Skip to comments.
Bush's "Imminent Threat" Lie!
Self
| 2-6-04
| Always Right
Posted on 02/06/2004 1:31:08 AM PST by Always Right
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
God Bless Ronnie on his birthday.
To: Always Right
Ronaldus Magnus is 93, right? May he dwell in peace.
2
posted on
02/06/2004 1:33:24 AM PST
by
ovrtaxt
(Support Tarquin Fin-tim-lim-bim-lim-bin- bim-bus stop F'tang F'tang Olé Biscuitbarrel (Silly Party))
To: Always Right
In one of his speeches, Bush specifically said that we don't want to wait until the threat is imminent, because by that time it's too late, or something to that effect.
The point was to deal with the threat BEFORE it becomes imminent.
3
posted on
02/06/2004 1:37:00 AM PST
by
FairOpinion
(If you are not voting for Bush, you are voting for the terrorists.)
To: FairOpinion
In one of his speeches, Bush specifically said that we don't want to wait until the threat is imminent, because by that time it's too late, or something to that effect. It is amazing how much lying is done to try to convince the American public Bush is lying. I didn't really go into the lying about Bush acting unilaterally with Britain and 30 some other countries...
To: Always Right
The Dems understand the "BIG LIE" theory.
You repeat a lie often enough, and people will think it's the truth.
I wish the Bush administration, Republicans and conservatives would take a more active role in refuting the Dems lies, every time they utter them -- which of course would keep us busy, but otherwise those lies seep into the public consciousness and can't be eradicated.
The "Saddam had no WMD" is another big lie. There is a tremendous amount of evidence that he had them before the war. The question about "what happened to them" is legitimate, but just because we can't find them now doesn't mean he never had them. Yet, the Dems have been successful in presenting it that way, because nobody is contesting their assertions.
5
posted on
02/06/2004 1:45:09 AM PST
by
FairOpinion
(If you are not voting for Bush, you are voting for the terrorists.)
To: Always Right
"...we are in a war against all terrorists who threaten us, not just al Qaeda." Damn good post, AR.
--Boot Hill
6
posted on
02/06/2004 1:45:54 AM PST
by
Boot Hill
To: Always Right
The amusing thing is - some of the Democrats now claiming Bush called Iraq an imminent threat, used that very term themselves, even though he did not.
But hey, why are we surprised? Democrats often use Goebbels' tactic of the big lie.
Whether it is anything from the great Willie Horton ad to Reagan/Bush 41's cold war victory when faced with facts they can't deal with the Left just lies about them...and continues to do so in the hope that if they repeat such shamelessly enough they can convince those who pay only passing attention to politics.
To: Always Right
While I think Saddam was an eventual threat to America, I have questioned the timing of this war from the beginning. The military was already overextended had not yet recovered from eight years of neglect (or worse). I also think we have more serious eventual threats to this country operating in our own hemisphere. Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela, and, frankly, Mexico come to mind.
Why the hell are we still in Bosnia and Kosovo? Give that problem to the Urpeons and let them fix it, seeing as they think we should let them take the lead.
8
posted on
02/06/2004 1:48:04 AM PST
by
Carry_Okie
(There are people in power who are truly evil.)
To: Dog; Coop
Ping.
9
posted on
02/06/2004 1:48:24 AM PST
by
Boot Hill
To: Carry_Okie
I also think we have more serious eventual threats to this country operating in our own hemisphere. Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela, and, frankly, Mexico come to mind. Oh for pete's sake.
To: FairOpinion
The "Saddam had no WMD" is another big lie. There is a tremendous amount of evidence that he had them before the war. The question about "what happened to them" is legitimate That is a good way to put it. Say matter of factly 'Saddam had em, the question is what happened to them'.
To: Always Right
Another excellent point from Bush's speech:
"Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.
As President Kennedy said in October of 1962, "Neither the United States of America, nor the world community of nations can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small. We no longer live in a world," he said, "where only the actual firing of weapons represents a sufficient challenge to a nations security to constitute maximum peril."
12
posted on
02/06/2004 1:51:34 AM PST
by
FairOpinion
(If you are not voting for Bush, you are voting for the terrorists.)
To: Boot Hill
thanks for the comment.
To: Always Right
14
posted on
02/06/2004 1:55:04 AM PST
by
FairOpinion
(If you are not voting for Bush, you are voting for the terrorists.)
To: Always Right
I second it -- excellent post, good job. It's good you took the time to lay it all out, and I agree that the liars need to be called out and their lies exposed.
15
posted on
02/06/2004 1:57:20 AM PST
by
FairOpinion
(If you are not voting for Bush, you are voting for the terrorists.)
To: Texasforever
Oh for pete's sake. Cuba has been developing biowarfare capability since the days of the Soviet Union. Fidel has been noted cooperating with Mr. Chavez. There are credible reports of Cuban portable bio-warfare labs already in Venezuela. Mr. Chavez has also had cooperative dealings with FARC, which has what any rational person would call a significant "white powder delivery" capability.
Mr. Lula is on record intending to seek the capability to produce nuclear weapons.
16
posted on
02/06/2004 1:59:08 AM PST
by
Carry_Okie
(There are people in power who are truly evil.)
To: Carry_Okie
Castro also had connection to Iraq. Maybe that's one of the places Iraq's WMD went.
17
posted on
02/06/2004 2:02:08 AM PST
by
FairOpinion
(If you are not voting for Bush, you are voting for the terrorists.)
To: Always Right
This is what the President said in the State of the union address 2003.
"Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option."
To: Always Right
Ted Kennedy, Dennis Kucinich, Helen Thomas, Howard Dean, AP, UPI, New York Times, LA Times, network news, and many more have all told us this fact These clowns are the American version of the BBC
19
posted on
02/06/2004 2:07:15 AM PST
by
Mo1
(Join the dollar a day crowd now!)
To: Broadside Joe
Thanks for that quote.
I was looking for that -- I remembered he said something like that, but didn't know when and exactly what he said.
20
posted on
02/06/2004 2:07:44 AM PST
by
FairOpinion
(If you are not voting for Bush, you are voting for the terrorists.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson