Democrats force Senate into unusual closed session

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: totalcommand
Correct.

Clinton would have done the same things as Bush (i.e. invading Iraq) if he thought they had actually acquired WMDs or all the necessary materials and knowledge of how to do so.

So you are saying Clinton lied to America and sent the military on a goose mission to attack and destroy absolutely nothing?

You are digging a deep hole for yourself.

No, Clinton destroyed sites that weapons inspectors couldn't get to.

He never claimed that Saddam had the materials and know-how to make a bomb. He never claimed that Iraq had WMDs. Had he believed or fabricated that, we would have invaded. That is a hole you will never climb out of.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: totalcommand
Correct.

Clinton would have done the same things as Bush (i.e. invading Iraq) if he thought they had actually acquired WMDs or all the necessary materials and knowledge of how to do so.

So you are saying Clinton lied to America and sent the military on a goose mission to attack and destroy absolutely nothing?

You are digging a deep hole for yourself.

does it matter whether Bush or Clinton lied first?

I think congress has a duty to investigate the charges that the executive branch -- no matter who was sitting behind the desk at the time -- deliberately misled the nation into going to war, and I think that congress owes it to the families of the dead and the american people as a whole to find out the truth, without regard to whether or not it puts the current administration in a positive or negative light.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: loki8481
I think congress has a duty to investigate the charges that the executive branch -- no matter who was sitting behind the desk at the time -- deliberately misled the nation into going to war, and I think that congress owes it to the families of the dead and the american people as a whole to find out the truth, without regard to whether or not it puts the current administration in a positive or negative light.

I agree. But those who are now calling for mass investigation were utterly silent in 1998.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: totalcommand
No, Clinton destroyed sites that weapons inspectors couldn't get to.

And what was in them that needed to be destroyed? I thought he had nothing?

He never claimed that Saddam had the materials and know-how to make a bomb. He never claimed that Iraq had WMDs. Had he believed or fabricated that, we would have invaded. That is a hole you will never climb out of.

You keep repeating garbage. Clinton told us he ordered an attack on Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs. That's WMD, plain and simple. Do you deny that chemical and biological weapons are construed as weapons of mass destruction?

 

[Jhhnn]

I suspect that Reid called for a closed session as a courtesy to his republican fellows. I doubt they'd want Reid's statements in that closed session to become part of the public record, at all.

Obviously, whatever it was, Reid got some long overdue action with the six member task force...

Of course, there are the usual attacks from Frist, and the choir joins in the chorus.

"They have no convictions, they have no principles, they have no ideas."

"Democrats Deny Open Government To American Electorate"

"It's nothing more than a stunt by Reid to divert attention away from the wildly good news about Bush's SCOTUS pick."

"Rockefeller Memo" (stolen, but who cares, right?)

"having no platform, no answers to improve the big issues we face, and nothing to do except obstruct, they've been looking to "bring down a president" for 5 years now."

"WOW!!!! the dem's put on a show today. and the showmasters. ried, levin and rockfeller.
they have obstructed progress in the US as far back as i can remember. and in their main show ring? joe wilson, the biggest flake in washington. even kerry fired him. his wife had to make a job for him. what a fool. almost a big a fool as bbond is who sucks all this BS in." (complete with false attribution and ad-hom)

"The left falls further every day - funny thing is, they just don't see it at all. You cannot obstruct on a daily basis without offering any reasonable plan for anything. Just starts looking pathetic after a while."

"If they (Democrats) can't hold their own accountable (and you know who I'm referring to), how could one reasonably expect anything from them?"

And my fave bit of disinfornation-

"Even more funny is that most of these Dems voted for the war. They had access to the information. "

They only had access to the information that the Admin provided, and nothing more...

Proud of yourselves, guys? Anybody ever offer a coherent argument as to why the Senate is dragging its feet on a full investigation of the obviously defective prewar intelligence provided to the Senate? No?

Didn't think so...

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: totalcommand
No, Clinton destroyed sites that weapons inspectors couldn't get to.

And what was in them that needed to be destroyed? I thought he had nothing?

He never claimed that Saddam had the materials and know-how to make a bomb. He never claimed that Iraq had WMDs. Had he believed or fabricated that, we would have invaded. That is a hole you will never climb out of.

You keep repeating garbage. Clinton told us he ordered an attack on Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs.

Quite right, their fledgling capacity to create weapons. Bush claimed they had gotten blueprints, and were acquiring uranium.

That's WMD, plain and simple. Do you deny that chemical and biological weapons are construed as weapons of mass destruction?

That's not WMD. You need the whole package to make a WMD, Clinton never claimed they had the package, Bush did, plain and simple. This is not an opinion. It is a fact.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: totalcommand
Quite right, their fledgling capacity to create weapons. Bush claimed they had gotten blueprints, and were acquiring uranium.

Backpedaling, are we? The discussion here is about Clinton's attack on Iraq and the WMDs he mentions as a basis for it.

That's not WMD. You need the whole package to make a WMD, Clinton never claimed they had the package, Bush did, plain and simple. This is not an opinion. It is a fact.

Ah, obfuscation at its finest. You've went back on your original comments and have resorted to shifting this discussion towards "Bush this" and "Bush that" which is precisely what I expected from you.

Dismissed.

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: totalcommand
Quite right, their fledgling capacity to create weapons. Bush claimed they had gotten blueprints, and were acquiring uranium.

Backpedaling, are we? The discussion here is about Clinton's attack on Iraq and the WMDs he mentions as a basis for it.

Let's see, who's really backpedaling here?

Here's what I wrote originally (so the world can see): "Umm, it was never concluded that Iraq had WMD's under the Clinton administration. It was something of Bush's making (or imagination)."

No refutations from you on that point whatsoever.

That's not WMD. You need the whole package to make a WMD, Clinton never claimed they had the package, Bush did, plain and simple. This is not an opinion. It is a fact.

Ah, obfuscation at its finest. You've went back on your original comments and have resorted to shifting this discussion towards "Bush this" and "Bush that" which is precisely what I expected from you.

Dismissed.

Nothing of substance in your post. No refutations. Dismissed.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: totalcommand
Let's see, who's really backpedaling here?

Here's what I wrote originally (so the world can see): "Umm, it was never concluded that Iraq had WMD's under the Clinton administration. It was something of Bush's making (or imagination)."

No refutations from you on that point whatsoever

I refuted your assertion, with evidence. Refuted. Clinton's own words refute you.

Nothing of substance in your post. No refutations. Dismissed.

I shouldn't be surprised at your lack of skill, given that ridiculous signature where you claim to "own" people in a thread.

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: totalcommand
Let's see, who's really backpedaling here?

Here's what I wrote originally (so the world can see): "Umm, it was never concluded that Iraq had WMD's under the Clinton administration. It was something of Bush's making (or imagination)."

No refutations from you on that point whatsoever

I refuted your assertion, with evidence. Refuted. Clinton's own words refute you.

It's funny that you cannot give me a single paragraph where Clinton says he has WMD's. He says he wants to contain their weapons programs, not that they have WMDs. You've quoted him saying only that.

You can keep writing that Clinton said that, but it won't make it true.

Nothing of substance in your post. No refutations. Dismissed.

I shouldn't be surprised at your lack of skill, given that ridiculous signature where you claim to "own" people in a thread.

You're the typical conservative parrot, who makes ridiculous statements and then stubbornly attempts to back them up.

 

[Jhhnn]

Pabster spin and diversion-

"The discussion here is about Clinton's attack on Iraq and the WMDs he mentions as a basis for it. "

Check the thread title-

" Democrats force Senate into unusual closed session"

And the summary-

"This administration manipulated intelligence in order to sell war in Iraq"

Which has diddly-squat to do with Bill Clinton, but you already knew that.

If you want to talk about Clinton, feel free to start a thread so you can rant about him- otherwise, it's only polite to stay on topic...

So, uhh, why are the Repubs dragging their feet on investigating the flawed prewar intelligence furnished by the Admin? Skeered? Embarassed? Complicit?

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Pabster spin and diversion-

"The discussion here is about Clinton's attack on Iraq and the WMDs he mentions as a basis for it. "

Check the thread title-

" Democrats force Senate into unusual closed session"

And the summary-

"This administration manipulated intelligence in order to sell war in Iraq"

Which has diddly-squat to do with Bill Clinton, but you already knew that.

And we look at who brought Clinton up in this thread:

totalcommand: "Umm, it was never concluded that Iraq had WMD's under the Clinton administration. It was something of Bush's making (or imagination)."

I never brought up Clinton.

If you want to talk about Clinton, feel free to start a thread so you can rant about him- otherwise, it's only polite to stay on topic...

See above.

So, uhh, why are the Repubs dragging their feet on investigating the flawed prewar intelligence furnished by the Admin? Skeered? Embarassed? Complicit?

Why the glorious 9/11 commission has already done the job!

 

[Steeplerot]

They should incorporate this smiley just for pabster debunking.

Is there ever going to be an end to these backwards people in the world?

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Pabster spin and diversion-

"The discussion here is about Clinton's attack on Iraq and the WMDs he mentions as a basis for it. "

Check the thread title-

" Democrats force Senate into unusual closed session"

And the summary-

"This administration manipulated intelligence in order to sell war in Iraq"

Which has diddly-squat to do with Bill Clinton, but you already knew that.

And we look at who brought Clinton up in this thread:

totalcommand: "Umm, it was never concluded that Iraq had WMD's under the Clinton administration. It was something of Bush's making (or imagination)."

I never brought up Clinton.

Yes, when you've lost, lie through your teeth. You could have at least pulled a GWB and edited your 11/01/2005 06:07 PM post for content first.

"Every leftist from Clinton (both) to Kerry had the same information (pre-war intelligence, for example) and came to the same conclusions that the Bush Administration did. You won't see the lefties admit that though. " - Pabster 11/01/2005 06:07 PM



Or, you could have just conceded the point, and avoided the need to make up things.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: totalcommand
It's funny that you cannot give me a single paragraph where Clinton says he has WMD's. He says he wants to contain their weapons programs, not that they have WMDs. You've quoted him saying only that.

Just for you:

"The credible threat to use force, and when necessary, the actual use of force, is the surest way to contain Saddam's weapons of mass destruction program, curtail his aggression and prevent another Gulf War."

That's Bill Clinton. Right here.

I hope you enjoy a tall glass of water with that double helping of crow

You can keep writing that Clinton said that, but it won't make it true.

See above.

You're the typical conservative parrot, who makes ridiculous statements and then stubbornly attempts to back them up.

I back my statements up with facts. I've provided facts, evidence, and links. Where are yours?

 

[arsbanned]

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: Bumrush99

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
New title for this thread:
"Democrats Deny Open Government To American Electorate"

HT: Captain Ed

LMFAO, the Bush adminstration is probably the most secretive and underhanded adminstration in the past 100 years... But most of that is a result of Bush looking like a underqualified nervous twit when faced with the horrors of press conference.

So you approve of this secret Senate meeting? You openly support secret meetings and tactics?

You can try to change the subject to Bush but this is the Senate. The democrats are trying to deny America open Government.
This hasn't happened in almost 25 years.
It's nothing more than a stunt by Reid to divert attention away from the wildly good news about Bush's SCOTUS pick.

They're not unprecedented. As the majority leader notes, they've been done a several fairly recent occasions.
So the Democrats "hijack" the Senate for a while. The Bush Administration and their minions in Congress have hijacked the entire government for 5 years.

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: totalcommand
It's funny that you cannot give me a single paragraph where Clinton says he has WMD's. He says he wants to contain their weapons programs, not that they have WMDs. You've quoted him saying only that.

Just for you:

"The credible threat to use force, and when necessary, the actual use of force, is the surest way to contain Saddam's weapons of mass destruction program, curtail his aggression and prevent another Gulf War."

Wow!!!!!! You've proven nothing!!!! Nice job again!

That's Bill Clinton. Right here.

I hope you enjoy a tall glass of water with that double helping of crow

You can keep writing that Clinton said that, but it won't make it true.

See above.

You're the typical conservative parrot, who makes ridiculous statements and then stubbornly attempts to back them up.

I back my statements up with facts. I've provided facts, evidence, and links. Where are yours?

Facts ain't no good without brains. I only need logic on my side, you've provided the facts for me.

 

[arsbanned]

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: Bumrush99

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: Bumrush99

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: Bumrush99

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
New title for this thread:
"Democrats Deny Open Government To American Electorate"

HT: Captain Ed

LMFAO, the Bush adminstration is probably the most secretive and underhanded adminstration in the past 100 years... But most of that is a result of Bush looking like a underqualified nervous twit when faced with the horrors of press conference.

So you approve of this secret Senate meeting? You openly support secret meetings and tactics?

You can try to change the subject to Bush but this is the Senate. The democrats are trying to deny America open Government.
This hasn't happened in almost 25 years.
It's nothing more than a stunt by Reid to divert attention away from the wildly good news about Bush's SCOTUS pick.

You mean the diversion by the Bush adminstration by appeasing the rabid base?
The Democrats have been strangled by the domination of House and Senate Republicans. Many of the same people that endorsed MILLIONS of dollars spent to investigate a blowjob are now refusing to look in to the worst intellegence breakdown in US history. The Democrats do not have many options left.

"options left"? That sounds like code for the Rockefeller memo :laugh:

You didn't answer the questions though.
"So you approve of this secret Senate meeting? You openly support secret meetings and tactics?"

Secret meetings are a part of our system of government. Senators make deals with each other all the time that are not part of the public record. Presidential advisors and focus groups determine policy based on information that is secret. Many of the reasons for the Iraq war are unknown, the complications and thought process that are involved in making a case for war are probably way above what the average person on the street grasps. Policy advisors are thinking 20 years ahead while we are all focused on the day to day activities.

A bunch of Senators speaking off the record is not a big deal to me. I'm sure plenty of them make huge decisions and deals while sitting at dinner. Do you have a problem with them talking off the record in the Senate? Does it change anything?

So you admit that the President can have advisors and keep things secret yet you came in here whining about Bush being secret? WTF?

Not if he is engaging in questionable activities. The Nixon Admin, another recent Republican mess, proved that.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: totalcommand
Wow!!!!!! You've proven nothing!!!! Nice job again!

I'll take it you've been "owned"?

Facts ain't no good without brains. I only need logic on my side, you've provided the facts for me.

See above.

 

[Jadow]

The timing of this is what is the most suspect. It is so obviously political, it's a joke.

OK, no WMD, we all know that. Bad intellegence, we know that too.

George Tenant fell on his sword because of it. There is no new news that is going to come out of this. If anything it will backfire on the dems, and their dismantling of the CIA over the past 30 years will come to light and be blamed for the bad intel.

That's why this is a stunt, there's nothing new here, there have already been commitees, a panel http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/03/31/intel.report/ came out with a big report on this, and it's just more piling on Bush.

Ya know what, I think Bush absolutely did his job and IF people like Colin Powell upsold the intellegence, it's because they honestly believed there were WMD, and they would do whatever it took to prevent thousands of American's from dying.

 

[Jadow]

duplicate post. ATOT server didn't git r done.

 

[arsbanned]

Originally posted by: irwincur
The left falls further every day - funny thing is, they just don't see it at all. You cannot obstruct on a daily basis without offering any reasonable plan for anything. Just starts looking pathetic after a while.

Even more funny is that most of these Dems voted for the war. They had access to the information. I guess the better question would be - who actually did their homework and READ the information before voting...

The "Left"? Have you seen Bush's poll numbers latesly? Heh.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Jadow
Ya know what, I think Bush absolutely did his job and IF people like Colin Powell upsold the intellegence, it's because they honestly believed there were WMD, and they would do whatever it took to prevent thousands of American's from dying.

That's my stance on it as well.

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: totalcommand
Wow!!!!!! You've proven nothing!!!! Nice job again!

I'll take it you've been "owned"?

Facts ain't no good without brains. I only need logic on my side, you've provided the facts for me.

See above.

You just repeated exactly what I said in my post. I'll add you to my list of the pwned.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: totalcommand
You just repeated exactly what I said in my post. I'll add you to my list of the pwned.

So you admit to being "pwned" ... :thumbsup: