Rachel Gillespie
December 13, 2010 703-894-1776, ext. 25
WASHINGTON, D.C.— The Bill of Rights Institute announces a new initiative to raise awareness of the rights protected in the Bill of Rights. As part of this new initiative they are asking Americans to pledge 10 minutes to read the Bill of Rights on December 15,which has been the federal day of observance for the Bill of Rights since 1941.
To help Americans celebrate and remember the freedoms embodied in the first 10 Amendments, the Bill of Rights Institute has created a new website for Bill of Rights Day. Americans are encouraged to explore the text of the first 10 Amendments, landmark Supreme Court cases and decisions based on those Amendments, and various resources and games on the website.
The Institute asks all Americans to join together and pledge to take 10 minutes to read through the Bill of Rights on December 15, and to visit BillofRightsDay.com to sign the pledge. The Bill of Rights Institute is urging all employers to give their employees 10 minutes to read the Bill of Rights either on their own, or together.
“The celebration of Bill of Rights Day encourages Americans to think about how vital the Bill of Rights is to the future of our country,” said Bill of Rights Institute Board of Directors member Todd Zywicki. “By thinking about how our rights are evident in our Founding documents, Americans will begin to see how their own lives are affected by the Bill of Rights and how their actions are important in supporting the experiment in self-government started by our Founders.”
Bill of Rights Day is sponsored by the Bill of Rights Institute, a nonprofit educational organization. More information on Bill of Rights Day can be found at www.BillofRightsDay.com.
###
The Bill of Rights Institute, founded in 1999, is a nonprofit educational organization. The mission of the Bill of Rights Institute is to educate young people about the words and ideas of America's Founders, the liberties guaranteed in our Founding documents, and how our Founding principles continue to affect and shape a free society.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
122 comments:
hope you come back soon
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
How many are left??. I guess all
of them!!.
John
http://www.webmasternow.com/copyandpaste.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CiAL5hBa4M
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7n2m-X7OIuY
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/napolitano2.html
http://www.atr.org/pcnaa-internets-next-biggest-threat-a5104
http://www.beaufortobserver.net/Articles-c-2010-11-27-249040.112112-The-Constitution-is-under-attack-while-we-fail-to-defend-what-made-this-the-greatest-nation-in-world-history.html
http://www.worldstart.com/tips/screenshots/copypaste.gif
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/12/realtime
http://kcpdchief.blogspot.com/2010/07/license-plate-readers-snag-violators.html
http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/nunfrisk.jpg
http://kansascity.craigslist.org/pol/2121630576.html
tsa on highways
OH LOOK!!!! following a number of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests....well you can read it for yourselves.
More evidence that screws any nutjobs claims a missle hit the Pentagon. The final seconds of actuall flight data (FDR File) has been decoded. Screwloosechange and JRF forums explained these errors and those smart enough were very clear the plane hit the pentagon. They debunked these missle claims severals years ago.
Summary and Conclusion by Frank Legge, (B.Sc.(Hons.), Ph.D.) and Warren Stutt, ( B.Sc.(Hons.) Comp. Sci.)
January 2011
In response to FOIA requests the NTSB provided a CSV file and a coded FDR file. All
contradictions between the official account of the course of flight AA 77 and these files
appear to be traceable to missing data. In the case of the CSV file the data stopped about
four seconds short of the impact. In the case of the FDR file the final frame was not initially
decoded. Some researchers recognized that data was missing, while others claimed that the
files proved the official account was false, as it appeared the flight terminated at a point too
high to have created the observed damage trail on the ground.
Previous analyses were further confounded by uncertainty of the position of the last data
point; failure to consider possible calibration errors in the pressure altimeter data, caused by
high speed and low altitude; and false information in the NTSB flight animation.
The recent complete decoding of the FDR file has enlarged and clarified the information
available and has thereby enabled resolution of the contradictions. It is clear that this file
supports the official account of the course of flight AA 77 and the consequent impact with
the Pentagon. The file thus also supports the majority of eyewitness reports.
http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf
Bringin it strong like the BIGDOG always does.
Hey BIGDOG,
You wanna 'bring it' over here?
http://www.kctalk.com/forums
Could be fun...
Ummm...no brudogg i have been down this road with you before just take the info and you decide.
BTW i have been to that forum and seen like 15-20 posts by you on most topics there are you an attention whore now? You have bored me once before with your lack of reading comprehension.
You still have yet to produce a quote that directly linked saddam to 9-11 by the Bushees and from all appearances you are trying it again on another forum. Misleading people with your rhetoric.
Secondly im not signing up to debate you there when we can have it out again here.
Oh and please bring me something new and thought provoking or ill just ignore your same old BS.
My post above is new and definitive in its conclusions. Hopefully you reviewed it and understand it.
So where did the plane go? The wreckage that is.
silly truther, erybody knows there's no such thing as wreckage
It was invisible wreckage, only idiots couldn't see it.
Wreckage??
Wow and if was to take you seriously i would say you are an ill-informed tool.
You can do a google on 9/11 wreckage in the pentagon and find many photos showing plane wreckage,including a taxi on a highway smashed by a light pole being sheered off and crashing down on said taxi.
Its obvious you dont care to be thorough in researching all avenues for evidence to back your idiocy up.
I will provide a starting point for you repleat with photos of invisible wreckage...LMAO!!!.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagontrap.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html
BIGDOG,
I don't really give a shit about 9/11 conspiracy theories anymore, I have enough facts to prove that it was an inside job. Even you have said that you believe that someones on the inside could have had something to do with it. I'll just refer you to the website below to address your request for the Bush Admin's 911-Iraq links.
http://projects.publicintegrity.org/WarCard
I don't want to "have it out" with you here or there, you are purposefully mean and you seem to have no problem with lying in order to try and make your little argument. I did learn a whole lot about seeing through people's bullshit in discussions with you in the past though and for that much I thank you. To put it in videogame terms for you, it was kinda like fighting a miniboss and I leveled up hella, it wasn't fun though and I'm pretty sure that I learned all I can from arguing with you.
Since there are hundreds of topics on that forum and I have less than a hundred posts there total, your numbers don't add up. I have been posting a lot there lately though. They had some drama there a while back, (over-moderation or something) people rarely post there anymore so I decided to help hold down the fort until the regulars come back. It's a great forum it's just a ghost town right now.
MY "lack of reading comprehension", that's hilarious coming from someone who thinks that Bush never tied Iraq to 911. I'm not misleading anybody with my so-called "rhetoric". I'm putting out facts and 'speaking' what I honestly believe. I start signing my own name to online posts and now I'm an attention whore, that's great BIGDOG. So now I'm a stupid attention whore misleading people with my "rhetoric". I don't play the little pussy manipulation games with people like you do and "try to teach someone a lesson" or whatever, I say straight up what I think. I'm gonna keep doing it too so come on over and dispute my "misleading rhetoric" or don't. [curling mustache] Moohahaha!
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rhetoric
Brudogg
P.S. Posts here don't always stick and it can be quite frustrating.
Big Dog this is how the bushees connected 9/11 to Saddam.
Inference----
the process of arriving at some conclusion that, though it is not logically derivable from the assumed premises, possesses some degree of probability relative to the premises.
In logic, the deriving of one idea from another. Inference can proceed through either induction or deduction.
Induction----
a process of reasoning, used esp in science, by which a general conclusion is drawn from a set of premises, based mainly on experience or experimental evidence. The conclusion goes beyond the information contained in the premises, and does not follow necessarily from them. Thus an inductive argument may be highly probable, yet lead from true premises to a false conclusion
Imply-----
to indicate or suggest without being explicitly stated
Anonymous, they did imply a connection on many occasions but they also straight up said it on occasions as well.
Brudogg
You still have yet to provide a quote that shows a Bushee directly connecting Iraq to 9-11. This is my pussy manipulating games....huh? Holding your rhetorical BS (infferences) to the fire and watching it go up in smoke.
BTW im still waiting for these quotes directly connecting Iraq to 9-11.
You also invited me to another forum to hash out old shit "could be fun". Then in another post, im mean to you so we cant hash it out here? and the the money quote:" I'm pretty sure that I learned all I can from arguing with you." Im a meany, you have learned all you can from me, yet you still invite me to another forum....Hmmmmmm!!!
Why bother. Within seconds you contridicted yourself and your motive has been exposed for what it is. Total BS, inferrences included.
Heres the kicker Brudogg. Im bored with you again. Nothing new from you, only a continuence of your contriving nature, the artificous of Brudogg bores me.
You can have the last word.
President Bush said in September 2003 that "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11 [attacks]."
"There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al Qaeda ties," the president said. But he also said, "We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the Sept. 11" attacks.
"MR. RUSSERT: The Washington Post asked the American people about Saddam Hussein, and this is what they said: 69 percent said he was involved in the September 11 attacks. Are you surprised by that?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: No. I think it’s not surprising that people make that connection.
MR. RUSSERT: But is there a connection?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: We don’t know...Now, is there a connection between the Iraqi government and the original World Trade Center bombing in ’93? We know, as I say, that one of the perpetrators of that act did, in fact, receive support from the Iraqi government after the fact. With respect to 9/11, of course, we’ve had the story that’s been public out there. The Czechs alleged that Mohamed Atta, the lead attacker, met in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official five months before the attack, but we’ve never been able to develop anymore of that yet either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don’t know."
Hillary Clinton, Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001."
" You still have yet to provide a quote that shows a Bushee directly connecting Iraq to 9-11. This is my pussy manipulating games....huh? Holding your rhetorical BS (infferences) to the fire and watching it go up in smoke. "
* You do play little pussy manipulation games, the 'art of the argument'-type bullshit that you try to pull, you have little regard for the truth, you fight like a girl. LOLz
" BTW im still waiting for these quotes directly connecting Iraq to 9-11. "
* Here:
"If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11. " Dick Cheney - September 9, 2003
" You also invited me to another forum to hash out old shit "could be fun". Then in another post, im mean to you so we cant hash it out here? and the the money quote:" I'm pretty sure that I learned all I can from arguing with you." Im a meany, you have learned all you can from me, yet you still invite me to another forum....Hmmmmmm!!! "
* That forum getting some action is in my interests, even if I have to deal with you.
" Why bother. Within seconds you contridicted yourself and your motive has been exposed for what it is. Total BS, inferrences included. "
* Dude, you're such an opposite-head sometimes.
"Heres the kicker Brudogg. Im bored with you again. Nothing new from you, only a continuence of your contriving nature, the artificous of Brudogg bores me."
* I'm rubber and you're glue...
" You can have the last word. "
* Thanks, I just... did.
Brudogg
Bigdog's trailer park is the heart of the base of the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11.
I dont post often but i came here to find out why the Justice files are not on anymore. Im not judging any one of you but your debating skills need work Brudogg...BTW interesting name.
Bigdog is absolute about your quote you provided. The ONE quote you provide doesnt link 9/11 to Iraq. Postulating a premise does not make it factual. To quote the induction principal "Thus an inductive argument may be highly probable, yet lead from true premises to a false conclusion."
The three quotes above explicitly denies any involvement by Iraq on 9/11. Its is factual.
You have only come up with an inference, wich you initiated as fact(debate rules...no, no). You see, i read Bigdogs rebutals against your premise and he has the quotes to back up his claims.
Your quotes doesnt mention Al-Q specifically, but mentions terrorists and your quote backs up Cheneys interview regarding harbouring terrorists and there is plenty of evidence linking Iraq as a safe haven for terrorists. I have deduced from your quote provided that the context of the quote was not laying blame at Iraqs feet for 9/11, only for harbouring terrorists.
Bigdogs mean?
The qualities of the person presenting an argument are irrelevant to the quality of the argument he presents.
Just one girls opinion, but the quality of Bigdogs rebutal far exceeds your premise. A premise, i might add, has no basis on wich reasoning proceeds.
Lily
No Bigdog you are not getting off that easy. Well Brudogg might think so.
One word and again not trying to be judgemental.
Florid
However i do hear the passion and can even sense that passion in your posts. You have a florid style about you...*wink*
Lily
Did not know BD had a fan, actually I brought up the inference thru deductive argument on the basis of propaganda. The premise that the American people cannot keep a cohesive understanding of events even surrounding 911. Propaganda at the non rational level. Appeals to passion, the most basic at times. Case in point would be several polls were people linked saddam to 911. True there may not be anything set in stone but the mind will build the bridge cause like most people they will not waste their time like we are exalting our florid doyen of political argument Mr BD. They did these knowingly and hiding behind deniability. This has to relegated to psychological warfare.
BIGDOG,
You've already had your ass handed to you on this subject(link below). I don't see any reason to hash out the same old shit.
http://mtjustice.blogspot.com/2010/05/tensions-with-north-korea-and-new.html
Here's a quote,
"If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11. " Dick Cheney - September 9, 2003
Here's a Question,
According to Mr. Cheney's statement above, what nation did he describe as "the heart of the base" of the 9/11 attackers?
I've got a word for ya too,
Fluoridation
as in, drinking the koolaid for so long does take it's toll. HA HA HA HA!
Brudogg
You also left out an important piece of the interview wich clearifies my exact reason for dismantling your false premise and your character to boot.
MR. RUSSERT: The Congressional Budget Office said that: “That the Army lacks sufficient active-duty forces to maintain its current level of nearly 150,000 troops in Iraq beyond next spring. In a report that underscores the stress being place on the military by the occupation of Iraq, the CBO said the Army’s goals of keeping the same number of troops in Iraq and limiting tours of duty there to a year while maintaining its current presence elsewhere in the world were impossible to sustain without activating more National Guard or Reserve units.”
Can we keep 150,000 troops beyond next spring without, in effect, breaking the Army?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: Tim, we can do what we have to do to prevail in this conflict. Failure’s not an option. And go back again and think about what’s involved here. This is not just about Iraq or just about the difficulties we might encounter in any one part of the country in terms of restoring security and stability. This is about a continuing operation on the war on terror. And it’s very, very important we get it right.
"If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11."!
They understand what’s at stake here. That’s one of the reasons they’re putting up as much of a struggle as they have, is because they know if we succeed here, that that’s going to strike a major blow at their capabilities.
MR. RUSSERT: So the resistance in Iraq is coming from those who were responsible for 9/11?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: No, I was careful not to say that.!
With respect to 9/11, 9/11, as I said at the beginning of the show, changed everything. And one of the things it changed is we recognized that time was not on our side, that in this part of the world, in particular, given the problems we’ve encountered in Afghanistan, which forced us to go in and take action there, as well as in Iraq, that we, in fact, had to move on it. The relevance for 9/11 is that what 9/11 marked was the beginning of a struggle in which the terrorists come at us and strike us here on our home territory. And it’s a global operation. It doesn’t know national boundaries or national borders. And the commitment of the United States going into Afghanistan and take down the Taliban and stand up a new government, to go into Iraq and take down the Saddam Hussein regime and stand up a new government is a vital part of our long-term strategy to win the war on terror. America’s going to be safer and more secure in the years ahead when we complete the task in Iraq."
You see Brudogg within a few moments of your quote, in the same interview, he made it real clear he was not infering or stating that 9/11 was carried out by Iraq. You have clearly made a huge mistake. Your reading comprehension skills are particularly deficient. As i have fully demonstrated.
Now seriously, im done with your deliberate attempt to mislead people. Maybe i should expose you on the other forum.
Lily said "Just one girls opinion, but the quality of Bigdogs rebutal far exceeds your premise. A premise, i might add, has no basis on wich reasoning proceeds."
Indeed. Now you see his dishonesty at first hand and his character fully exposed.
" You see Brudogg within a few moments of your quote, in the same interview, he made it real clear he was not infering or stating that 9/11 was carried out by Iraq. You have clearly made a huge mistake. Your reading comprehension skills are particularly deficient. As i have fully demonstrated. "
* Oh, well, if Cheney said so then it must be true? That's your argument, really?
* And coming from someone who can't spell but still refuses to use a spell checker, your critique of my reading comprehension skills means shit.
* You haven't answered the question so I'll repeat myself for you repeat myself for you.
According to Mr. Cheney's statement, what nation did he describe as "the heart of the base" of the 9/11 attackers?
(2nd Cheney quote from Bigs goes here)
* He claims that taking over Iraq is part of a war on terrorists that began on 9/11. In this statement he linked 9/11 and Iraq by inference and implication.
* By that logic shouldn't they drop a few on Arizona, a terrorist just went apeshit there last week and they won't even guard their border against possible terrorists coming in. So now is Arizona the "heart of the base" of the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 also?
* What about Saudi Arabia, since most of the supposed hijackers were from there, wouldn't that actually be the "heart of the base"?
" Now seriously, im done with your deliberate attempt to mislead people. "
" Indeed. Now you see his dishonesty at first hand and his character fully exposed. "
* These are the same old tired lines of bullshit. That game of yours is dead and gone, Dramaqueen. Let me guess, your ends supposedly justify your means so making up lies about people is okay for you to do right?
" Maybe i should expose you on the other forum. "
* No, please, no, don't come to the forum that I just asked you to come to, noooooooo!!!
"* Oh, well, if Cheney said so then it must be true? That's your argument, really?"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! oh man my stomach hurts...ok...ok...ok. Im good now.
*Chuckles*....better find another quote because you dismissed your entire arguement in order to dismiss my rebutal. Oh man this is amuseing and like lily stated: "A premise, i might add, has no basis on wich reasoning proceeds."
Here is the transcript of that interview.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080244/ns/meet_the_press/
Im still waiting for, how did you say:"but they also straight up said it on occasions as well."
Again show me where they said something like...We know Iraq plotted and carried out 9/11. No Brudogg spun implications. Lets see these straight up quotes. By the end of this day. If you do not provide these straight up quotes, then you sir, will have proven me right.
BIGDOG
"If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11. " Dick Cheney - September 9, 2003
If you answer this question then you will have your answer and mine:
According to Mr. Cheney's statement, what nation did he describe as "the heart of the base" of the 9/11 attackers?
Oh, and if you don't answer the question in the next 10 minutes then you sir, will have proven me right.
Time's up, Asshole, you lose, as usual. http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/5193/bigdogpwned.jpg
Now your statement that "We know Iraq plotted a carried out 9/11." is false. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Now your character is fully exposed as are your deliberate attempts to mislead people. Maybe I should expose you on the other forum.
Oh, I see now how wrong I was now. Bigdog has been wrong this whole time. How could I have been so blind?
Lily
I did not post that bigdog.
Lily
To whomever that did. I have my ideas. You are a real class act. If its who i think it is. Live in peace and love. Right now im not sure either exists in your life.
Lily
No, I did not post THAT.
Lily
Well Lily, you and BIGDOG seem to have a lot in common. You think so much alike and you even tend to mispell the same words. Perhaps you should hook up, ya know, go fuck yourself.
wow. This is uncivil up in here.
How about this BIGDOG? Just answer the question please.
Brudogg
Well. Why does Brudogg like to offend someone like lily. Showing his loving character once again.
Now on point. I have given you more the 24 hours to answer me with these explicit quotes. Ill repeat; "Again show me where they said something like...We know Iraq plotted and carried out 9/11. No Brudogg spun implications. Lets see these straight up quotes."
Brudogg admitted and then misquoted as usual: "Now your statement that "We know Iraq plotted a(he cant spell..."and") carried out 9/11." is false. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Now your character is fully exposed as are your deliberate attempts to mislead people. Maybe I should expose you on the other forum."
You have no quotes proving Iraq was linked to/involved in or even farted on 9/11.
Thank you, you are finished as anyone i would try to have a debate with. That was your goal anyway, to be an idiot and dishonest. That way Bigdog will leave me alone.
Again thank you for admitting.
Brudogg said: "Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11."
*Case and Point*
BIGDOG
Oh and you owe lily an apology for being a jerk. My bet is you ran her off too.
You are a very special case, BIGDOG. What you're doing is not debate, it's more like jerking off.
I have never suggested that Iraq was "linked to/involved with 9/11", that was the Bushies that claimed that and I have disputed such claims right here in this post.
I gave you a quote that you asked for, if you won't accept it or dispute it then that's your problem.
Answer the question, dispute the question, or STFU.
I haven't been "a jerk" to anyone but you here lately. Just how stupid do you think people here are anyway? I'm not giving much love these days to people who purposefully lie on me and talk shit and try to run game.
That sucks that you are feeling unloved, maybe you should get a puppy or something.
So once again I'll pose the question that you have repeatedly refused to answer.
According to Mr. Cheney's statement below, what nation did he describe as "the heart of the base" of the 9/11 attackers?
"If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11. " Dick Cheney - September 9, 2003
36 hours and ticking
What's funny is KKFI is a bunch of 9-11 wackos who blame the government, the same government the station happily takes government grants from. The same government that was behind 9-11. Idiots
You show little understanding of what government is.
So BIGDOG, are you going to answer the question or not?
" What's funny is KKFI is a bunch of 9-11 wackos who blame the government, the same government the station happily takes government grants from. The same government that was behind 9-11. Idiots "
That's some ridiculous shit. Another game. A couple of talk shows does not a station make. A few bad apples does not a government make.
"If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11. " Dick Cheney - September 9, 2003
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1R1zWsUaGo
"So BIGDOG, are you going to answer the question or not?"
Nope!! After i DISPUTED! your claim with Russerts follow up question and cheneys answer; of wich killed your Fallacious arguement. You know the one you that said the Bushees said Iraq was responsible for 9/11. However BECAUSE you said.
"* Oh, well, if Cheney said so then it must be true? That's your argument, really?"
Wich, by your implication, disputes Cheneys credibility
and your question. Furthermore, your premise. In fact. In a real debate you just ruined anything Cheney said and your whole premise just fell flat.
Wich raises a serious observational question.
Im curious Brudogg how man media outlets that were anti-bush (alot) reported a quote from any Bushee saying Iraq was responsible for 9/11??
Oh BTW right at 67 hours and ticking. See how nice i am. I'm keeping track.
I'll even allow you to find some other Bushee who said, no spin by you(inferrence), Iraq is responsible for 9/11.
tick tock
BIGDOG
Over 72 hours and ticking.
Going in circles here. Change the subject. Big dog is not going to budge and brudogg cut it out you're not getting anywhere. Big dog has been programmed well and you are indoctrinated on liberal issues. No offense y'all. Mlk said it well. Greatest purveyor of violence my own govt.
I'm not giving you any more quotes until we've dealt with this one. -
"If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11." Dick Cheney - September 9, 2003
BIGS - " Nope!! After i DISPUTED! your claim with Russerts follow up question and cheneys answer; of wich killed your Fallacious arguement. You know the one you that said the Bushees said Iraq was responsible for 9/11. However BECAUSE you said.
"* Oh, well, if Cheney said so then it must be true? That's your argument, really?"
Wich, by your implication, disputes Cheneys credibility
and your question. Furthermore, your premise. In fact. In a real debate you just ruined anything Cheney said and your whole premise just fell flat. "
I think you must mean "in a fake debate" because I've been saying the whole time that Cheney was a liar. You are the one attempting to give him credibility. Regardless of what he may have said later, his statement at the time was his statement at the time and you won't touch the actual quote that you asked me for. You are obviously on the crack, BIGDOG.
So again:
According to Mr. Cheney's statement above, what nation did he describe as "the heart of the base" of the 9/11 attackers?
If I'm liberally indoctrinated then I would like to know how so please. Thanks, Brudogg.
So Bigdog, are you trying to say that yes Cheney did make the connection but it was accidental?
Cheney has more credibilty than you thats for sure. No im not programmed nor budging; because Brudogg is trying to twist the interview into something Cheney never said, nor implied. Hence 96 hours and ticking and still no direct statements like an example ill provide on my own in a few. One Brudogg could easily inject into this debate but hasnt because he is unaware and ill-informed.
What i am saying for the last time. I have disputed your inferrence as just that and i feel i dont have to answer you. I have made it clear Russerts follow up question immediately thereafter;(not the next day or week, but the next second) was answered with an explicit statement by Cheney. Since you implied Cheney has no credibility. Both, your allegations and my dispute, has no credibilty in debate. I can except your withdrawal of Cheneys clearifying statement, wich in turn renders yours void as well. Hence i said you can quote another Bushee. So we are clear a Bushee must be direct to the president. I think thats a fair boundry, if you will. Its also fair to say. Some debate would be admitted by some underlings soon after 9/11 and like Perle did the day after 9/11.
“Iraq has to pay a price for what happened yesterday. They bear responsibility." (he was wrong) I would be understanding of Perles comment being made to Tenet (emotional response) the day after 9/11. Soon after 9/11, note the below quote.
On September 20, 2001, Perle signed a letter — along with 40 fellow participants of the Project for the New American Century — addressed to President Bush that stated the following:
"Even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack, any strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq."
Your quote was made some 2 years later after Perles. An obvious admission by signature proves he was wrong about what he said the day after 9/11. Cheneys was carefull not to say what you are implying. My DISPUTE has more ground to stand on than your inferrence.
Political sidenote: Believe it or not. The letter those 40 senators signed carries alot of weight and Cheney would not want to cross them by saying Iraq was responsible. Way to early in Bushs presidency for pisses allies off.
You say i lied on you (i didnt) and by your response it seemed heated. Wouldnt Cheney be lieing on those 40 powerfull political allies. I wonder how heated they would be?
Wich raises another serious observational question.
Im curious Brudogg how man media outlets that were anti-bush (alot) reported a quote from any Bushee saying Iraq was responsible for 9/11??
tick tock
BIGDOG
Hillary Clinton, JD, US Senator (D-NY) at the time of the quote, stated in an Oct. 10, 2002 speech titled "Floor Speech of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on S.J. Res. 45, A Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq":
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001."
You're full of shit, BIGDOG and I'm not playing your little weasel games. Now answer the question please, or dispute the validity of the question, or better yet just read the damn statement where Cheney straight up said that Iraq was the 'heart of the base' of the terrorists that attacked us on 911 and quit bitchin. Now I'll repeat myself once again to refresh your memory on where we were at before your most recent question dodge attempt.
"If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11." Dick Cheney - September 9, 2003
So again:
According to Mr. Cheney's statement above, what nation did he describe as "the heart of the base" of the 9/11 attackers?
While those PNAC folks may own a few senators and influence a lot more, most of those 40 people are not senators or elected officials.
BigDog
There is nothing left of that deadhorse. Move on to something
new.
"Now answer the question please, or dispute the validity of the question,"
I have and easily prevailed. Moreso when you dismissed Cheneys credibility.
"or better yet just read the damn statement where Cheney straight up said that Iraq was the 'heart of the base' of the terrorists that attacked us on 911 and quit bitchin."
WOW what a miss quote. That is not what Cheney said. REVISIT clearification Cheney made immmediatley after.
Since you have conceded by proxy. Cheney is not Credibile. How is it your question is valid but somehow my rebutal is nonsensical? Why do you continue? Im not allowing you to re-write historical evidence proving Cheney never said Iraq was responsible for 9/11.
You are tho and its intelectually dishonest and your reading comprehension skills are lacking. Im not going to educate you on a compound-complex sentence structure, like Coordinating conjunctions,
Subordinating conjunctions, nonessential, essential, independent this, dependent that...etc.
Cheneys clearifying statement is all i needed to destroy your premise.
Moving on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxFD5kSqzUw
BigBark,
In his 'clarification statement', Cheney said that he was careful not to say that the resistance in Iraq was coming from those responsible for 9/11 and then he proceeded to link the takeover of Iraq to the attacks on 9/11. His so-called clarification is rather one large inference that Iraq is linked to al queda. I mean what else could he be trying to say when he's asked if the resistance in Iraq is coming from those responsible for 9/11 and he responds that the relevance for 9/11 was that it was the beginning of a struggle in which "the terrorists" come at us and strike us here on our home territory? So resistance in Iraq is relevant because of 9/11 terrorists. Is that not linkage by inference and implication?
He also says that taking over Iraq is a vital part of their long term strategy to "win the war on terror"(whatever that's supposed to mean). He adds that they will kill and takeover anyone they feel like without regard for national borders.
*Bigdog quotes in italics
" I have and easily prevailed. Moreso when you dismissed Cheneys credibility. "
" Since you implied Cheney has no credibility. Both, your allegations and my dispute, has no credibilty in debate "
You see how the truth is unimportant to you? It's all about you prevailing and trying to run your weak game.
I've dismissed Cheney's credibility from the git go, he is one of the Bushie liars, that's what I've been saying from the start and you know it. So by your little game rules, since I'm saying that the bushies have no credibility then their credibility cannot be debated. That means that you also stipulate that they have no credibility. And that means that I have easily prevailed, moreso when you dismissed Cheney's credibility.
" Cheney is not Credibile. "
I'm well aware of that, that's the point that I've been trying to make, thank you for finally admitting it. Specifically, he lied when he linked the 'war in Iraq' to the 9/11 attacks.
" Since you have conceded by proxy.
Who's the proxy, you? Do you even know what a proxy is?
" How is it your question is valid but somehow my rebutal is nonsensical? "
This was my question:
According to Mr. Cheney's statement, what nation did he describe as "the heart of the base" of the 9/11 attackers?
My question is valid as long as you do not dispute the actual statement that it is based upon and so far you have not done so, you haven't touched it. Your so-called rebuttal was for a different set of statements, related yes but not Cheney's original statement. You still have not addressed the question nor have you shown the slightest hint that you can even comprehend the original statement being debated here.
The statement, once again:
"If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11." Dick Cheney - September 9, 2003
" Why do you continue? "
Because somebody needs to because people are still dying over this shit, because I can, because I choose to, because seeking out and disseminating the truth just feels like the right thing to do
" Im not allowing you to re-write historical evidence proving Cheney never said Iraq was responsible for 9/11. You are tho and its intelectually dishonest and your reading comprehension skills are lacking. Im not going to educate you on a compound-complex sentence structure, like Coordinating conjunctions,
Subordinating conjunctions, nonessential, essential, independent this, dependent that...etc. "
Whatever. How is it that you feel you can attack my reading comprehension but you can hardly write a complete sentence and you can barely spell or punctuate? And you can't even address the one statement that we're talking about.
" Cheneys clearifying statement is all i needed to destroy your premise. "
Oh yeah, the old 'well he said he didn't do it' argument. Works everytime huh?
" WOW what a miss quote. That is not what Cheney said. REVISIT clearification Cheney made immmediatley after. "
Now read your own words here real close, Littledog. You say it's a misquote, you say that's not what he said, then for reference you give... a different quote. You still won't touch the actual quote in dispute. Now what was the point of your little game here? I think it's time for you to go lay down.
Now here's a statement for you:
In your little game world, you can intentionally believe that suspected terrorists are actually enemy combatants and that torture is actually just enhanced interrogation and a hundred other lies but you know that when it comes down to it, you're lying to yourself.
For clarification of that statement:
I was careful not to say that you lie and believe lies. I'm just saying that you lie and intentionally believe lies.
At some point in your quest to become a better liar, you will eventually realize that you're full of shit. When that happens, don't be too hard on yourself, we all make mistakes.
Brudogg
The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them.--- Karl Marx
What wisdom!
It doesnt matter Brudogg. BD is right and you are wrong. (heavy sarcasm) The way you insinuate nasty things about him, i can tell you are losing this debate. BD has been rock solid and your pebbles breach no mans skin. You have read into what Cheney said in order to fit your 'little game', as you like putting it. The twister explanation you provided sealed it for me. Now, i know you may think this is BD, like you have before. I have come to realise how much an ass you are. Furthermore, i have been wrist deep in baby shit because i am a new mother, so much for fucking myself. Reading your comments and BD's you are the abusive one. You havent produced any 'straight up quotes'. BD obviously wont answer and in my opinion he shouldnt have to. The perponderance of evidence is on you to provide. You havent.
Bigdog im going to help you because Bru is an asshole and i believe you are reading skills are fine because i share them....hehe.
Cheney said "if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11."
Consider this "if you will" invites a follow up question.
"the geographic base of the terrorists" Iraq is part of that region, full of many terrorists. that regional base recognise no borders like Cheney alluded to.
"who have had us under assault now for many years" Terrorists from that region have assaulted us for many years now and in many places.
"but most especially on 9/11."
This decribes one of the terrorist assaults, but does not assign blame to Iraq for 9/11. So when the follow up question was asked and duly warranted, because it was muddy waters at that point as Bru is implying. The only "straight up quote", about Iraqs responsibility, was after the follow up.
MR. RUSSERT: So the resistance in Iraq is coming from those who were responsible for 9/11?
The resistance in Iraq defined as the geographical base of the terrorists in that region, ascribed by context.
VICE PRES. CHENEY: No, I was careful not to say that.
Pretty cut and dry for me too BD.
Lily
The word 'base' defined:
11. Military .
a. a fortified or more or less protected area or place from which the operations of an army or an air force proceed.
b. a supply installation for a large military force.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/base
The word 'terrorism' defined:
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorism
The word 'terrorist' defined:
1. a person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorist
"If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11." Dick Cheney - September 9, 2003
"Lily",
I don't know what "you" think I said about "you" but you're right in that I can sure be an asshole sometimes. From that last post it seems "you" have a pretty good bitchstreak "yourself". Bigdog and I both have a history of being pricks to each other on this blog. Bigdog says that he enjoys it, not kidding. None of that changes the fact that Cheney tied Iraq to the 9/11 attacks though.
If you're saying that Cheney said that Iraq was the heart of the geographic base of the terrorists that attacked us on 9/11 then I agree with you because that's what he said.
Biggins won't answer the question that I've repeatedly asked and he refuses to dispute that question and the huge glaring red flag here is that he has refused to discuss the original quote that is in dispute.
Now that that's settled, Does anyone here support the body scans and pat downs at the airports?
Brudogg
Thank you lily and congrats on being a new mother.
I appreciate your efforts in recognising i have been the nice guy, if you will. Being truthfull, i would have not been nice to bruce. Seeing you post. Well lets just say i didnt want to run you off with my manorisms towards a liberal idiot.
Lily, i also appreciate you summerising, in full context, what you believe was said. I would ditto what you said until this quote from you: "So when the follow up question was asked and duly warranted, because it was muddy waters at that point as Bru is implying."
Bruce never implied it was muddy waters, but he did say 'they straight up said Iraq was responsible for 9/11' and to this very day he hasnt produced one shred of evidence to convince me otherwise.
This is why im moving on. His reading comprehension skills are beneath a 4th grader and like you said to bruce "The perponderance of evidence is on you to provide. You havent."
That's correct he hasnt provided anything. The big white flag Bruce is waving is his inability to provide straight up quotes. Your ability to recognise context rebuts the picture bruce is trying to paint.
"MR. RUSSERT: So the resistance in Iraq is coming from those who were responsible for 9/11?
The resistance in Iraq defined as the geographical base of the terrorists in that region, ascribed by context.
VICE PRES. CHENEY: No, I was careful not to say that.
Pretty cut and dry for me too BD."
That makes two fo us.
BIGDOG
" Bruce never implied it was muddy waters, but he did say 'they straight up said Iraq was responsible for 9/11' and to this very day he hasnt produced one shred of evidence to convince me otherwise. "
Way to misquote me, Bigs. I'll quote you correctly now.
" You still have yet to produce a quote that directly linked saddam to 9-11 by the Bushees "
Here is a quote from Mr. Cheney that I have produced to you over and over again that you still have yet to address.
"If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11." Dick Cheney - September 9, 2003
Still waiting,
Brudogg
Hundreds of hours and ticking...
Don't be like Big Dog, thrice divorced, and living in a van down by the river!"
Victory to Bigdog. The evidence is overwhelmingly in Bigdogs favor.
"If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11." Dick Cheney - September 9, 2003
about 9 years later...
stand up a good representative government in Iraq
Hasn't happened.
taking over Iraq secures the region
Iraq is taken over yet the region is still not secure.
never again becomes a threat to the United States
The Iraq region HAS NEVER BEEN a threat to the United states.
so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction
No WMDs ever found.
so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists
It was not a safe haven for terrorists.
the geographic base of the terrorists who had us under assault on 9/11.
The Iraq region was NOT the base of the 9/11 terrorists.
Sorry Bigdog, but Bru is Right this time.
How's the golf game?
Flip
Cheney's sentence starts with Iraq and ends with 9/11. It doesn't take a rocket scientist.
Oh look. We got an idiot who likes to speek for me. Well go ahead and post more shit in my name. I will not return here again.
Feel free scumbag!
The real Flip.
Now this is all fucked up here. Victory is yours, douchebag.
Bru
Way to go Brudogg. Lets see. You ran off Lily and Flip. Bottom line you are an attention whore via internet trolling.
BTW...!!Still ticking!!
BIGDOG
I didn't run off anybody and you are a liar. Keep on ticking bigbitch...
Victory is mine...as usual.
Ohhhhh my. The loser has spun out of control. Thats what happens when a dumbass tries to pass off idiocy for intellectualism.
BIGDOG
I don't pretend to be "intellectual" like you do. Because I'm not a sheeple like you are, I don't have to pretend anything. You go ahead and keep playing games and in your own mind you can "win" every time but El Rushbo is never going to give you a treat. Here's a tip for "the victor" from "the loser": You might want to watch it when calling someone a dumbass because labels have a tendency to come back on you.
BAD DOG! Now go fetch my newspaper Bigbitch
See how you are. You try and pass shit off, get called on it, and expect me to prove your idiocy to be true? I have shown without any disdain for you how your reading comprhension needs work. I thought Lily was very succinct in showing you where you were contextually wrong. What i have done is prove your dumbass wrong as well. Your mere refusal to think in a rational manor gives me great pain.....you know what let me ask you one thing. All bullshit aside!
This quote from Cheney you provided proves what exactly? Are you saying Cheney and the Bushies lied to get us into war with Iraq and this statement proves that they were sayin Iraq was responsible, justifying war against Iraq??
Yes or No
BIGDOG
All bullshit aside? WTFever.
Once again, the statement that Cheney made proves that he did directly connect our military actions against the nation of Iraq to the 9/11 attacks against us, as you are well aware yet you still deny, and you even accuse ME of not being able to read.
The Nation of Iraq had nothing to do with ANY attacks on US and they did not cooperate with Al Ciada.
You may have beaten me but you didn't prove me wrong on the facts and you have not succeeded in changing history. I hear you can get a time machine on ebay pretty cheap.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoJOODXi8dk
"All bullshit aside? WTFever."
Pfffffft!! Again reading comprehension drills are fun. Here we go one more time.
Simple questions. Simple answers and please elaborate, but atleast read and comprehend its a yes or no. Feel free to elaborate afterwards.
YES or NO.
Are you saying that 'the statement' was a lie to the American people in order to gain support for the Iraqi invasion?
BIGDOG
I'm saying that the connection was made and until we can agree on that fact then we are at an impasse.
You see folks. The so called impasse is his lack of reading comprehension. I have shown this to be evident several posts ago and now you are verifying the obvious; of wich Lily was very succinct in showing you.
YES or NO.
Are you saying that 'the statement' was a lie to the American people in order to gain support for the Iraqi invasion?
BIGDOG
Bigdog you said: " You still have yet to provide a quote that shows a Bushee directly connecting Iraq to 9-11. "
YES or NO.
Are we now in agreement that Cheney directly connected Iraq to 9/11?
Bru
A Look Ahead
The year is 2027. The inhabitants of the landmass formerly known as the United States, having lost the bulk of their freedoms to the will of the world government, have also lost their innovative niche and their niche in the world economy along with it. They now live in mass-poverty, much civil unrest, and ongoing martial law. Due to UN carbon emissions standards, the residents are only allowed to grow and eat green soybeans that are genetically modified to reduce human flatulence and fertility and can only be fertilized with liquefied human remains. Before the UN took over, there was an effective ad campaign against the new soy stating that soybean green was made of people but it quickly became politicized and about half of the people believed it and about half did not but neither side actually looked into the facts and so it was decided for the majority of people on one side of the planet by a minority of people on the other side of the planet that soybean green was for the greater good and the program was implemented anyway and most people accepted it. 2012 came and went and the only major event that year was the nationwide internet shutdown initiated by Acting President Biden due to unsubstantiated claims of extreme political rhetoric. In 2014, eccentric billionaire Richard Branson with assistance from Russia and several x-prize winners sent unmanned laser probes to etch his corporate logo into the lunar surface, a logo which can still be seen from earth with the naked eye to this day, but even now in 2027 humankind still has not been back to the moon, The Justice Files is still not back on the air, no new posts on the blog, and Bigdog and Bru are still having the same argument that they've been having for over 16 years.
The Future Is Not All Set In Stone
NO!! I have made it clear i disagree with you and so have others.
YES or NO.
Are you saying that 'the statement' was a lie to the American people in order to gain support for the Iraqi invasion?
BIGDOG
BigD
If we can't come to an agreement on what Cheney actually said and if you are still unwilling to address his statement then I have no intention of moving on to other topics.
Bru
According to Mr. Cheney's statement, what nation did he describe as "the heart of the base" of the 9/11 attackers?
A. Iraq
B. Zimbabwe
C. China
D. Rhythm
"If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11." Dick Cheney - September 9, 2003
His statement, in an interview, includes a follow up question by Russert. For some strange reason you want to quote cheney, but you wont admit into discusion the full context of the interview. This is unfair. Within the boundaries of rational discussion; it proves the idiocy of your premise. Plus your inabilty to comprehend is painful.
I will not answer anything that evolves or directly relates to your voided question. I have refuted your question by full context of the interview.
Furthermore, you basically said Cheney isnt credible, but you source a non-credible source. Your question is voided by your own fault and your attempt to frame this discussion is quite clear. You allow the follow up...wich clearified on its own merits Cheneys statement and i will answer the question. One things for sure. An agreement can be made if you allow Cheneys clearifying statement after Russerts follow-up. It all rests on you brudogg. Restore my confidence in you or lose anytype of discussion from here on out.
BIGDOG
YES or NO.
Are you saying that 'the statement' was a lie to the American people in order to gain support for the Iraqi invasion?
BIGDOG
American People = Dumb asses. I win. Or lose.
LOL. Or SOL.
Biganklebiter,
There you go trying to rewrite history again. I have addressed that which you falsely claim that I will not discuss. I'll repost it even though you obviously can't understand what you read. I think that people not understanding each other well enough is one of the most severe problems that humanity has while simultaneously being one of our greatest blessings.
" BigBark,
In his 'clarification statement', Cheney said that he was careful not to say that the resistance in Iraq was coming from those responsible for 9/11 and then he proceeded to link the takeover of Iraq to the attacks on 9/11. His so-called clarification is rather one large inference that Iraq is linked to al queda. I mean what else could he be trying to say when he's asked if the resistance in Iraq is coming from those responsible for 9/11 and he responds that the relevance for 9/11 was that it was the beginning of a struggle in which "the terrorists" come at us and strike us here on our home territory? So resistance in Iraq is relevant because of 9/11 terrorists. Is that not linkage by inference and implication?
He also says that taking over Iraq is a vital part of their long term strategy to "win the war on terror"(whatever that's supposed to mean). He adds that they will kill and takeover anyone they feel like without regard for national borders. "
Sunday, January 23, 2011 7:53:00 AM CST
As far as your cheney's credibility games go, I don't play them. And I'm still waiting for you to address the original statement in dispute. I'll post it for you again.
"If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11." Dick Cheney - September 9, 2003
Bru
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rosl8W73hus
Bigs,
still ticking!!
497 hours by my clock
"Cheney said that he was careful not to say that the resistance in Iraq was coming from those responsible for 9/11"
Indeed. Yet somehow you come up with Cheney straight up said Iraq was responsible for 9/11.
You see this folks he admits he was wrong but adds more layers of shit, to old shit...its still shit.
BIGDOG victorious again!
Tell him what he won, Bru!
Satisfaction of a downed liberal sufices any real American.
Any other liberal douschebag that wants to get the 9/11 troof smacked the fuck out of them. Step up!!! The brudogg is still a porch pooch; moreso has been relegated to third porch pooch status. No more alpo glow. No more dog, just plain ole brubitch!!!
Go get my dino bites brubitch....lol
Give it a rest Girls...
"Give it a rest Girls..."
You hate America.
damn bd.. you are a flea and brudog has scratched you off his sweaty ballsack. Give it a rest.
How original!!! "You Hate America". Really is that all you have???
You need a set of balls before you can scratch me off. Still waiting for any twoofer to step up so i can knocked them the fuck back down....MOOOOOOHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
BIGDOG Slayer of twoofers.
How original!!! "You Hate America". Really is that all you have???
All that is needed.
Alright, I'm going to call it: Time of Death, February 13 22:42 hrs.
Awhhhh yes the time brudoggs lies fell flat-lined.
Jesse Venturas and the super-nano-thermites debunking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrGxzsxSqMk&feature=player_embedded
BIGDOG *evil grin*
http://www.newsweek.com/2011/03/20/how-dumb-are-we.html
http://twistedcritic.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/retard.jpg
Post a Comment