StlSluggers wrote:I could care less about political affiliation. I'm just shocked that a guy could get convicted, let alone get 60 years, with what seems to be practically no evidence at all.
Shocked? Really?
This isn't a surprise to me. He was a bad guy they needed to get off the streets, so they got him off the streets. No different than Saddam. He needed to be removed, so the WMD story was floated, and he was removed. Same thing here, just a much smaller scope.
Now if the guy really didn't kill Levy, then someone got away with it. That bugs me more than them pinning a murder on someone that needed to be removed from public anyway.
Yes doctor, I am sick. Sick of those who are spineless. Sick of those who feel self-entitled. Sick of those who are hypocrites. Yes doctor, an army is forming. Yes doctor, there will be a war. Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
StlSluggers wrote:I could care less about political affiliation. I'm just shocked that a guy could get convicted, let alone get 60 years, with what seems to be practically no evidence at all.
Shocked? Really?
This isn't a surprise to me. He was a bad guy they needed to get off the streets, so they got him off the streets. No different than Saddam. He needed to be removed, so the WMD story was floated, and he was removed. Same thing here, just a much smaller scope.
Now if the guy really didn't kill Levy, then someone got away with it. That bugs me more than them pinning a murder on someone that needed to be removed from public anyway.
The only thing that's not shocking in this thread is your ability to be completely wrong on every societal issue you take a stance on.
StlSluggers wrote:The only thing that's not shocking in this thread is your ability to be completely wrong on every societal issue you take a stance on.
Blah, blah, blah. The WMD story I was referring to was that Bush used it as his basis for going in instead of just admitting that the US needed to flex some military muscle after dropping the ball with Bin Laden. Of course Bush blew the plan of getting rid of Saddam quick and easy, but that's another story.
You accusing me of being wrong on "every societal issue" I take a stand on is funny. Seems you've been brainwashed my friend and that's a shame because you have always been one of the good guys in my book, so I really hope you just missed your morning coffee today or something. If not, then it's a real shame the internet idiots have claimed another good soul.
Yes doctor, I am sick. Sick of those who are spineless. Sick of those who feel self-entitled. Sick of those who are hypocrites. Yes doctor, an army is forming. Yes doctor, there will be a war. Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
By the way, from the link you provided (since I got bored waiting on your response):
Former president George W. Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq six years ago on the grounds that Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction and posed a threat to international security.
Isn't that exactly what I said?
Madison wrote:No different than Saddam. He needed to be removed, so the WMD story was floated, and he was removed.
Yes doctor, I am sick. Sick of those who are spineless. Sick of those who feel self-entitled. Sick of those who are hypocrites. Yes doctor, an army is forming. Yes doctor, there will be a war. Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
Madison wrote:He needed to be removed, so the WMD story was floated, and he was removed.
thats a reach, at best. a rewrite of history at worst.
Wait, I must be in a parallel universe or something today...
Are you saying Bush didn't claim Saddam had WMD's and we didn't go in and get him?
Yes doctor, I am sick. Sick of those who are spineless. Sick of those who feel self-entitled. Sick of those who are hypocrites. Yes doctor, an army is forming. Yes doctor, there will be a war. Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
Madison wrote:By the way, from the link you provided (since I got bored waiting on your response):
Former president George W. Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq six years ago on the grounds that Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction and posed a threat to international security.
Isn't that exactly what I said?
Madison wrote:No different than Saddam. He needed to be removed, so the WMD story was floated, and he was removed.
You must have chosen the wrong word. When someone 'floats a story', it is supposed to mean that the story itself is fake and put out as disinformation or as bait to get other information. Literally, you'll see that it means 'to suggest', but that definition is much stronger than the actual usage. Maybe you meant to say that WMDs were used as justification for the invasion. That would be correct, but no story was 'floated' unless you can prove that most of the world, including the U.N., knew they were dealing with misinformation and chose to believe for the purposes of supporting an invasion.
He said I was wrong on every societal issue I comment on, and both he and I know that's absurd, so the brainwashing comment was simply to figure out what the heck was going on. I said it nicely and even mentioned I hoped he simply missed his morning coffee or something. Geez. This place sure has turned touchy-feely.
StlSluggers wrote:You must have chosen the wrong word. When someone 'floats a story', it is supposed to mean that the story itself is fake and put out as disinformation or as bait to get other information. Literally, you'll see that it means 'to suggest', but that definition is much stronger than the actual usage. Maybe you meant to say that WMDs were used as justification for the invasion. That would be correct, but no story was 'floated' unless you can prove that most of the world, including the U.N., knew they were dealing with misinformation and chose to believe for the purposes of supporting an invasion.
Do I think the WMD story....errr...."justification"... was hogwash? Absolutely. By "float the story" I simply meant that he used something that could be argued as plausible (although unlikely) as his "official" and "public" reason for going in. I didn't mean to imply that he was the first to dream up WMD's or anything like that, simply that he "tossed it out there" (better?) that he was going in because of that.
Anyway, I've stated that position more times than I can count on the board, so why is it an issue now?
The entire thing and reason for my post was that I was surprised that you were "shocked" (to use your word) that a bad man got locked away without really any evidence. It certainly isn't the first time, it won't be the last, and the number of times something similar to that have happened is too large to count. So I don't understand you being "shocked" about it. Would be like me being shocked the sun came up today.
Yes doctor, I am sick. Sick of those who are spineless. Sick of those who feel self-entitled. Sick of those who are hypocrites. Yes doctor, an army is forming. Yes doctor, there will be a war. Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by Madison » Mon Feb 14, 2011 8:25 am 
This place sure has turned touchy-feely. 
