President of the United States a Liar?

Not taking any bets on this , but if I were, I would let you all know. By the way, there is talk of impeachment proceedings being brought up by Congress on the both of them.

What? you all just figured that our?

Bush has woven himself into a web of lies since he ran for office in 2000. The man is worse than Clinton! He Started the Iraq war on lies and false intelligence.

Tim

Umm, ghost, a sin is a sin.
There is no differenes, degrees, or levels to that sin, unless of course, your a Catholic.
As such, a lie simply is a lie.
Accordingly, all politicians, and those who are in positions of authority or power, lie.

Your stipulating that one lied more or to a dgree that another did not amounts to being meritless, immaterial, and redundant.




seekerof

seekerof

so you are trying to tell me that two lies...

Sir did you get blown by your intern? " Ummm no..."

is just as bad as

"They have weapons that they want to use against us and they will arm our enemies with in attempts to destroy our nation. We must go, bomb their cities, kill all who oppose us, dispose their leader, and impose our system of government severely unbalancing the peace in another location of the world."

Are you insane?

Mr.Bunny, I think that what I said is self-evident. Hello?!




seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof
Mr.Bunny, I think that what I said is self-evident. Hello?!

seekerof

I think that what you said shows a personality where life is an absolute of black and white with no room for compromise or the ability to consider any scenario as an isolated and independent situation.

I think that is an unbelievably sad and pathetic existence..

So I asked in the way I did to see if that impression was accurate.

sigh... you sad poor pathetic little man... ... I would pity you if I cared enough about your existence.

Do not pity me.
And before you call someone pathetic, which you are doing from behind the protective screen of your monitor, think twice and try reading the terms and conditions of this site, k?

If you have an issue or difference of opinion, then state it, back it, but to resort to your 'a' typical rhetorical character and personal attacks is unbecoming of oneself, then again, it is quite easy to do when your not face-to-face, is it not? Apparently, so.

Now that is what is sad....




seekerof

[edit on 6-1-2006 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by Seekerof
Do not pity me.
And before you call someone pathetic, which you are doing from behind the protective screen of your monitor, think twice and try reading the terms and conditions of this site, k?

If you have an issue or difference of opinion, then state it, back it, but to resort to your 'a' typical rhetorical character and personal attacks is unbecoming of oneself, then again, it is quite easy to do when your not face-to-face, is it not? Apparently, so.

Now that is what is sad....


seekerof

[edit on 6-1-2006 by Seekerof]

I think you will find that the use of pathetic is in direct correlation to a pitiable state, as is the "sad", "little" is also s synonym in use for small in spirit and also pitiable. not an attack, simply an observation leading to the comment that if i cared enough then you would be pitied.

As for stating an opinion and backing it. Well you have already shown by your posts that you are unwilling to even consider the possibility that you could be wrong.

Seems we do not have much a choice to make such statements face to face due to the very nature of this medium. Rest assured that I do not have any qualms about telling people what I think of them face to face. Nor would I to you or anyone else. Seems I have this nasty habit of thinking for myself and saying what I think.

You keep commenting on the "protection" of being behind a screen and not face to face... are you physically threatening me? That would be fascinating...

"..... They have weapons that they want to use against us and they will arm our enemies with in attempts to destroy our nation. We must go, bomb their cities, kill all who oppose us, dispose their leader, and impose our system of government severely unbalancing the peace in another location of the world."

REPLY: The above is not a quote but an opinion, speculation and, as recent events in Iraq and Afghanistan have shown, is pure bunk.

As to Bush lying, and although this has been mentioned in at least one other thread: Title 50 of the US Code; Chapter 36 Subchapter 1, Section 1802 is titled Electronic Surveilance Without Court Order. Enacted in 1978, and has been used by every president since it's enactment. Paraphrasing, this is used only for calls to or from a foreign country as it pertains to specific phone numbers, as it has been used by the NSA, on about 30 numbers.

The FISA court allows wiretaps (and I use that term loosley, since capturing radio waves is not the same thing) to be undertaken when needed, and then allows for a court order to be gotten at a later date.

So........ Bush lied?

One good example of the need to do the above is the following:
May 27th, 2002, FISA judge Royce Lamberth (D) forced the closing down of 20 FBI"wiretaps" which began in the summer of 2000, as they related to Al-Queda suspects involved in the 1998 African Embassy bombings, and the investigation of Hamass members in New York City.

Over the past two years, wiretaps have prevented the bombing of the Brooklyn Bridge, the Mall of America, and a couple of others.

By the way, Bush Jr. is the exact opposite of Bush Sr. Bush Sr. was/is a Socialist and New World Order kind of guy.
You want New World Order? ..... check out the UN and the EU.

The "movie" was edited to present one particular viewpoint. If we can't watch the whole thing, one cannot ascertain all of the facts pertaining to what was said.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
As I have said before here, I supported this war strongly in the beginning. I believed our president and all that I was being told about the threat to the USA and the world from terrorism. I argued with my family that war was really justified this time.

Once I realized we had been blatantly lied to, I felt like a fool. It's embarrassing to admit that one has been fooled. I was embarrassed to have been duped, to have fallen hook, line and sinker for what now looks like such an obvious deception. It's not easy to admit.

And the people who have held on for all this time... I imagine it gets harder as time goes on to let go of the hope that they haven't been fooled. Sometimes I think that's one reason people refuse to see what's right before their eyes.

To change now would be to admit they were fooled. And they'd rather pretend than admit that.

REPLY: The reasons for going to Iraq were instated by the previous president, and were agreed to by Bush.

"quotes" by gimmefootball400, and my "REPLIES".

".... Lemme see here, Bush's lies have always made no sense at all. Lying about not stealing the 2000 and 2004 elections right out from under the noses of both Congress and the House."

REPLY: Every single recount (about 12) of both elections show there was no dis-enfranchisement, and that bush won. Do the research!
...........................

"....I cannot forget his act of sitting there in an elementary school classroom, ignoring what was going on during 9-11."

REPLY: And running around outside would have done what, exactly? He finished the story he was reading to the kids, then left to take care of business.
..........................

".... Having almost 3,000 innocent lives of Multiple Nationalities die on your soil on something that you let happen or was behind in the perpetration of. Letting an attack happen on American soil so that he could have a false pretense to go to war. Lying about the hijackers of all the aircraft saying, "They were of Iraqi desent."

REPLY: Proof, please?
...................................

".... Lying to both Congress and the House of Representatives so they could push your "Patriot Act" into law."

REPLY: 99% of every law comprising the Patriot Act have been in place for decades; it's nothing new. Again.... research!
.......................................

".... I Believe that I shall go on about the lies that have spewed out of the mouth of the rat.(Bush) Claiming that Iraq had "weapons of mass destruction" in their possession. and that they "were ready to use those weapons against the U.S. and Israel." Hello, if Iraq had the weapons, then why haven't we found any yet in the nearly three years that we have been there?"

REPLY: Links have been provided in another thread pertaining to convoys of Iraqi military going to Syria and Libya, right up to the day the war started. Also links to lists of WMD's or their precursors that have been found. Research!
......................................

".... I've said this before and I'm gonna say it again dam it, "Iraq was never a threat to either the U.S., but they were a threat to Bush and Cheney's oil over in Saudi Arabia." This man has also said that "Al-Qaida" will strike inside the United States again in the future."

REPLY: See the previous post concerning Al-Queda terrorism already stopped by "wiretaps." As to the oil, you obviously know nothing of the oil market, or how it's bought and sold. I'm still waiting for the pictures of American oil tankers sitting in the harbor.....
......................................

".... They will strike inside the U.S. again when Bush calls up his pal Osama and tells him to attack so that he can have a cause for war against Iran."

REPLY: Could you please provide that number? Also, in case you haven't noticed, Bush is allowing the UN and the EU to take care of the Iran issues; it's been going on for months. We'll see what "negotiations" and appeasement" accomplish.
..........................................

Katrina.

".... One of the worst natural disasters to strike the United States in history. A tragedy like this one WOULD HAVE BEEN averted if Bush wouldn't have sit on his arse in Crawford for nearly a week."

REPLY: The Crawford Ranch, just like Air Force One and Camp David, has all the communications required to take care of any eventuality of any proportion. And his being in Washington could have stopped the hurricane?
.....................................

".... He knew that Katrina was coming and coming fast, and he did nothing to help evacuate the people before the thing hit. Lemme rephrase that, he sat on his fat, oil-riding, and greedy arse for nearly a week when perhaps thousands of people died of malnutrition in New Orleans alone!"

REPLY: Total hogwash! Bush called THREE DAYS before the hurricane hit to convince the mayor and governor to begin preparations, and at the same time declared the hurricane a national disaster for N.O. and Mississippi.
It's not the federal governments job to take care of local issues; FEMA action takes place three days after ANY disaster, allowing the local government to make preparations for FEMA's arrival. Research!
The governor has to ASK the National Guard to come in to help; it's the law. Research!!! The governor did not ask for the help, and the mayor didn't execute the plans as set out in the N.O. emergency directive. Research!!!
..................................

".... Who really knows how many people were killed during and after Katrina? It took Bush five days to DECIDE whether or not to send aid down to the Gulf Coast."

REPLY: Total BS; see above, and.......... research!!!
..................................

".... Did you notice that most of the people that did not have a way out of New Orleans were Black?"

REPLY: Ummmmm.. 85% of New Orleans is black; what did you expect to see..... Japanese? Also, the mayor is the one who had no plans to evacuate most of the poor of his city. He's also the one who will have a large part in rebuilding the city (at least 'till he's fired or not re-elected). How much do you want to bet he won't re-build much if any section 8/low-income housing?
.......................................

".... I have just recently found out that there is talk of impeachment proceedings to take place against both Bush and Cheney. If they are impeached, which they most certainly will...."

REPLY: Don't hold your breath... you won't have enough time to do all of the RESEARCH!
.................................

".... I do ask one question of you though. Do YOU think that we will ever have the freedoms that we once had before??? (I believe we will once Bush Co. has left 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.)"

REPLY: You must have been asleep during the previous admin's 8 years.

[edit on 6-1-2006 by zappafan1]

Originally posted by MrBunny
I think you will find that the use of pathetic is in direct correlation to a pitiable state, as is the "sad", "little" is also s synonym in use for small in spirit and also pitiable. not an attack, simply an observation leading to the comment that if i cared enough then you would be pitied.

Umm, yes, it was a personal attack, purposely intending to demean and belittle. You backtracking of what you blatantly and purposely insinuated and stated into now it was a "simple observation" is weak and indicates a number of things concerning your personal character and integrity.
You said:

....you sad poor pathetic little man...I would pity you if I cared enough about your existence...

MrBunny, again, you might seriously want to consider reading the before mentioned Terms and Conditions of this site.
Furthermore, if the day ever comes that you desire a different medium, you let me know, k?

As for this topic, are you religious? Do you have religious beliefs? Are you a Christian? These two questions stand in stark relation to what I initially stated: a sin is a sin, there are no varying degrees or levels between sins. Murder is a sin just as theft is a sin. As such, the punishment for the sin would be the same.

Civil law gives determination of a difference and punishment for crimes [ie: sins], but in the eyes of G_d, a sin is a sin. Apparently, this was missed by you when making your personal affronting commentary to me, when you said/posted to me: "sad poor pathetic little man....I would pity you if I cared enough about your existence"?

Be very thankful that this was not made in a real world, face-to-face medium, because I highly doubt you would have looked me in the eyes and commented to me that I was a "sad poor pathetic little man...I would pity you if I cared enough about your existence" without receiving due literal and extreme recourse. Your lack of comprehending what I was mentioning is not a fault of my own, but your own fault. Because of your lack of comprehending what I was referencing, without asking for clarafication, without knowing the perspective I was coming from, you made brazen 'from behind the protection of your computer screen' assertions that I took personal affront with and to, hence my subsequent rebuttal.






seekerof

[edit on 6-1-2006 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by Seekerof



As for this topic, are you religious? Do you have religious beliefs? Are you a Christian? These two questions stand in stark relation to what I initially stated:

That's three questions.. and not questions I asked.. I care nothing about your religion and definitely not your god.

a sin is a sin, there are no varying degrees or levels between sins. Murder is a sin just as theft is a sin. As such, the punishment for the sin would be the same.

Typical mindset of a medieval inquisitor... I think you are letting your nature show...

Civil law gives determination of a difference and punishment for crimes [ie: sins], but in the eyes of G_d, a sin is a sin.

Crimes and sins are quite different.. "sins" are the domain of the deities and have no place in law. I do not believe in, worship, or care about your or any god who is so infinitely blind to fit your description.

Apparently, this was missed by you when making your personal affronting commentary to me, when you said/posted to me: "sad poor pathetic little man....I would pity you if I cared enough about your existence"?

Missed? No, as I said.. "sin" has no place in law.



Again you seem to think that you matter enough to me for me to feel anything more than neutral in my opinion of you. A personal affront is an attack based in dislike.. I don't dislike you... I don't like you either. You could linger in an excruciating drawn out death alone at the base of a cliff or live a long fruitful successful life and in either case it has no bearing whatsoever on me. Why is this such a difficult concept for people to grasp?



Because of your intensely closed minded statements I view you exactly as I described.

Be very thankful that this was not made in a real world, face-to-face medium, because I highly doubt you would have looked me in the eyes and commented to me that I was a "sad poor pathetic little man...I would pity you if I cared enough about your existence" without receiving due literal and extreme recourse.

Thankful? Thankful of what? Thankful that you are not here to backup your incredibly narrow views the only way you seem to know how? With physical violence? Because that is clearly what you are inferring.



I would advise that it is incredibly unwise to threaten or challenge anyone to combat that you do not know. There are people in the world who have dedicated their lives to the arts.



Ohh and BTW.. I am quite capable and willing to tell people exactly what I think of them, in person or not.. and I often have... have no doubt of that at all. Just listen to some of Henry Rollins' spoken word, Black Flag, Iggy Pop and the Stooges... you'll get a clear idea of how blunt I can be.

Your lack of comprehending what I was mentioning is not a fault of my own, but your own fault. Because of your lack of comprehending what I was referencing, without asking for clarification, without knowing the perspective I was coming from, you made brazen 'from behind the protection of your computer screen' assertions that I took personal affront with and to, hence my subsequent rebuttal.

it's "lack of comprehension" not "lack of comprehending" perhaps it's you inability to articulate that leads to these arguments.. or perhaps you think we lesser beings should be able to read your mind.



Ultimately what you were trying to do was railroad the conversation into somehow believing that Clinton's Lie about shagging his intern is equally as bad (evil, sinful,destructive, etc.. etc) as Bush's manipulations of the truth resulting in the state of the world today.



awww... you took personal affront to my comments... I will have to weep for you.




What this thread really comes down to is the legality and honesty of Bush and his policies. From many years of being subject of his rule both presidential and gubernatorial, I would say that he is about as honest a person as you will find in most maximum security prisons and about as worthy of respect as a runny pile human waste. He however has enough lawyers, money, influence, and control of the courts that his.. honesty will likely never be legally contested.

Originally posted by Seekerof
Umm, ghost, a sin is a sin.
There is no differenes, degrees, or levels to that sin, unless of course, your a Catholic.
As such, a lie simply is a lie.
seekerof

Seekerof,

I agree with you about lieing being wrong! However, Clinton lied about sex. What he did is wrong only because he Lied. Bush, on the other hand lied about the need for a War! Wars get people KILLED! Clinton's lie about Sex didn't Kill anyone.

So far this lie has killed atleast 27787 civilians and maybe as many as 31317 Civilians in Iraq plus another 2'407 Military personnel. Together, that would be about 30'194 People DEAD(using the lower nuber of civilans!

Are you telling me there is no difference between lieing about who you screwed, and getting Thousands of People Killed! If that's how you really feel about the value of human life, something is wrong with you!

Tim

Originally posted by MrBunny

I think that what you said shows a personality where life is an absolute of black and white with no room for compromise or the ability to consider any scenario as an isolated and independent situation.

Actually, if you read their posts on this and other like threads, it is the "Bush lied" proponents that seem to live in the black and white world. It seems to be all they think about and post about day after day after day.

Really, there is more to life than attacking Bush with the same frequency that you breathe. That is so one dimensional. If you can't drag yourself away from your computer every once in awhile, look at all the other categories and threads that are out there on ATS alone.

Originally posted by Simon_Boudreaux
My self I didn't go to MSNBC just to take a poll.I went there to read some news as I'm sure the rest of the people polled did as well..Saw the poll read all the options and made my choice.
Simon

But didn't you click on the story with the poll because it interested you? Those not interested in an impeachment would be less likely to click on the story. Right there the results of the poll become skewed, and therefore meaningless as a poll - except perhaps to those who want to see an impeachment.

My case is based on mathematics and statistics, while yours seems to be based on nothing more than seeing what you want to see.

I rest my case.

Time for you to (gracefully) accept defeat on this issue and move on.

[edit on 1/13/2006 by centurion1211]

What I will Never Understand is People who Blindly Defend Master Bush, even after all the so-called Truth that were POVED to be nothing but Lies.

Still, that does not matter to these Folk - they Follow their Leader, into the Abyss if they have to.

I find that Sad really - for when they WILL open up their eyes, they will be very Angry individuals.

Well - Untill then!

Originally posted by ghost
Are you telling me there is no difference between lieing about who you screwed, and getting Thousands of People Killed! If that's how you really feel about the value of human life, something is wrong with you!

When you can betray your wife you can easily betray your country! Clinton did that, betrayed his wife, then lied about it to the American people on TV and to Congress. Later made a confession on TV when he was leaving office. He even took a lie detector test and still lied ? What does that say ? You cant trust him with an intern but you can trust him with the fate of the western world ?? I think not.
Agreed the war in Iraq didn’t have solid grounding on the WMD claims but it was good for people of Iraq in general and to the entire region in general.
You are bothered about a few thousand that died- mostly due to terrorist bombings by the insurgents in Iraq- and forget about the millions of people in Iraq that have been subjugated and tormented under the murderous reign of Saddam, why dont you speak about all the people who have gotten freedom, a shot at democracy and a better life after the War in Iraq ?? Just because the civilian causalities now in Iraq are high doesn’t mean that they are worse off then they were under Saddam. Plus it gives the region an alternative to the Muslim theocracy that has plagued the region.
I am not saying that what Bush did was okay but what he did was understandable. Sin or not it is the people who have perpetuated the war even when it was over that will face perdition rather than Bush or any politician. This war in Iraq is bloody and the only cause for it is the insurgents. Its not like the US is invading a country for the first time we did it in Japan and look what Japan is today! But unlike the Japanese the Muslim terrorists are not courageous enough to face up to their enemy and confront him directly. Instead they use car bombings and terrorist actions to show their bravado, which is extremely cowardly. The only one to blame for civilian deaths is the terrorists and any military in the world would respond to the situation in Iraq in the same way if not worse!
Check out any of the Islamic terrorist's areas of operations in the world like Israel, Kashmir, Chechnya all of them have numerous civilian deaths because the terrorists use the civilians as shields and exploit the compassion of a free society as its weakness.

Originally posted by MrBunny
Ohh and BTW.. I am quite capable and willing to tell people exactly what I think of them, in person or not.. and I often have... have no doubt of that at all.

I know that this is doesnt concern me but,
I dont know where you come from but in my neighborhood you would find yourself dead in 1 min with an attitude like that, no matter who you are !!

Yeah I saw the video and I have this to say, what makes you people think that this video shows the President as a liar ?? The Patriot act was passed by Congress was it not ? So they approve it and this means that the wire taps are legal unless the Congress were to withdraw that legislation. Now that they are refusing to continue with it then it would make wiretaps beyond 72 hours illegal.
otherwise I seen no prob with it. Also the Senetor for Wisconsin is stating his opinion in the video it would seem to me and not necessarily that of the entire congress. Moreover he is a democrat, so obvioulsy he would see it as affrontery the Presidents assertion that he has the authority to introduce such laws.

Omg...a politician that lies? Surely you must be kidding! I have never heard of such a notion!

Sorry about that, had to get that out of my system.