It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush: U.S. deaths in Iraq 'laid foundations for peace'

page: 7
4
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 06:06 AM
link   
reply to post by goosdawg
 


Errr, the "shrub" repeated the same data that nearly every other country had since before GWI. Get your own lie straight before rewritting history..........

Your "source" are self absorbed liars with an agenda to undo history..........




posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by heliosprime

Errrr, Iraq was part of persia at the time..........Sparta had attacked Perisa at home before "jerkses" went to Greece...............



Didn't realize we were morphing this from a figurative anology to a literal one


But hey, whatever allows you to dodge points



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 06:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

But hey, whatever allows you to dodge points


Thank you..............I appreciate the compliment.............



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by heliosprime

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

But hey, whatever allows you to dodge points


Thank you..............I appreciate the compliment.............


Here is another one:

You spelled 'appreciate' correctly.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 06:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 


Does this mean we are going "steady"? Or are you just lusting after my brain?



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by heliosprime

Does this mean we are going "steady"? Or are you just lusting after my brain?



I have no doubt you'd like to go steady with me, you are a marine afterall; and they like their men pretty like. But no, I was lusting after your brain.

So much in fact, I feel like sharing some food for thought:

Just and Unjust Wars



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 08:24 AM
link   
reply to post by heliosprime
 


Okay, I will bite.




Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.



George has successfully engineered the freedom of the press out of his press briefings, stonewalling any questions that would paint him in an unflattering light (That he still manages to look terrible is a feat in itself).

George has also abused a law by Congress that should never have been passed (FREE SPEECH zones), which directly conflicts with the people's ability to peacably assemble effectively for any redress of grievances.

I realize that "EFFECTIVELY" is nowhere in that sentance, but it should be fairly obvious that the writers meant us to be able to assemble in protest ANYWHERE WE LIKE so long as we did it peacefully.




The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


This whole amendment just... well. The President has participated in a warrantless, illegal wiretapping operation, promoted it, defended it, and claimed necessity. No matter what he says, this is in direct violation of Amendment 4.

A person's effects are their words in a computer, their computer files, and anything else that can be considered in their POSSESSION inside their house. A lot of people want to equate this to "Papers", no, it is effects.




No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


Abu Ghraib, and any other secret prisons, are in direct violation of the section I have bolded. Before you comment on the "Unless" caveat; that particularly refers to inter/intra-military crimes for which court martials take place, meaning that it is under the militaries jurisdiction to deal with their OWN people. Everything else is applied to the "NO PERSON" words at the beginning of the amendment.

George has publicly defended the secret prisons, and also signed into law several laws which extradite captured POW's to these secret bases.

The same is true for Amendment 6, which deals with any criminal court proceedings having the right to a speedy trial and confrontation of witnesses/presentment of evidence against them. The only problem with this amendment being at hand is that it focuses primarily on jurisdiction... we'd have to figure out how to form a jury and such for non-american criminals.

On particular note concerning the DISQUALIFICATION's listed in the Constitution is this;




The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.


I'm fairly certain you could probably tag the Prez and V.P. on the BRIBERY charges, if not on the TREASON charges.

I hope this has been somewhat helpful in the subject at hand.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 08:33 AM
link   
I don't know why you guys even bother trying to debate helioprime.... he has no interest in anyone elses opinion other than his own. He is a thread hog and will clog one up with his inane patter as long as there are those to indulge him.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by grover
 


Pardon the off topic post but...

You're absolutely right, it's a total waste of time.

Reminds one of the "The Black Knight" of Monty Python and The Holy Grail:



It's a shame that, in his narrow world, comprehensive evidence compiled by highly regarded independent researchers could so flippantly and ignorantly be dismissed as "lies" by "liars."


Sounds like someone watches too much fox "news."

Pathetic, really...

Perhaps he could use some help to shine up his "arguments":




posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by grover
I don't know why you guys even bother trying to debate helioprime.... he has no interest in anyone elses opinion other than his own. He is a thread hog and will clog one up with his inane patter as long as there are those to indulge him.


Yeah I think that last one was the extent of my patience heh. It's very hard to get me to this point... But helio has done this. What a shame.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 03:01 PM
link   
To add to Goosedawgs push for something refreshing and humorous for this thread...

Check out this video you guys, I thought it was hilarious and on point!





posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by TheColdDragon
 


Wow a real answer to a real question not just BS about me.


Well stated and well organized. Perhaps a little thin in some areas, but I agree.

My vote is violation of his oath of office because he has failed to close the borders after 911. That is willful violation of well established law concerning illegal aliens. He has also aided in the violation of the civil rights of several border agents through his good "buddy" Johnny Suton demon prosecuter in Texas.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by grover
 


Grover, dude, admitt it, you are my twin brother. You just can't stand losing an argument to me since mom put you up for adoption and kept me.

Now how does any of your hate answer the OP question?

Rem Jeffersons liberty tree..........."Blood of patriots and tyrants"........I think that applies



[edit on 29-3-2008 by heliosprime]



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by heliosprime

Grover, dude, admitt it, you are my twin brother. You just can't stand losing an argument to me since mom put you up for adoption and kept me.

Now how does any of your hate answer the OP question?


Please elucidate where and how you are winning an arguement against anyone...



posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 05:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

Please elucidate where and how you are winning an arguement against anyone...


The FACT that grover my twin brother has me on his ignore list is a great victory..........
He can't debate the facts so he hides.

Now what about my reasons for impeaching bush? For not closing the borders and the persecution of border agents?



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join