Who Is Buried in Bush's Speech?

PNAC
It is called 'Neoconservatism'. There is no one person responsible. Step back from the tree and look at the forest.

Read the following link....



http://www.thelibertycommittee.org/neo-conned.htm

pna
Now read this link and as you do think of how many times you have heard the same language from the Bush administratin in the past week or so.





Link

More grist for the mill.....

http://truthout.org/docs_03/022803A.shtml

Ah, the sophistries! Of course he lied. When you knowingly use a lie (though it may not be yours) to convince others of something you want to convince them of, you're a liar.

The information about Niger had surfaced and been found faulty before October 2002 -- according to a number of American sources, not least of which was the CIA -- and this was known by the administration. All of these have been quoted here in A2K in parallel discussions -- and there have been plenty more in the press. I think the most likely outcome (and a cheap one) will be to throw the mess at Cheney, who was deep in this, along with Rice.

When I read arguments above which try to parse the words to exculpate the guy sitting behind the desk where the buck stops, I not only weep for the erstwhile democratic republic, I wonder what brought us to a pass where we've forgotten what kind of truths we have the right and duty to expect from our government -- especially when it is committing this nation and its few allies to an invasion.

1. Bush, in the State of the Union Speech, used verbage that was knowingly questionable.
2. Knowing that it was questionable, he laid the veracity of that verbage at the feet of a trusted ally. (If our friends say the world is flat-it must be flat)
3. The usage of a nuclear threat was made against Saddam as proof of an immanent and horrific danger to the US and our allies.
4. The Bush administration used knowledge of WoMD that was significantly dated in the assumption that it must still be true without substantiating with current information.
5. The Bush adminstration used 9/11 as a "new light" with which to assess Iraq/Saddam as being party to an assult on the US.
6. The invasion/occupation of Iraq, regardless of the status of Saddam, was a given.
7. Corroborating evidence (the aluminum tubes) (testimony from former Iraqi dissidents) has been equally discredited.
8. As of this date no evidence has been offered that substantiates any of the allegations against Saddam (other than he was a nasty man)
9. The justification for pre-emption, denied by the UN as legitimate cause is nowhere to be seen.
10. Bush, as the responsible party (head of state) has offered zero explanation for his lapse of judgement other than to blame others.

wow, y'all and I'm barely awake.....back later

InfraBlue

No problem on the double posts. Any time you want to edit or remove a post, you can use those buttons up in the top right corner of your post. And welcome to a2k...your pointing to the neo-conservative philosophy and its influence here is quite appropriate.

Walter

That link is very good. Thanks. Gel...yours too.

The press - spineless buggers that so many of them have become - are now finally feeling a bit more courageous. It's the pack thing. The last two weeks have witnessed a distinct shift, and it is hurting Bush and crowd. I doubt very much they'll drop Cheney as it constitutes such a deep admission of mistakes (and dishonesty) and this administration does NOT admit mistakes or dishonesty. They are undoubtedly working overtime with Blair's people trying to mount some convincing spin they can both put their shoulders behind at the upcoming meeting, but too much is coming out from all sorts of sources which is undercutting anything they might claim about intel. So I expect Rove to fall back on diversion. Over the last week or so, there have been a number of separate sources talking up Korea again. As this is precisely how these guys try to start a PR program, that might be it.

Lola
A little late to join in on this discussion since it would appear that all that can be said has been. However, would just like to add one thought. I cannot understand the furor caused by a few words in the speech when the far greater travesty are the lies and subterfuge used by this administration to drag the US into this quagmire.
Those lies are what Bush should be held responsible for.

Not either/or, Au, all. All lies. Starting with the campaign.

Those sixteen words uttered in a State of the Union message are far more damaging than the equal truth - "I did not have sex with that girl" (ie, sex is defined as sexual intercourse, which is a common definition) - One is to try to maintain a marriage and reputation the other has killed an estimated 10-20,000 people. Get real!

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=424786

BillW, Some will never acknowledge the difference. They wish to believe in their president no matter what the consequences. Kinda sad, if you ask me. Maybe they will begin to see the 'light' as more American soldiers are killed - after the war was declared over. Being stubborn is one thing, but seeing our men and women coming home in body bags is another. c.i.

Is the 16-word lie flap a smoke screen?
Is the 16-word lie flap a smoke screen? We all know Bush and his civilian et al lied and changed his reason for attacking Iraq almost daily. If it wasn't so deadly I would advise Bush et al to fire his comedy writers.

According to STRATFOR, everyone is missing the real issue that still is a threat:

"STRATFOR July 14, 2003: The crisis du jour in Washington is a revelation that President George W. Bush quoted from a forged letter about Iraq trying to buy uranium from Niger in his State of the Union address. Congress, as usual, is missing the point. Weapons of mass destruction were not the primary reason Bush went to war in Iraq, but he certainly thought they were there. Everyone thought they were there.

The really critical issue is where are Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons today? What the CIA did with the Niger letter is of no real importance. What the CIA knows and doesn't know about the current war in Iraq and whether guerrillas control chemical or biological weapons is the critical issue that everyone is avoiding."

The other REAL issue is contained in my post: "IMPORTANT! The beginning of the end of Rumsfelt, Cheney et al?" If you have not read it yet, you should. It will put everything into perspective about the mess we are in.
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=9449&highlight=

-----BumbleBeeBoogie

From now on the American people get to say to a Bush speech,

"Hmmm, what part is true, what part is being said that is knowingly false, and what part can I depend on!"

Now folks, that is what I call leadership - Can't even depend on the spoken word, hmmmmmmm!

I haven't had time to read everyone's posts here yet. I'll do that in a couple of hours. But I must say that I think Bush and his group, cocky little smarties they are, have painted themselves into a corner and hopefully this time they won't be allowed to wiggle free. Is the Korea thing supposed to take our minds off the "17 little words?" or however many there are. As if the number of words would make a difference in whether it was a lie or an attempt to mislead or not. Back later. Now, who can we believe about the danger in Korea? Credibility is the issue here. As it has been all along. Finally, I hope, the press and the American people are waking up to this question. Can we trust our President and his administration? I think the answer is "no."

Lola
Sure there is a danger in Korea but the question to whom. Why is it we are made to believe that the actions of North Korea are a danger to the US exclusively?

effort by ideologues to disrupt cooperation between the U.S. and Syria...."
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/15/opinion/15KRIS.html

The implication is that there is more of a split within the administration than we've noticed when the Pentagon and State scream over the back fence at each other.

Bush might get off the hook if it's found that Cheney, Rice, Wolfowitz et al. have been playing even more dirty pool behind Bush's back. Which is why (if we want the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth) "the buck stops here" must be the criterion, not which underling did what and when.

We've been told by our "intelligence" agency that North Korea's missiles are not long range enough to reach the US, but who are we to believe? c.i.

Is Bush et al implosion imminent?
============= SF GATE MORNING FIX =============
July 16, 2003 -- Corey Feldman is 32 today
By Mark Morford: [email protected]
http://sfgate.com/columnists/morford/a/
"Lube up, lean into the fire, and laugh"
~~ nil desperandum ~~


== MARK'S NOTES & ERRATA ==
Where opinion meets benign syntax abuse

== Nothing Left To Lie About ==
With BushCo reaming the nation on just about every possible front, is
implosion imminent?
(By Mark Morford)
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2003/07/16/notes071603.DTL&nl=fix

And the lies, the flagrant GOP bitch slappings of the American public, the maniacal jabs straight in eye of truth with the icepick of utter BS, have just reached some sort of critical mass, some sort of saturation point of absurdity and pain and ridiculousness and you just have to stand up and applaud.

Really. It's almost as if you should cheer the invidiousness, it is so
spectacular, unprecedented, the tower of lies reaching the point where you, Jaded and Benumbed American Citizen, are forced to either recoil and ignore and deny, succumb and scream and laugh, or, like Bush himself, just sort of stand there, wide eyed, dumfounded, blinking hard, looking more blank and confused than ever, as the unified BushCo front begins to gloriously unravel.

This much we now know, as compiled by the CIA and the U.N. and U.S.
military leaders and Bush's own teams of experts and scientists and
lackeys and pretty much anyone with any sort of common sense or astute
observation as yet unclouded and unmisled by the raging masturbatory
pro-war gropings of, say, Fox News. A brief summary:

-- SADDAM WAS ALL OVER 9/11. Funny how U.S. intelligence never found a single connection. Funny how BushCo knowingly led the nation on to
believe there was one. Funny how the only role Saddamn actually played
in 9/11 was to watch it unfold on CNN and exclaim, "Holy Allah with a
case of Cuban cigars, Hashim, a million dinars says BushCo uses that as
an excuse to come swipe our oil and pump up Halliburton and build a
Starbucks in downtown Baghdad! Prepare the escape pod!"

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.html

-- IRAQ WAS AL QAEDA'S BITCH. See above. Fact is, U.S. intelligence
found no proven link between Iraq and any recent terrorism threats
against the U.S. Fact is, bin Laden hated Saddam and denounced his
socialist Baath party as "infidels.". Fact is, BushCo worked extremely hard to manipulate the media to make you think the two were so close they might as well have been gay lovers. Curiously, this sinister obfuscation is still not clear to millions of Americans, most of whom tend to live in Texas and/or anywhere near major military manufacturing plants. Go figure.

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/11/Iraq.Qaeda.link

-- THOSE 9/11 TERRORISTS? BUNCHA SNARLING IRAQIS. Well, no. Most were, in fact, Saudi. There were no Iraqis at all. Saudi Arabia remains a
desperately important American ally, one that provides billions in U.S.
investment and hence BushCo loves them and kisses their rings and
doesn't say a peep about the millions they also give to terrorist cells--- like, say, those of al Qaeda -- to protect their oil fields. Shhh.

-- SADDAM HAS MILLIONS OF DRUMFULS OF SCARY CHEMICALS ready at a moment's notice to poison the entire world and most of EuroDisney. Not even close. Huge chunks of "proof" of Iraq's purported chemical-weapons and nuclear-weapons programs have already been dismissed by U.N. inspectors and weapons experts. Saddam did, however, possess large quantities of bootlegged Britney Spears posters, which, if dropped on
Israel, would have certainly caused pandemonium if not outright giggling and many heavy longing sighs.

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/194/world/What_little_intelligence_was_n:.shtml

-- SADDAM SCORED URANIUM FROM NIGER TO MAKE NUKES. This is so cutely wrong it's painful. The document stating this was forged and bogus and BushCo knew it and referenced it anyway in the State of the Union
address to help justify the war, and now he's all flustered and denying
everything and the CIA director is bumbling in as the fall guy, and oh
my freaking God do they ever think you are stupid.

http://truthout.org/docs_03/071403B.shtml

-- THE WAR ON IRAQ WILL BE AS EASY AS LANCING A BOIL ON DICK CHENEY'S FOREHEAD. Yes! Instant and painless and easy it will be, and it will cause minimal casualties and we'd be all done in a week and America
would be back home and happily watching "The Bachelorette" and the
world will love us and see how glorious and righteous we are and everyone will convert to Christianity and join Promise Keepers and the
700 Club and never have sex and we will ban all icky gay people to
Canada. Whee!

Or not. Never you mind that thousands of soldiers are to be stationed in
Afghanistan and Iraq "indefinitely," for years to come. Or that more than half of the U.S. Army's entire combat force is bogged down in Iraq right now. Or that U.S. soldiers are still dying in Iraq every day, more than 80 so far (33 in hostile fire), with more to come, endless guerrilla warfare possibly requiring even more U.S. troops, months after BushCo declared the war essentially over. Whoops. Gosh. Sorry.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3066983.stm
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/6299093.htm

-- THE JESSICA LYNCH "RESCUE" WAS ALL-AMERICAN HEROISM AT ITS FINEST.
So cute. The "rescue" was actually all-American Pentagon PR bulls** at
its finest, a rather embarrassingly staged hoax so full of overblown stunts and dumb machismo and awkward twists that not even Fox News would touch the story after a while, and they'll run anything. No wonder the Pentagon has refused to release the unedited video footage of the "rescue."

http://www.msnbc.com/local/arkcity/m299507.asp?cp1=1

-- IRAQ'S OIL MONEY WILL GO STRAIGHT TO "LIBERATED" IRAQI PEOPLE. Seriously now. Did anyone really ever believe this, even in their most drunken and heavily Xanaxed state? The money, of course, is going
straight into U.S. and U.K. coffers as "payment" for the Gulf War, with
only a fraction going for "rebuilding." But the bottom line is, we control the oil. We control Iraq's billions. We do not care who knows it. Special note from Donny "Beady Eyes" Rumsfeld to all you people who somehow genuinely believed we bombed Iraq for the betterment of the Iraqi people: Tthhppbbbhhhppbb.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,997055,00.html

-- OH MY GOD LOOK JUST LOOK AT ALL THOSE SCARY WMDs. There are no WMDs. There are no WMDs. There are no WMDs. And there never were. Two little words from BushCo, straight to you: Ha-ha, suckers.

The list goes on. This list is nearly endless. The list is growing and
expanding and now threatens to split and explode and spread like some
sort of giant viscous blob and invade small towns and kill plants and induce women to slap their hands to their faces and scream while it slowly steamrolls innocent children as they innocently stand there in the street playing innocent Frisbee, innocently.

And there are others. There are flagrant lies and cover-ups and misprisions not even related to the war, more about increasingly nauseating domestic issues, major budget crises and unabashed pro-corporate decisions and anti-gay anti-women anti-sex fun for the whole terrified white Christian family.

There is, for example, the recent hacking to death of the EPA's major
greenhouse-gas/air-quality study. There was the (failed) attempt to kill the Bureau of Labor Statistics report that tracked factory closings in the U.S. There is the secret $135 mil in budget moneys set aside to cram invidious sexless Christian "abstinence only until marriage" programs down the throats of jaded American teens and desperate budget-reamed schools.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2085481

There was, as Slate so effortlessly delineates, the regular and rather
sneering deep-sixing of serious economic data and fiscal forecasting---
much of it generated by Bush's own teams -- because it didn't match the
GOP's makeshift rosy scenarios.

There is massive unemployment. There is the largest budget deficit in
history, now a staggering $455 billion, over $50 billion more than the
administration predicted just five months ago.

There are state and local governments broke to the point of having to
cut back essential services like police and fire departments, hospitals, public schools, road maintenance and sewers. There is Lynne Cheney. 'Nuff said.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2003/07/15/national1050EDT0553.DTL&nl=fix

There appears to be no end. There appears to be a limitless supply of
lies and half-truths and misinformations BushCo can invent on the spot,
and is now a good time to recall how Clinton was savaged and vilified
and attacked and nearly impeached because he lied about having big dumb sex with a rather unappealing intern?

And yet here is BushCo, openly and shamelessly lying about leading this
nation into a vile and petroleum-drunk war, massacring tens of thousands, killing hundreds of U.S. soldiers (and counting), gutting the budget, favoring the rich with useless tax cuts, hiding and prevaricating and dodging and treated the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution the way a crusty abusive Catholic priest treats an altar boy.

This is where you have to laugh. This is where you applaud. Stand up and cheer, for it has been a masterful performance, a rather unprecedented series of major cover-ups and well-orchestrated PR maneuvers and outright fabrications unmatched in recent history. Hell, the epic scale of BushCo's strocities make Clinton's little oral-sex fixation seem like a jaywalking violation.

Is now the time? Is this is where we start to notice how it is all coming unraveled, Bush's snide web of lies just too flagrant and too insulting for too long, CIA directors and intelligence experts and military leaders and scientists and the like all coming forward now to refute any number of false BushCo claims, the chinks in the armor now becoming cracks and fissures and flubs and stumbles and ultimate raging implosions?

Is this why impeachment proceedings have yet to begin in earnest
against BushCo? Because we're just too stunned, too frozen in disbelief
at the mounting mountains of evidence that we have been duped and
misled and lied to on a scale we can't really begin to assimilate? Could very well be.

Because the tower of lies, oh how it teeters, how it quivers, how it feels oh so ready to fall.