|
|
|
|
#1
12-16-2005, 03:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The \"we saw the same intel\" argument put to rest
Despite your handle, you are clearly French. Or at least you are still a commie.
|
|
#2
12-16-2005, 05:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"we saw the same intel\" argument put to rest
Sir, I'm full-blooded Russian and not a commie. I'm merely opposed to the tyranical regime of George W. Bush.
Calling me a commie, that's a good one, I love it when Republicans are wrong and have no argument, they resort to name-calling like little school-children. I think your hero Rush's favorite is to call someone a liberal, as if that's necessarily a bad thing.
|
|
#3
12-16-2005, 06:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"we saw the same intel\" argument put to rest
[ QUOTE ]
Sir, I'm full-blooded Russian and not a commie. I'm merely opposed to the tyranical regime of George W. Bush. Calling me a commie, that's a good one, I love it when Republicans are wrong and have no argument, they resort to name-calling like little school-children. I think your hero Rush's favorite is to call someone a liberal, as if that's necessarily a bad thing. [/ QUOTE ] hahahahaa
|
|
#4
12-16-2005, 08:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"we saw the same intel\" argument put to rest
[ QUOTE ]
Sir, I'm full-blooded Russian and not a commie. I'm merely opposed to the tyranical regime of George W. Bush. Calling me a commie, that's a good one, I love it when Republicans are wrong and have no argument, they resort to name-calling like little school-children. I think your hero Rush's favorite is to call someone a liberal, as if that's necessarily a bad thing. [/ QUOTE ] looks like waxie has both sides riled up.
|
|
#5
12-16-2005, 12:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"we saw the same intel\" argument put to rest
Well, that changes everything. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]
|
|
#6
12-16-2005, 12:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"we saw the same intel\" argument put to rest
My understanding is that Congress can request the "raw" intelligence if they so desire. Of course, that would take more effort on their parts, as would poring over the raw intelligence for themselves, so they generally don't do it. Of course I could be wrong, but that is my understanding.
So the use of the term "withheld" does not mean "are totally prevented access to." Rather, it means that they are given summary-like intelligence findings, and they still have the option of requesting more detail, including the same raw intelligence the CIA has. Generally however they simply don't request that.
|
|
#7
12-16-2005, 01:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"we saw the same intel\" argument put to rest
Good job, 6M.
Of course there are Congresspersons and Senators who can get more than cursory info - If they want it, care about it, or are willing to take the time and make the effort to inspect/investigate it.
|
|
#8
12-16-2005, 01:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"we saw the same intel\" argument put to rest
The vibe from M, Nut, and BCP is that the administration pulled on a sleight of hand in slightly distorting the true intelligence picture, but if the democrats in Congress had investigated adequately then then would have seen through it? The fact the dems were sucessfully mislead because they were too lazy or incompetent still leaves the administration dishonest. How can you guys miss this?
|
|
#9
12-16-2005, 02:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"we saw the same intel\" argument put to rest
[ QUOTE ]
The fact the dems were sucessfully mislead because they were too lazy or incompetent still leaves the administration dishonest. [/ QUOTE ] Can you read minds? How do you know with utter certainty there was any dishonesty?
|
|
#10
12-16-2005, 03:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"we saw the same intel\" argument put to rest
because they said there were weapons of mass destruction and there weren't any. if that's not lying, the word has no meaning.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
