Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 06-18-2004, 08:38 PM   #1 (permalink)
Psycho
 
Location: somewhere
ugh...

Quote:
WASHINGTON - Blaming what he called "lazy" reporters for blurring the distinction, Vice President Dick Cheney said that while "overwhelming" evidence shows a past relationship between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida, the Bush administration never accused Saddam of helping with the Sept. 11 attacks.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5233810/

i didn't start this thread to ask about about the 9/11 commission, or their report, or Bush's response to it, nor am i trying to have a bonfire with people holding picket signs reading 'down with war,' or bush is the devil or whatever. all i'm saying is that for me personally, i'm finding it increasingly difficult to credit the current administration with anything more than half-truths.
*sigh*
__________________
~my karma ran over my dogma.~
Karby is offline  
Old 06-18-2004, 09:15 PM   #2 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
So you're going commie, right? Why else would you even imply criticism of the president during a period of post major combat operations?

Fuck. Rummy got caught in a lie on t.v.. The transcript and the video are readily available online.

Of course they lied. How many different justifications did they have? How many have turned out to be plausible and consistent?

WMDs? Still looking.

Liberating the oppressed? Whoops, don't mind those incriminating pictures, that's just what the "spread of democracy" looks like.

Imminent threat? "Well, we never actually said anything about an imminent threat." *wink* *wink*.

Link to 9/11? Heh, yeah, so the american public is a little gullible.
filtherton is offline  
Old 06-18-2004, 09:25 PM   #3 (permalink)
Baltimoron
 
djtestudo's Avatar
 
Location: Beeeeeautiful Bel Air, MD
Quote:
WMDs? Still looking.
Intellegence? Everyone agreed he had them.

Quote:
Liberating the oppressed? Whoops, don't mind those incriminating pictures, that's just what the "spread of democracy" looks like.
So I guess a couple hundred Iraqi criminals "oppressed" by a couple hundred shit-for-brains soldiers is a lot worse then millions dying at the whim of Hussain?

Quote:
Imminent threat? "Well, we never actually said anything about an imminent threat." *wink* *wink*.
I guess haveing the capability to produce chemical and biological weapons and having active ties supporting terrorist groups doesn't constitute an "imminent threat" anymore, huh?

Quote:
Link to 9/11? Heh, yeah, so the american public is a little gullible.
Yes, SOME of us are...
__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun
djtestudo is offline  
Old 06-18-2004, 10:55 PM   #4 (permalink)
Huggles, sir?
 
seretogis's Avatar
 
Location: Seattle
Saddam Hussein would have to personally detonate a nuclear weapon in downtown New York for some people here to be convinced that he was an imminent threat. We, lowly citizens, will never know the whole story and are simply pulling each others hair regarding the tiny pieces of information that are deemed unimportant enough for us to be told.
__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames
seretogis is offline  
Old 06-19-2004, 12:37 AM   #5 (permalink)
Banned
 
cthulu23's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally posted by seretogis
Saddam Hussein would have to personally detonate a nuclear weapon in downtown New York for some people here to be convinced that he was an imminent threat. We, lowly citizens, will never know the whole story and are simply pulling each others hair regarding the tiny pieces of information that are deemed unimportant enough for us to be told.
Donald Rumsfeld practically shat himself on Face the Nation while trying to deny that anyone in the administration ever referred to Iraq as an "immeditate threat." Obviously, the White House has backed away from the idea of Iraq as an immediate danger, so why is it still repeated? I also strongly suspect that If the US had any secret intelligence that confirmed their justifications for war, we'd have heard of it long ago.

Last edited by cthulu23; 06-19-2004 at 12:42 AM..
cthulu23 is offline  
Old 06-19-2004, 06:20 AM   #6 (permalink)
undead
 
Pacifier's Avatar
 
Location: Duisburg, Germany
Quote:
Originally posted by djtestudo
Intellegence? Everyone agreed he had them.
everyone? So USA and UK is everyone?
The rest of the coalition belived becasue they were paid enough.

and intellegence ... presenting a 10 year old document as a "proof"?


Quote:
Originally posted by djtestudo
I guess haveing the capability to produce chemical and biological weapons and having active ties supporting terrorist groups doesn't constitute an "imminent threat" anymore, huh?
that was not was filtherton menat (I guess)
Rumsfeld saif that noone in the administration used the words "imminent threat", which is a lie.
Rumsfeld himself used this phrase...
__________________
"It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death
Albert Einstein
Pacifier is offline  
Old 06-19-2004, 06:50 AM   #7 (permalink)
Insane
 
The thing is everyone, including France,, Russia, Germany, did agree that Saddam had them. Russia's intelligence told us Saddam was planning to attack the US, which could remain to be true. (The articles currently plastered on CNN.)

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/...ror/index.html

The fact is these countries simply didnt want to be bothered because they had economic interests in Saddam and thats the absolute only reason they didnt help us.

I will not, and will never say Bush or the administration "lied." 1. To present false information with the intention of deceiving. This administration honestly felt Iraq was a threat to our National Security and they acted. I'm not saying it was right or wrong but I still respect the fact that this administration is willing to defend it's people.

Our planning of the Iraqi war sucked, we should have had a much better post-war plan and obviously the prison situation was deeply regrettable and completely disgusted me. Other than that, the world is a safer place without Saddam Hussein at the helm and lets just hope democracy springs up in Iraq,regardless of your opinion of the war please support the efforts currently being made to give Iraqis sovereignity, I dont see how anyone can be against that.

Just my opinion on the issue.

P.S. I dont feel any 1 man can represent an entire country. I would support the deposing of any dictator in favor of turning the country into a democracy.
theusername is offline  
Old 06-19-2004, 07:52 AM   #8 (permalink)
Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate
 
Location: Los Angeles
Quote:
Originally posted by theusername
P.S. I dont feel any 1 man can represent an entire country. I would support the deposing of any dictator in favor of turning the country into a democracy.
I think there are those who would agree that the first line is true even in this country.
Zeld2.0 is offline  
Old 06-19-2004, 02:26 PM   #9 (permalink)
Tilted
 
Why are people falling hook line and sinker for the media spin that our war on Iraq was because of 9/11? We went into Iraq to prevent the next terrorist strike, folks. Saddam had the will, the means, and the intention of attacking us on our own soil, as well as persuing WMDs.

If Bush hadn't gone into Iraq, I guarantee that the Democrats would be screaming just as loudly at him for inaction. Lose-lose. I'm just glad he's an outsider and does the *gasp* right thing instead of falling into Washington Politics as usual.
Hwed is offline  
Old 06-19-2004, 02:44 PM   #10 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
the problem is that the rest of the planet agreed that the un inspections regime had worked by the time bushwar began--that is why the "coalition" is the farce that it is and has been---it is not because of economic interests---despite the constant refrain to this end circulating around the rightwing media---the second thing is that obviously the americans had to present hussein as a present danger to them and the link to al qeada was crucial in this---otherwise bush would have found himself without any reason to go around the un at any particular time----the only problem was that their arguments to this end were false and unconvincing then, and are only more obviously false now. the americans did not go into iraq because of "terrorism" in any direct way---read the project for a new american century website, think about the crap concerning the first gulf war and how the reaganiste cowboys felt hamstrung by the un at that point---the war has nothing to do with the arguments proffered by bush and the other mayberry machiavellians---the only surprise is that so many people actually believed them. now, sadly for bush (but no-one else) both the wmd argument and the iraq as imminent danger via their-link to terrorism in the abstract and al qeada in particular arguments have collapse entirely--the history of american foreign policy since world war 2 demonstrates that the americans have never cared about dictatorships no matter how brutal so long as they were convenient for the americans (think about pinochet, for example, though the examples are legion)--so that argument is crap as well....the discourse that has been floated until recently about terrorism has made thinking on the matter nearly impossible for many people, and that is beyond unfortumate. maybe people should rely less american television for their information.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 06-19-2004, 03:00 PM   #11 (permalink)
This vexes me. I am terribly vexed.
 
Superbelt's Avatar
 
Location: Grantville, Pa
Quote:
The thing is everyone, including France,, Russia, Germany, did agree that Saddam had them. Russia's intelligence told us Saddam was planning to attack the US, which could remain to be true. (The articles currently plastered on CNN)
That's called an intelligence echo chamber. Most of those countries got their intel directly from us. Then we use that intel that originally came from us anyway to justify our actions by saying "everyone else said the same thing"
Superbelt is offline  
Old 06-19-2004, 03:30 PM   #12 (permalink)
Junkie
 
hannukah harry's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally posted by djtestudo


Yes, SOME of us are...
glad to see you're finally admitting your gullability...
__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer
hannukah harry is offline  
Old 06-19-2004, 03:31 PM   #13 (permalink)
Junkie
 
hannukah harry's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Hwed
Why are people falling hook line and sinker for the media spin that our war on Iraq was because of 9/11? We went into Iraq to prevent the next terrorist strike, folks. Saddam had the will, the means, and the intention of attacking us on our own soil, as well as persuing WMDs.

If Bush hadn't gone into Iraq, I guarantee that the Democrats would be screaming just as loudly at him for inaction. Lose-lose. I'm just glad he's an outsider and does the *gasp* right thing instead of falling into Washington Politics as usual.
what world do you live in? i haven't seen any news reports say we're in iraq because of 9/11?

are you just a troll?
__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer
hannukah harry is offline  
Old 06-19-2004, 03:37 PM   #14 (permalink)
Cracking the Whip
 
Lebell's Avatar
 
Location: Sexymama's arms...


Please watch the personal comments.

First Warning.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!
Lebell is offline  
Old 06-20-2004, 08:24 AM   #15 (permalink)
undead
 
Pacifier's Avatar
 
Location: Duisburg, Germany
Quote:
Originally posted by theusername
The thing is everyone, including France,, Russia, Germany, did agree that Saddam had them.
BS
when Powel presented the "proofs" germanys foreign minister said the germany was "not convinced" by those "proofs"
__________________
"It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death
Albert Einstein
Pacifier is offline  
Old 06-20-2004, 11:37 AM   #16 (permalink)
pig
pigglet pigglet
 
pig's Avatar
 
Location: Locash
Quote:
Originally posted by Karby

...all i'm saying is that for me personally, i'm finding it increasingly difficult to credit the current administration with anything more than half-truths.
*sigh*
Yep, and I think you'll find that they aren't particulary apologetic about it. The truth is strictly need to know, and I suppose that the " 'Merican People" aren't on need to know status.

As for the rest of the Iraqi war stuff, I'll say what I characteristically say about this situation. In my opinion, none of the arguments justifies going to war on it's own. If they were all true, then perhaps I could see some sort of justification for military involvement. Unfortunately, it seems that a lot of them have turned out to be crap. That aside, what I have not understood since the beginning of this things is Why now? In order to make this type of strident military campaign, committing thousands of U.S. troops to the area, and a whole bunch of taxpayer $$$, in a publicly acknowledged "pre-emptive strike" I expect a bullet proof rationale for war (are we actually at war? I mean, is there an official declaration of War. I am under the impression that we are not.) that can listed out on a slide presentation, not exceeding perhaps 10 slides. What a fiasco.

If the Administration / Congress / Federal government can not provide this explanation, and so far they have failed, that is sad. If they are unwilling to because of security concerns, fine. Just don't expect my trust and support. I don't trust and support things that I know are lying or intentionally deceiving by shading / sheltering the truth, even if it is claimed to be for my own good. That is a situation in which I inherently am unable to determine the truth of the claim.
__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

Last edited by pig; 06-20-2004 at 11:42 AM..
pig is offline  
Old 06-20-2004, 07:32 PM   #17 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Quote:
Originally posted by djtestudo
[B]contents
While you many glory in the torture of criminals(or at least endorse said torture with apathy) you must see that torture is not an effective means to spread human rights. It also doesn't help "win the hearts and minds" of the iraqi people. Plus, you have no idea if any of the torture victims were indeed convicted criminals. Many of them quite possible were in the wrong place at the wrong time and got caught up in an american sweep. How would you like a chemical light in your anus for being in the wrong place at the wrong time? How would you like to be forced to suck some sweaty piss-covered stranger's cock because your liberaters got you confused with the enemy? What if it wasn't you, what if it was someone in your family? A child, maybe your wife or your mother? Close your eyes and picture someone sodomizing someone you care about and laughing and tell me again about "oppression".

Imminent threat, as i remember was the whole "Iraq can attack the u.s. withing forty five minutes if they so choose" If that sounds accurate to you than i'd like to tell you about my friend from nigeria.

Quote:
Yes, SOME of us are...
Lord bush is thy shepherd.
filtherton is offline  
Old 06-20-2004, 07:49 PM   #18 (permalink)
Baltimoron
 
djtestudo's Avatar
 
Location: Beeeeeautiful Bel Air, MD
What the FUCK are you talking about?

Where did I say anything like that.
__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun
djtestudo is offline  
Old 06-20-2004, 08:43 PM   #19 (permalink)
Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate
 
Location: Los Angeles
This thread got interesting real fast.. =/
Zeld2.0 is offline  
Old 06-20-2004, 08:45 PM   #20 (permalink)
BFG Builder
 
Location: University of Maryland
I suggest everyone step back, breathe in, take a toke, and relax. We can discuss this civilly. I did a news search using UMD's resources, and found this article from 2003. The Boston Globe has this article on their website (do a search for the headline), but I refuse to register for them.

Quote:
Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe

September 16, 2003, Tuesday ,THIRD EDITION

SECTION: NATIONAL/FOREIGN; Pg. A1

LENGTH: 1053 words

HEADLINE: CHENEY LINK OF IRAQ, 9/11 CHALLENGED

BYLINE: By Anne E. Kornblut, Globe Staff, and Bryan Bender, Globe Correspondent

BODY:
WASHINGTON - Vice President Dick Cheney, anxious to defend the White House foreign policy amid ongoing violence in Iraq, stunned intelligence analysts and even members of his own administration this week by failing to dismiss a widely discredited claim: that Saddam Hussein might have played a role in the Sept. 11 attacks.

Evidence of a connection, if any exists, has never been made public. Details that Cheney cited to make the case that the Iraqi dictator had ties to Al Qaeda have been dismissed by the CIA as having no basis, according to analysts and officials. Even before the war in Iraq, most Bush officials did not explicitly state that Iraq had a part in the attack on the United States two years ago.

But Cheney left that possibility wide open in a nationally televised interview two days ago, claiming that the administration is learning "more and more" about connections between Al Qaeda and Iraq before the Sept. 11 attacks. The statement surprised some analysts and officials who have reviewed intelligence reports from Iraq.

Democrats sharply attacked him for exaggerating the threat Iraq posed before the war.

"There is no credible evidence that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with 9/11," Senator Bob Graham, a Democrat running for president, said in an interview last night. "There was no such relationship."

A senior foreign policy adviser to Howard Dean, the Democratic front-runner, said it is "totally inappropriate for the vice president to continue making these allegations without bringing forward" any proof.

Cheney and his representatives declined to comment on the vice president's statements. But the comments also surprised some in the intelligence community who are already simmering over the way the administration utilized intelligence reports to strengthen the case for the war last winter.

Vincent Cannistraro, a former CIA counterterrorism specialist, said that Cheney's "willingness to use speculation and conjecture as facts in public presentations is appalling. It's astounding."

In particular, current intelligence officials reiterated yesterday that a reported Prague visit in April 2001 between Sept. 11 hijacker Mohamed Atta and an Iraqi agent had been discounted by the CIA, which sent former agency Director James R. Woolsey to investigate the claim. Woolsey did not find any evidence to confirm the report, officials said, and President Bush did not include it in the case for war in his State of the Union address last January.

But Cheney, on NBC's "Meet the Press," cited the report of the meeting as possible evidence of an Iraq-Al Qaeda link and said it was neither confirmed nor discredited, saying: "We've never been able to develop any more of that yet, either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don't know."

Multiple intelligence officials said that the Prague meeting, purported to be between Atta and senior Iraqi intelligence officer Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani, was dismissed almost immediately after it was reported by Czech officials in the aftermath of Sept. 11 and has since been discredited further.

The CIA reported to Congress last year that it could not substantiate the claim, while American rec ords indicate Atta was in Virginia Beach, Va., at the time, the officials said yesterday. Indeed, two intelligence officials said yesterday that Ani himself, now in US custody, has also refuted the report. The Czech government has also distanced itself from its original claim.

A senior defense official with access to high-level intelligence reports expressed confusion yesterday over the vice president's decision to reair charges that have been dropped by almost everyone else. "There isn't any new intelligence that would precipitate anything like this," the official said, speaking on condition he not be named.

Nonetheless, 69 percent of Americans believe that Hussein probably had a part in attacking the United States, according to a recent Washington Post poll. And Democratic senators have charged that the White House is fanning the misperception by mentioning Hussein and the Sept. 11 attacks in ways that suggest a link.

Bush administration officials insisted yesterday that they are learning more about various Iraqi connections with Al Qaeda. They said there is evidence suggesting a meeting took place between the head of Iraqi intelligence and Osama bin Laden in Sudan in the mid-1990s; another purported meeting was said to take place in Afghanistan, and during it Iraqi officials offered to provide chemical and biological weapons training, according to officials who have read transcripts of interrogations with Al Qaeda detainees.

But there is no evidence proving the Iraqi regime knew about or took part in the Sept. 11 attacks, the Bush officials said.

Former senator Max Cleland, who is a member of the national commission investigating the attacks, said yesterday that classified documents he has reviewed on the subject weaken, rather than strengthen, administration assertions that Hussein's regime may have been allied with Al Qaeda.

"The vice president trying to justify some connection is ludicrous," he said.

Nonetheless, Cheney, in the "Meet the Press" interview Sunday, insisted that the United States is learning more about the links between Al Qaeda and Hussein.

"We learn more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the '90s," Cheney said, "that it involved training, for example, on [biological and chemical weapons], that Al Qaeda sent personnel to Baghdad to get trained on the systems."

The claims are based on a prewar allegation by a "senior terrorist operative," who said he overheard an Al Qaeda agent speak of a mission to seek biological or chemical weapons training in Iraq, according to Secretary of State Colin Powell's statement to the United Nations in February.

But intelligence specialists told the Globe last August that they have never confirmed that the training took place, or identified where it could have taken place.

"The general public just doesn't have any independent way of weighing what is said," Cannistraro, the former CIA counterterrorism specialist, said. "If you repeat it enough times . . . then people become convinced it's the truth."
So although he never actually described a link between 9/11 and Iraq, he also failed to dismiss the claims when confronted with them. To rely on a technicality as justification is unacceptable in my opinion; he should have discredited the claims when they were first suggested as the intelligence community had recommended.

So where does this leave us now? Poor excuses based on thin technicalities are not enough to get anyone off the hook, let alone the Vice President of the United States.
__________________
If ignorance is bliss, you must be having an orgasm.
DelayedReaction is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 08:40 AM   #21 (permalink)
Insane
 
Location: 38 51' N 77 2' W
Quote:
Originally posted by DelayedReaction
I suggest everyone step back, breathe in, take a toke, and relax.
cough, hack, sputter, wheeze.

that is the best advice i have seen in the politics forum yet. i feel much better.

passing it on, to the left hand side.
__________________
if everyone is thinking alike, chances are no one is thinking.
gibingus is offline  
 

Tags
ugh

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:39 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360