On the Impeachment Front ... Help Needed

GrowRebel

Well-Known Member
Ever heard of the JDL?,
http://www.jdl.org/
How about the B'Nai Brith
http://www.zionism-israel.com/dic/Bnai_Brith.htm
How about the ADL, anti defamation league
http://www.adl.org/
All these guys lobby congress for their interests!
Yes I've heard of them, but I don't understand what they have to do with this subject ... :confused:

GrowRebel ...

I highly recommend this book.

Amazon.com: Rescuing Sprite: A Dog Lover's Story of Joy and Anguish: Books: Mark R. Levin

It's helped thousands of people who have had to deal with the loss of our little critters.

Vi
Thank you Vi ... I've lost so many animal friends in the past ... I will always miss them and can only get used to them being gone ... :cry:

... now ... on with the news ...

One Step Closer to Impeachment
[snip]
There is also credible evidence that policies set in Cheney's office authorized the torture of prisoners in U.S. custody, in violation of three treaties the United States has ratified, as well as the U.S. Torture Statute and War Crimes Act. The policies on the treatment of prisoners emanating from Cheney's office triggered the abuse and torture, according to Lawrence Wilkerson, former Secretary of State Colin Powell's chief of staff.

:blsmoke:
 

medicineman

New Member
that's when I stated the UN violations against Israel, yet no one is beating a war drum to go after them as they did Iraq and are doing to Iran now ...
Why is
Israel allowed to break UN resolutions and Iraq was not?

Originally Posted by medicineman
Ever heard of the JDL?,
http://www.jdl.org/
How about the B'Nai Brith
http://www.zionism-israel.com/dic/Bnai_Brith.htm
How about the ADL, anti defamation league
http://www.adl.org/
All these guys lobby congress for their interests!



That is why my friend, all those stated organizations have a hand in our foriegn policy, Believe it!
 

ViRedd

New Member
"Why isIsrael allowed to break UN resolutions and Iraq was not?"

Pat Bucannan would say its because of the Israeli "Amen Corner" that lobbies Congress.

Vi
 

Johnnyorganic

Well-Known Member
Since when is mentioning something once going on and on? That example underscores my contention about you moonbats and your love of hyperbole. Virtually every point I make you counter with some sort of conspiracy theory.

Bush was not elected in 2004?
How is it that EVERYTHING this administration does is evil?
It just seems to me that if everybody agrees on something, I would at least have heard about it.

It's all about credibility. Based on your arguments you don't have any outside of your fringe element echo chamber.
 

GrowRebel

Well-Known Member
Since when is mentioning something once going on and on? That example underscores my contention about you moonbats and your love of hyperbole. Virtually every point I make you counter with some sort of conspiracy theory.
Bullshit ... point it out ... none of what I posted is a theory ...

Bush was not elected in 2004?
He was NEVER elected ... 2000 or 2004

How is it that EVERYTHING this administration does is evil?
Ask them ...

It just seems to me that if everybody agrees on something, I would at least have heard about it.
I don't know what you are talking about here ...

It's all about credibility. Based on your arguments you don't have any outside of your fringe element echo chamber.
I have provide very credible sources ... you don't accept them because they prove you are wrong ... but I know the folks at home know facts when they see them ... which is what I provide ...

Like I said ... I'm not about to get you to join the team ... it's more than enough to point out how blind you are regarding the facts ... nothing more is needed ... :neutral:
 

ViRedd

New Member
Johhny ...

The ultra-right sees a conspiracy behind every bush. The ultra-left sees a Bush behind every conspiracy. The extremes of both sides are whacked out. :?

Vi
 

Johnnyorganic

Well-Known Member
Johhny ...

The ultra-right sees a conspiracy behind every bush. The ultra-left sees a Bush behind every conspiracy. The extremes of both sides are whacked out. :?

Vi
How can one debate with someone who is in denial about the threat of radical Islam?
 

Johnnyorganic

Well-Known Member
I have provide very credible sources ... you don't accept them because they prove you are wrong ... but I know the folks at home know facts when they see them ... which is what I provide ...

Like I said ... I'm not about to get you to join the team ... it's more than enough to point out how blind you are regarding the facts ... nothing more is needed ... :neutral:
I seem to remember both elections. He won both elections.

Your 'sources' are left wing blogs. What fucking facts?

As far as the folks at home are concerned. I offer the big lie. Big Lie tactic is a propaganda device often associated with the Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels. Simply, it is this: if those in authority repeat an outrageous falsehood over and over, and there is no countervailing voice exposing this big lie to the public, or if that voice is censored by the media, the big lie is likely to be believed.
 

ViRedd

New Member
How can one debate with someone who is in denial about the threat of radical Islam?
Good question. A better one would be WHY are they in denile? Personally, I think its the bitter hatred harbored against George Bush by the move-on types and the publicity they put out over the Net ... and also the misleading news coverage by the Main Stream Media. CNN has done a great job on the terrorism threat issue through the Glenn Beck TV show. But even after watching this show at my suggestion, the Left-Wing bats on this forum still deny the truth.

I haven't seen all the Democrat debates, so I can't say for sure ... but have any of the Democrat candidates addressed the issue of Islamic terrorism at all? Any said what their policies would be toward the issue?

Vi
 

ccodiane

New Member
Good question. A better one would be WHY are they in denile? Personally, I think its the bitter hatred harbored against George Bush by the move-on types and the publicity they put out over the Net ... and also the misleading news coverage by the Main Stream Media. CNN has done a great job on the terrorism threat issue through the Glenn Beck TV show. But even after watching this show at my suggestion, the Left-Wing bats on this forum still deny the truth.

I haven't seen all the Democrat debates, so I can't say for sure ... but have any of the Democrat candidates addressed the issue of Islamic terrorism at all? Any said what their policies would be toward the issue?

Vi
From what I've seen, the Dem debates feature questions like, "How are you going to help the uninsured children"?, and, "What are your solutions to the mortgage crisis?", or, "What would you do to stabilize this uncertain economy"? etc etc. The Republican debates feature questions like, "What are your positions on religion, abortion, and gay marriage"?, and, "Do you support torture/waterboarding"?, or, "What do you despise most about one of your fellow Republican candidates"?

I actually like the "hard" questions the Republicans get. It is a lot more revealing of character, something I think the dems would rather not disclose until after being elected.
 

ViRedd

New Member
Well, you've made my point. That study you posted was done for CNN by the Center for Public Integrity, which was founded by, and is run by Charles Lewis. Here's some info on Mr. Lewis:

Charles Lewis is a former 60 Minutes producer who left the ranks of commercial journalism to found, in 1989, the Center for Public Integrity,[1] a non-partisan group which reports on political and government workings. When commenting on his move away from primetime journalism, Lewis expressed his frustration that the most important issues of the day were not being reported. Lewis and the Center recently won the first George Polk Award for Internet Journalism for the piece "Windfalls of War." He is also a hardcore liberal, as seen through many of his publications.
Honored over 30 times in the last eight years, the Center has published 14 books including the recent "The Buying of the President 2004." Previously relying on its print newsletter, The Public, it now primarily focuses on the Web [1] to convey its investigative findings which extend to world-wide public policy journalism. Critics of the Center accuse it of partisan sympathies, but Lewis has pointed out that it had also reported on such topics as the Clinton's Lincoln Bedroom scandal as well as the latest string of controversies under the Bush administration.
Lewis has given interviews for various publications and has appeared in the 2003 documentary Orwell Rolls in His Grave, which focuses on the hidden mechanics of the media, its role as it should be and what it actually is, and how it shapes (to the point of almost controlling) U.S. politics. He has commented on the dismal state of U.S. political reporting which was and is woefully understaffed across the board. He also discussed the inability of media to fulfill its public duty in keeping the public informed when television, newspaper and radio outlets are owned almost entirely by a few major corporations such as General Electric, Disney, Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation—and how the interests of these large conglomerates steer the route of what we believe to be "objective journalism" today.
He was also interviewed for the 2005 documentary Why We Fight by Eugene Jarecki, which focuses on the United States Military-industrial complex and on wars led by the U.S. over the last fifty years. In his statements, Lewis elaborates on Vice President Dick Cheney's involvement with Halliburton Energy Services resp. its subsidiary KBR, the privatization of war [2], war as a precursor for economic colonialism and "most of the government's decisions" being "substantially dictated by powerful corporate interest".

In other words, Mr. Lewis has an agenda.

 

Johnnyorganic

Well-Known Member
IF (big if) the present administration misled the country regarding Iraq, I could care less. Iraq is a front in our War on Radical Islam. The President felt we should fight the bad guys in Iraq. We seem to be fighting Al Queda in Iraq.

In WW II, we fought in the Philippines, the Solomon Islands, Wake Island, Saipan, Tarawa.... None of which attacked the U.S. Each had one thing in common, Japanese troops. If they were not there when U.S. troops arrived, they came as fast as possible.

Some historians theorize that FDR knew a Japanese attack was imminent prior to Pearl Harbor, but chose to do nothing hoping a sneak attack would draw the U.S. into WW II. Was Roosevelt a war criminal?
 

ozstone

Well-Known Member
I honestly dont know how you can draw a comparison between WW2 and the reasons for being In Iraq.
Maybe a good place to start in "Your War" on Radical Islam is closer to home than the Middle East.
 

ccodiane

New Member
I honestly dont know how you can draw a comparison between WW2 and the reasons for being In Iraq.
Maybe a good place to start in "Your War" on Radical Islam is closer to home than the Middle East.
The demise of the Democratic party? An excellent suggestion.
 

Johnnyorganic

Well-Known Member
I honestly dont know how you can draw a comparison between WW2 and the reasons for being In Iraq.
Maybe a good place to start in "Your War" on Radical Islam is closer to home than the Middle East.
That's the point. We fight them where they are. We didn't start this war.

My point about WW II is that none of the countries I mentioned attacked us, but we fought there anyway.
 

ozstone

Well-Known Member
Dude except for Thailand it was war against the Japanese not the countries they invaded. Japan was at war with China and the US and Its Allies, Australia included blockaded vital supplies Like oil, Iron Ore etc, Japan was nearly totally reliant on Imports and this blockade was seen as Aggressive so The Japs bombed Pearl Harbour to try and bring the US to the talk table but it didnt quite work out that way not long later Germany declared war on the US and next thing the US is at war on two fronts.
I hope that was easy to understand.

Now Iraq,
Beleive any story you want, if the Politicians are selling you a good story then you got a bargain, because its worthless.
Just step back and look at the BIG PiCTURE its Oil Oil Oil, and they call Saddam the Devil with two dicks and it is still not enough to convince me he was all that, Rumsfeld dealt with him and sold him weapons, all of a sudden the Xmas cards stop and he is a threat to humanity.
I beleived Afgansitan for a while, but if the Allies were true about what they are doing, they would have had a big fucking Surge there and sorted that out first.
 
Top