FOX VIEWERS, Republicans, will you watch Joe Wilson on MSNBC's Countdown and MSNBC's Hardball tonight?

Question

to find out what the vice president did to pressure anyone who spoke out or questioned this administrations use or false use of intel that led us into the War in IrAq?

Personally I dont see how people can continue to argue for the war on Iraq when all facts of blatant misuse of intel was used, shaped and bent to propel us into war with Iraq, and not go after Afganistan, like we should have.

Your thoughts republicans, if you dare

Halo, what kind of planet are you on. Those video games are rotting your brain son.

So, apparently, no one cares about this FACT that is now proven. Libby, who was assistant to V.P. and the PResident was found guilty!!!
Thats a fact!

We are at war with Islam?
What are you smoking guy?

Islam is a peaceful people.

What we did was go after Saddam because of this intel that just came out, not intel but a cover up attempt.

With a new Walter Reed commission opening up, to look into what went wrong, Bush himself said he will hold anyone accountable if they leaked info.
So does that mean a ommission will be established to see how high this cover up goes in the white house?

Whats really SAD is that people are still trying to support this administration when they have been found caught red handed with their hand in the cookie jar

Butterbar, FACT! Libby was found guilty for a reason. Whether investigation does begin to see how high this goes up is up to congress.

FACT, how many republicans conceeded in their own (5) minute debates of the faulty intel given on Iraq, but quickly followed that up with 'but thats not the issue NOW"
Read the transcripts or look at the videos...

How republicans keepspeaking is beyond me.
My only hope is that this will change the course on the upcoming supplemental spending budget that democrats have control of.

Troll Bust -- how many generals has bush fired that told him we should not be in this war, we cannot be in this war?

How many people told him we could not sustain an after war mission in Iraq, that is now coming true?

If you bring up Clinton administration, then what do you have to say about
1) Osama Bin Laden being offered to Ira Fliesher on T.V., before 9/11
2) what about Condi Rice's report that she neglexcted that warned of immenent threat from Bin Laden, THAT SHE IGNORED!!!!

And all those quotes you raise, shows that Iraq attempted to build WMD', but Joe Wilsons testimony, and Libbys convition show This Administration's falsifying facts to propel us into war, when Dimplomacy should have been the answer

It was made to appear by this administration that saddam was an imminent threat -- but he wasnt.
Yet we still NEEDED to go into war, enough to cover up the facts.

Thanks for the arguement attempts bush supporters -- but it only shows that republicans are still not willing to Man up for their mistakes. And the shame is that men and woman dont seem to be of any concern to you all, that die every month.
9 more american soldiers died today, and yet you still want to argue a losing cause.
Way to go

Jeeper, so you dont see reason to withdraw in Iraq, when we are there because of someones own political agenda?
you dont care that in the middle of acivil war are the best of america that fight for a constitution that Bush sets aside at his convenience.
You dont care how many more american familes will be destroyed because of this?
what kind of patriotism do you hold?
Care only about you, is that your familymotto? As long as you arent fighting over there its okay others die carelessly.


Heck even Mccain recently said the lives are being wasted

Pathetitc is all I can say to anyone that stil argues for this administration

deaf -- you say 17 american agenices -- how many of those were either supporting or pressured by this administration?

Even coming out today, how many state attorneys were pressured then fired for not bringing charges against democrats before the last election? 8. 8 State Attorneys let go, and filing suit against republicans and this administration for trying to sway their efforts, as they did with all the intel.
So their goes your arguement

Answer 1

They won't go here.

The best argument that the Bush apologists have is that Bush was lied to, or that the intel agencies were incompetent.

Everything the administration did kept in a high level of "plausible deniability" for Bush.

Not all of us were fooled though

Answer 2

Let's rock:
1. All 17 of America's intel agencies came to the same conclusion. Iraq had WMD.
2. The U.N. intel agency agreed.
3. Iraq had violated no less than 13 U.N. resolutions prior to Resolution 1441
4. Resolution 1441 warned of Military action if Iraq hindered the inspectors in any way.
5. British, French, German, Russian, Italian, Spanish, and Chinese intel agencies agreed that Iraq had WMD.
6.1441 passed the U.N security council on a 15-0 vote.
7. Congress passed the Iraq War Resolution with bi-partisian support.

So, is passing along information your believe to be true the same as lying? If the rest of the world agrees with you, are you really manipulative?

If Bush lied, EVERYONE LIED!!!!! So did your precious Democrats!!

Peace be with you.....

Answer 3

Ohhh I dare

So he is going to show how Saddam violated UN laws for over what... twelve years... continually refused to allow inspections to occur un-interrupted so the WORLD could make sure he was not armed and that there is historical evidence that Saddam had spent time and money to get weapons of mass destruction (See Osirak Nuclear reactor)? Probably not...

So let me get this straight, some how VP Cheney altered history, convinced Iraq not to follow UN law (Which said if he did not comply they would be invaded), and convinced the world's most powerful intelligence communities in to doing his biding, even before he was elected in to office (because that's when all of this started)?!?!?!?! WOW he really must be Darth Vader!

BTW... We did go after Afghanistan... remember? we knocked the Taliban out of power there? Remember? Probably not... it would go against your personal opinion so why deal with facts.

Remember the Oil for food scandal? gee the countries who voted against following UN law and supporting the invasion of Iraq were all receiving money from Saddam... Isn't that called a bribe? Are we supposed to feel morally inferior to people who ignore the laws because they want to line their pockets with blood money? oh wait that's only the US right? France was swimming in Saddam's blood money for over 25 years (remember they sold him the nuke plant and the infrastructure he used to make his chemical weapons and was the biggest violator of the UN's food for oil program)... But it was The US who was the bad guy... No, excuse me it was VP Cheney...

Why is it people conveniently forget things like UN law, or that the countries which did not back us were profiting from Iraq's suffering, That The Kurds Thank The US for saving them from Saddam and call OUR boys "Martyrs" for dieing for their freedom.

I guess because people like you care soooooo much about the world you would rather let a tyrant and a person who is thumbing hi nose at world law get away with his crimes and would rather persecute some one who was doing the right thing, only because he was a republican.

I mean after all how can anyone who is not a Republican be Evil? Saddam killed thousands... but he was not a republican so he must have been a good guy deep down. That guy in Iran, Not a Republican, so despite a proven track record of violence and publicly stating he wants to destroy a sovereign nation, he must actually be a great and kind man.

What about Hitler? He was not a republican either, in fact he was a socialist... Was he a good guy too?

try facts instead of opinion... the world would be a better place.

ADD ON: Spot on 'The Deafening Silence'!!! Facts... Such preaty little things...

Answer 4

If I dare? This is an easy one. We're at war with Islam. Period. We can sit and argue Iraq forever, but nothing changes the facts. We're there because terrorists - Islamic ones want you and I dead. Those are the facts. We can argue WMD all day. The truth is after Gulf War 1, we agreed to a cease fire and said action could begin again at any time - of our choosing. Saddam didn't comply with our cease fire, or with UN resolutions. So we went in and removed the SOB. Now we're trying to give the Iraqi people a fresh start at the same time taking out some of those people who want us dead. That's the truth.

You liberals I am convinced will never get it. Hopefully while those who do get it are in office we can reduce the threat enough so that if you nuts do get the White House back we won't be attacked again.

Put your hatred aside and look at the facts. Nothing I have said can be argued, its truth. Truth will always win.

Answer 5

Do you mean to say that the Administration cannot defend itself against attacks from their opponents? Wilson wrote articles questioning Iraq trying to buy "yellow cake"...a stand which has since been called into serious question...and the administration has NO right to find out who this guy is?...especially when he initially said he was hired by Cheney...which he wasn't. Wilson is hardly a stellar witness to any of these events. He has had political motivations from the very beginning...So, no, I have no interest in hearing his most recent lies.

Answer 6

Why would anyone listen to Joe Wilson?

The Senate Select Committee on Pre-War Intelligence has already said that almost everything Joe Wilson wrote in the NY Times article was false.

1. Joe Wilson wrote that Iraq had not tried to buy uranium from Niger.

But Joe Wilson told the CIA that Iraq had twice tried to buy uranium from Niger.

2. Joe Wilson said he had seen the forged Niger documents and told them they were forged, before he went to Niger.

But Joe Wilson has never seen the forged Niger documents and he went to Niger 7 months before the United States came into posession of the documents.

3. Joe Wilson said he went to Niger at the beheast of VP Cheney.

But Joe Wilson was sent to Niger by the CIA and the CIA never sent any info on his trip to Niger to VP Cheney.

4. Joe Wilson says his wife had nothing to do with him being sent to Niger.

But they have the e-mail Joe Wilson's wife sent to her boss, asking that Joe Wilson be sent to Niger.


You really need to read the two Senate Select Committee on Pre-War Intelligence Reports.


And as for arguing for this war now.

Every Intelligence service in the United States thought Iraq had WMD, Every western Intelligence Service thought Iraq had WMD.

They were all wrong............ we cannot change those facts now.

But to withdraw from iraq now, would lead to a massive genocide in Iraq, no one can argue that point.

I don't see how one political side can argue we should withdraw from Iraq because they are in a civil war, but then turn around and argue that the US should interviene in a civil war in Darfur .

Answer 7

I'm sorry, but what does the proven LIAR Joe Wilson or MSNBC know about it? They will speculate to their liberal hearts' content about the evil Darth Cheney, but what facts do they have? None.

Wilson's op-ed in the NYTimes was replete with lies, because his report to the CIA actually does support the conclusion that Iraq was seeking uranium.

As for "false" intel, that also is a canard, and a dirty damn lie.

You are supposing "facts" where none exist - all the feelings and opinions about misuse of intel are just that - unproven. Fact and evidence and proof are required, and you have none that support your belief.

Those are my thoughts, based on facts, reality, logic and evidence. Beats all those "feelings" and conspiracy theories that you guys have, no?

Answer 8

Um...you're saying that Bush/Cheney influenced/browbeat/pressured relevant Congressional members into going along with skewed intel?

Explain exactly how this was accomplished, seeing as Bush was still just a Governor back in 1998. He must've been one heck of an influential Governor, huh?

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

Feel free to visit reality someday--you might enjoy it.

Answer 9

Joe Wilson is a proven liar. Why would anyone want to watch him tell more lies? Only complete idiots would believe what he says.

What's really sad is you ignoring the truth.

Answer 10

Yeah, like Joe Wilson is going to give me an unbiased report.