What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
176 Comments
- inactive, on 08/25/2008, -2/+80This is the full Report, It's quite long so this might help a little :) http://spreeder.com/
There is also a shorter but way less detailed version http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0808/S00304.htm - inactive, on 08/26/2008, -10/+80MEANWHILE, SOME DUMB INBRED FOX FAKE "NEWS" WATCHING HICK IN GEORGIA...is saying "I'm glad terrorists isn't attacking my woodshed".
- TruthExposed, on 08/25/2008, -8/+66Don't worry about this, we all can trust McBush, he is always honest.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/7/3/0717/55 ... - Vbp6us, on 08/26/2008, -4/+45I can't believe this administration will be leaving without any punishment for their actions. There is no question about them lying to the public.
- algaeturd, on 08/26/2008, -2/+42Get an education and you'll come to the conclusion that you don't move on from war crimes. You investigate them.
And up to this point, the investigation has been blocked.
You're the typical dumb American who put Bush into office and then let out a collective 'whoops!' 4 months later. And then voted him in again as the country spiraled down the *****.
So you'll have to forgive me for assuming you have the brain capacity and intelligence of a rabbit turd.
I have an 8-year-old son who is more logical in regard to our government than you are.
Go back to your 'Hate America' cave troll and pray for the end days. That's what you guys want, isn't it? Just steer the ship to the bottom of the ocean with your republican captain at the helm and you standing idly by saluting the flag?
Admiral Douche Bag, I dub thee. A fitting title for a *****, uneducated guy. - hydroplane, on 08/26/2008, -1/+33Most of Bush's cabinet ran his daddy's war in Iraq, was it really any surprise we were going back over there?
- richmomz, on 08/26/2008, -0/+27In an ideal world our intelligence agencies would help shape our foreign policy in Washington, but this is further proof that this process has been reversed - foreign policy is now formulated first, and the intelligence to back it up is gathered (or fabricated) later.
- bigcynic, on 08/26/2008, -2/+22The oil industry starting drafting those invasion plans back in '72, when Saddam nationalized Iraq's oil fields and kicked Big Oil out.
- ad33lshahid, on 08/26/2008, -2/+21i can't imagine another place or time where the president has ~25% approval rating, more than 50% of the country is in favor of impeachment, the fact that the Iraq war was completely illegal and fits the definitions of a major war-crime is becoming common knowledge--- and it all continues unabated. amazing
- jadex, on 08/26/2008, -1/+20Perhaps you should tell John Sidney McCain III to MOVE ON out of the 1960's
- inajeep, on 08/26/2008, -1/+18Never forget. Some people are voting for McCain who need to be reminded of the crap we went through because of Bush and his line of thinking (or lack of).
- SOS84, on 08/26/2008, -1/+18The man murdered several hundred thousand innocent Iraqis. He must be tried as the war criminal he is and the traitors that supported him must as well.
- athinnes, on 10/01/2009, -1/+17War crimes, depriving people of there vote, lying to the American people. Who cares right? I mean come on, it was like SEVEN years ago. Can't we all just forget about it and move on.
No *****, no. - Waiting2awake, on 08/26/2008, -3/+19In a word - Yes. It does look like Americans are going to put one of those corporately controlled politicians into the WH.
Then they will bitch and bitch because they will continue to lose ground with civil rights, freedom, etc.
Of course it will be seen as merely incompetence because - "my government wouldn't/couldn't hurt/lie to me. ", but they will then claim they have to get them out of the WH and vote in one of two other corporately controlled Politicians given to them from the MSM. And the wheels keep on turning.
How do you eat an elephant? One small bite at a time. - inactive, on 08/26/2008, -2/+18RE: Council of Foreign Relation
- SatoriSeeker, on 08/26/2008, -1/+17We don't matter. Who surrounds our 'representatives' on daily basis? Certainly not common people I'll tell you that. They live in a different reality than we do and sadly I don't think they take the constitution and their oath to protect it nearly as seriously as we do. They think in career terms and a sort of high school level need to be accepted by one party or both. It really is time to clean congress out top to bottom, except for ron paul and kucinich and a tiny handful.
- greenvortex, on 08/26/2008, -5/+20I think I might agree with you, but I could not get through all of your ***** nicknaming. Using "McSame", etc. does not make you look clever. It just reduces the chance that you might actually convince anyone of anything.
- BlacklabelSAR, on 08/26/2008, -1/+15Were you a Nixon fan too?
Let's imagine I rob you at gun point. Then I ask you to not move for 5 minutes. Now I ask you not to call the police as 5 minutes have passed and I think you should just "move on". Why live in the past, right? - MorganMghee, on 08/25/2008, -10/+24Vote Third Party!
- skiner24, on 08/26/2008, -3/+17The invasion into Iraq was planned so Bushie could go after the oil fields. Then the story was: They have weapons of mass destruction, we better go after them. After so long, who really believes and trusts the government.
- inactive, on 08/26/2008, -1/+14Please march to the nearest police station and be micro chipped so you too can be safe from terrorism.
- dondara, on 08/26/2008, -1/+13***** off redneck. You might be happy with your head full of ***** but some people want to know the truth.
- 5plic3r, on 08/26/2008, -0/+12Buried for the use of "Obushma" and "McSame". Stop propagating this retarded meme.
- yayster, on 08/26/2008, -1/+13Yeah, but now that same person is worried about Russia coming down his street in tanks.
- gdonald, on 08/26/2008, -3/+15Impeach.
- inactive, on 08/25/2008, -4/+16I fully intend to vote for Barr. He and Root are easily the most qualified of all of the candidates currently announced and the Libertarian Party has been able to get their candidate on all fifty state ballots plus DC which is important for them to be the new leaders of this Great Nation.
- kdawg1012, on 08/26/2008, -2/+13This will come back to haunt us. Lack of accountability for the Bush Administration means that future Administrations will use the same illegal and immoral actions - and cite the Bush Administration as precedent.
- MattB123, on 08/26/2008, -0/+11They wouldn't use "isn't", it would surely be "ain't".
- ba28, on 08/26/2008, -2/+13I am still wondering when are going to get Bin Laden? Wasn't that the whole point of sending troops to the middle east?
- birdly, on 08/26/2008, -0/+11Anyone shocked by this, please take your head out of your bum.
- inactive, on 08/26/2008, -1/+11This from a ***** who still hasn't "moved on" from the Civil War.
- inactive, on 08/26/2008, -0/+10Actually, the invasion of Iraq (and most likely Afghanistan as well) was motivated by geopolitical maneuvering. Read the PNAC papers if you want a blueprint for the last 8 years:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/publicationsrepo ... - an0nymous, on 08/26/2008, -0/+9It's always better to know the truth, even if it makes you unhappy.
- inactive, on 08/26/2008, -1/+10I'm pretty sure the Iraq war was planned out before that
- FairDinkumMate, on 08/26/2008, -1/+9Cashman - We've been here before so STOP LYING!
There was NEVER a 'Congressional Declaration of War' against Iraq.
It didn't happen, thus Bush has no wartime powers. If there was, half of the crap he's been trying to pull wouldn't be necessary because he'd already have the power.
The US Constitution is VERY clear about congress declaring war. This is just another exampleof the right-wing trying to avoid the details encompassed DELIBERATELY in the Constitution. But Iguess when you have a leader that thinks "It's just a piece of paper" your attitude toward it is pretty clear. - apextek, on 08/26/2008, -1/+9I could have told they were doing this ***** in 2001. Everybody was proud to be a flag waving bush american to listen.
Im glad I listened to my gut. - anarcurt, on 08/26/2008, -1/+9Don't forget his responsibility for 4000+ US soldiers dead and another $1,000,000,000,000 in debt from his illegal war.
- mediaspree, on 08/26/2008, -1/+9They were for the war before they were for it.
- yourmanstan, on 08/26/2008, -1/+8wow they must be REALLY good if they could get that done BEFORE it happened.
- inactive, on 08/26/2008, -0/+7Lincoln.
- inactive, on 08/25/2008, -34/+41Obushma and McSame went along with funding this nonsense even after they knew it was a scam from "W". Now OBushma has chosen Biden who also voted for the Iraq Use of Force Resolution and forgot all about Congressional declaration of War. It will be interesting to see which person will stand up with McSame but you can bet that it will be another supporter of the Iraq use of force, another supporter of the now proven unconstitutional income tax and another supporter of the federal reserve.
Will Americans be stupid enough to put OBushma or McSame into the White House even though we know they are liars who have violated their oath of office? - thrashertm, on 08/26/2008, -1/+8First, Bush and Cheney should apologize. Then, everyone that helped Bush and Cheney sell this war should apologize. Then the politicians that supported the war, and voted for the initial use of force authorization should apologize. Then the American people, myself included, that supported the war should apologize.
Then we should impeach Bush and Cheney and they spend the rest of their days rotting in a prison. I can dream. - inactive, on 08/26/2008, -1/+8What's the statute of limitations on treason?
- inactive, on 08/26/2008, -1/+8@Truth
Tv told them the 3rd's are either a waste of time or crazy.
They want change, so they support who the TV told them would give them change.
I'm not even being sarcastic. The average voter is that stupid.
They didn't come up with "change we can believe in" playing pool or something. They did market research to find out what people want to hear and gave it to them.
Then you have the other turds who still haven't figured out Bush is a bad president, wanting to vote for McCain.
Dogs are harder to train. - bmhart, on 08/26/2008, -1/+8And this is surprising... how? MSM won't touch this, we'll never hear anything about it in the US, sadly.
- TheSwashbuckler, on 08/26/2008, -0/+7"The documents suggest that the public relations push for war came before the intelligence analysis"
The public relations push by the neocons for war with Iraq goes back at least to January 1998:
January 26, 1998
The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC
Dear Mr. President:
We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.
The policy of “containment” of Saddam Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months. As recent events have demonstrated, we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections. Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished. Even if full inspections were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons production. The lengthy period during which the inspectors will have been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less likely that they will be able to uncover all of Saddam’s secrets. As a result, in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons.
Such uncertainty will, by itself, have a seriously destabilizing effect on the entire Middle East. It hardly needs to be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world’s supply of oil will all be put at hazard. As you have rightly declared, Mr. President, the security of the world in the first part of the 21st century will be determined largely by how we handle this threat.
Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.
We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam's regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council.
We urge you to act decisively. If you act now to end the threat of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or its allies, you will be acting in the most fundamental national security interests of the country. If we accept a course of weakness and drift, we put our interests and our future at risk.
Sincerely,
Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage William J. Bennett
Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Dobriansky
Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad
William Kristol Richard Perle Peter W. Rodman
Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr. Vin Weber
Paul Wolfowitz R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick
http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonlette ... - Dumbledorito, on 08/26/2008, -0/+7This one is of the "edjumacated" variety of hick.
- OrangeTide, on 08/26/2008, -0/+7I guess you aren't familiar with the Civil War. Or with the Nixon administration. Hell, Jackson is on the $20 bill and he committed GENOCIDE. (why are the 3 richest nations also have a history of genocide: US, Japan, Germany)
As far as presidents go, Bush is only a naughty schoolboy. - akchrs, on 08/26/2008, -2/+8The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338) [1] (codified in a note to 22 USCS § 2151) is a United States Congressional statement of policy calling for regime change in Iraq; it was signed into law by President Bill Clinton.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act - IIAmusedII, on 08/26/2008, -2/+8***** you to the death, you stupid ***** conservative.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 180 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is