Election 2004 - Info You Need to Decide

[William330]

The so-called "mainstream" media has failed to inform the people.

Take a minute to read the following quotes, you will probably be shocked:

http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html



.

 

[Kirby]

Actually, I'm not shocked at all. These are the reasons I can't put any trust in the Kerry Campaign.

 

[epj3]

I like how they are quoting 'facts' on Iraq from those who weren't even involved in the war with Iraq.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/powell-rice-wmd.wmv

Hmm makes you think.

 

[frolf]

though i am a conservative, i really wish our board wouldn't turn into a propaganda battle ground.


i want to talk about the clouds in the pretty sky, and why velcro works so well.

thanks.

 

[aNoodle]

Uggggghhhhh. I can't take it anymore!

 

[MyHarley]

Hey ANoodle, do you need a pink ribbon for that bumper??

 

[aNoodle]

Hey ANoodle, do you need a pink ribbon for that bumper??

Haha...sure why not. My Kerry sticker is just an election week special...so I'll have a spot open soon! What does the pink ribbon signify?

 

[Section_8]

Haha...sure why not. My Kerry sticker is just an election week special...so I'll have a spot open soon! What does the pink ribbon signify?

The search for a cure for cancer, specifically breast cancer in women. Won't be a dry eye in here amongst the guys when this is found, one day..

 

[epj3]

The search for a cure for cancer, specifically breast cancer in women. Won't be a dry eye in here amongst the guys when this is found, one day..

Thats sooo horrible but funny.

 

[bmwrocks]

Kerry has never changed his stance on Iraq. He has always believed the world would be and is a better place without Saddam. He just believes the way the Bush has handled the war, by going it nearly alone, without a plan to win the peace, and how things are going now and how he cannot admit his mistakes was wrong. This is of course over-simplistic as the issues of war are too complex for me. And Bush won't matter anymore after tomorrow anyway.

 

[Bryan330i]

Hey "bmwrocks"

 

[epj3]

I agree. I was thinking there's no way kerry will actually win, but thats just becuase of where I live and the message boards I visit. In reality I know more kerry supporters than bush supporters. I think it's going to be a landslide like Clinton's first election. Probably 70/30 or something like that. Wouldn't surprise me, especially after Bryan's tale of not being chosen for that poll.

 

[William330]

Kerry has never changed his stance on Iraq. He has always believed the world would be and is a better place without Saddam. He just believes the way the Bush has handled the war, by going it nearly alone, without a plan to win the peace...

Geez, you sound like a Kerry commercial, just regurgitating his talking points.

Some facts and context:

The same allies who liberated Iraq, are the same allies who stormed the beaches at Normandy to liberate Europe. Was that a "fraudulent coalition"?

Note that when Saddam invaded Kuwait in 1991, when the UN was on board, and we had even more allies on board than today, Kerry voted NO to remove Saddam from Kuwait.

Last month Kerry outrageously cited Jordanian dictator Abdullah as a credible source to criticize elections in Iraq. Newsflash to Kerry: Mideast dictators are the problem we're trying to clean up -- we don't need the advice of a Mideast dictator on how to establish a democracy.

As for the UN (who was on Saddam's payroll to the tune of $11 Billion), nine months before the Sept 11th attacks, two members of the UN "Security Council" -- communist China and Malaysia -- did not support a UN Resolution demanding the Taliban regime hand over Bin Laden and dismantle terrorist training camps:

December 19, 2000

SECURITY COUNCIL IMPOSES WIDE NEW MEASURES AGAINST TALIBAN
AUTHORITIES IN AFGHANISTAN, DEMANDS ACTION ON TERRORISM

Resolution 1333 (2000) Calls for Closure of Training Camps, End
to Provision of Sanctuary; Ban Imposed on Military Assistance

The Security Council demanded this afternoon that Afghanistan's
Taliban authorities act swiftly to close all camps where
terrorists are trained in the territory under their control and
called for confirmation of such closures by the United Nations.​

And when the war in Iraq began in March 2003, the Baathist dictatorship of Syria was acting President of the UN Security Council.

The UN and make-believe "allies" will never provide security for the American people, and to think otherwise is simply naive.



.

 

[William330]

I like how they are quoting 'facts' on Iraq from those who weren't even involved in the war with Iraq.

The war with Iraq began in 1991, and never ended because Saddam
continually refused to comply with his disarmament obligations (UN
Resolution 687).

Saddam was supposed to comply in 15 days, but instead played games
for over 12 years.

.

 

[Bryan330i]

I like how they are quoting 'facts' on Iraq from those who weren't even involved in the war with Iraq.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/powell-rice-wmd.wmv

Hmm makes you think.

Great link Eric, I sent it to 26 people. Thanks!

 

[William330]

An interesting video clip, albeit from an un-named source (the BBC?) with an obviously-biased commentator.

Does that mean Chief UN Weapons Inspector Hans Blix lied to the world?



"Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance -- not even today -- of
the disarmament, which was demanded of it and which it needs to carry out to
win the confidence of the world and to live in peace.

The nerve agent VX is one of the most toxic ever developed.

13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the Iraqi Air Force between 1983 and
1988, while Iraq has declared that 19,500 bombs were consumed during this
period. Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical
agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 tonnes."

Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003

http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocusnewsiraq.asp?NewsID=354&sID=6​

.