US: Saddam paid for lawmakers' Iraq trip

[stephanie]

Hummmm..

1 hour, 1 minute ago



WASHINGTON - Federal prosecutors say Saddam Hussein's intelligence agency secretly financed a trip to Iraq for three U.S. lawmakers during the run-up to the U.S.-led invasion.

An indictment in Detroit accuses Muthanna Al-Hanooti of arranging for three members of Congress to travel to Iraq in October 2002 at the behest of Saddam's regime. Prosecutors say Iraqi intelligence officials paid for the trip through an intermediary.

In exchange, Al-Hanooti allegedly received 2 million barrels of Iraqi oil.

The lawmakers are not mentioned but the dates correspond to a trip by Democratic Reps. Jim McDermott of Washington, David Bonior of Michigan and Mike Thompson of California. There was no indication the three lawmakers knew the trip was underwritten by Saddam.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080326/ap_on_go_co/iraq_junket

[Little-Acorn]

There was no indication the three lawmakers knew the trip was underwritten by Saddam.


Of course not. When you use Useful Idiots to do your bidding, there's no need to tell them of such things. They are merely idiots, after all.

Did Saddam get his money's worth? It appears so. See statements in red below, from an article that appeared shortly after their little "free" trip:

---------------------------------

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/001/737zcgnk.asp

The Baghdad Democrats

From the October 14, 2002 issue:
David Bonior and Jim McDermott have created a headache for their party.

by Stephen F. Hayes
10/14/2002, Volume 008, Issue 05

IT'S A RARE POLITICAL MOMENT when Terry McAuliffe says no comment. Yet McAuliffe, the garrulous chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said just that last Wednesday at the Brookings Institution after a speech by Al Gore. Asked about the trip to Baghdad taken by three of his fellow partisans--Representatives David Bonior, Jim McDermott, and Mike Thompson--McAuliffe was nonplussed.

"Have we issued anything on that?" he asked DNC spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri, who shook her head.

"I don't think we have," he said with a shrug of his shoulders.

"We handle the politics, and leave those comments to elected officials," Palmieri explained. "But nice try."

Problem is, the elected officials aren't saying much either. Bonior was until recently the second-ranking Democrat in the House, and yet it's nearly impossible to get Democrats to say anything about his and the others' trip to Baghdad.

But if other Democrats aren't talking about the Baghdad tour, Bonior and McDermott themselves won't shut up. And the more they talk, the more scrutiny they invite.

The controversy ignited on September 29 when Bonior and McDermott appeared from Baghdad on ABC's "This Week." Host George Stephanopoulos asked McDermott about his recent comment that "the president of the United States will lie to the American people in order to get us into this war."

McDermott didn't backpedal at all: "I believe that sometimes they give out misinformation. . . . It would not surprise me if they came out with some information that is not provable, and they, they shift it. First they said it was al
Qaeda, then they said it was weapons of mass destruction. Now they're going back to and saying it's al Qaeda again." When Stephanopoulos pressed McDermott about whether he had any evidence that Bush had lied, the congressman replied, "I think the president would mislead the American people."

An American official floating unsubstantiated allegations against an American president during a visit to Baghdad would be troubling enough. But McDermott compounded his problem by insisting, despite its twelve years of verifiable prevarication, that the Iraqi regime should be given the benefit of the doubt on inspections and disarmament. Said McDermott on "This Week": "I think you have to take the Iraqis on their face value."

But McDermott and Bonior only accept Iraq's more conciliatory statements at face value. They selectively ignore those statements by Iraqi officials defying the international community's demand for unfettered inspections. Even after Iraqi vice president Taha Yassin Ramadan made clear that inspectors would not be allowed into presidential sites--some 12 square miles of Iraqi territory--McDermott claimed the Iraqi regime really wanted to be accommodating. "They have given us assurances that there will be unfettered inspections," McDermott said at an October 2 press conference he held with Bonior after returning from Iraq. "In the United States, we have a tradition, we have a Constitution that says if there's a bad person there, we give them due process and inspections is the due process in this example."

At the same press conference, McDermott and Bonior retrospectively revised the primary goal of their trip. "First of all," said Bonior, explaining the objectives of the trip, "we wanted to impress upon the Iraqi government and the people of Iraq how important it was for them to allow unconditional, unfettered, unrestricted access to the inspectors."

[red states rule]

Hummmm..

1 hour, 1 minute ago



WASHINGTON - Federal prosecutors say Saddam Hussein's intelligence agency secretly financed a trip to Iraq for three U.S. lawmakers during the run-up to the U.S.-led invasion.

An indictment in Detroit accuses Muthanna Al-Hanooti of arranging for three members of Congress to travel to Iraq in October 2002 at the behest of Saddam's regime. Prosecutors say Iraqi intelligence officials paid for the trip through an intermediary.

In exchange, Al-Hanooti allegedly received 2 million barrels of Iraqi oil.

The lawmakers are not mentioned but the dates correspond to a trip by Democratic Reps. Jim McDermott of Washington, David Bonior of Michigan and Mike Thompson of California. There was no indication the three lawmakers knew the trip was underwritten by Saddam.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080326/ap_on_go_co/iraq_junket

Stephanie, you saying that Hussein should not have had a US spokesmen defending him? Saddam has so much cash he was able to afford three

[jimnyc]

Funny how such threads involving Democrats get so many responses from their supporters.

[retiredman]

what part of "secretly" do you guys have a hard time understanding:laugh2:

[red states rule]

what part of "secretly" do you guys have a hard time understanding:laugh2:

The bullshit part where Dems plead ignorance when they are busted

[retiredman]

The bullshit part where Dems plead ignorance when they are busted


the trip was approved by Bush's State Department.... do they get busted too?

[red states rule]

the trip was approved by Bush's State Department.... do they get busted too?

It was not the members of the Bush State Dept being used as useful idiots by Saddam

Dems always play ignorant when they get caught.

[retiredman]

It was not the members of the Bush State Dept being used as useful idiots by Saddam

Dems always play ignorant when they get caught.

did the Bush state department approve of and endorse the trip? yes or no?

[red states rule]

did the Bush state department approve of and endorse the trip? yes or no?

Changing the subject again I see when your beloved Dems are busted working for Saddam

Once again, the "support" they show the troops and America is on display

[retiredman]

Changing the subject again I see when your beloved Dems are busted working for Saddam

Once again, the "support" they show the troops and America is on display


they went on a trip before the war...the state department approved and endorsed it.

learn the facts or shut your piehole.

[red states rule]

they went on a trip before the war...the state department approved and endorsed it.

learn the facts or shut your piehole.

You do hate to see how your Dems were in Saddma's hip pocket and being used

Accept it MFM, it is the truth

They sold out their country for poltical points.

[retiredman]

You do hate to see how your Dems were in Saddma's hip pocket and being used

Accept it MFM, it is the truth

They sold out their country for poltical points.

did Bush's state department approve and endorse the trip or not? yes or no?

answer the question.

[red states rule]

did Bush's state department approve and endorse the trip or not? yes or no?

answer the question.

My you are desperate to shift the attenion away from the Three Stooges who did the bidding of Saddam.

[retiredman]

My you are desperate to shift the attenion away from the Three Stooges who did the bidding of Saddam.

nobody did anyone's bidding. why are you afraid of just answering a simple question?

[red states rule]

nobody did anyone's bidding. why are you afraid of just answering a simple question?

You had Baghdad Bob McDermott singing the prises of Saddam, while calling Pres Bush a liar

All while enjoying the all expense paid trip from Saddam

More Dem support showing how they "love" America

[retiredman]

You had Baghdad Bob McDermott singing the prises of Saddam, while calling Pres Bush a liar

All while enjoying the all expense paid trip from Saddam

More Dem support showing how they "love" America


man....you just spin and spin and spin and can'ty QUITE ever get around to answering a simple yes or no question. what a fucking joke you are!:laugh2:

[red states rule]

man....you just spin and spin and spin and can'ty QUITE ever get around to answering a simple yes or no question. what a fucking joke you are!:laugh2:

No spin - just facts

Libs took Saddam money to go into his back yard and defend Saddam against the evil Pres Bush

You on the other hand, want to ingore these facts and change the subject

[retiredman]

No spin - just facts

Libs took Saddam money to go into his back yard and defend Saddam against the evil Pres Bush

You on the other hand, want to ingore these facts and change the subject


the democrats in question had no idea who paid for the trip...and neither did the Bush state department, who had approved and endorsed the trip.... something you can't quite seem to admit!:laugh2:

[red states rule]

the democrats in question had no idea who paid for the trip...and neither did the Bush state department, who had approved and endorsed the trip.... something you can't quite seem to admit!:laugh2:

It is the first excuse Dems offer when caught

Would you want to know who is paying for your trips overseas?

Of course the Three Stooges in question could not wait to give Saddam some positive press, and at the same time smear America and Pres Bush

All that and it did not cost them a dime. What more could the Stooges ask for?

[retiredman]

It is the first excuse Dems offer when caught

Would you want to know who is paying for your trips overseas?

Of course the Three Stooges in question could not wait to give Saddam some positive press, and at the same time smear America and Pres Bush

All that and it did not cost them a dime. What more could the Stooges ask for?

can't quite bring yourself to answer the question.... LOL

[red states rule]

can't quite bring yourself to answer the question.... LOL

I bet you are sad you were not invited to go along. What a dream vacation for you

[retiredman]

I bet you are sad you were not invited to go along. What a dream vacation for you

I would love to have gotten a first hand look at how Iraq is doing.

still can't quite bring yourself to actually answer questions and defend your positions, I see.

[red states rule]

I would love to have gotten a first hand look at how Iraq is doing.

still can't quite bring yourself to actually answer questions and defend your positions, I see.

Seems one of the Dems benefited money wise from the trip

Khafaji arranged travel and financing for the "Baghdad Democrats"--Jim McDermott, Mike Thompson and David Bonior--last fall. Following the trip, al Khafaji contributed $5,000 to McDermott's Legal Defense Fund.

So tell us again how they did not know who was paying for the trip

And I am sure you would have been singing the praises of Saddam while bashing the US and Pres Bush. The Baghdad Democrats would have told you what to say so you would give a decent performance

[retiredman]

Seems one of the Dems benefited money wise from the trip

Khafaji arranged travel and financing for the "Baghdad Democrats"--Jim McDermott, Mike Thompson and David Bonior--last fall. Following the trip, al Khafaji contributed $5,000 to McDermott's Legal Defense Fund.

So tell us again how they did not know who was paying for the trip

And I am sure you would have been singing the praises of Saddam while bashing the US and Pres Bush. The Baghdad Democrats would have told you what to say so you would give a decent performance

no one in our government knew in 2002 who was bankrolling that organization. Like I said, the Bush State Department endorsed and approved the trip. YOu can't quite seem to explain THAT, can you?

[red states rule]

no one in our government knew in 2002 who was bankrolling that organization. Like I said, the Bush State Department endorsed and approved the trip. YOu can't quite seem to explain THAT, can you?

Not surprised you keep defending Dems when they side against their own country

Birds of a feather MFM

[retiredman]

Not surprised you keep defending Dems when they side against their own country

Birds of a feather MFM


not surprising you run away from facts.

[red states rule]

not surprising you run away from facts.

There were more links between Saddam and the Democratic Party than there were between Saddam and al Queda.

At least Saddam understood which group has a better chance of destroying America.

[retiredman]

There were more links between Saddam and the Democratic Party than there were between Saddam and al Queda.

At least Saddam understood which group has a better chance of destroying America.


lies and insults are all you have left.

sad:lol:

[red states rule]

lies and insults are all you have left.

sad:lol:

They knew why they were going. They knew they were going to make Saddam look good and Bush look bad. Who did they think was going to pay for that kind of publicity?

The DNC?

[retiredman]

They knew why they were going. They knew they were going to make Saddam look good and Bush look bad. Who did they think was going to pay for that kind of publicity?

The DNC?

lies.

why would the Bush state department approve and endorse a trip if that is what there were going for?

please quit tap dancing and explain that.

[Dilloduck]

lies.

why would the Bush state department approve and endorse a trip if that is what there were going for?

please quit tap dancing and explain that.

Because they would have been soundly critized for not approving a "fact finding trip" by Democrats.

[retiredman]

Because they would have been soundly critized for not approving a "fact finding trip" by Democrats.

do you really think, that in the wake of 9/11, with all the Bush rhetoric tying Iraq to Al Qaeda, that anyone would have criticized the state department's failure to approve of a fact finding trip if they KNEW that Saddam was bankrolling it? really? Put down the koolaid for a moment and rethink that.

[Dilloduck]

do you really think, that in the wake of 9/11, with all the Bush rhetoric tying Iraq to Al Qaeda, that anyone would have criticized the state department's failure to approve of a fact finding trip if they KNEW that Saddam was bankrolling it? really? Put down the koolaid for a moment and rethink that.

Are you crazy ??---the Democrats criticize Bush for waking up in the morning.

[retiredman]

Are you crazy ??---the Democrats criticize Bush for waking up in the morning.

get real. If anyone had KNOWN that Saddam was the source of funding, no one would have approved it and no one would have dared to go ON the trip.

[Dilloduck]

get real. If anyone had KNOWN that Saddam was the source of funding, no one would have approved it and no one would have dared to go ON the trip.

Right--because their real agenda for going there would have been exposed.
Have another bowl of Wheaties.

[retiredman]

Right--because their real agenda for going there would have been exposed.
Have another bowl of Wheaties.


so..the state department was aware and didn't say anything?

take it to comedy forum. Your assertion is silly, and you know it.

[red states rule]

get real. If anyone had KNOWN that Saddam was the source of funding, no one would have approved it and no one would have dared to go ON the trip.

The Three Stoges would have. Dems NEVER pass up a chance to bash Amercia and insult Pres Bush.

[retiredman]

The Three Stoges would have. Dems NEVER pass up a chance to bash Amercia and insult Pres Bush.

so three democratic congressmen are lying when they say they had no idea as to Saddam's involvement in bankrolling their trip?

Is the state department lying when they said that they had no idea either?

[red states rule]

so three democratic congressmen are lying when they say they had no idea as to Saddam's involvement in bankrolling their trip?

Is the state department lying when they said that they had no idea either?

So you would take a trip for free and it would never occur to you to ask who was paying for it?

Or should we hold Dems to lower standards as you want us to?

[retiredman]

So you would take a trip for free and it would never occur to you to ask who was paying for it?

Or should we hold Dems to lower standards as you want us to?

did the state department endorse the trip and the funding source?

[red states rule]

did the state department endorse the trip and the funding source?

Should have known, you would not turn down an all expense paid Bush bashing excursion

[retiredman]

Should have known, you would not turn down an all expense paid Bush bashing excursion

nice dodge. can't answer the question, can you?

did the state department endorse the trip and the funding source? yes or no?

[red states rule]

nice dodge. can't answer the question, can you?

did the state department endorse the trip and the funding source? yes or no?

Still trying to take the spotlight off your fellow Saddam supporters I see

[retiredman]

Still trying to take the spotlight off your fellow Saddam supporters I see

get back to me when you grow a set of balls.

the record is clear: no one in government had any idea who was actually behind the funding....and if you don't think that lawmakers from both sides of the aisle take trips all the time that are paid for by special interest groups, you are as clueless as you are annoying.

[red states rule]

get back to me when you grow a set of balls.

the record is clear: no one in government had any idea who was actually behind the funding....and if you don't think that lawmakers from both sides of the aisle take trips all the time that are paid for by special interest groups, you are as clueless as you are annoying.

I know full well anyone who keeps hitting you with facts about your party you find annoying

[retiredman]

I know full well anyone who keeps hitting you with facts about your party you find annoying

is it a FACT that the state department approved and endorsed the trip?

yes or no?

[red states rule]

is it a FACT that the state department approved and endorsed the trip?

yes or no?

Very lame attempt to shift the blame from the Saddam supporters to someone else MFM

[retiredman]

is it a FACT that lawmakers from both parties routinely take fact finding trips funded by outside interest groups? yes or no

[red states rule]

is it a FACT that lawmakers from both parties routinely take fact finding trips funded by outside interest groups? yes or no

The fact is the Three Stooges were used as useful idiots to a terrorist - and they did what they set out to do

Defend Saddam and bash Pres Bush

Once again you give your guys a pass in the spirit of party loyality

[retiredman]

The fact is the Three Stooges were used as useful idiots to a terrorist - and they did what they set out to do

Defend Saddam and bash Pres Bush

Once again you give your guys a pass in the spirit of party loyality

once again, you run away from FACTS that don't fit your talking points! LOL

you should NEVER talk about loyalty...you are on record as being perfectly willing to piss all over our constitution as long as your party stays in control.

[red states rule]

once again, you run away from FACTS that don't fit your talking points! LOL

you should NEVER talk about loyalty...you are on record as being perfectly willing to piss all over our constitution as long as your party stays in control.

Keep trying to shift the blame and change the subject. It is what you do best

Dems have shown their loyality enough times for all to see. Their loyality is with their party first and above all else

[retiredman]

Keep trying to shift the blame and change the subject. It is what you do best

Dems have shown their loyality enough times for all to see. Their loyality is with their party first and above all else

blah blah blah...keep running away from the facts.

it is what you do best!

[red states rule]

blah blah blah...keep running away from the facts.

it is what you do best!

The facts are your Dems were caught red handed siding with a terrorists

Keep your track shoes on MFM - you will ned them as more facts come out

[Dilloduck]

is it a FACT that lawmakers from both parties routinely take fact finding trips funded by outside interest groups? yes or no

Hell ya--they'd take the shirt off your back if they could. Come to think of it they can and do. :laugh2:

[red states rule]

Hell ya--they'd take the shirt off your back if they could. Come to think of it they can and do. :laugh2:

Dems would break into your home and take your wood stove

Then come back for the smoke

[retiredman]

The facts are your Dems were caught red handed siding with a terrorists

Keep your track shoes on MFM - you will ned them as more facts come out

siding with terrorists? LOL

did the state department of president Bush approve and endorse the trip? yes or no

do legislators from both parties go on trips funded by special interests all the time? yes or no?


show some balls, RSR...answer those two direct questions.... a simple yes or no for each. you can do it.

[red states rule]

siding with terrorists? LOL

did the state department of president Bush approve and endorse the trip? yes or no

do legislators from both parties go on trips funded by special interests all the time? yes or no?


show some balls, RSR...answer those two direct questions.... a simple yes or no for each. you can do it.

Liberals still think Saddam was such a warm and fuzzy guy who posed no threat to anyone

But Pres Bush is the worlds biggest terrorist

[retiredman]

I really thought you might have been able to actually answer a couple of questions this time. silly me.

[red states rule]

I really thought you might have been able to actually answer a couple of questions this time. silly me.

But you did not disappoint me. You still look the other way, ignore the actions of members of your party, and support those who do the bidding of our nations enemies

[retiredman]

But you did not disappoint me. You still look the other way, ignore the actions of members of your party, and support those who do the bidding of our nations enemies


I do no support anyone who does the bidding of our nation's enemies...nor do I countenance the behavior of those, like you, who are its domestic enemies.

[red states rule]

I do no support anyone who does the bidding of our nation's enemies...nor do I countenance the behavior of those, like you, who are its domestic enemies.

You support these three stooges, along with Kerry,Murtha, Durbin, Kennedy, Reid, and Pelosi - they have all sided against America and with the terrorists

Case closed

[retiredman]

You support these three stooges, along with Kerry,Murtha, Durbin, Kennedy, Reid, and Pelosi - they have all sided against America and with the terrorists

Case closed


none of those people have sided against America and with terrorists.

you are a LIAR.

no surprise there!

[red states rule]

none of those people have sided against America and with terrorists.

you are a LIAR.

no surprise there!

You are right MFM. They have not sided with terrorists

If you ignore their words and actions like you do

[retiredman]

You are right MFM. They have not sided with terrorists

If you ignore their words and actions like you do


no. none of them has sided with terrorists.

but you have admitted your disdain for our constitution, which shows which side YOU are on, that's for sure!

[red states rule]

no. none of them has sided with terrorists.

but you have admitted your disdain for our constitution, which shows which side YOU are on, that's for sure!

So going over to Iraq before the war amd defending Saddam is not siding with terrorists?

Only to liberal moonbats like you would offer that lame defense

[retiredman]

So going over to Iraq before the war amd defending Saddam is not siding with terrorists?

Only to liberal moonbats like you would offer that lame defense

who defended Saddam? none of those guys.

[red states rule]

who defended Saddam? none of those guys.

It was Baghdad Bob who said while in Iraq he trusted Saddma more then he trusted Pres Bush

[retiredman]

It was Baghdad Bob who said while in Iraq he trusted Saddma more then he trusted Pres Bush


I have no idea who you are referring to, but none of the three representatives who took the State department sanctioned trip were named Bob.

and whoever this Bob fella is, that purported quote certainly is no testimony to Saddam's trustworthiness.

Hell...I'd trust YOU more than I'd trust Bush.

[red states rule]

I have no idea who you are referring to, but none of the three representatives who took the State department sanctioned trip were named Bob.

and whoever this Bob fella is, that purported quote certainly is no testimony to Saddam's trustworthiness.

Hell...I'd trust YOU more than I'd trust Bush.

During the visit, Congressman McDermott suggested that while Americans should take Saddam Hussein at his word on the inspection issue, President Bush would "mislead" the American people. This quote deeply angered some members of the house, with Virginia Congressman Thomas Davis calling it "outrageous" and "far outside the mainstream of rational political discourse."

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2002/iraq-021002-3c5e051b.htm

[retiredman]

During the visit, Congressman McDermott suggested that while Americans should take Saddam Hussein at his word on the inspection issue, President Bush would "mislead" the American people. This quote deeply angered some members of the house, with Virginia Congressman Thomas Davis calling it "outrageous" and "far outside the mainstream of rational political discourse."

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2002/iraq-021002-3c5e051b.htm


He was RIGHT! Saddam didn't HAVE any WMD's and Bush DID mislead us into war.

Oh..and his name is Jim, I think... not Bob.

[red states rule]

He was RIGHT! Saddam didn't HAVE any WMD's and Bush DID mislead us into war.

Oh..and his name is Jim, I think... not Bob.

But but both pres Bush and Dems said he had them

Everyone believed he did have them

Only you believes he complied with the Useless nations resoultions and disposed of them

BTW, his name is Baggdad Bob

[retiredman]

But but both pres Bush and Dems said he had them

Everyone believed he did have them

Only you believes he complied with the Useless nations resoultions and disposed of them

BTW, his name is Baggdad Bob

your silly pet nickname for him really doesn't count.

and the fact remains: he was correct. Saddam did NOT have any WMD's and Bush did mislead us into war.

[red states rule]

your silly pet nickname for him really doesn't count.

and the fact remains: he was correct. Saddam did NOT have any WMD's and Bush did mislead us into war.

If Pres Bush so did your Dems

"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. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

http://rightwingnews.com/quotes/demsonwmds.php

[retiredman]

If Pres Bush so did your Dems




as I have said countless times before, I take issue with EVERY democrat who ever spoke about Saddam's WMD with absolute certainty and I won't vote for any of them who voted FOR the use of force resolution until they repent for that sin.

Bush DID mislead us into war.... he was the CINC... it's HIS baby.

[red states rule]

as I have said countless times before, I take issue with EVERY democrat who ever spoke about Saddam's WMD with absolute certainty and I won't vote for any of them who voted FOR the use of force resolution until they repent for that sin.

Bush DID mislead us into war.... he was the CINC... it's HIS baby.

So were Dems lying as well. they said the same exact thing as Pres Bush

BTW, you voted for Kerry and he voted to go to war

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002



So much for your rants

[manu1959]

as I have said countless times before, I take issue with EVERY democrat who ever spoke about Saddam's WMD with absolute certainty and I won't vote for any of them who voted FOR the use of force resolution until they repent for that sin.

Bush DID mislead us into war.... he was the CINC... it's HIS baby.

actually george tenant and richard clarke led everyone into war......they cooked the intelligence.......

let me see who put those two in office.............

[retiredman]

actually george tenant and richard clarke led everyone into war......they cooked the intelligence.......

let me see who put those two in office.............

who put them in office in January 2001? That would be Bush. He cleaned house all over the executive branch...those two became HIS boys the minute he decided to keep them on. sorry.:laugh2:

[red states rule]

who put them in office in January 2001? That would be Bush. He cleaned house all over the executive branch...those two became HIS boys the minute he decided to keep them on. sorry.:laugh2:



Still ducking how your guys said the same thing about WMD's I see

[retiredman]

So were Dems lying as well. they said the same exact thing as Pres Bush

BTW, you voted for Kerry and he voted to go to war

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002



So much for your rants

can you fucking read?

I said: "I won't vote for any of them who voted FOR the use of force resolution until they repent for that sin".

Kerry admitted his vote was a mistake. Only then did I vote for him and I didn't support him at all in the primaries.

So again.... you are on record as promising not to vote for McCain....is that right?

[red states rule]

can you fucking read?

I said: "I won't vote for any of them who voted FOR the use of force resolution until they repent for that sin".

Kerry admitted his vote was a mistake. Only then did I vote for him and I didn't support him at all in the primaries.

So again.... you are on record as promising not to vote for McCain....is that right?

Was that when he said he voted for the war before he voted against it? :laugh2:

[retiredman]

Was that when he said he voted for the war before he voted against it? :laugh2:

nice dodge from having to admit you fucked up.

SOOOOO typical of RSR's work

[red states rule]

nice dodge from having to admit you fucked up.

SOOOOO typical of RSR's work

It was a dodge on your part, Another pass issued by MFM to another Dem

No surprise in that

[retiredman]

It was a dodge on your part, Another pass issued by MFM to another Dem

No surprise in that

I told you a year ago that every democrat who had voted for the use of force and had not publicly come out and admitted it was a bad vote would never get my support. that has always stood.


YOu tried to make my vote for Kerry as something that had gone against that rule but you fucked up and now are tapdancing and dodging away. pathetic.

[red states rule]

I told you a year ago that every democrat who had voted for the use of force and had not publicly come out and admitted it was a bad vote would never get my support. that has always stood.


YOu tried to make my vote for Kerry as something that had gone against that rule but you fucked up and now are tapdancing and dodging away. pathetic.

Your oparty loyality is clear MM. You will always kiss a Dems ass no matter what they say or do

Party before country (and the truth) above all else

[retiredman]

Your oparty loyality is clear MM. You will always kiss a Dems ass no matter what they say or do

Party before country (and the truth) above all else


no...those are just slanderous insulting opinions. My loyalty is to God, family, country,and then party. It is how I have lived my entire adult life.

[red states rule]

no...those are just slanderous insulting opinions. My loyalty is to God, family, country,and then party. It is how I have lived my entire adult life.


Sorry if the truth hurts MFM

The truth will set you free

To you God is the DNC

[Yurt]

Sorry if the truth hurts MFM

The truth will set you free

To you God is the DNC

i think MFM has made it clear that he does believe in God and God first, i don't think it is up to us to question someone's faith in God

[retiredman]

thank you Yurt.

did you read my Sunday Sermon?

[red states rule]

i think MFM has made it clear that he does believe in God and God first, i don't think it is up to us to question someone's faith in God

Valid point

But he does have a strange way of showing his beliefs on the board

[Yurt]

thank you Yurt.

did you read my Sunday Sermon?

you're still a political hack :laugh2: ;)

i skimmed it, seemed ok, some not...

[retiredman]

you're still a political hack :laugh2: ;)

i skimmed it, seemed ok, some not...


tell me.... you had no idea about St. Thomas Christians on the Malabar coast!

[Yurt]

tell me.... you had no idea about St. Thomas Christians on the Malabar coast!

i did not know about that until i read your blog

[retiredman]

i did not know about that until i read your blog

stick with me Yurt...I'll teach ya some shit.:cheers2:

[Yurt]

stick with me Yurt...I'll teach ya some shit.:cheers2:

no doubt....:cool:

[retiredman]

no doubt....:cool:

it'll all be good

[red states rule]

it'll all be good

about as good as getting a 24 hour enima