Bush humiliated by prison abuse

Strange how W states this while in France.
"I was humiliated" along with most Americans, Mr Bush told a press conference in Paris after talks with French President Jacques Chirac.
news.com.au...
Sanc'.

I seem that Mr. bush is kissing a lot of behinds lately, but the ones that he truly has to kiss is not the ones on frances and italy but the american peoples ones. If he is to win this coming elections.

Hi marg6043,
He better start kissing more than a few behinds of the American people
if he wants to win the election. After all, he stole the last one and should
not be in office in the first place.
Sanc'.

Lets behave or they will throw you on the mud pit, I wonder what he will do this election times to win.

Originally posted by marg6043
Lets behave

or they will throw you on the mud pit, I wonder what he will do this election times to win.

Daddy knows best
Sanc'.

Originally posted by sanctum
After all, he stole the last one and should
not be in office in the first place.

You are saying he is lying, well you are just lying with that statement, he did not steal the last election. The press came down to FLorida and counted the votes, there was no fault play, that's just what democrats want the world to think but those who know, know its bs.

And france has a lot more to anwser and apologize for than we do.

[Edited on 5-6-2004 by Muaddib]

You are saying he is lying, well you are just lying with that statement, he did not steal the last election.
[Edited on 5-6-2004 by Muaddib]

I didn't say W was lying. The Hawks take care of that dept'.
Link for vote counting info
davesweb.cnchost.com...
Sanc'.
Edited: excessive quoting.
[Edited on 5-6-2004 by sanctum]

[edit on 6-6-2004 by sanctum]

That's a democrat site which owner/owners hate republicans. Which I do not even find reliable one bit. I just read the first few paragraphs and found exagerated information. You know that the democrat party has a lot of socialist ideas don't you? If it was up to Clinton we would be socialists with the people having no guns, with no Bill of rights or Constitution at all, since he called them "radical." And that's not exagerated at all. You can find his speeches from several different links, not all of them republican and see this is true.

The republican party might want to apply some new laws, but at least is not as radical as the democratic party.


[Edited on 5-6-2004 by Muaddib]

Mixed findings of reliability would include one who post-hoc rationalizes election theft and Supreme Court judgment for the first time in US history of who is to be President, by stating that "the press" concluded a vote count in Florida as if this is relevant, without even a link.

pffft, your attemp at ridicule is pathetic. It had to come from a democrat...


" In the first full study of Florida's ballots since the election ended, The Miami Herald and USA Today reported George W. Bush would have widened his 537-vote victory to a 1,665-vote margin if the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court would have been allowed to continue, using standards that would have allowed even faintly dimpled "undervotes" -- ballots the voter has noticeably indented but had not punched all the way through -- to be counted.

The study, conducted by the accounting firm of BDO Seidman, counted over 60,000 votes in Florida's 67 counties, tabulating separate vote totals in several standards categories. "

Excerpted from.
www.pbs.org...

"pffft, your attemp at ridicule is pathetic. It had to come from a democrat..."

Not even in the ballpark. Your reliability is called into question again.

Thank you for the link for the benefit of other readers. Findings obviously unreliable due to sample size, standard selected for recounting and motive behind that methodology.

You choose to ignore this conclusion: "If those numbers did not stand, the Herald reported, a more generous hypothetical revisited recount would have scored the White House for Gore -- but with a 393-vote margin."

All codswallop.

The vote that counted was in the Supreme Court, simple as that, and auditable.

Sounds to me like you both are getting stuck in party lines too much. Please learn to think for yourselves, and don't just do what those in Washington want you to.

PS, I'm registered Republican.

Note the mention of "a more generous hypothetical revisited recount..."

My reliability in question? You should know that we are not supposed to "quote excessively from links" which is why I did not..... I thought you were a writer and scholar in ATS...

Now, if you want to read the first part of the paragraph we can see what they meant....


"In their reports, the newspapers assumed counts already completed when the court-ordered recount was stopped would have been included in any official count. Thus, they allowed numbers from seven counties -- Palm Beach, Volusia, Broward, Hamilton, Manatee, Escambia and Madison -- to stand, but applied the most inclusive standards to votes in the rest of the state. If those numbers did not stand, the Herald reported, a more generous hypothetical revisited recount would have scored the White House for Gore -- but with only a 393-vote margin. "

And keep reading

Under most other scenarios, the papers reported, Bush would have retained his lead.

Excerpted from same link in previous post.

Humm, what could they have meant by "a more generous hypothetical revisited recount" to make Gore win....

Once more, your petty attempt at ridicule and slander is pathetic.






[Edited on 5-6-2004 by Muaddib]

Yes, Muaddib, I agree with you that the "press recount" is debatable.

I don't follow any US partisan lines. Both of the main parties who contest the antiquated election system in the US would be guilty to varying degrees of office-gaining tactics. The admin in power chose to use influence to defraud the electorate in both deregistering voters and in employing a complicit judiciary.

More important than that is the incompetence and stench of corruption around every activity of the incumbent administration. Coupled with the stripping away of civil rights of decent Americans.

But there are also those who will tragically defend all this fraudulent and corrupt activity to their dying day. That is following the party line. Those types are excellent servants.

[Edited on 5-6-2004 by MaskedAvatar]

(Moving more on topic, with apologies for the interlude):

Is the topic title "Bush humiliated by prison abuse" actually a Prediction of his yet-to-come personal experience?

[Edited on 5-6-2004 by MaskedAvatar]

For one to follow the party line you will have to agree completly with whatever party you choose to side with. I have stated many times I do not agree in everything Bush has said or done, but the other options are much worse. The main disagreement I have with Bush and the administration is in the way they downplay the environment and reports from scientists such as The Pentagon Weather Nightmare.

The war on terrorism is also an issue we must continue to pursue but its not the only concern we should have.

[Edited on 5-6-2004 by Muaddib]

The Army reported on Friday 16 more criminal investigations into possible misconduct by U.S. soldiers against detainees and civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Just a few bad apples? My a$$! This will go higher, but maybe not under this Administration.............


www.registerguard.com...