Bush = Dumb Ass
POSTED BY: Succatash
UPDATED: Friday, August 20, 2004 04:20
VIEWED: 16362
PAGE 10 of 12
Geezer, the line was included to reference BRITISH intelligence because then it could be factually true while still be misleading. This is straightforward evidence from original sources, so by just blowing this off I have a feeling you would never admit that the Adminstration was purposefully misleading the public no matter WHAT evidence was given. But having observed Rue's meticulous and extensive research, I have a feeling this is not the only point. Be prepared to blow off a few more. But alos realize that the more you rationalize, the more your credibility goes down.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Geezer, the line was included to reference BRITISH intelligence because then it could be factually true while still be misleading. This is straightforward evidence from original sources, so by just blowing this off I have a feeling you would never admit that the Adminstration was purposefully misleading the public. But having observed Rue's meticulous and extensive research, I have a feeling this is not the only point. Be prepared to blow off a few more. But alos realize that the more you rationalize, the more your credibility goes down.
Look. First of all, I noted in my original response to Rue that I had been propagandized by both sides, and had not seen proof either way to my satisfaction. If you, or Rue, believe Bush lied, that's fine, I wouldn't think of trying to prove otherwise to you. But don't burn me at the stake because I haven't converted.
It was a mistake on my part to even try to respond point by point to Rue's allegations. As noted, I've seen these all before, just as I've seen the defenses by the "real" Bushies. I find both generally self-serving, and get the same response (Blasphemer! How can you not see the Revealed Word!) from both sides when I challenge their dogma.
My original issue with Rue was that she wanted the Iraqis to govern their country immediately, and I wanted to know how this would work without the CPA, the interum government, and the US Military there to back them up. What I got back from her, and you, was (in cliff notes form)"Bush Lied!, Bremer's a dictator!, It's all about the oil!" etc. Along with voluminous quotes from everywhere in the world.
I'd really rather have had her opinion on what would be a good way to proceed from here to give the Iraqis some sort of decent country. I'm looking for discourse about this particular issue, not a rehash of arguments about things that happened in the past.
I now await Rue's remark that I'm dodging the issue again. I'll pre-emptively note that it's her issue, not mine.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
No he ain't smart, must be the president with the lowest IQ
Should make an eventful US election, Kerry is somewhat dull but looking better than Bush right now, although it's difficult to remove a current President
just did a search
Google = Bush + lies
Results 1 - 10 of about 2 MILLION !!
Enrun, World-Com, Cheney's cash, WMDs, job prospects and electronic manufacturing moving off to China...
..seems like Bush needs to do some work and fix those lies if he plans on getting those votes
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So, out of curiosity, if the trail of events (that Bush repeatedly put a statement into his address that even the CIA couldn't back, but dodged responsibility for accuracy by tossing it onto the Brits) has not convinced you that he did this DELIBERATELY- i.e. it was not bad intelligence from the CIA or a mistake or slip of the tongue- what would it take to convince you that he lied? At what point would you be convinced? Could you EVER be convinced?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
So, out of curiosity, if the trail of events (that Bush repeatedly put a statement into his address that even the CIA couldn't back, but dodged responsibility for accuracy by tossing it onto the Brits) has not convinced you that he did this DELIBERATELY- i.e. it was not bad intelligence from the CIA or a mistake or slip of the tongue- what would it take to convince you that he lied? At what point would you be convinced? Could you EVER be convinced?
OK, but this is the last time.
I could be convinced by a senior intelligence official stating something to the effect of: "We told the President prior to the war that there were unequivocally no WMD in Iraq. and he later said there were.", assuming there was some sort of proof of this statement.
A successful impeachment would be pretty convincing, but I haven't even heard this being seriously proposed.
Confession? I'd believe that.
The whole "Yellowcake" thing is a red herring as far as I'm concerned. Any politician will use the information he has in a way most favorable to him. When I'm looking for a lie, I'm looking for the whole WMD caboodle.
As noted in another thread, I don't even really think it matters any more. The dead horse has been beat to a paste. I don't think there will ever be a resolution because both sides are too hardened in their positions. Nothing is ever going to convince you Bush didn't lie, and nothing is ever going to convince the Bushies he did. At this point I don't know, and don't much care any more, and both sides can at least agree to hate me as an unbeliver.
Please do not try to convert me any more. I feel about both sides the same way I feel about the folks that come to my door and want to bring me to Jesus, or whatever. I don't want to go.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You don't want people trying to bring you Jesus???? Actually, I LIKE these people coming to my door. I invite them in very nicely (if I have the time) and we have wonderful chats.
heh heh heh
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
You don't want people trying to bring you Jesus???? Actually, I LIKE these people coming to my door. I invite them in very nicely (if I have the time) and we have wonderful chats.
heh heh heh
So you have a walk-in freezer in your basement too? Long pig - It tastes like chicken.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh, and one more thing on the "Yellowcake" McGuffin.
---------------------------------------
Come with me back...back in time...to right before the 2003 State of the Union Address...to the Oval Office in the White House, where an alternate time track is being created.
Bush: "I've changed my mind, Condi. Based on the shakiness of the information, I'm taking out the line, "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." Instead, I'll use this firm intelligence from the CIA, "The Iraqis already have 550 metric tons of uranium oxide in their inventory."
Condi: "Sounds good, Sir."
As we move forward along this new timeline, where the only change was that line in the State of the Union Address, would we expect any difference in the events leading up to the war? Probably not.
-------------------------------------
Now, back again, to an even earlier point but the same location, where another alternate time line is created as Donald Rumsfeld bursts into the Oval Office.
Rummy: "Mister President, you have to see this! Our intelligence has just confirmed that Saddam has destroyed all his WMD. There are no longer any left in the whole country."
Bush: "Darn it, there goes my excuse for the war. Better call a press conference and break the bad news."
Condi: "Sounds good, Sir."
And how does this change subsequent events? Pretty much, I'd say.
------------------------------------
The point of our little time travel excercise? Whether Bush did exaggerate the intelligence about african yellow-cake (or lie, if you insist), or not, it wouldn't have made any significant difference.
Only if he lied, or did not, about WMD as a whole, would history have changed.
BTW: Yes, with this post I am just trying to piss folks off.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Geezer:
Oh no, I let them escape after about an hour! I think they put the mark of the devil on my door on their way out.
heh heh heh
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh Geezer, now really. Did you think that that one statement was all I was going to point out? I have barely begun.
What I will post (when I have more time than recently) is a long, long series of information and extended quotes, in context, not just about the yellowcake claims, and not just by Bush. It will outline the entire administration engaged in a 'pattern of deception'.
I see you understand the difficulty of 'proving a negative'. But out of curiosity, is it frustrating to be held to an impossible standard? Do you see the irony of your complaint, given Bush based his decision to go to war on Hussein being able to 'prove' there were no WMD?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME