Howdy Cat

Jun 20, 2009 -- 6:42PM, catboxer wrote:

Ah, so "mistakes were made."

Bullshit and nonsense.

Mistakes aren't made by themselves. People make them.

That mistakes aren't made by themselves and made by people is stating the obivious.

Jun 20, 2009 -- 6:42PM, catboxer wrote:

But in this case there was no mistake. All the evidence shows that the members of the Cheney administration willingly, knowingly, and feloniously lied through their teeth about their reasons for attacking Iraq.

The Cheney Adminstration ?  

Don't you mean the Bush Adminstration? 

I disagree that ALL the evidence shows that the Cheney adminstrations "knowingly" and "feloniously"  lied through their teeth about reasons for attacking Iraq.   

Jun 20, 2009 -- 6:42PM, catboxer wrote:

Why else would Cheney have ordered Sheikh al-Libi to be tortured until he admitted to knowing about the connection between Saddam and al-Qaida?

What is  the evidence that it was "Cheney" who ordered that:

 Who ordered that Sheikh al-Libi be tortured.

And that the purpose of the torture was to force Sheikh al-Libi into making a false confession?

I don't see why the CIA could not have just killed or had al-Libi killed and falisfied a confession. 

As to  made confessions it is a matter of debate.:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_al-Shaykh_al-L...

Jun 20, 2009 -- 6:42PM, catboxer wrote:

Surely you know that eliciting false confessions is always one of the main reasons for combining torture with interrogation. Look no further than the Salem witch trials.

I do not know that the purpose of combining torture with interrogation is ALWAYS to elicit a FALSE confession.  I do know that SOMETIMES using torture along with interrogation and maybe even MOST times will elict false confessions, but SOMETIMES the...confessor will make a TRUE confession and SOMETIMES the person under torture will REFUSE to make a false confession.   I believe that at least two of the accussed witches in the Salem witch trials refused to make false confessions while being subjected to.....enhanced interrogation().  If am not mistaken one man died rather than make a false confession. 

Jun 20, 2009 -- 6:42PM, catboxer wrote:

But I guess we can feel good now that we've toppled "Sodom" and "liberated" the Iraqi people. By the way, how's that going for us. Just check today's headlines.

And I guess you would rather have Sodom Hussein stay in power.  A person who was clearly a danger not only to his own people but to other countries in the the Middle East ?

Jun 20, 2009 -- 6:42PM, catboxer wrote:

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- A suicide truck bombing near a Shiite mosque killed at least 67 people and wounded at least 200 Saturday in a city close to Kirkuk, Iraq, an official with Kirkuk police said.

The explosion occurred in a busy area near the Rasoul mosque, police said, and a number of people were trapped under rubble.

Police said at least 25 houses and shops were destroyed in the attack, the deadliest this year.

The blast took place about 1 p.m. in the town of Taza, about 10 miles southwest of Kirkuk and 149 miles north of Baghdad. Taza is predominantly inhabited by Shiite Turkmen.

Hours after the blast, authorities were still digging through rubble searching for possible survivors and more bodies.

To paraphrase, "They made a wildnerness and called it 'democracy.'"

It was more of a wilderness and less of a democracy under Sodom Hussein. 

Gee that never would have happened if your hero Sadaam Hussein was still dictator.

Poor, poor innocent Sadaam, an innocent vicim of the Zionist controlled Miltary Industrial Complex.   

As I stated before I was totally against the premptive invasion of Iraq.  Lefist Muslim Fellatist bitched and whined the US supported dictators before the Iraq War and bitched and whined after one was toppled.  The damned  if you do and damned if you don't principle. 

Given that Sodom Hussein had used WMD's against Iran and against those civilians in his own country and that he did hinder UN inspectors I thought it was credible that he might have WMD's or was developing WMD's  in Iraq.   But as  long as he was using them against Iranians, Kurds and other innocent women and children in Iraq that was none of my bussiness nor the bussiness of the US or the UN.  

We could have just imposed sanctions.  Everybody knows how effective they have worked. 

 I definetly thought is was bullshit that Sodom Hussein's Iraq had Al Qeda training bases.

So why do you think was the "real reason'  that the Cheney Adminstration invaded Iraq? 

Have A Thinking Day And May Reason Bless You

Howdy Cat

Jun 21, 2009 -- 6:48PM, catboxer wrote:

And I guess you would rather have Sodom Hussein stay in power.  A person who was clearly a danger not only to his own people but to other countries in the the Middle East ?

What business is that of ours?

You did not answer the question I asked.  This is typical of leftist.  A  direct question is asked and give an evasive answer. .  I ask once again,

Would you rather have has Sodom Hussein stay in power?    

I will not stoop to your level.  What business is that of ours ?   Globalization.  What happens in the Middle East does concern our national interest.   Some of countries  are our alllies.

Jun 21, 2009 -- 6:48PM, catboxer wrote:

Oh, wait. I forgot, the United States rules the world.

It belongs to us; everybody else just lives on it.

Empty meaningless lefist rhetoric.  

Jun 21, 2009 -- 6:48PM, catboxer wrote:

We're supposed to do that because we're so good and so much more moral than everybody else.

I think we are certainly better than Iraq under Sodom Hussein.  Who do you think is "more moral" than the United States?  What country or countries do you consider to be so good or more moral? 

Jun 21, 2009 -- 6:48PM, catboxer wrote:

And the fact that the Cheney administration saw attacking Iraq as the best for this country

I will agree with you that it is a fact the Bush-Dick adminstration saw that attacking Iraq was in not only our national interest but also in our international interest. 

Jun 21, 2009 -- 6:48PM, catboxer wrote:

 and this country's oil companies to gain control of the world's largest oil producing region might have had something to do with it too.

It might have had something to do with it.  But that is speculation.   What is the evidence that the U.S. oil companies have control of Iraq's oil ? 

Jun 21, 2009 -- 6:48PM, catboxer wrote:

What's the matter with you IDBC? Don't you know how the world works?

You don't know that all the moralizing these politicians do is just a story to cover up their dirty business? It's a stew of lies, cooked up by the larcenous and violent and fed to a gullible public. That's the world of TV news, not the real world. The other countries of the Middle East indeed! Like we really give a shit!(Like THEY really give a shit?)

Wake up and smell the hot blood. it's on our hands.

And no, I don't give a damn about Saddam Hussein. He was a little Stalin whom we set up because he was anti-Iran and had a war with them, but then after a while he wouldn't behave and he was in the way. And he was sitting on top of all that oil.

Do you care about the his  victims ? 

Of course your special.  You aren't one of the "gulliable public".     You are an elitist.  If you and your kind only had the power the world would be a utopian paradise.  

You are WRONG in claiming the the "WE" set up Sodom Hussein.  Sodom Hussein took power by murder and brutality long before he started the war with Iran. 

Now I can't speak of "we", I can only speak for myself and I do give a shit! 

How about YOU, do you include yourself in that we ? 

Do you have blood on YOUR hands? 

I do know that Osama bin Laden and many other oppressed Muslims agree with you 100%.   They 3,000 GUILTY civilans had BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS. 

I do know how the world works.  I know that our politicans are not the only ones who lie and cover up their dirty business with self-rightous moralizing. 

I know that this is not confined to just politicans.  I know that author=33717984 is also guilty.

Have A Thinking Day And May Reason Guide You

Cat

Jun 22, 2009 -- 4:15PM, catboxer wrote:

Saddam Hussein was a scummy dictator who brutalized his own people, but he was a piker compared to Bush and Cheney, who have now turned Iraq into a smoking, stinking ruin.

Wake up and smell the hot blood on our hands.

Saddam Hussein's crimes in that country were insignificant compared to ours. You're projecting.

I disagree.  That Bush and Cheney were worse than Saddam Hussein and that the blood is on our hands.  

Have A Thinking Day And May Reason Bless You.