Scandals

[Typhoid]

No, Its not being treated like a scandal.


I dont see news on TV about "the Bush scandal", but youre still hearing them about "the Clinton scandal"

And i think by far the Bush scandal totally surpases the Clinton scandal. Because in the Clinton scandal, he didnt declare war on a country, spend billions of dollars, and have the whole thing result in tons of deaths.

[Ace195]

How is this a scandal ? Bush told the world that there "might" be WMD in the middle east with the current intel he showed. That violated the peace accord that saddam had signed which gave bush every right to fuel this war. He got the Joint Chief's Approval Before he moved. what he didn't do was get the UN's No big ****in whoop though the un is just a big bunch of pink commie pussies... Anyways the reason clinton was being impeached was that he LIED to a grad jury otherwise known as PURJURY. (can't spell sorry) It's not that he slept around hell I give him props for that but he should have the balls to say yep I tapped that. Bush's wasn't a scandal, Clinton on the other hand his was because of him telling those lies I.E. " I never had sexual relations with that woman."

[Bond]

Oh god... here we go again...

Keep in mind we live in nice little democracies, we have no idea what real "scandals" are.

And isn't your main news channel in Canadian controlled by the government?

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by Bond

And isn't your main news channel in Canadian controlled by the government?

First off, it might be, but then again, so are American ones. And if American ones arnt, then neither is ours.


Where i live we get like, 20 News channels, and 15 of them are American.

[Crono]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

First off, it might be, but then again, so are American ones. And if American ones arnt, then neither is ours.


Where i live we get like, 20 News channels, and 15 of them are American.

Our "main" news channel, CBC, is run by our government.

I know there are many others, but I've always seen CBC as the main source here... though maybe not everyone does.

But yeah we do have a lot of American channels, I'm not aware of any major news channels that are run by the government like CBC is.

[Bond]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

First off, it might be, but then again, so are American ones. And if American ones arnt, then neither is ours.


Where i live we get like, 20 News channels, and 15 of them are American.

To my knowledge our government does not run any news channels.

It used to run PBS but it is not privately funded.

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by Bond

To my knowledge our government does not run any news channels.

It used to run PBS but it is not privately funded.

Oh, well i never watch CBC for news, i watch it for hockey. I get my news from CNN or other American channels.

[Crono]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

Oh, well i never watch CBC for news, i watch it for hockey. I get my news from CNN or other American channels.

So I guess you care more about American news than Canadian news? Why wouldn't you watch CBC, it provides Canadian and International news.

[Professor S]

Ok, let me remind you of the FACTS concerning the war.

1) Bush did not lie, he acted on what is now considered bad information (which I think is a concession to the media, and not really the truth). This same information that the entire world, including the previous president Bill Clinton used had and believed.

2) In 1998 the UN, YES THE UN, found 10,000 pounds of chemical and biological weapons in Iraq that mysteriously dissappeared. Iraq then showed no evidence they were destroyed and broke 16 UN regulations trying to keep the UN out. A better question is, WHERE ARE THEY?

3) The US found trailers used to make chemical weapons in Iraq after the war. These were overlooked by the media as they had no weapons inside them and the excuse was that they were used to make food. This is a plausible argument (even if highly unlikely due to Saddam's record) until you realize that each of these trailers had fermentation tanks. Unless they were for making beer, they were made for processing and distributing chemical weapons.

4) It was discovered after the war that Saddam was negotiating with North Korea not just for nuclear materials, but an ENTIRE NUCLEAR WEAPONS MISSILE SYSTEM.

There's more, but I think this is enough. Now speaking of scandals, did Bill Clinton have intelligence that made him get a BJ in the oval office? No, he was horny. At least Bush had his reasons.

[Neo]

I question whether or not there was any real information linking Iraq to al qaeda. In fact I think saddam and osama actually hate each other.

Now I won't dispute the fact that the world is a much safer place without saddam in it. And it may have been worth the cost in lives and money to dispose of him. That guy was a freakin lunatic who killed his own people and exploited his country. His sons were sadistic bastards also and I'm glad they're dead. Though the Bush administration grabbed at straws to make a case for WMD and an osama-saddam link as justification for war.

I don't believe for a second that Kerry will be soft on terrorism. Edwards made that clear last night (he's almost as charismatic a speaker as Clinton). Plus Kerry actually has functioning brain cells and would likely restore other nation's faith in our leadership.

Clinton lied under oath but he should never have been asked those questions in the first place. His personal life is his own damn business. Though it would have been fun if he had just come out and said "yeah I stoked her, what of it?"

[Neo]

And it's not that I think rich people are evil, it's just that they're allowed to get away with too much because they are rich and powerful. I'm all about having money, but money and power easily corrupt. It's simplistic but usually true. The CEO of my company may pay my salary directly but all that money ultimately comes from the consumers I sell to. He would have nothing without people like me.