Both Blair and Bush said a discussion re 'planned bombings' of Al Jazeera never happened. I believe them. Why do you believe them, Walter?
Do you think two heads of state who happen to be friends should not be able to discuss anything that is not available for public consumption?
I'm not sure, if I can believe them - don't cry "wolf".
However: you believe that they didn't discuss this, because they said so. But, if I understand you correctly, they of course could have dicussed it privately, despite negating it.
According to this morning's newspaper article, Bush and Blair did talk about bombing Al Jazeera, but they claim it was in a joking manner. The issue is who do we believe?
Opinion: Bush: "The President Who Invited America's Decline," Thomas L. Friedman (excerpts)
Quote:When I watch Mr. Bush these days...he looks to me like a man who wishes that we had a 28th amendment to the Constitution - called "Can I Go Now?" He looks like someone who would prefer to pack up and go back to his Texas ranch. It's not just that he doesn't seem to be having any fun. It's that he seems to be totally out of ideas relevant to the nation's future....Mr. Bush has two choices. One is to continue governing as though he's still running against John McCain in South Carolina. That means pushing a hard-right strategy based on dividing the country to get the 50.1 percent he needs to push through more tax cuts, while ignoring our real problems: the deficit, health care, energy, climate change and Iraq. More slash-and-burn politics like that will be a disaster.
It was appalling to watch Mr. Bush and Dick Cheney using their bully pulpits to act like two Rove attack dogs, accusing Democrats of being less than patriotic on Iraq. For two men who have fought this war without deploying enough troops, always putting politics before policy, without any plans for the morning after and never punishing any member of their team for rank incompetence to then accuse others of lacking seriousness on Iraq is disgusting....
"We are entering the era of hard choices for the United States - an era in which we can't always count on three Asian countries writing us checks to compensate for our failure to prepare for a hurricane or properly conduct a war," said David Rothkopf, author of "Running the World: The Inside Story of the National Security Council and the Architects of American Power. "If President Bush doesn't rise to this challenge, our children and grandchildren will look at the burden he has placed on their shoulders and see this moment as the hinge between the American Century and the Chinese Century. George W. Bush may well be seen as the president who, by refusing to address these urgent questions when they needed to be addressed, invited America's decline."
cicerone imposter wrote:According to this morning's newspaper article, Bush and Blair did talk about bombing Al Jazeera, but they claim it was in a joking manner. The issue is who do we believe?
Who do you want to believe, c.i.?
I suppose, it's really a
belief factor here, since we won't get any more infos since it is
:
The Mirror may be subject to an official gagging order that prevents it revealing any more details of the Al-Jazeera bombing memo, but the original story remains on the Mirror website.
All UK newspapers are subject to the order imposed by Attorney-General Lord Goldsmith today. It follows the Mirror's exclusive story that claimed that President Bush allegedly suggested bombing the Qatar headquarters of the Al-Jazeera TV station.
The ban prevents newspapers from revealing further details of the memo, but existing reports can remain in circulation. The Mirror said the government had done nothing to stop publication of the original story but said it had agreed not to publish further details.
Al-Jazeera itself published details of the Mirror story and said it was investigating the report while the White House called the claim "outlandish and inconceivable".
Jeremy Dear, general secretary of the UK's National Union of Journalists, said the gagging order was an attack on both the freedom of the press and the freedom of information.
"These sort of attempts to stifle uncomfortable revelations printed in a newspaper - which is only carrying out its proper duty to inform the British public - does the government of what is supposed to be a democracy no credit whatsoever."
source: Journalism UK
It's not only the UK that their government gags the media. This administration has created new ways of inflecting the same gagging of news in this country, and president Bush only does photo ops with a controlled audience like the military, his last bastion of support.
I'm going to avoid this at all costs, but just in case, I've memorized the first point in Hugh Hewitt's 12-step plan
http://hughhewitt.com/archives/2005/11/20-week/index.php#a000607
blatham, Good link on The Survey on Bush. Made a hard copy for posterity.
Another gem:
Subject: The power of words
Why should they ask me to put on a uniform and go 10,000 miles from home and drop bombs and bullets on brown people in Vietnam while so-called Negro people in Louisville are treated
like dogs and denied simple human rights? No, I'm not going 10,000 miles from home to help murder and burn another poor nation simply to continue the domination of white slave masters of the darker people the world over. This is the day when such evils must come to an end. I have been warned that to take such a stand would cost me millions of dollars. But I have said it once and
I will say it again. The real enemy of my people is here. I will not disgrace my religion, my people or myself by becoming a tool to enslave those who are fighting for their own justice, freedom and equality... If I thought the war was going to bring freedom and equality to 22 million of my people, they wouldn't have to draft me, I'd join tomorrow. I have nothing to lose by standing up for my beliefs. So I'll go to jail, so what? We've been in jail for 400 years.
-- Muhammad Ali in 1967.
How articulate is that! The boxer's words alone would have punched
George W. Bush out of the Oval Office.
What a shame we have no more Muhammad Alis to do it today.
c.i.: What does posting some 30-year old anti-war, US-hating drivel from Muhammad Ali have to do with this topic? Please take your spam elsewhere.
I'm thankful most members of our military don't think like you or him.
Damn liberals are everywhere.
Sometimes, tico, words written years ago have meaning today. Sorry you missed it.
JW, your link is awesome. Not that anybody that needs to read it will, but thank you.
Foxfyre wrote:JW, your link is awesome. Not that anybody that needs to read it will, but thank you.
Foxy - VDH calls it
The Crying Game. Read it through to the last paragraph to see why...and also why the Dems are in deep, deep trouble.
Hi. Just thought I would pop in to post that map of the country everyone's talking about.
The last three Red States left in the country as of Nov 2005 are clearly labelled in this one. Incidentally, out of 538 Electoral Votes, these three Red States have 12.
I am very much afraid that Blatham, being a Canadian, is unfamiliar with the US Electoral System. He tells of the "falling" approval ratings of G. W. Bush. Does he know that Bush can not run again because of Article 22 in the constitution.
I am sure that Blotham really believes that the Approval Ratings of G. W. Bush really mean something.
Or could it be that Blatham thinks that the lowered approval ratings of G. W. Bush will somehow cause other Republicans to lose their seats in November 2006?
If so, I am very much afraid that Blotham knows little about the upcoming Election in November.
He does not appear to know that no more than 30 seats in the House will be competitive since the two parties gerrymandered their districts more efficiently than ever after the 2000 census.
I do not think that even Blatham would think that five Republican Senators will be unseated in November. I am sure that Blotham knows that only one third of the Senators run every two years.
Under the circumstances, approval ratings mean NOTHING.
blatham wrote:map turns blue
Bernie: Do you realize you posted a link to the dailykos website? I didn't think you would permit yourself to read anything from a "partisan" site. How did this happen?
cicerone imposter wrote:Sometimes, tico, words written years ago have meaning today. Sorry you missed it.
So does the title of this thread. Sorry you missed it.
