Pretty much. Yeah.

Thats why this will remain a liberal wet dream.



That goes back to proving that he lied. You have to prove that he told you something he did not believe to be true. So far no one on here has been able to do that.


Emphasis mine.

Thats a stretch. Even if you can prove he lied, that doesnt prove he wanted to see soldiers get hurt or killed.



Even assuming that were true, it would not necessarily mean Bush intended to have soldiers hurt or killed. At best, it would mean he was guilty of recklessly endangering them.

Indeed America can do as she (*)(*)(*)(*) pleases thats the benefit of being a Hyper power Hegemon.

__________________
"True Freedom is the Freedom to oppress others"

You give a man a fish you feed him for a day, you teach a man to fish you feed him for life"



Ideology: Self Preservation.

Michigan would do this. A judge disallowed the wire tapping in Michigan, so any soldier from Michigan has a good chance to recieve this right. Each state could have done the same, so that tells you there was a power to limit the searches, but none of them did it.

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspyi...s20061114.html

Maybe someone should email the judge to remind them?

The evidence is overwhelming that Bush told the american public the opposite of what US intelligence agencies were telling him. That's called lying. Summarizing an NIE re the imminency of Iraq's threat to the US is fine. But the Bush administration materially changed the report to change the NIE conclusion. That's fraud. That's lying.

Unless Bush anticipated a ground war with zero US casualties, which is preposterous on its face, he intended to have soldiers die in the Iraq invasion.

Unless Bush anticipated a ground war with zero US casualties, which is preposterous on its face, he intended to have soldiers die in the Iraq invasion.

Thank goodness that Bugliosi can tell you that Bush should be charged with 1st degree murder and not the lesser inapplicable charge of reckless endangerment.

If he was sincere in what he was saying, he was not lying. Even if what he believed was the exact opposite of what the "experts" believed.


What part did they change? Did Congress have access to the original report?



So you want to make the claim that Bush took a ghoulish delight in the idea of American soldiers dying. Yeah, good luck with that.



He's not guilty of either. And to the majority of Americans, that is obvious.

The evidence is overwhelming that Bush told the american public the opposite of what US intelligence agencies were telling him. That's called lying. Summarizing an NIE re the imminency of Iraq's threat to the US is fine. But the Bush administration materially changed the report to change the NIE conclusion. That's fraud. That's lying.

Show us the evidence.Ive been looking for it for years.It has been established actually the the NIE and the white paper were more or less mirrors of each other,with minor differences.

Look

What you state here is a lie.

I guess that makes you a hypocrite?

__________________

Hypocrite? It could. But now I relish pointing out that you probably did not read your own source. If you had, you might have seen these:

(U) Conclusion 85. The Intelligence Community's elimination of the caveats from the unclassified White Paper misrepresented their judgments to the public which did not have access to the classified National Intelligence Estimate containing the more carefully worded assessments.

U) Conclusion 87. The key judgment in the unclassified October 2002 White Paper on Iraq's potential to deliver biological agents conveyed a level of threat to the United States homeland inconsistent with the classified National Intelligence Estimate.

COMPARISON

Classified NIE
We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of United Nations (UN) resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade. (See INR alternative view at the end of these key judgments.)

White Paper
Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade.
_________________________________________
Classified NIE
We judge that we are seeing only a portion of Iraq's WMD efforts, owing to Baghdad's vigorous denial and deception efforts.

White Paper
Baghdad hides large portions of Iraq's WMD efforts.
__________________________________________
Classified NIE
Most analysts believe that Saddam's personal interest in and Iraq's aggressive attempts to obtain high-strength aluminum tubes for centrifuge rotors . . . provide compelling evidence that Saddam is reconstituting a uranium enrichment effort for Baghdad's nuclear weapons program. (DOE agrees that reconstitution of the nuclear program is underway but assess that the tubes probably are not part of the program.)

White Paper
Iraq's aggressive attempts to obtain proscribed high-strength aluminum tubes are of significant concern. All intelligence experts agree that Iraq is seeking nuclear weapons and that these tubes could be used in a centrifuge enrichment program. Most intelligence specialists assess this to be the intended use, but some believe that these tubes are probably intended for conventional weapons programs.
______________________________________
Classified NIE
We assess that Baghdad has begun renewed production of mustard, sarin, GF (cyclosarin), and VX.

White Paper
Baghdad has begun renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably including mustard, sarin, cyclosarin, and VX.
_____________________________________________
Classified NIE
We judge that Iraq has some lethal and incapacitating BW agents and is capable of quickly producing and weaponizing a variety of such agents, including anthrax, for delivery by bombs, missiles, aerial sprayers, and covert operatives.

White Paper
Iraq has some lethal and incapacitating BW agents and is capable of quickly producing and weaponizing a variety of such agents, including anthrax, for delivery by bombs, missiles, aerial sprayers, and covert operatives, including potentially against the U.S. Homeland.
__________________________________________________ _____________
That's only a portion of the fraudulent re-write done by the Bush administration.

Judgments become facts. New text showing that the US is an Iraqi military target is fabricated and added to the text.

That is textbook fraud.

Are you going to call me a hypocrite again or just admit that you are stunningly wrong about the fraud of the Bush Administration in the White Paper?

I doubt it. Bush is the Boss of the agencies that put together these NIEs. I am certain that someone apprised him of the contents of the report.



See my response to MrRelevant.


Not at all. Intent is not ghoulish delight. Simply knowing that his ordered invasion would cause the deaths of US soldiers evinces his intent to kill.

Buglisoi disagrees with you and I do as well. How do you know a majority of Americans agree with you? Did you ask them?

Well, your belief is not good enough for me.


Is that a yes?



You are claiming he wanted them to die. That is what intent means.

That claim is retarded even by liberal standards.



I guess it sucks for both of you that you are a tiny minority.



Because if they did not, they would get Bush impeached. They have had plenty of opportunity.



Yes. Last election.

Just in case you weren't aware of it. In the last election American voters handed the GOP and President Bush a decisive DEFEAT. So much so that the leadership of BOTH houses of congress passed to the Democrat's along with the majority of seats in both houses. Bush's corruption and bungling is coming home to roost, and has doomed Rove's dreams of a "permanent GOP majority".

I have to wonder though. These guys are very careful about covering their asses. Do you think Bush will resign on Jan. 19 and let Cheney give him a pardon. If he does, who's going to pardon Cheney? Maybe Cheney will just skip out to Halliburton's new headquarters in Dubai.

Guess we'll just have to wait and see.