderAndrew]

Read my post again. I only said it about 10 times.

 

Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. However, Saddam did have ties to Al Qaeda.

 

Al Qaeda was around long before 9/11, and is responsible for many terrorist acts. They are a very large organization.

 

CNN.COM

 

This is also from CNN.

 

The Bush administration has said the terrorist network and Iraq were linked.

 

In response, a senior administration official traveling with President Bush in Tampa, Florida, said, "We stand by what Powell and Tenet have said," referring to previous statements by Secretary of State Colin Powell and CIA Director George Tenet that described such links.

 

In February 2003, Secretary of State Colin Powell told the United Nations that Iraq was harboring Abu Musab Zarqawi, a "collaborator of Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda lieutenants," and he said Iraq's denials of ties to al Qaeda "are simply not credible."

 

In September, Cheney said Iraq had been "the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

 

Bush, responding to criticism of Cheney's comment, said there was no evidence Saddam's government was linked to the September 11 attacks.

 

Just this week Bush and Cheney have made comments alleging ties between al Qaeda and Iraq. (Full story)

 

Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. John Kerry said, "the administration misled America."

 

"The administration reached too far," he told Detroit radio station WDET. "They did not tell the truth to Americans about what was happening or their own intentions."

 

Now, I dare you to find a direct Bush quote where he said Saddam was responsible for 9/11. Kerry would have you believe Bush lied about that. Bush said Saddam had ties to Al Qaeda. He does.

[Vault-Tech]

you know ender i think your a bush lover because every time someone trys to pin something on him you defeand him and call it propaganda now theres a whole lot that people have said that is true to what bush has done so excuse me for the first time you are the propiganda spreder and you tell total bs i just wanted to say.

[EnderAndrew]

You're wrong.

 

If someone pins religious motivations on Bush, I say they're right. Bush does mix religion too much into politics. And Bush is foolish for supporting CAFTA. And I don't like Bush's proposed amnesty program for illegal immigrants. Legal immigrants wait years and years for green cards. They pay taxes, and contribute to society while suffering huge limitations. Yet, we're going to punish them further while rewarding those that snuck into our borders, eat away at our social programs, and don't pay taxes all in the name of national security. If we're going to give amnesty and visas to the illegals, we need to give work visas to all the legal immigrants as well.

 

I also don't care for Bush's current policies on North Korea. Why should we bribe those bastards? (The North Korean government - I have no qualms with North Korean citizens. The only Koreans I've met are Republic of Korea Marines, and those guys rocked!)

 

Bush's stance on gay marriage is non-constitutional. That's not a matter of partisan politics, it's just clearly against what the country stands for. The 14th Ammendment makes it fairly clear that the government isn't supposed to be passing legislature to take away basic rights and liberties. If there is no victim, there is no crime.

 

And while I prefer a heterosexual lifestyle (and am Christian to boot), I think there is no victim in two gays getting married. Thereby, the government really has no right to stop them. That's what freedom is all about.

 

I wish we had a real canidate running for President. You say you hate Bush. But you hate Bush because of lies the media you told you. That's not fair. If the media painted accurate representations of public figures, and you hated Bush for things he actually did, I'd support you.

[Vault-Tech]

not everything on the news is a lie but most of it is and i have maney points in my own mind to say i dont like bush so dont tell me im being manipulated iv seen manipulated people and alot of the news tell how great bush is not how horrible he is. one thing being this war its all bs another being sadam sure he was a bad guy but he posed no treat to america at all and no links to alcida were found another being the national homeland security donald rumsfeild he is the worst of the worst when it comes to doing his job and **** chaney has done close to nothing with his job he just wants to get rich off of the oil in iraq

[EnderAndrew]

If the news are lies, then where do you get your facts from?

 

And I've seen very few pro-Bush stories in the news. However, I can point to articles from a variety of news sources that say Al Qaeda and Iraq were linked. And I can show you people like Russia's Putin (who doesn't like Bush and has no reason to lie) who says that Iraq was going to attack the US.

 

The head of the CIA said it too.

 

As far as Cheney goes, most Vice Presidents either do nothing, or stay below our radar. Unless you're Quayle and you make an ass of yourself. And we're not making money off the oil in Iraq. We're spending US dollars fixing up their country.

 

And yes, Halliburton is making money doing rebuilding in Iraq. Yet, no other company has demonstrated the assets and resources for such a large scale reconstruction project. And while Cheney had links to Halliburton, Cheney didn't give them any contracts. Everyone had to bid, and Congress voted on those bids. And plenty of people in Congress don't like Cheney.

 

Rumsfeld isn't in charge of Homeland Security. Tom Ridge is. Rumsfeld has no personality what-so-ever. He comes across as a snake. And I don't really know what to give him credit for, or what to blame him for. The Joint Chiefs run the show in military operations. The Secretary of Defense makes policies, and budget decisions. That's it. As far as the Joint Chiefs go, I give them a 80% grade. They did an incredible job in the early stages of the war. It was one of the most successful wars in history, with minimal casualities despite Iraq using human shields, and putting their military vehicles and targets in hospital parking lots. However, they underestimated what it would take to establish a police force in Iraq.

 

Again, I come back to wondering where you get your opinions from. How are you so sure of everything if the news is fabricated? You seem convinced that you know exactly what type of person Bush is and Cheney is.

 

Can you tell me what they've done over the past 4 years?

[oherror]

the media doesn't lie out right, but tells half-truths. they pick the ones that will get them the most air time.

 

also what enderwiggen said on the oil is true if you could see the damage that the oil rigs have suffered though disrepair it unbeliveable that the damn things still work to a point. the oil fields are in no condition to supply any oil for quite sometime and will take some major money to get them back so they could supply oil.

 

I truly don't see where you get your "Facts" from vault-tech. You seem just plain anti-bush. So if karry is elected and he screwes up. Will you bash him too? I think you just like to flame public figures.

[EnderAndrew]

Sometimes I think news wire services like the AP are a horrible thing.

 

I see a headline on the AP. I paraphrase said story, and put it out as a new story.

 

The problem is when information passes through multiple hands, it tends to change quite a bit.

[mkreku]

In the end, you batted 1-15.  Care to try again?

Right. Because you stated your opinions without a single source of information it must mean he batted 1-15. Why should he try again? He has several articles full of sources, you have a crappy, Bush fanboy post on a nerd board. Hmm.. Which to believe..

 

"Seriously, I'm not a Bush lackey. I just hate the propogation of lies.

 

And in response to Mkreku's political cartoon, the 9/11 comission didn't say there was no connection between Iraq and Al Quaeda. The 9/11 comission said the Saddam didn't have a direct hand in 9/11 itself. And that's standard for Al Quaeda, where few people know anything that's going on. Saddam did however cooperate on weapons programs with Al Quaeda, and help fund in them in past endeavors.

 

So, if you're going to claim they weren't inked at all, I'd take that is either your uninformed, you refuse to accept facts in front of you, or you're lying."

 

Not a Bush lackey? Liar. Where are your sources? Have none? (as usual) Liar. I don't trust a word you say. Sorry.

[mkreku]

Ender, I do appreciate the reason you bring to the forum; please do not use the phrase "anti-American" when referring to people who are anti-Bush, or people who, anti-Bush or not, have criticisms of current policy. Clearly the existing policy is not making the world better for Americans, let alone anyone in any other country.

I'm anti-American-foreign-politics myself. I have lots of american friends who I can discuss this subject with maturely and calmly. But whenever I try to discuss american politics on this board, it immediately drops to the level of name-calling and right wing extremist views. It's like every little piece of criticism against the US is a personal assault on every right wing American who reads it. In EnderWiggin's case I can understand it, since he's the biggest Bush fanboy I've ever met, but why does everyone else get so worked up? Being over-nationalistic and under-informed is a very dangerous combination.

[LostStraw]

Ender, I do appreciate the reason you bring to the forum; please do not use the phrase "anti-American" when referring to people who are anti-Bush, or people who, anti-Bush or not, have criticisms of current policy.  Clearly the existing policy is not making the world better for Americans, let alone anyone in any other country.

I'm anti-American-foreign-politics myself. I have lots of american friends who I can discuss this subject with maturely and calmly. But whenever I try to discuss american politics on this board, it immediately drops to the level of name-calling and right wing extremist views. It's like every little piece of criticism against the US is a personal assault on every right wing American who reads it. In EnderWiggin's case I can understand it, since he's the biggest Bush fanboy I've ever met, but why does everyone else get so worked up? Being over-nationalistic and under-informed is a very dangerous combination.

You seem to participate in the same level of maturity you criticize others on the board for. I think you're more mature then quite a few people here, but realize your own faults too.

[mkreku]

You seem to participate in the same level of maturity you criticize others on the board for. I think you're more mature then quite a few people here, but realize your own faults too.

Oh, I fully realize that. But it's impossible to play football if you're using chess rules, so to speak. There's no point sticking to any rules if your "opponent" does not. I try to think of it as adaptation..

[Ivan the Terrible]

First off, I don't even know if these quotes are legit since other people can't find them.

[mkreku]

Nice post, Ivan. It even has sources. But unfortunately EnderWiggin never even looks at sources and dismisses them as "liberal propaganda". Then he tries to shove his (unsourced) opinions down your throat anyhow. Not a very giving discussion.

[triCritical]

Read my post again.  I only said it about 10 times.

 

Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11.  However, Saddam did have ties to Al Qaeda.

 

Al Qaeda was around long before 9/11, and is responsible for many terrorist acts.  They are a very large organization.

Am I saying they had anything to do with 9/11.

 

As for the links, AQ had links with scores of nations. Their ifrastructure is a loose net of cells that operate all over the world. Heck, what became AQ had support from the US prior to them being a threat to the US. Your case is worse then Frederick's case for Silesia!

 

The Casus Belli was WMD's and some UN violations. Given that has changed, given more recent info, don't be a revisionist and change the case for war.

[anari_quun]

I simply dislike Bush for the following reasons:

 

- Questionable rhetorics.

- Diplomacy with isolationistic tendencies.

- His affiliations with Enron.

- His and Cheney's affiliations with Halliburton.

- Pushing his own religious beliefs in a country's constitution that's based on freedom of religion.

Despite the fact that Ender "seems" to support Bush, he's just speaking with reason, and attempting to use sources as a basis for his argument. It's obvious everyone else is stongly anti-Bush, but most people can't come up with justifiable sources to demonstrate why.

 

I've already said why I don't like Bush now; the above quote sums up what I've ALWAYS hated about Bush, war aside. The fifth one in particular: Not only do I not approve of Bush's Christian (read: fundamentalist) overtones, I don't approve of those overtones putting a Christian face on the country, further alienating it with the rest of the non-Christian world.

 

Oh, and Vault- Having already seen F. 9/11, I can tell you've gotten all of your ideas and opinions from the stretched truths in the movie. Maybe it's actually in your interest to help Bush's re-election by demonstrating how uneducated Bush haters are? Seems like it.

[omnimutant]

Call me a freak, but I really have'nt seen any reason to hate President Bush. I'm not his biggest fan or anything and I do disagree with some of his ideas, but no sitting President is gona satisfy everyone at the same time. Most of the people I know who claim to hate President Bush, ironicly are the same people that voted for Al Gore, and were really ticked by the outcome of such a close election. Some of them did not understand the Electorial Vote process, and have been screaming conspiracy ever since. The Fact is the Bush is a guy who's decided to take the hardest job in our nation and try and be the figure head for our counrty. Not very many people have done this, and even fewer have done it right, yet we still prevail. More and more people refer to the Government as a sepreate entity from our lives, as if we have no control over it, but nothing is further from the truth. WE are our own governing body. We run the country, if you don't like somthing, then stand up and change it. No one in our government has done anything that they though was not good for our counrty, ever. They may be wrong about certian things, but thier intentions are genuine.

 

That said I think people like Michael More make this "shock docs", because fear sells. He jumps on a dead horse and beats new life into it. He does "controversial" things to get the media attention. I think Michael More is a brillaint Marketing guy, selling alot of people stuff they want to hear, and nothing more. Calling this movie a Documentary would be like calling Quake a CRPG. Looks more like propaganda to me.

[EnderAndrew]

I didn't need additional sources to respond to Ivan at the moment, because we were responding to the quotes he posted.

 

And my points still stand. Often if you read one quote, and then read the next, you will see they are seperare statements that don't directly contradict each other. However, the headlines that Ivan put above them are contradictary. He is putting words in Bush's mouth. There is a big distinction between saying Al Qaeda had ties to Saddam, and saying Saddam orchestrated 9/11. Yet, Ivan's argument is based upon a bunch of instances where he assumes one statement has to include another. I'm not citing outside sources. I'm using his own sources, and simple logic shows that one statement does not necessary mean the other.

 

I've put sources up here before, and I'll do it again, yet Mkreku's entire crutch is that I never have sources, and that sources made one right in a debate. Well, apparently, logic be damned.

 

When I've quoted sources like CNN, you dismiss them as American biased despite the fact they report tons of Anti-American stuff every day. They also repeat news articles shown by Arabic news agencies, and CNN is considered one of the most trusted news sources in the entire world. I also demonstated where they ratted out Ted Turner (one of their principal owners) before the Atlanta Olympics. Yet, we can't trust them.

 

But websites that have a track record of faulty reporting are fine. And Michael Moore is also a great source, even if he has a track record of lying, so long as he says what you want to hear.

 

As far as your assualts on maturity, there is a world of difference between insulting Bush, insulting myself, and insulting all Americans. I'll give you free reign on the first two. However, considering how often you've insulted all "dumb Americans", you've demonstrated your inability to be objective. Your ignorance and hatred in the matter shines through. And while you constantly call me a Bush fanboy, I'm pretty quick to point out several of Bush's faults myself, and I didn't vote for him.

 

Funny how you never respond to those comments.

[mkreku]

However, considering how often you've insulted all "dumb Americans", you've demonstrated your inability to be objective. Your ignorance and hatred in the matter shines through.

Just how often have I insulted all "dumb Americans"? Those are quotation marks, you know. You claim I've often written that quote. Let's put your credibility to a test then. I have 500+ posts. Often would imply what? Every tenth post? Every twentieth? Let's say every 100:th. Find five posts where I've used that quote or you're a liar who puts words in people's mouths. I don't remember writing that even once.

 

Now we'll see how objective you are. Or perhaps it is your ignorance and hatred that shines through?

[Cantousent]

To be honest, I've only witness mkreku insult Americans once and I've begun to suspect it was one of those heat of the moment things.

 

This post is just an observation about that one particular issue. Far be it from me to comment on the political debate. B)

 

Well, I'll comment on the debate itself rathen than the subject. A lot of people seem to have good points. Some of you actually have good points, which is almost more important. The only question I would ask (and I would ask this question of everyone, including myself) is this: how much of what you post is made in good faith, and how much of what you post is made to win an argument? The idea of honest debate is that we arrive at the right answers, not that we somehow win.

 

Anyhow, that's my sermon on the mount.

[EnderAndrew]

Grr. Here's a huge waste of my time, but I'm game.

Yup. Comes with being educated. Hard for you to grasp, huh?

I include this quote because it's indicative of talking down to people, and questioning their education.

I wonder what your history "books" are called? Saving Private Ryan?

Here you rip the American education system and assume that Americans don't know anything about history.

Yeah, it will probably snow in hell before an american spends money on something educational. You go watch Spiderman 2 instead..

Again you rip Americans in general.

Well, let's see, in that case I can say you're the usual ignorant, uneducated american that's totally unaware of the world surrounding what you seem to think is the true center of the universe, America.

Again, you rip Americans in general.

Why do americans always refer to the killing of thousands of innocent people as "collateral damage"? Gee, 9/11 was just "collateral damage" in the war against imperialism. The real target was the Pentagon, but they missed.

You could have gone the route of talking about our government, but here again, you talk about all Americans. Are there are differences between civilians accidentally killed in friendly fire, and those intentionally murdered. Intent does matter to most people.

Do you remember a few days after 9/11 when America demanded the entire world should hold a silent moment to honor the victims of the tragedy?

America hasn't demanded anything out of the whole world since the Monroe doctrine. Once again, you editorialize and demonstrate your hatred towards America.

Americans only count american lives as being worth something.

Are you seeing a trend yet?

If your comment was written by anyone else than an american I would have thought it was a joke. Sadly though..

You're amazingly accurate in your "ignorant, uneducated american" impersonation. We actually have a kind of "contest" of who can find the "dumbest american" on one of the swedish boards I'm a member on, and so far we mostly have really funny quotes from NRA members and the likes ("we could bomb you back to the stone age!"), but I imagine I have a new contestant here! I hope you won't mind if I use your page as an entry 

It's amazing how facts vary depending on which country you're from.

This is not quite true, although I think this is what all American school books say

My new avatar is Wasteland's depiction of a true american redneck. They are the funniest people on this planet, I think. Once I was up on this lookout in South Carolina, when I ran into a gang of rednecks. They all had mullets and I just couldn't help myself from laughing out loud. They threw empty beercans at me for that.

Your avatar sends a constant message. And I'm reading it. You wanted to see how "often" you bash on Americans. Well, we both talk about a variety of subjects. However, I haven't seen a single conversation that branced to the US where you didn't make a slam on Americans in general, and their education. I'd say that qualifies as often. Who's the liar?

 

You also have demonstrated a trend of making personal attacks rather than informed debates. And you also have a tendency to talk down to people, patronizing them at every opportunity. Leaving out personal attacks you made on me, I've got you saying:

Naah. Why bother with a liar and a thief?

So it's just another one of your failures then? Ok.

And you accuse me of having comprehension problems? Are you lacking a pair of cromosomes or something?

This is so stupid it's bordering on retarded.

Random evil guy, could you please stop filling my thread with idiotic nonsense?

Well, Mr. Obvious...

So I can't decide if the story immerses me or not until I've completed the game? That's retarded.

I don't know which is worse; the "random evil guy" troll or the childish (bordering on retarded) reply?

WHAT?! DO I SMELL AMERICANS PLANNING TO DOMINATE THE WORLD IN THIS THREAD?

Haha, that's a nice way of saying "amateurish"

 

Ps. Did I mention your site lacks p0rn?

I'm trying to explain something (although pretty basic) to a person with the mental capacity of a rock. I'M DONE.

Dumb as a rock as usual.

Small minds are easily amused. The village idiot is always happy!

The level of the discussion on this board is horribly low. In fact it's not worthy of being called a discussion. Name-calling, false quoting, lying.. it's all there. The only thing missing are the "we can bomb you to the stone-age" remarks..

I honestly hope your artistic levels far exceeds your maturity level.

We've been taught by different school systems and we're obviously not on the same level of education.

Many people have cited the way you've needlessly flamed people. You accuse everyone else of being an idiot, and childish. I loved your chess/football analogy where you blamed your behavior on everyone else. That was priceless. Ever hear of personal accoutability?

 

I also found this humorous, looking back. You said:

I know, in fact I haven't found any credible source of information backing up Michael Moore's claims.

 

Some comments of yours, I just don't know...

Do you believe O.J. is innocent or rich?

How did this relate to a discussion on China? Is this supposed to be a slam on the United States?

 

Yet for all your hang-ups on education, you seem to have no qualms supporting Moore despite the fact that easily verifiable facts show that he lies and has no consideration for objectivity. Anyone who questions him however is a right-wing extremist.

 

I've never claimed americans are "garbage". I've claimed that american foreign policies are garbage. I think american foreign politics are garbage. I think the american people is exactly the same human species as the rest of the world, worth neither more or less than anyone else.

Well, your other posts would say otherwise. Personally I take this quote, as well as your last quote as a staunch denail of your behavior.

 

Ok, just answer me this then: Name one time in history when a muslim country started a war on the US and called for Jihad? Feel free to provide a link to where you get your facts too! (for the first time in this thread)

I forgot about this one. Before the US moved into Iraq, Saddam declared Jihad on the US and called all good Muslims to attack us. Iraq declared war officially on the US a few days before we moved in.

 

I also loved who you repeatedly called me names until I provided you with links originally. And since the fourth link was a joke, that was the only link you responded to. The other links you never talked about. You resorted to calling me more names, and talking about dump American tontests. Apparently, that's your idea of debate.

 

I also LOVE every time you say

I saw Fox News

and then blast other people for watching Fox News. I sure don't watch that trash, but it's nice to know you did. Let me add "hyprocrite" to my list of reasons why I shouldn't waste my time with your comments any more.

[bigbrotheriswatching]

I forgot about this one.

[EnderAndrew]

Can't say that I have. My favorite periods of history are the cold war, and 15th century Japan.

 

Saddam calls for jihad

Saddam talks about God and US invasion

 

These weren't the links I was looking for. I was looking for the speech right before the war. Hrm.

[Cantousent]

I only follow the news in one language. That is, unless you count what passed for news a few thousand years ago, in which case I follow the news in three languages. Still, I follow the modern news in that one language very, very well.

[Leferd]

good op-ed piece titled: "Calling Bush a Liar"

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/30/opinion/30KRIS.html

 

(may need to register -but it is free and well worth it)

[Cantousent]

Leferd, thanks for the link. I read the article, and the views about both Bush and Clinton resonated within me. For those of you who didn't register, I'll quote from Kristof's article.

 

In the 1990's, nothing made conservatives look more petty and simple-minded than their demonization of Bill and Hillary Clinton, who were even accused of spending their spare time killing Vince Foster and others. Mr. Clinton, in other words, left the right wing addled. Now Mr. Bush is doing the same to the left. For example, Mr. Moore hints that the real reason Mr. Bush invaded Afghanistan was to give his cronies a chance to profit by building an oil pipeline there.

 

"I'm just raising what I think is a legitimate question," Mr. Moore told me, a touch defensively, adding, "I'm just posing a question."

 

Right. And right-wing nuts were "just posing a question" about whether Mr. Clinton was a serial killer.

 

I'm against the "liar" label for two reasons. First, it further polarizes the political cesspool, and this polarization is making America increasingly difficult to govern. Second, insults and rage impede understanding.

 

...And, to be fair, this is from later in the article. I don't want to deceive anyone about the nature of the piece.

 

Some Democrats, like Mr. Clinton and Senator Joseph Lieberman, have pushed back against the impulse to demonize Mr. Bush. I salute them, for there are so many legitimate criticisms we can (and should) make about this president that we don't need to get into kindergarten epithets.