Forums Index >> General >> Iraq War Worsens Terrorism Threat
Page : 1 : <2>
^
How is it that this administration can hoodwink us and get us to war and kill many innocent people and not get impeached?
That an easy question to answer, NO ONE HAS THE BALLS.
Ya numbNuts!, weird how we are on the same page...
had W et al blown in and capped OBL and Saddam and not occupied Iraq, we'd be looking at years of republican presidencies...
How does he not get impeached? It boggles the mind, doesn't it? Vash is right w/regard to the press and their role in shaping public opinion IMHO. But remember, the dems can't convene investigative committees because THEY AIN'T GOT ANY POWER. Seriously, they can't. The best they can do is put together weak ass forums in borrowed rooms...sad really. If they can't investigate...no one is held accountable, because no malfeasance can be said to have occurred (following JJ's logic).
Its why you never want one party to control every facet of the government. The party in power tends to turn a blind eye to its own abuses.
I apologize in advance but wasn't Clinton a DEM?
44:
According to the Laura Ingram* show the NY Times only "cherry picked" from the NIE report?
Did you read the rest of it?
I have not, but apparently there is good news to the report as well.
KKB: Can you cite the good news?
Historical color chart fun.
http://www.mapsofwar.com/ind/imperial-history.html
Washington Post, liberal rag:
This Time, Congress Has No Excuse
The Washington Post
Andrew Cohen
Of all the stupid, lazy, short-sighted, hasty, ill-conceived, partisan-inspired, damage-inflicting, dangerous and offensive things this Congress has done (or not done) in its past few recent miserable terms, the looming passage of the terror detainee bill takes the cake. At least when Congress voted to authorize the Iraq War legislators can point to the fact that they were deceived by Administration officials. But what's Congress' excuse now for agreeing to sign off on a law that would give the executive branch even more unfettered power over the rest of us than it already has?
It just keeps getting worse. This morning, esteemed Yale Law professor Bruce Ackerman published this fine essay in the Los Angeles Times. His lead? "Buried in the complex Senate compromise on detainee treatment is a real shocker, reaching far beyond the legal struggles about foreign terrorist suspects in the Guantanamo Bay fortress. The compromise legislation, which is racing toward the White House, authorizes the president to seize American citizens as enemy combatants, even if they have never left the United States. And once thrown into military prison, they cannot expect a trial by their peers or any other of the normal protections of the Bill of Rights.
"This dangerous compromise," Professor Ackerman continued, "not only authorizes the president to seize and hold terrorists who have fought against our troops 'during an armed conflict,' it also allows him to seize anybody who has 'purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States.' This grants the president enormous power over citizens and legal residents. They can be designated as enemy combatants if they have contributed money to a Middle Eastern charity, and they can be held indefinitely in a military prison."
Scary enough for you? But wait, there is more. The legislation also appears to allow illegally-obtained evidence-- from overseas or right here at home-- to be used against enemy combatants (which gives you an idea of where this Congress really stands on the National Security Agency's domestic spying program). And wait, there is this: the Administration's horrible track record when it comes to identifying "enemy combatants" and then detaining them here in the States. Two of the most famous ones, Yaser Hamdi and Jose Padilla, both ended up having the highest courts in our land back up their legal claims, which is why the government had to release Hamdi outright and then turn Padilla over to the regular civilian courts (where he is a defendant in a weak case against him).
Do you believe the Administration has over the past five years earned the colossal expanse of trust the Congress is about to give it in the name of fighting terrorism? Do you believe that Administration officials will be able to accurately and adequately identify so-called "enemy combatants" here at home so as to separate out the truly bad guys from the guys who just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time? Did you want your legislative branch to abdicate so completely its responsibility to ensure that there are adequate checks and balances upon executive power even in a time of terror? You might have answered "no" to all three questions. But your answer doesn't matter. And neither does mine. To Congress, the answer is "yes, sir." Our Congress is about to make yet another needless mistake in the war on terror and this time the folks making it won't be able to say that the White House tricked them into it.
Last edited: Thursday, September 28, 2006 at 3:33:17 PM
My pen is ready!
IMPEACH, IM-PEACHH, IM... How do u spell IMPEACH again?
Ahww yes, I-M-P-E-A-C-H.
Last edited: Thursday, September 28, 2006 at 4:02:17 PM
even the iraqis
want us out...
Fox news clip, kkb. Don't kill the messenger.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/09/29/sheppard-smith-clashes-with-kristol-on-the-war-it’s-“repulsive”-that-bush-won’t-do-anything-till-after-the-election-in-iraq/
Tally Ho,
Sorry if my words seemed pointed. They weren't meant to be. :)
Just asked 44 if he read the rest of the report. NY Times did not report on all of it.
KKB
Last edited: Friday, September 29, 2006 at 4:46:48 PM
Apparently the report is out there, NYtimes isn't the only one who spoke of it...all the major outlets (probably not Fox though) reported the same thing.
I don't think that cloud had a silver lining.
Stink.
Tell me I'm wrong, but I think the NIE report "was" classified although there are the leaks that come about.
According to my above post the NY Times only mentioned part of the report.
It's all up in the air me thinks for right now.
Let's keep an eye on it.
KKB
It was classified, but apparently parts were leaked. Bush then declassified the parts that were leaked to help provide context. I watched a couple news programs that had read the four pages...chris mathews, and scarborough country and both guys talked about thinking that the four pages bush declassified didn't help bush's case at all...it completely verified what the NYTimes had said.
The NIE report is not meant for our eyes, so we will likely never see the rest of it...we only got to see that much because someone leaked it. I'd say, because it wasn't meant for our eyes, its probably closer to the truth than anything else we've seen/read in a while. Also, the cia and military intelligence both released reports in the past year that were availible to the public that concluded the same thing: the war in iraq is recruiting more terrorists and hurting our image in muslim communities. Didn't you hear/read that before?
If not...you may want to upgrade your news sources...they aren't doing you right.
Stan
Kinda off-topic, but heard that women were part of Islam before. They could have became even to the higher positions such as being imams and teach Islam and co-operate in community. They neither had to cover their faces. During this time Islam was doing good, but then some men started to restrict the rights of women and seperate them from men. All this happened very slowly. This lead to fall in Islam community, economic and culture as women weren't anymore part of it. Many muslimic men think women doesn't belong to mosques. Earlier women were praying inside mosques with men. Women were behind men. I think the restriction order nowdays have good intention of eliminating sexual energy and desire between the sexes. No sins in God's House. In Qur'an reads that profets(sp..) wives may not be in mosques. I think it means the Muhammed. But there are no words, for the restrictions of women, among the common muslims...
You don't have to let go of one rope before grabbing the other. But you'll have to let go of one if you want to swing forward.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm
Another of the men named by the FBI as a hijacker in the suicide attacks on Washington and New York has turned up alive and well.
The identities of four of the 19 suspects accused of having carried out the attacks are now in doubt.
Eek.
I hope you are joking Mr.HO.
Triv
---> religious thread.
Page : 1 : <2>
: :
As I am sure you have seen, the New York Times today reported that the National Intelligence Estimate in April concludes “that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.” The NIE represents the consensus view of the U.S. Government’s 16 major intelligence agencies. The Times notes that the Iraq War is a major “reason for the diffusion of jihad ideology” and cites one intelligence official acknowledging that the NIE “says that the Iraq war has made the overall terrorism problem worse.” Let me put this news in terms that you can clearly understand: Our own intelligence agencies now confirm that the Iraq War is undermining America’s security and credibility at our nation’s peril.
--Ned Lamont
Please read the article...
Unjustified and making us less safe. How you like dem apples?
Last edited: Monday, September 25, 2006 at 4:50:19 PM