Quote:
|
Originally Posted by host
ace....what would it take for you to believe that you were lied to.....?
|
Facts that indicate that I was lied to.
Quote:
|
If you were interested in buying my car, and I told you that the car had 50K miles on it, and then you peeked at the odometer yourself, and you observed that it displayed 100K miles, would you consider my "50K" statement to be a lie?
|
Yes.
Quote:
|
The following is a description of lies, ace....and of conspiracy by the VP's office to insert lies into Powell's pre-Iraq invasion, UN presentation. Consider the following, in the context of Tenet's newly revealed statements. There was no discussion, that he knew of, regarding alternative solutions to going to war with Iraq. I include a quote from Rumsfeld:
|
I saw Sadaam in a new light after 9/11 also.
Quote:
|
They spun the Iraq "threat", in a new way, ace.....nothing had changed from the pre-9/11 days, when Tenet, Powell, and Rice are all on record, saying that Saddam's Iraq warranted close observation, but that it's military was reduced to the point that it was not even considered an imminent threat to it's own neighbors...
|
Sadaam's military was not an issue for me. His desire for nuclear weapons and hatred for this country were issues for me. Things chnged after 9/11, you call it a change in spin, I don't. I think there was a need to take a fresh look at all information.
Quote:
|
on 9/16/01, Cheney told Russert that Saddam "was bottled up".
|
Have you ever "bottled up" a rattle snake as a kid? The snake is dangerous even when it is in the "bottle". You are only safe when the snake is killed or removed from the area.
Quote:
|
Rumsfeld admitted that there were no material changes in the offensive capabilities of Saddam's Iraq, between early 2001, and March, 2003. What changed was that the Bush admin. embraced the illegal concept pre-emptive war of aggression, they lied and spun what was previously not considered a threat...into an "imminent threat to US national security".
|
If Bush embraced an illegal concept of pre-emptive war, why has no one taken any action, UN, Congress, RoW?
Quote:
|
It was a war crime when the invasion and occupation of Iraq was planned and executed, and it became the modern day example of why preemptive, war of aggression is illegal. IT IS TOO EASY TO GET IT WRONG, and they did. They got it wrong for doing it, in the first place, and they were proved wrong after they destroyed the stability of Iraq, and it's region, at a huge cost in human life and wealth.
|
What was our motivation for this illegal war? Territory? Oil? Genocide? Spices? Trade routes? What?
Quote:
Beleive what you want, ace....all I can do is try to place the record, in front of you:
Here is Mr. Bush himself, explaining his justification for illegal, preemptive war that he has planned and made the decision to pursue:
|
He is saying exactly what I was thinking. He did exactly what I would have done.
Quote:
|
<b>ace....if you consider what Tenet said in his new book, and the quote from Rumsfeld in the above July, 2003 USA Today reporting, and the evidence in the "Downing Street Memos" that the US was "fixing the facts around the policy" to invade Iraq....it is not unreasonable to view the following Bush statement as a lie:</b>
|
Perhaps I am splitting hairs, but I have not seen a quote where Tenet said Bush or Chaney lied.
It is not a surprise to me that Bush, cheney and Rumsfeld wanted Sadaam's a$$ hanging from a tree. It is a suprise to me that it was a surprise to so many others including Tenet.
Quote:
Even with all of Colin Powell's protests about misleading and inaccurate information offered to him by the white house, the VP's office, and by the NSC, I documented, in this post, how Powell's presentation about Zarqawi's poison camp was misleading and inaccurate:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...9&postcount=47
|
Are you saying Powell soldout to Bush and presented what he knew were lies. Are you saying Tenet soldout to Bush and that Tenet sat behind Powell during his presentation when he knew Powell was spreading lies to justify the war? And people think I am a cynic.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ratbastid
ace, you don't experience being lied to because the WMD and threat-related justifications that the administration provided in selling the war weren't the things that justified the war in your eyes. If you had based your support for the war on those things the way many in congress did, I assert you'd feel differently.
|
Perhaps that is the key.
In other words - the people who think Bush lied where persuaded to support the war based on what he said in speeches? So, a person who thought Bush was an idiot, that Bush wanted revenge, etc., bought into Bush's "sales pitch" for the war hook-line and sinker? O.k., I think I understand.
Quote:
|
On Saturday, a members of the Senate Intelligence Committee (which one I don't remember and I don't have time to look at the moment) said ON THE FLOOR that the intelligence they were shown in committee didn't jive at all with what the administration was saying to support the war, but because of secrecy rules, he couldn't say anything about that. The best he could do was to vote "no" to authorize. I don't know what more of a smoking gun you need, if that's not it. I know YOU weren't lied to, but congress and the American public absolutely was.
|
That is sad. If I thought we were going to war based on iformation that did not add up, I would risk saying something - even if it was against the rules. First I would have gone to Bush and said - there is a problem, things don't add up, let's see if you can clear these things up for me. You say you can't or won't - Then I have to do what I have to do!
Wouldn't you have done the same?