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.

 

Do you think there really is a legal case against Bush for lying? read this

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 02:49 AM
link   
Some say Bush just believed bad intelligence, others say it was Bush's own bad intelligence that led us into a war in Iraq. Some believe he deliberately lied to go to war in Iraq and get control of the oil. Do you think Bush lied? Do you think that he could go to jail for lying after all Martha Stewart is in prison for lying to the FBI? If it is proven Bush deliberately lied that is over 1000 lives gone due to his lie, imagine all the lives altered forever due to this lie. Would you like to see him in jail if it is proven he deliberately lied? Do you think that the day will ever come that he will be imprisoned or at least have to answer for it in a court of law?

seacoastnh.com...


There is a law against misrepresentation. Prominent New Hampshire attorney John Perrault makes his case against the President's policies. Perrault analyzes the legal consequences of deceit - about WMD, Al Queda and Iraq.


[edit on 16-10-2004 by Banshee]



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 02:53 AM
link   
If you hold to this rule, then many members of Congress, including Kerry, would be guilty. They voted for the war in Iraq based upon the same intelligence the President had.



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 02:59 AM
link   
First, do no copy and paste an entire web page....just excerpt some main points and give the link.

Second....It was the UNSCOM report in 1999, an agency created by the UN which the whole world relied on for most of the intelligence and most of the world agreed that saddam did have wmd before the war...some were just asking for more sanctions on IRaq...which last time killed 500,000 children in IRaq...., mainly Russia, China, France and Germany opposed the war....and this was because they wanted to protect their investments in Iraq....perhaps you haven't heard of the food-for-oil scandal in which billions were used against the sanctions that the UN put forth on Iraq after the first Gulf War....including in these corrupt deals in which Russia and France were at the core of, they sold illegal arms to Iraq as late as 2002....

So no, the president is not going to be impeached or thrown to jail unless we really become part of the NWO and a dictatorship rises in the US.....perhaps under Kerry/Edwards who are claiming now that they can make the blind see and those who can't walk will be able to walk again among other things.... It seems Edwards is proud of announcing he and Kerry are the anti-Christ.....




[edit on 16-10-2004 by Muaddib]



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 03:04 AM
link   
BTW the following is an excerpt on what democrats were saying about Iraq's wmd including during Clinton's administration...who was in office for 8 years.....


"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 | Source

"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 Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 | Source


Excerpted from.
www.glennbeck.com...

Go to the above link to see some of the other things democrats were saying about WMD in Iraq....

[edit on 16-10-2004 by Muaddib]



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 03:05 AM
link   
my thoery of 9/11, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the future to come.

9/11 was indeed another reichstag fire, another operation northwoods.

This led us to invade Afghanistan, in order to build the pipeline, and then Iraq, specifically for the oil reserves.

All wars run on oil, bottom line.

We need that oil reserve for the next stage of the world plan, which is of course war with North korea and Iran.

Those countries make Iraq look like a cake walk.

We will have to go to war with those countries preemptively to stop them from selling nuclear weapons to terrorists.

A nuclear device in the hands of true terrorists makes 9/11 look like a scrape on the knee.

Anyway, we'll see how things pan out.



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 03:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by __rich__
9/11 was indeed another reichstag fire, another operation northwoods.


Any evidence? no? then just another wild theory with no evidence to back it up...if you are going to mention the way the towers fell and all the other stuff...please do make a search of the forums...this has been discussed many times....



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 03:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by dcgolf
If you hold to this rule, then many members of Congress, including Kerry, would be guilty. They voted for the war in Iraq based upon the same intelligence the President had.


Apparently you were off Planet when we impeached Clinton for Lying


How can you tell if a Politician is lying.
His mouth is moving


TUT



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by tututkamen

Originally posted by dcgolf
If you hold to this rule, then many members of Congress, including Kerry, would be guilty. They voted for the war in Iraq based upon the same intelligence the President had.


Apparently you were off Planet when we impeached Clinton for Lying


How can you tell if a Politician is lying.
His mouth is moving


TUT


So you want to ignore that the whole world was lying and just blame Bush directly? Who lied first? Bush? Clinton? The UN?...... The UN seems to have been the first, then followed by Clinton and other democrats and then Bush.

Want to impeach and jail the whole world? Be my guess....



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 03:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by __rich__
9/11 was indeed another reichstag fire, another operation northwoods.


Any evidence? no? then just another wild theory with no evidence to back it up...if you are going to mention the way the towers fell and all the other stuff...please do make a search of the forums...this has been discussed many times....


evidence? just look at the current world situation. North korea IS building nuclear weapons. Iran IS building nuclear weapons.

based on those countries histories do you think they would seel a nuclear device to the highest bidder? of course they would.

if a nuke is smuggled into the us and detonated who do we retaliate against? Its tough to trace a nuclear bomb after it has been exploded.

We need to contain the worlds oil supply to contain these rogue nations, and destroy their nuclear ambitions.

the terrorists want nothing less than armageddon so they can have their 72 virgins.

we MUST stop North korea and Iran, and that is NOT an easy task, and will take years of planning and maneuvering. which has already started.

is this wild theory? you tell me.



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 03:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by tututkamen

Originally posted by dcgolf
If you hold to this rule, then many members of Congress, including Kerry, would be guilty. They voted for the war in Iraq based upon the same intelligence the President had.


Apparently you were off Planet when we impeached Clinton for Lying


How can you tell if a Politician is lying.
His mouth is moving


TUT


Actually, no, I remember exactly where I happened to be. I was at a Jiffy Lube getting my radiator flushed.

In all honesty, I bet Bush only had to worry about cheating on his wife and lying to a grand jury. It would make listening to faulty intelligence and having the entire (almost) Congress agree with you a little more humbling.

At least GW would have an easier time convincing Laura he was wrong as well as hundreds of Congressman about Saddam than Clinton would have explaining "executive meetings" with that woman, Ms. Lewenski to Hillary!



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 03:50 AM
link   
It really doesnt matter if kerry or Bush wins.

Both have the exact same agenda. Which is basically the salvation of our country and possible the human race.

these are truly end times. Ill say it again Iran and North korea WILL sell nuclear weapons to terrorists.

Would we retalitate with our full arsenal if a nuke is smuggled and detonated in the US? Who could we retaliate against? Short of full out nuclear war against all potential enemies. But that would only result in the terrorists goals, to create armageddon.

I say again, the current wars are just maneuvers to strengthen our strategic position preparing for attacks on Iran and North Korea, to prevent possible nuclear holocaust.

Is this not a logical strategic scenario?

Instead of becoming polarized over left vs. right, Rep. vs. Dem., everyone should become enlightened as to who exactly controls US policy. And it is definately not the President.



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 04:09 AM
link   
Exactly my point!


www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 04:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by dcgolf
If you hold to this rule, then many members of Congress, including Kerry, would be guilty. They voted for the war in Iraq based upon the same intelligence the President had.


Did they vote for a war? Or did they authorize the use of force to ensure Iraq complicity with UN inspections? You'll find it was the latter if you look at the records.

9/11, Iraq War, Abu Ghraib, Valerie Plame CIA leak... Screw misrepresentation, these guys are moronic criminals at best and anti-American terrorists at worst.

They made their own Office of Special Plans to cook up data on Iraq.

Powell went to the UN and gave them plateloads of absolute BS.

Talk about lies - they said there was a terrorist training camp in the Kurdish sector of Northern Iraq - RIGHT UNDER THE No-Fly Zone we've controlled for 12 years!

9/11 gave the Administration a carte blanche - and there's more evidence it was the administration that orchestrated 9/11 than there is it was conducted by fictional Al-CIA-duh.



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 05:16 AM
link   
Muaddib when did you become a mod? It just says member beside your name, until you do, leave the warnings to the mods.

Someone here said Congress and the Senate was given the same info that the President was, I'm not so sure on that one. Here is an argument that was supposed to have been presented to the president on the aluminum tubes, scientists said there were no WMD based on all the info they had but they were largely ignored, its short and a little easier to understand than some of the other jargon on this.

www.ucsusa.org...

[edit on 16-10-2004 by goose]



posted on Oct, 16 2004 @ 06:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
First, do no copy and paste an entire web page....just excerpt some main points and give the link.

So no, the president is not going to be impeached or thrown to jail unless we really become part of the NWO and a dictatorship rises in the US.....perhaps under Kerry/Edwards who are claiming now that they can make the blind see and those who can't walk will be able to walk again among other things.... It seems Edwards is proud of announcing he and Kerry are the anti-Christ.....




[edit on 16-10-2004 by Muaddib]


#1 Muaddib, congratulations on becoming a Moderator

#2 GHB declared us the NWO a decade ago. You believe the Son but not the Father. You shall be dealt with later.
#3 Dictatorship is Rising.



As far as the legal hassling and wrangling and posturing in Florida, I would suggest you talk to our team in Florida led by Jim Baker."—Crawford, Texas, Nov. 30, 2000

I was curious do you know where Jim Baker is now and what he is doing?
He was obviously very successfull in Florida.

"The legislature's job is to write law. It's the executive branch's job to interpret law."—Austin, Texas, Nov. 22, 2000

Baker did a Great Job of assisting the Judicial system in the interpretation of Law. Better than the USSC

"Anyway, after we go out and work our hearts out, after you go out and help us turn out the vote, after we've convinced the good Americans to vote, and while they're at it, pull that old George W. lever, if I'm the one, when I put my hand on the Bible, when I put my hand on the Bible, that day when they swear us in, when I put my hand on the Bible, I will swear to not—to uphold the laws of the land."—Toledo, Ohio, Oct. 27, 2000

"I think if you know what you believe, it makes it a lot easier to answer questions. I can't answer your question."—In response to a question about whether he wished he could take back any of his answers in the first debate. Reynoldsburg, Ohio, Oct. 4, 2000 (Thanks to Peter Feld.)


"This is what I'm good at. I like meeting people, my fellow citizens, I like interfacing with them."—Outside Pittsburgh, Sept. 8, 2000

"I don't know whether I'm going to win or not. I think I am. I do know I'm ready for the job. And, if not, that's just the way it goes."—Des Moines, Iowa, Aug. 21, 2000

"This is a world that is much more uncertain than the past. In the past we were certain, we were certain it was us versus the Russians in the past. We were certain, and therefore we had huge nuclear arsenals aimed at each other to keep the peace. That's what we were certain of. ... You see, even though it's an uncertain world, we're certain of some things. We're certain that even though the 'evil empire' may have passed, evil still remains. We're certain there are people that can't stand what America stands for. ... We're certain there are madmen in this world, and there's terror, and there's missiles and I'm certain of this, too: I'm certain to maintain the peace, we better have a military of high morale, and I'm certain that under this administration, morale in the military is dangerously low."—Albuquerque, N.M., the Washington Post, May 31, 2000

"If you're sick and tired of the politics of cynicism and polls and principles, come and join this campaign."—Hilton Head, S.C., Feb. 16, 2000


"Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?"—Florence, S.C., Jan. 11, 2000







[edit on 16-10-2004 by tututkamen]




top topics



 
0

log in

join