What is Digg?203 Comments
- DJCult, on 10/11/2007, -10/+84God I wish this administration would GTFO already....I get so nervous reading articles like this.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -10/+70The legal definition of Treason:
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00002381----000-.html
Now, no one is saying Cheney is trying to take Iran's side against the US. I want to be clear. But by intentionally instigating war against Iran, Cheney will have the result of a) causing Iran to declare war against us, which is strictly against US policy, and b) it gives aide and comfort to our enemies, al Qaeda, who will exploit Cheney's actions as they have in Iraq.
Cheney's actions are therefore TREASONOUS, since the stated policy objective of the US is to calm the tensions in Iraq, end the violence, and come home. Anything that leads us to more WAR is strictly against US policy, since there is no declaration of war, or even a non-binding resolution from Congress stating that we should be belligerent towards Iran.
Cheney is violating US law by even trying to instigate war with Iran. HR333 already lists this behavior. It's time for every Congress person to take it seriously. This man needs to be stopped before he starts World War III.
And yes, I'm concerned about the Iranian nuclear program. But there are only two ways to stop it. Convince them to stop, or literally nuke them into the stone age. The latter option would have the result of also destroying our nation in repercussions. So it's pretty clear which path we must choose. - hoghug, on 10/11/2007, -7/+54I would hope you could tell which was worse...
(hint: not the blowjob) - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+30@demicritter, yes, because the article mentions Cheney is leveraging the American Enterprise Institute and right now, on the PBS News Hour is an AEI representative on a media offensive. She's claiming that if we leave Iraq, Iraq will become al Qaeda's base. Oh, and we need to attack Iran too.
I'm sure there's no connection. It's all made up by Raw Story. - swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -6/+30I agree, sonofdy acts as a GOP apologist in every article that is critical of republicans. The only explanation is that he is either a) clinically insane, b) heavily medicated and dissasociated from reality or most likely C) on Karl Rove's payroll. I also think 9/11 truthers are paid republican plants, attempting to discredit the left wing with nonsense conspiracy theories.
Rove and the GOP have a history of doing this, they even hired "activists" to fake a riot at during the florida recount.
http://www.democrats.com/joel-kaplan - dave11980, on 10/11/2007, -0/+22For those of you not aware, this is called a conspiracy. Multiple people conspiring to get the US into another war. Think about that next time you talk bad about the conspiracy theorists.
- inactive, on 10/29/2007, -1/+22Do you even read what the Israeli government says in Israel's main newspapers like Haaretz & The Jerusalem Post? Also, you are aware that a few months ago we sent new Patriot missile defense systems to our allied countries in the Middle East because of worries that Iran would retaliate against them for a strike that we want to make on Iran?
- inactive, on 10/29/2007, -2/+22Really? So the aide didn't meet with AEI regarding this, more than half of our Navy is off of their coast, & we aren't constantly threatening them? There is a mountain of facts that shows that you are wrong. And if I can be so bold to assume, you're probably a Republican, who's party has been wrong about nearly everything for at least the last 6.5 years and has been the most corrupt in modern US history. Do you even follow the think tanks? Do you even know the policies that the AEI has produced, which are currently failing or have already failed? Do you even know the history in detail of our Vice President?
- swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -2/+21sonofdy the fact that Cheney is trying to "establish the policy and political pathway to bombing Iran" is evidence that, like the issue of Iraq, we (liberals) were right, and you (neo-conservatives) were entirely wrong. Take a hint.
- Dumbledorito, on 10/11/2007, -1/+19Assuming sonofdy1 is a Bush supporter, you'd think he wouldn't be so hot to play a game of "you were wrong" against anybody.
- inactive, on 10/29/2007, -6/+24sonofdy1
This person is a paid Republican plant in the Digg community. Just look at the comments he makes & on which articles & how many. The GOP is paying people to fight an online
blog propoganda war, which has been proven time & time again. They don't care about facts, they just want to make the Left look bad & the Right look good & they pay people to
do this & here is a great example. This is a full-time job for some people, to put out propaganda to hurt our country, as the GOP has clearly done consistently for the last 6.5
years. No morals, no ethics, & they laugh at the law. - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -5/+20I'd go with (b). If he was truly working for the GOP, I'd expect him to have better arguments and at least be consistent. But I agree about many truthers -- especially the ones who can only ask the same questions over and over, but never remember the answers....
There truly are people as insane as sonofdy walking around. I met a man the other day who told me Global Warming was all a hoax made up by scientists who are getting rich off federal grants. Scientists getting rich... Right. I'll tell my wife she needs to change scientific disciplines. We could use some of that rich global warming money.
Sonofdy, sorry to be talking about you in the 3rd person. Just consider this another voice in your head. - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -6/+21Agreed. See my earlier post re: treason. It's time to make the case in Congress.
- swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17sonofdy I accidently dugg you up some i'm going to have to evidence my displeasure with a comment:
We were right about Iraq from the start, you were wrong all this time. Those of us who feared Iraq would be used as a platform to attack Iran are being proved right daily by reports like this. I would think you'd get the hint. - fuzzmeister, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15If this administration thinks that Iran is ANYTHING like Iraq, they are gravely mistaken. Iran has one of the largest armies in the world, with decent technology, and a much larger population than Iraq. Iran as a society is also much more advanced than Iraq was before the war, and without the imams it could be a global economic and political power. To destroy such a country would be one of the biggest mistakes of the past century. Also, Iran's finances would go directly to terrorist groups in the event of a war. Just imagine what Al Qaeda could do with a few hundred million.
- gcube9x, on 10/11/2007, -17/+31They're just trying to get as much done with the time they have left in office, since nobody cares enough to stop them. I don't know what's worse, some president getting a blowjob, or one trying to instigate fights with a crazy nuke-weilding government.
- Daisama, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14@tpzoso
Wow, you must be joking. You think the US could take Iran in a War? Good one.
Considering Ahmadinejad is the President, he won't let Iran just get bombed. By bombing Iran, a terrible war will start that might not end for a while. Besides, if you are really worried about Iran having nukes (which I am sure they are the only country.....not), don't forget that they still need a few more years to develop an actual bomb.
Oh and I have a question for you: How would Iran nuke LA or NYC? Just wondering. - inactive, on 10/29/2007, -1/+14demicritter
RawStory.com does little writing themselves, its just a website of links to articles from credible news sources. I've spent well over 7000 hours researching news sources over the last 6 years to try to figure out which ones have a high accuracy rate (hindsight is 20/20). RawStory.com is at the very top of the list, NewsMax & Fox News are at the bottom of the list.
Do your homework.
- Innova69, on 10/11/2007, -4/+17And the nightmare rides on.......
- inactive, on 10/29/2007, -2/+15RE: sonofdy1
The Digg community should stop people that are propagandists, stand up & say no!
Our country has made fun of other countries for propagandist techniques for longer than I have lived (at least since the 1920s), why are we so passive about it in our own country now?!
Its not about the Right vs Left, or Dem vs Rep, its about evidence & the frickin' facts!
The facts speak for themselves, don't get fooled by propaganda!
And no offense to any Republicans that are reading this, but the GOP has a serious problem utilizing propaganda against the public. Right wing Neoconservative think tanks like AEI & PNAC wrote this administration's policies & look how those policies are working out. They even have their own "news" cable channel, Fox News, which has been proven over & over by their own internal documents that they spin every single story (propagandize) towards right-wing extremist (Neoconservative) views.
- withincontext, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13@mach32
It's incredible that you have the nerve to say that. Iranians actually like Western culture, it's their government that is ***** things up for them. Hmm, sound familiar? Personally, I don't want to be nuked because Bush is a douche.
See how that works? Putting yourself in someone else's shoes? Try it some time.
God, I feel like Rosie. Kill me now. - swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13No bpd1093 the consensus was sonofdy is *on meds* that make him irrational. Not "anyone that disagrees," sonofdy, just you in particular. I'm guessing prescription antipsychotics to deal with your hatred of Muslims, thorazine for the rage-induced hallucinations of an Islamic NWO, diazepams to cut down on the incessant shaking in fear of Democratic immigration policy giving bin Laden a work visa, and vicodin to take the edge off.
- AHardDaysNight, on 10/11/2007, -5/+15A better title would be "Cheney plans to usurp Bush to bomb Iran". We all know Cheney wants to bomb Iran like Dresden on steroids, but the more interesting facet of the story is that he plans to basic overrun Bush to do this. Last I checked this was a bit beyond the powers of the VP.
- matrixcodex, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11@tpzoso
Terrorism
1. The deliberate commission of an act of violence to create an emotional response from the victim in the furtherance of a political or social agenda.
2. Violence against civilians to achieve military or political objectives.
3. A psychological strategy of war for gaining political or religious ends by deliberately creating a climate of fear among the population of a state.
Bombing Iran now would be terrorism on our part, plain and simple. Only when their words become true actions of war would bombing them even be justifiable. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10@sonofdy:
"so the fact that daily reports like we will attack iran next week for 4 plus YEARS"
"What happened to the "we will bomb iran by the end of march" crap?"
Evidence of these outrageous claims?
"Its rawstory so its probably wrong."
The conservative mindset in a nutshell. "I don't like it so it must be *****." How's ignorance working out for you? - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10@gtluke:
Surprise! You were lied to!
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/states/US/H/00/epolls.0.html - fishbert, on 10/11/2007, -3/+12There was a similar story yesterday about a leak that the White House had authorized covert actions to destabilize Iranian society.
The only way we were able to go to Iraq was because sufficient support for such an action was present in Congress and the minds of the public. After what has happened there, it is nearly impossible for us to attack Iran in a similarly unprovoked manner (even if Bush/Cheney really really really wanted to).
Has anyone else stopped to think that these kinds of stories may be intentionally put out there to put pressure on Iran... and nothing more? - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11@tpzoso,
You're really digging yourself a hole here. Bombing a country [that has not attacked us] is not an act of war unless they declare war in return? We're entitled to nukes because we INVENTED them? Are you serious?
Any country that develops nuclear weapons is entitled to them because no one will dare to take them away. That's why they do it! And an act of war is very well defined. You should look it up before making such frankly ludicrous claims. You're making yourself look rather silly.
The only danger to the US from Iranian nukes is if Iran gives a nuke or just nuclear material to someone else who might use it. But they'd have to believe it was untraceable, because if you think our invasion of Iraq was a bit "disproportionate" to the attack on 9/11, Iran has to know we'd completely level their country if they ever attacked us. - peppaz, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11I seriously cannot believe that noone important has a problem with Dick Cheney and his highly questionable motives as well as his numerous conflicts of interest. His Halliburton stock rose 3000 percent since they were given the government contracts to be in Iraq. Of course Cheney wants to bomb Iran as well, he can't profit on war if his company isn't rebuilding what we blow up!
My stomach literally knots up when I hear things like this. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11DERRRR ME REPUBLICAN
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10I think you misunderstand Iran's political system. The power is with the clerics. The President doesn't have nearly as much power as the US President does.
Here, read this. Amadinejad is an *****, but he can't start a war on his own.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Iran#The_Supreme_Leader - swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11I can not digg you down enough times. *****.
- wreckosaurus, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9Wow, that was an interesting story. Not so much because cheney wants to bomb iran, which is something we all know. But because the vice president is trying to "tie the hands" of the president and launch the country into a third war, and for once, bush is the good guy, sort of.
- pintomp3, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7future: way to think like a terrorist there.
- Comatose51, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8Since when did Americans cared about the UN? Didn't we violate the UN when we attacked Iraq without UN authorization? If we're going to bomb Iran, then let's get the authorization from Congress and do it. Stop this hypocrisy with citing UN violations but attacking anyways without UN authorization. If we act against someone because of UN violations we must also seek UN authorization to attack because of that. Otherwise, this would be no better than someone saying another person broke the law and summarily executing him without a trial or a judgment.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10And I'm sick of uneducated rightwing hicks like you.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10It's a good point. I wonder what Cheney has on him?
I also wonder, since I haven't mentioned this before, whether the illegal wiretapping program explains why some Democrats are such cowards about stopping this war. What are the chances their phones were tapped too, and that Cheney got the goods on enough of them to make a difference?
It wouldn't be the first time.... - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8It seems that the Bush Administrations, desired, last major action, is to start a war with Iran.
- dupswapdrop, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8Lets do it lets go to WAR!
Oh wait a minute we are at war.
But wait two wars are better than one right?
Ok lets do it lets go to WAR again! - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Since we are on planted stories/conspiracies, I don't think it is coincidental AT ALL that we have had in the last three days:
1. "Leaked" story about the U.S. trying to destabilize the Iranian government from within the country
2. Story from Iran that nuclear production is in "final stages"
3. This story
The push is on. - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Do you have any new comments, @wintermd? This one is kind of stale. Maybe if the Democrats have six years in power and two countries to ***** up, I'll start to care that you think they haven't done much.
- genep3419, on 10/11/2007, -4/+10Most GOP backers are just enablers of the dry drunk we have for president and like living in the nightmare he has created; by the way he demands that we live in it too.
They are very unhappy people content to have some madman leading them around. And the dems aren't really doing much either. Instead on doing an intervention they are practicing on becoming enablers.
And today as the president tells a reporter that the terrorists are a threat to his children, he fails to mention that getting struck by lightning is also a threat that is 4 times as likely to happen. But this is Bush's terrorist nightmare, one that he created and forces us and many other countries to live in. The real kicker to his nightmare is that as long as he is creating this dream is will continue to get worse and worse.
Sweet dreams! - firstprimate, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7@ambrosious
Iran has not called for the 'complete annihilation' of any country. And if you really believe the propaganda about the bad bad Iranian mullah's you have bigger problems that the implicit racism you exhibit by wanting to attack a country that has not invaded, nor threatened to invade, any other country, instead of attacking those that have threatened and invaded multiple countries, used nukes and threaten to do so again, and are generally responsible for much suffering and oppression in the dark skinned parts of the world - .uk and .us - zxponent, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7I still don't understand the Neo-Con's logic for a preemptive strike. If there was genocide going on I would support it, but that is the only reason I can think of for such deliberate, destructive action.
- madhighlandcow, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7"But everyone is concerned, and rightfully so, when a nation like Iran, who is openly calling for the complete annihilation of another country, has nuclear weapons."
Speaking as a concerned inhabitant of this planet, what REALLY scares me is one of the two Cold-War nuclear superpowers being run by a shadowy crowd of criminals who are openly perverting (and subverting) long-held rules of international relations and criminal justice.
Ten to one that if it came down to nukes, America would throw the first one. - Independentsam, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6I understand Iran's political system better than I understand Iraq's.
- Comatose51, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Anyone else here ever noticed that if we took over Iran we would have a really nice tic-tac-toe, non-stop land connection from Iraq - Iran - Afghanistan and into oil and gas rich Central Asia, Russia's backyard and sphere of influence? I'm not saying that there's a conspiracy here but it's a strange coincidence that all the terrorists and nuclear weapons seekers seem to come out of this nice little corridor.
To be fair to Iran, if I was Iran I would be ***** scared right now because I have the Americans to the north (Afghanistan) and south (Iraq) of me. - Osjpr, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6They want to increase the threat of terrorism and make war with Iran for the next election. These guys really are idiots. Keep threatening and calling the bluff of other countries and you will get a solid kick in the teeth eventually.
- b1111, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Bush is the only one currently keeping this madman from invading the entire middle east, you have to give him credit for that.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6That's fine. I'm just saying, it's only useful to counter his BS arguments as they happen. No one is going to follow your in-depth investigation as well as you, and so they'll just think you're out to attack him unfairly.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 194 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is