Galloway Senate testimony removed from Senate Committee website!
- Thread starter Dandred
- Start date
Sorry. said:
Not true. I know a guy (dead now) who worked on the planes.
How much clinton knew and didn't know is open to debate, but i can't belive he knew nothing and had nothing to do with it.
But its rather pointless now,and i can't work up the energy to get pissed off at bill anymore.
Dandred said:
If 1/10 of the charges agaisnt clinton are true, and all of the charges agaisnt bush are true, clinton is far far worse.
And clintons "score" was bizzare, he bombed an asprin factor to distract the press........ he lied about bringing our troops home form kosovo, which the UN didnt aprove of btw.
But those details are of no consiqensce when liberals or eurpeans do them.......
If you want the details on clinton google them, i'm not going to bother.
Dandred said:Why post a laod of crap that that means nothing then
I did it for you.
Unless you like the idea of being angry at bush for the rest of your life.
I don't see any point of remaining angry at bill, but if you want to spend your life hating bush, go right ahead.
Its no skin off my ass.
Dandred said:
Keep waiting, as i'm goint to explain to you why hatred cause people to loose.
It blinds people and weakens them.
Did you ever look at the isreal vs arab conflic and wonder why the arabs amost always loose?
Hatred.
Study histoy and see how many people lost confilits by letting hatred rule their minds and hearts..............
Now thier are some petty short term advantages and uses of hatred, but its looser in the long run.
Wess said:No an Eminence Gris is a person who exercises power or influence in certain areas without holding an official position.....
FFS....you know a janitor in the White House as well don't ya pee?
ROFLMAO
You know nothing about the issue, and i can't be arsed to educate you.
So unless you are smart enough to give me one good reason of why i should bother, I'm going to ignore mena arkansaw.
Jo/Joe said:
They did in the clip i saw.
An don't confuse posturing and posing and playing to the peanut gallery for winning anything.
It wasn't a trial
The senators wanted to question him so we can hang him latter.
Now that he's lied to cogress we can charge him.
Its a crime you know.
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
Oh balls. If they had any evidence they would have brought it out. They didn't. (Have you *seen* the "documents"? They're an embarrassment. I wouldn't bring them out either.) There will be no legal repercussions at all.pbman said:
And you are undoubtedly well aware that the general consensus on both left and right was that Coleman was a pussy and got his ass kicked. Levin took Galloway down a peg but not on the subject of his being guilty. They were saying this on LGF, freep, everywhere - because he *was* a pussy and *did* get his ass kicked.
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
Clinton had cruise missiles shot at various places in 1998, including a "chemical weapons factory" in Sudan, which turned out to be a pharmaceutical manufacturing plant.DexterTCN said:
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
pbman said:
Let me get this straight: you are telling us that Clinton was a "rapist"? I hope you have a good lawyer because you're going to need it.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
xiannaix said:
Not true. All American presidents since Wilson have done this sort of thing. Or are you going to tell us you have never heard of the US occupation of Haiti from 1915 - 35? Or how about how the CIA helped to remove the elected president of Syria in 1947 and replace him with a military strongman (Adib Shishakli). There are plenty of other examples.
It was Roosevelt (the first one) who began the era of US foreign interventionism back in 1904 with the Roosevelt Corollary to the (anti-European Colonialism) Monroe Doctrine of 1823. Nobody with any knowledge of US history would pretend otherwise. Which suggests a lack of it here.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
slaar said:
True. "Walk softly and carry a big stick" was his motto. I don't know why I said Wilson. Probably because people tend to look rather kindly on Wilson, when they should not. That said, you could say that McKinley preceded Roosevelt in his interventionist views.
nino_savatte said:
This is america.
I can legaly call him any damn thing i want.
Differnt countries have differnt laws, and our laws respect the freedom of speach.
You guys should look into that.
Anyways, no dobut your press is biased as hell since they reported only the "blow job" charges to you guys.
http://www.google.com/search?source...&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2004-21,GGLD:en&q=clinton+rape
nino_savatte said:
You are extrapolating two events that span several Presidents to show a parallel to the use of the military by one?
how about I restrict the claim a bit and say post WWII (not because I think I'm wrong but because I'm not digging up 200 years of military Hx to argue with you)
Dandred said:
It was a compound comment.... more troops to more places. Viet Nam is one place.
But as far as your comment goes - yeah - that was a large deployment of course.
Dandred said:
Sure. But the comment was regarding Clinton bombing all over and sendnig troops to many different locations.
Dandred said:
I don't know. But both are certainly a lot fewer than the democrats war in Viet Nam.
fubert said:
So your defense of Clinton is "see GW is nasty too!" ?
Is that not an admission that Clinton was in fact a nasty guy?
and for the record.... I voted for the guy, never thought the Whitewater investigation should have ever gotten anywhere near where it got to and found the impeachment absurd... so don't go accusing me of being a Clinton basher... I'm not.
Similar threads
