"These Are The Crimes That Try Men's Souls"
 

[url=http://www.tompaine.com/articles/these_are_the_crimes_that_try_mens_souls.php:fe31e]TomePaine.com These Are Cimres that Try Men's Souls[/url:fe31e]

[url=http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/letters/bushsecretmemoltr5505.pdf:fe31e]The PDF[/url:fe31e]

if its on the internet it must be true

[quote="Sgt>Stackem":62031]if its on the internet it must be true[/quote:62031]

Nice way to dismiss it without any proof or justification that it's bullshit. Saying "it's on the internet it must be true" is the limpest rebut I've ever heard.

the letter wont even make the presidents desk .. anyone wanna wager ? rolleyes:

Of courese it won't. That's because President Bush already knows everything that the letter says.

coloring material anyone?

[quote="$p!k3":4657f][quote="Sgt>Stackem":4657f]if its on the internet it must be true[/quote:4657f]

Nice way to dismiss it without any proof or justification that it's bullshit. Saying "it's on the internet it must be true" is the limpest rebut I've ever heard.[/quote:4657f]


I only made it through the first paragraph, its just some nonsense that is on the web. there are many sites on this world wide web and most are bullshit. I think you found one

[quote="Sgt>Stackem":1d91a][quote="$p!k3":1d91a][quote="Sgt>Stackem":1d91a]if its on the internet it must be true[/quote:1d91a]

Nice way to dismiss it without any proof or justification that it's bullshit. Saying "it's on the internet it must be true" is the limpest rebut I've ever heard.[/quote:1d91a]


I only made it through the first paragraph, its just some nonsense that is on the web. there are many sites on this world wide web and most are bullshit. I think you found one[/quote:1d91a]

oOo: oOo: oOo: oOo: oOo: oOo: plzdie:

[quote="Short Hand":431f7][quote="Sgt>Stackem":431f7][quote="$p!k3":431f7][quote="Sgt>Stackem":431f7]if its on the internet it must be true[/quote:431f7]

Nice way to dismiss it without any proof or justification that it's bullshit. Saying "it's on the internet it must be true" is the limpest rebut I've ever heard.[/quote:431f7]


I only made it through the first paragraph, its just some nonsense that is on the web. there are many sites on this world wide web and most are bullshit. I think you found one[/quote:431f7]

oOo: oOo: oOo: oOo: oOo: oOo: plzdie:[/quote:431f7]
Great point shorthand.. You halfwit slut.

great word combo !

+ 10

[quote="Sgt>Stackem":b2821]if its on the internet it must be true[/quote:b2821]

Just FYI, the Memo that this whole thing is about is real. Tony Blair himself released the memo before the election under huge pressure. As I understand it, this got MAJOR air time in the UK. UK papers have called the memo the smoking gun that proves the Iraq war was was planned in advance, and the US along with Britain had made up their mind about going to war whether Iraq had WMD or not and whether Iraq cooperated or not. The memo challenges the legality of the war. However, no one will touch it with a 10 foot pole across the pond.

[url="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1592724,00.html"]http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 24,00.html[/url]

+ 1 ninty.

the guy broke the treaty after the 1st Gulf war, kicked inspectors out, cant provide info on how WMDs were destroyed (if they were which I believe were hidden) other than than that Sadumass Hussain is a great guy.

Stackem, nobody is arguing if Saddam is good or bad. There are plenty of bad people on this planet.

How many people have the North Koreans killed? The government ther issues something like 25 grams of food per day to every individual. Thats hardly enough to live on. What about Darfur? Genocide has been taking place there for a couple years now. Over 800,000 people have died. The list goes on and on.

I read an article the other day that said millions of people live in modern day slavery.

The memo released confirms that this war was never about WMD, weapons inspectors or the first gulf war. If that was what this war was truly about, then the call to go to war would have happened with reluctance when all other options were exhausted, yet the green light for war was given 8 months before hand.

I'm not making this stuff up. I find it hard to justify a war based on WMD when the decision to go to war was made even before searching for them had started.

This isn't a left vs right thing. I think it's important for everyone to understand what is going on in the world. It shouldn't matter what your political affiliation is. Everyone should have the chance to analyze what has happened and why it happened. I hope everyone can take a step back and look at what is going on in the world today and justify it. If you can do that, then that's great. I unofrtunatley, can not. And that's the way I see things.

[quote:13712]
Bush asked to explain UK war memo

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Eighty-nine Democratic members of the U.S. Congress last week sent President George W. Bush a letter asking for explanation of a secret British memo that said "intelligence and facts were being fixed" to support the Iraq war in mid-2002.

The timing of the memo was well before the president brought the issue to Congress for approval.

The Times of London newspaper published the memo -- actually minutes of a high-level meeting on Iraq held July 23, 2002 -- on May 1.

British officials did not dispute the document's authenticity, and Michael Boyce, then Britain's Chief of Defense Staff, told the paper that Britain had not then made a decision to follow the United States to war, but it would have been "irresponsible" not to prepare for the possibility.

The White House has not yet responded to queries about the congressional letter, which was released on May 6.

The letter, initiated by Rep. John Conyers, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, said the memo "raises troubling new questions regarding the legal justifications for the war as well as the integrity of your own administration..."

"While various individuals have asserted this to be the case before, including Paul O'Neill, former U.S. Treasury Secretary, and Richard Clarke, a former National Security Council official, they have been previously dismissed by your administration," the letter said.

But, the letter said, when the document was leaked Prime Minister Tony Blair's spokesman called it "nothing new."

In addition to Blair, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon, Attorney General Peter Goldsmith, MI6 chief Richard Dearlove and others attended the meeting.

A British official identified as "C" said that he had returned from a meeting in Washington and that "military action was now seen as inevitable" by U.S. officials.

"Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.

"The NSC had no patience with the U.N. route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action."

The memo further discussed the military options under consideration by the United States, along with Britain's possible role.

It quoted Hoon as saying the United States had not finalized a timeline, but that it would likely begin "30 days before the U.S. congressional elections," culminating with the actual attack in January 2003.

"It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided," the memo said.

"But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbors, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran."

The British officials determined to push for an ultimatum for Saddam to allow U.N. weapons inspectors back into Iraq to "help with the legal justification for the use of force ... despite U.S. resistance."

Britain's attorney general, Peter Goldsmith, advised the group that "the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action" and two of three possible legal bases -- self-defense and humanitarian intervention -- could not be used.

The third was a U.N. Security Council resolution, which Goldsmith said "would be difficult."

Blair thought that "it would make a big difference politically and legally if Saddam refused to allow in the U.N. inspectors."

"If the political context were right, people would support regime change," the memo said.

Later, the memo said, Blair would work to convince Bush that they should pursue the ultimatum with Saddam even though "many in the U.S. did not think it worth going down the ultimatum route." [/quote:13712]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/11/britai ... index.html