Reply
Wed 26 Jul, 2006 07:54 pm
Even before the bombs fell on Baghdad, a group of senior Pentagon officials were plotting to invade another country. Their covert campaign once again relied on false intelligence and shady allies. But this time, the target was Iran. BY JAMES BAMFORD Page 1 2 3 4 5 6
How did the Bush administration sell the Iraq war? Check out our award-winning story on the PR machine for regime change in Iraq -- and join a reader debate: Is war with Iran unavoidable?
I. The Israeli Connection
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/10962352/iran_the_next_war/1
blueflame, The US military is stretched to max now, and another war will require reinstating conscription.
I'm not saying it's not impossible with this regime in Washington DC, but I'm wondering how many will flee the draft when they know how Iraq and Afghanistan has turned out.
I sure wouldn't want my children fighting any war created by Bushco; the world is in termoil as it is. The only other option is a nuke.
Many in this world are saying Bush is the worst terrorist today; he may just live up to his reputation.
BANG
I bet Hezbollah were paid by Haliburton to kidnap those Israelis too....but even if they didn't we still have the 9/11 hoax.
Isn't it amazing that most Americans still thinks Saddam was connected to 9-11 - still?
cicerone imposter wrote:Isn't it amazing that most Americans still thinks Saddam was connected to 9-11 - still?
Not as amazing as the number of damn fools that think Bush was.
cicerone, it's an incredible article from Rolling Stone. And I thought they were dead.It certainly sums up the Bushie years. Lies, war, lies, war. And of course the PNAC players are all over it. Their white paper Rebuilding America's Defenses spells out their blueprint for world domination and they've followed the script pefectly so far. And Brand X yes the first step in that plan was a desire expressed in writing for a new Pearl Harbor.
We know that given the extreme nature of the neo-con agenda, the Bush Administration had their work cut out for them in fomenting support for an invasion and occupation of Iraq. Therefore, among the first move by Rumsfeld following 9/11 was to somehow try to connect Saddam to the terror attacks. The various intelligence agencies reported to Rumsfeld that there was no Iraq connection to 9/11, that it was an al-Qaida operation, but that was merely a bothersome impediment. Since the CIA and the other intelligence agencies would not, or could not, supply the intelligence needed to justify a war on Iraq, Rumsfeld set up his own rump intelligence agency, the Office of Special Plans, stocked it with political appointees of the PNAC persuasion, and soon was stovepiping cherry-picked raw intel straight to Cheney and others in the White House. Shortly thereafter, Cheney, Rice and others in the White House Iraq Group went big-time with the WMD scare and the melding of Saddam Hussein with the events of 9/11.
Based on this sexed-up and phony intelligence, Cheney, Bush, Rice, Rumsfeld and the others began warning about mushroom clouds over the U.S., drone planes dropping biological agents over the East Coast, huge stockpiles of chemical weapons in Iraq, etc. Secretary of State Colin Powell, regarded as the most believable of the bunch, was dispatched to the United Nations to make the case, which he did, reluctantly, by presenting an embarrassingly weak litany of surmise and concocted facts.
The world didn't buy it, and the opposition to the U.S. war plan was palpable and huge: 10 million citizens throughout the world hit the streets to protest, former allies publicly criticized Bush. Only Tony Blair in England eagerly hitched his wagon to the Bush war-plan with large numbers of troops dispatched -- as it turned out, over the legal, moral and political objections of many of his closest aides and advisers.
blueflame1 wrote:cicerone, it's an incredible article from Rolling Stone. And I thought they were dead.It certainly sums up the Bushie years. Lies, war, lies, war. And of course the PNAC players are all over it. Their white paper Rebuilding America's Defenses spells out their blueprint for world domination and they've followed the script pefectly so far. And Brand X yes the first step in that plan was a desire expressed in writing for a new Pearl Harbor.
I absolutely defy you to quote exactly one thing that Bush said, not two, and then give an argument that it's a lie. If you prefer, you can provide a link to any previous post of yours or someone else's that has this - one statement, and evidence that it's a lie. We both know you can't and won't.
The fact is that Bush doesn't lie. Remind me to refer you to some immense article that I didn't write and claim that it proves something.
For some people, Bush doesn't lie, because it goes in one ear and out the other with nothing in-between:
Today's Bush Lie
"[Castro] welcomes sex tourism," Bush told a room of law enforcement officials in Florida, according to the Los Angeles Times. "Here's how he bragged about the industry," Bush said. "This is his quote: 'Cuba has the cleanest and most educated prostitutes in the world.'"
"As it turns out, Bush had lifted that quotation not from an actual Castro speech but rather from a 2001 essay written by then Dartmouth University undergraduate Charles Trumbull. In the essay, Trumbull did appear to quote a Castro speech about prostitution. Sadly, the student made the quotation up.
"According to officials, the actual quotation from Castro's 1992 speech reads as follows: 'There are hookers, but prostitution is not allowed in our country. There are no women forced to sell themselves to a man, to a foreigner, to a tourist. Those who do so do it on their own, voluntarily. We can say that they are highly educated hookers and quite healthy, because we are the country with the lowest number of AIDS cases.'"
"...And this isn't the first time the Internet has baffled Bush. Back in 2003, the President cited another student's thesis when making a case to go to war. The student's [plagiarized and "sexed up"] work ended up in a government document describing Iraq's weapons capability. Not exactly the kind of hard intelligence needed to justify an attack on another country." The Register, 07.28.04
Bush: We Do Not Engage in Torture
We are finding terrorists and bringing them to justice. We are gathering information about where the terrorists may be hiding. We are trying to disrupt their plots and plans. Anything we do ... to that end in this effort, any activity we conduct, is within the law. We do not torture." - President Bush (Nov. 7, 2005).
THE FACTSall of which have occured at U.S. detention facilities. See State Dept. Study Cites Torture of Prisoners: Rumself Approved Similar Practices (Washington Post March 10, 2005).
Finding WMDs
BUSH: We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. [Bush on Polish TV, 5/29/03]
POWELL: We have already discovered mobile biological factories of the kind that I described to the Security Council on the 5th of February. We have now found them. There is no question in our mind that that's what their purpose was. Nobody has come up with an alternate purpose that makes sense. [Powell, 6/2/03]
THE FACTS
The Washington Post reported an explosive story that a secret, fact-finding team of scientists and engineers sponsored by the Pentagon determined in May 2003 that two small trailers captured by U.S. and Kurdish troops were not evidence of an Iraqi biological weapons program. The nine-member team "transmitted their unanimous findings to Washington in a field report on May 27, 2003."
Despite having authoritative evidence that the biological laboratories claim was false, the administration continued to peddle the myth over the next four months.
(Center for American Progress)
SOCIAL SECURITY "CRISIS"[/color
"Thirteen years from now, in 2018, Social Security will be paying out more than it takes in. And every year afterward will bring a new shortfall, bigger than the year before. For example, in the year 2027, the government will somehow have to come up with an extra $200 billion to keep the system afloat -- and by 2033, the annual shortfall would be more than $300 billion. [color=red]By the year 2042, the entire system would be exhausted and bankrupt. If steps are not taken to avert that outcome, the only solutions would be dramatically higher taxes, massive new borrowing, or sudden and severe cuts in Social Security benefits or other government programs."
-- 2005 State of the Union Address
THE FACTS
"This passage contains three statements worth scrutiny. First, the statement that starting in 2018 the government "will somehow have to come up with" extra billions to stay afloat ignores the fact that there exists a substantial trust fund now invested in US treasury bonds and will make up the shortfall for several decades. Second, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has projected the trust fund will be exhausted in 2052; the year 2042 is an older figure that came from the Social Security Trustees, who used a different set of economic assumptions. Finally, even after 2052, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has noted the system could still pay out 80 percent of normal benefits without new taxes or borrowing."
In addition, the head of the non-partisan General Accounting Office testified before Congress that Social Security "does not face an immediate crisis". Source: Savage, Boston Globe (02/03/05), Associated Press, Los Angeles Times (03/10/05)
Brandon9000 wrote:blueflame1 wrote:cicerone, it's an incredible article from Rolling Stone. And I thought they were dead.It certainly sums up the Bushie years. Lies, war, lies, war. And of course the PNAC players are all over it. Their white paper Rebuilding America's Defenses spells out their blueprint for world domination and they've followed the script pefectly so far. And Brand X yes the first step in that plan was a desire expressed in writing for a new Pearl Harbor.
I absolutely defy you to quote exactly one thing that Bush said, not two, and then give an argument that it's a lie. If you prefer, you can provide a link to any previous post of yours or someone else's that has this - one statement, and evidence that it's a lie. We both know you can't and won't.
The fact is that Bush doesn't lie. Remind me to refer you to some immense article that I didn't write and claim that it proves something.
June 2002 "There are no war plans on my desk"
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020613-8.html
Perhaps the cleaning lady was just that moment elevating them in order to dust. Or perhaps they were tucked in the safe behind the portrait of Honest Abe.
Of course, we know now from many sources that war planning began months earlier, at Bush's order.
cicerone imposter wrote:For some people, Bush doesn't lie, because it goes in one ear and out the other with nothing in-between:
Today's Bush Lie
"[Castro] welcomes sex tourism," Bush told a room of law enforcement officials in Florida, according to the Los Angeles Times. "Here's how he bragged about the industry," Bush said. "This is his quote: 'Cuba has the cleanest and most educated prostitutes in the world.'"
"As it turns out, Bush had lifted that quotation not from an actual Castro speech but rather from a 2001 essay written by then Dartmouth University undergraduate Charles Trumbull. In the essay, Trumbull did appear to quote a Castro speech about prostitution. Sadly, the student made the quotation up.
"According to officials, the actual quotation from Castro's 1992 speech reads as follows: 'There are hookers, but prostitution is not allowed in our country. There are no women forced to sell themselves to a man, to a foreigner, to a tourist. Those who do so do it on their own, voluntarily. We can say that they are highly educated hookers and quite healthy, because we are the country with the lowest number of AIDS cases.'"
"...And this isn't the first time the Internet has baffled Bush. Back in 2003, the President cited another student's thesis when making a case to go to war. The student's [plagiarized and "sexed up"] work ended up in a government document describing Iraq's weapons capability. Not exactly the kind of hard intelligence needed to justify an attack on another country." The Register, 07.28.04
So, now all you have to do is to show how being wrong is lying.
cicerone imposter wrote:Bush: We Do Not Engage in Torture
We are finding terrorists and bringing them to justice. We are gathering information about where the terrorists may be hiding. We are trying to disrupt their plots and plans. Anything we do ... to that end in this effort, any activity we conduct, is within the law. We do not torture." - President Bush (Nov. 7, 2005).
THE FACTSall of which have occured at U.S. detention facilities. See State Dept. Study Cites Torture of Prisoners: Rumself Approved Similar Practices (Washington Post March 10, 2005).
So, some countries which are not the US engage in torture. Now all you have to do is provide evidence that the US engages in torture as a matter of policy approved or ordered by the president or his cabinet, which you have certainly not done.
cicerone imposter wrote:
Finding WMDs
BUSH: We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. [Bush on Polish TV, 5/29/03]
POWELL: We have already discovered mobile biological factories of the kind that I described to the Security Council on the 5th of February. We have now found them. There is no question in our mind that that's what their purpose was. Nobody has come up with an alternate purpose that makes sense. [Powell, 6/2/03]
THE FACTS
The Washington Post reported an explosive story that a secret, fact-finding team of scientists and engineers sponsored by the Pentagon determined in May 2003 that two small trailers captured by U.S. and Kurdish troops were not evidence of an Iraqi biological weapons program. The nine-member team "transmitted their unanimous findings to Washington in a field report on May 27, 2003."
Despite having authoritative evidence that the biological laboratories claim was false, the administration continued to peddle the myth over the next four months.
(Center for American Progress)
Quote:He was repeating a claim transmitted to him by the CIA, which based its intelligence reports on an Iraqi source, code-named "Curveball," whom it later determined to be a fabricator. But the CIA didn't formally recall Curveball's reporting until May 2004, according to the report of the bipartisan Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction. That CIA reversal came roughly a year after Bush's interview with Polish television.
www.factcheck.org
According to your standard, you're a liar, since you consistently present errors as evidence of lies.
Brandon has myopia. He seems to have missed the simple fact that Wilson reported back to the CIA that the yellow cake attempted purchase by Saddam never happened, but Bush and the administration continued their lies to the American public and the world.
In retaliation, they outed Valerie Plame. There was no other reason for this administration to reveal her name.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace