USA Politics Thread - *No gun debate*

[Zorbtek 0]

Yes, the entire thing.

But it is video with music, and shows me nothing more but that a plane hit the World Trade Center and had fallen.

The other video however raises some serious questions.

[red oct 2]

that bomb the fire fighter is talking about could be refering to building 7, most likely it was demolished simply because its structure was questionable after the attack. I don'ttheres nothing suspicious about that, they did the exact same thing to the surviving sections Oklahoma City building. Or maybe its a video from the 90's from the earlier terrorist attack.

[Garcia 0]

that bomb the fire fighter is talking about could be refering to building 7, most likely it was demolished simply because its structure was questionable after the attack. I don'ttheres nothing suspicious about that, they did the exact same thing to the surviving sections Oklahoma City building. Or maybe its a video from the 90's from the earlier terrorist attack.

Firefighters reported explosions when they fought the fire long time before it would even be possible to demolish them because they was in bad shape after the attack. Also, most people that had anything with the contruction of the building first stated it should have withstood the attacks, actually that there was no way the buildings did collaps because of the planes. It was reported that the building collapsed due to the heat (2000 degrees celsius or something?), but really, just think logically, you don't get that much heat from only the material in the building, so you need a fuel source that feed the fire with fuel that generates that much heat. The airline fuel isn't supposed to generate that much heat when burning, and besides, most of the fuel from the planes would have been used in the inital explosion, and what might have been left would have been used quite fast after that. There's no way that the fire should have been able to generate that much heat for such a long time. And of course you got that fact that you do see dustclouds coming out of the buildings several floors under the collaps all the way down and that the chance for 2 that high buidlings to go down like that would be like 1/1000000000000000000 if not smaller...

There's quite many loose ends when it comes to 9/11, and surely something dodgy must have gone on, but it's quite likely it'll never be known if there was anything else going on and who was behind it.

[Sertorius 0]

A good analysis of many of the most popular theories concerning 9/11: Popular Mechanics - Debunking The 9/11 Myths

[EiZei 0]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps....refer=#

Quote[/b] ]

Spy Agency Sought U.S. Call Records Before 9/11, Lawyers Say

June 30 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. National Security Agency asked AT&T Inc. to help it set up a domestic call monitoring site seven months before the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, lawyers claimed June 23 in court papers filed in New York federal court.

The allegation is part of a court filing adding AT&T, the nation's largest telephone company, as a defendant in a breach of privacy case filed earlier this month on behalf of Verizon Communications Inc. and BellSouth Corp. customers. The suit alleges that the three carriers, the NSA and President George W. Bush violated the Telecommunications Act of 1934 and the U.S. Constitution, and seeks money damages.

``The Bush Administration asserted this became necessary after 9/11,'' plaintiff's lawyer Carl Mayer said in a telephone interview. ``This undermines that assertion.''

Interesting to say the least.

[miles teg 1]

Wow...very scary. Looks like old "W", Dick, Rumy, and Co. were well on their way to taking away the rights of Americans before 9/11.

I don't know what the hell they are thinking, but if this type of activity to peel away Constitutional rights continues, we could easily have a civil war in the United States and tons of new homegrown militias emerging. In the past militia groups were mostly made up of ultra-extreme right wing red neck types afraid of the U.N. taking over America. Now I think you will eventually see left-wing groups forming their own militias or uniting with the right-wing red neck types with alot more organization. For example in the past, these groups just recruited fat old bubbas who had military experience back when they were young. New groups will likely actively recruit young people fresh out of high school and train them as a regular army would. Believe it or not, this is not illegal at all in the United States as long as no firearms laws are broken and no illegal activities (such as bomb making) are being done. The only thing required for such an organization is plenty of money and skilled fundraising professionals. That along with the recruitment of former drill sergeants and other ex-military professionals willing to set up guerilla warfare schools within a strict legal framework.

The last group like that which ever formed on a large scale was the Black Panthers, although they engaged in criminal activities at times. Nevertheless they scared the hell out of the federal government.

But hopefully nothing like that will happen if idiot Bush is not replaced with a Bush clone. But with the electronic voting machines largely controlled by one corporation (at least around 80% of them) whos CEO vowed publicly to win the election for Republicans in the last Presidential election, I think we will get another neocon Bush clone in office.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[walker 0]

Hi all

I find it very odd that TBA were engaged in spying on what amounts to all US citizens at home long before 9/11 and completly outside any oversight of judiciary or the senate or congress beyond disturbing.

This action is far more reminiscent of communists than anything else.

I always said it was a bunch of commies running the US republican party.

Shocked walker

[Nemesis6 0]

I find it very odd that TBA were engaged in spying on what amounts to all US citizens at home long before 9/11

You know what I find odd? Space monkeys and killer clowns from outer space. Seriously, who comes up with a concept like that and brings it to the movie screen? Crazy...

Foiled terror attacks, however, aren't odd - New details on NYC Train plot

Quote[/b] ]Federal law enforcement officials tell ABC News a plot designed to use 15 to 20 suicide bombers on one commuter train as close to Sept. 11 as possible was well underway.

The specific target was the PATH commuter trains that run in a tunnel under the Hudson River into New York City.

“This is a plot that would have involved martyrdom, explosives and certain of the tubes that connect New Jersey with lower Manhattan,†said Mark Mershon, Assistant Director-in-Charge of the FBI New York Field Office. “We’re not discussing the modality behind, beyond that.â€

But law enforcement officials say the plotters had already accessed detailed blueprints and drawings of the PATH tunnels, available on the internet.

And like the London bombers, the plan was to load backpacks with explosives.

All 15 to 20 bombers were to board one car and detonate when the train was under the river, according to officials.

“There’s no question that they are vulnerable. With the right amount of explosives, the tunnel could be compromised,†said Gerry Hauer, former Director of New York City’s Office of Emergency Management and now an ABC News consultant.

The FBI identified the ringleader as 32-year-old Assem Hammoud of Lebanon.

[walker 0]

Hi all

In reply to Nemesis6 as you seem to be staying on topic this time.

So TBA has been spying on what what amounts to every US citizens phone calls since before 9/11 without oversight by senate or congress and without a warrant from the courts and you think it is OK.

And yet with all this spying on virtualy every phone in the USA they did not prevent 9/11?

Maybe TBA was too busy looking for your Space monkeys and killer clowns from outer space.

I would laugh but big brother might hear me.

Kind Regards Walker

[Jinef 2]

Oh Say Can You See ..... Land Of Liberty blah blah

What a joke.

Breaking News:

Maria Sharapova is sexy, but not sexy enough to win against ze French! Seriously, that Federer guy is almost as good as me. Let Second Service.

Cheerio, Pip Pip What.

[Sophion-Black 0]

Quote[/b] ]So TBA has been spying on what what amounts to every US citizens phone calls since before 9/11

Every... boy where do you get you're info from? Looks here like your stuttering too.

Imagine, there are 298 MILLION people in the US. How much time and how many men do you think it would take to listen in on all conversations. THINK! The information observed would turn up weeks later! It is impractical to even think that. Now international calls on the other hand would take less time but I'm sure there are still many many calls to sort through. The thing that even seems remotely sensible is that the government is looking at phone calls from questionable locations.

Quote[/b] ]And yet with all this spying on virtually every phone in the USA they did not prevent 9/11?

look above. The messages between the terrorists was "domestic" and was sent via a subliminal picture.

Quote[/b] ]Maybe TBA was too busy looking for your Space monkeys and killer clowns from outer space.

Try picking up all the slack that Clinton left behind:

Quote[/b] ]USC Paragraph 5 of the AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ RESOLUTION OF 2002

"Whereas in Public Law 105-235 (August 14, 1998) [112 Stat. 1538], Congress concluded that Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in 'material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations' and urged the President 'to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations';

look at the date (August 14, 1998). kind of makes you frustrated that Bush is getting the blame even though he's just doing what he is told by congress... sad. I kind of feel bad for the poor little monkey-face. He sure has the world biting at his heels. or is that because the Democrats can't criticize one of their own. oh yeah that's right... they can't! To think the white house was all under fire for the same thing. To you walker... I would have to say the Democrats (and some select Republicans) have fallen to communism. My reason for saying commies... because they have totally lost sight on what nation this is and what it stands for.

I fall silent for your next move, kind sir!

[EiZei 0]

Quote[/b] ]So TBA has been spying on what what amounts to every US citizens phone calls since before 9/11

Every... boy where do you get you're info from? Looks here like your stuttering too.

Imagine, there are 298 MILLION people in the US. How much time and how many men do you think it would take to listen in on all conversations. THINK! The information observed would turn up weeks later! It is impractical to even think that. Now international calls on the other hand would take less time but I'm sure there are still many many calls to sort through. The thing that even seems remotely sensible is that the government is looking at phone calls from questionable locations.

Who said anything about the actual calls? The data that NSA was collecting was call records not the calls themselves on massive scale.

Quote[/b] ]

The thing that even seems remotely sensible is that the government is looking at phone calls from questionable locations.

Yeah, who needs that pesky 4th amendment anyways.

Quote[/b] ]I would have to say the Democrats (and some select Republicans) have fallen to communism.

Ooh, this is almost retro.

[walker 0]

Hi all

Well the big brother commie NeoConMen who control the US Republican party have even been locking up US Citizens with no trial.

Quote[/b] ]American filmmaker sues Rumsfeld over detention in Iraq

Cyrus Kar says he was hooded, threatened by U.S. soldiers

Saturday, July 8, 2006 Posted: 2030 GMT (0430 HKT)

LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- An aspiring Iranian-American filmmaker who spent nearly two months in a prison in Iraq without being charged has sued Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and other military officials, calling the government's detention policies unconstitutional.

Cyrus Kar, 45, of Los Angeles seeks unspecified damages and sweeping changes in the government's detention policies overseas.

The suit was filed this week in federal court by the American Civil Liberties Union of California. It is the first civil case challenging detention policies in Iraq, said Mark Rosenbaum, the organization's legal director.

A phone message left for a Pentagon spokesman was not immediately returned Saturday.

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/08/rumsfeld.sued.ap/index.html

Heck the man is a former US Navy Veteran with permission from the US Government to be in Iraq to finish his film yet they stuck him in jail for 55 days until his family brought a writ of Habeus Corpus.

I guess all these NeoConMen denyers will blame it on the Bill Clinton conspiracy or weir rabbits from outer space or some such.

Sorry Sophion-Black but that excuse dont wash anymore.

Kind Regards Walker

[Nemesis6 0]

Damn you Walker! Damn you for exposing our secret plan to rule the United States with our Communist Neo-Conservative ! Now we'll have to construct a new specimen thanks to meddling Anarchists like you!

[Sophion-Black 0]

Quote[/b] ]

The thing that even seems remotely sensible is that the government is looking at phone calls from questionable locations.

Yeah, who needs that pesky 4th amendment anyways.

I was referring to locations such as Syria, and Iran. All those kind and friendly nations.

Quote[/b] ]I guess all these NeoConMen denyers will blame it on the Bill Clinton

Lets review:

Quote[/b] ]"Whereas in Public Law 105-235 (August 14, 1998) [112 Stat. 1538], Congress concluded that Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in 'material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations' and urged the President 'to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations';

1998 would be under Clinton's term of office. That's a fact not an excuse. IF: Clinton finished what he started in Iraq THIS WAR WITH IRAQ WOULD NOT BE HAPPENING! IT WOULD HAVE ALL READY BEEN DONE! BYE BYE SADDAM! All we had to do was to help, in some way, the Kurdish uprising. That would have also triggered more effort on in the south (the Shiites) and eventually lead to the overthrow of Saddam. If I can remember correctly WE were assuring the Kurds that we will help... sad.

Quote[/b] ]Potential bomb parts were found in a taxi in which Kar was riding

The wrong place at the wrong time for this guy...

Keep in mind the the US is not in any way in a position of authority over Iraq. There are many countries that fought in Iraq not just the US, and some of their laws are different than ours. It doesn't say who/which country caught him.

Quote[/b] ]"Human rights monitors note that the vast majority of the over 15,000 detainees in U.S. military custody in Iraq have never been charged, tried, provided counsel, or allowed to challenge their detention in court, and over one-fifth of them have been detained for over a year in this manner," the suit states.

I never trusted, and will never trust anyone that argues in court for a living. Because they are expected and payed to persuade. So to this I really can't say anything, I just don't know what to think on this manner. If you want (if it makes you feel better) go ahead and chalk one... I pass due to lack of information.

Wait a minute...

Quote[/b] ]I guess all these NeoConMen denyers will blame it on the Bill Clinton conspiracy or weir rabbits from outer space or some such.

Lets look at this again shall we. To whom are you calling NeoConMen and where did you get space rabbits? You forget that all of the above is true? Did you "forget" to click the link for the USC?

There are as many factors going on today as there was to dissolve the USSR. Many factors, both distinguishable and disguised, have pushed us to this very point in time. To the War on Terror, the War in Iraq, and even to the modern confrontation with North Korea. Not every factor can be traced to Clinton, the Terrorists, or the Communists. There are such factors as major disputes between political parties. Where, to most cases, the other side obsessively "needs" to make the other side look defective. Thus trying to get their party in power. Now, basically I'm saying: I'm not blaming anyone for the actions they did not do. I am highlighting the truth to the degree of enlightenment. There are things Bush did wrong and I blamed him for it. Take example: the story you just posted. If its true I hope they get what is entitled to them. But what they think they should get is determined through justice, not through anger or egotistic hunger. But what is fair. To me this incident could very well be dragged through the dirt and the outcome may be more than what is rightfully noted. but that is because of the press, you can't keep everyone happy.

Now that I'm done with my... uh speech (wow), I'm going to eat.

I await your next move, kind sir!

[earl 0]

Food for thought:

"A little patience, and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their spells dissolve, and the people, recovering their true sight, restore their government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are suffering deeply in spirit, and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public debt. If the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at stake," - Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to John Taylor, June 4, 1798.

When will King George and his neoCon cabal run out of steam, and when will real conservatives (small gov't, fiscal reponsibility) take back their party? Another interesting historical perspective:

"A person is brought hither in the dungeon of a ship's hold; thence he is vomited into a dungeon on land, loaded with irons, unfurnished with money, unsupported by friends, three thousand miles from all means of calling upon or confronting evidence, where no one local circumstance that tends to detect perjury can possibly be judged of; such a person may be executed according to form, but he can never be tried according to justice.

I therefore could never reconcile myself to the bill I send you, which is expressly provided to remove all inconveniences from the establishment of a mode of trial which has ever appeared to me most unjust and most unconstitutional. Far from removing the difficulties which impede the execution of so mischievous a project, I would heap new difficulties upon it, if it were in my power. All the ancient, honest, juridical principles and institutions of England are so many clogs to check and retard the headlong course of violence and oppression. They were invented for this one good purpose, that what was not just should not be convenient. Convinced of this, I would leave things as I found them. The old, cool-headed, general law is as good as any deviation dictated by present heat," - Edmund Burke, arguing that American prisoners should retain the right to due process and fair trial in England.

It makes sense to expand executive powers during an emergency, but what happens when the Chief Executive declares what amounts to permanent emergency?  Where is the check and balance when King George can place himself and his people above the law, indefinitely? It starts to look less like democracy and more like something else, when all the king's horses and all the king's men are busy finding ways around the constitution.

[EiZei 0]

Quote[/b] ]

The thing that even seems remotely sensible is that the government is looking at phone calls from questionable locations.

Yeah, who needs that pesky 4th amendment anyways.

I was referring to locations such as Syria, and Iran. All those kind and friendly nations.

But they are not merely monitoring calls to/from "suspicious countries" but recording information on every call made by customers of those telcos involved in the program.

[Sophion-Black 0]

Quote[/b] ]

The thing that even seems remotely sensible is that the government is looking at phone calls from questionable locations.

Yeah, who needs that pesky 4th amendment anyways.

I was referring to locations such as Syria, and Iran. All those kind and friendly nations.

But they are not merely monitoring calls to/from "suspicious countries" but recording information on every call made by customers of those telcos involved in the program.

My dear EiZei, You totaly missed this part:

Quote[/b] ]Imagine, there are 298 MILLION people in the US. How much time and how many men do you think it would take to listen in on all conversations. THINK! The information observed would turn up weeks later! It is impractical to even think that.

And let me see where you are getting this information? A simple link will do.

blah blah ham jiberoo

Get to the point... I know my "speech" wasn't that long!

My quote against your first quote:

...But the greatest danger of all would be to do nothing.

-John F. Kennedy: Cuban Missile Crisis Address to the Nation

Yes, it does seem rational to give more power to the executive branch during an emergency. by definition it is their job to enforce laws, which is greatly needed during a disaster. But this can also lead to the answer of your own question: when the order has been restored and the nation/region/state/city have regained control. then it would be wise to restore power to respective branches.

Remember, in the US: Congress decides when to terminate the emergency status. Basically the President has to make sure the emergency is dealt with effectively (if not you forget impeachment on grounds of dereliction of duty). Congress can and has been known to "lay down the law" if you know what I mean.

[EiZei 0]

Quote[/b] ]

The thing that even seems remotely sensible is that the government is looking at phone calls from questionable locations.

Yeah, who needs that pesky 4th amendment anyways.

I was referring to locations such as Syria, and Iran. All those kind and friendly nations.

But they are not merely monitoring calls to/from "suspicious countries" but recording information on every call made by customers of those telcos involved in the program.

My dear EiZei, You totaly missed this part:

Quote[/b] ]Imagine, there are 298 MILLION people in the US. How much time and how many men do you think it would take to listen in on all conversations. THINK! The information observed would turn up weeks later! It is impractical to even think that.

And you seem to be missing the simple point that the phone calls themselves are not being recorded, just who calls to who, when and how long. You could easily fit millions of that kind of records on a 90e single consumer hard drive.

Quote[/b] ]

And let me see where you are getting this information? A simple link will do.

Uhh.. you totally missed this two months ago? You might want to start reading more newspapers..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_call_database

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm

http://www.forbes.com/technol....ty.html

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12779087/site/newsweek/page/2/

Quote[/b] ]

Yes, it does seem rational to give more power to the executive branch during an emergency. by definition it is their job to enforce laws, which is greatly needed during a disaster. But this can also lead to the answer of your own question: when the order has been restored and the nation/region/state/city have regained control. then it would be wise to restore power to respective branches.

So, check back in couple of decades then? (well, in the unlikely event they have'nt found some other bad guys to replace terrorists)

[earl 0]

Get to the point... I know my "speech" wasn't that long!

I know... history can be so boring.

Quote[/b] ]...But the greatest danger of all would be to do nothing.

-John F. Kennedy: Cuban Missile Crisis Address to the Nation

Who suggested doing nothing??  We are all talking about "doing something" but I would argue for doing it within the limits of constitutional rights and with regard for the check and balance systems that exist to keep a presidency accountable to the people.  It seems there are an awful lot of republicans, and even democrats who support the war on terror in the current theatres, but who can't justify some of the methods, and the extent to which the Bush administration is insulating itself from public accountability.

Quote[/b] ]Yes, it does seem rational to give more power to the executive branch during an emergency. by definition it is their job to enforce laws, which is greatly needed during a disaster. But this can also lead to the answer of your own question: when the order has been restored and the nation/region/state/city have regained control. then it would be wise to restore power to respective branches.

Remember, in the US: Congress decides when to terminate the emergency status. Basically the President has to make sure the emergency is dealt with effectively (if not you forget impeachment on grounds of dereliction of duty). Congress can and has been known to "lay down the law" if you know what I mean.

How can Congress operate effictively when they are kept in the dark?  This is current:

"I have learned of some alleged intelligence community activities about which our committee has not been briefed. If these allegations are true, they may represent a breach of responsibility by the administration, a violation of the law, and, just as importantly, a direct affront to me and the members of this committee who have so ardently supported efforts to collect information on our enemies.  [and later...] The U.S. Congress simply should not have to play Twenty Questions to get the information that it deserves under our Constitution." - Representative Peter Hoekstra in the NYTimes.  They also published a leaked letter to President Bush, four pages: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package....tra.pdf

Have you heard TBA ever mention what the criteria are for having America back "under control"?  If they won't even tell Congress what they are doing, how will anyone ever know?  You say you don't believe lawyers, since their job is all about persuasion.  And so, what about politicians, any important difference there?  If you believe anything you read about Cheney's "one percent doctrine" then you can easily see that the state of emergency will continue forever.  So, are you comfortable with the fact that your constitution is on hold, indefinitely?

[Sophion-Black 0]

So, check back in couple of decades then? (well, in the unlikely event they have'nt found some other bad guys to replace terrorists)

Come on... get real. The Democrats will never let this happen. If it gets too serious (worse case scenario) the public can easily revolt. either way, the power will be restored to respective branches.

Quote[/b] ]You say you don't believe lawyers, since their job is all about persuasion.  And so, what about politicians, any important difference there?

What do you think politicians do during debates? Eh? They BS!

Quote[/b] ]So, are you comfortable with the fact that your constitution is on hold, indefinitely

Lets see here... In my opinion the constitution is fine. Its just that Congress doesn't do anything. This would put the other two branches with higher power. Simple, set a fire under their seat (figuratively speaking), get them to do their jobs! Look we have something in our military docturine called Military operations other than war (MOOTW). WTF! if your in combat (like Operations: Eagle Claw, Earnest Will, Uphold Democracy, Golden Pheasant, Just Cause, Power Pack, Urgent Fury, Joint Force, Desert Shield/Storm, Iraqi Freedom, Anaconda, Enduring Freedom) then the obvious thing would be to declare war! its just congress saying: "we don't want to put down war on the papers."

...panzies...

[JGreyNemo 0]

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/rape-and-murder-five-more-us-soldiers-charged/2006/07/10/1152383622182.html

If they're guilty, then they should be shot. Period. If they're guilty and it's likely that they are, then they are human waste, and should be disposed of.

Iraq's a mess and military action was never the smartest way of getting rid of Saddam Hussein. I stood by that when we went in. And I stand by that now.

But we're in now. And goddam, even I can't think of a decent solution to that problem.

[scary 0]

IF: Clinton finished what he started in Iraq THIS WAR WITH IRAQ WOULD NOT BE HAPPENING! IT WOULD HAVE ALL READY BEEN DONE! BYE BYE SADDAM! All we had to do was to help, in some way, the Kurdish uprising. That would have also triggered more effort on in the south (the Shiites) and eventually lead to the overthrow of Saddam. If I can remember correctly WE were assuring the Kurds that we will help... sad.

Erm, that was down to Bush Snr. and Cheney in 1991 when there was already a Shia uprising to which assistance had been promised by Bush - but then he got bored and decided against it, despite other nations and the US military wanting to see it through. It would have been finished before the year was out.

If you want to know why Iraqis don't trust Western troops, it might have something to do with the punishment meted out to them after the uprising failed. Bush Snr. is as responsible for as many coalition deaths as his spineless son.

Bush Jnr should fish out his balls and try getting down and dirty in Daddy's war himself instead of posing for photo opportunities wearing a uniform other people work for. Still, at least he gets to call himself a 'War President'.

[Sophion-Black 0]

IF: Clinton finished what he started in Iraq THIS WAR WITH IRAQ WOULD NOT BE HAPPENING! IT WOULD HAVE ALL READY BEEN DONE! BYE BYE SADDAM! All we had to do was to help, in some way, the Kurdish uprising. That would have also triggered more effort on in the south (the Shiites) and eventually lead to the overthrow of Saddam. If I can remember correctly WE were assuring the Kurds that we will help... sad.

Erm, that was down to Bush Snr. and Cheney in 1991 when there was already a Shia uprising to which assistance had been promised by Bush - but then he got bored and decided against it, despite other nations and the US military wanting to see it through. It would have been finished before the year was out.

If you want to know why Iraqis don't trust Western troops, it might have something to do with the punishment meted out to them after the uprising failed. Bush Snr. is as responsible for as many coalition deaths as his spineless son.

Bush Jnr should fish out his balls and try getting down and dirty in Daddy's war himself instead of posing for photo opportunities wearing a uniform other people work for. Still, at least he gets to call himself a 'War President'.

My bad, your right on the uprising part... sorry 'bout that.

BUT: if you remember correctly (or look back in time) you would see that Clinton only slapped Saddam's wrist for not disarming (missile strikes). he should have dome more than sign papers is my point.

[walker 0]

Hi all

Valerie Wilson (nee Plame) has brought a writ seeking to bankrupt Vice President Dick Cheney, his former top aide Scooter Libby, top presidential adviser Karl Rove and other White House officials for their part in the Traitorgate conspiracy.

Quote[/b] ]Former CIA Officer Sues Cheney Over Leak

By Daniela Deane

Washington Post Staff Writer

Thursday, July 13, 2006; 5:54 PM

The former CIA agent whose identity was leaked to reporters by administration officials filed a civil lawsuit today against Vice President Dick Cheney, his former top aide, top presidential adviser Karl Rove and other White House officials, accusing them of conspiring to destroy her career out of revenge.

In the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, former CIA operative Valerie Plame and her husband, former U.S. ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, accused the officials of leaking her identity to reporters to get back at Wilson for criticizing the Bush administration's motives for going to war in Iraq.

"This lawsuit concerns the intentional and malicious exposure by senior officials of the federal government of . . . Valerie Plame Wilson, whose job it was to gather intelligence to make the nation safer and who risked her life for her country," the lawsuit said.

Besides Cheney and Rove, the suit names former top Cheney aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby and 10 other unnamed administration officials or political operatives.

The administration officials "embarked on an anonymous 'whispering campaign' designed to discredit and injure the Plaintiffs and to deter other critics from speaking out," the suit said.

The lawsuit accuses the White House officials of violating the Wilsons's constitutional rights and the couple's privacy rights. The couple asks for an unspecified monetary amount in compensatory and punitive damages.

Several news organizations wrote about Plame's identity after syndicated columnist Robert Novak named her in a column in July 2003. Novak's column appeared soon after Wilson wrote an opinion piece in the New York Times that said the administration had distorted intelligence on Iraq to justify going to war.

The CIA had dispatched Wilson to Niger in early 2002 to determine whether reports were true that Saddam Hussein had tried to buy yellowcake uranium there to make a nuclear weapon. Wilson discounted the reports after his trip, but President Bush still referred to them in his 2003 State of the Union address laying out the reasons for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March of that year...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn....92.html

Follow link for full article

I said a long while back that if it was found that there were lies to cause us to go needlesly to war; that those involved should have their personal fortunes so reduced as to cause them to live in a housing project/council house. This would seem to be the begginning of this process.

I see no reason why soldiers and families of those killed, wounded and maimed in the Iraq war should not take legal action against members of TBA and TBA2 for damages caused by lying to bring us to a needless war.

We all now know there was after all:

No WMD

No link with 9/11

No link with Al Qaeda

It is now obvious to even the least sensible human being and NeoConMan denyer that TBA and TBA2 Lied and Lied and Lied again in order to drag the coalition into war.

I look forward to seeing each of these faithless commy NeoConMen destitute on the street.

Kind Regards Walker