• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Memoir by George W Bush to be published in November

http://www.monkeydyne.com/bushresume/early.html

That link pretty much spells it out....the shrub was helped throughout most of his life. Without his family's influence, he wouldn't have had a chance to get his name in any history books.


The same goes for the Kennedys, Al Gore Jr, Jesse Jackson Jr, Jay Rockefeller, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, etc etc etc

And if Obama was a white guy he never would have been accepted at Harvard law and never would have been president.
 
You almost have it right. The reason the left hates Bush is that the left is intolerant of ignorance.

If that is so why do high school dropouts always favor the lefties in elections? Why do the groups with the lowest IQs and the lowest rates of high school graduation favor the dems so heavily?
 
If that is so why do high school dropouts always favor the lefties in elections? Why do the groups with the lowest IQs and the lowest rates of high school graduation favor the dems so heavily?

Do they? I thought it was just the opposite. The dumber they are, the more they vote republican....
 
Yes those links said that Bush didn't believe the Iraqi Foreign Minister. Woopedy doo.

It's interesting what you do and don't see. :roll:

This probably doesn't carry any weight with you either, ehh?
No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD.

Agent Ferris said:
Yes those links said that Bush didn't believe the Iraqi Foreign Minister. Woopedy doo. Wow, your own links said it was the CIA that told Bush about what the Iraqi Foreign Minister had said. The intelligence community gives the Administration information not the other way around and that information comes in the form of the annual NIE in which all 16 members of the intelligence community came to the consensus opinion that Iraq had WMD and was reconstituting WMD production.

Your refusing to read makes having an intelligent conversation with you very difficult. The link told you that the CIA said there was information left out of the NIE report. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Or is it simply that you won’t admit it?

Agent Ferris said:
You don't even read your own links and have no clue whatsoever how intelligence gathering works in this country, in fact your impression is the exact opposite of the way it operates.

You're the one not reading.

Three versions of the NIE report were released. Bush and shooter selectively declassified cherry picked info to get Congress to give them that carte blanc to go into their War of Choice. The final version is why the CIA said important intel was not made available to Congress.

There have been three separate releases of the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraq's Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction, including most recently a June 1, 2004 CIA response to a Freedom of Information Act request by the National Security Archive. The CIA released an Unclassified version of the NIE, titled Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs, in October 2002. In response to the brewing controversy over U.S. intelligence estimates of Iraqi WMD programs, the White House approved the release of another version of the report in July 2003.
CIA Whites Out Controversial Estimate on Iraq Weapons

To educate yourself on this, read thru the link. I suspect you won't.

Agent Ferris said:
No actually I don't jest. Tell me again your take on the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, I need another good laugh.

Shirley you do. The fact that you, or any American, laugh at what Bush and Cheney and Libby and Rove conspired to do to bring us into their War of Choice is sad. Tens and hundreds of thousands of people were killed in that war. And more Americans are dying in Iraq every day... all because that spoiled brat wanted to show daddy that he could do... something. :shock:

Ok, let's look at what you're waving around.
SEC. 602. [50 U.S.C. 422] (a) It is a defense to a prosecution under section 601 that before the commission of the offense with which the defendant is charged, the United States had publicly acknowledged or revealed the intelligence relationship to the United States of the individual the disclosure of whose intelligence relationship to the United States is the basis for the prosecution.

Please tell me, when did ”the United States publicly acknowledged or reveal the intelligence relationship to the United States of the individual”, Valerie Wilson? Never happened.

“United States “ refers to the government, not to an individual. That sissy Rove doesn’t represent the U.S. Armitage doesn’t. Libby doesn’t. Contrary to Cheney’s claims, he cannot declassify a covert agents status. I’m pretty sure the president can’t either but, I can’t find the document I’m looking for. “Only” the CIA can change a covert agents status.

It’s funny how you ignore this section of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act:
"Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined not more than $50,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."

Face it, pal. They’re all guilty as hell and deserve to be in jail.
 
The same goes for the Kennedys, Al Gore Jr, Jesse Jackson Jr, Jay Rockefeller, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, etc etc etc

And if Obama was a white guy he never would have been accepted at Harvard law and never would have been president.

I agree, family connections make life easier for some. Doesn't make it right whether we are talking about the DEMS or the GOP. The legacy thing only serves to put non-deserving people into a higher status than they could have achieved on their own. BUT, the damage has been done. It has become accepted that dumb people can now aspire to be president.
As for the Obama statement you made, you should be able to back that up like I did about GWB....otherwise, it is just your opinion.
 
If that is so why do high school dropouts always favor the lefties in elections? Why do the groups with the lowest IQs and the lowest rates of high school graduation favor the dems so heavily?

I'd love to see a source for this.
 
You don't need a source for this, and you know it.

Denial seems to be in ample supply among the left these days.

And you are right, HS Dropouts have been in the dem camp for decades.
 
It's interesting what you do and don't see. :roll:

This probably doesn't carry any weight with you either, ehh?

You mean the information given by the Iraqi Foreign Minister? You mean Congress didn't know that the Baathist regime was claiming that they didn't have WMD's? Are you serious?

Your refusing to read makes having an intelligent conversation with you very difficult. The link told you that the CIA said there was information left out of the NIE report. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Or is it simply that you won’t admit it?

A) The POTUS doesn't write the NIE kid genius the intelligence community writes the NIE and their consensus opinion was that Saddam had WMD stockpiles and was reconstituting his WMD programs.

B) Your link did not say that information was left out of the NIE it said that the Iraqi Foreign Minister told them that his government didn't have WMD. That would be like taking a claim by the North Korean foreign minister that his government doesn't have a nuke seriously.

You're the one not reading.

Three versions of the NIE report were released. Bush and shooter selectively declassified cherry picked info to get Congress to give them that carte blanc to go into their War of Choice. The final version is why the CIA said important intel was not made available to Congress.

CIA Whites Out Controversial Estimate on Iraq Weapons

To educate yourself on this, read thru the link. I suspect you won't.

lol you don't know wth you are talking about Congress had full access to the 92 page NIE before the October vote in fact it was Congress that requested it, it was the unclassified version which was originally released to the public by the CIA in October and then a 3rd unclassified version was released by the POTUS in July and another by the CIA in June of 04, but Congress had FULL access to the NIE in its entirety before the vote.

Get educated:

What Was Congress Told?

The intelligence to which Bush refers is contained in a top-secret document that was made available to all members of Congress in October 2002, days before the House and Senate voted to authorize Bush to use force in Iraq. This so-called National Intelligence Estimate was supposed to be the combined US intelligence community's "most authoritative written judgment concerning a specific national security issue," according to the Senate Intelligence Committee. The report was titled "Iraq's Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction."

FactCheck.org: Iraq: What Did Congress Know, And When?


Shirley you do. The fact that you, or any American, laugh at what Bush and Cheney and Libby and Rove conspired to do to bring us into their War of Choice is sad.

Um no they didn't conspire to do anything as the consensus opinion of all 16 members of the U.S. Intelligence Community given to the POTUS and the LOTUS concluded that Saddam had WMD and was reconstituting his WMD programs.

Tens and hundreds of thousands of people were killed in that war. And more Americans are dying in Iraq every day... all because that spoiled brat wanted to show daddy that he could do... something. :shock:

If by Bush you mean all 16 members of the U.S. Intelligence Community then ya sure thing.

Ok, let's look at what you're waving around.


Please tell me, when did ”the United States publicly acknowledged or reveal the intelligence relationship to the United States of the individual”, Valerie Wilson? Never happened.

Um no it happened when Richard Armitage leaked her name to the press. By your reading of the law if I told you after reading the Novak article containing Plame's identity that Plame was a member of the CIA I would have been just as guilty of "outing a CIA agent" as Rove, Cheney etc.

“United States “ refers to the government, not to an individual.

I think the press would constitute as the United States publicly acknowledging Plame as a CIA operative.

That sissy Rove doesn’t represent the U.S.

Rove didn't leak her name it was Richard Armitage.

Armitage doesn’t.

He leaked her name.

Libby doesn’t.

Libby didn't leak her name Richard Armitage did.

Contrary to Cheney’s claims, he cannot declassify a covert agents status.

Cheney didn't leak her name Richard Armitage did.

I’m pretty sure the president can’t either but, I can’t find the document I’m looking for.

George W. Bush didn't leak her name Richard Armitage did.

“Only” the CIA can change a covert agents status.

Well actually the CIA outed Plame along time ago to the Swiss embassy in Havana but that's another story all together.

It’s funny how you ignore this section of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act:


Face it, pal. They’re all guilty as hell and deserve to be in jail.

No I didn't ignore that part of the IIPA I've read it top to bottom actually and the only person possibly guilty of that crime is Richard Armitage. Unless of course you consider saying that Plame was a CIA agent after that fact was already released into the public domain by a member of the U.S. government to be a crime.
 
A) The POTUS doesn't write the NIE kid genius the intelligence community writes the NIE and their consensus opinion was that Saddam had WMD stockpiles and was reconstituting his WMD programs.

Who declassifies what's in a classified document Einstein? :doh

lol you don't know wth you are talking about Congress had full access to the 92 page NIE before the October vote in fact it was Congress that requested it, it was the unclassified version which was originally released to the public by the CIA in October and then a 3rd unclassified version was released by the POTUS in July and another by the CIA in June of 04, but Congress had FULL access to the NIE in its entirety before the vote.

Since it's obvious you aren't interested in the truth and refuse to read.. I'm not wasting anymore time with you.

Enjoy your next tea party. :2wave:
 
Who declassifies what's in a classified document Einstein? :doh

The Congress had full access to the classified NIE.

Since it's obvious you aren't interested in the truth and refuse to read.. I'm not wasting anymore time with you.

Enjoy your next tea party. :2wave:

AWW little baby got sick of getting PWNED by the facts, baby want to take his ball and go home? I guess factcheck.org is in cahoots with Rove and the other sinister forces conspiring against you, they probably helped in the controlled demolition too huh troofer?

Congress had full access to the entire NIE, you're FOS, and a troofer to boot. KTHXBAI.
 
Last edited:
Who declassifies what's in a classified document Einstein? :doh



Since it's obvious you aren't interested in the truth and refuse to read.. I'm not wasting anymore time with you.

Enjoy your next tea party. :2wave:

LOL-you are whining about truth and have a signature that says the polished turd has restored honor to the presidency?

OMG is that funny
 
The Congress had full access to the classified NIE.

pssst::: POTUS (do you know what that is?) declassifies classified info on NIE reports. Seeing thsat you didn't know that simple fact puts the rest of your arguements in perspective. :roll:

Congress had full access to the entire NIE, you're FOS, and a troofer to boot. KTHXBAI.

A "troofer"... wowwwww. :confused:

Congress has access to what the president allows them to have access to. :doh

Your misunderstanding of the facts and the law are amazing. Not to mention your stubborn refusal to even look at the facts of just about anything that debunks your empty right wing talking points. Maybe you can take a research class after high school to show you how to find and appreciate facts. You don't have to be afraid of them all your life. :2wave:
 
You don't need a source for this, and you know it.

There are a million lame excuses for not backing up your claims, and this is one of them.
 
Here is an interesting analaysis of Congress's use of NIEs, by the Congressional Research Service, a NON-PARTISAN branch of the Library of Congress. It discusses in detail what Congress gets and who in Congress gets it, and the details of the 2002 Iraq NIE events.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL33733.pdf

A highlight:

The intelligence process, however, is not an exact science and, on occasion, NIEs have proved unreliable because they were based on insufficient evidence or contained faulty analysis. This was demonstrated in the NIE produced in 2002 on Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction, parts of which were significantly inaccurate. NIEs can provide insights into the likely effects of certain policy approaches, but they are not usually made to take into account the details of planned U.S. diplomatic, economic, military, or legislative initiatives.
 
it will be an interesting read if for no other reason to see how it does and does not dovetail with mcclellan's account
since stringing together the words will be the assignment of the ghost writer, i do wonder if they will at least let the shrub select the pictures; he can then include those where he colored within the lines
 
Here is an interesting analaysis of Congress's use of NIEs, by the Congressional Research Service, a NON-PARTISAN branch of the Library of Congress. It discusses in detail what Congress gets and who in Congress gets it, and the details of the 2002 Iraq NIE events.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL33733.pdf

A highlight:

Thankyou.

Two points.

Congress did in fact have full access to the 2002 NIE before the vote.

This NIE did turn out to be inaccurate which was covered by the Senate Intelligence Committees Report on PreWar Intelligence, however, it was the best intelligence which was available and definitively proves that Bush was not lying to lead us into war but genuinely thought that Saddam had WMDs.
 
Denial seems to be in ample supply among the left these days.

And you are right, HS Dropouts have been in the dem camp for decades.

You don't have one? Good to know. :2wave:
 
Congress did in fact have full access to the 2002 NIE before the vote.

How do you know? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I want to know. And was that "full access" to a classified, unabridged version?

EDIT - I found confirmation myself, including:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A44837-2004Apr26?language=printer

This NIE did turn out to be inaccurate which was covered by the Senate Intelligence Committees Report on PreWar Intelligence, however, it was the best intelligence which was available and definitively proves that Bush was not lying to lead us into war but genuinely thought that Saddam had WMDs.

Well, the question is whether the NIE itself was inaccurate due to political pressure, but I'm not saying it was, or that Bush was involved directly if it was.
 
Last edited:
pssst::: POTUS (do you know what that is?) declassifies classified info on NIE reports. Seeing thsat you didn't know that simple fact puts the rest of your arguements in perspective. :roll:

Psst Congress had full access to the classified NIE.

A "troofer"... wowwwww. :confused:

Why else bring up the troofer lie that Ashcroft quit flying commercially before the 9-11 attacks?

Congress has access to what the president allows them to have access to. :doh

Maybe in your world where we don't have three separate but equal branches of government but here in reality Congress had full access to the NIE.

Your misunderstanding of the facts and the law are amazing.

You mean like the fact that I provided by factcheck.org that Congress had full access to the 2002 NIE? Or maybe like the fact that I provided from the actual IIPA which states that in no uncertain terms once the U.S. makes a covert agents public it can no longer be a crime to mention it? In your reading of the law in question if after reading the Novak article one were to tell someone that Plame was a CIA operative they would be in violation of the law.

Not to mention your stubborn refusal to even look at the facts of just about anything that debunks your empty right wing talking points.

Dude you've been PWNED by the facts.

Fact: Armitage not Rove, Libby, or Cheney leaked the identity of Plame.

Fact: Once a covert agents name is leaked publicly it is no longer a crime to tell someone that person is a CIA agent.

Fact: Congress had full access to the NIE before the vote for the war.

Fact: Ashcroft never quit flying commercially.

Fact: Fact Bush took Clinton's warnings seriously and went further than the recommendations.


Maybe you can take a research class after high school to show you how to find and appreciate facts. You don't have to be afraid of them all your life. :2wave:

You mean my primary sources to the actual laws in question, primary sources like quotes from the people in question, or my reputable fully referenced secondary and tertiary sources cited by primary sources? Take your pick bub the facts are not on your side.
 
How do you know? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I want to know. And was that "full access" to a classified, unabridged version?

Factcheck.org:

What Was Congress Told?

The intelligence to which Bush refers is contained in a top-secret document that was made available to all members of Congress in October 2002, days before the House and Senate voted to authorize Bush to use force in Iraq. This so-called National Intelligence Estimate was supposed to be the combined US intelligence community's "most authoritative written judgment concerning a specific national security issue," according to the Senate Intelligence Committee. The report was titled "Iraq's Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction."

FactCheck.org: Iraq: What Did Congress Know, And When?


Well, the question is whether the NIE itself was inaccurate due to political pressure, but I'm not saying it was, or that Bush was involved directly if it was.

The Senate Intelligence Committee found in their report on Pre-War Intelligence that no pressure was put on analysts:

Here's the full report:

Congressional Reports: Report of the Select Committee on Intelligence on the U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq

And here's the section in question:

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/pdf/s108-301/sec9.pdf
 
No problem, I'm going to go give a hardy **** you to the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 and go win some money at texas hold'em on fulltilt BBL.

Uh-oh, they're listening in on you. A FEMA truck is on its way to take you to a Death Panel.
 
Back
Top Bottom