The Decider

n-Track Studio Discussion Forum
221

This thread had been the most interesting, and entertaining one I’ve read all year.
I think someone said back there…page 2.
<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote

Oops, I forgot, I am talking to ksdb. Of course he can bug out when the going gets tough

Certainly doesn’t seem to hold up at this point. :laugh:
My hats off to you ksdb, you have definitly hung in there during your crucifiction.
:;):
Again, an entertaining read, good times had by all! :D

Keep shinin’

jerm
222

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/050106Z.shtml

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
Bush Team Imposes Thick Veil of Secrecy
By Mark Silva
The Chicago Tribune

Sunday 30 April 2006

Washington - As the Bush administration has dramatically accelerated the classification of information as “top secret” or “confidential,” one office is refusing to report on its annual activity in classifying documents: the office of Vice President Dick Cheney.

A standing executive order, strengthened by President Bush in 2003, requires all agencies and “any other entity within the executive branch” to provide an annual accounting of their classification of documents. More than 80 agencies have collectively reported to the National Archives that they made 15.6 million decisions in 2004 to classify information, nearly double the number in 2001, but Cheney continues to insist he is exempt.
223

…A guy goes in and robs a bank. He is caught leaving by the police. He proclaimes, "I am the bank President. I decide the rules. I am not stealing…just rearanging the money for security purposes. Even if I was stealing it would not be wrong because if a president does it, it is legal."

The police let him go and go home…:stuck_out_tongue:

224

A parable! :D

225

Moral: It’s good to be King.

226

Just apples, oranges and mustard seeds.


Holy crap! I can’t stop!!!

KingFish

227

Anyone with two good ears had better listen! :)

228

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
At this point, they were only involved in clarifying Wilson’s false information with declassified information.

There you go again - blaming the whole thing on Wilson.

<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
There’s no evidence yet that indicates that Libby or Rove specifically leaked Plame’s name.

Well that’s what’s being investigated now isn’t it? It was most likely that someone from the admin leaked Plame’s name because they had the information.

<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
Wilson didn’t find anything particularly useful or helpful.

This is not an accurate statement. He didn’t find anything because there was nothing to find.

<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
If he actually had significant information, he should have gone public immediately after Bush’s SOTU speech and not wait until we were already at war.

Why’s that? Wilson had no reason to go public at that time. It was after we went to war, that Wilson decided he needed to correct the record.

<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
He was specifically trying to make the Bush look bad and got caught for being a political hack.

He was specifically trying to correct Bush misleading us in his State of the Union.

Now Bush has always claimed that the British had intel on Iraq trying to get yellow-cake, and this is a perfect example of Bush cherry-picking information to justify the war, because the CIA did NOT have evidence that Iraq had sought yellow-cake.

It’s no wonder that we didn’t find any WMD in Iraq - because they were none. There was no nuclear program either. The fact is that the CIA had a mole inside of the Saddam’s inner circle who was telling us this information, but we ignored him. Instead we believed in known liars like “Curveball”. Why did we do that? Because Bush wanted to go to war in Iraq on 9/12/2001. Rumsfeld & Cheney wanted to do it on 1/1/2001.

We were lied our way into this war & more and more truth comes out everyday about it. The most recent being the information about the 2 mobile labs which was, of course, bogus in the beginning, i.e., they were NOT mobile WMD lab’s as Bush et al claimed they were.

Try as will ksdb, you’re defending a liar.
229

Wow, you know Clinton, Kerry, Bush, The U.N. Blair, Gore et al all said the Hussien had WMD’s…man what a bunch of friggin liars they are huh? This is a bigger conspiracy than I thought!! We are doomed! We have to be, the media tells me so, almost everyday! And! And! And! the allegations against Bush are so horrifying and I hate him so much that the allegations MUST be true! Anybody can see that! No need to wait for the evidence to come out in a court of law! Yah, I believe in innocent until proven guilty, but not in this case!! No Sireeeeeeeeeeee! He’s guilty as sin, I just know it! I listen to the news and read the blogs of people that are smart like me. I KNOW whats going on!! You betcha buddy!! You can’t pull the wool over MY eyes Bushy baby!

230

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
Wow, you know Clinton, Kerry, Bush, The U.N. Blair, Gore et al all said the Hussien had WMD’s…man what a bunch of friggin liars they are huh?

Possibly…yes…maybe…they are politicians after all.

One thing is true that can’t be denied. Only one of them started a war (Or two if you want to include Blair, but he was betting on Bush to be right - I wonder if Blair feels as mislead as many of us do - I bet many are saying Blair was a patsy for Bush.).

The rest has sense enough to not act, and that includes Bush Daddy. If anyone has reason to continue he did, yet he didn’t.
231

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
Wow, you know Clinton, Kerry, Bush, The U.N. Blair, Gore et al all said the Hussien had WMD’s

Yes & they were all WRONG!!!
232
Quote (BobBlais @ May 03 2006,13:57)
Wow, you know Clinton, Kerry, Bush, The U.N. Blair, Gore et al all said the Hussien had WMD's...........man what a bunch of friggin liars they are huh? This is a bigger conspiracy than I thought!! We are doomed! We have to be, the media tells me so, almost everyday! And! And! And! the allegations against Bush are so horrifying and I hate him so much that the allegations MUST be true! Anybody can see that! No need to wait for the evidence to come out in a court of law! Yah, I believe in innocent until proven guilty, but not in this case!! No Sireeeeeeeeeeee! He's guilty as sin, I just know it! I listen to the news and read the blogs of people that are smart like me. I KNOW whats going on!! You betcha buddy!! You can't pull the wool over MY eyes Bushy baby!

Why must it be an all or none concept? Is it because the republican spin machine turned out all sorts of twisted info about Hussain and WMDs ("we shouldn't wait for the mushroom cloud...")? Is it because the country wanted to blame someone for 9/11 and Osama could not be reached (a terrible failure of this administration)? Is it because of the republican "you are with us or you are against us" mentality (which pushed away much of the world)? Is it because anyone who did not lockstep with Bush at the time (before the war) was quickly labeled "anti-patriotic" or worse (now what was the name of that out-spoken democrat from the mid-west...)? I'm sure it was a combination of these forces that drew people to believe that Hussain had WMDs. It helped that a person that many liberals trusted (Colin Powell) went to the UN to sell the idea.

So I guess that we should blame Kerry, Gore.. etc. for supporting a war that they had gotten mis-information about. But keep in mind that they did not have the same level of information as the President and his administration did. Remember, they were spoon fed info about WMDs just like everyone else. And I would bet that many people here felt like war was the only way to remove the threat of a (mushroom cloud) on american soil.

Honestly, I am sick and tired of this black and white mentality that really points to the divisive nature of the republican party. The repubs have for years pushed the notion that "the dems are as bad or worse than the repubs". And if you don't promote the Bush agenda, then you must be "against us". Now the Republicans twist history to say that "you had your chance to say something back before the war, why didn't you?" The people who did are no longer in office thanks to the Republican spin machine (wasn't he from South Dakota?).

You can't pull the wool over MY eyes Bushy baby!

Sorry friend, he already did. And if you believe that he is doing ok right now, he is still pulling wool.

:(
233

Quote: So I guess that we should blame Kerry, Gore… etc. for supporting a war that they had gotten mis-information about. But keep in mind that they did not have the same level of information as the President and his administration did.

Sorry, Gore was VP when Clinton got his info about Hussein and the WMD’s. Same level of information when Clinton told us that Hussein was dangerous and should be dealt with.


Quote: Why must it be an all or none concept? Is it because the republican spin machine turned out all sorts of twisted info about Hussain and WMDs (“we shouldn’t wait for the mushroom cloud…”)?

See above.

Quote: Honestly, I am sick and tired of this black and white mentality that really points to the divisive nature of the republican party.

Ummmmm, insert democrats there would you? Would be accurate then.


Quote: The repubs have for years pushed the notion that “the dems are as bad or worse than the repubs”.

If the shoe fits…


Quote: And if you don’t promote the Bush agenda, then you must be “against us”.

Actually was said to nations who protected and harbored terrorists.

This is the last post for me on this subject but I must say this. We all have our opinions. We may or may not like what an elected official does or anyone else for that matter, but what I find astounding is the level of hatred many have for Bush. Still a human being last I saw. Yet the hatred for this human is so thick when some speak of him. Don’t anyone deny it. You know its true. Some actually say it, “I hate Bush” and it just trips off thier tongue as easily as saying “I love you”. That is very sad. I didn’t like Clinton. At all. Hate him? Nope. I refuse to hate a person. Hate what they do or say? Sure. That is why I refuse, this post being the exception, to argue or debate anything that concerns Bush et al. I will not debate with someone who is driven by hate for a person.

234

Quote
Wow, you know Clinton, Kerry, Bush, The U.N. Blair, Gore et al all said the Hussien had WMD’s

Yes & they were all WRONG!!!



Uh mister soul, don’t forget, they lied too right?

235

Mr. BB - the Democrat’s didn’t start this war - Bush did. The Democrat’s who voted for the war’s authorization were just giving the President the tools he needed for “peace” as Bush put it initially. The Democrat’s were given intelligence that was totally bogus.

So you know that Bush was lying when he said that bill was for peace. Bush wanted to go to war in Iraq in 2001 or before. He asked Richard Clarke on 9/12/2001 to review Iraq’s links to bin Laden & Al Qaeda.

236

Oh I just KNOW I’m gonna hate myself for this…

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
He asked Richard Clarke on 9/12/2001 to review Iraq’s links to bin Laden & Al Qaeda.


Don’t you think any sane government leader would have done the same? Sure. Why not? Iraq had known ties to the screwballs in Afghanistan. EVERYBODY would have thought the President nuts if he had NOT ordered an investigation. I still believe the whole mess is one big intelligence breakdown on the USA’s part. Of course, the media, the opposition et al get more mileage out of the deal if they crucify ONE guy for it. I don’t believe for a second anything would be significantly different had John Kerry won the election.

I knew it. I hate myself already… come on… call me a Bush defender or whatever. I’m a big boy. :D

D
237
Quote (Diogenes @ May 03 2006,08:21)
Oh I just KNOW I'm gonna hate myself for this...

He asked Richard Clarke on 9/12/2001 to review Iraq's links to bin Laden & Al Qaeda.


Don't you think any sane government leader would have done the same? Sure. Why not? Iraq had known ties to the screwballs in Afghanistan. EVERYBODY would have thought the President nuts if he had NOT ordered an investigation. I still believe the whole mess is one big intelligence breakdown on the USA's part. Of course, the media, the opposition et al get more mileage out of the deal if they crucify ONE guy for it. I don't believe for a second anything would be significantly different had John Kerry won the election.

I knew it. I hate myself already... come on... call me a Bush defender or whatever. I'm a big boy. :D

D
I can't think up any whatever names right now!!

I do take exception to your old worn out line of Kerry wouldn't have been any better.

We'll never know. And you can never know.

But I do know either of my aussy shepherds are smarter and could run the country better than any drugstore cowboy Texican.

BTW - I am a horseman and have been all my life.....raised bulls (Angus/Holst) and have 3 horses right now. I've roped and cut steers and trained reiners. I earned my hat and boots. I really take offense at GW calling himself a rancher, cowboy or anything but what he really is.

KingFish
238

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
But I do know either of my aussy shepherds are smarter and could run the country better than any drugstore cowboy Texican.


:D You may be right KF. It’s all dem “unknowns” that are killing us!

Let me quantify the statement a little bit…

Would 9/11 and our response have been significantly different? Nope. The federal response to Katrina? Nope. You know why? Because underneath the executive level of government, the same inept chuckleheads would have been in place. So it would not have been significantly different for the better or worse. Of course this is totally my own jaded opinion which is worth a can of Pepsi if you have a buck to throw in…

D

PS Hey I saw them pictures of Dubya totin’ wood and roundin’ up them doggies on TV… He claims to be from Texas…
239

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
Mr. BB - the Democrat’s didn’t start this war - Bush did.


Isn’t that a bit simple Mr Soul? God knows I’m no Republican and I think Bush is one of the biggest assholes to sit in the White House, but many of us made a mistaken call there, and I think blaming the whole deal on Bush is a cop out. Just because we didn’t vote for him doesn’t mean we can sit back like Pilate and say we wash our hands of the whole deal and its not our fault.
240

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
Sorry, Gore was VP when Clinton got his info about Hussein and the WMD’s. Same level of information when Clinton told us that Hussein was dangerous and should be dealt with.


But still he (Clinton) did NOT take us to war. WHat did he know that our current President didn’t?

<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
Quote: The repubs have for years pushed the notion that “the dems are as bad or worse than the repubs”.

If the shoe fits…


That’s the point I am making… it does NOT fit. It is a Republican spin so that americans believe that all politicians are as corrupt and inept as the current administration. If that was true, then We would have hit near 9 trillion debt in the Clinton administration. But we didn’t. If that was true, we would have gone to preemptive war with Iraq in the Clinton administration… we didn’t. If that was true, gas would have skyrocketed during the Clinton administration… it didn’t.

The facts are that Clinton staved off a huge recession (remember the stock market crashes in the far east?) and went to war in countries were we had no other interest than to stop genocide. Did it drive the deficit though the roof… nope. Seems to me that those terrible liberals have a much better handle on what America needs to run properly. Remember the 160 billion dollar surplus and balanced budgets?


<!–QuoteBegin>
Quote
Quote: And if you don’t promote the Bush agenda, then you must be “against us”.

Actually was said to nations who protected and harbored terrorists.


Actually, it was said in a speech to rally other countries for our anti-terrorism cause. What really happened is that any american that spoke up against any republican led idea was immediately labeled a traitor or anti-american. And not a single republican spoke up to clarify this point during this time. So you can spin history how you like, but the fact is that those words were meant for those inside and outside the US. And the proof is in those people who spoke against going to war with Iraq. Many of those politicians no longer have jobs. And it wasn’t just democrats. What is Colin Powell doing these days?

So although it is easy to say those democrats are dividers, you got to put it all in perspective. Democrats do not hate republicans. Democrats do not hate what Republicans stand for. And I think if you were to poll equal numbers of republicans and democrats, you might find that a very close number of each dislike Bush and his policies. Their dislike might be for different reasons, but Bush is not very popular right now.

Could it be that he has lied too long and been caught too many times? Could it be that his policies have failed on so many different levels? Could it be that people just are tired of hearing him say, “nuculer”?

I don’t hate the guy. I think he is inept and way over his head. I think he is surrounded by selfish, greedy, powerhungry men with an agenda that is slowly becoming less and less hidden.

But to blame the democrats for this is just unjust. Even if you want to blame top democrats for believing the WMD mockup stories they were spoon fed, you cannot blame them for us actually going to war. Nor can you blame them for the unwise tax refunds during wartime. Nor can you blame them for the pitiful Katrina federal relief. Nor can you blame them for tax relief the Oil companies have enjoyed for the last 6 years. Or the failing “no kid left behind” program. Or the prescription medicare debacle… the list never ends…

No, I do not hate Bush… he is an inept liar… and that is sad for the country and the world.