ClumsyMonkey.net

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=8&u=/ap/20040110/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/bush_o_neill_7

WE KNEW IT!!! Bushy Boy was planning to go to war even before 9/11. 9/11 was a blessing for him.

Americans revolt! This man should not be in office, and I am sick to my stomach to think that he would use a personal vendetta to send his country into war. This is almost Nazi-like.

I am so fucking pissed. Is anyone else enraged by this? This man must be stopped. He lied to his country. He essentially used billions and billions of taxpayer's money to support a personal vendetta, not too mention threw 130,000 of his soldiers into danger. The entire point of him getting elected was to go to war with Iraq and get Saddam. The rest was just minor details to make it look like he wanted to be the president. He just wanted to be president so he could pull the trigger.

Honestly I'm at a loss for words. He must be stopped. Our world will be better off without him. Americans should be rioting in the streets. I ccould only hope...

yeah...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3925358/

well that just cancelled out any progress the republican party had going towards proving Iraq wasn't a world embarrasment and disaster

I just saw this on TV this morning. Looks great on Bush...

O'Neill kept saying stuff like Bush barely even listened during meetings unless it was something that he was really interested in, and that whenver O'Neill tried to bring up issues with the economy, Bush would kind of zone out, wouldn't respond to anything O'Neill said, and never asked any questions.

What a great leader. He's a roll model for our ADD generation!

Speaking of personal vendetta's, don't you think O'Neill may be a little bitter because he got fired. Wait a minute, why am I defending Bush. It's obvious the war in Iraq was started for all the wrong reasons. Bush is as much a war criminal as Saddam by the looks of it.

He probably got fired because he doesn't agree with Bush. Hence his going to the press about it all.

wow, yeah, i could see this being W's family thing where he just wants to take him out to make daddy proud, but i still say takin saddam out was a good thing.

it feels good to know i was right the whole time.

Yeah, you and about every other free thinking person alive....

they're all liars. it's not like this guy is the patron saint for the end of this war. they're all the same. Bush crossed O'Neill, and in turn he's now trying to cross Bush. He's doing it for a reason, not because he doesnt want war, but because he wants revenge.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/1/11/115515.shtml

O'Neill has been caught in lies also. he's the former head of a major company too. there's alot more to this then just bush's lies.

The point isn't that O'Neill is great, just that Bush sure as hell isn't.

my point is not a single one of them is credible, bush, o'neill, or anyone else for that matter.

It would still be nice for that to damage the possibility of Bush being re-elected.

Exaggerate much? Seriously, Bush's whole platform for the election of 2000 was to put more heat on Saddam and Iraq. Tell me something I didn't know. Bush says one thing and its "Lies, Lies!" but this O'Neill guy makes a report and it is the gospel. Bush isn't my favorite guy in the World right now, but honestly. .... and I promised myself I wouldn't get involved...

Well Bush has lied more than once. This entire war was based on a lie. When it comes to lies, I think lies impacting more than 300 million people are pretty serious.
O'Neill has evidence. He presents it in his book. It's a hell of a lot better than the evidence Bush has brough forth for his war. I agree it's good to be skeptical, but it's not like O'Neill is the first one to proclaim this. He's just presented the most evidence. PBS has actually shown 3 seperate documentaries on the issue since the war started.

Hey guess what? Clinton had plans for regime change in Iraq as well. Iraq has been a problem since the late 1980's so DUH he had a plan to deal with him if he had too, SO DID CLINTON!. The lack of political knowledge in this forum is daunting. Keep thinking O'Neill is telling the truth, but the man was a loon and was FIRED! Do urselves a favor and research O'Neill and his accusations rather than blindly taking it as fact.

Have researched. Please don't act like the "know it all" you aren't. thanks.

J-Neli wrote:O'Neill has evidence. He presents it in his book.

that's what gets me. you have to buy the book. As in everything he's written inside this book is based not for you and me to use as public information but for him to make a buck. this is why i hate books and i hate authors.

If i were in his position, i would have just had a press confrence, or published these findings and handed it out for free. this may not be what his intentions are, but in my opinion i think it could be another pete rose incident. the guy didn't admit to gambling until it because profitable to do so. he's not going to tell what he knows about bush's intentions until it's profitable.

Venom wrote:Hey guess what? Clinton had plans for regime change in Iraq as well. Iraq has been a problem since the late 1980's so DUH he had a plan to deal with him if he had too, SO DID CLINTON!. The lack of political knowledge in this forum is daunting. Keep thinking O'Neill is telling the truth, but the man was a loon and was FIRED! Do urselves a favor and research O'Neill and his accusations rather than blindly taking it as fact.

It's not a matter of taking what he says as fact. It's a matter of choosing who you trust more (ie, who you think is being more truthful). The fact of the matter is, O'Neill seems to be the lesser of two evils here...

The fact of the matter is, O'Neill seems to be the lesser of two evils here...

Could you expand on that? What about O'Neill makes you think you can trust him?