Opps! Bush busted again.
Can we finally impeach this dirty bastard?
Posted by Christopher at March 2, 2006 09:52 AMYou mean "Slam Dunk!" Tenet?
That line was, of course, reported by Boob Woodward and thus may be comlpete B.S., but such inconsistent things are attributed to Tenet that it's hard to know what the man really said.
Are there two Tenets?
Posted by Michael Miller at March 2, 2006 09:59 AMTenet has a bipolar disorder. I don't know what this would do to his personality, but probably nothing good.
Posted by tempus at March 2, 2006 10:02 AMG. Bu$h and the Repugnicans IBM defense ("I Been Misled") melted away a long time ago. Anyone remember the Downing Street Minutes??
Posted by oppressmenot at March 2, 2006 10:07 AMYou mislead the country into war with the CIA chief you have, not the one you wish you had!...uh, er, sumthin' like that.
Any democratic nation peopled with reasonably intelligent, patriotic citizens would demand that existing constitutional mechanisms to remove such elected officials be implemented immediately.
Posted by euzoius at March 2, 2006 10:08 AMWhen it rains...
Posted by God Of War at March 2, 2006 10:09 AMGoddamn, Soto-man, you're on a roll today.
Rather, Bushcorp is on a roll (straight into Hell) but you're on the ball in stringing up the effigy.
Well done.
Posted by God Of War at March 2, 2006 10:10 AMIt looks like they pretty much lie about everything. No wonder they are so secretive.
Posted by T2 at March 2, 2006 10:14 AMIMPEACH
IMPEACH
IMPEACH
It is the lies!!
I think everybody hates liars!
Except republi-cons!
Bush could announce a news conference, roll the cameras, parade a nun on stage and knife her to death, and then deny doing it. In 24-48 hours the press would be reviewing the outraged reaction of Focus on the Family regarding Brokeback Mountain's sweep of the Oscars. Mary Matalin would allege Sister Primm was secretly an Al Qaida operative and even if it was Bush that field-dressed her (and it wasn't, no matter what you think you saw!) she had it coming to her.
Posted by steve duncan at March 2, 2006 10:40 AMSteve Duncan - she had it coming to her
and 'some would say' that her family was deeply sorry for the pain and consternation that her death had caused to bush ...
Posted by Jim Faith at March 2, 2006 10:48 AMThe depth of the black and white question of how any American human being could choose to override all the evidence, mislead his fellow Americans and the World at large, drop kick France, Germany and any others who didn't lock step and take his country into war is profound. We've all be chewing on this for 5 years but the simplistic absolute truth of the lies and how he set aside his country, FOR WHAT, WHAT WAS THE MOTIVE BECAUSE IT ISN"T WHAT HE TOLD THE WORLD?
Posted by mainsailset at March 2, 2006 10:49 AMRight you are Steve. WTF!? This 'man' (to use the term loosely); this Congress; the damn paperless, unverifiable, Repugni-con programmed voting machines, and the whole way of doing busness in DC has got to change. Now.
Posted by oppressmenot at March 2, 2006 10:51 AMSteve: very funny. But Mary Matalin is MUCH tougher than Bush or Laura, not to mention Cheney.
Posted by tempus at March 2, 2006 10:53 AMIMPEACH
IMPEACH
IMPEACH
IMPEACH
IMPEACH
IMPEACH
IMPEACH
IMPEACH
IMPEACH
I swear to God Chris beat me to it. That's precisely what I was going to comment.
I truly think Bush could start randomly mugging little old ladies on live TV and his "base" (there's an apt descriptor if ever I saw one) would still support him, Faux News would say that anyone objecting hated this country, and the swifty liars would produce TV spots linking the little old ladies to the Manson family.
No, the Manson's have no money. Try Conrad Black.
Posted by tempus at March 2, 2006 11:10 AMHere is an article on how Bush is screwing up the world in India and Pakistan right now.
Posted by Tester at March 2, 2006 11:16 AM"Bush stared the American people in the face and made assertions not based on fact that night."
"That night?" "That night?" When has it ever NOT been, "That night?"
Impeach George "Dubai-yeah" Bush!
Impeach George "Dubai-yeah" Bush!
Impeach George "Dubai-yeah" Bush!
Impeach George "Dubai-yeah" Bush!
Impeach George "Dubai-yeah" Bush!
Impeach George "Dubai-yeah" Bush!
Ed
Posted by Ed Drone at March 2, 2006 11:50 AMI want to see California's legislature vote to secede unless Bush is impeached and his administration removed from power.
No funding to fix the levees, federal laws to overrule food-labeling laws and environmental regs...let's ditch this place! :)
It's worth stressing, as Waas does, that the assessment that Iraq was "unlikely" to attack the US unless attacked first was unanimously held by the participating IC agencies. Agencies, one should note, many of which had been perfectly willing to abet some of the Admin's other egregious frauds, like the aluminum tubes farce.
Posted by KM at March 2, 2006 12:30 PMHere's how the GOP controlled Corporate Media slants it: MSNBC runs an online poll regarding the AP Katrina tape released yesterday. The gist of which was- did the tape show Bush was not engaged, got bad info, or don't know? Its 80% that Bush was not engaged. But on the TV - the reporter said the answer for the poll was yes, no, maybe.....with absolutely no reference to the rest of the answer choice as it related to Bush performanc. In other words, because the poll was blasting Bush, MSNBC hid the real results of the vote on the broadcast. Media manipulation.
Posted by T2 at March 2, 2006 12:48 PM“Saddam Was Not An Imminent Threat”
You are correct, Sir.
The trouble with this post is that Bush, Cheney, Rice and everyone else who was remotely associated with the administration never said he was.
As a matter of fact, they went to great lengths to dissuade anyone who even hinted that Saddam was an imminent threat.
What was actually said was “In the post-9/11 world, we need to stop Saddam before he becomes an imminent threat.” The thought behind that being it was too dangerous to allow a hostile regime to continue without 100% assurance that they possessed no WMD.
No one, at any time, ever suggested that Iraq would attack the U.S. I would appreciate a link to any information to the contrary. The fear was that Iraq would clandestinely supply terrorist organizations to attack their common enemy. I know, it’s hard to imagine the benevolent kite-flying ruler of Iraq doing such a thing, but Bush got nervous after that whole twin tower thing.
We’ve got enough differences to fight about without making shit up.
Actually, it was John Edwards who referred to Sodamn Insane as an imminent threat.
This post is another by Steve al-Soto in his never-ending quest to demonstrate the non-existence of any intellectual honesty or acumen on his part.
Heck, it's enough to make David Gregory drink or Ruth Bader-Ginsburg to fall asleep.
Posted by dipshit at March 2, 2006 01:18 PMWe’ve got enough differences to fight about without making shit up.
Then why do you?
Posted by idiosynchronic at March 2, 2006 01:26 PMThe administration never painted it like Iraq was tied to al-qaeda?
So what was that reference to a "mushroom cloud", WMD's, the tubes for enriching uranium, just to get us thinking it was to supply al-qaeda?
Please, do explain dipshit and u.jest.
The administration never painted it like Iraq was tied to al-qaeda?
****
There is evidence galore of ties between Saddam and al-Qaeda. Just what in the heck are you talkin' 'bout fool?
Posted by dipshit at March 2, 2006 01:31 PMI see the champion of all things Right and wrong is back.
Posted by snark at March 2, 2006 01:40 PMThe Patriot Act passes 89-10 in the Senate.
Clinton, Kerry, Obama, Boxer, Kennedy all voted for it!!!! This time, they had 4 years to think about it to.
Why are DEMOCRATS taking our liberties away like this? Why ar they ignoreing the majority of public opinion?
Posted by GK at March 2, 2006 01:40 PMThere is evidence galore of ties between Saddam and al-Qaeda. Just what in the heck are you talkin' 'bout fool?
Posted by dipshit at March 2, 2006 01:31 PM
I see you back up your words. Oh ya you can't.
Posted by goose1 at March 2, 2006 01:41 PMYeah, that's right, bring on the Mr. T.
'Cause we all know you've got bigger ones and speak more truths with a mohawk, gaudy chains, and a ripped up jean jacket.
'Cause only fools need to cite evidence! Pity! Pity da citiations!
Posted by idiosynchronic at March 2, 2006 01:41 PM“Saddam Was Not An Imminent Threat”
You are correct, Sir.
The trouble with this post is that Bush, Cheney, Rice and everyone else who was remotely associated with the administration never said he was.
West, buy a theasurus. You are wrong again. Why do you keep making a fool of yourshelf?
Posted by goose1 at March 2, 2006 01:42 PMThe Patriot Act passes 89-10 in the Senate.
Well, FUCK.
Gah, even Reid voted for that piece of shit.
At least Harkin is my senator.
Posted by idiosynchronic at March 2, 2006 01:44 PMThere is evidence galore of ties between Saddam and al-Qaeda. Just what in the heck are you talkin' 'bout fool?
Posted by dipshit at March 2, 2006 01:31 PM
*****
I wasn't aware that Bizarro World had internet access.
Posted by God Of War at March 2, 2006 01:50 PMThere is evidence galore of ties between Saddam and al-Qaeda. Just what in the heck are you talkin' 'bout fool?
Posted by dipshit at March 2, 2006 01:31 PM
I see you back up your words. Oh ya you can't.
Posted by goose1 at March 2, 2006 01:41 PM
****
I sure can back up my words. Take a little look-see below at some of the many, many pieces of evidence:
"Cooperation between the two organizations should be allowed to develop freely through discussion and agreement."
--Internal Iraqi Intelligence memo on Iraq-al Qaeda cooperation, June 25, 2004, New York Times
"In August 1998, the detainee traveled to Pakistan with a member of Iraqi Intelligence for the purpose of blowing up the Pakistan, United States and British embassies with chemical mortars."
--U.S. government "Summary of Evidence" for an Iraqi member of al Qaeda detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba
"Abdul Rahman Yasin, a fugitive of the [1993 World Trade Center] attack, is of Iraqi descent, and in 1993, he fled to Iraq with Iraqi assistance."
--Senate Intelligence Committee report
"To gain the knowledge of the message from bin Laden and to convey to his envoy an oral message from us to bin Laden, the Saudi opposition leader, about the future of our relationship with him, and to achieve a direct meeting with him."
--Internal Iraqi Intelligence memo describing the goal of meetings with an al Qaeda envoy, February 19, 1998
"To gain the knowledge of the message from bin Laden and to convey to his envoy an oral message from us to bin Laden, the Saudi opposition leader, about the future of our relationship with him, and to achieve a direct meeting with him."
--Internal Iraqi Intelligence memo describing the goal of meetings with an al Qaeda envoy, February 19, 1998
"The consistent stream of intelligence at that time said it wasn't just al Shifa. There were three different [chemical weapons] structures in the Sudan. There was the hiring of Iraqis. There was no question that the Iraqis were there."
--Interview with John Gannon, former chairman of the CIA's National Intelligence Council, October 25, 2004
"Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden have sealed a pact."
--Milan's Corriere della Sera, December 28, 1998, as cited in the Senate Intelligence Committee report, p. 328
"Following the expulsion of al Qaeda from Afghanistan and their arrival in northern Iraq, Abu Musab al Zarqawi (a senior al Qaeda figure) was relatively free to travel within Iraq proper and to stay in Baghdad for some time. Several of his colleagues visited him there."
--The Butler Report, July 14, 2004
Game, set, match. You lost the argument...again. Commence with the name calling.
I see the champion of all things Right and wrong is back.
Posted by snark at March 2, 2006 01:40 PM
****
Hi snark..it's nice to be back.
Posted by dipshit at March 2, 2006 01:55 PMBbtb,
Good question.
The ties between Iraq and Al-Qaeda are tentative at best. But, in a post 9/11 world, tentative is as good as guilty.
Just as the “mushroom cloud” reference was meant to invoke a visceral reaction, it was used in the context of the fact that by the time you see a mushroom cloud, it’s too late to do anything about it. That’s why preemptive action was required.
Everyone in the world, liberal, conservative, French, Russian, all agreed Saddam had WMDs. There was some disagreement over how advanced the Iraqis were in different areas, primarily nuclear. Eriposte has written an encyclopedic tome on the subject and has proven without doubt that some in the intelligence community were convinced that Saddam sought uranium and aluminum tubes for weapons production.
Others in the intelligence community disagreed with the assessment.
Prior to 9/11, Iraq would have been given the benefit of a doubt. After 9/11, the president’s main function is to protect the country. He felt preemptive action was the best way, and since he won the last election, that’s what happened.
Bush also felt that best course to long term security and a better world was to change the dynamic in the Middle East by introducing democracy to the keystone of the area. All the basics were in place, such as Iraq having an educated populace with advanced rights for women (relatively speaking), conditioned to secular governance and with the wealth to support an advanced democracy.
These factors are still present and after an adjustment period, Iraq will emerge as a model for the rest of the region.
Posted by j.west at March 2, 2006 02:02 PMHere's some good evedence for you, DipShit, a qoute from your master, "We have no evidence of any connection between Sadam Hussien and September the 11th".
So, why don't you stop trying to ram your propagandist crap up people's butts?!!
Posted by oppressmenot at March 2, 2006 02:02 PMHey..what do you guys think about John Conyers' aides coming up with all that evidence showing how corrupt and unethical he really is.
It's no wonder David Gregory went on a bender before calling in his news report!
Posted by dipshit at March 2, 2006 02:05 PMThese factors are still present and after an adjustment period, Iraq will emerge as a model for the rest of the region
I suppose the ethnic cleansing is just a mere technicality in your "adjustment period".
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11612294/
Posted by herbal tee at March 2, 2006 02:06 PMHere's some good evedence for you, DipShit, a qoute from your master, "We have no evidence of any connection between Sadam Hussien and September the 11th".
So, why don't you stop trying to ram your propagandist crap up people's butts?!!
Posted by oppressmenot at March 2, 2006 02:02 PM
***
Who ever said there was....yet? There are still hundreds of thousands of documents yet to be translated.
Posted by dipshit at March 2, 2006 02:07 PMHey... I've been gone for a bit. Is Steve al-Soto pissed 'cuz that civil war in Iraq he was hoping and praying for never happened?
Posted by dipshit at March 2, 2006 02:08 PMNice try at misdirection, but the article states that the intelligence report unanimously concluded that Saddam would not attack the US directly or indirectly by aiding terrorists---it makes no reference to any time frame whatsoever and is certainly not limited to opining on the risk of an imminent attack.
So when when Nero Jr told us in early 2003 that "intelligence sources reveal" that Saddam could be expected to aid terrorists, that was a lie.
It's a pity that the 9/11 Commission had detailed findings on all those Saddam/Al Qaida "connections and ties" and came out decisively against them as existing in any meaningful way. That means that the Reactionary Right will have to continue to read non-peer reviewed shit-history from Regnery Press for the rest of their lives---to the extent they are literate, of course.
Posted by euzoius at March 2, 2006 02:12 PMHard to believe people are still trying to pass off that Stephen Hayes tripe.
Posted by snark at March 2, 2006 02:27 PMGood Lord, but the trolls are awfully desperate today. I know there's been an awful lot of bad news for your boy Bushie, but I didn't realize it was bad enough to rattle both dipshit and ujest out of their cages at the same. I think we made need a new archive for "Desperate Trolls."
Posted by ann at March 2, 2006 02:35 PMann, isn't it hilarious? You can almost hear the "bing bing BOING" cartoon noises as they tweak! Highly entertaining.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 2, 2006 02:55 PMGrounds for Impreachment NOW?
Posted by Judith at March 2, 2006 04:34 PMWest:
The trouble with this post is that Bush, Cheney, Rice and everyone else who was remotely associated with the administration never said he was.
As a matter of fact, they went to great lengths to dissuade anyone who even hinted that Saddam was an imminent threat.
Are you really willing to admit you are such a moronic dork? Why don't you put a magnetic sign on your car saying "Caution, Dork Driving"?
So the Bush administration faked its way into Iraq. But, ultimately, why? I mean, they haven't taken very good care of the place since they got there. The pipelines and other oil industry infrastructure, rickety even before the war, are on the verge of disintegration -- and that's on the days when insurgents aren't sabotaging it. And they've let the insurgency and sectarian violence rise to the point of civil war. So what gives? Is the strategy to let the Iraqis exterminate each other over the course of several decades and then siphon off the oil?
Posted by Grace Nearing at March 2, 2006 04:38 PMYeah, but it sure has been wonderful without them (trolls).
Posted by Judith at March 2, 2006 04:57 PMYeah, but it sure has been wonderful without them (trolls).
Dipshit and u.jest all in one day! There is a strong stench of desperation in the air tonight.
Posted by ann at March 2, 2006 06:46 PMAnn, I think they work in pairs. Ever notice how we keep getting tag teams of trolls here?
Posted by Judith at March 3, 2006 01:25 AM"As a matter of fact, they went to great lengths to dissuade anyone who even hinted that Saddam was an imminent threat...."
Yeah, when backed into a corner and directly confronted with a yes-or-no question - something that the courtiers in the Washington press corps almost never do. But in the meantime, what Bush did was ASSOCIATE Saddam and the terrorists and the threat of attack by always mentioning them together in the same breath.
To give you an example: You say about your neighbor "I don't like that guy. I don't like wife-beaters." Now, you haven't actually SAID "my neighbor is a wife beater," you just put two unrelated sentences together. This is what Bush and Condi did. Again and again and again, until we have a huge percentage of the poor grunts in Iraq thinking they are there to avenge the 9-11 attacks, when in fact there is no such connection.
Posted by Middle Aged Artillery Veteran at March 3, 2006 08:39 AM