Where Are You?

[Deborah13]

Seriously? You think my saying that Bush wasn't entirely honest is more unsubstantiated than you saying Obama is a Muslim? You've got to be kidding. How many times did Bush change the stated reason for the Iraq war? If he was totally honest from the beginning, why did the stated purpose change? If it was all about WMDs, and they knew exactly where they were, then why wasn't that the first place they went? Instead, the first thing they did was to secure the oil fields. And you think he was entirely honest? And if we use the same standard on Bush as people in this thread are using on Obama, then he wasn't that great of a Christian either. He believed that the the Bible was not entirely true and that all religions lead to the same god (Source).

The TOG​

Thanks TOG for this source.

Wow! That was an eye opener. I didn't know about this interview. Sounds very much the same as SOME of Obama's view of the Bible and God. But Obama makes his view clear while in office not when he is conveniently leaving office.

Joel Osteen, made a comment very close to this one, his faith was called into question.
George Bush Jr. was asked.....
"When asked if the God he prays to is the same as those worshipped by other faiths:

I do believe there is an almighty that is broad and big enough and loving enough that can encompass a lot of people."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/deadlineusa/2008/dec/09/george-bush-religion
Here is the that interview described by Fox News
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/09/bush-says-creation-incompatible-evolution/

It's funny how we think we know what someone really believes when they give only partial information and we all on our own fill in the rest.
Woman do it all the time when they like a guy and assume they know what he thinks and how he will behave without asking or trying him. Often ends in disaster. Human nature. Will we ever learn?

 

[jasonc]

I think in most court houses people will be respectful of each other if someone doesn't want to marry a gay couples. Usually there is more than one person who is authorized to do that i would think.

uhm, then tell me why pastors and churches are refused? and why in the past blacks whom were refused to be married by said person where fired and or sued? its the same logic used. I hope that you are right, but im skeptical.

 

[jasonc]

Well, they do have their face darkener, so there's that...lol.

Patriarchal. Right. This stuff means something to these people beyond formalities, and it should to the American people also. Bowing down to a leader of a country is an act of submission.

if that is the case then when I bow to my shihan is that an act of submission? its respect. we all bow at the same time. I doubt you would complain if the japan pm bowed first to us and Obama was after him. funny Obama is a guest of that nation. its courtesy. it was just done in the wrong manner. btw bush did some things.
TOG, im not a fan of Bush, while we went into Iraq under the precedent sent by the un and also the Clinton signed law which is quoted. sorry but that is record. he neither was honest all the time.

 

[Mike S]

How many times did Bush change the stated reason for the Iraq war? If he was totally honest from the beginning, why did the stated purpose change? If it was all about WMDs, and they knew exactly where they were, then why wasn't that the first place they went?

The TOG​

It never was all about WMDs, and President Bush WAS honest. There are reasons to disagree with President Bush, but dishonesty is not one of them.


The 2002 Authorization for the Use of Military Force in Iraq Congressional resolution had 23 "whereas" clauses, and only a few mentioned WMDs. When they were mentioned, they were mentioned in the contexts of "had large stores", "programs", seeking capabilities", and similar qualifying statements. That Congressional resolution was passed by a large bipartisan majority, 69% in the House and 77% in the Senate.

The liberal narrative that Bush went to war strictly on the basis of large existing stores of WMDs is nothing more than partisan spin after the fact, pure invention.

 

[jasonc]

It never was all about WMDs, and President Bush WAS honest. There are reasons to disagree with President Bush, but dishonesty is not one of them.


The 2002 Authorization for the Use of Military Force in Iraq Congressional resolution had 23 "whereas" clauses, and only a few mentioned WMDs. When they were mentioned, they were mentioned in the contexts of "had large stores", "programs", seeking capabilities", and similar qualifying statements. That Congressional resolution was passed by a large bipartisan majority, 69% in the House and 77% in the Senate.

The liberal narrative that Bush went to war strictly on the basis of large existing stores of WMDs is nothing more than partisan spin after the fact, pure invention.

beat me to it. I watched that vote live.hillary Clinton, yes, john Kerry, yes and joe liberman, yes. a lot of the anti Iraq libs voted for that war.

 

[Deborah13]

uhm, then tell me why pastors and churches are refused?

I don't understand this question.

and why in the past blacks whom were refused to be married by said person where fired and or sued?

Because it was clearly racism which the Bible does not support in anyway.
Nowhere does the Bible say that blacks don't have the right to marriage. Is it sin for blacks to marry? Very hard to justify that view.

its the same logic used. I hope that you are right, but im skeptical.

Under the equality laws they most definitely can be fired or sued. But I think within the individual offices there will likely be more understanding of their position and things will be quietly accommodated by those who do not mind, as long as those who object do so in a humble and respectful way. No one can sue them if their job description does not include this service and they are accommodated by someone else within that location. Well they could but they would lose.
That would be like me demanding that the lady at the other end of the counter, who does not like me, issue my drivers license rather than another one. Hardly a court case there.

 

[jasonc]

I have since posted 2 more articles, he definitely celebrated it and hosted all of them at the White House.

he hosted seder and channukah and attended both is a jew then? Ramadan is more the sid el fatir. its not just a meal its a thirty day fast of no eating during the hours of light and prayer must be done during shumah weekly. if Obama was celebrating that, we should have pics of him going to a prayer service on Friday. until you produce that, im not buying it. I have been around Ramadan twice to know what they do.

 

[jasonc]

I don't understand this question.

Because it was clearly racism which the Bible does not support in anyway.
Nowhere does the Bible say that blacks don't have the right to marriage. Is it sin for blacks to marry? Very hard to justify that view.

Under the equality laws they most definitely can be fired or sued. But I think within the individual offices there will likely be more understanding of their position and things will be quietly accommodated by those who do not mind, as long as those who object do so in a humble and respectful way. No one can sue them if their job description does not include this service and they are accommodated by someone else within that location. Well they could but they would lose.
That would be like me demanding that the lady at the other end of the counter, who does not like me, issue my drivers license rather than another one. Hardly a court case there.

they cant do that with blacks and yet we expect them with gays? uhm gay rights are akin to the civil rights acts. I hope you see my connection. a member of the klan did what he did on religious grounds. the klan is very much a religion. its not just a bunch of men who meet in robes and talk hate they do have bibles and church and teach these:

serpent seed doctrine
moses was white
only blacks died in the flood, but shem was black somehow and he was cursed for that by noah when he shamed him. if I recall that crap right.
all jews are white.
jesus was white.

 

[Mike S]

its not just a bunch of men who meet in robes and talk hate they do have bibles and church and teach these:

serpent seed doctrine
moses was white
only blacks died in the flood, but shem was black somehow and he was cursed for that by noah when he shamed him. if I recall that crap right.
all jews are white.
jesus was white.

Hmmm, conveniently dismissing the tens of thousands of black Jews in Africa, were they?

 

[jasonc]

Hmmm, conveniently dismissing the tens of thousands of black Jews in Africa, were they?

the sad thing is mike. I had to learn what they say from posters here that made me wonder if they were kkk. so I looked it up. its out there aint it. I can get more on this from the us government and the prison system. the army has stuff on it as well.

 

[Deborah13]

It never was all about WMDs, and President Bush WAS honest. There are reasons to disagree with President Bush, but dishonesty is not one of them.


The 2002 Authorization for the Use of Military Force in Iraq Congressional resolution had 23 "whereas" clauses, and only a few mentioned WMDs. When they were mentioned, they were mentioned in the contexts of "had large stores", "programs", seeking capabilities", and similar qualifying statements. That Congressional resolution was passed by a large bipartisan majority, 69% in the House and 77% in the Senate.

The liberal narrative that Bush went to war strictly on the basis of large existing stores of WMDs is nothing more than partisan spin after the fact, pure invention.

The mention of WMDs by the majority of people includes "programs, seeking capabilities, etc".
The UN investigators were looking for all these things. They were not finding anything. So why didn't we wait for them to finish their investigation?
I don't remember anyone in the Bush Administration saying we were going into Iraq to protect our oil interests. When did they say that?

 

[jasonc]

The mention of WMDs by the majority of people includes "programs, seeking capabilities, etc".
The UN investigators were looking for all these things. They were not finding anything. So why didn't we wait for them to finish their investigation?
I don't remember anyone in the Bush Administration saying we were going into Iraq to protect our oil interests. When did they say that?

remember that Hussein stalled the inspectors a lot under Clinton and started again with bush. he was given plenty of time to comply. remember recently we found a lot of old containers of wmd's that soldiers were injured from exposure that was never revealed to the public under bush and Obama. soldiers weren't allowed to claim that, and if they did it was denied. they were treated but the name of the illness wasn't connected to the actually truthful cause of it in name. sad. the new York times did an article on it.

 

[Deborah13]

remember that Hussein stalled the inspectors a lot under Clinton and started again with bush. he was given plenty of time to comply. remember recently we found a lot of old containers of wmd's that soldiers were injured from exposure that was never revealed to the public under bush and Obama. soldiers weren't allowed to claim that, and if they did it was denied. they were treated but the name of the illness wasn't connected to the actually truthful cause of it in name. sad. the new York times did an article on it.

Once the inspectors were there they were there. I don't remember much stalling then, Sodom knew he was in serious trouble.
Our soldiers would not have been around these old EMPTY containers, yet with enough residue to be toxic, if we had not sent them there in the first place.
I've been around uranium mines and mills enough to understand this.
We have two family members who live in the Lake Powell uranium mining camps during the 60's. Neither worked or directly handled the uranium. They are women who washed the dusty clothes of the husband/father who worked in the mine. They have each received $50,000 in compensation because they got cancer. The house that they lived in is at the bottom of Lake Powell.
At another location just about 20 yrs ago....
Many of the little houses built by Union Carbide for their miners and mill workers were so high in radiation, simply from the uranium dust they brought home on their clothes and bodies, that most were destroyed.
So yes, certain types of residue is very toxic but you can't make a bomb out of it.

 

[Mike S]

remember that Hussein stalled the inspectors a lot under Clinton and started again with bush. he was given plenty of time to comply. remember recently we found a lot of old containers of wmd's that soldiers were injured from exposure that was never revealed to the public under bush and Obama. soldiers weren't allowed to claim that, and if they did it was denied. they were treated but the name of the illness wasn't connected to the actually truthful cause of it in name. sad. the new York times did an article on it.

Jason, I think that was all about the decision by Bush and Rove to not respond to criticism, and in this case, not bring up a subject that the Dems and media would only demagogue. I'm not sure that was a good decision, but I've admired Bush's restraint since leaving office. He never criticizes the President or other current administration leaders. He has a sense of dignity and integrity that complete eludes former Democratic presidents.

 

[jasonc]

Once the inspectors were there they were there. I don't remember much stalling then, Sodom knew he was in serious trouble.
Our soldiers would not have been around these old EMPTY containers, yet with enough residue to be toxic, if we had not sent them there in the first place.
I've been around uranium mines and mills enough to understand this.
We have two family members who live in the Lake Powell uranium mining camps during the 60's. Neither worked or directly handled the uranium. They are women who washed the dusty clothes of the husband/father who worked in the mine. They have each received $50,000 in compensation because they got cancer. The house that they lived in is at the bottom of Lake Powell.
At another location just about 20 yrs ago....
Many of the little houses built by Union Carbide for their miners and mill workers were so high in radiation, simply from the uranium dust they brought home on their clothes and bodies, that most were destroyed.
So yes, certain types of residue is very toxic but you can't make a bomb out of it.

nerve agents don't leave residue. that is what hit them. not enough there to make something but he had plants that were taken down and could be operational again in months.

I can make mustard agents in my house, fire plus r -134 a = mustard gas. it dissipates within minutes in the sun and doesn't if its in a ditch and or buried. once the sun hits it breaks down.

 

[jasonc]

Jason, I think that was all about the decision by Bush and Rove to not respond to criticism, and in this case, not bring up a subject that the Dems and media would only demagogue. I'm not sure that was a good decision, but I've admired Bush's restraint since leaving office. He never criticizes the President or other current administration leaders. He has a sense of dignity and integrity that complete eludes former Democratic presidents.

that is true. unlike Clinton whom removed the w's from the key boards

Deborah, beta and dulram radation aren't lethal if you are protected in proper gear and or have no cuts or dust to enter into the cavities.

 

[th1b.taylor]

Seriously? You think my saying that Bush wasn't entirely honest is more unsubstantiated than you saying Obama is a Muslim? You've got to be kidding

TOG, in post #135 you said;

No more than any other politician. His Holiness George W. Bush wasn't entirely truthful either.

To which I, in post #139 replied;

That amounts to an unsubstantiated declaration and either one of us has a monumental task to prove our case

And you want to twist what I said for some kind of faux defense coupled with a left wing reporter's interpretation of George Bushes religion?

First of all, this string has nothing to do with GW and I find it to be in bad taste to attempt to hijack this thread and such, irresponsible behavior, is not only not good Christianity, it fails the measure for adult behavior, rather, severely.

Please, Go back and read what I said and let's not treat one another like nannies spanking an unruly Tommie boy!

 

[Mike S]

Once the inspectors were there they were there. I don't remember much stalling then, Sodom knew he was in serious trouble.
Our soldiers would not have been around these old EMPTY containers, yet with enough residue to be toxic, if we had not sent them there in the first place.
I've been around uranium mines and mills enough to understand this.
We have two family members who live in the Lake Powell uranium mining camps during the 60's. Neither worked or directly handled the uranium. They are women who washed the dusty clothes of the husband/father who worked in the mine. They have each received $50,000 in compensation because they got cancer. The house that they lived in is at the bottom of Lake Powell.
At another location just about 20 yrs ago....
Many of the little houses built by Union Carbide for their miners and mill workers were so high in radiation, simply from the uranium dust they brought home on their clothes and bodies, that most were destroyed.
So yes, certain types of residue is very toxic but you can't make a bomb out of it.

I thank your family for what they've gone through. It's a shame we didn't know enough about the dangers of toxic waste earlier than we did.

I remember Love Canal, for instance, very well, I lived in Buffalo at the time. The chemical waste field that had been buried for decades eventually had a housing development built on it, and the worst happened. The toxic wastes oozed up out of the ground and caused all kinds of problems for the kids. The housing had to be abandoned, and the site cleaned up at great expense. What was the history of that site? Hooker Chemical disposed of their waste products in what was thought to be the proper method of the 30s and 40s. When the site was capped and covered with soil, it then had a provision in the deed that no housing was ever to be built on the site. Eventually the site was purchased from Hooker Chemical, and after a few changes of ownership, it ended up belonging to the Niagara Falls School District. The provision in the lease somehow disappeared from the deed or was ignored, the site sold again, and housing was, in fact, built on the site. What was acceptable waste disposal methods of the day turned out to not be so acceptable after all.

 

[Mike S]

Deborah, I thank your family for what they've gone through. It's a shame we didn't take the the dangers of toxic waste more seriously earlier than we did.

I remember Love Canal, for instance, very well, I lived in Buffalo at the time. The chemical waste field that had been buried for decades eventually had a housing development built on it, and the worst happened. The toxic wastes oozed up out of the ground and caused all kinds of problems for the kids. The housing had to be abandoned, and the site cleaned up at great expense. What was the history of that site? Hooker Chemical disposed of their waste products in what was thought to be the proper method of the 30s and 40s. When the site was capped and covered with soil, it then had a provision in the deed that no housing was ever to be built on the site. Eventually the site was purchased from Hooker Chemical, and after a few changes of ownership, it ended up belonging to the Niagara Falls School District. The provision in the lease somehow disappeared from the deed or was ignored, the site sold again, and housing was, in fact, built on the site. What was acceptable waste disposal methods of the day turned out to not be so acceptable after all.

 

[jasonc]

I thank your family for what they've gone through. It's a shame we didn't know enough about the dangers of toxic waste earlier than we did.

I remember Love Canal, for instance, very well, I lived in Buffalo at the time. The chemical waste field that had been buried for decades eventually had a housing development built on it, and the worst happened. The toxic wastes oozed up out of the ground and caused all kinds of problems for the kids. The housing had to be abandoned, and the site cleaned up at great expense. What was the history of that site? Hooker Chemical disposed of their waste products in what was thought to be the proper method of the 30s and 40s. When the site was capped and covered with soil, it then had a provision in the deed that no housing was ever to be built on the site. Eventually the site was purchased from Hooker Chemical, and after a few changes of ownership, it ended up belonging to the Niagara Falls School District. The provision in the lease somehow disappeared from the deed or was ignored, the site sold again, and housing was, in fact, built on the site. What was acceptable waste disposal methods of the day turned out to not be so acceptable after all.

while we have nothing like that in my county's history. we did build a park on an old dump that is adjacent to the river and also a community. trash and buses were left right on the river to go where it wants to go. I have no arials to show that easily a black and white zoom in will show a marsh but not that stuff.