Added: 5 years ago
From: BI30
Views: 142,035
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (754)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • "We've always been at war with Eastasia."

  • Cant anyone see that the government officals are retarded fools that believe all things that any normal person see's as just plain ridiculous.

    The US government murder over a theory given to them by the corporation or another intellegence agency.. As long as it has any rubber stamp it is all good for the blood spilling, but when it comes to listening to sense the rubber stamp wins.

    This government has out lived it's usefullness and we need an overhaul. Kick the corporates out first.

  • I'm just wondering when this guy and his former boss are to be held accountable and judged by international court for crime against humanity

  • When the United Nations relaxed its sanctions regime in 1998 and permitted Iraq to buy spare parts for its oil fields, it was Halliburton, under Mr Cheney's leadership, that cleaned up on the contract to repair war damage and get Saddam Hussein's oil pipes flowing at full capacity again. Two Halliburton subsidiaries did business worth almost $24m (£15m) with the man whom these days Mr Cheney calls a "murderous dictator" and "the world's worst leader"

  • Cheney had advanced knowledge of 911.

    He was basically the mastermind behind it, along with his CIA friends.

    They even freed one of the Saudis who took flight lessons in the US, after he has been arrested by the police.

    Also he sat with Bush, Rice and the Saudi official prince Bandar after 911 and celebrated their success.

    And as chairman of Halliburton, he profitted greatly from these wars.

    USA = Nazi empire

  • Mohammed Omar's Taliban and Osama Bin Laden's Al Qaeda were symbiotic. Omar needed Osama's money and in exchange Bin Laden was protected by the Taliban.

  • HAHAHAHA WHAT A STUPID DICK!!! DICK HEAD CHENEY

  • Richard Bruce Insaney is a nut. Thank God his presidency is over.

  • ae911truth.or

    

  • ae911truth.or

    

  • hard to keep the lies straight because so many were said.

  • Cheney has never said that Saddam Hussein or the government of Iraq has been proved to know, finance, harbor, guide any of the 9/11 terrorists - or their task on 9/11. There is MUCH evidence of such a connection - including the Czechs' report (Czech intelligence reported their observations of 4 separate meetings between the head of Iraqi intelligence and a man who must be Mohammed Atta - not long before 9/11). Cheney has never held the evidence of such a 9/11 connection - to be conclusive.

  • @Richard19551 Which makes what he said all the more sinister. The Bush Administration... in the days and months leading up to the invasion of Iraq... played a LOT of word games, frequently "implied" a Saddam/911 connection, and took full advantage of that misperception to drum up support for the war, waiting until only after the fact to act "surprised" that anyone might have come to that conclusion before the war.

    But no one went further to imply a DIRECT connection than Cheney.

  • No. You're mistaken. Read "The Connection" by Stephen Hayes, primarily about evidence of connections between Saddam Hussein and: i) terrorists, ii) al-Qaeda and bin Laden, and iii) 9/11. The author's as open to debunking as to citing it. I'm convinced there are such ties - that Hussein and other top officials in Iraq knew of and were pleased with the 9/11 attacks before they took place. NO ONE in Bush adminstration ever said this - words like "conclusive", "proof" "determinative" nevers said.

  • No, the Bush administrattion (including Cheney) NEVER implied this! Cheney did mention the Czech intelligence (and there is much else besides). The Clinton Justice Department in 1998 obtained this indictement: "In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would WORK COOPERATIVELY WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF IRAQ". (My caps).

  • @BI30 america are the real terrorists! over 1 million innocent men women and children are dead as a result of the illegal war mongering in the middle east to find WMD. Fucking insane.

  • @drewsiboberinski I certainly wouldn't label "ALL" Americans as terrorists, as we are almost as powerless to dictate military policy in our country as much as anyone else. But take solace in the notion that this country overwhelming rejected "The Bush Doctrine" in favor of a candidate that promised to end the war in Iraq this year.

    Famous quote: "'War' is 'Terrorism' of the rich. 'Terrorism' is 'war' by the poor."

  • @BI30 Your "government" is actually a front for corporate america. They don't give a rats arse for the every day person. It doesn't matter weather the president is on the left or the right . They are puppets for the elite. America sold it's soul to the devil many years ago. The level of corruption is mind numbing!

  • In court case, Smith v. Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.,a federal case heard by U.S. District Judge Harold Baer, Jr.. On May 7, 2003, Judge Baer ruled Hussein & his Baathist government, as well as al-Qaeda & the Taliban, provided "material support" to the September 11 conspirators. Also former detainee, an Iraqi named Jawad Jabber Sadkhan, “admittedly forged official documents and reportedly provided liaison between the governments of Afghanistan & Iraq.”9/11 & Iraq connections have been proven.

  • @BlackRepublican2010 I haven't yet decided if it is "cute" or just "pathetic" that 8 years on, Bush-apologists are STILL trying to link Saddam to 9/11 in order to justify Bush's invasion of that country (Bush himself denies any link.)

    The Smith case does DOES NOT contend that Saddam was involved in 9/11 (explaining why would take more space than I have here, and would fall on deaf ears anyway.) You might try actually READING the case first.

    No, I've decided... it's definitely "pathetic".

  • While I could give close to 50 clear and profound warnings our govet had prior to 911, I chose only a very SMALL handful of warnings, leaving out more DAMAGING ONES.

    I did not go into the "WHY" of 911. It dates back to IRAN CONTRA but most importantly the 1990s when OIL MEN IN TEXAS INVITED TALIBAN to Texas and TOOK THEM TO WASHGTN DC to meet Pres Clinton, wanting them to allow their UNOCAL PIPELINE.

    911 also covered up the Admins 2.3 trillion THEFT Rumsfeld announced on TV the day b4 911.

  • The NSA received info on September 10th that "something big" was coming. (NY Post) June 21, 2002: "Recent news that the NSA intercepted 2 messages the day before the WTC and Pentagon attacks -- messages that indicated imminent action -- obliges us to reconsider whether the airliner hijackings that led to 3,000 lost lives and $20 billion in property damage could have been foiled." prospect d o t o r g

    STAND DOWN CHENEY - and nobody even lost a job over it. They were ALL in on it. All of them.

  • Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon authorized the leak which reveal America's spy agencies were warned about a terrorist strike weeks before September 11.

    August 24, before the attacks, a Mossad warning, confirmed by German intel, BND, said that "terrorists plan to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture." The warning alert was passed to the CIA. Israel warned later a second time.

    STAND DOWN CHENEY

  • The entire gene pool of the Cheney family is corupt foregone conclusion evident in deviant behaviour at any spectrum of their personal or business life.

  • FUCK WHO THEY ATTACKED AND WHO THEY KILLED. AMERICA IS GOING DOWN LIKE THE TITANIC

  • "Of COURSE it's not evidence of collusion but why would you continue an irresponsible policy that enraged Muslims across the region after 9/11? Their cause was RIGHT. And you couldn't continue it anyway because the Saudis were kicking us out of their country so we couldn't patrol the no fly zone. the situation was not tenable, 9/11 caused the war in Iraq even though Iraq had no complicity because our policies dealing with Saddam caused 9/11."

    That's what I really said about the fatwa. you LIE

  • @batvette Sorry, but trying to claim "we had to invade Iraq because AQ wanted us out of Iraq" doesn't make me a liar, it makes you absurd.

    Oh, and I'm blocking you. This thread is going nowhere, and you've sufficiently proved my point.

  • " I don't deny that the Czechs STILL claim the story is true. Despite the fact it has been thoroughly debunked, much like every other ideologue, they're not about to admit their "intelligence" service got it wrong. If you put more stock in Czech intelligence than our own FBI, that's your prerogative, but it doesn't make it true."

    You're claiming the intelliugence supports Cheney.

  • @batvette If your saying *Czech* intelligence supported Cheney, I won't dispute that. The fact no one else on the planet does, and the fact this was pointed out to him yet he kept repeating anyway, you have yet to concede.

  • So how come you didn't dispute any of these things back when I supposedly said them? Because in most cases I did not and you know you can distort them and nobody will bother to go back 5 pages to check. I know better anyway you will likely just delete all this anyway to hide the embarrassing trail. you and I know that at every turn you were misinformed and I in turn laid down absolute facts if not you'd have challenged them at the time.

  • @batvette I could of Blocked you 15 posts ago. I didn't. I did delete 2 off-topic posts seeking to argue an unrelated subject. I've disputed every false claim you've made, and agreed on established facts (like the Czech's).

    You've turned into an embarrassing crybaby. Now why would I want to delete posts showing that?

  • MOREOVER can you show me a single point within the JOINT RESOLUTION which was shown to be known by the administration to have known otherwise before the war? NOT ONE.

    What's funny is you lied below about the content of Tenet's NIE in pursuit of calling this war based on lies. Need I point out the absurdity of this all?

    In contrast of everything I say you were wrong about can you show me a direct factual claim made by me you can prove wrong? No.

    Learn to concede facts and adopt them.

  • @batvette Actually, any claim of Saddam's WMD's and nuclear program as "fact" is a lie, since there were still questions regarding those claims (UN inspectors had already been in the country two months prior). The true extent of those lies were much clearer by the time Bush kicked out the inspectors the following March.

    False claims by you: Intel supported Cheney; Cheney didn't try to link Iraq to 9/11; AQ colluded with Saddam; Wilson outed his own wife; Wilson lied for a job with Kerry; More?

  • @BI30 your own BBC story was the source of my claim about czech officials GO LOOK RIGHT NOW.

    When did I say Cheney didn't try to link Iraq to al qaeda? COPY PASTE NOW

    When did I say Al Qaeda colluded with saddam COPY PASTE NOW

    Of COURSE WIlson outed his wife HE WROTE A STORY IN THE TIMES FULL OF LIES A CIA AGENT COULD NOT HAVE. WILSON LIED KERRY GAVE HIM A JOB DO THE MATH

    god damn what a little baby you are- so how's the economy treating you now that years of you giving the world

  • @batvette I never claimed the Czech's disavowed their claim. COPY PASTE NOW.

    When did you say Cheney didn't try to link...? FIRST POST, Cheney "misremembered" but that the intel supported the claim (not significant unless you're trying to defend his lie.)

    AQ/Iraq collusion claim? "Al Qaeda's 1998 fatwa".

    Story in Times never mentions his wife. Joe Wilson was not a CIA Agent.

    I'm still recovering from the Bush economy, little boy.

  • Owned: claimed congress depended on Bush for intelligence Owned: claimed some vote was held in congress in 2003 Owned: claimed Tenet's NIE doubted Iraq had WMD Owned: claimed Attas meeting was completely debunked long before Czechs were still making the claim Owned: claimed Wilson had no involvement in politics Owned: claimed there were protests in congress immediately b4 the war And surely more if I go back and look Die for lies? Did Saddam verifiably disarm to UN satisfaction
  • @batvette Just because you THINK something you assert is true, doesn't make it so. I think your definition of "owned" is questionable. You haven't "owned" me if your claims don't stand up to scrutiny, and nothing you've claimed has.

    I never claimed there was a vote held in 2003. You have the transcript. I suggest you look. The NIE, search it for the word "dubious". Atta claim debunked; Czech's STILL making claim today. Never said Wilson wasn't in politics. You claimed he lied for the job. FAIL.

  • @BI30 what you claimed: "That's when Bush sent Powell to the UN to give his Dog Pony Show, which "convinced" enough members of Congress to finally approve the use of force in 2003."

    How did they "finally approve the use of force in 2003?"

    YOU WERE FULL OF IT.

  • @batvette I probably shouldn't have said "approved" then. I should have said "permitted" by not challenging the 2002 vote. I would of thought that was obvious, since you brought it up.

  • Okay so I see your BBC article. As you say it claims US investigators were finding the story unbelievable- yet also reiterates the Czechs at the time were insisting it was true! Try your search on google and add history commons and look at the stream of conflicting claims. I think while verbally making the claim but not inserting it in the joint resolution as an actual basis for war, President(!) Cheney was acting responsibly. You disagree, okay, that freedom to do so makes America great.

  • @batvette I don't deny that the Czechs STILL claim the story is true. Despite the fact it has been thoroughly debunked, much like every other ideologue, they're not about to admit their "intelligence" service got it wrong. If you put more stock in Czech intelligence than our own FBI, that's your prerogative, but it doesn't make it true.

    I find it interesting that the fact they didn't include the claim in their declaration of war isn't suspicious to you, but rather shows "responsibility".

  • @batvette "Two years"? Try "two MONTHS".. watch?v=s-FfXmhmj5E

    Bush apologists make me sick. Cheney-apologists even more so.

  • @BI30 As sick as it makes me to see Americans discrediting the legitimacy of bipartisan policy and threatening to censor those who oppose their opinions?

    Tell me, does the joint resolution, the only written document stating the justifications for the Iraq war, make this claim? It doesn't.

    Doesn't it make the point a strawman, since the public watching meet the press did not vote on the war and Congress by duty of balance of powers, must ignore the executive branch in their JR vote?

  • @batvette Did you ever notice that Cheney only cited *Czech* intelligence? Not British or our own? That's because they found no evidence to support the story. But Cheney went around repeating the claim and citing "Czech" intelligence in order *to build public support* for a war they had been planning more than a year before Bush even started *running* for president.

  • @BI30 I did, but like his request to the CIA for a direct answer on Niger Yellowcake that Wilson and his wife purposely diverted so they could meddle and try a career change into politics, Cheney wasn't getting conclusive answers. Atta and a meeting in prague is not important enough for him to risk his neck lying about, if you think Saddam is not up to his neck in terrorism see w w w d o t husseinandterror d o t c o m , and the info in that is backed by links including the BBC. But sure yo u>

  • @batvette I have no clue what you believe the Wilson's "purposely diverted", and since neither has since run for political office, you have reached a point where you are pulling crap out of your ass. This thread is over.

  • @BI30 So you must be ignorant that Kerry paid for the website hawking Wilson's book and gave Wilson a paid position on his campaign staff as senior foreign policy advisor, which he was fired from by Kerry the day after the Senate released their report on WMD intel and the Iraq War? Political analysts point out that a campaign post as foreign policy advisor is the preliminary to Secretary of State appointments?

    Take the 100% factual points I am offering and use them to bolster your position.

  • @batvette Kerry paid to promote Joe Wilson's story AFTER it came out, but didn't aid Wilson or push him to produce the report. They had NO prior contact. As for Wilson being brought on to the Kerry campaign, The Bush's destroyed the livelihood of both Joe and his wife. I don't think the Wilson's destroyed their own livelihood in 2003 for a chance that they might get a Presidential appointment by a yet-to-be decided Democratic candidate. If you want to discredit Wilson, you'll have to do better.

  • @BI30 how can you claim they had NO contact, you're being silly and I didn't say they did! Who was it that outed Plame? JOE WILSON did when he went public attacking the white house, didn't he! Did it not occur to them that people would ask why a state dept employee was sent to fulfill a request made of the CIA? That had the CIA sent one of their people, could NOT have gone public as Wilson did because CIA have top secret clearances and Wilson had none? The Senate Report discredited Wilson.

  • @batvette You suggested Wilson produced a false report in hopes of landing a political appointment, so Yes, did say that. And Joe did not out his wife. There was NO mention of his wife in his "What I didn't find in Niger" story. The fact that Joe's wife worked for the CIA was first revealed in a story by Robert Novak. As for who exactly told Novak that bit of info, that hasn't been revealed, but it's safe to assume it wasn't Joe.

  • @BI30 If everything Wilson did was on the up and up, why did Kerry fire him and completely wash his hands of him the day after the Senate issued its bipartisan report? Look it up, that's the way it went down.

  • @batvette Kerry didn't "fire" Wilson. There were questions of "conflict of interest", and the story was distracting from the rest of the campaign. You're suggesting Kerry "used" Wilson... even implying the job was a "reward for producing a false report", neither of which has any basis of reality.

    Do not continue this Wilson thread or you will be blocked. This is off-topic for this video and clogging my Comments Section.

  • @Bl30 are right they had long planned this. Did Saddam show he had changed? Did Bill Clinton not sign the Iraqi liberation act into law, reiterating our policy intent of regime change? The ILA was toothless and a failure, yet provided $8 million to give directly to Chalabi's INC to dig up dirt and defectors. The intel used for the war vote came through Clinton DCI appointeed Tenet. Over half the Democrats in both houses approved the war. So what are you implying here about Dick Cheney?

  • @batvette I don't have to "imply" anything about Cheney. He flat out repeatedly tried to connect Iraq to 9/11, And his reason for doing so is clear: to drum up support for invading Iraq.

    As for Clinton and Democrats, you might want to re-read that 1997 ILA. It NEVER called for "invasion". It called for "change from within" by aiding the rebel movement, which Chalibi supposedly led at the time. Like Clinton, Bush believed Chalibi's nonsense. Unlike Clinton, Bush went to war over it.

  • @batvette finally someone making sense

  • @luckypapi87 I shudder to think that anyone should volunteer to fight or die for their country, be it actual land or national security, and the way of life its citizens expect, and while they are over still fighting, some of those citizens who helped send them can't find an original idea to run for office and decide they will unseat their CinC by discrediting that war and trying to make them return as losers. Both Kerry and Edwards were leading the case to sell the war in their party in 2002

  • So you tripped the man up on what he remembered saying two years prior in a pop question in a live debate. Well aren't we proud of ourselves! What's important here is the claim was supported by the intel he he had at the time he made it. Not long after, there was enough doubt on it it was not used in the joint resolution, the ONLY doc issued listing the rationale for war. So the war does not depend on it AND nobody's decision was influenced by the claim. Period. Fuck you idiots, USA-1 SADDAM-0

  • @batvette Nice try, but this wasn't the only instance of Cheney making the claim. If that were true, you might have a point. But he made the claim REPEATEDLY, even after being told the FBI found no basis for it. In fact, he repeated it so often, even after public criticism, that Bush was forced to publicly respond (as the video shows). The last reported instance of Cheney repeating this nonsense in an attempt to try and connect Iraq to 9/11 was 2007, more than 6 years after 9/11.

  • Americans are the stupidest people on the PLANET earth ,liers criminals and mafia run their country.

    Very simple USA People are not connected to their representing authority.

  • I find it funny that America believe there is a difference between the Democrats and Republicans. Obama what a load of change that was! Grow up they are all bought and paid for Israel and the Military Industrial Complex.

  • buzzer lol!!!

  • Didn't matter whether Iraq had something to do with 9/11 or not, we were still gonna bomb them.

  • I feel bad for the GOPers that have to twist and turn to defend Cheney, because they cannot step outside the box of the Two Party Farce Theater. I was a diehard Republican, voted for Bush twice and everything. After awhile, I realized I was twisting truth just to defend a frickin' politician, not a family member or friend. Wasn't comfortable anymore and now I've moved away from that garbage. Face it, Bush and Sauron Cheney tried to link Al Qaeda with Iraq....repeatedly.

  • ITS FUN.... how every americans and western countries are trying to just overlook this FATAL error... that killed oved one million innocents..

    AND started the worst kind of terrorism.. but thats how you fight terrorists..

    USA is and was allways the largest terrorist nation on this planet..followed by israel jews

  • Islamists have 57 islamic countries.

    Americans only have America.

  • @sickofcommies foolish boy, you just have no idea what you are talking about.

    maybe you should wake up instead of protection the USA.

    islamists have 57 islamic countries, americans only have america?

    look at the size of america and you will see that al these 57 islamic countries would fit in it.

    besides that, what about afhanistan/iraq. . just to examples of islamic countries who are controlled by the US and there are many more, the control europa/australie/zuid amerika enz enz.

  • @1984socrates That's not even true,lol.

  • @sickofcommies your goverment is so corrupt that it's just pathetic that all these people that live in the US are not standing up and fight it.

    all these corrupt bankers who have filled there pockets with the money of innocent suvilliance are now sitting on there throne in the white house and you probably don;t even know it.

    If you look at your goverment then osama would just be an anoying child with some grow up problems.

  • @1984socrates Every government on earth are corrupt socialists bent on a one world order. It's because they're all the same religion, Satanists. They await the Antichrist and want to make him king of the world.

    That's their new-age dream.

  • osama died10 yr ago search Dr steve pieczenik works above gov& is takin gov to court for murder. now we know y gov admitted putting fake videos of osama after 9/11.bc he was dead.srch Benazir Bhutto, she was assassinated, after stating to live news in 2007that osama was dead. she died,that year. fact 92% of ppl killed in war r civilians.23yr old solider Bradley manning released secret documents frm war. to wikileaks 4 us.hes torched for life in jail frm gov ppl call him a hero

  • Please subscribe to my channel and i will subscribe to yours and will spread the Truth like free money .

    Vote for the truth .

  • OMFG Libs are mentally challenged. He said there's a story that's been public out there that the Czechs "alleged" that Mohammed Attah met with Iraqi intelligence.

    And John Edwards is a typical insane liberal moron with no class who cheats on his wife who is dying of cancer and then lies about it until the new baby arrives and he ends up looking like an even bigger dumbass.

  • @sickofcommies You think suggesting "Atta met with Iraqi Intelligence" in response to a question about "what does Iraq have to do with 9/11", wasn't an attempt to link Iraq to 9/11? Speaking of "mentally challenged".

    And anyone whose Party is considering running Newt Gingrich (who cheated on TWO wives, one while still in the hospital with cancer) for president doesn't have a leg to stand on to criticize Edwards.

  • @BI30 Fuck Gingrich. That doesn't mean that you Edwards lovers can criticize anybody. Go fuck yourself you pile of shit. You are really grasping at fucking straws. You support the KKK communist party. You're a fucking Nazi. Please die!

  • @sickofcommies So much anger for such a little man.

  • @BI30 Liberals in every party are internationalist communists. They're an international Satanic secret society bent on world domination. They are crypto muslims.

  • @sickofcommies I say this with the best of intentions:

    Put down the crack pipe and switch off Beck.

  • @BI30 You're a moron.

  • You tell 'em.

  • @BI30 How about if I bring up Beck then you can talk about Beck.

  • @BI30 Crackheads all overwhelmingly support Obama.Go shoot yourself in the dick.

  • @sickofcommies So liberals who are peace loving. environment protecting. poor supporting are the satanists but the rich loving, war/gun/death penalty supporting, war supporting, environment destroying, racists are the christians? ROFLMAO.

  • @sickofcommies Wow. That's a little over the top there don't you think? I happen to be a liberal and I'm not a communist or a Nazi like your previous comments suggested. I actually love capitalism and believe America will stay that way forever. I hope she does. You people are just out there spreading hate and lies all over not just America, but the entire world. Why do you think so many countries hate our country?

  • @wolfgirl3440 Nope. Not over the top at all. It's a bit of an understatement. I don't care about the world or what it thinks. They're all commies. They don't like America because it's the only non Communist country.

    They say America is behind the rest of the world because we don't have commie socialized medicine.

    If we're the only country not like that then that's a good thing. The people for it have the choice to go anywhere else in the world. The people against only have the USA.

  • @sickofcommies If you don't care about the world, then you're lucky you live in America. If you lived most anywhere else, you'd have to worry about the rest of the world invading you all the time. And not all countries are "commies". In fact, most countries in the world are capitalist countries. Canada, Mexico, UK, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Australia, India, Egypt, Peru, need I go on? I could fill up an entire comment box of examples.

  • @wolfgirl3440 amen

  • @sickofcommies Also, America is not behind the rest of the world. How could you think that?!?! We have the most advanced technology and the best education in all the world. Most countries don't have "commie socialized medicine" either.

  • @BI30 just because al qaeda members hooked up and met hussein administravtive officials for watever reasons..doesnt indicate explicitly that theres a connection between iraq and 9/11..except it suggest that theres a good possibility thats very plausible...that iraqi intel knew that 9/11 was imminent .....just because they didnt do it themselves doesnt mean they are completely innocent..its guilt by association.....go get your head checked out..you seem to not be able to think..

  • @luckypapi87 First off, Cheney didn't say "al Qaeda Members", he said "ATTA", the lead 9/11 hijacker. THAT IS a n explicit attempt to link Iraq to 9/11. And the meeting was NOT "pretty well confirmed" as Cheney claimed. In fact, it had actually been DEBUNKED.

    Second, my "head". You need to get your *EARS* checked out.

  • @BI30 No, to this day czech intel stands by their claim, if you say otherwise I'd love the education of a credible link. However let's cut the bull, 9/11 has EVERYTHING to do with Iraq, since Al Qaeda's fatwa of 98 cited 3 grievances, 2 of them our policies dealing with Saddam so after 9/11 we have to change that yet cannot trust him as he is supporting terror against Israel knowing their brutal reprisals were stirring up Muslim militants and anti-US sentiments across the region. All this was >

  • @batvette If we were going to invade every Muslim country that cheered the attacks of 9/11, we would have to start with Saudi Arabia... home of 15 of the 19 hijackers. Number of hijackers that were Iraqi? Zero.

    As for a "credible link" on the Atta/Prague meeting being debunked, you have to look outside the U.S.: Search BBC News for "Hijacker 'did not meet Iraqi agent'.

    Further posts attempting to relitigate the Iraq War or rehabilitate Commandant Cheney will be deleted.

  • @BI30 Would you have continued the status quo of our Iraq policy after 9/11?

    Have you read Al Qaeda's 1998 fatwa? You shouid if you think Iraq and 9/11 are unrelated.

    Anyway John Edwards voted yes on the joint resolution that sent the troops and ultimately laiunched the war. What do you think about him trying to get in office by discrediting policy he was part and parcel to with it unfinished and young Americans in harm's way? I'll check the BBC, I am open to correcting my errors if so.

  • @batvette Yes, I *absolutely* would have continued "the status quo" with Iraq. Saddam was our only check on Iran in the region. He was contained and the country itself wasn't the violent basket-case it is today. Add to that the lives of 4,500 dead soldiers that would still be alive today, and you're damn right I would have preferred "the status quo".

    I'm not defending Edwards, but Congress only knew what the WH was telling them... that they had "proof" Saddam was about to attack using WMD's.

  • @BI30 You thus didn't read Al Qaeda's 1998 Fatwa and don't even understand why they attacked us. It's pretty silly to even take a position on the matter if you don't understand that their grievances were just and valid.

    The status quo of containing Saddam Hussein killed over one million Iraqis. Muslims. Mostly children. Al Qaeda directly stated this. The sanctions killed a million Iraqi children yet allowed Saddam with corrupt UN officials to skim $13bilion and you would continue this?

  • @batvette Briefly, AQ's "fatwa" is not evidence of collusion, nor is it evidence of Iraq's complicity in an event three years later. AQ *HATED* Saddam. Threatening to invade Iraq nearly caused the very collusion Cheney was already claiming.

    And PLEASE don't try and use the number of Iraqi's killed by Saddam over a 20 year period to justify a war that killed just as many in just two. Likewise, "$13 billion" lost due to fraud wouldn't have covered ONE MONTH of the Iraq War in 2006.

  • @BI30 Of COURSE it's not evidence of collusion but why would you continue an irresponsible policy that enraged Muslims across the region after 9/11? Their cause was RIGHT. And you couldn't continue it anyway because the Saudis were kicking us out of their country so we couldn't patrol the no fly zone. the situation was not tenable, 9/11 caused the war in Iraq even though Iraq had no complicity because our policies dealing with Saddam caused 9/11. WE FUCKED UP but could not walk away due to long

  • @batvette "why would you continue an irresponsible policy that enraged Muslims across the region after 9/11?"

    As opposed to what Bush did?

    And bin Laden cited our presence in "Saudi Arabia" as justification for 9/11, and 15 of the 19 hijackers were from SA. So based upon your "logic", we should have invaded SA.

  • @BI30 Saudi Arabia expelled OBL and revoked his citizenship in the '90's. I'm trying to explain to you why 9/11 required we review our policy on Iraq and it was imperative we change it.

  • @BI30 "Congress only knew what the white house was telling them."

    WOW. did you just say that? Good god do you even know the constitution provides for a balance of powers between branches of gov't? The intelligence reform act of 1980, by LAW Congress has a wholly seperate conduit of intelligence from the executive branch- indeed, the NIE on Iraq WMD Tenet prepared for the JR vote in October 2002 came from a request by DEMOCRATS in Congress and Bush by law could not influence its contents.

  • @batvette Duh, "Balance of power" does not mean "redundancy" of every function.

    And you might want to Google "2002 NIE caveats".

  • @BI30 It does in the case of intelligence conduits for policymakers. IT IS LAW. Intelligence reform act of 1980.

    You might want to Google "McCain-Palin 2008". Is McCain President? No. So why would you suggest that Congresss should have ignored the majority conclusion of the NIE and seized upon the distant minority dissent of that report?

  • @batvette Congress does NOT direct the intelligence gathering of the CIA... and they DAMN sure don't direct the Military Intelligence (which Bush used EXTENSIVELY when the CIA wasn't giving him what he wanted. And Congress wouldn't have been "ignoring" the NIE if they had chosen to vote against the war. They simply weighed the caveats against the "proof" they were being fed by the WH (including Powell's Slideshow).

    You've gone from Defending Cheney, to trying to justify the Iraq war.

  • @BI30 The only power that the executive branch has that congress does nol is directing covert operations. What each has is requesting intelligence product from the DCI.

    See here's the rub- the whole time since Bush took office, we had nobody in Iraq. What "military inteligence" was Bush collecting? If he even was what does it have to do with Congress whose vote was based solely on the NIE? The white house did not FEED them anything and Powells slideshow was 4 months after the JR vote.

  • @batvette You make my case for me: No "on the ground intel", yet Bush spoke with "certainty" about Saddam's WMD's and nuclear program. Not all "covert operations" are "combat". Congress has NO power over Military Intelligence, which Bush (ab)used extensively for his "intel" on Iraq.

    And yes, Powell's slide show was 4 months after the vote. Why?

  • @BI30 What "military intelligence" were we gathering when the military was not in Iraq until after march 2003?

    Better make this a good one!

    I'm telling you everything EVERYone knew about Iraq WMD came across Tenet's desk in that NIE. If anyone in congress had their vote swayed by Cheney or Bush telling BS lies you better recall them pronto, they swear an oath to follow the constitution and that means balance of powers between branches, IGNORING Bush and voting on the facts.

  • @batvette EVERYTHING in Powell's slideshow was the result of "military intelligence". NOT ONE SLIDE was based on information gathered by the CIA. Tenet's NIE called the WMD claims into SERIOUS question, but when Powell needed convincing to give show to the UN, Tenet famously called it a "slam dunk". Powell forced Tenet to sit behind him at the UN because of it. Remember those DRAWINGS of "mobile weapons labs"?

    As for Congress, you are suggesting Yea votes were foolish for trusting Bush.

  • @BI30 powells slideshow was in feb 2003, and an attempt to garner a coalition action out of the UN. US legislaters decisions were already over. If Powell was told to lie good for him and those who told him to, unless you think that Bush and Powell serve the UN not the US.

    Saddam had bribery going straight to the Presidencies of France and Russia. Chirac sought to block action against Saddam because France would collect a windfall when the $ crashed and Euro rose. Powell SHOULD have lied.

  • @batvette First off, you again make my point. You asked previously why no one called a vote in that "48 hour period". Powell's slideshow made it far less likely. His audience wasn't just the UN. It was also Congress and the American people.

    And saying Powell SHOULD have lied to drum up support for a war based upon lies just to achieve an ulterior agenda, says volumes about your credibility here.

  • @BI30 My credibility? Okay that's enough, you have to get personal.

    The facts you were OWNED on should be known by a child.

    You were asked to produce substantiation on several gross errors and could not yet you question MY credibilty.

    Have a nice day and I'm sure every Iraqi war veteran appreciates you working overtime to discredit the mission they sacrificed for.

  • @batvette My I remind you your FIRST post on the subject ended with "Fuck you idiots"? Don't start whining about it "getting personal" when I question your credibility.

    Funny that you think I've been "OWNED". You have had to resort to "parsing Cheney's words" to outright justifying lying the world into war, and think you're on more solid ground.

    As for substantiation, please cite a single claim that you haven't already conceded? As for the Vets, which of us is thinks they should die for lies?

  • "Tenet's NIE called the WMD claims into SERIOUS question,"

    and THAT was a blatant lie.

  • IN CONCLUSION do yourself the favor of reviewing the facts I have provided and yes they are or you'd have refuted them as I did your claim Congress approved something in 2003 for instance- and get familiar with the joint resolution and NIE, and use these facts to improve your own position. You think I know all this stuff by hanging out with republicans at FreeRepublic, nope. I learn from owning people who oppose the war. Your arguments are far above average, fix your facts you'll do better.

  • Why shouldn't I justify the war, 3/4 of Congress approved it and 80% of the public did the day it was launched. Nothing really changed and it's silly to regret preventative actions after you prevent what you said you were.

    We'd be in a world of hurt if we didn't, how bout the dollar is worth 10 cents what it is now yet gasoline is $10 a gallon! Do you know how we crushed the USSR? Reagan used oil as a weapon, devaluing the Soviets sole export. Saddam, Russia, France and China same on us.

  • @batvette We've come full circle. MAYBE 3/4 of Congress and "80% of the public" supported the invasion BECAUSE on comments like Cheney's? That's the point I've been making all along. Welcome to the party.

    I'm not about to go off on another tangent with you about "war for oil".

  • @BI30 well finally you got me there, that 80% may have been ignorant,. spoon fed by Bush and media.

    I certainly was not.

    But here is the rebuttal- the people did not vote on the war, congress did. they knew exactly what they were voting on, some on capital hill have been in office since the 70's, even 60's.

    Please do not insult us both telling me a man with a double digit IQ in office for just 20 months misled them into voting against their will on that war.

  • @batvette You are forgetting the post-9/11 hysteria at the time. No one was about to take a chance on voting No against the case the Bush Administration was making in the press. Between Cheney's Atta lie and Rice's mushroom cloud, the vote was a lock.

    And again, remember, the 2002 AUMF was not 100%. It would of been even more lopsided in 2003, but always had enough GOP votes to ensure passage. So when you question the intelligence of Congress, remember where most of those Yes votes came from.

  • @BI30 If what you say is true why are you complaining about Cheney and not recalling these Democrats for failing their oath? And if they are so weak and stupid they let a moron from Texas lead them by the nose I suppose that means we were supposed to vote these great leaders into office on 2004?

    I say again most of these people in congress had been in office for decades while shrub had been in washington 20 months. Please do not insult me arguing they were Bush's patsies. It's utter BS.

  • @batvette How do you know I DIDN'T openly criticize those Democrats that voted Yes? I did, most of whom eventually came out to say they feel they were misled into voting Yes. Unlike Bush/Cheney apologists like yourself that continue to argue they did nothing wrong, never lied, and even if they did, were justified in doing so.

    You've gone from suggesting people were foolish for believing Cheney was linking Iraq to 9/11, to making a case for lying the world into war.

  • @BI30 No I'm saying it's silly to demand Powell be truthful to the UN when 2 security council members were scheming behind the scenes to undermine UN sanctions and were about to participate with Saddam in destroying the US economy. Does the President and Colin Powell serve the interests of the UN, France and Russia- or America? If what they were poresenting was lies, please produce a single document available to them in Feb 2003 stating Saddam had disarmed. Please, do!

  • John Kerry held a chair on the Senate Intel Committee, who has sole oversight- not the Prez- on intel operations of the CIA and delegates their budget, from 1992-2001. When he vacated that chair and went to the Foreign Relations committee, John Edwards took his place. What pray tell was Bush doing in '92, snorting coke, drinking and crashing cars? Congress knew everything about Iraq Bush did and more, many have been in office for decades. However they ALLknew Saddam had gotten rid of his WMD.

  • @batvette If you believe "the Senate Intel Committee" has access to the same intel (or more) than the Prez, then you are dreaming. Bush/Cheney *directed* the intel-gathering process to produce ONLY what THEY wanted to hear. Bush could have come right and told Kerry he was lying, and Kerry STILL could not have told the rest of Congress, so claiming Congress knew "as much" or "more" shows just have little you know about how the process works.

  • @BI30 The entire body of intelligence used for the vote on the Iraq War was contained in a National Intelligence Estimate compiled by DCI George Tenet dated October 2002, issued by Clinton appointed DCI George Tenet, in response to a formal written request from Senate Democrat Diane Feinstein of CA. We did not have a SINGLE humint asset in Iraq from the time Bush took office until that document was issued.

    What part of any of the above factual data do you dispute?

  • @batvette You keep citing "facts" that aren't and wondering why I'm not convinced. You might as well cite "the sky is blue". That's a "fact" too, but it doesn't prove your point any better.

    The 2002 NEI was full of caveats that lots of Democrats asked about and delayed Bush's War (originally scheduled for late 2002). That's when Bush sent Powell to the UN to give his Dog Pony Show, which "convinced" enough members of Congress to finally approve the use of force in 2003.

  • @BI30 Democrats passed the joint resolution into law in october 2002, which became public law 107-243 after final approval by Bush.

    Kindly cite the bill and/or the official roll call of both houses and the date in 2003 it was held you are alluding to.

    i think we both know you don't need to look.

  • @batvette Easy. The very same joint resolution to use force. Have you asked yourself why we waiting until March to act on a resolution passed the previous October?

    I'm not about to relitigate the Iraq War in 500-character soundbytes. This thread is closed.

  • @BI30 please provide the date of the roll call and the tally of votes.

  • @batvette I think you already did. I cited the same vote.

  • March? the mechanics of the AUMF required Bush to pursue diplomacy with certain triggers to be followed. Pursuant to section 2 item 2, seeking diplomatic action through the security council which he did. That launches the inspections. On March 7 2003 when Blix says Iraq's cooperation is not immediate nor unconditional, breaching UN1441, France's subsequent statement of veto intent fulfills Section 3 title B sub 1 A and B, Bush is thus bound by US law to attack Iraq after 48 hour notice 2 congrs

  • @batvette You DO realize you just proved my point, don't you? Congress voted for a bill that contained "triggers" before the actual use of force was authorized. MANY members of Congress argued in March of 2003 that those conditions had not been met, yet we invaded Iraq anyway.

  • @BI30 no, the 48 hour notice was given, among the Yays there was silence. I'd love to see news reports proving me wrong if so so I can't make the error again. Can you show me them? Can you show either house calling for an emergency session after that 48 hour notice? That's the mechanism they utilize.

    There was grumbling amongst some Nays like Cynthia "Marginalized" McKinney and well, she's umm, marginalized.

  • @batvette You don't call a vote you know will fail, and Bush always had enough GOP votes to ensure passage.

  • standing agreements with the royal family of Saud to protect them and Saddam deeply wanted revenge upon them. They paid for that protection for 30 years since 1973 by allowing us print our monopoly money with no backing other than OPEC oil. The cost of the war was a pittance compared to what we were paid by them- look up "petrodollars" if you doubt this. Should we have reneged on that deal after already being paid?

  • @batvette This subject is WILDLY off-topic and won't be followed up on.

  • @sickofcommies Sorry, but how is it Liberal has become so demonized? Might I remind you there are liberal Republicans, as well as Conservative Democrats? Y'see, the Liberals have done more for this country than conservatives. Freed the slaves, gave women the right to vote, uplifted the elderly and disabled from poverty, fought for civil rights. What have Conservatives done? Voted against each and everyone of them... So Liberal is nothing dirty. I wear Liberal as a badge of honor sir.

  • @xDraconianKingx Liberals were the slavers, Republicans freed the slaves. Then the Democrats responded by starting the KKK.

  • @sickofcommies You have to remember Republicans were once Liberal just as Democrats were Conservative.

  • @sickofcommies Please stop eating paint chips!, you're already dumb as shit

  • @jubfarib Commie libs eat the chinese products with the lead paint chips in them.

  • Pycho vs Phoney

  • I believe this man is easily one of the most hated men in America. Whenever the time comes that we finally rise up and destroy the government and every criminal in it comes - Cheney better watch the fuck out!

  • I cant believe Americans dont have enough morals and balls to put an end to their politicians murdering ways,you all have blood on your hands

  • What a piece of filth he is

  • Dick Cheney burn in Hell you Asshole !!!

  • Isn't there a difference between insinuating there is a connection and resting your case that we ought to go to war with Iraq on the case? knee-jerking sheep.

  • kerry and especially edwards really blew these debates.

  • I am praying that Dick either change his Evil Heart and admit what him and his boyfriends have done to The United States of America and The World or that someone turn off his PaceMaker. You see, the man literally and figuratively has an Artificial Heart. The dude is sick and he still runs things...Pace Maker. He sets the Pace for everyone. It is a fast Pace leading straight to Hell. Hitler was murdering Men like Dick. Not women and children and not 6 million. Hitler killed maybe 6 Dick Cheney's.

  • Vaders a tricky one!