After blasting House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's trip to Syria, the White House has once again been caught in a web of hypocrisy. Many top Republicans - including the Bush Administration itself - have long worked with Syria without such criticism. The most recent example is an officially approved delegation of three Republican congressmen who visited Syria and met with its president just days before Pelosi. "It was done in cooperation with the administration," said Rep. Joe Pitts' chief of staff. Rep. Darrell Issa, an Arab-American with a history of visits to the region, praised the dialogue and said it "will go on continuously and constructively." Come to think of it, weren't those three Republicans (along with the one in Pelosi's delegation) doing exactly what was recommended by the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group Report created and authorized by Bush? Not to mention the fact that Bush sent then-Secretary of State Colin Powell to Syria in 2003. Besides, Bush himself has interacted far more closely with Syria than Pelosi did. Remember that the CIA kidnapped Canadian national Maher Arar while changing planes in New York and then flew him to be "interrogated" in Syria, where torture is even more legal than it is in America these days. It's hard to believe the Syrians would have done us any favors without something in return: this kind of deal required not only cooperation but also a deal of some sort. You know something suspicious is going on when the CIA has to outsource torture. All of this makes the White House's tough talk sound ridiculous, like when Cheney said Syria has "been isolated and cut off because of his bad behavior, and the unfortunate thing about the speaker's visit is it sort of breaks down that barrier." Especially considering Pelosi was given a briefing from the State Department before leaving and that a Bush spokesman said Wednesday they will "listen to what she has to say after she returns." George Bush must be absolutely terrified that a Democratic woman from San Francisco is upstaging him in not only the Middle East but across the globe. Even worse, Pelosi's use of diplomacy threatens to undermine Bush's tactics in Iraq and his plans for future wars. Without the facts or logic on his side, Bush's only recourse for defending himself is this hypocritical and ridiculous attack. http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/analysis/200
Well, the terrorists endorse the visit for sure! http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3385140,00.html Life is good when you talk with terrorists!
This thread is misleading, as usual. Commandos, don't sell your integrity out so cheap. I'll just end up buying what little you have at a rock bottom price! No hypocrisy at all. One group was endorsed/approved by Bush to do such (he still handles foreign policy), Pelosi was not. Did I not just read a headline today, that Olmert denied giving Pelosi a "message of peace" to take to Syria? In which case, that puts her credibility on the line.
I dident touch the text , the source is there and you have the right to say your opinion ... very simple if you know something about the subject let us know + add source to backup .
You did create the thread title You might not be aware of the one news thread per day rule here either.
Note to commandos: editorials are not news. Most of those links go to editorials (ie opinion pieces). Pawning them off as actual news is almost sad
True enough, in fact, it's not even news at all, it's from buzz flash! Not aware of any rules regarding propaganda. Nuff said
Its strange that GTech never comes up with some good arguments. He always attack his opponent personally. Thats why I stop reading Gtech`s posts, its just not interesting to read that kind of attacks.
Its something in there blood , go back and see the both 9k posts from Gtech and Lorien are BS posts I Posted something today about them , that reflect how they are : http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=2735547&postcount=48
Yeah, "You did create the thread title" was absolutely brutal! I should be ashamed! Meanwhile "Gtech and Lorien are BS posts" What a putz! Allah dislikes the hypocrite
I am talking about your posts in general, you are more busy talking about how bad your opponent are than making good arguments on the cases. Actually I would like to see you discuss with good points, that would make your posts interesting. Now I just jump your posts because normally they will just say "you love terrorists" or something like that.
Ah, I see! You just happened to "stumble" upon *this* thread and decided to make a general observation about me personally and felt *now* was a good time to illustrate what hypocrisy means. Hopefully you like these "good points!" Job well done