Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Wikileaks
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 789856" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p>AV,</p><p>Appreciate the response, we agree to disagree and let history over the coming years tell the story. However, again taking the position of conceding the WMD in Iraq, what greater purpose does it serve for Bush to go before the US public and say what he said when as we're all conceding here, the truth was that there were in fact WMD's in Iraq after all? First he said there were and made the case to the world in order to justify the Iraq war and then as the wikileaks data Elder refers too, and you sourced in your post sez that WMD did in fact exist in Iraq, Bush goes before the public again and then claims in an admission that it did not and even goes on to try and at least give other credibility in reasons to then be over there. What's the political mission here? Is he telling the truth when he argued for WMD in Iraq and then lying later as per the vid in saying there now wasn't? Why would he do this?</p><p> </p><p>But let's go one step further, first off of the 200k plus cables wikileaks has, only around 1000 have been released so far. To quote Politico on 12/7 after Assange's arrest:</p><p></p><p> </p><p><a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/onmedia/1210/WikiLeaks_vows_another_release_despite_arrest.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: red">source</span></a></p><p> </p><p>Also if you research the NY Times, Der Spiegel and I think Guardian (don't quote me on that last one) all 3 news outlets have all along insisted that Wikileaks uphold to certain standards and all 4 players in previewing the documents have redacted information if anyone felt that lives would indeed be at risk or other legit secrets would be compromised. Even Assange himself has admitted there are legit reasons to keep some things secret. Also, the vast majority of the cables, emails, etc. in Wikileaks' hands are yet to go public and thus the reason for gov't actions over the last nearly 2 weeks in an effort to prevent more from coming out. Let's all be honest here, in scale very little has come out and the flipside of this coin as William Phaff said so well in a <a href="http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/leaks_reveal_complicated_us_strategy_20101207/" target="_blank"><span style="color: red">piece</span></a> at Truthdig,</p><p></p><p>so none of this was really any big surprise. On a personal note, I've had more fun out of anything released with the fact that Hillary was in effect engaged in identity theft making her nothing more than the common street level thief. In recent days she's even stated that her stint as Sec. of State will be her last forray in public service so did the fraud revelations do her in as a career? You'd think repubs would champion wikileaks unless they all know beyond those origin 1000 cables released is the other shoe that has yet to drop?</p><p><img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/emoticons/winks.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":winks:" title="Winks :winks:" data-shortname=":winks:" /></p><p> </p><p>The reactions of State actors of shock and horror is all put on much like the neighborhood ladies who all knew who was cheaping on who and then when it all came out public, they put on the front of shock in public display so as to pretend they never knew all along. Yeah and the men know too and of course play their respected parts but it's all a farce. </p><p> </p><p>At the end of the day, the only people caught clueless in the whole deal are all us poor schmucks who slave and work day in and day out to support these worthless bastards we stupidly "elect" to dominat.....rul.....govern us.</p><p> </p><p>Wikileaks has been talking to these media outlets for several months on what would be disclosed first and in fact the gov't knew well ahead of time also. The media outlets insisted the gov't be given opportunity to input, you know, "sir we have this information, care to respond?" yet they choose not to or in effect took the "no comment" route. This way makes it easier to play the role of victim.</p><p> </p><p>But now that the truth on Iraq WMD is out there, conceding Elder's point as fact, and it was known to be coming, why then in just recent days and going back to Bush's comments in public that no WMD was found, would Bush again even in his latest book say <a href="http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/11/bush-decision-points-wmds-iraq" target="_blank"><span style="color: red">this</span></a> concerning WMD in Iraq,</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Now on the one hand, you insist WMD was there and quite honestly I've always thought that was correct but we may disagree on how they got there and why they were there to begin with. I never believed Saddam was the <a href="http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2849.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: red">only bad guy</span> </a>over in Iraq.<img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/wink.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":wink2:" title="Wink :wink2:" data-shortname=":wink2:" /> I also believe there is good reason as to why they were never found as in made public and yet again you and I may disagree on that as well. Do you think they went to Syria? Ooooo! Syria! Go back 28 years and look at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Syria" target="_blank"><span style="color: red">events</span></a> but then start coming forward, watch the pieces move on the board and then you might start putting together the puzzle but you may also not like what it shows either!</p><p> </p><p>But regardless what you or I say or think, the simple fact is the man who ultimately held the final decision, the man if you will accept on it's face, saw all the data, all the secret documents, all the inside details and yet he himself claims that no WMD was in fact found in Iraq, the commander in chief said this, your boss if you will, then how is it you continue to claim otherwise or are you calling Bush a liar? If not a liar, then why the deception by Bush to the public and how does this from the standpoint of greater good make us safer and in the chief duties of constitutional authority, defend this country? Why do we believe him in both cases (Iraq has WMD, Iraq doesn't have WMD) yet what he sez are 180 degress apart from each other?</p><p> </p><p>As a lowly soldier, you claim almost firsthand knowledge of WMD in Iraq (you're not a contractor for "The Shop" are you?<img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/wink.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":wink2:" title="Wink :wink2:" data-shortname=":wink2:" />) yet your highest commander sez there were no WMD in Iraq. Tell me, why in this case should I believe you and not him? I'm willing to accept your claim although ultimately you may dislike why but can you at least see the problem with this whole thing to begin with. Someone at the top is lying but why? And it still leaves serious questions about the war and it's true purpose to begin with but let's focus on the WMD for now.</p><p> </p><p>Lastly, what I find funny in all of this is that in the first 2 data dumps of the Iraq and Afghan war, there was the 15 minutes of fame if you will and then all was quite. Oh sure, there were grandstanding politicians getting the mileage they always get but once the blovating was done, life for all returned to normal. This latest disclosure however goes to the heart of the emperor himself as being naked and OMG look at the reaction. "We can just blovate when only soldier's arse's are on the line (besides that's what we pay them for anyway) and then do absolutely nothing else but when Assange has the unmittigated gall to expose "us" for what "we" are then we have to by any means crush him!" I would hope that if the public learns anything from the actions of wikileaks, it observes the reactions of our elected "leaders" and we begin to see them for what they really are, regardless of party or side of the isle in which they sit. </p><p> </p><p><img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/peaceful.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":peaceful:" title="Peaceful :peaceful:" data-shortname=":peaceful:" /> I can still do this!</p><p><img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/happy-very.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":happy-very:" title="Happy Very :happy-very:" data-shortname=":happy-very:" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 789856, member: 2189"] AV, Appreciate the response, we agree to disagree and let history over the coming years tell the story. However, again taking the position of conceding the WMD in Iraq, what greater purpose does it serve for Bush to go before the US public and say what he said when as we're all conceding here, the truth was that there were in fact WMD's in Iraq after all? First he said there were and made the case to the world in order to justify the Iraq war and then as the wikileaks data Elder refers too, and you sourced in your post sez that WMD did in fact exist in Iraq, Bush goes before the public again and then claims in an admission that it did not and even goes on to try and at least give other credibility in reasons to then be over there. What's the political mission here? Is he telling the truth when he argued for WMD in Iraq and then lying later as per the vid in saying there now wasn't? Why would he do this? But let's go one step further, first off of the 200k plus cables wikileaks has, only around 1000 have been released so far. To quote Politico on 12/7 after Assange's arrest: [URL="http://www.politico.com/blogs/onmedia/1210/WikiLeaks_vows_another_release_despite_arrest.html"][COLOR=red]source[/COLOR][/URL] Also if you research the NY Times, Der Spiegel and I think Guardian (don't quote me on that last one) all 3 news outlets have all along insisted that Wikileaks uphold to certain standards and all 4 players in previewing the documents have redacted information if anyone felt that lives would indeed be at risk or other legit secrets would be compromised. Even Assange himself has admitted there are legit reasons to keep some things secret. Also, the vast majority of the cables, emails, etc. in Wikileaks' hands are yet to go public and thus the reason for gov't actions over the last nearly 2 weeks in an effort to prevent more from coming out. Let's all be honest here, in scale very little has come out and the flipside of this coin as William Phaff said so well in a [URL="http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/leaks_reveal_complicated_us_strategy_20101207/"][COLOR=red]piece[/COLOR][/URL] at Truthdig, so none of this was really any big surprise. On a personal note, I've had more fun out of anything released with the fact that Hillary was in effect engaged in identity theft making her nothing more than the common street level thief. In recent days she's even stated that her stint as Sec. of State will be her last forray in public service so did the fraud revelations do her in as a career? You'd think repubs would champion wikileaks unless they all know beyond those origin 1000 cables released is the other shoe that has yet to drop? :winks: The reactions of State actors of shock and horror is all put on much like the neighborhood ladies who all knew who was cheaping on who and then when it all came out public, they put on the front of shock in public display so as to pretend they never knew all along. Yeah and the men know too and of course play their respected parts but it's all a farce. At the end of the day, the only people caught clueless in the whole deal are all us poor schmucks who slave and work day in and day out to support these worthless bastards we stupidly "elect" to dominat.....rul.....govern us. Wikileaks has been talking to these media outlets for several months on what would be disclosed first and in fact the gov't knew well ahead of time also. The media outlets insisted the gov't be given opportunity to input, you know, "sir we have this information, care to respond?" yet they choose not to or in effect took the "no comment" route. This way makes it easier to play the role of victim. But now that the truth on Iraq WMD is out there, conceding Elder's point as fact, and it was known to be coming, why then in just recent days and going back to Bush's comments in public that no WMD was found, would Bush again even in his latest book say [URL="http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/11/bush-decision-points-wmds-iraq"][COLOR=red]this[/COLOR][/URL] concerning WMD in Iraq, Now on the one hand, you insist WMD was there and quite honestly I've always thought that was correct but we may disagree on how they got there and why they were there to begin with. I never believed Saddam was the [URL="http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2849.htm"][COLOR=red]only bad guy[/COLOR] [/URL]over in Iraq.:wink2: I also believe there is good reason as to why they were never found as in made public and yet again you and I may disagree on that as well. Do you think they went to Syria? Ooooo! Syria! Go back 28 years and look at [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Syria"][COLOR=red]events[/COLOR][/URL] but then start coming forward, watch the pieces move on the board and then you might start putting together the puzzle but you may also not like what it shows either! But regardless what you or I say or think, the simple fact is the man who ultimately held the final decision, the man if you will accept on it's face, saw all the data, all the secret documents, all the inside details and yet he himself claims that no WMD was in fact found in Iraq, the commander in chief said this, your boss if you will, then how is it you continue to claim otherwise or are you calling Bush a liar? If not a liar, then why the deception by Bush to the public and how does this from the standpoint of greater good make us safer and in the chief duties of constitutional authority, defend this country? Why do we believe him in both cases (Iraq has WMD, Iraq doesn't have WMD) yet what he sez are 180 degress apart from each other? As a lowly soldier, you claim almost firsthand knowledge of WMD in Iraq (you're not a contractor for "The Shop" are you?:wink2:) yet your highest commander sez there were no WMD in Iraq. Tell me, why in this case should I believe you and not him? I'm willing to accept your claim although ultimately you may dislike why but can you at least see the problem with this whole thing to begin with. Someone at the top is lying but why? And it still leaves serious questions about the war and it's true purpose to begin with but let's focus on the WMD for now. Lastly, what I find funny in all of this is that in the first 2 data dumps of the Iraq and Afghan war, there was the 15 minutes of fame if you will and then all was quite. Oh sure, there were grandstanding politicians getting the mileage they always get but once the blovating was done, life for all returned to normal. This latest disclosure however goes to the heart of the emperor himself as being naked and OMG look at the reaction. "We can just blovate when only soldier's arse's are on the line (besides that's what we pay them for anyway) and then do absolutely nothing else but when Assange has the unmittigated gall to expose "us" for what "we" are then we have to by any means crush him!" I would hope that if the public learns anything from the actions of wikileaks, it observes the reactions of our elected "leaders" and we begin to see them for what they really are, regardless of party or side of the isle in which they sit. :peaceful: I can still do this! :happy-very: [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Wikileaks
Top