Printable View
Now we know the identity of "deep throat", the mystery has gone and it's kind of uninteresting.
Although absurd an idea I was kind of hoping it was George Bush Snr.
I am wondering now if we ever do get the full story of things like the Kennedy assassination where there are many inconsistences will we be feeling let down.
Is life more interesting when we don't know what's inside the wrapper and our imaginations run wild?
Is anticipation or mystery more exciting than experience or answers?
Wasn't 'deep throat' Linda Lovelace?
:w00t: :w00t:Quote:
Originally Posted by DanB
who killed kenn(ed)y?
is elvis still alive? (gep lives)
cia planned 911?
MJ is a pedofile?
the pope is the dark overlord (lucas version)
hey wait a second why does usa get all the conspiracy theories? (trust?)
drama rawks
Bookmakers wouldn't even take bets on someone making that comment :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by DanB
So who was he? Can you PM me some piccies? :w00t:
this man :blink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sara
...and off the same website it seems Rae Dong Chong went to the University Of Phoenix. :blink:
http://servedby.advertising.com/site...4780113/bins=1
Shocking!!! :ohmy:
edit: The Bachelor degrees seem to have alot of BS in them.
You Americans never tell us the best stories there though :(
Like "summoning" UFO's on TV ... This one includes the TV Report.
wtf is watergate? wikipedia doesn't really say anything other than it was a burglary and people got sacked for it :huh:
mystery = ignorance (aka lack of info)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
SourceQuote:
The Watergate affair signifies the web of political scandals that plagued President Richard M. Nixon from 1972 until his resignation in 1974.
On June 17, 1972, during the presidential campaign of that year, Washington, D.C., police officers arrested seven employees of the Committee to Re-Elect the President (creep), as they were breaking into the Democratic National Committee's headquarters in the Watergate apartment complex. Details of the gathering scandal emerged after the election in news stories in the Washington Post and from a Senate select committee's televised hearings that grew out of them. Not only had Nixon, his aides, and his reelection campaign conspired to sabotage the president's Democratic challengers, but they were now attempting to impede the investigation of the Watergate case.
In May 1973, Nixon was forced to agree to the naming of a special prosecutor for the case, Archibald Cox. Working with a federal grand jury presided over by Judge John Sirica, Cox subpoenaed secret tape recordings of presidential meetings and telephone conversations; Nixon refused to release them, citing the doctrine of executive privilege. In October 1973, the president ordered Cox's firing. This was done, but only after the Justice Department's two highest officials resigned rather than carry out the order. Public outrage forced Nixon to reactivate the Watergate Special Prosecution Force. A new special prosecutor, Leon Jaworski, resumed the legal battle to obtain the tapes.
In July 1974, the House Judiciary Committee adopted three articles of impeachment, charging the president with obstruction of justice. The Supreme Court rejected the president's claim of executive privilege in United States v. Nixon (1974), upholding Judge Sirica's order that the tapes be produced. Responding to the Court's decision and the committee's vote, Nixon released eight transcripts of subpoenaed tapes; they provided the "smoking gun" evidence that he had violated the law and that he had known about the cover-up, which he had steadfastly denied. Public reaction and the prospect of an impeachment trial forced Nixon to resign from the presidency on August 9, 1974. His successor, Gerald Ford, pardoned him the next month for all offenses he had committed or might have committed during his presidency.
Controversy persists as to the significance of Watergate. Nixon and his defenders argue that he did nothing that other presidents of both parties had not already done; they claim that Nixon was hounded from office by his political enemies. Nixon's critics reply that he endangered the constitutional system by corrupting the electoral process and that he had sought to expand the powers of the presidency beyond constitutional limits.
In other words, he did nothing Bush hasnt.. and got pardoned for it by the Republican that took over too :rolleyes: ... God help him if he'd had a Blow Job instead of breaking and entering, attempted election rigging and perverting the course of justice tho.. the same people would have lynched him ;)
We do have confirmation from Woodword and Bernstein.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Of course, they are the very prototype for the "liberal press" so they probably can't be trusted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Somehow, not what I imagined lol.
Still he certainly stuffed Nixon....
wouldn't the liberal press be soft on crime, though? woodward & bernstein were practically charles bronson with a typewriter -- media as vigilante. :P
Well, Woodward and Bernstein picked on Nixon because he wasn't gay.
The political fallout was just gravy, it was the Radical Feminist Left agenda they were really propogating.
You didn't know this?
I read it on the internet.
Hasn't this something to do with Area 51?
Where is Mr Mulder - he knows about these things - and wasn't the smoking man shot? :blink:
J2
At the end of the day the result would be the same. Media /grand jury in an ideal world.
However just something to ponder....until we get the full story.
Do you think that given the fact that there was an attempted cover up utilising the CIA (simplified) that the media was the surest way of achieving the result ?
Whatever his reasons for the way he did it or even why he did it the important thing is that corruption of any kind is not tolerated and doesn't go unnoticed or unpunished.
Public outrage can be a far stronger weapon in the fight against corruption than any court.
Are you forgetting that Nixon had already enlisted (and received the support of) the Attorney General of the United States in his plan to cover up the crimes?Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Who could/who would have trusted the Justice Dept. to prosecute a case against Nixon?
I find a rather eerie/humorous parallel between Nixon and Bush.
As Watergate was unfolding, Nixon was reelected by a landslide.
As Iraq unfolds, Bush is reelected.
Apparently, Republicans have gotten even better at ignoring reality.
G. Gordon Liddy agrees with your assessment.
Now there's a guy who would know.
Being what he was, he probably knew the witness protection program isnt exactly airtight :ph34r:Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
this was one of our questions in a test we had for every class. the winning class got unlimited snacks and drinks during the last school assembly. it was a big deal for the USa
G. Gordon Liddy? there's an oasis of sensible thought. a guy who advises shooting any federal agent who sets foot on your property... who also happens to be a former federal agent who got caught... um... committing burglary.Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker