Results 1 to 39 of 39

Thread: Obama releases secret Bush anti-terror memos

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth
    Posts
    4,264

    Obama releases secret Bush anti-terror memos

    Obama releases secret Bush anti-terror memos

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200***02/...e/terror_memos

    WASHINGTON – The Obama administration threw open the curtain on years of Bush-era secrets Monday, revealing anti-terror memos that claimed exceptional search-and-seizure powers and divulging that the CIA destroyed nearly 100 videotapes of interrogations and other treatment of terror suspects.
    The Justice Department released nine legal opinions showing that, following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Bush administration determined that certain constitutional rights would not apply during the coming fight. Within two weeks, government lawyers were already discussing ways to wiretap U.S. conversations without warrants.
    The Bush administration eventually abandoned many of the legal conclusions, but the documents themselves had been closely held. By releasing them, President Barack Obama continued a house-cleaning of the previous administration's most contentious policies.
    "Too often over the past decade, the fight against terrorism has been viewed as a zero-sum battle with our civil liberties," Attorney General Eric Holder said in a speech a few hours before the documents were released. "Not only is that school of thought misguided, I fear that in actuality it does more harm than good."
    The Obama administration also acknowledged in court documents Monday that the CIA destroyed 92 videos involving terror suspects, including interrogations — far more than had been known. Congressional Democrats and other critics have charged that some of the harsh interrogation techniques amounted to torture, a contention President George W. Bush and other Bush officials rejected.
    The new administration pledged on Monday to begin turning over documents related to the videos to a federal judge and to make as much information public as possible.
    The legal memos written by the Bush administration's Office of Legal Counsel show a government grappling with how to wage war on terrorism in a fast-changing world. The conclusion, reiterated in page after page of documents, was that the president had broad authority to set aside constitutional rights.
    Fourth Amendment protections against unwarranted search and seizure, for instance, did not apply in the United States as long as the president was combatting terrorism, the Justice Department said in an Oct. 23, 2001, memo.
    "First Amendment speech and press rights may also be subordinated to the overriding need to wage war successfully," Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo wrote, adding later: "The current campaign against terrorism may require even broader exercises of federal power domestically."
    On Sept. 25, 2001, Yoo discussed possible changes to the laws governing wiretaps for intelligence gathering. In that memo, he said the government's interest in keeping the nation safe following the terrorist attacks might justify warrantless searches.
    That memo did not specifically attempt to justify the government's warrantless wiretapping program, but it provided part of the foundation.
    Yoo, now a professor at the University of California at Berkeley School of Law, did not return messages seeking comment.
    The memos reflected a belief within the Bush administration that the president had broad powers that could not be checked by Congress or the courts. That stance, in one form or another, became the foundation for many policies: holding detainees at Guantanamo Bay, eavesdropping on U.S. citizens without warrants, using tough new CIA interrogation tactics and locking U.S. citizens in military brigs without charges.
    Obama has pledged to close the Guantanamo Bay prison within a year. He halted the CIA's intensive interrogation program. And last week, prosecutors moved the terrorism case against U.S. resident Ali Al-Marri, a suspected al-Qaida sleeper agent held in a military brig, to a civilian courthouse.
    A criminal prosecutor is wrapping up an investigation of the destruction of the tapes of interrogations.
    Monday's acknowledgment of videotape destruction, however, involved a civil lawsuit filed in New York by the American Civil Liberties Union.
    "The CIA can now identify the number of videotapes that were destroyed," said the letter submitted in that case by Acting U.S. Attorney Lev Dassin. "Ninety-two videotapes were destroyed."

    It is not clear what exactly was on the recordings. The government's letter cites interrogation videos, but the lawsuit against the Defense Department also seeks records related to treatment of detainees, any deaths of detainees and the CIA's sending of suspects overseas, known as "extraordinary rendition."
    At the White House, press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters he hadn't spoken to the president about the report, but he called the news about the videotapes "sad" and said Obama was committed to ending torture while also protecting American values.
    ACLU attorney Amrit Singh said the CIA should be held in contempt of court for holding back the information for so long.
    "The large number of videotapes destroyed confirms that the agency engaged in a systematic attempt to hide evidence of its illegal interrogations and to evade the court's order," Singh said.
    CIA spokesman George Little said the agency "has certainly cooperated with the Department of Justice investigation. If anyone thinks it's agency policy to impede the enforcement of American law, they simply don't know the facts."
    The details of interrogations of terror suspects, and the existence of tapes documenting those sessions, have become the subject of long fights in a number of different court cases. In the trial of Sept. 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui, prosecutors initially claimed no such recordings existed, then acknowledged after the trial was over that two videotapes and one audiotape had been made.
    The Dassin letter, dated March 2 to Judge Alvin Hellerstein, says the CIA is now gathering more details for the lawsuit, including a list of the destroyed records, any secondary accounts that describe the destroyed contents and the identities of those who may have viewed or possessed the recordings before they were destroyed.
    But the lawyers also note that some of that information may be classified, such as the names of CIA personnel who viewed the tapes.
    The separate criminal investigation includes interrogations of al-Qaida lieutenant Abu Zubaydah and another top al-Qaida leader. Tapes of those interrogations were destroyed, in part, the Bush administration said, to protect the identities of the government questioners at a time the Justice Department was debating whether or not the tactics used during the interrogations were legal.
    Former CIA director Michael Hayden acknowledged that waterboarding — simulated drowning — was used on three suspects, including the two whose interrogations were recorded. John Durham, a senior career prosecutor in Connecticut, is leading the criminal investigation, out of Virginia, and had asked that he be given until the end of February to wrap up his work before requests for information in the civil lawsuit were dealt with.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,690
    and if 3000 americans are killed on obama's watch it will be interesting to see how he reacts?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth
    Posts
    4,264
    Quote Originally Posted by j4ever41 View Post
    and if 3000 americans are killed on obama's watch it will be interesting to see how he reacts?
    It will be interesting to see how O'bama reacts should the CIA destroy evidence.

    IMHO, the war was (and still is) a big mistake. Given Bush's inexperience in politics (Texas governors don't do very much) and his mediocre mind ("I looked into Putin's eyes and saw his soul"), it's not a big surprise he wandered into it . . .

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,690
    true, but i am more interested in my first post above.


    It will be interesting to see how O'bama reacts should the CIA destroy evidence.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The world in my head.
    Posts
    1,315
    The war in iraq i believe was a mistake. . and as much as we blame Bush, (and i think he is an idoit), it was not Bush's fault, nor was katrina nor was 9/11, and what the CIA does is not his fault either....

    People blame the president for alot of things they have no control over. In all honesty the two house's of congress have alot more power than the president. but nobody even knows who their representatives are so its easier to blame the president.

    Until people hold their congressman and women accountable for their actions our country will not start moving forward again.. when you have people in office making 200K a year, and companies willing to give them 10million to vote their way.. who do you think wins, special interest groups or the American people????????????

  6. #6
    amcon's Avatar
    amcon is offline physical pain is temporary. It may last a minute, or an hour, or a day, or a year, but eventually it will subside... The pain of quiting will lasts forever!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    in the freaking cold
    Posts
    3,846
    Quote Originally Posted by j4ever41 View Post
    and if 3000 americans are killed on obama's watch it will be interesting to see how he reacts?
    Quote Originally Posted by quarry206 View Post
    The war in iraq i believe was a mistake. . and as much as we blame Bush, (and i think he is an idoit), it was not Bush's fault, nor was katrina nor was 9/11, and what the CIA does is not his fault either....

    People blame the president for alot of things they have no control over. In all honesty the two house's of congress have alot more power than the president. but nobody even knows who their representatives are so its easier to blame the president.

    Until people hold their congressman and women accountable for their actions our country will not start moving forward again.. when you have people in office making 200K a year, and companies willing to give them 10million to vote their way.. who do you think wins, special interest groups or the American people????????????
    well, my thoughts are:

    what would a dif president have done? what could they have done? 9-11 was the first time (besides the war on drugs) that we were all out attacked on american soil.

    as for the cia - destroying documents... do you think that is the first time? do you think it will be the last?

    illegal search and seizure - agreed they need to protect the american people first... and thats where the problem lied pre 9-11, we were knowingly or unknowingly letting the terrorists in to our country... tuff decisions but remember the panic and terror that was in you hart and in you community when we as a country got a first hand view if what the enemy can do... ? and how else could we have contained it so quickly?

    illegal search and seizure - second part - this is the part where the govt grabs too much power, and socialism starts... that is why we hear this socialist govt that we have now (oboma) was not started with him voted in to office - bush did pave the way for a socialist govt...

    so ... solution should always be offered - not just bitch about what happend - solution is that we the people must presure our politicians to hear our voice!!! we must fight what we believe in ... dem's or rep's dont matter as much as liberals, moderates and consertives!!! imo the consertives will grow in size and power and we will go back to a more "reagan type" system... small govt, large efforts to help the small business man.

    and pray alot!!!


    note: watch when reps take the office next... if oboma is going to air dirty laundry, trust me the repubs will crush him after he leaves... dont ever slap some one if you know you cant get the last lick in...
    Last edited by amcon; 03-03-2009 at 06:51 AM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    13,966
    We need Bill back

  8. #8
    amcon's Avatar
    amcon is offline physical pain is temporary. It may last a minute, or an hour, or a day, or a year, but eventually it will subside... The pain of quiting will lasts forever!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    in the freaking cold
    Posts
    3,846
    Quote Originally Posted by xlxBigSexyxlx View Post
    We need Bill back
    they tried to get him via his wife back ... the prob was monica said she wouldnt work as a intern again...


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    13,966

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The world in my head.
    Posts
    1,315
    There actually was a grass roots style movement to try and get Clinton to run again.. the rules say he can't serive 3 terms back to back to back.. says nothing about him running again after a break.. haha

    sorry just a side note, didn't mean to whore the thread....


    Back to the orignal thread.. I voted for Obama, because i liked his views in which i believe a president can change. IMO I believe to many people battle over having their party win instead of really just listening to what people are saying and their plans.... I don't believe in parties i think they only split politics instead having them work together.

  11. #11
    amcon's Avatar
    amcon is offline physical pain is temporary. It may last a minute, or an hour, or a day, or a year, but eventually it will subside... The pain of quiting will lasts forever!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    in the freaking cold
    Posts
    3,846
    Quote Originally Posted by quarry206 View Post
    There actually was a grass roots style movement to try and get Clinton to run again.. the rules say he can't serive 3 terms back to back to back.. says nothing about him running again after a break.. haha

    sorry just a side note, didn't mean to whore the thread....


    Back to the orignal thread.. I voted for Obama, because i liked his views in which i believe a president can change. IMO I believe to many people battle over having their party win instead of really just listening to what people are saying and their plans.... I don't believe in parties i think they only split politics instead having them work together.
    oboma ran as a moderate (and as consertive just little) ... now he if full liberal - are you happy that you voted for him?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Dar ad-Dawah
    Posts
    1,229
    Who is this Obama guy you people keep talking about?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    34,255
    what was the reason for releasing this info now? Seems like a jack-ass move to me.

    Iraq was a major error, but there was a war cry in Washington. Nobody was crying for war louder than your current vice president, look it up.

    I'm glad Obama is taking steps to move military force out of Iraq. Don't expect the war to end though. He's only interested in moving the war to Pakistan, Afganistan, and Darfur. I do agree however Pakistan may be a good idea given the political climate there.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    3,300
    Quote Originally Posted by Kratos View Post
    what was the reason for releasing this info now? Seems like a jack-ass move to me.
    Seems like peculiar timing, just like all the other minor shit storms that he's produced since being elected. With all the things that Obama does wrong, every one is so concerned with talking about all the stupid shit that comes out of his administration, while forgetting that one by one, socialist programs are being implemented. Obama's goal is not prosperity, but redistribution. As long as something keeps people busy talking about anything but that, he won't have any problems achieving that goal.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    34,255
    Quote Originally Posted by Nooomoto View Post
    Seems like peculiar timing, just like all the other minor shit storms that he's produced since being elected. With all the things that Obama does wrong, every one is so concerned with talking about all the stupid shit that comes out of his administration, while forgetting that one by one, socialist programs are being implemented. Obama's goal is not prosperity, but redistribution. As long as something keeps people busy talking about anything but that, he won't have any problems achieving that goal.
    I think he's trying to create as much hate for the Bush administration as possible as soon as possible. There are still a lot of ill feelings about his presidency and the state of the economy among voters. He wants to ensure a republican won't get elected next time around ensuring a second term for himself. It's un-American, there is no call for the release of this info, if there is a problem with how we do business, fix it.

    And yeah, he'll be able to push more socialist policy in two terms then one.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    T-MOS LIVES FOREVER/W GOD
    Posts
    9,329
    Quote Originally Posted by BuffedGuy View Post
    Who is this Obama guy you people keep talking about?
    OMG.......................


    buffed guy............................

    made a joke..............................

    and it was short enough I read it.................................

    LMAO

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The world in my head.
    Posts
    1,315
    Quote Originally Posted by amcon View Post
    oboma ran as a moderate (and as consertive just little) ... now he if full liberal - are you happy that you voted for him?

    I think it is too early to say what he can or will do... nothing that he has said or done so far has even taken effect.

    now i do hate that alot of Dem congress men are throwing out very liberal bills hoping to have their name on something under a Dem president.... good example is HR 45 (gun bill), everybody is blaming on Obama and it was put infront of congress while bush was in office. its just easy to claim Obama is trying to make people register and take away guns, when neither of those are in that bill nor does the bill have anything to do with Obama directly.. but that goes back to my past point about people not truely knowing how their own government works..

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,690
    I think it is too early to say what he can or will do

    WHAT?

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Dar ad-Dawah
    Posts
    1,229
    Quote Originally Posted by prone2rage View Post
    OMG.......................


    buffed guy............................

    made a joke..............................

    and it was short enough I read it.................................

  20. #20
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth
    Posts
    4,264
    Quote Originally Posted by amcon View Post
    well, my thoughts are:

    what would a dif president have done? what could they have done?
    A different President would have seen through Dick Cheney's lies:

    http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep...on/na-cheney16
    A GOP congressional leader who was wavering on giving President Bush the authority to wage war in late 2002 said Vice President Dick Cheney misled him by saying that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had direct personal ties to Al Qaeda terrorists and was making rapid progress toward a suitcase nuclear weapon, according to a new book by Washington Post reporter Barton Gellman.
    Cheney's accusations, described by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey of Texas, came in a classified one-on-one briefing in the vice president's office in the Capitol.
    The threat Cheney described went far beyond public statements that have been criticized for relying on "cherry-picked" intelligence of unknown reliability. There was no intelligence to support the vice president's private assertions, Gellman reports.
    Armey had spoken out against the coming war, and his opposition gave cover to Democrats who feared the political costs of appearing weak. Armey reversed his position after Cheney told him, he said, that the threat from Iraq was "more imminent than we want to portray to the public at large."
    Cheney said, according to Armey, that Iraq's "ability to miniaturize weapons of mass destruction, particularly nuclear," had been "substantially refined since the first Gulf War."
    Cheney linked that threat to Hussein's alleged ties to Al Qaeda, Armey said, explaining "we now know they have the ability to develop these weapons in a very portable fashion, and they have a delivery system in their relationship with organizations such as Al Qaeda."
    "Did Dick Cheney . . . purposely tell me things he knew to be untrue?" Armey said. "I seriously feel that may be the case. . . . Had I known or believed then what I believe now, I would have publicly opposed [the war] resolution right to the bitter end."


    Dick Armey would not have encouraged other Republican congressmen to vote for war if Cheney had not lied. Bush (referred to as "Shrub" here in Texas) should have seen Cheney as the liar he was, but he didn't. So, with the combination of a fool and a liar running the country, we ended up in a war.
    Last edited by Tock; 03-04-2009 at 08:50 PM.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth
    Posts
    4,264
    Quote Originally Posted by Kratos View Post
    Iraq was a major error, but there was a war cry in Washington. Nobody was crying for war louder than your current vice president, look it up.
    Maybe so, but that was based on the information given to Congress by the Bush Administration, which, as it turns out, was 'adjusted' by the folks who wanted a war.

    I'll be when GW Bush writes his memoir, he won't have many good things to say about his VP.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The world in my head.
    Posts
    1,315
    I'll go on record saying i'm an Obama supporter, but i don't think he is amazing... i dis-agree with alot of what he says and does. but even if you are voting for the lesser of two evil's you still have the duty as an American to vote.. I do not believe that all the time i am now and have in the past spent away from my family in Iraq is supporting America, i do believe there was no direct link between taking out Iraq and supporting american freedoms. IMO i have earned the right to voice my opinion about my country because i truely have give alot of my life to it... But as i believe that, i also believe that as an American you need to vote for who you believe fits you best.

    i am for full gun rights, but also for gay marriage. i think are health care system sucks, but i don't want to be told who to go see... and there will never be a president or congressman that fits perfect for me and my views or anybody.. so you have to look at ALL the views and weight out what you believe needs to be done. no president will ever be perfect because we live in a country with 300million people and no government will ever make everybody happy. there is and will always be a cause and effect with every choice our government does. a person like Ron Paul (buffedguy will like i added him haha) will never be elected to the top office because he wants to be totally fair. and lets face it going back to the constitution for answers would take away big bucks from people that support political figures so companies won't let him run (by ways of no funding). we no longer live in a democracy we live in a capitalistic society. and he who has the gold makes the rules..


    and to J4ever41, yes i do believe it is too early, you can't really name major issues that he has changed that have taken effect, there ideas pushed out there. there are concepts pushed by other people using his name. . . . but there isn't anything soild yet
    Last edited by quarry206; 03-05-2009 at 03:45 AM.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    3,300
    Quote Originally Posted by quarry206 View Post
    I think it is too early to say what he can or will do... nothing that he has said or done so far has even taken effect.
    Dude...have you not noticed that every time he opens his socialist mouth, the markets dive? Maybe none of his policies have taken their intended legal effect yet...but the effects of him being elected President are becoming more evident as the days go on.

    The Wall Street Journal noted that nothing has changed since the election, with the exception of one thing...the President. Since then, the markets have been nothing but diving, diving, diving.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The world in my head.
    Posts
    1,315
    Quote Originally Posted by Nooomoto View Post
    Dude...have you not noticed that every time he opens his socialist mouth, the markets dive? Maybe none of his policies have taken their intended legal effect yet...but the effects of him being elected President are becoming more evident as the days go on.

    The Wall Street Journal noted that nothing has changed since the election, with the exception of one thing...the President. Since then, the markets have been nothing but diving, diving, diving.
    So what your saying is before Obama took office the world markets and the US dollar was perfect? That car companies have crashed in two months? people lost their jobs over night? US foreign policy was so perfect that countries ran to us for everything and now run away?

    -in the past year how many companies have gone belly up?
    -how many millions of homes have been foreclosed on because dumbass people got house's they couldn't afford?
    -how many major companies are still spending tons of money on CEO bonus's and golf tournaments but asking the government to bail them out?
    -when bush was in office and the markets started to crash it wasn't his fault, since for two strait years of his term the S&P stayed below 1K?
    -the issues with Citibank only came up since late January?
    -are the European markets dropping because of the US president
    -when the stock market crashed the last week of Sept. 08 it was because people thought he would take office?


    ONCE MORE I'LL REPEAT.. just because i voted for him doesn't mean i agree with everything he says... my only point is alot of people are blaming the pain the country is in right now on somebody that hasn't really done much...... I hope some of his ideas never make it to paper... but do you really think that if McCain or another candidate were in office all the markets would even out??

    but this is the last thing i'll say about this topic, this is one of those issues you either agree or dis agree there is not changing opinions.. like i said before, everybody votes for who they believe does them best.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    3,300
    Well..if you read...I didn't say any of that. You cannot deny that every time he opens his mouth, the markets take another dive. Nothing he has done or said as of yet has had a positive effect on anything.

    Wallstreet doesn't care about politics, it only cares about numbers. Every time Obama speaks, the markets reflect negatively. He ran on a platform of "hope" and "change"...now it's all doom and gloom. Things were not perfect before he took office, but they certainly weren't getting worse at the increasingly rapid rate that they are now.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Va-j-j-ville
    Posts
    3,472
    the markets have a 6 month forecast of the ecomony. w/ that said the market knew a dem was going to the whitehouse, obama. I do wish him all the best however the I don't think anyone can point to ONE president who took office and has seen a market fall like it has since the guy you voted for. He will shove all his socialism/nationalism crap down everyones throat w/in a yr. Wait until the healthcare reform gets signed...grab a number and wait in line whether it's an emergency or not->TT
    Taxes...shit I 'm gonna ramble........
    You think it's bad now...just wait. Sorry...IMHO. politics and religion, OMG

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,690
    Quote Originally Posted by quarry206 View Post
    I'll go on record saying i'm an Obama supporter, but i don't think he is amazing... i dis-agree with alot of what he says and does. but even if you are voting for the lesser of two evil's you still have the duty as an American to vote.. I do not believe that all the time i am now and have in the past spent away from my family in Iraq is supporting America, i do believe there was no direct link between taking out Iraq and supporting american freedoms. IMO i have earned the right to voice my opinion about my country because i truely have give alot of my life to it... But as i believe that, i also believe that as an American you need to vote for who you believe fits you best.

    i am for full gun rights, but also for gay marriage. i think are health care system sucks, but i don't want to be told who to go see... and there will never be a president or congressman that fits perfect for me and my views or anybody.. so you have to look at ALL the views and weight out what you believe needs to be done. no president will ever be perfect because we live in a country with 300million people and no government will ever make everybody happy. there is and will always be a cause and effect with every choice our government does. a person like Ron Paul (buffedguy will like i added him haha) will never be elected to the top office because he wants to be totally fair. and lets face it going back to the constitution for answers would take away big bucks from people that support political figures so companies won't let him run (by ways of no funding). we no longer live in a democracy we live in a capitalistic society. and he who has the gold makes the rules..


    and to J4ever41, yes i do believe it is too early, you can't really name major issues that he has changed that have taken effect, there ideas pushed out there. there are concepts pushed by other people using his name. . . . but there isn't anything soild yet
    Well i dont think its to early to see what direction he is wanting to go. Why do you think the healthcare in this country sucks?

  28. #28
    amcon's Avatar
    amcon is offline physical pain is temporary. It may last a minute, or an hour, or a day, or a year, but eventually it will subside... The pain of quiting will lasts forever!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    in the freaking cold
    Posts
    3,846
    Quote Originally Posted by Tock View Post
    A different President would have seen through Dick Cheney's lies:

    http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep...on/na-cheney16
    A GOP congressional leader who was wavering on giving President Bush the authority to wage war in late 2002 said Vice President Dick Cheney misled him by saying that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had direct personal ties to Al Qaeda terrorists and was making rapid progress toward a suitcase nuclear weapon, according to a new book by Washington Post reporter Barton Gellman.
    Cheney's accusations, described by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey of Texas, came in a classified one-on-one briefing in the vice president's office in the Capitol.
    The threat Cheney described went far beyond public statements that have been criticized for relying on "cherry-picked" intelligence of unknown reliability. There was no intelligence to support the vice president's private assertions, Gellman reports.
    Armey had spoken out against the coming war, and his opposition gave cover to Democrats who feared the political costs of appearing weak. Armey reversed his position after Cheney told him, he said, that the threat from Iraq was "more imminent than we want to portray to the public at large."
    Cheney said, according to Armey, that Iraq's "ability to miniaturize weapons of mass destruction, particularly nuclear," had been "substantially refined since the first Gulf War."
    Cheney linked that threat to Hussein's alleged ties to Al Qaeda, Armey said, explaining "we now know they have the ability to develop these weapons in a very portable fashion, and they have a delivery system in their relationship with organizations such as Al Qaeda."
    "Did Dick Cheney . . . purposely tell me things he knew to be untrue?" Armey said. "I seriously feel that may be the case. . . . Had I known or believed then what I believe now, I would have publicly opposed [the war] resolution right to the bitter end."


    Dick Armey would not have encouraged other Republican congressmen to vote for war if Cheney had not lied. Bush (referred to as "Shrub" here in Texas) should have seen Cheney as the liar he was, but he didn't. So, with the combination of a fool and a liar running the country, we ended up in a war.
    i wont disagree with that but what did "A GOP congressional leader" or the GOP know about al-qaeda...?

    i believe bush wanted to make amends for two things 9-11, and for his father... as for sudam h... he has the weapons - they most likely are is seria now...

    we know they had them and they disappeared... S.H. was hoping that when they did not find them we would pull out... then we killed his kids and cabnet members and S.H. went and hid... not real well but... he was a very proud man

  29. #29
    amcon's Avatar
    amcon is offline physical pain is temporary. It may last a minute, or an hour, or a day, or a year, but eventually it will subside... The pain of quiting will lasts forever!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    in the freaking cold
    Posts
    3,846
    Quote Originally Posted by ni4ni View Post
    the markets have a 6 month forecast of the ecomony. w/ that said the market knew a dem was going to the whitehouse, obama. I do wish him all the best however the I don't think anyone can point to ONE president who took office and has seen a market fall like it has since the guy you voted for. He will shove all his socialism/nationalism crap down everyones throat w/in a yr. Wait until the healthcare reform gets signed...grab a number and wait in line whether it's an emergency or not->TT
    Taxes...shit I 'm gonna ramble........
    You think it's bad now...just wait. Sorry...IMHO. politics and religion, OMG
    the major consern with the general public is that he is soooo liberal... and that scares people...

  30. #30
    amcon's Avatar
    amcon is offline physical pain is temporary. It may last a minute, or an hour, or a day, or a year, but eventually it will subside... The pain of quiting will lasts forever!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    in the freaking cold
    Posts
    3,846
    Quote Originally Posted by Nooomoto View Post
    Well..if you read...I didn't say any of that. You cannot deny that every time he opens his mouth, the markets take another dive. Nothing he has done or said as of yet has had a positive effect on anything.

    Wallstreet doesn't care about politics, it only cares about numbers. Every time Obama speaks, the markets reflect negatively. He ran on a platform of "hope" and "change"...now it's all doom and gloom. Things were not perfect before he took office, but they certainly weren't getting worse at the increasingly rapid rate that they are now.
    agreed, people want to talk about change right now put the "proof is in the resuslts" the market is tanking!!! smart (i use that loosely) businesses (gm, cry'sler, bank after bank) are stiking their hands out saying "give me or else!!" and oboma has to buck up... some of that is the prev admins fault. if a well fair state doesnt work, why would a well fair country work?????

    if you were in debt, and opened up more credit to spend how would that help you get out of debt? how does the gov raise funds? taxes to the 250k and above will only cover half of the bill (IF AND ONLY IF THEY TOOK ALL THEIR MONEY 100 % TAX!!!) so where is the rest of the money coming from? who will pay that off?

    even if a "better" administration started 4 years from now - THEY COULD DO NOTHING TO FIX IT!!! liberals are cementing their position as socialists, and 99.9% of the people who make 250k + will either leave or set up off shore companies that will opperate via internet... (--- my prediction

  31. #31
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth
    Posts
    4,264
    Quote Originally Posted by amcon View Post
    i wont disagree with that but what did "A GOP congressional leader" or the GOP know about al-qaeda...?
    Dick Armey? He was the Republican House Majority Leader, not just any gop congressional leader.
    Don't know who Dick Armey is? Tsk tsk tsk . . .
    He was the #2 guy in the House of Representatives back in the day. Exerted huge influence in getting things done, getting campaign $$$ for candidates, getting Republicans to vote his way. Almost made it to House Speaker.




    i believe bush wanted to make amends for two things 9-11, and for his father... as for sudam h... he has the weapons - they most likely are is seria now...

    we know they had them and they disappeared...
    Who knows this? "We?" Not me . . .
    Hans Blix searched for them for years, never found a trace.
    The Bush Administration said Saddam had purchased some material to make bombs, and tried to hush up the people who knew otherwise. Here's the story behind that story:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Ga...he_White_House

    In short, the Bush Administration was chuck full of liars and incompetants who got the US into a needless war, got thousands of innocent US soldiers killed, lots more crippled for life, and killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi killed and crippled.
    When that wasn't enough for them to screw up, they bungled the US economy, then pissed off every other country on the planet, and got the country hopelessly into debt. Now, anytime the Chinese government wants to plunge the US into a financial abyss, all they have to do is sell the Trillion $$$ + of US securities they own, and you and me both will be lucky to have cold oatmeal for breakfast for the next ten years.

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Kabutzkatura
    Posts
    4,665
    even if a "better" administration started 4 years from now - THEY COULD DO NOTHING TO FIX IT!!! liberals are cementing their position as socialists, and 99.9% of the people who make 250k + will either leave or set up off shore companies that will opperate via internet... (--- my prediction
    Blah Blah Blah I can watch a commercial on fox network and see that same crap.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nooomoto View Post
    Well..if you read...I didn't say any of that. You cannot deny that every time he opens his mouth, the markets take another dive. Nothing he has done or said as of yet has had a positive effect on anything.

    Wallstreet doesn't care about politics, it only cares about numbers. Every time Obama speaks, the markets reflect negatively. He ran on a platform of "hope" and "change"...now it's all doom and gloom. Things were not perfect before he took office, but they certainly weren't getting worse at the increasingly rapid rate that they are now.
    How can you possibly make a connection there. That is so dumb to think that you can make a logical conclusion out of that.
    Last edited by IM708; 03-06-2009 at 05:26 AM.

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    3,300
    ^^^Check the numbers, dude. The DJ has dropped 3,000 points since election day. The only thing that's changed since then and now is the man sitting at the big desk. It's the only connection to make. Nothing else would or can explain how fast the markets are tanking. It's not the fact that the markets are going down, they've been doing that since the end of Summer last year. It's how fast it's happening since Obama was elected.

    EDIT: From Bloomberg:

    The Dow Jones Industrial Average has fallen 20 percent since Inauguration Day, the fastest drop under a newly elected president in at least 90 years, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The gauge has lost 53 percent from its October 2007 record of 14,164.53, slipping 4.1 percent to 6,594.44 yesterday.
    Last edited by Nooomoto; 03-06-2009 at 09:49 AM.

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The world in my head.
    Posts
    1,315
    ^^^^ the DJ hit a high in oct of 2007, and has had strait drops since then. with its largest drop happening before Obama even won the election.

    and most all market experts point to the fall of GM and other key companies with in the DJI, all with'in the last six months to the fast drop... not the president

    just because the market has kept dropping since he has been in office does not mean he is the reason...i listed off reasons in my last post reasons that even your wall street journal list as reasons for horrible market values.. your fast come back was you never said any of it.. true you didn't, but you are totally ignoring clear and hard facts of long term drops that started before the president was even running for office. and clear cause and effects..

    since we are throughing un proven - un related facts out how about this... since the steelers started their winning steak to the super bowl, the markets have made drop after drop... lets blame the NFL...... yes the president has control of alot but there is no way you can link the whole world having major drops in markets because of him taking office.. Europe, china, japan and the US all of their markets are suffering..

    America has hit the middle of a shit storm of lots of things going wrong coming together. though i do agree the president needs to get off his ass and get to work on fixing it.. he is not the reason it happened..


    nobody can deny that lots of major companies have fallen apart, world markets have dropped, foreclosers have been sky high for two years now because of people not living within their means. and now America for the past 6 years has spent 16 billion dollars a month on a war in Iraq that hasn't done one thing but kill Americans and make Iraq worse off then when we first got here..... everything started two years ago falling and yes it has hit a shit storm at once,, AND YES I'LL AGREE WITH YOU, Obama needs to get up and do something not just sit around... but it was not his doing, but yes it is his job to try and help fix it....
    Last edited by quarry206; 03-06-2009 at 01:07 PM.

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The world in my head.
    Posts
    1,315
    DJI OCT 9, 2007 --14,164
    DJI Apirl 10,2008 --12,581
    DJI OCT 10, 2008 --8,579
    DJI Jan 23, 2009 --8,116
    DJI Mar 4, 2009 --6,875


    It has been a slop for a while now, and though your number of 3,000 is way off.. yes it has dropped, since late Jan when he took office, but look at that time frame and see what else happened, to include the cut of jobs by major companies, GM, banks and other major companies coming clean about how bad they really are.... The president does need to get on the ball... but you can't give any facts other than things that are un related. un-related because to much other stuff has happened since he took office to blame falls on him...

  36. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by amcon View Post
    well, my thoughts are:

    what would a dif president have done?He would have not gone to war with iraq what could they have done? i dont know who 'they' are. 9-11 was the first time (besides the war on drugsdumbest war ever. steroids are included in this war making you a hypocrite) that we were all out attacked on american soil.point being?

    as for the cia - destroying documents... do you think that is the first time? first time we know ofdo you think it will be the last?of that magnitude? i hope so.

    illegal search and seizure - agreed they need to protect the american people first... and thats where the problem lied pre 9-11, we were knowingly or unknowingly letting the terrorists in to our country... how can we uphold civil liberties and restrict possible 'terrorists' from coming in?tuff decisions but remember the panic and terror that was in you hart heart and in you community when we as a country got a first hand view if what the enemy can do... ? and how else could we have contained it so quickly? contained what quickly? they bombers blew themselves up...

    illegal search and seizure - second part - this is the part where the govt grabs too much power, and socialism starts...this is completely untrue. many socialist countries have a lot more liberties than the U.S. does. Im from canada, which isnt socialist, but more so than the U.S., we have a lot more protection from this bullshit. socialism has NOTHING to do with civil liberties. Please look up the United States' ranking on world democratic index: 2008 ranking
    No. ↓ Location ↓ Index ↓ Category ↓
    1 Sweden 9.88 Full democracy SOCIALIST
    2 Norway 9.68 Full democracy SOCIALIST
    3 Iceland 9.65 Full democracy SOCIALIST
    4 Netherlands 9.53 Full democracy SOCIALIST
    5 Denmark 9.52 Full democracy SOCIALIST
    6 Finland 9.25 Full democracy SOCIALIST
    7 New Zealand 9.19 Full democracy
    8 Switzerland 9.15 Full democracy
    9 Luxembourg 9.10 Full democracy
    10 Australia 9.09 Full democracy
    11 Canada 9.07 Full democracy
    12 Ireland 9.01 Full democracy
    13 Germany 8.82 Full democracy
    14 Austria 8.49 Full democracy
    15 Spain 8.45 Full democracy
    16 Malta 8.39 Full democracy
    17 Japan 8.25 Full democracy
    18 United States 8.22 Full democracy


    that is why we hear this socialist govt that we have now you will never have a socialist government in the U.S., and if there was, its not that bad...(oboma) was not started with him voted in to office - bush did pave the way for a socialist govt...yeah by showing how badly you can **** up a free market economy. the democratic party is farther right then the conservative party is here...

    so ... solution should always be offered - not just bitch about what happend - solution is that we the people must presure our politicians to hear our voice!!! we must fight what we believe in ... dem's or rep's dont matter as much as liberals, moderates and consertives!!! imo the consertives will grow in size and power and we will go back to a more "reagan type" system... small govt, large efforts to help the small business man.

    and pray alot!!!


    note: watch when reps take the office next... if oboma is going to air dirty laundry, trust me the repubs will crush him after he leaves... dont ever slap some one if you know you cant get the last lick in...i dont think the purpose of this was to take shots at the republican party as a whole. But i mean i thought the people should have a right to know???
    ....
    Last edited by JiGGaMaN; 03-06-2009 at 02:12 PM.

  37. #37
    sorry for picking on you amcon, yours was the first i disagreed with terribly. im not gonna waste my time responding to the rest of these half-wit economic theorists who have no idea how a stock market works or what socialism even means (it may surprise you).

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    3,435
    Quote Originally Posted by JiGGaMaN View Post
    sorry for picking on you amcon, yours was the first i disagreed with terribly. im not gonna waste my time responding to the rest of these half-wit economic theorists who have no idea how a stock market works or what socialism even means (it may surprise you).
    Um...just to respond to your earlier post. That the US is even listed as a "full democratic" government should give you insight into how flawed that list truely is. We don't have a "democracy" nor were we ever supposed to have one. That's one of the great fallacies always trumpted about in the media and in history books. We also haven't had a true "free market economy" in about 97 years. So to say Bush is a testament to how much you can mess up a free market economy is faulty logic, although he did contribute greatly to it's ultimate demise.

    The list you mentioned is important not because of it's accuracy, but because it points out an important feature of most western civilizations that all modern governments are mixed. Meaning most governments have partial socialization and partial privatization. What differs is the areas that are socilized and privatized. Many of the so called "socialized" governments on that list actually have much freer economies than ours. Not only that, but the relative size and population density of all those countries makes socialism possible without widespread corruption. People on the left love to point to European countries as the model we should follow, but the stae of texas is literally bigger than almost all those countries combined. This would, in fact, make it the perfect arguement against socialization and for states rights! However, to say Socialism has no effect on civil liberties is just flat out wrong. Socialism is coersion and force. Socialism is literally incompatible with liberty.

    I also find it very funny if not sadly ironic that given the amount of corruption, crony capitalism and lobbying that's so prevalent in the US government that any citizen could ever call for more government involvement! I thought we just got out of a presidency that marked one of the greatest power grabs in history (as evidenced by this thread) and now we're lining up to give the executive branch even more power?

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Kabutzkatura
    Posts
    4,665
    (to jiggaman) Christ, we maybe have 5 sensible people on this website. Breath of fresh air ...thanks

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •