| Author | Message | ||
| Corey Feldman (Meatballs_4)
New member Username: Meatballs_4 Post Number: 20 Registered: 9-2003 |
Good debating, very entertaining. Telson stop with the damn copying and pasting though, you robot. KDS, Telson can't admit that you were intelligence cause then you would have an edge over him so either way if he believes it or not he must deny it, lol. | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Intermediate Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 1060 Registered: 2-2003 |
Art, I think it was very reasonable for Clark to change his mind just as some of us have changed our minds on the past/present successes and failures of our current administration, especially if they are starting a career in politics! Now that he is no longer a General, he does not have to brown nose to the current administration if he wished to promote or retain his position. A position gained by being politically active, unless said officer is a decorated fighter pilot veteran. Some who do not understand will hold the views he had in the past against him. Those of us who understand the BS Clark had to withstand to rise in rank will be familiar with this. Sunny | ||
| Kds (Kds)
Member Username: Kds Post Number: 356 Registered: 5-2003 |
Telson..... I missed your comments about my being a liar....I guess they were too hidden among your gratutitous insults....heh. In any event.....I'll let my statements and photographs stand where they are and ask anyone else here to come forward and state, without concern, if they think I am a liar and then we can take your petty allegation further if an online crowd forms up, accusing me of same. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2774 Registered: 6-2001 |
Dave: Still waiting for the decision, expect one by the end of the year. I start another trial 11/10, but that may settle. I'm getting a new 360, and because of my bad behavior in the past, the wife imposed strict conditions, which means that after tax, the car costs about 500k, when all is said and done. That means I've got to work my butt off to get it. Regards, Art | ||
| Kds (Kds)
Member Username: Kds Post Number: 354 Registered: 5-2003 |
Art.... Anyone can change their mind, therefore IMHO it's obviously the reasoning as "to why" that is the issue here. I contend that Mr. Clarks history and past comment's as to what his positions were, and where he decided to stand and on what side of the political fence, and at what time, were merely done to benefit his opportunities at "this" time as it appears he has tried to do thruout his career that has been documented thus far. | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 162 Registered: 8-2003 |
Dave, go reread the "Billionaire..." thread again, and you'll see how laughable your non-argument that "everybody does it", isn't an argument, really is: ITS REALITY, buddy, its called THE FINANCIAL MARKETS, buddy, its called a FREE MARKET ECONOMY ! Hey, what do you REALLY want deep deep down, COMMUNISM and a STATE ECONOMY? Jeez. Why not be honest and simply admit that all you wanted to do was attack the integrity of a famous multi-billionaire simply because he is against Bush and putting his money there, because that is all it was, just like your snide attacks against me - which right now came pretty much out of the blue, I would say - or anyone else for that matter who is against Bush and who promptly get slandered. As for Realpolitik, you really think that Saddam with his, what, sick and 60 years old, pampered Palace life, now on a run thats got to be extremely dismal, gives a big •••• about being a semi-martyr-on-the-run, when he could have gone out with a big, big bang with lots and lots of WMD's and become a REALLY big martyr instead ?? Besides, the ADMINISTRATION themselves admitted that WMD's dont have anything to do with it, see below. So how come you're still breezing through life phantasizing about WMD's ?? | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Advanced Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 3129 Registered: 1-2002 |
Telson, "Dave, you upset because what you wrote in the thread on Soros was complete and utter BS, with the sole intention of slandering Soros who wants Bush out?" Telson, none of what I wrote is utter BS, nor have you proven that it is. Again, the "everybody does it" defense, so popular amonst you Clinton lovers, doesn't hold water, since we are no longer in the 6th grade. Wanting Bush out is fine: that is democracy. But aligning yourself with a scumbag hypocrite with at least several hidden agendas to do so, and who willingly almost put the world into a depression just to enrich himself, is beneath contempt. As for your slander comment, I will consider the source. It deserves no more response than that. "As for WMD's, if Saddam had had them he would have used them, as simple as that." Telson, you have a very dim and feeble grasp of realpolitik if you believe this. Saddam has gained MUCH more cred on the Arab street by NOT using them. Had he actually used them, he would have been a true int'l pariah. Now, still alive, he has scored a major PR victory against the US by NOT using them. When you get your cranial-rectosis cured, you may just realize that I am right. | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 160 Registered: 8-2003 |
Dave:" if you read any of Telson's pathetic spam" Dave, you upset because what you wrote in the thread on Soros - Billionaire launches get-out-the-vote effort against Bush - was complete and utter BS, written by you with the sole intention of slandering Soros who wants Bush out and is spending money for that? As for WMD's, if Saddam had had them he would have used them, as simple as that. Besides, even the administration had said that Iraq was no threat in that regard: "Colin Powell Secretary of State. "But if the heart of your question is whether or not we see any complicity between Iraq and the events of Sept. 11 through Al Qaeda, we do not have that connection."" http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline /DailyNews/powell_transcript021112.html "Powell 2001: WMDs Not Significant Asked about the sanctions placed on Iraq, which were then under review at the Security Council, Powell said the measures were working. In fact, he added, "(Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq, and these are policies that we are going to keep in place." http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/ 4119353.html "On May 15 2001, Powell went further and said that Saddam Hussein had not been able to "build his military back up or to develop weapons of mass destruction" for "the last 10 years". America, he said, had been successful in keeping him "in a box"." http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/ content_objectid=13434081_method=full_siteid =50143_headline=-THE%2DBIG%2DLIE-name_page.html "Condoleeza Rice 2001: "Saddam does not control the northern part of the country," she said. "We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."" http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/ content_objectid=13434081_method=full_siteid= 50143_headline=-THE%2DBIG%2DLIE-name_page.html "WMD Just a Convenient Excuse for War, Admits Wolfowitz By David Usborne The Independent Friday 30 May 2003 The Bush administration focused on alleged weapons of mass destruction as the primary justification for toppling Saddam Hussein by force because it was politically convenient, a top-level official at the Pentagon has acknowledged. The extraordinary admission comes in an interview with Paul Wolfowitz, the Deputy Defence Secretary, in the July issue of the magazine Vanity Fair. "For bureaucratic reasons we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on," Mr Wolfowitz tells the magazine. The comments suggest that, even for the US administration, the logic that was presented for going to war may have been an empty shell. They come to light, moreover, just two days after Mr Wolfowitz's immediate boss, Donald Rumsfeld, the Defence Secretary, conceded for the first time that the arms might never be found." http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/053103A.shtml Art, RE Clark, the way I see it its pretty simple and no big deal, as I wrote in the thread "Democratic Presidential candidates": "While CLark may in the early stages have reacted as a soldier, albeit retired, who demonstrates loyalty to his political leadership irrespective of the correctness of their actions, and praised the President and policy etc, he pretty quickly found his independent feet and, as per his track record as CNN commentator, was very consistently against the war. Best, PS, the reason the thread goes double width sometimes is when you're posting long links, that's why I'm "returning" them like that. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Advanced Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 3128 Registered: 1-2002 |
Dang, that IS weird. I don't know, Art. I'm not much of a tech guru! By the way, how was your big trial? | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2772 Registered: 6-2001 |
Dave, Rob, etc: How do we make this readable? This thread has lines that are at least 2 pages wide. Art | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Advanced Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 3125 Registered: 1-2002 |
Yes, Art, that is the question, and a valid one. However, as I have said all along, let's wait until the one year anniversary of the fall of Husseign's reign before we definitively declare that there are no WMD's. Remember, Iraq is bigge than Kalifornia. Pretty easy to hide stuff there--especially if it is hidden in plain sight. Remember also, Hussein hired a bunch of Bosnian Serbs right before we attacked to help him hide stuff, as the Sewrb's were the world masters at hiding things in plain sight from us & NATO. Let's wait until May before excoriating the president, OK? Theh, if there is still no track of anything, I will agree that the premise of thr war was BS. Until then, none of us knows...and all this partisan griping (and words, if you read any of Telson's pathetic spam) just looks & sounds like sour grapes. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2770 Registered: 6-2001 |
Other than exchanging pictures and insults, has anyone taken the time to deal with the issue: The statements made by Clark in 02 were favorable, but as we discovered in the middle of 03, appear to have changed. I suggest that because we now know or have very strong suspicion that Bush's behavior was either fraudlent, or at best mistaken, is it right for Clark to have changed his mind? That, in my humble opinion is the gist of this thread. Anyone care to make a reasoned response? Art | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 142 Registered: 8-2003 |
lol, Ralph, the idiot is nothing but a pathetic liar too stupid to remember his own lies. KDS: "I was an intelligence officer in the military for 6 years, so I have no problem with the other issues of this debate...." Kds Post Number 260, Monday, October 06 http://www.ferrarichat.com/discus/messages/132929 /324718.html#POST326816 And then, just yesterday in this thread here, the story KDS was dishing us up totally changes: "I served as my regimental intelligence officer for 2 out of my 6 years in the forces..." Kds Post Number 334, Tuesday, October 21 | ||
| Ralph Koslin (Ralfabco)
Member Username: Ralfabco Post Number: 979 Registered: 3-2002 |
KDS Don't worry about this bullshit. One would not expect someone who has never been around a military unit to understand anything about having a unit move into combat with just a few "hundred" soldiers. It is not a democracy. There are other career fields that have the luxury to sit down and explain procedures, allow comments, debate, suggestions, and take questions and answers. However when you have a SP time to make; you cannot sit around and talk about what can and cannot be done. If one does not like the system or agree, they should request seperation through the required methods. The procedure should start through the chain of command. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Advanced Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 3114 Registered: 1-2002 |
Telson, two can play this game:                 | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 135 Registered: 8-2003 |
 I find it tremendously sad when someone feels the need to switch off their brains, and delegate all responsibility over to some leader just because that makes life so nice and comfortable, no more hard decisions any more, just floating along, being a follower. No matter that the emperor, Bush in this case, has no clothes, and has built a case for an imbecilic and extremely counter-productive war that is built on absolutely nothing but Spin, Lies and Deceit. Talking with people like KDS is like talking with someone who you know has flown across the world, yet, when challenged, will with great tenacity maintain that the earth is flat, just because his guru said so. No facts could ever change his mind, because, you guessed it, his guru doesn't believe in facts. Where what was just pathetic however becomes almost criminal, is when someone, who has the incoherence and intellect of a border case mentally challenged person, albeit great tenacity at twisting facts around as fast as they come up, when such a person like KDS in this case goes on to embellish his obviously factually totally unwarranted case with OUTRIGHT LIES. The laughable pics he posted (apart from showing what looks suspiciously like a redneck) demonstrate, if anything, even more the amazing stupidity of KDS. He claims to have been an intelligence officer, and posts pics of himself (or someone else, even, who is to know in the days of photoshop) in the SAND??????? ROFLMAO WHAT THE HELL IS THAT SUPPOSED TO PROVE ? The good thing is, the stupidity of these rightwing extremist foot soldiers of Bush is what inevitably leads to their downfall: Here is what KDS, in his inimitably childish but all too transparent bragging efforts to exchange hype for substance, posted first: "I was an intelligence officer in the military for 6 years, so I have no problem with the other issues of this debate...." Kds Post Number 260, Monday, October 06 http://www.ferrarichat.com/discus/messages/132929 /324718.html#POST326816 And then, just yesterday in this thread here, the story KDS was dishing us up totally changes: "I served as my regimental intelligence officer for 2 out of my 6 years in the forces..." Kds Post Number 334, Tuesday, October 21 LOL, a fraud, fact twister and spinner par excellence, too stupid to remember his own lies. Go play in never never land, or join a sect or sthg, because your present guru cum war criminal Bush is on his way out, imposter KDS, and as you cannot survive without one that's your sole remaining choice, lol. Good bye to bad rubbish, KDS ! | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Member Username: Amir Post Number: 293 Registered: 2-2003 |
Don't worry Kds, we won't blow your cover. You carry on with your, umm, intelligence gathering. | ||
| Kds (Kds)
Member Username: Kds Post Number: 341 Registered: 5-2003 |
Amir....ask Rob Lay....I e-mailed him the pictures and had him explain to me why I couldn't get these posted....and read the rest of my last reply. Have a nice day.....oh....BTW...."duck and cover"... I'm finished here. | ||
| Kds (Kds)
Member Username: Kds Post Number: 340 Registered: 5-2003 |
Heh......cool eh ??? Now I can post some of the great car pics I get from time to time. -------------- OK Telson......you are so predictable I will say that tomorrow you will either reply....."I borrowed someone else's ID and photos and posted here on their computer" which, since a couple of people on the Ferrari board (yes, I know "you" don't post anything Ferrari related) actually "know me and have met me" so, we can dismiss that one all together......or you will say "gee that doesn't prove that you were an int officer at all". Well...no photo would actually, as we didn't sit behind desks like doctor's do with signs saying "Doctor Sawatsky"......so there you go...but to be one, you have to be in the military, and since I kept my "6 month tdy" in the Sinai out of our previous discussions, I thought that would be even more credible to post here, as it also demonstrates the reason for my interest in things middle eastern that are military and politically related. TDY was 6 months, the same duty as the US guys in Kosovo, or the Canucks in Cyprus , Golan or Sinai. "You" can believe whatever you want....I know you will anyways.... ------------ Some text for the rest of you who may be viewing this little "tete a tete". Yeah that's me (look at my current valid passport and you'll see how well I have been preserved...LOL !!!)....sitting with a gaggle of Polish officers that had just recieved their UN medals....the tall guy on the right of the photo is "Walter".....a Polish regimental signals warrant officer that I "befriended"....and I'll leave it at that. Contact with Warsaw Pact soldiers, even on UN missions, was strictly verboten (they were the enemy after all in 1978) and this photo was taken off the Canadian section of the base at the entrance to the Polish area. I was very nervous to say the least getting my picture taken with them in this area....but no one was around so what the hell. The picture of my friend from Edmonton on top of the BTR was set up for a reason.....look at what he is pointing at with is right hand....it's a ship in the desert, right ???...actually...it's an oil tanker in the Suez Canal....neat picture eh ? The last one shows me in the bottom left hand corner (I know it's hard to tell) cataloging ammunition finds with a camera. I had no idea that this photo was taken by a friend who actually wanted a pic of "Doc" Johnson holding what I told him (yelled at him about 15 seconds later actually) was a live unexploded 122mm round. The Israeli M60 had crashed into a Egyptian ammo truck near Mitla pass. I got it for posterity sake as it shows what happens when you let unqualified people in the field (he was a medic...not a combat soldier) and it made for an interesting story. I am done with this thread now. :-) | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Member Username: Amir Post Number: 292 Registered: 2-2003 |
So you found the WMD. Great! Congrats! Too bad they have the Star of David on them. 47 people killed so far since Friday. 10 more killed just today. All terrorists of course. Even the kids. | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Member Username: Amir Post Number: 291 Registered: 2-2003 |
Exactly what is this picture of four people supposed to prove about your identity and claims about being an "intelligence" officer? Are we supposed to know one of these people so that we can ask him to confirm that one of the other persons in the picture is someone named Kds? Suppose we get that far. Then what? How is he to confirm that the person in the picture who he knew as Kds is the one making the posts under the username Kds. Tell us, o intelligence officer... | ||
| Kds (Kds)
Member Username: Kds Post Number: 339 Registered: 5-2003 |
Wow....I finally figured it out.....    | ||
| Kds (Kds)
Member Username: Kds Post Number: 338 Registered: 5-2003 |
Here the pics....I hope.....  | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 134 Registered: 8-2003 |
My pleasure. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Advanced Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 3112 Registered: 1-2002 |
Thank you for answering! | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 133 Registered: 8-2003 |
 Dave, not that I see where that has anything to do with anything else, let the facts speak for themselves, I say, particularly as I believe privacy is in order on the web, most particularly so in this day and age, but, the answers are yes and yes. And the next vote is, as mentioned a couple of times already, going to be the most important vote this country has faced in the last 100 or so years in my opinion.  Best, | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Advanced Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 3110 Registered: 1-2002 |
Telson, a month or so ago, in another thread, I posed 2 questions to you. No doubt, in all the posts on that thread, you forgot to respond. So I will pose them again, and would be really grateful for yes/no responses: 1) are you a United States citizen? 2) if so, do you vote regularly? Thanks, Dave | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 132 Registered: 8-2003 |
Yeah, I'm getting older too ;-) Best, | ||
| tony hopkins (Tonyh)
Junior Member Username: Tonyh Post Number: 246 Registered: 12-2002 |
yes, it's china whites.however, i don't get out to clubs much these days.7.00am to 6.00 pm 5 days a week is hard enough without a 3.00 am night out! tony | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 131 Registered: 8-2003 |
Oh, hi, just checked your profile, a colleague, good stuff. No, not UK, although I've been there many times, great nightlife, whats that place there, China Nights or Whites or sthg, Embassy, etc, good stuff. | ||
| tony hopkins (Tonyh)
Junior Member Username: Tonyh Post Number: 245 Registered: 12-2002 |
telson, out of london? | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 130 Registered: 8-2003 |
Tony, Spot FX (currencies in the interbank market) mainly. Best, | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 129 Registered: 8-2003 |
Art, I without doubt agree with you on some points regarding Clark. Now, on Iraq a lot of credit is also due to Dean, no doubt about that. Thing is, is he truely electable, can he really become POTUS 44? The way I personally see it at this stage is that my numero uno priority is to get Bush out of the White House, I really believe he is the biggest danger this country has faced in a very very long time, and only then, just like the NeoCons have started their mission some 30 what years ago, find a coherent, well presented way to get the country going in what I believe is what history has in store for the most highly developed countries, liberalism based on self confidence, optimism in the future and enlightenment, the exact opposite of Neo-conservatism that is based on deep pessimism, personal fears and insecurity leading to paranoia and subsequent general, random hatred. But, one step at a time, is the way I see it. Regards, | ||
| tony hopkins (Tonyh)
Junior Member Username: Tonyh Post Number: 244 Registered: 12-2002 |
telson, what contracts/products do you trade? tony | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2753 Registered: 6-2001 |
I've seen the arguments, but one thing sticks out: the issues regarding no weapons of mass destruction only became an issue long after Mr. Clark had made the statements atrributed to him, in which he praised Bush. Then we discovered that the facts were indeed incorrect. These inconsistent statements with the time interval show just how much afraid the conservatives are of General Clark. In my humble opinion, he's much too conservative for my blood. If the choice is between him and Bush, I'm not sure which I'd vote for, since in a lot of areas, their the same. However, this attempt to smear him is easily explanable, and if Clark is smart, he'll do so, and point out how the lies of this administration made him change his mind. Art | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 124 Registered: 8-2003 |
Kds; you go to your neighbor to post them then ? PS, whats a manipulated pic supposed to tell us anyway ? | ||
| Kds (Kds)
Member Username: Kds Post Number: 335 Registered: 5-2003 |
Attention Rob Lay.... Would you please confirm for Telson that I "am not" behind the spamming of his threads with the "Trollson" handles and blank pages as he has accused me of being. I would appreciate it....and BTW....thanks again for posting those pics when you have a chance. Cheers.... | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 122 Registered: 8-2003 |
KDS, oh great PRETENDER,DISSEMBLER and FACT TWISTER, can you read ? First YOU CLAIMED you were an INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, ROFLMAO. kds: "I served as my regimental intelligence officer for 2 out of my 6 years in the forces..." Then its pics of you as UN PEACE KEEPER, lol. Besides, I'll try and spell it out for your limited intelligence one more time: ANY IDIOT CAN MANIPULATE ANY and EVERY PIC for ANY and EVERY purpose on the web these days, so don't even bother. SAYONARA KDS PS: What about this here, why not do an ISP check on that while we're at it: KDS, I deal in probabilities, and I'd wager that the probability is pretty high that it's you behind "Trollson/Masterdebater" down there in the thread producing the huge reams of empty space and all the other recent incarnations of him, that started appearing since you decided you needed to chime in, you're just the kind of slimy and disingenuous character to enjoy ridiculous and childish games like that, just as ridiculous and childish as making the claim that you're a former intelligence officer on a web board of all places, using hype over substance to bolster up your argument as facts are totally lacking. | ||
| Kds (Kds)
Member Username: Kds Post Number: 334 Registered: 5-2003 |
Nice try....I served as my regimental intelligence officer for 2 out of my 6 years in the forces....that is a secondary duty in addition to your regular ones. Unfortunately for you (and really now...why didn't I think of it 24 years ago that I'd be debated some leftist on the "internet"....geez, I could have made a sign that said "intelligence officer", smuggled a camera onto the base, and took some photos at a desk in the mess hall) During that 6 years time I was stationed in Germany and also did 6 months as a UN peacekeeper in the Sinai. I will be posting pics from that time for 2 reasons....they cannot be made up due to the timeline and scenery involved.....they clearly show my face to match my passport....and two of them should not have been taken at all as I could have been sent home had the photos been found out. That's all..... This is not for your benefit Telson.....the people here I think know what you are about, this is merely to show them that I am not a liar like you are. Like I said, I'll repost commentary once they are up. All the best..... | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 121 Registered: 8-2003 |
LOL, kds, you said you were an INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, ROFLMAO. Now its UN PEACE KEEPER, lol. Besides, I'll try and spell it out for your limited intelligence one more time: ANY IDIOT CAN MANIPULATE ANYTHING ON THE WEB THESE DAYS, so don't even bother. SAYONARA KDS | ||
| Kds (Kds)
Member Username: Kds Post Number: 333 Registered: 5-2003 |
Telson... I never said that I was a secret agent or anything like that....please.....once again you are a liar....but you can continue to make ridiculious assertions because others here who read you may find them humorous as I do. I have caught you in lies 3 times now....that's enough for me. This is exactly what I am refering to by your use of slander. And now that you are about to be discredited once again you call your detractors names as well to hide what will be your obvious embarassement. This little act of posting photos is more for those here, whom I interact with on the Ferrari board, as there have been more than a few "misrepresentations" made lately about various things here, and that simply, is not my style. I have already sent an e-mail to Rob Lay asking him to post a few photos here. The only thing Photoshopped will be my passport numbers, part of my DOB and last name for obvious reasons. I will add commentary after they are posted. | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 119 Registered: 8-2003 |
kds: "In any event I will post my current passport photo to this thread (for current ID purposes) as well as a couple of pics from when I was attached to the UN as a peacekeeper in the middle east from 77-78 to substantiate my 6 years of military service and the basis of my claims regarding said experience." KDS, I deal in probabilities, and I'd wager that the probability is pretty high that it's you behind "Trollson", you're just the kind of slimy and disingenuous character to enjoy ridiculous and childish games like that, just as ridiculous and childish as making the claim that you're a former intelligence officer on a web board of all places, to bolster up your argument with the laughable statement that you were a former intelligence officer, because facts are totally lacking. I have an idea: Go to your local high school, maybe they'll be impressed. Anyway, don't bother here with making up more childish claims and stuff with Photoshop etc. First, last time you were making the claim that you were an intelligence officer, now it's some other crap. Second, any idiot can manipulate just about anything on the web these days. Third, as said many many times, you're complete incoherence and frightening lack of intelligence is the best prooof of the fact that you may be many things, but you most certainly lack the most elementary intelligence to comprehend even the most simple facts, such as that this war was based on nothing but SPIN, LIES and DECEIT. Just go and sell your cars, lol, and try and impress your customers that you're a secret agent. Sayonara, KDs, as mentioned previously, if this board had an ignore function you'd be the only one here to go on that, you are just a huge, incoherent, waste of time. Wesley Clark: "We went into Iraq under false pretenses We went into Iraq under false pretenses. There was deceptive advertising; you'd be taking [President Bush] to the Better Business Bureau if you bought a washing machine the way we went into the war in Iraq. We're taking casualties. We haven't made America safer by this. We've made America more engaged, more vulnerable, more committed, less able to respond. We've lost a tremendous amount of goodwill around the world by our actions and our continuing refusal to bring in international institutions. Source: CNN Late Edition interview with Wolf Blitzer Aug 17, 2003 Iraq distracts from the War on Terror I think the conflict with Iraq was elective. It was purely elective and it represented a big distraction from the War on Terror. It was not a reinforcement of it. It was a distraction from it. Source: WCGU-FM interview on "Sound Off With Sasha" Jun 27, 2003 Of course a good Republican who has an IQ north of 50 and hasn't been brainwashed has the exact same opinion: "There is scant evidence to tie Saddam to terrorist organizations, and even less to the Sept. 11 attacks. Indeed Saddam's goals have little in common with the terrorists who threaten us, and there is little incentive for him to make common cause with them. Don't attack Saddam. It would undermine our antiterror efforts." Brent Scowcroft National Security Advisor to Presidents Gerald Ford & George Bush senior Wall Street Journal, 15 Aug 2002 | ||
| Ryan Alexander (Ryalex)
Junior Member Username: Ryalex Post Number: 157 Registered: 8-2003 |
My father is an officer who did four years with NATO in Germany under Clark; I don't know where he stands personally but I definitely got the sense then that people really didn't like him (esp. the Cdn officers). | ||
| Rikky Alessi (Ralessi)
Member Username: Ralessi Post Number: 423 Registered: 5-2002 |
I'm not sure why you are trying to wave the bloody red shirt. When we do that we will just get people who don't really know what to do in office i.e. Ulysses S. Grant. Heck, he didn't even WANT to be President. The funniest thing is that (even though you won't admit it) you would be saying the same thing that I am saying if there weren't any military people on the Democrat side. Oh well, C'est la vie du Democrats. | ||
| Trollson (Masterdebater)
New member Username: Masterdebater Post Number: 1 Registered: 10-2003 |
  | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Intermediate Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 1038 Registered: 2-2003 |
Who here can actually say they met and talked with Clark? I did, for 15 minutes at Brindisi Airport, standing on the tarmac with two of the team I deployed with. I served in that campaign as well. People try to point out his mistakes in his military career. Have any of you bothered to realize that there might have been a political reason for trying to take charge of the airport? When you develop a target package, you combine the political targets, the military targets, and the allied targets into one prioritized list. Unless someone can say how or why the airport was on that list, he was doing his job or until proven otherwise. Not on the word of some political or military leader for another country, from one of our own. | ||
| Kds (Kds)
Member Username: Kds Post Number: 328 Registered: 5-2003 |
Nobody is slandering anyone except you Telson. I am simply pointing out quotes made by Mr. Clark which directly contradict his political position of today at 11.50am MST. (note sarcasm) Had I done any less, namely refer to him as an opportunist or hypocrite without doing so then you would be correct....but alas...you are wrong again. When confronted with the "obvious" or a position that discredits the beliefs you wish to advance, you resort to name calling and abuse which is typical of people who espouse left wing politics. In any event I will post my current passport photo to this thread (for current ID purposes) as well as a couple of pics from when I was attached to the UN as a peacekeeper in the middle east from 77-78 to substantiate my 6 years of military service and the basis of my claims regarding said experience. It may take 24 hours as I am at work and have to scan the photos from home then get someone to post them for me as I can't seem to master it. I have asked Jim, the other poster on this thread to help me, and barring that I am sure Rob Lay would assist. Have a nice day..... ;-) Oh...as to CNN, the only self-censorship they practiced was the refusal to report of Hussein's graphic human rights abuses so that they could curry favor with him for interviews as per the confession of the CNN chief Eason Jordan. Nice guys...you leftists are... | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 117 Registered: 8-2003 |
Jim, Clinton is history. (I actually share your opinion on 99,9% of politicians, but sometimes things are more clear cut than at other times, and Bush 43, totally unlike his father, just really isn't a viable contender any longer in what is supposed to be a democracy.) "Bush had said something then retracted it the next day everyone would be calling foul." Clark actually didn't retract sthg the next day, but he put it in the proper context. Watching him on CNN he was consistently against the war in Iraq, he really has a very stable track record on that. As for Bush, actually that is exactly what he has been doing the last 2 or what years over Iraq, coming up with invented reason after invented reason for why we were supposed to attack Iraq, yet most in the USA were not crying foul, quite the contrary, they were wrapping themselves in the flag and denouncing all criticism as national treason, lol, facts or no facts that Bush never managed to present as they didn't exist: "USA Today Amanpour: CNN practiced self-censorship CNN's top war correspondent, Christiane Amanpour, says that the press muzzled itself during the Iraq war. And, she says CNN "was intimidated" by the Bush administration and Fox News, which "put a climate of fear and self-censorship." As criticism of the war and its aftermath intensifies, Amanpour joins a chorus of journalists and pundits who charge that the media largely toed the Bush administrationline in covering the war and, by doing so, failed to aggressively question the motives behind the invasion." http://www.usatoday.com/life/columnist/mediamix/2003 -09-14-media-mix_x.htm Best, | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Intermediate Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 2020 Registered: 7-2002 |
what I don't like is that if Bush had said something then retracted it the next day everyone would be calling foul. And also now the Dems think Clark is great because of his military service yet Clinton dodged the draft and that was cool too. Totally inconsistent, but that is the media for ya. | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 116 Registered: 8-2003 |
Jim, Clark is as clear as you can get after he clarified his Iraq position: "Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark backtracked from a day-old statement that he probably would have voted for the congressional resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq, saying Friday he "would never have voted for this war." The retired Army general, an opponent of the conflict, surprised supporters when he indicated in an interview with reporters Thursday that he likely would have supported the resolution. On Friday, Clark sought to clarify his comments. "Let's make one thing real clear, I would never have voted for this war," Clark said before a speech at the University of Iowa. "I've gotten a very consistent record on this. There was no imminent threat. This was not a case of pre-emptive war. I would have voted for the right kind of leverage to get a diplomatic solution, an international solution to the challenge of Saddam Hussein." Source: Mike Glover, Associated Press Sep 20, 2003 AND that, as many here have been maintaining all along: "We went into Iraq under false pretenses We went into Iraq under false pretenses. There was deceptive advertising; you'd be taking [President Bush] to the Better Business Bureau if you bought a washing machine the way we went into the war in Iraq. We're taking casualties. We haven't made America safer by this. We've made America more engaged, more vulnerable, more committed, less able to respond. We've lost a tremendous amount of goodwill around the world by our actions and our continuing refusal to bring in international institutions. Source: CNN Late Edition interview with Wolf Blitzer Aug 17, 2003 Best, | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Intermediate Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 2019 Registered: 7-2002 |
I think it is funny how people only see what they want to see. Clark sounds like he talks out of both sides of his mouth too. Notice he doesn't say we should not have gone in to Iraq..only that he is critical of the "way" we did it. The guy is a former military power junkie and now he says this. Politicians' stories/opinions change as public opinion dictates. I don't trust any of them. | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 115 Registered: 8-2003 |
LOL, KDS, the right wing board pretender, dissembler and fact twister who goes around pretending he was a former intelligence officer in an unbelievably childish and laughable effort to bolster his non existent case, when he doesn't even have sufficient brains to comprehend even now that the Iraq war was based on nothing but lies. I mean, hey, it's clear that our tiny minority of resident right wing extremists would start doing what they always do, slander the critics, ignore all and every fact, a tactic as transparent, ineffective, deceptive and plain ridiculous as anything they've ever done, lol. "Wesley Clark: "We went into Iraq under false pretenses We went into Iraq under false pretenses. There was deceptive advertising; you'd be taking [President Bush] to the Better Business Bureau if you bought a washing machine the way we went into the war in Iraq. We're taking casualties. We haven't made America safer by this. We've made America more engaged, more vulnerable, more committed, less able to respond. We've lost a tremendous amount of goodwill around the world by our actions and our continuing refusal to bring in international institutions. Source: CNN Late Edition interview with Wolf Blitzer Aug 17, 2003 Iraq distracts from the War on Terror I think the conflict with Iraq was elective. It was purely elective and it represented a big distraction from the War on Terror. It was not a reinforcement of it. It was a distraction from it. Source: WCGU-FM interview on "Sound Off With Sasha" Jun 27, 2003 " | ||
| Kds (Kds)
Member Username: Kds Post Number: 327 Registered: 5-2003 |
How about that Wesley Clark.....the consumate politician....er political opportunist.....sounds like a die hard right wing Republican to me....so, tell me who lied Telson ??? Did Clark lie too ??? This just too easy.......see what happens when people with dreams of power and simple minds need try to get elected....they become Democrats. XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU SEPT 25, 2003 16:05:37 ET XXXXX GENERAL CLARK PRAISED CONDI, POWELL, RUMSFELD AND BUSH: 'WE NEED THEM THERE' **World Exclusive** Democratic presidential hopeful General Wesley Clark offered lavish praise for the Bush Administration and its key players in a speech to Republicans -- just two years ago, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal! MORE During extended remarks delivered at the Pulaski County GOP Lincoln Day Dinner in Little Rock, Arkansas on May 11, 2001, General Clark declared: "And I'm very glad we've got the great team in office, men like Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, ���� Cheney, Condoleezza Rice... people I know very well - our president George W. Bush. We need them there." MORE Clark praised Reagan for improving the military: "We were really helped when President Ronald Reagan came in. I remember non-commissioned officers who were going to retire and they re-enlisted because they believed in President Reagan." Clark continued: "That's the kind of President Ronald Reagan was. He helped our country win the Cold War. He put it behind us in a way no one ever believed would be possible. He was truly a great American leader. And those of us in the Armed Forces loved him, respected him, and tremendously admired him for his great leadership." Clark on President George Bush: "President George Bush had the courage and the vision... and we will always be grateful to President George Bush for that tremendous leadership and statesmanship." Clark on American military involvement overseas: "Do you ever ask why it is that these people in these other countries can't solve their own problems without the United States sending its troops over there? And do you ever ask why it is the Europeans, the people that make the Mercedes and the BMW's that got so much money can't put some of that money in their own defense programs and they need us to do their defense for them?" "And I'll tell you what I've learned from Europe is that are a lot of people out in the world who really, really love and admire the United States. Don't you ever believe it when you hear foreign leaders making nasty comments about us. That's them playing to their domestic politics as they misread it. Because when you talk to the people out there, they love us. They love our values. They love what we stand for in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights." -------------- | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Intermediate Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 2017 Registered: 7-2002 |
I am no expert on Wesley Clark, but from what I have read he is a hot head opportunist just like the people you don't like. Here are some links and excerpts. http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/970940/posts ...Let us look at what kind of a president Wesley Clark would make according to CounterPunch of November 12, 1999, "The poster child for everything that is wrong with the GO (general officer) corps," exclaims one colonel, who has had occasion to observe Clark in action, citing, among other examples, his command of the 1st Cavalry Division at Fort Hood from 1992 to 1994. ..."With the end of hostilities it has become clear even to Clark that most people, apart from some fanatical members of the war party in the White House and State Department, consider the general, as one Pentagon official puts it, 'a horse's ass.' Defense Secretary William Cohen is known to loathe him, and has seen to it that the Hammer of the Serbs will be relieved of the Nato command two months early." ...'THE GUY WHO ALMOST STARTED WORLD WAR III' In Waging Modern War, General Clark wrote about his fury upon learning that Russian peacekeepers had entered the airport at Pristina, Kosovo, before British or American forces. In the article "The guy who almost started World War III," (Aug. 3, 1999), The Guardian (U.K.) wrote, "No sooner are we told by Britain's top generals that the Russians played a crucial role in ending the West's war against Yugoslavia than we learn that if NATO's supreme commander, the American General Wesley Clark, had had his way, British paratroopers would have stormed Pristina airport, threatening to unleash the most frightening crisis with Moscow since the end of the Cold War." "I'm not going to start the third world war for you," General Sir Mike Jackson, commander of the international KFOR peacekeeping force, is reported to have told Gen. Clark when he refused to accept an order to send assault troops to prevent Russian troops from taking over the airfield of Kosovo's provincial capital. The Times of London reported on 23 May 2001 in an article titled, "Kosovo clash of allied generals," that "General Sir Michael Jackson [was] told that he would have to resign if he refused to obey an order by the American commander of Nato's forces during the Kosovo war to stop the Russians from seizing control of Pristina airport in June 1999." If General Clark had had his way, we might have gone to war with Russia, or at least resurrected vestiges of the Cold War and we certainly would have had hundreds if not thousands of casualties in an ill-conceived ground war http://www.losaltosonline.com/articles/2003/09/23/news/community/news01.txt http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20030918-073343-2743r.htm http://americanprowler.org/article.asp?art_id=2003_9_15_23_58_37 | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 112 Registered: 8-2003 |
Ladies and Gentlemen, let us help the village in Texas that's been frantically searching for it's missing village idiot the last 3 years get him back double quick next year:  And help us welcome the next President of the United States, General Wesley Clark, the former NATO supreme comander, who unlike Bush certainly understands national security and how to achieve it, who most certainly demonstrated great skills in alliance building and maintenanace, the sine qua non for effective solutions against international terror, who would not start wars based on nothing but Spin, Lies and Deceit, and who most certainly wasn't a personal coward unlike our current incumbents. Add in ex Wallstreet, ex Clinton Treasury Secretary Rubin for Fed Chairman, and Senator Jon Corzine, ex Goldman Sachs CEO, as Treasury Secretary, and we've got ourselves a spiffy winning team (I'm supporting Clark).  "New York Times Clark Says 'Rush to War' Based on Twisted Facts By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE Published: October 4, 2003 RLINGTON, Va., Oct. 3 � Gen. Wesley K. Clark delivered a searing indictment of the Bush administration on Friday, asserting that its "headlong rush to war" was based on twisted facts and had violated the nation's democratic principles "with dire consequences for our security." General Clark said the administration was governing "against the will of the majority" by being secretive, demonizing critics and retaliating harshly "against anyone who expresses dissent, questions their facts or challenges their logic." The general, a former supreme Allied commander in Europe for NATO and the most recent entrant into the Democratic presidential race, called for an investigation of the intelligence that led the country into the Iraq war. "We need an independent, comprehensive investigation into the administration's handling of the intelligence leading to war in Iraq," he said. "Nothing could be a more serious violation of public trust than to consciously make a case for war based on false claims." "We need to know if we were intentionally deceived," he said. And as the other Democratic presidential candidates have done, he called for an independent commission to investigate accusations that the White House released the name of a covert operative whose husband had challenged President Bush's assertions that Iraq posed a threat. The Justice Department is investigating the assertions. "Why would White House officials have had that name?" General Clark, 58, asked. His speech, delivered here to a group of military reporters, was his clearest enunciation yet of his rationale for running: that as the commander of NATO forces who pulled together the 19-member alliance to win its first and only war, in Kosovo in 1999, he was a sophisticated and experienced player on the international stage. The speech also underscored his other rationale, that as a four-star general, he had the credentials and credibility to challenge President Bush not only on the war in Iraq but also on the United States' role in the world at a time when national security is a heightened priority. General Clark's campaign aides suggest that he is running for president because he is "the right man at the right time." The general said as much in his speech on Friday as he described the confluence of a disturbing series of events, including the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, reports that C.I.A. analysts felt pressured to make their intelligence assessments of Iraq conform with the administration's policy objectives, and a report by the House intelligence committee that there was insufficient evidence to go to war. Moreover, he said, the administration had fractured its relationship with its allies. This was not an accident, General Clark said, but "a direct consequence of the willful decisions of the administration to turn its back on 60 years of national security success that came directly from strong alliances." General Clark, who retired from the Army three years ago, said that since leaving the service he had been briefed by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and seen some of the intelligence that led the administration to declare war in Iraq. In neither case, he said, had he heard or seen anything that should have compelled the nation to war. He said he had heard "behind the scenes" justifications for the war, among them that it would be a good way to reshape the Middle East. "I'm retired," General Clark said. "I'm not in that chain of command. That's why I'm speaking out. That's why I'm answering the call." http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/04/politics/ campaigns/04CLAR.html?ex=1380686400&en=509350 cd8c0796de&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND Now, rightwing extremists are attacking Clark because of what they are instrumentalizing as a construed ambivalence on Clarks alleged stance on the war, where his words were taken out of context, here is his clarification: "Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark backtracked from a day-old statement that he probably would have voted for the congressional resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq, saying Friday he "would never have voted for this war." The retired Army general, an opponent of the conflict, surprised supporters when he indicated in an interview with reporters Thursday that he likely would have supported the resolution. On Friday, Clark sought to clarify his comments. "Let's make one thing real clear, I would never have voted for this war," Clark said before a speech at the University of Iowa. "I've gotten a very consistent record on this. There was no imminent threat. This was not a case of pre-emptive war. I would have voted for the right kind of leverage to get a diplomatic solution, an international solution to the challenge of Saddam Hussein." Source: Mike Glover, Associated Press Sep 20, 2003 Which only makes sense, as Clark of course realized: "We went into Iraq under false pretenses We went into Iraq under false pretenses. There was deceptive advertising; you'd be taking [President Bush] to the Better Business Bureau if you bought a washing machine the way we went into the war in Iraq. We're taking casualties. We haven't made America safer by this. We've made America more engaged, more vulnerable, more committed, less able to respond. We've lost a tremendous amount of goodwill around the world by our actions and our continuing refusal to bring in international institutions. Source: CNN Late Edition interview with Wolf Blitzer Aug 17, 2003 Clark, being a professional, obviously also realized: Iraq distracts from the War on Terror I think the conflict with Iraq was elective. It was purely elective and it represented a big distraction from the War on Terror. It was not a reinforcement of it. It was a distraction from it. Source: WCGU-FM interview on "Sound Off With Sasha" Jun 27, 2003 A good Republican like Scowcroft, who isn't a neoconservative extremist like our current incumbents, of course realized exactly the same: "There is scant evidence to tie Saddam to terrorist organizations, and even less to the Sept. 11 attacks. Indeed Saddam's goals have little in common with the terrorists who threaten us, and there is little incentive for him to make common cause with them. Don't attack Saddam. It would undermine our antiterror efforts." Brent Scowcroft National Security Advisor to Presidents Gerald Ford & George Bush senior Wall Street Journal, 15 Aug 2002 Best, |