The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Current Events
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Current Events Help understand the world by talking about things happening in it

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-10-2007, 02:50 PM   #16
Ronald Cherrycoke
Master Locutor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hippikos View Post
You forget Bush/Cheney started the war, nobody else you quoted. even after the weapon inspectors did find nothing and asked for 6 months to be absolutely sure.

That would make Junior an unreal liar? Clinton lied, but nobody died...

As for Bliar, he's just Bush's poodle, obsessed with the same disastrous neocon ideas.

You forget Bush/Cheney started the war, nobody else you quoted. even after the weapon inspectors did find nothing and asked for 6 months to be absolutely sure.

Say What!...Looks like they all voted for war......


Measure Title: A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.



That would make Junior an unreal liar? Clinton lied, but nobody died...


If he would lie about sex...what wouldn`t he lie about?



As for Bliar, he's just Bush's poodle, obsessed with the same disastrous neocon ideas


That`s a great excuse...I thought he was a English liberal? Which makes him a socialist. I suppose MI6 is also populated by Karl Rove robot neo-cons?...get a grip son!
Ronald Cherrycoke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 02:59 PM   #17
Ronald Cherrycoke
Master Locutor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce View Post
That is a lie.

Despite Ronald Cherrycoke's bleating, nobody voted to go to war. They, both sides of the aisle, voted to give the president the power to protect and defend the United States with military force if necessary.

You can't fault them for not knowing Bush was working to an agenda scripted before he took office. Or that he was cherry picking favorable intelligence and suppressing damning evidence, to carry out that agenda. Even Powell was taken in.

The thought of comparing Clinton's pussy chasing to Bush's Middle East holocaust is just so contemptible and disgusting, it makes me think Ronald Cherrycoke is a Urbane Guerrilla alias.

Despite Ronald Cherrycoke's bleating, nobody voted to go to war. They, both sides of the aisle, voted to give the president the power to protect and defend the United States with military force if necessary.


Yep...because Iraq was about to invade America? Spin it anyway you want but it authorized Bush to invade Iraq.




Measure Title: A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.


The thought of comparing Clinton's pussy chasing to Bush's Middle East holocaust is just so contemptible and disgusting, it makes me think Ronald Cherrycoke is a Urbane Guerrilla alias.


Holocaust ?...I thought that happened before when Saddam murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people?
Ronald Cherrycoke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 03:08 PM   #18
WabUfvot5
Operations Operative
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 634
No president will have a clean record in this age of partisan war. The key for me is Bush and crew put all that Iraq intel under the 9/11 umbrella and linked Iraq to it. Intentionally misleading at best and downright treasonous at worst.
WabUfvot5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 03:09 PM   #19
piercehawkeye45
Franklin Pierce
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,695
Actually the Holocaust started after Israel got power in 1948...
piercehawkeye45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 03:12 PM   #20
Ronald Cherrycoke
Master Locutor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by tw View Post
Meanwhile Ronald Cherrycoke responds to a post chock full of George Jr lie after George Jr lie. What does Ronald Cherrycoke post?
It's an old Rush Limbaugh trick. When confronted with lie and after lie, then Ronald Cherrycoke posts as if those lies were never posted and therefore do not exist.

Classic of extremists who advocate the massacre of American troops. Deny facts even when posted under your nose. Ronald Cherrycoke - you deny so much that you are probably lying about being a soldier. Oh. Was that a dishonorable discharge? Is denial of reality a habit? George Jr lied repeatedly. Only one who is so foolish as to even advocate pre-emption (or not understand what pre-emption is) would deny those lies.

Posted are lies after lies from the mental midget president and his administration. Posted was the only solution available for getting out of Iraq with minimal loses. Ronald Cherrycoke pretends the Iraq Study Group did not exist. How convenient. Just another way to protect extremist rhetoric and ignore more presidential lies.

Provided were example after example of a lying president. But Ronald Cherrycoke does as any brown shirt would do. He pretends no such examples were posted. Then he need not face reality - such as his contempt for the American soldier.

Amazing that Ronald Cherrycoke has so little respect for the victims of 11 September as to associate it with a silly unabomber. Amazing that Ronald Cherrycoke would associate lying about sex equivalent to massacre of hundred of thousands of Iraqis. But that is how Rush Limbaugh also promotes hate and destruction.

Ronald Cherrycoke has utter contempt for people killed on 11 September and for the millions that will suffer and die in Iraq because - in both cases - the same president lied and denied. But then Ronald Cherrycoke provides a perfect example of a brown shirt.

Ronald, this is when you start posting honestly. Provided were lists of George Jr lies. Rather than pretending the list does not exist, instead return to reality and defend those presidential lies. Let’s see if you can be honest. Those George Jr lies are listed. Rather than denying them, instead, try to explain them. This is the time that you post honestly and not as Rush would do.


Drafted in 1969...MOS 11B10 (light infantry) 187th infantry 101st Airborne Division (Airmobile)..I Corps RVN...Honorable Discharge after two years service.
Ronald Cherrycoke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 06:00 PM   #21
Ronald Cherrycoke
Master Locutor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 153
Hey...didn`t all those demorats read the bill they voted for?



SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.


(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that--

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

(c) War Powers Resolution Requirements-

(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/.../~c107Edn1tL::
Ronald Cherrycoke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 07:09 PM   #22
Ronald Cherrycoke
Master Locutor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jebediah View Post
No president will have a clean record in this age of partisan war. The key for me is Bush and crew put all that Iraq intel under the 9/11 umbrella and linked Iraq to it. Intentionally misleading at best and downright treasonous at worst.


The Bush Administration claimed Iraq was responsible for 9/11. It's always difficult to prove a negative, but that simply never happened.

Many people may believe this was the case because in "Fahrenheit 9/11," Michael Moore truncated a comment by Condi Rice in order to deliberately give viewers of his movie that false impression. Here's the quote as it appeared in the film:




"There is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11"




Now here's the full quote:



"Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It�s not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York."
Ronald Cherrycoke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 07:44 PM   #23
richlevy
King Of Wishful Thinking
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
Posts: 6,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Cherrycoke View Post
"Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It�s not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York."
Wow, that's some spin. a) Moore shouldn't have taken it out of context. For one thing, it's such a damningly stupid statement in it's entirety by in effect stating that we are safest by bombing and invading any country that hates us.

b) Condi's statement isn't the most important one on the issue. Bush was the one pushing the the Iraq - 9/11 connection and later Cheney, who beat the dead horse long after such a link was discredited.

Of course Condi's 'first strike on hatred' theory would justify any number of actions, even those by our enemies who feel that we hate them. Was she Secretary of State when she said this? It's bad enough from a Natl Security Advisor. From a Secretary of State it's ludicrous.
__________________
Exercise your rights and remember your obligations - VOTE!
I have always believed that hope is that stubborn thing inside us that insists, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that something better awaits us so long as we have the courage to keep reaching, to keep working, to keep fighting. -- Barack Hussein Obama
richlevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 08:39 PM   #24
WabUfvot5
Operations Operative
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 634
The spin is so intense here I'm dizzy.
WabUfvot5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 09:00 PM   #25
Ronald Cherrycoke
Master Locutor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by richlevy View Post
Wow, that's some spin. a) Moore shouldn't have taken it out of context. For one thing, it's such a damningly stupid statement in it's entirety by in effect stating that we are safest by bombing and invading any country that hates us.

b) Condi's statement isn't the most important one on the issue. Bush was the one pushing the the Iraq - 9/11 connection and later Cheney, who beat the dead horse long after such a link was discredited.

8 September, 2003, 02:03 GMT 03:03 UK

Bush rejects Saddam 9/11 link



Bush delivers his State of the Union address in January 2003
Bush maintains Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda are connected

US President George Bush has said there is no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in the 11 September attacks.

The comments - among his most explicit so far on the issue - come after a recent opinion poll found that nearly 70% of Americans believed the Iraqi leader was personally involved in the attacks.

Mr Bush did however repeat his belief that the former Iraqi president had ties to al-Qaeda - the group widely regarded as responsible for the attacks on New York and Washington.





"We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the 11 September attacks," Mr Bush told reporters as he met members of Congress on energy legislation.


As recently as last Sunday, Vice-President Dick Cheney, refused to rule out a link between Iraq and 11 September, saying "'we don't know".

"We will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who've had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

Jordanian link

On Wednesday, Mr Bush said Mr Cheney was right about suspicions of a link between Iraq and al-Qaeda, citing the case of Jordanian Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a leader of an Islamic group in northern Iraq called Ansar al-Islam believed to have links to al-Qaeda.

The US believes Mr Zarqawi received medical treatment in Baghdad and helped to orchestrate the assassination of a US diplomat in Jordan.

And Mr Bush denied there had been any attempt by his administration to try to confuse people about links between Saddam Hussein and 11 September.

"What the vice-president said was is that he [Saddam] has been involved with al-Qaeda.

"And Zarqawi, an al-Qaeda operative, was in Baghdad. He's the guy that ordered the killing of a US diplomat... There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al-Qaeda ties."



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3118262.stm

Last edited by Ronald Cherrycoke; 02-10-2007 at 09:19 PM.
Ronald Cherrycoke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 09:16 PM   #26
Ronald Cherrycoke
Master Locutor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 153
From another forum...



Lets see if I got this right. Al queda was in Iran, Afghanastan, Syria, Lebanon, Pakistan, Yugoslavia, India, Malaysia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, Sudan but they were not in Iraq. That Saddam was quite a swell guy being able to keep those bad guys out.



Haaaaaa...haaaaaa...
Ronald Cherrycoke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 09:32 PM   #27
Ronald Cherrycoke
Master Locutor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 153
The Republican Chairman and Democratic Vice Chairman of the 9-11 Commission on Thursday rejected the media’s widespread reporting that the commission’s report issued the day before had directly contradicted Bush administration statements about connections between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.


http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberal...20040618.asp#1




Lee Hamilton, “I must say I have trouble understanding the flap over this. The Vice President is saying, I think, that there were connections between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's government. We don't disagree with that.”

Last edited by Ronald Cherrycoke; 02-10-2007 at 09:40 PM.
Ronald Cherrycoke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2007, 12:35 AM   #28
Urbane Guerrilla
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 6,674
I can't name a single one of that alleged seventy percent of Americans who thought Iraq did it. I am not among that number.

I find it fascinating that so many of the leave-genocidal-dictators-alone-lest-someone-be-upset-about-disposing-of-them faction is willing to believe that some other Americans believe Iraq did it. How bovine, to be so led by a nose ring.

The people upset at the prospect of dictator removal are fascist-sympathizing rats and nothing better -- lacking utterly in any higher human feeling. Which is why I yell at the entire pack of stumblefucks, telling them how small their minds are, how minuscule their souls, how worthless their intellectual lives. Oh, and they're hung like mice.
__________________
Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course.
Urbane Guerrilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2007, 02:16 PM   #29
WabUfvot5
Operations Operative
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 634
Hail Stalin!

Nobody thinks Iraq did it. Osama and his cronies did it. We we made to believe Saddam had ties to Al-Qaeda or gave some help to them and their kind. See here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0021007-8.html I will take time to point out that's no commie link either.
WabUfvot5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2007, 04:15 PM   #30
tw
Read? I only know how to write.
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Cherrycoke View Post
Lets see if I got this right. Al queda was in Iran, Afghanastan, Syria, Lebanon, Pakistan, Yugoslavia, India, Malaysia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, Sudan but they were not in Iraq.
Ronald Cherrycoke promotes another George Jr lie. Obviously he has no idea about Muslim Brotherhood. If a president tells him Al Qaeda is in Iraq, then Ronald says, "Yes sir". Same president could not even name countries on Israel's border. But Ronald trusts this president.

If I want to sell more stones, I call them diamonds. It's called counterfeiting, Ronald. You are suppose to have enough grasp to understand the difference between a tiny Al Qaeda verses an Iraqi insurgency created (and maybe financed) by America. Oh. I forgot. Ronald only repeats what his idol tells him to. That Iraq insurgency has always been Al Qaeda out to kill us in our beds. Al Qaeda is all everywhere threatening to destroy the world. Maybe we should hire the Power Rangers to protect us? Ronald: Power Rangers ... fiction. Get it?

This Al Qaeda you promote only exists where fear promotes the glory and legacy of a mental midget. Those with basic knowledge knew this Al Qaeda you promote never existed except to promote more Orange Alerts. Ronald - you do remember all those terrorist attacks averted by Orange alerts? Oh. That's right. I forgot. This president does not lie.

Last edited by tw; 02-11-2007 at 04:20 PM.
tw is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:14 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.