Ahh, the old "Bush lied about Iraq" argument...
That's not very fair ganging up on Dieval guys.
Quote:
| Originally posted by RickSp,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (RickSp,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>From Cheney's scare tactics, to outright lies, the Bush administration will do anything it has to to stay in power.[/b] |
This is a very large inference made from One fact. Let's verify whether the allegations charged by Bush's fliers are legitamite or not before we judge them.
http://www.crossroad.to/News/Persecution/seeds.html
http://www.persecution.org/
Persecution is a reality for Christians in intolerant nations abroad. We have had cases in the USA and in Canada where the mere speech of religiously-oriented persons has resulted in their imprisonment. I would be glad to dig out specific article sources if anyone disagrees. They are there, trust me. You can check South Carolina's State Code of Laws to verify that it is illegal to disrupt church services. Jesus disrupted church services back in His day, so objectively speaking Christians are silenced here in this state.
I do not view Bush's fliers as anything which plays on fears. It is a warning. Is using a warning to obtain political support consistent with playing on fear? If so, then we are all guilty of doing this, because everyone of us fears what someone in one party or the other is going to do; and we talk to others about it. Liberals here on this forum have said "our economy is in a wreck, our education is suffering, our reputation is ruined, we need to get Bush out." Do I need to draw conclusions?
As far as this "Bush lied" thing goes...what did Bush lie about? Substantiate your claim with evidence please.
Quote:
Originally posted by Paavo,@
People like Dieval and others have become so lost in their pathetic partisan pride, they don't even know what lie to hold onto and defend anymore. |
Oh really? Which lie are they or I holding onto? I have affirmed belief that Saddam had WMDs, that he was capable of delivering them to al-Qaeda, and that removing him from power to stabilize & democratize the country would be good, IMHO, for promoting long-term friendship in the Arab world.
I defend my views. I can name off several assertions I've dismissed in the past 6 months.
Lie #1: Saddam had WMDs.
--Disproven by Sarin bomb
Lie #2: Saddam had working WMDs.
--Disproven by live Sarin bomb; mix was active
Lie #3: Saddam had stockpiles of WMDs.
--Disproven by truckloads (of WMDs) being moved from an Iraqi depot hours before UN inspectors arrived, prior to the US invasion, as shown in Colin Powell's report to Congress and broadcast on CNN.
Lie #4: No Iraq-alQaeda connection.
--Disproven by mounting evidence; here's a tidbit.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Publ...04/152lndzv.asp
Lie #5: Saddam would never help al-Qaeda.
--Complete and utter assumption ignoring 1) the fact that Saddam has paid the families of suicide bombers in the past who martyred themselves in the attack of Israel and 2) the fact that person(s) responsible for the first WTC attack were given shelter by Saddam.
<!--QuoteBegin-Paavo, ...and the dude sends some late - token fluff to Afghanistan, and then goes to a totally unrelated country with massive forces - and people don't see anything wrong with it? Twisted times...[/quote]
I've never seen anything wrong with removing dictators from power. What? We didn't even kill Saddam. Anyway, the idea that Iraq is "unrelated" is your own personal belief in dispute of established facts. But hey, trust Mainstream News Corporations to tell you the truth if that's your prerogative. I would appreciate it if you would at least concede that it is your opinion and not established fact though.
Tell ya what I think...I think you guys have deep contempt for Bush that is based in nothing but your own emotions. The man is a sitting puppet doing the work of everyone who pulls his strings from both ends of the spectrum. Ted Kennedy writes an education bill, Bush passes it. Then liberals blame him for the state of education. Bill Frist ® writes up a Health Care social program that his brother will cash in big on, Bush passes it. Hillary shakes hands with Frist and yet Health Care is Bush's fault. Soldiers get out of order in Iraq and start abusing prisoners; again blame goes to Bush. Assault Weapons Ban expires and the same exact people claim it's ALL Bush's fault. Congress votes to give the President authority to go to war with Iraq, and it's ALL Bush's fault.
Ron Paul voted against giving Bush that authority while Kerry went along with the show. But that doesn't really matter does it...
You wanna talk about partisan pride Paavo? Who's blind here and who's paying attention to the details?
Think about what I said.