News – Prime Minister Tony Blair said Thursday that he will step down as prime minister on June 27, after a decade in office in which he brokered peace in Northern Ireland and followed the United States to war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Blair will leave office as soon as a new leader is elected for the Labour Party. He remains as head of government until h
Not a member? Sign-up today!
stwor
uncogito
tanglang
ellegay
lovingu
dominian
electra3
fmnews
Prismoon
shanemca
jassie
youmustagree
TipsOfAllSorts
Catie
parislemon
ekklesiawarrior
blackandwhitekitty
Doodle07
Ratskii
dunkirk
Will1313
chinstahova
jaern
JCFE3
jvillekid
AMDeitzler
searchbeam
Beeboppin71
david_nwpa
quicksilver0602
mcarpentry
MYPOV01
deathray
aframerindio
BDuff1700
kingkam
michaeln
scott4261
HonestlyTruly
alfo
Digidave
Blindjustice4u
360)
Now if we could find a way for our President and defacto President to both tender their resignations. Bush brought Blair down , yet he was still the loyal lapdog to the end.
Can't blame Bush for this. Blair is a big boy. He knew Bush was lying and followed him anyway. Blair has only himself to blame.
to say bush lied is a lie and to repeat a lie long enought is what the nazi and other dictators do and its unamerican.
to say bush lied is a lie and to repeat a lie long enough is what the nazi and other dictators do and its unamerican:>>>>>
aluminum tubes, aluminum tubes, aluminum tubes, aluminum tubes.....WMD, WMD, WMD, WMD...Mushroom cloud, mushroom cloud, mushroom cloud...cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run....dissenters are un-American, dissenters are un-American, dissenters are un-American, dissenters are un-American...flip flopper, flip flopper, flip flopper, flip flopper, flip flopper...liberal media, liberal media, liberal media, liberal media, liberal media....liberals support terrorists, liberals support terrorists, liberals support terrorists, liberals support terrorists....liberals abetting terrorists, liberals abetting terrorists, liberals supporting terrorists...hmmmm, I see what you mean.
No you don't. There is a difference between a mistake and a deliberate lie. It's the same as the difference between manslaughter and murder. It's an issue of intent. A prime example is your point of view. You say Bush lied but have absolutely no proof to back up your assertion. This makes your point of view an opinion, and opinions can't be lies. If you knew Bush didn't lie and said he did, that would be a lie. Bottom line is there is no proof whatsoever that Bush intentionally lied to Congress. Think about it. So many people have an irrational hatred of the man that goes beyond mere political disagreement that if there was proof, he would be brought up on charges and impeached unequivocally. Dissent is not un- American, slander is.
There is a difference between a mistake and a deliberate lie.>>>>>
psssst; they were told the evidence wasn't there for WMD OR for hussein trying to purchase nuclear material from Africa. They were TOLD before they said it.
And, uh, dissent is NOT "un-American." It is one of the most precious freedoms we have, not to mention responsibilities. But I see they 'gotcha,' so I won't waste my time trying to deprogram you. You're on your own.
Dissent is about as American as Mom and apple pie...long live all three!
...let-alone the BushCheneyInc meetings prior to 9-11 stating the need for a reason to invade Iraq, eh?
Slander is unAmerican? Kinda like the Valerie Plame incident?
Can you say Chapidowick...or as Ted Kennedy would say, "we'll cross that bridge when I come to it?" or "I didn't inhale!"
Can you say, "Read my lips, no new taxes!" Can you say, "We will protect you!" Can you say, "I am going to my ranch to do the business of the people!" (Bush said that on August 9, 2001. His business included meeting with National Security Adviser Condi Rice who warned him of a perceived imminent threat from Osama bin Laden.)
Can you make intelligent claims that do not lapse back in time to the 1970's?
Can you say,
"Saddam Hussein's actions will not be tolerated...We intend to make that point clear with the use of force".
-"Look, we have exhausted virtually diplomatic effort to get the Iraqis to comply with their own agreements and with international law."
-1996-"If the history of the last six years has taught us anything, it is that Saddam Hussein does not understand diplomacy, he only understands power....We must be prepared to respond with froce if neccesary."
-"So,metimes th U.S. has to act alone, or at least act first. Sometimes we can not let other countries have a veto on our foreign policy".
-"The hard fact is that so long as Saddam Hussein remains in power,he threatens the well being of his people, the peace of his region, and the security of the world."
"the actual use of force, is the surest way to contain Saddams weapons of mass destruction program, and curtail his aggression".
1-2, Tom Daschele, 3-John kerry, 4-6, Bill Clinton. All lies? If so, where is your outrage?
But only the idiot President is unwilling to correct the
biggest mistake in US military history (other than Custer).
Never mind the fact that most of the mis(information)
was coerced and planted by his administration to
cover for his pre-concieved intentions..
So, stop obsessing and start correcting..OK??
Are you denying that the entire free world believed Saddam had wmd's? Are you not just as angry with hillary as you are at President Bush for what she said in the months and years before the war? Also, are you so stupid(not ignorant but stupid) that you can honestly believe that leaving the middle east in the state it is currently in would be a good thing?
Yet we maintained a no-fly zone over Iraq for nearly 10 years with no outrage. Bill Clinton and the Democrats followed through with UN resolutions and kept Hussein hemmed in to a point he was not a volatile threat. At the time the UN weapons inspectors were doing their job, they had found no evidence of WMDs. Also, we lived in a world in which "terrorist" threats did not seem to be high on the minds of most Americans. Consider that the WTC was bombed and the the perpetrators were apprehended during the Clinton years.
Why do Republicans consistently attempt to rewrite history and then accuse Democrats of being the only ones who do so?
In the context of the times in which those quotes were spoken, we had not lost 3,500 US soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians as a result of a war which few people can explain without the use of tryte sound bites.
The perpetrators were not apprehended. Bin laden claimed direct responsibility for the '93 bombing. Was he apprehended? NO! All because the presidents "pair" were not in his possession, but in the mouth of a fat beret wearing wh*re!
In the six years that GW has been in office, has he had his henchmen apprehend bin Laden? It does not appear to be that way. Have we let him get away too many times? It would appear that way.
During the current administration, has he been able to walk freely out in the open?
I can do one better, I can spell Chappaquiddick!
Can you say Chapidowick...or as Ted Kennedy would say, "we'll cross that bridge when I come to it?" or "I didn't inhale!">>>>>
If you're going to try deflection, use something that is comparable to the conversation. You make no sense.
"psssst; they were told the evidence wasn't there for WMD OR for hussein trying to purchase nuclear material from Africa. They were TOLD before they said it."
Nope, they weren't...where do you get your BS info from?
Yep, they were. And ya remember the 'downing street memo?' Naw, of course you don't. It showed they planned to attack Iraq before 9/11. 9/11 just gave them the 'smoking gun' they needed. CONS said it was made up to make bush boy look bad. Well, the two people in the UK who slipped that memo out, have been sentenced to prison for leaking top secret info. Soooo, if it was made up, how come they're going to jail? hmmmmmm? Ya'll have been had, but rather than be embarrassed, or rather than giving a rats #ss about your country, you'll keep on spinning to save face & excuse these dirts bags you voted for. Speaking of un-American, darlin, you fit the bill.
http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/
That is a great site! Thank you.
Your welcome. I'm always searching for information, since all the CONmedia gives is tripe.
oops...that should be 'you're.'
All part of the conspiracy theory propaganda
What most do not realize is that the BIGGEST conspiracy is the real one that we are in the middle of while innocent young Americans die..
Here's a simple math question that even 97% of the dumbest people in the dumbest states in America who voted for the dumbest president can figure out:
Which is worse..2 million Arabs kill eachother as they have for the past 3,000 years and 7,000 American soldiers die trying to stop it..
OR
2 million Arabs butcher eachother as they have for the past 3,OOO years and 3,500 American soldiers die trying to stop it????
Meanwhile BinLaden makes videos and it begs ANOTHER MATH QUESTION:
What is 1/5 of a half assed effort to capture him over the past 6 years?????
We haven't even committed 20% of out troops there..
They're too busy fighting "daddy's war"..
"Which is worse..2 million Arabs kill eachother as they have for the past 3,000 years and 7,000 American soldiers die trying to stop it.."
MrCoffeeCake,
What WOULD BE WORSE is that 3,500 Americans, not 'innocent', but WARRIORS, PLEDGED TO DEFEND THEIR COUNTRY WITH THEIR LIVES, die for NOTHING, because you get your way, and the Jihadists gain control of Iraq, of the world's THIRD LARGEST OIL RESERVES
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/Iraq/Oil.html
and with those kind of resources available to them, use the cover of a STATE SPONSOR (embassies, protected diplomatic pouches, UN contigent in NYC, not to mention all the power controlling a nation gives you, like unlimited training, money, recruitment, etc) to KILL UNTOLD NUMBERS OF AMERICANS, PERHAPS MILLIONS, once they have developed nuclear weapons and ICBM's.
The 'innocent young Americans' you shed crocodile tears over GET IT (if you read any decent-sized sampling of milblogs, you would GET that), but you apparently can't conceive of the threat and apparently seem incabable of acknowledging it until one of those Jihadists starts hacking your head off!
All part of the conspiracy theory propaganda>>>>
What is? The memo? Like I said, two people were sent to prison in the UK for giving that memo out. If it's a 'conspiracy' how could that be? Think. Try it, you'll like it.
3,500 soldiers dead..STOP DEFENDING THE OFFENDERS!
That is not heresay..
Less oil producesd in Iraq than before 2001..Not heresay
Less electricity and fresh water than before 2001..FACT
"The Iraq qar will be funded by their oil and we'll be
seeing parades in the street????? HERSAY..BULLSHooT
How about going to bed one night knowing that several thousand American families will get to see their children??..and in one piece!
You do have to sleep at night.
My neocon friend, I say: you still haven't a clue and how is that "I don't remember committing that particular high-crime" excuse working for you.
Bush, we know exactly where the millions of barrels of WMD are.
Rumsfeld, the threat is imminent.
Rice, the smoking gun will be a mushroom cloud.
All BS! There have been books written by eye witnesses to the lies and sexed up intel describing this in detail. When are you going to take the blinders off?
Remember the sage advice of our founding fathers: he who gives up liberty for security deserves neither.
Also, remember the advice of the old wise man who once said, "don't be an idiot'.
Lurch,
You are trying to deceive people with your statement:
" Rumsfeld, the threat is imminent."
That is such a distortion of the facts, that it really disappoints me that you would post that.
You, and everyone who wants to see the truth, instead of hyperpartisan distortion, should read the CNN article on Rumsfeld's comments, made in answering questions with regular folks, including the mother of a soldier soon to be deployed, in the Fall of 2002:
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/11/14/rumsfeld....
Please take your own advice:
"don't be an idiot",
and don't treat your readers as idiots, either, by trying to deceive them.
Jordan11-"And ya remember the 'downing street memo?' Naw, of course you don't. It showed they planned to attack Iraq before 9/11."
Actually, 'they' planned to attack Iraq, starting in 1998! The 'they'you must be referring to consist of Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Hillary, Madeleine Albright, Sandy Berger, Bill Richardson and all your other Clinton Administration heroes, and they declared their intention with the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act
So President Bush is to be faulted for executing a law that CLINTON signed?
Lest you claim that Bush 'twisted' the intent of that act, be so kind as to not attempt to deceive people by failing to mention that the Iraq Liberation Act was CITED in the October 2002 Congressional Authorization of Force, which was voted FOR by, among others: Patrick J. Kennedy, John Murtha, Henry Waxman, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd, John Edwards, John Kerry, Harry Reid and Jay Rockefeller!
Read the post.I wrote that dissent in NOT un- American.I believe it applies to all situations.You apparently believe dissent is only patriotic when it is in congruence with your beliefs.That is hypocrisy.Your personal attack against me is not appreciated and is a detriment to this forum.You are the one who is programmed to where you can't even have respect for someone else's point of view.We were all here when Iraq did not comply with UN mandates for weapons inspections. Remember those?This created suspicion in everyone's mind. The intel game is not exact science.Bush and Co. were given an opinion that the evidence was not there.It is the job of the President to evaluate that opinion.Your questioning of that decision is yours to make, but it does not imply a deliberate lie.Show me the proof that Bush believed there were not WMD's and decided to BS everyone and go in anyway. You don't have it.You would convict a man before he has had due process.That I am sure is not American.
Good set of posts, whatever2000. :)
We were all here when Iraq couldn't even control its own airspace, America did. We were all here when Iraq couldn't buy a bucket of KFC without the UN and America's permission. We were all here when the weapons inspectors said they had verified that 98% of all the WMD was destroyed and the remaining WMD was either used in Iran-Iraq or was already deteriorated beyond use due to lack of facilities. We were all here when Bush ignored the domestic intel. We were all here when the domestic intel complained of interference and incredible pressure to sex up the intel.
>Show me the proof that Bush believed there were not WMD's and decided to BS everyone and go in anyway.
On top of all the intel buried by Wolfie, Pearle, and Cheney there were inspectors on the ground in iraq. We all know Bush kicked them out of Iraq before they could finish the job. Why?
If we are a country based on laws and justice, Bush et all need to be investigated and punished.
"We all know Bush kicked them out of Iraq before they could finish the job. Why?"
Because he knew they would destroy his case for a war that he wanted real bad.
Lurch, why do you keep stating untruths:
Lurch- "We were all here when Iraq couldn't buy a bucket of KFC without the UN and America's permission."
That statement is so FAR FROM THE TRUTH, that I have to conclude that you must really despise your readers, and think us all complete fools.
EVERYONE knows, in direct contradiction to your assertion that Saddam was VIOLATING the Oil For Food program. It was in the news many times, or perhaps it was NOT, if you only read the 'fair and balanced' NYT?
Read this portion of the Iraq Survey Group (Duelfer) report, and try rephrasing the statement of yours that I quoted, if you have some integrity:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/repor...
"You say Bush lied but have absolutely no proof to back up your assertion."
Actually the 9-11 Commission report which was sanctioned by Bush does back it up.
I respect Blair so much more than Bush...a stong, intellient leader caught up in Bush's obsession with Iraq. His only major mistake was the wrong intelligence he got about WMDs...other than that, a good person. I will miss him...
I can honestly say I will not miss him.
He knew what he was doing. He can't blame his mistakes on Bush.
I agree.
Blair's farewell speeches seem almost apologetic.
He's tried to hastily redeem himself with some good deeds - Africa and climate change, but his legacy is Iraq. He knows history is already judging him poorly and will continue to do so, as it will Bush.
I have no respect for him. What UnusualSuspect regards as strength and intelligence I see as only treachery and connivance.
I have no sympathy for him either, and like you, entropy, I will not miss him.
Good riddance to Tony Blair. I deceitful, self-serving liar of the first degree.
No, it does not...maybe you should read it
Yes it does. I did read it.
Maybe you should follow your own advice and read it.
Depends on your interpretation of the word 'read'.
Quote the statement and tell us which page it is on
It backs up that the intelligence community had an opinion that Bush disregarded. That is within his job description as far as I am concerned. Any President who does not question these opinions is not doing their job. The intel community has certainly been in error before. You may disagree with GW's decision. To say he lied is unsubstantiated.
To say he didn't lie is to say he is an absolute moron who was totally controlled and manipulated by the people around him the entire time he was in office because he was such an idiot he had lost all common sense and ability to rationally think for himself.
Come to think of it, you may be right.
I've never met a man that dull and gullible, but that's not to say it couldn't happen.
So your defense of Bush is that he is delusional and believes his falsehoods. That might even be worse!
WORST PRESIDENT EVER!