It wasn't only in Haditha...

[Neomega]

Explain to me why its so hard to believe he moved the WMD.

I wanna play too!!

Oh Noes!!!!, The world superpower America is attacking me, I'll hide my weapons in case the other United States of America Attacks!

 

[Mr. Do]

Oh you two crazy kids, use your brains. Clearly, Saddam had the WMD's moved next-door, thinking that after the Americans had invaded and toppled his government, he'd simply hide out for however many years while the Liberal Media did his job for him and destroyed the American armed forces for him, then bring the WMD's back and use them against anyone of the other forces for good that haven't yet been destroyed by the Liberals.

 

[malclave]

You are now officially put on my "never take anything this guy says seriously again" list.

Heh. You were on mine when you equated a user here with Hitler.

 

[malclave]

and furthermore, Saddam certainly could not have had mobile nuclear weapons labs, yet Bush in his state of the Union speech said something he was warned had no evidence behind it, that Saddam tried to buy Uranium yellowcake from Europe, which was completely false.

The President never said that.

Can we stick to actual facts, instead of fabrications?

 

[Mr. Do]

You're right. Bush in fact merely referred to a fabrication plagiarised by the British government that any fact-checker with half a brain would have discredited in a matter of minutes. It was mentioned in the State of the Union Address when it was known to be dubious, but with the caveat of referring to the British. Still, you must be very proud of such an honest president.

 

[.Shane.]

The President never said that.

nice bit of disingeniousness. The only thing he was wrong about was that Bush said "Africa" not "Europe". Its from the 2004 State of the Union, I think.

Bush: The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

Source: White House itself http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html

regarding weapons labs:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/11/AR2006041101888.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/g8/interview5.html

THE PRESIDENT: We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said, Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons. They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two. And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them.

bold is mine...



this is like shooting fish in a barrel, malclave, follow your own advice and stick to the facts.

 

[Neomega]

The President never said that.

Can we stick to actual facts, instead of fabrications?

Wow, Europe???? Why did I say that? I meant Nigeria.

Perhaps I was thinking about Joseph Wilson, head of CIA operations in Europe, was the one who sternly warned Bush that the claim had no evidence to back it up.

EDIT: Oh Africa, I thought he said Nigeria.

 

[malclave]

You're right. Bush in fact merely referred to a fabrication plagiarised by the British government that any fact-checker with half a brain would have discredited in a matter of minutes.

Apparently not.

http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html

 

[.Shane.]

Apparently not.

http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html

Wait, don't you remember, HE NEVER SAID THAT!

No suprise that you will cherry-pick the posts you reply to...

 

[malclave]

Wait, don't you remember, HE NEVER SAID THAT!

Still factually challenged?

 

[blackheart]

This thread has become too... ridiculous to post in anymore, but Uiler pretty much touched base with what I was going to say.

And a few short responses:

Rmsharpe - controlling the media would be key to any war, except that we're a freedom-loving, free press democracy. So instead of trying to cover up our misdeeds, why don't we just not commit them in the first place?

tulkas12 - don't come crying to the police if someone close to you is murdered, because hey, that's just a fact of life like it is in war! Follow the Golden Rule.

 

[Mr. Do]

Apparently not.

http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html

Fine, he wasn't lying (As I already said), but was making assertions based on merely very flawed information. If that makes you feel better, then, ha, good for you.

 

[Neomega]

He was warned the intelligent could be false, yet he chose to say it anyways.

HE threw the dice, he lost. We can argue whether it was a technically according to Websters as a lie or not, but the American public already has figured out it certainly was not honest.

 

[Uiler]

Heh. You were on mine when you equated a user here with Hitler.

Don't forget I only made the equivalence in terms of his attitude to the role of the media in war. Let's see - he uses almost exactly the same as Hitler's to describe his personal philosophy on the subject, he says the free press are practicising sedition when they criticise America and hence the free press should be controlled and advocates planting false stories in the media to enhance America's reputation. What else would you compare his philosophies on the role of the media to but that of a dictatorship? Because it certainly isn't that of a democracy. As the saying goes, if the shoe fits...

I guess he must be happy now that people are starting to be investigated for sedition for writing letters to local newspapers criticising the war.

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=16438

Maybe he (and you) want to reintroduce the infamous Aliens and Sedition Act as well which Jefferson and Madison fought hard to overthrow?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Acts

Fortunately, America is still a democracy and there are still plenty of good decent folk in America who understand what the word democracy means.

You're right. Maybe I shouldn't compare people here to dictators. It's not like they are in power or have control of an army. They're just ordinary Joes on the street. Maybe it is better to compare them to another ordinary Joe on the street - the anonymous guy who ratted out my granddad to the Chinese Communist Party for having "seditious" material (stuff from overseas) many decades ago which ended up with him being arrested and put on trial. Fortunately they only gave him a warning and sentenced him to do public work in the streets while wearing a billboard declaring him to be a traitor to the country (meant to publicly humiliate and cause ostracisim from the community). It's the same narrowminded victory at all costs thinking. Same anyone who says anything positive about the enemy/negative about the government is a traitor kind of thinking. The worse thing is the guy who ratted out my granddad was probably not just an ordinary Joe but also someone he knew well since this was in a rural area where everyone knew everyone else.

Basically with the attitude that some posters here display I'm inclined to think that the only reason they don't behave the same way as the "friend" who ratted out my Granddad is because they *can't* in America because America is still a democracy not because they personally *won't*. The difference between "can't" and "won't" is very important.

 

[VoodooAce]

Heh. You were on mine when you equated a user here with Hitler.

When a poster uses a comment that is so similar to something said by a historical personality, there is nothing wrong with noting those similarities. People can cry about Godwin's Theory all they want. Maybe people should try not to sound like Hitler, huh? Maybe this being pointed out will make people realize how ridiculous they're sounding.

It was a ligitimate comparison, whether you liked it, or not. Still, I doubt very much that you having Uiler on some list or another is going to cause him any loss of sleep.

 

[Xenocrates]

This is slightly relevent to the debate:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060605/ts_alt_afp/usmilitarytorture_060605124903;_ylt=AkQRTzhXK2wZdcHDTe3Zzh1sbEwB;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Basically, the 'Pentagon' may not include safeguards against torture in it's military handbook. I think the final decision hasn't yet been made and it will be interesting to see what happens.

 

[amadeus]

Rmsharpe - controlling the media would be key to any war, except that we're a freedom-loving, free press democracy. So instead of trying to cover up our misdeeds, why don't we just not commit them in the first place?

If it actually happened; the investigation is ongoing.

 

[Uiler]

Honestly speaking, I think there are people here who would *like* to reintroduce the Sedition Act (with the monetary fines changed to refect present day values rather than late 18th century values). It seems to reflect perfectly their attitude to the press. Note that the excuse used to pass the Sedition Act was...war.:

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/statutes/sedact.htm

SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That if any persons shall unlawfully combine or conspire together, with intent to oppose any measure or measures of the government of the United States, which are or shall be directed by proper authority, or to impede the operation of any law of the United States, or to intimidate or prevent any person holding a place or office in or under the government of the United States, from undertaking, performing or executing his trust or duty, and if any person or persons, with intent as aforesaid, shall counsel, advise or attempt to procure any insurrection, riot, unlawful assembly, or combination, whether such conspiracy, threatening, counsel, advice, or attempt shall have the proposed effect or not, he or they shall be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor, and on conviction, before any court of the United States having jurisdiction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars, and by imprisonment during a term not less than six months nor exceeding five years; and further, at the discretion of the court may be ho]den to find sureties for his good behaviour in such sum, and for such time, as the said court may direct.

SEC. 2. And be it farther enacted, That if any person shall write, print, utter or publish, or shall cause or procure to be written, printed, uttered or published, or shall knowingly and willingly assist or aid in writing, printing, uttering or publishing any false, scandalous and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame the said government, or either house of the said Congress, or the said President, or to bring them, or either of them, into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them, or either or any of them, the hatred of the good people of the United States, or to stir up sedition within the United States, or to excite any unlawful combinations therein, for opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States, done in pursuance of any such law, or of the powers in him vested by the constitution of the United States, or to resist, oppose, or defeat any such law or act, or to aid, encourage or abet any hostile designs of any foreign nation against United States, their people or government, then such person, being thereof convicted before any court of the United States having jurisdiction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars, and by imprisonment not exceeding two years.

SEC. 3. And be it further enacted and declared, That if any person shall be prosecuted under this act, for the writing or publishing any libel aforesaid, it shall be lawful for the defendant, upon the trial of the cause, to give in evidence in his defence, the truth of the matter contained in Republication charged as a libel. And the jury who shall try the cause, shall have a right to determine the law and the fact, under the direction of the court, as in other cases.

SEC. 4. And be it further enacted, That this act shall continue and be in force until the third day of March, one thousand eight hundred and one, and no longer: Provided, that the expiration of the act shall not prevent or defeat a prosecution and punishment of any offence against the law, during the time it shall be in force.

APPROVED, July 14, 1798.

After it was passed, 25 newspapers were shut down for criticising the government and their editors arrested.

We won't even need to write a new reply. We can just take the text of the Virginia Resolution:

RESOLVED, That the General Assembly of Virginia, doth unequivocably express a firm resolution to maintain and defend the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of this State, against every aggression either foreign or domestic, and that they will support the government of the United States in all measures warranted by the former.

That this assembly most solemnly declares a warm attachment to the Union of the States, to maintain which it pledges all its powers; and that for this end, it is their duty to watch over and oppose every infraction of those principles which constitute the only basis of that Union, because a faithful observance of them, can alone secure it's existence and the public happiness.

That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the compact, to which the states are parties; as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact; as no further valid that they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.

That the General Assembly doth also express its deep regret, that a spirit has in sundry instances, been manifested by the federal government, to enlarge its powers by forced constructions of the constitutional charter which defines them; and that implications have appeared of a design to expound certain general phrases (which having been copied from the very limited grant of power, in the former articles of confederation were the less liable to be misconstrued) so as to destroy the meaning and effect, of the particular enumeration which necessarily explains and limits the general phrases; and so as to consolidate the states by degrees, into one sovereignty, the obvious tendency and inevitable consequence of which would be, to transform the present republican system of the United States, into an absolute, or at best a mixed monarchy.

That the General Assembly doth particularly protest against the palpable and alarming infractions of the Constitution, in the two late cases of the "Alien and Sedition Acts" passed at the last session of Congress; the first of which exercises a power no where delegated to the federal government, and which by uniting legislative and judicial powers to those of executive, subverts the general principles of free government; as well as the particular organization, and positive provisions of the federal constitution; and the other of which acts, exercises in like manner, a power not delegated by the constitution, but on the contrary, expressly and positively forbidden by one of the amendments thererto; a power, which more than any other, ought to produce universal alarm, because it is levelled against that right of freely examining public characters and measures, and of free communication among the people thereon, which has ever been justly deemed, the only effectual guardian of every other right.

That this state having by its Convention, which ratified the federal Constitution, expressly declared, that among other essential rights, "the Liberty of Conscience and of the Press cannot be cancelled, abridged, restrained, or modified by any authority of the United States," and from its extreme anxiety to guard these rights from every possible attack of sophistry or ambition, having with other states, recommended an amendment for that purpose, which amendment was, in due time, annexed to the Constitution; it would mark a reproachable inconsistency, and criminal degeneracy, if an indifference were now shewn, to the most palpable violation of one of the Rights, thus declared and secured; and to the establishment of a precedent which may be fatal to the other.

That the good people of this commonwealth, having ever felt, and continuing to feel, the most sincere affection for their brethren of the other states; the truest anxiety for establishing and perpetuating the union of all; and the most scrupulous fidelity to that constitution, which is the pledge of mutual friendship, and the instrument of mutual happiness; the General Assembly doth solemenly appeal to the like dispositions of the other states, in confidence that they will concur with this commonwealth in declaring, as it does hereby declare, that the acts aforesaid, are unconstitutional; and that the necessary and proper measures will be taken by each, for co-operating with this state, in maintaining the Authorities, Rights, and Liberties, referred to the States respectively, or to the people.


That the Governor be desired, to transmit a copy of the foregoing Resolutions to the executive authority of each of the other states, with a request that the same may be communicated to the Legislature thereof; and that a copy be furnished to each of the Senators and Representatives representing this state in the Congress of the United States.

Agreed to by the Senate, December 24, 1798.

Back in 1798, public opposition to the Sedition Act destroyed the Federalist party (the remains of which would later on become the GOP) and contributed to the rise of Jefferson and the Republicans (who confusingly enough are today's Democrats).

http://www.crf-usa.org/bria/bria19_4b.htm

The Alien and Sedition Acts provoked a debate between Republican and Federalist state legislatures over freedom of speech and the press. In a resolution he wrote for the Virginia legislature, James Madison argued that the Sedition Act attacked the "right of freely examining public characters and measures, and of free communication among the people." In heavily Federalist Massachusetts, state legislators responded that a sedition law was "wise and necessary" to defend against secret attacks by foreign or domestic enemies.

The Federalists in Congress issued a report accepting the old English common law definition of free speech and press. It argued that the First Amendment only stopped the government from censoring beforehand any speeches or writings. The government, argued the Federalists, should be able to protect itself from false and malicious words.

Congressman John Nichols, a Republican from Virginia, challenged this Federalist view. He asserted that Americans must have a free flow of information to elect leaders and to judge them once they were in office. Nichols asked why government, which should be critically examined for its policies and decisions, should have the power to punish speakers and the press for informing the voters.

In the end, the people settled this debate in 1800 by electing Thomas Jefferson president and a Republican majority to Congress. In his inaugural address, Jefferson confirmed the new definition of free speech and press as the right of Americans "to think freely and to speak and write what they think."

 

[Azash]

What good can come of having these claims released?

The truth about a rather senseless massacre, which would otherwise have been deemed "rumour" or "self-defense".

 

[RedWolf]

War is war. It is ugly. I know soldeirs who have admitted popping shots at people for fun. This is the nature of war.

Edit: I take my original comment back somewhat. I still believe that terrible things should befall US soldiers who "take potshots for fun" but at the same time take the poster less seriously after realizing he believes Saddam was responsible for Oklahoma as well.