Log in or Sign up

Howard Dean on "Softball"

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by Jetstorm, Dec 2, 2003.

Page 2 of 4

dallastigers Founding Member

Joined:

Sep 2, 2002

Messages:

1,361

Likes Received:

1

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Howard Dean on "Softball"

Originally posted by lsu_buzz
I guess its a question of magnitude. Bush lies about the big stuff. Perhaps if he had a sexual affair, you might get angry. Probabaly 90% of all conservatives can't stand Clinton because of character issues, but you give Bush a pass on the same character issues.

Bush did lie about Iraq. This administration used the power of FEAR like no other. This war was not about WMD. This war is about a vision of a greater middle east that is friendly to U.S. interests... period! Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Perl, and others have been planning this for years.

Andrew Card... "you don't introduce new products in August"

Paul Wolfowitz... "For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on"

Paul Wolfowitz... "almost unnoticed but huge - namely that the ousting of Saddam would allow the United States to remove its troops from Saudi Arabia, where their presence had long been a major al-Qaeda grievance"

Think about that last quote for awhile. We went to war because of an Al-Qaeda grievance. Are you kidding? You guys have nerve to criticize Dean!
Click to expand...

First off I do not believe that Bush lied I think you need to go back over all his speeches and not just the ones on WMDs, but your magnitude point is ridiculous unless being Gov of Vermont has more power in National and World affairs than I am aware of.

Did Bush scare all those Democrats into voting Yes? I will tell you about the power of fear - Democratic organizations calling and mailing my 80 something year old grandma year in and year out about how Republicans were going to cut her Social Security and Medicare. My mom and I would have to explain each time the truth. Guess what the cuts never came even when the bills passed or the Republican candidate got elected.

Give us some links to those other quotes. If those are true I would like to see them in their full context. Why did you delete the last quote?

dallastigers, Dec 2, 2003

#11
dallastigers Founding Member

Joined:

Sep 2, 2002

Messages:

1,361

Likes Received:

1

Originally posted by lsu_buzz
You would be wrong about the investigation being more embarrasing to Clinton. George W. Bush gave about $125 million in aid to the Taliban in 2000. That pretty much destroys the notion that Clinton should known about 9/11. I'll give you the reference if you like.

Click to expand...

Please do. I was not aware that Bush had that much money to give out as a private citizen (or Gov if you are talking about the son) in the year 2000.

dallastigers, Dec 2, 2003

#12
lsu_buzz Founding Member

Joined:

Oct 6, 2003

Messages:

77

Likes Received:

0

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Howard Dean on "Softball"

Originally posted by dallastigers
First off I do not believe that Bush lied I think you need to go back over all his speeches and not just the ones on WMDs, but your magnitude point is ridiculous unless being Gov of Vermont has more power in National and World affairs than I am aware of.

Did Bush scare all those Democrats into voting Yes? I will tell you about the power of fear - Democratic organizations calling and mailing my 80 something year old grandma year in and year out about how Republicans were going to cut her Social Security and Medicare. My mom and I would have to explain each time the truth. Guess what the cuts never came even when the bills passed or the Republican candidate got elected.

Give us some links to those other quotes. If those are true I would like to see them in their full context.
Click to expand...

The Card quote is well known. I hit submit on the Wolfowitz quotes a little too soon so I went back and edited my post.

Do you deny that the GOP has not used fear to win support for this war? Tom Delay is still justifying the war by linking it to 9/11. Why do you think most American's believe Sadamm was involved in 9/11? It is because this administration played upon that tragedy to win support for the war. We heard statements like mushroom clouds, 45 minutes to arm their weapons with chemical warheads, unmanned drones capable of releasing biological weapons, imminent threat, etc. All this came from the administration. They gave us the impression they had hard intelligence about nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, and that Iraq posed an imminent thread to the U.S. Hell, the state of the union speech was a lie. They worded it so that they could blame the Nigerian uranium claims on the Brits.

As far as magnitude of the lies. I was comparing Bush's lies about policy and war to Clinton's lies about sex.

And your comparison about the Democrats use of fear with Social Security is ridiculous compared to the use of fear to lead the nation to war.

lsu_buzz, Dec 2, 2003

#13
dallastigers Founding Member

Joined:

Sep 2, 2002

Messages:

1,361

Likes Received:

1

Here is a few links for you in Regards to Clinton's possible embarrassment

Townhall

Townhall2

Discussion link

Sudan offered to give up Bin Laden in March of 1996

Same year 09-11 plan was started
ABCNEWSlink

President Clinton's first opportunity to defeat Osama bin Laden came late in the afternoon of March 3, 1996, in an Arlington, Virginia, hotel suite. It was the first attempt by the Clinton Administration to deal decisively with the arch-terrorist. It lasted less than 30 minutes.
____Sudan's then?Minister of State for Defense Elfatih Erwa flew in for a secret meeting with Timothy M. Carney, the U.S. ambassador to Sudan, and David Shinn, Director of East African Affairs at the State Department. Both Carney and Shinn were State Department veterans. Also present was a middle-aged man who was a member of the CIA's Directorate of Operations (Africa division) at the time and is still active with the agency today. . . . The CIA believed, and its representative told Erwa at the time, that some 200 al Qaeda terrorists were holed up in Sudan. (The actual number, the author learned in Khartoum in 2002, was as high as 583. . . .)
____Five days later, Erwa again met with the CIA operative. This time, the two State Department officials were not present. Erwa and the CIA officer were alone as they decided the fate of Osama bin Laden.
____Sudan offered to arrest and turn over bin Laden at this meeting, according to Erwa. He brought up bin Laden directly. "Where should we send him?" he asked. This was the key question. When Sudan turned over the infamous Carlos the Jackal to French intelligence in 1994, the CIA covertly provided satellite intelligence that allowed Sudanese intelligence to capture him on a pretext and escort him to the VIP lounge at the Khartoum airport. There, he was met by armed members of French intelligence and flown to Paris in a special plane. Would the CIA pick up bin Laden in Khartoum and fly him back to Washington,D.C.? Or would bin Laden go to a third country?
____The CIA officer was silent. It was obvious to Erwa that a decision had not yet been made. Or perhaps his offer was not quite believed. Yet, the Sudanese official was still hoping for a repeat of the French scenario. Finally, the CIA official spoke. "We have nothing we can hold him on," he carefully said. Erwa was surprised by this, but he didn't let on. He was still hoping for a repeat of the French scenario, a silent and quick operation to seize bin Laden and bring him to justice. . . .
____Sudan's files on bin Laden and his network were extensive. Sudan had dossiers on all of bin Laden's financial transactions, every fax he sent (the Mukhabarat had even bugged his fax machines), and every one of bin Laden's terrorist associates and his dubious visitors. If Sudan's surveillance was as good as Erwa claimed, bin Laden's entire global terrorist network would be laid bare. And the CIA would be able to track the movements of his foot soldiers and lieutenants across the Middle East.
____There were good reasons to believe that Sudan was serious about taking action against bin Laden. . . . His terrorist activities had isolated Sudan from the United States and much of the developed world. Sudan's internal politics were moving against the terror master too. President Bashir was in the midst of a power struggle against Hassan al-Turabi, the Islamist leader. Bin Laden supported Turabi with cash and a potential armed cadre of Muslim militants. If Bashir could rid himself of bin Laden, he could simultaneously restart Sudan's relationship with the United States and vanquish his chief internal political rival.
____Over the next few months and years, Sudan would repeatedly try to provide its voluminous intelligence files on bin Laden to the CIA, the FBI, and senior Clinton Administration officials — and would be repeatedly rebuffed through both formal and informal channels. This was one of the greatest intelligence failures of the Clinton years — the result of orders that came from the Clinton White House.
____As the Clinton Administration was weighing whether to seize bin Laden or take the opportunity to obtain valuable intelligence on his global network, the CIA's own intelligence on bin Laden was shockingly poor.
____Human intelligence on al Qaeda was virtually nonexistent. Washington Times investigative reporter Bill Gertz uncovered a memo written only a few months after Sudan offered its intelligence on bin Laden. The July 1, 1996, CIA memo was marked "TOP SECRET UMBRA," meaning only the case officers, analysts, and officials specifically cleared to read the documents marked "UMBRA" could have access to this sensitive document. The July 1996 memo reveals how ignorant America was about its emerging nemesis. "We have no unilateral sources close to bin Laden, nor any reliable way of intercepting his communications," the report said. "We must rely on foreign intelligence services to confirm his movements and activities."
____This frank report reveals that as early as 1996 — five years before the September 11 attacks — the CIA and other senior policymakers knew about bin Laden-related intelligence failures. When it came to rectifying the cause of these failures, however, little was done.
____
____Richard Miniter is the author of "Losing bin Laden: How Bill Clinton's Failures Unleashed Global Terror." The excerpts are from that book.
Click to expand...

dallastigers, Dec 2, 2003

#14
lsu_buzz Founding Member

Joined:

Oct 6, 2003

Messages:

77

Likes Received:

0

Originally posted by dallastigers
Please do. I was not aware that Bush had that much money to give out as a private citizen (or Gov if you are talking about the son) in the year 2000.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it was 2001. It's late, and I've been looking at this computer since 9:00 am.

http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/05/17/us.afghanistan.aid/index.html

This was humanitarian aid. However, since we know that Bin Laden and the Taliban were joined at the hip, we should NEVER have sent that aid. This is war after all.

lsu_buzz, Dec 2, 2003

#15
dallastigers Founding Member

Joined:

Sep 2, 2002

Messages:

1,361

Likes Received:

1

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Howard Dean on "Softball"

Originally posted by lsu_buzz
The Card quote is well known. I hit submit on the Wolfowitz quotes a little too soon so I went back and edited my post.

Do you deny that the GOP has not used fear to win support for this war? Tom Delay is still justifying the war by linking it to 9/11. Why do you think most American's believe Sadamm was involved in 9/11? It is because this administration played upon that tragedy to win support for the war. We heard statements like mushroom clouds, 45 minutes to arm their weapons with chemical warheads, unmanned drones capable of releasing biological weapons, imminent threat, etc. All this came from the administration. They gave us the impression they had hard intelligence about nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, and that Iraq posed an imminent thread to the U.S. Hell, the state of the union speech was a lie. They worded it so that they could blame the Nigerian uranium claims on the Brits.

As far as magnitude of the lies. I was comparing Bush's lies about policy and war to Clinton's lies about sex.

And your comparison about the Democrats use of fear with Social Security is ridiculous compared to the use of fear to lead the nation to war.
Click to expand...

I never brought up Clinton when you quoted me I was always talking about Dean and why you want to hold him and Bush to different standards in regards to character (which you brought up as well).

Please provide Card quote link.

As far as the power of fear reference it is again to show you that Democrats do this all the time. I do not think I compare it or put it on the same level as your accusation nor did I say I agreed that this is what Bush did. I was not scared because of Bush's statements I had thought more needed to be done to Saddam ever since 1998.

Do you you think it is ok to scare the elderly just because it is not on the same level as "the use of fear to lead the nation to war?" Also again how is it that Bush got those Democrats to vote for the war, did Bush scare them as well with mostly the same intel that he had?

dallastigers, Dec 2, 2003

#16
dallastigers Founding Member

Joined:

Sep 2, 2002

Messages:

1,361

Likes Received:

1

Originally posted by lsu_buzz
Yeah, it was 2001. It's late, and I've been looking at this computer since 9:00 am.

http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/05/17/us.afghanistan.aid/index.html

This was humanitarian aid. However, since we know that Bin Laden and the Taliban were joined at the hip, we should NEVER have sent that aid. This is war after all.
Click to expand...

Please tell me you are joking about this. The article even mentions that the Aid was by-passing the Taliban Govt.
In case you forgot the Afgans were our allies in our fight against the Taliban who did not control the entire country, and this was food not money.

WASHINGTON -- Warning that Afghanistan is "on the verge of a widespread famine," Secretary of State Colin Powell Thursday announced a $43 million package in humanitarian assistance for the Afghan people.

Powell also called on other nations to send aid to the Central Asian nation.

"If the international community does not take immediate action, countless deaths and terrible tragedy are certain to follow," Powell said.

The package includes $28 million worth of wheat from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, $5 million in food commodities and $10 million in "livelihood and food security" programs, both from the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Powell called the crisis a "looming catastrophe," and said that he was working with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to press upon potential donors the need to respond to the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan "with energy and dispatch."

Almost 4 million at risk

A nation of 26 million, Afghanistan has been hit by three consecutive years of drought. The nation has also endured more than 20 years of civil strife. The Taliban religious militia, which imposes a harsh brand of Islam, captured Afghanistan's capital, Kabul, in 1996 and now controls an estimated 95 percent of the country.

The Thursday aid announcement follows the return of a U.S. delegation last month from a visit to Afghanistan, where it found the population on the verge of a famine due to a devastating drought.

Leonard Rogers, the deputy assistant administrator of USAID's Bureau for Humanitarian Response, estimated that Afghanistan is nearly 2 million tons short of what the country needs to feed its people, a deficit two times more than last year. According to U.N. figures, 3.8 million people in the country are at risk of famine.

Powell said the United States expects to announce additional assistance to Afghan refugees, and would continue to look for ways to provide more aid to Afghanistan, especially for farmers feeling the crunch from a ban on poppy cultivation, a decision by the ruling Taliban that the U.S. welcomes.

The United Nations estimates that the drought has forced more than 700,000 people to flee their homes, landing at camps for internally displaced citizens.

The team visiting Afghanistan found the conditions of the camps woefully inadequate, and said that the shelter facilities, water and sanitation was very poor.

Officials were especially concerned about refugees leaving Afghanistan for bordering countries, such as Pakistan and Iran, and expressed concern that those countries might send the refugees back to Afghanistan.

One "holding facility" on the Pakistani side of the border in Jalozai was described as inappropriate for holding refugees.

Alan Kreczko, acting assistant secretary of state for the Bureau of Population, Refugee and Migration Affairs, said that while the United States "understands the frustration" felt by the border countries who have acted as "generous hosts," he cautioned "this is not the time" to send the refugees back.

U.N. to distribute aid

While U.S. officials cited the drought as the major factor for the deepening humanitarian crisis, the members of the delegation said that Afghanistan's ruling Taliban's regime and the security problems it presents, hinders access and contributed to the situation.

The U.N. Security Council imposed sanctions against the Taliban in an effort to pressure the militia to hand over Saudi exile Osama bin Laden, who is accused of bombing two U.S. embassies in Africa. Humanitarian aid is allowed.

Powell said the U.S. aid is administered by the United Nations and non-governmental organizations, and bypasses the Taliban, "who have done little to alleviate the suffering of the Afghan people, and indeed have done much to exacerbate it."

The sum brings U.S. assistance to $124.2 million for this year, making the United States the largest Afghan donor for the second year in a row.
Click to expand...

dallastigers, Dec 2, 2003

#17
lsu_buzz Founding Member

Joined:

Oct 6, 2003

Messages:

77

Likes Received:

0

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Howard Dean on "Softball"

Originally posted by dallastigers
I never brought up Clinton when you quoted me I was always talking about Dean and why you want to hold him and Bush to different standards in regards to character (which you brought up as well).

Please provide Card quote link.

As far as the power of fear reference it is again to show you that Democrats do this all the time. I do not think I compare it or put it on the same level as your accusation nor did I say I agreed that this is what Bush did. I was not scared because of Bush's statements I had thought more needed to be done to Saddam ever since 1998.

Do you you think it is ok to scare the elderly just because it is not on the same level as "the use of fear to lead the nation to war?" Also again how is it that Bush got those Democrats to vote for the war, did Bush scare them as well with mostly the same intel that he had?
Click to expand...

It is not ok to scare the elderly. It is even less okay to scare the living hell out of the public to lead them to war.

I will admit that the Democrats in congress are spineless dogs. There are only a few good ones. Dean was against the war - and not for touchy-feely reasons either. It is just horrible foreign policy and not in our national interests.

Here is a reference to the quote. I will try to find the full interview somewhere.
http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/12/schneider.iraq/

lsu_buzz, Dec 2, 2003

#18
dallastigers Founding Member

Joined:

Sep 2, 2002

Messages:

1,361

Likes Received:

1

Originally posted by lsu_buzz
Yeah, it was 2001. It's late, and I've been looking at this computer since 9:00 am.

Click to expand...

9:00AM??

dallastigers, Dec 2, 2003

#19
lsu_buzz Founding Member

Joined:

Oct 6, 2003

Messages:

77

Likes Received:

0

Originally posted by dallastigers
Please tell me you are joking about this. The article even mentions that the Aid was by-passing the Taliban Govt.
In case you forgot the Afgans were our allies in our fight against the Taliban who did not control the entire country, and this was food not money.
Click to expand...

The northern alliance were allies, and I am not joking. Furthermore, the areas that were controlled by the northern alliance are the most fertile areas of the country.

Giving food aid to the Afgans prior to Sept. 11 only strengthened the Taliban regardless whether they impeded or not. By helping the population, there was little incentive for them to rise up. Now, I am all for helping people. However, given the *obvious" dangers of Bin Laden and the Taliban, we should never have sent aid.

lsu_buzz, Dec 2, 2003

#20

(You must log in or sign up to reply here.)

Page 2 of 4

Share This Page