President Bush flatly said last week that those who thought the Iraq war had increased global terrorism were “naive” and “mistaken.” Apparently that includes the nation’s 16 intelligence agencies, which reached that conclusion in the recently declassified National Intelligence Estimate report, saying that the war had become a “cause celebre” for jihadi recruitment efforts.
Granted, the estimate also contains some conclusions that give Bush ammunition, such as the statement that “should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves and be perceived to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight,” which the administration said underscored the importance of winning in Iraq.
But overall, the New York Times was right to characterize the report as one that undercuts the president’s optimistic statements that “America is winning the war on terror.” In fact, the report argues, Islamic terrorists “are increasing in both number and geographic dispersion,” and the high-profile carnage and occupation in Iraq is helping swell those ranks.
Bush can run, but he can’t hide from these facts.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- JWink on Jail consultants straining patience
- Monkeyhawk on Health care reform would save state money
- Monkeyhawk on Health care reform would save state money
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Health care reform would save state money
- XXX on Open thread 11/22
- JWink on Health care reform would save state money
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
52 Comments
When did we suffer the worst casualties in WW2?In both the Pacific and in Europe, a huge number of casualties occured in the final months of battle.Of course things are heating up, nobody is surprised by that.
Bush is not Clinton, Clinton ran in Somalia and that is what gave Osama the idea that we could not accept casualties. Osama said it himself, I think we should take him at his word.
“President Vladimir V. Putin said … that Russia gave intelligence reports to the Bush administration suggesting that Saddam Hussein’s government was preparing terrorist attacks in the United States or against American targets overseas. … Mr. Putin said Russia’s intelligence services received and passed along the information after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and before the American-led invasion of Iraq began in March 2003. He did not give details of the nature of the intelligence or the type of attacks reportedly being prepared. … Mr. Putin said Russian ’special services’ had received information about plans for terrorist attacks ‘more than once.’”
“There Is … Evidence That Around This Time [1997] Bin Ladin Sent Out A Number Of Feelers To The Iraqi Regime, Offering Some Cooperation.” (‚”Final Report Of The National Commission On Terrorist Attacks Upon The United States,” The 9/11 Commission Report, 7/22/04)
“In March 1998, After Bin Ladin’s Public Fatwa Against The United States, Two Al Qaeda Members Reportedly Went To Iraq To Meet With Iraqi Intelligence.” (‚”Final Report Of The National Commission On Terrorist Attacks Upon The United States,” The 9/11 Commission Report, 7/22/04)
“According To The Reporting, Iraqi Officials Offered Bin Ladin A Safe Haven In Iraq.” (‚”Final Report Of The National Commission On Terrorist Attacks Upon The United States,” The 9/11 Commission Report, 7/22/04)
Nor should liberal democrats like yourself run or hide from these facts.
Hey Paul, if you haven’t noticed we aren’t fighting three world powers, we are in the middle of a civil war in a developing nation. The Nazis had a powerful military with tanks, planes, submarines and rockets. On the other hand the Iraqis have IED and AK-47s.
Of course Paul doesn’t care about the loss of American soldiers when he can sit safely, 1000s of miles away bragging about how tough he is.
Paul, you are a sadistic, anti-American coward. Why don’t you go to the families of some of the slain soldiers and tell them that it was good that their children were used as cannon fodder for your entertainment.
The report goes on to say that the September 11 investigators found “no evidence that these or the earlier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship.” It also says that the commission did not find any “evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States.”
Conservatives continue to run from these facts. BTW, where are those WMD again?
I fear for you Kia.
YOU are embracing Paul Rosell.
PAUL is embracing bush shills Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin. His post about WW2 is lifted almost directly from their radio rants.
How many Americans were dying in Iraq before bush’s buisiness venture there? ( A biz venture that Paul Rosell has a financial stake in by the way)
Where is Osama bin Laden?
WHY has bush dissolved the task force detailed to find Osama?
WHY did bush lift sanctions against nuclear armed Pakistan where Osama is now hiding?
For Paul
Pg. 66 9/11 comission report
“But to date we have seen no evidence that these or the earliercontacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Norhave we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developingor carrying out any attacks against the United States”
Paul,
Incerpts From
United States Senate:
The Report of the Select Committee On POSTWAR FINDINGS ABOUT IRAQ’S WMD PROGRAMS AND LINKS TO TERRORISM AND HOW THEY COMPARE WITH PREWAR ASSESSMENTS.
“[Bin] Ladin generally opposed collaboration [with Baghdad]” (p. 65)
“Saddam did not trust al-Qa’ida or any other radical Islamist group and did not want to cooperate with them.” (p. 67)
“the Iraqi regime issued a decree aggressively outlawing Wahabism in Iraq and threatening offenders with execution.” (p. 67)
“Another senior Iraqi official stated that Saddam did not like bin Ladin because he called Saddam an “unbeliever.” “(p.73)
“Debriefings of key leaders of the former Iraqi regime indicate that Saddam distrusted Islamic radicals in general, and al Qa’ida in particular… Debriefings also indicate that Saddam issued a general order that Iraq should not deal with al Qa’ida. No postwar information suggests that the Iraqi regime attempted to facilitate a relationship with bin Ladin.” (p. 105)
Conclusion 5:… “Postwar information indicates that Saddam Hussein attempted, unsuccessfully, to locate and capture al-Zarqawi and that the regime did not have a relationship with, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi.” (p. 109)
http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf
Will you people quit picking on kia and paul? You know you are only confusing them with useless facts. They much prefer taking things out of contex so their arguements have some sort of support because even the lies are crumbling now.
“President Bush flatly said last week that those who thought the Iraq war had increased global terrorism were “naive” and “mistaken.”"
Once again, Bush “flatly” lied.
Rosell, no matter how you twist it, you’re still lying. (as usual)
Amazing how many people arguing for both sides have top secret clearance to get all these intelligent reports. Also amazing that people sitting in front of their widescreen actually know what’s going on in a place so far away. Amazing that a person who never spent a day in the military would have a clue about anything that happens inside it.
Will a democrat or liberal with a security plan please stand up. They all signed off on The war in Iraq and they all had access to the intellegence that justified it. If murdering and denying basic civil right to a whole nation isn’t enough reason to be in Irag what exactly do democrats stand for besides I hate bush. After five years of continuous harping on the war and its failure, no wonder you are finally wearing down the confidence of our nation. Nazi propagandist proved that if you tell a lie over and over again it soon becomes the truth. From the day the soldiers set foot on Iraqi soil you have shouted we are losing, we are boged down, we can’t do this, we will loose too many soldiers, the plan is flawed, there aren’t enough troops, there are too many troops, the Iraqis don’t want to be freed. and so on. Then it was there are no WMD’s. You will not let up on that. There wasn’t the huge cache of WMD’s as we expected. There were some but not the huge pile we wanted to see. From this you built your cry ” Bush is a Liar”. He tricked us into going to Iraq. Bush must be the greatest planner of all time because he was able to trick the entire world into believing that Saddam had WMD’s for years prior to the war. Including the entire UN and all your favorite democrats. Clinton, Gore, Kerry, all of them had acknowledged that saddam had the WMD’s. How did Bush do that. He is a genius. Then moving along, you ranted about our loosing some more and then how horrible cruel our murderous troops were for embarassing the enemy, How we were killing inocent civilians and anything that, if the enemy could find a way to buy as a weapon against our commitment, you provide for free. Meanwhile our soldiers are fighting for your freedom and your life. Make no mistake the enemies goal is for you to die. Any other conclusion is stupid, naive, wishful thinking. They have told us as much repeatedly. You don’t thank them you don’t support them. You can’t just say you do. They are making every effort to protect the innocent civilians who are dressed and act just like the enemy. Unpresidented effort to eliminate collatoral damage like no nation in the world ever, while the enemy kills it’s own people and hides in mosques but your focus is the errant ordinance or mistaken identy not on the enemy. Our military is rebuilding utilities and schools in Iraq but you report the charges of terrorist prisoners that there quran was disrespected and launch investigations. They later distroyed them themselves. You were played. The day Bush won the election you made it clear that you were unhappy. It has been 7 years and you are still having your tantrum at the expence or our countrys unity, security, commitment, progress, and our moral integrity. Wake up. Stop beating our country down and find a democrat who has some character and a plan for our security.
Paul Rosell, you Clinton-bashing moron…. It wasn’t Somalia, it was Iran, when Khomeini attacked our embassy and took everyone hostage in a blatant act of war and Jimmy Carter did NOTHING. Right there he told the muslims that the USA is a paper tiger. That’s when all the terrorism against us started and it’s been downhill ever since.
Stephen Poison,
Appropo name that.
If you are applying for the position of blog bush apologist/shill, you need to be advised that Paul Rosell already holds that position; with all the liabilities and questions of character and credibility it entails.
bush said just last week that he will not withdraw from Iraq even if his dog Laura and his wife Barney are the last of his support in the matter.That is suggestive of a personality and sense of righteousness so self absorbed as to border on delusional.
i sure am glad that the eagle has allowed for you highly credible individuals to post your 2 cent comments and opinions on here. why this is better entertainment than the ol “wrasslin” shows! WEEEEHOOO!
p.s.- shut up already
Excellent powers of observation once again you have twisted facts the name is POLSON not POISON. The enemy is Islamofacist not the President of the USA. You still do not present a plan or anyone who has one. Keep ranting it tells your story. Are the Republicans still harping on Clintons failure to produce his Middle Class Tax Cut. Move on. Be pro USA.
And billybob joins the fray by posting HIS 2 cents. Priceless.
Well Stephen,
Most Americans have never been directly or indirectly hurt by “islamofascists”. A great MANY Americans have been hurt by the administration of george bush.
See? It makes sense to take into account just who is hurting you before you make an enemies list.
And given his treatment of the American people and our Constitution, most Americans consider it VERY “pro USA” to be anti bush.
Wince when should we trust Russian intelligence? Especially when it comes from Putin? You can see now the relationship between George W. and Putin – it is ice cold.
So much for gaining allies.
That’s the problem here. Bush and his band of merry men would not wait to build a coalition. Instead, they wanted the oil to themselves and rode in like a bunch of drunken cowboys with their guns blazing.
If you’re not with us, you’re against us. That statment from Bush told the world what he thought of them. Bush shows his arrogance each time he speaks. Arrogance does not win friends – didn’t George’s momma teach him that?
“Will a democrat or liberal with a security plan please stand up.”- There have been a few plans put up by the Democrats, but the republikan controlled congress refuses to accept anything other than lie and die.
“They all signed off on The war in Iraq and they all had access to the intellegence that justified it.”- How many times will repugs regurgate this shit. The intelligence given to congress was sanitized of anything shrub didn’t like or didn’t lead to the conclusions he wanted.
“If murdering and denying basic civil right to a whole nation isn’t enough reason to be in Irag what exactly do democrats stand for besides I hate bush.”- Why wasn’t that good enough for you repukes when Clinton went into Somalia? Are Iraqis more important than Somalis because they have oil? Wonderful way you determine the value of a human life.” After five years of continuous harping on the war and its failure, no wonder you are finally wearing down the confidence of our nation. Nazi propagandist proved that if you tell a lie over and over again it soon becomes the truth.”- No we were harping on bush because of his failure. His failure to go into Iraq with a plan, his failure to remove rummy for being a complete failure, for his failure to do what is right for both the US and Iraq. It is his failures that are wearing down the confidence of the nation, not the Democrats pointing out his failures. Bush is proving Goebbels right every day. But fortunately the evil liberals refuse to give into the neocon propaganda. Germany would have been better off with evil liberals like we have in the US to confront Hitler and the Nazis.
While it is very nice of you to present the liberal side of things Steven, you could at least take a few minutes to get them right. To misrepresent things has you have only serves to reinforce the notion you are paul by some other name. I could continue to debase all of your crap but I believe my point has been made, you are a full of shit repuke lap dog.
military taking on terrorist threats
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNgwLX9WmsE&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1SpGnkJ3Rk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0lVygyEo2E&mode=related&search=
“Be pro USA.”
Now this is rich. A repug supporting the current administration and its continued assault on the Constitution telling people who disagree to be pro USA. Has it occurred to you that dissent is pro American? It takes more than a $2 magnet from Walmart and recitation of Bush’s speeches and GOP talking points from memory to be pro USA.
Here’s some first hand video by a guy who was hired by Halliburton, then fired after he nearly died so Cheney could make a few million more dollars:
http://www.filecabi.net/video/foottruck30.html
Maybe the conservatives can slap another two dollar yellow ribbon on their SUV. Halliburton needs replacements, any takers to go over there and serve as cannon fodder?
Paul – I already posted links de-bunking your lies about the werewolves being such an effective resistence. So now I see Rush O’Hannity have given you new talking points. Gee, I didn’t know D-Day was during “final months of battle”!
Polson – I AM “pro USA”. That is why I want the best for my country. And staying a failed course is NOT best for my country.
Wow anybody thinking about taking a job in Iraq take a look at that video Doug put up at 12:48 spooky stuff
Your Micheal Moore has stock in Haliburton does that make Cheney better or worse.
Actually Moore has shares of a mutual fund and they have shares of Hliburton. There is a big difference between the two but I’m sure you aren’t concerned with such subtle differences.
Does Moore use his position of trust to enhance Haliburton and thus enrich himself at the expense of the rest of us?
From Stephen Polsons
“Will a democrat or liberal with a security plan please stand up”post———————————–Nazi propagandist proved that if you tell a lie over and over again it soon becomes the truth———————————–
George Bush: Athena Performing Arts Center May 24, 2005 in Rochester, NY
“See in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda”
Audio clip + link to White House transcripthttp://www.newsgateway.ca/Bush_propaganda_quote.htm
You know what scares me? Not terrorists, not WMD’s, not bird flu, not Janet Jackson’s nipple, not Saddam or Osama or Hugo Chavez.What scares me is that there are many, many more people like Paul Rosell and Stephen Polson out there. Especially here is conservative, Republican Kansas. I worry that their kind will turn out in droves at election time.
What can average folk like us do to ensure that a new batch of Bush’s and Tiahart’s do not make it into office in the coming elections?
Paul Rosell,
Hey stupid-ass. You may want to lay off fondling the family pets so you have more time for Googling. Here’s the post-Somalia record: it was REPUKES like you who urged a hasty exit, and Clinton who stayed in there and got the job done. Your historical revisionism would do Josef Goebbels proud, Paul Rosell.
Oh, and we’re still waiting for that categorical denial that you’re a paid employee of AIPAC, Paul Rosell.
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/09/who-wanted-to-cut-and-run-from-somalia.html
**********************************
Monday, September 25, 2006Who wanted to “cut and run” from Somalia?
My post this morning on Salon concerns the accusation voiced this weekend by Chris Wallace in his Fox News interview with President Clinton (a favorite accusation of neoconservatives) that Clinton “emboldened” Al Qaeda when he withdrew American troops from Somalia as soon as we suffered casualties, which (so the neoconservative mythology contends) led Osama bin Laden to believe that we were weak and could be defeated.
President Clinton’s response was refreshingly aggressive because the premise of the question is so patently and outrageously false. Clinton responded: “They were all trying to get me to withdraw from Somalia in 1993 the next day after we were involved in ‘Black Hawk down,’ and I refused to do it and stayed six months and had an orderly transfer to the United Nations.”
As I document in the Salon post, that defense, if anything, is a profound understatement, because it was Clinton (along with Senate Democrats like John Kerry) who wanted to stay in Somalia because a precipitous withdrawal would be panicky and weak, but it was primarily conservatives in Congress — mostly Republican Senators and some conservative Southern Democrats — who were demanding that American troops be withdrawn immediately, and were even threatening to cut off all funds for our troop deployment.
My analysis is set forth in the Salon post. Following are the full excerpts providing the factual support for that analysis:
GOP Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, speech on the Senate floor October 6, 1993
I supported our original mission, which was humanitarian in nature and limited in scope. I can no longer support a continued United States presence in Somalia because the nature of the mission is now unrealistic and because the scope of our mission is now limitless. . . . Mr. President, it is no small feat for a superpower to accept setback on the world stage, but a step backward is sometimes the wisest course. I believe that withdrawal is now the more prudent option.
GOP Sen. Dirk Kempthorne, speech on the Senate floor, October 6, 1993
Mr. President, the mission is accomplished in Somalia. The humanitarian aid has been delivered to those who were starving. The mission is not nation building, which is what now is being foisted upon the American people. The United States has no interest in the civil war in Somalia and as this young soldier told me, if the Somalis are now healthy enough to be fighting us, then it is absolutely time that we go home. . . It is time for the Senate of the United States to get on with the debate, to get on with the vote, and to get the American troops home.
GOP Minority Leader Sen. Robert Dole, Senate speech, October 5, 1993
I think it is clear to say from the meeting we had earlier with–I do not know how many Members were there–45, 50 Senators and half the House of Representatives, that the administration is going to be under great pressure to bring the actions in Somalia to a close. . . .
GOP Sen. Jesse Helms, Senate floor speech October 6, 1993:
All of which means that I support the able Senator from West Virginia–who, by the way, was born in North Carolina–Senator Robert C. Byrd, and others in efforts to bring an end to this tragic situation. The United States did its best to deliver aid and assistance to the victims of chaos in Somalia as promised by George Bush last December.
But now we find ourselves involved there in a brutal war, in an urban environment, with the hands of our young soldiers tied behind their backs, under the command of a cumbersome U.N. bureaucracy, and fighting Somalia because we tried to extend helping hands to the starving people of that far-off land. Mr. President, the United States has no constitutional authority, as I see it, to sacrifice U.S. soldiers to Boutros-Ghali’s vision of multilateral peacemaking. Again, I share the view of Senator Byrd that the time to get out is now.
President Clinton’s speech, on October 8, 1993, arguing against withdrawal
And make no mistake about it, if we were to leave Somalia tomorrow, other nations would leave, too. Chaos would resume, the relief effort would stop and starvation soon would return. That knowledge has led us to continue our mission. . . .
If we leave them now, those embers will reignite into flames and people will die again. If we stay a short while longer and do the right things, we’ve got a reasonable chance of cooling off the embers and getting other firefighters to take our place. . .
So, now, we face a choice. Do we leave when the job gets tough or when the job is well done? Do we invite the return of mass suffering or do we leave in a way that gives the Somalis a decent chance to survive? Recently, Gen. Colin Powell said this about our choices in Somalia: “Because things get difficult, you don’t cut and run. You work the problem and try to find a correct solution.” . . .
So let us finish the work we set out to do. Let us demonstrate to the world, as generations of Americans have done before us, that when Americans take on a challenge, they do the job right.
Sen. John Kerry, Senate floor speech, 10/7/93, supporting Clinton’s anti-withdrawal position
But, Mr. President, I must say I have also been jarred by the reactions of many of our colleagues in the U.S. Senate and in the Congress. I am jarred by the extraordinary sense of panic that seems to be rushing through this deliberative body, and by the strident cries for a quick exit, an immediate departure notwithstanding the fact that what we are doing in Somalia does not bear any resemblance to Grenada, to Panama, to Iraq, and most importantly, to Vietnam. . . .
We must recognize that any decision that we make about Somalia is not just a decision to get our troops home. It is not just a decision about looking out for the interests of the United States. There are extraordinary ramifications attached to the choice that we make in the next days in the Congress and in this country. . . .
Mr. President, we are in a situation now where withdrawal would send the wrong signal to Aidid and his supporters. It would encourage other nations to withdraw from the U.N. effort in Somalia and no doubt would result in the total breakdown of the operation and possibly the resumption of the cycle of famine and war which brought the United States and other members of the international community to Somalia in the first place.
Rightly or wrongly, the Bush administration committed us to this operation. We, as a nation, have accepted this responsibility. We should not panic and flee when the going gets rough. If we are going to withdraw, we have an obligation to do so in a responsible manner, in a way that does not undermine the operation or leave the Somali people to a worse fate. I think the President’s plan, as currently outlined, will allow us to step aside responsibly.
New York Times article, October 6, 1993, by then-reporter Thomas Friedman
As hundreds of additional United States troops with special weapons and aircraft began heading to Somalia, a wave of hostility toward the widening operation swept Congress. . . . But Mr. Aspin and Mr. Christopher were besieged by skeptical lawmakers, who scorched them with demands for a clear road map for an exit from Somalia, coupled with bitter complaints that the policy goals were unclear or unrealistic.
It is not clear whether the critics can assemble sufficient votes to pass a law requiring Mr. Clinton to stop the operation. But Congressional anxiety, already high, has been fueled by a wave of constituents’ telephone calls reflecting outrage over the prospect of a new hostage crisis, and television pictures of Somali crowds dragging a dead American servicemen through the streets. . . .
Mr. Christopher said the United States wanted to withdraw its forces when possible, “but not before our job is done of providing some security.”
New York Times, October 6, 1993
A wave of hostility toward the military operation in Somalia swept Congress today, forcing the White House to send two Cabinet secretaries to Capitol Hill to try to calm critics and plead for additional time to formulate a new policy.
“It’s Vietnam all over again,” said Senator Ernest F. Hollings, Democrat of South Carolina, who is in a group of conservatives calling for quick withdrawal from Somalia. . . .
Mr. McCain, a prisoner of war in the Vietnam War, said of Mohammed Farah Aidid, who has been blamed for attacks on United Nations peacekeepers: “We should tell Mr. Aidid that we want the Americans back. Otherwise he will pay sooner or later. Then we should come home.”
As always, no matter how many times it occurs, it is truly disturbing how there seems to be no limit on the false propaganda and rank historical revisionism which can be disseminated by this administration and its followers and uncorrected by our national media. My full analysis of this is here.”
Maybe we could plaster their cars with gay pride bumper stickers so they would be too embarrased to leave home and go vote?
No amount of facts against the Bush policies will ever convnice any of the Bushies to admit they were wrong. George W. will never admit he is wrong or has been wrong.
Limbaugh and Hannity are making millions spoon feeding this crap to these sheeple. Sheeple like to be spoon fed – they think that absolves them of any wrongdoing.
So to get rid of Bush sheeple we will need to get rid of all the Republicans up for re-election. Starting with Tiahrt. he is the th emost dangerous of all.
I wonder, did Toddy boy know about Foley’s penchant for minor boy pages? If so, when did he know it and why didn’t he do something about it?
An Israeli helicopter fired a missile and killed two teenagers while they were riding their bicycles, and offered the reason that they were “suspected terrorists.”
It sounds like “W” was jealous, but now has they power to label anyone a “suspected terrorist” and do whatever he pleases, thanks to that awful bill that congress passed { which included 500 million for the Zionists }.
From the New York Times:Detainee Memo Created Divide in White House
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/01/washington/01detain.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
I wonder how many Republicnas are going to whining about all this power they given to the President when the next president is not a Republican?
This smakc so McCarthyism – again. And how did that work for us?
As much as I want to see Tiahrt go, I just dont feel like its going to happen.
McGinn cant compete with the huge disparity in funds. I heard Tiahrt has over a million and McGinn only has 2-3 thousand.
I.E. I dont see any or hear any McGinn advertisements around Wichita.
The same thing was said about Tiarht when he upset Glickman – remember?
Tiarht ran under the radar and was very proud of that fact. Perhaps that same radar is working and we just don’t see it. Toddy boy just may be going down this time.
And, if not, it will be fun to watch him squirm when other Democrats in other states get elected and pick up more power to shove it back into Tiarht’s face when he is trying to snowball everyone.
Foley thread, please.
Cap’n,
F-in’ totally, man. Throw us a bone, editors. I’ll even take back all the nasty things I said about Rhonda. Well, some of them.
We want to talk about how Rep. Foley wanted to do to young boys all the things the Republican “leadership” has been doing to the Constitution.
FOLEY THREAD!
Let Randy Schofield write the header.
J R and Cap’n,
Indeed. I want to discuss, in microscopic and exacting detail, how the House Leadership of Hastert and Boehner covered up for a sexual predator in their ranks, and left him in place as the head of a House Committee tasked with safeguarding the welfare of CHILDREN.
“GOP protects child sex predators in their midst.” Our useless fucking media finally has a story around which it can wrap its tiny, tiny mind.
CF ask Barney Frank
Polson.
(I prefer “poison” which I earlier called you on purpose.)
Barney Frank excused some parking tickets. He was almost unanimously rebuked by a DEOMCRAT controlled House. He has sice won re-election in his district 7 times.
To compare the despicable Mark Foley with Barney Frank tells us you are grasping at straws here Polson.
Get in line shill. You got Kia and Paul Rosell to challenge for your title of Republican shill/apologist.
Answer the question Kia would not and that Paul never weighed in on.
Why does the REPUBLICAN controlled House ethics commitee not plan to investigate Foley until AFTER the election?
Because they don’t want the voters to know that they KNEW about Foley and let him go on his merry way.
Online predators can be charged with a crime if it is with a 16-year old? Can’t they?
I want to see Jeb Bush come down on this issue – has anyone heard from his piehole yet?
Good post CF – Bush 1 initiated Somalia and created a situation withuot a clear mission. The Reps were all in favor of it at that time. Then, once Clinton inherited it the Reps pretended that the whole thing was Clinton’s idea from the start.
Polson – I don’t recall claims that Barney Frank was going after children. If he did then he should go to jail – as should Foley. I also don’t recall a Democratic coverup as occurred with Foley – including withhoolding information from the Pages.
Ben Huie,
Indeed. Allow me to pick up where you left off.
Polson,
You’re an idiot. When confronted with the GOP culture of institutional corruption and protection for child sex predators, all you can do is squeak the name “Barney Frank” like an autonomic reflex.
You’re a moron, Polson. Homosexuality is not pedophilia. And Barney Frank wasn’t trying to seduce underage CONGRESSIONAL PAGES, with the leadership of his party turning a blind eye and ignoring evidence that was presented to them.
The GOP culture of corruption: fiscal, political, moral.
Ian – IF your claim is true then Frank should share a jail cell with Foley, Hastert, and Shimkus.
Polockson, every time you open your stewpud pie-hole and say the dems don’t have a plan, I POST A LINK to their plan.And you continue to lie and say there’s no plan.We spell your name wrong on purpose, that’s sarcasm, you twit.
Ian you inbred, half black idiot.End of argument.I win.
According to the Washington Post, Rice says:The central problem was that the intelligence reporting on the potential threat was “very nebulous. . . . And so, when you’re dealing with nebulous information that doesn’t direct you toward a particular attack at a particular place at a particular time, you have to try board [sic] efforts,” she countered.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/02/AR2006100200187.html
Personally I think Rice was pretty “bored” with the intelligence reports because they did not tell her “Hey, Abullah is going to fly that plane there into that building at this time, on this exact day. Allah Akbar!”
The “prostitute” Steve Gobie was an employee Barney Frank hired as part of his staff. When Frank found out he was running a prostitution business he fired him. Congress reprimanded Frank for fixing parking tickets for Gobie. Fixing parking tickets isn’t on the same level as being a pederast like Foley.
Doug,
Totally. The difference is something all these “Mark Foley Republicans” ought to get through their heads.
Another week end, another republikan we need to protect our children from.