Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lurqer who wrote (23262)	7/25/2003 12:57:45 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 89467

<font size=4>"In a televised address last October<font size=3> in which he sought to rally congressional support for a resolution authorizing war against Iraq, <font size=4>President Bush declared that the government of Saddam Hussein posed an immediate threat to the United States<font size=3> and outlined what he said was evidence pointing to its ongoing ties with Al-aida." President Bush NEVER said Iraq was an "IMMINENT THREAT". FACT:<font size=4> President Bush never said the words, "imminent threat" regarding Iraq, he chided those who would wait until the threat was imminent in the State of the Union Address. And President Bush did precisely the same thing when addressing the nation when discussing the Iraq threat. "Imminent threat" was born by democratic politicians & liberal media in response to the SOTUA. It was falsely attributed to President Bush & his Administration by liberal media & democratic politicians. Then it was used by the lieral left to make false accusations to scare voters & sway public opinion. <font size=5> See the irrefutable facts below........ ____________________________________________________________ October 7, 2002 President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat ...."Some ask how urgent this danger is to America and the world. The danger is already significant, and it only grows worse with time. If we know Saddam Hussein has dangerous weapons today -- and we do -- does it make any sense for the world to wait to confront him as he grows even stronger and develops even more dangerous weapons?" ..... <font size=5> State of the Union Address<font size=3> whitehouse.gov <font size=5> ....Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option.....<font size=3> whitehouse.gov

To: lurqer who wrote (23262)	7/25/2003 1:48:31 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 89467

Thanks for providing irrefutable evidence that media outlets do lie & repeat lies just like your favorite politicians.......<see the following> Message 19144949 Then see..... <font size=4> How Many More Lies Lie Ahead? A new DNC hit piece in the form of a television campaign ad relates the following information in typewritten words across the screen. "In his State of the Union address George W. Bush told us of an imminent threat..." Right off the bat we are confronted with one huge whopper of a lie, because George W. Bush never mentioned an "imminent threat" posed by Iraq at any time during his State of the Union (S.O.U.) address. In fact, the foundation of the Bush doctrine of preemptive strikes is that we should undertake them BEFORE an enemy's threat becomes imminent. <font size=3> americandaily.com ____________________________________________________________ Times-Ledger Boro pols call for inquiry into handling of Iraq info <font size=4> Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney (D-Astoria) said, “If the Congress was intentionally misled on the issue of Iraq’s imminent threat to the U.S., I would regret my vote,” she said in a prepared statement. “The serious questions that continue to emerge about these issues should only be fully explored and resolved in a special inquiry, where the officials involved can present testimony and answer questions that the public deserves to know.” <font size=3> timesledger.com ____________________________________________________________ <font size=4> Paul Krugman Who's Unpatriotic Now? Some nonrevisionist history: On Oct. 8, 2002, Knight Ridder newspapers reported on intelligence officials who "charge that the administration squelches dissenting views, and that intelligence analysts are under intense pressure to produce reports supporting the White House's argument that Saddam poses such an immediate threat to the United States that pre-emptive military action is necessary."..... .....Issues of principle aside, the invasion of a country that hadn't attacked us and didn't pose an imminent threat has seriously weakened our military position...... (c) 2003 New York Times News Service<font size=3> fcnp.com ____________________________________________________________ <font size=4> BUSH CALLS IRAQ IMMINENT THREAT Source: Los Angeles Times, January 29, 2003 THE STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS ph.ucla.edu __________________________________________________________ CBC News Canada'a Perspective Looking through the fog <font size=4> "Bush claimed that Iraq posed an imminent threat to the U.S."<font size=3> cbc.ca ___________________________________________________________ No solid proof yet linking Saddam Hussein to Al-Qaeda Agence France-Presse Washington, July 25 Iraq posed an imminent threat to US security because Saddam could provide Al-Qaeda with the feared chemical, biological or nuclear "weapons of mass destruction," US officials said in the months leading up to the war. hindustantimes.com ____________________________________________________________