Happy Thanksgiving
 

Great. So after getting her son killed unnecessarily, he wants to kill the mom, too? Is this compassionate conservatism?

Happy Thanksgiving
 

I am just the conduit channeling the spirit of thye great man.

"Disneyland" for this turkey = "going to the farm" for your childhood pet.
 

Well, look which end he's holding.

Catch 22
 

I am sorry but the "court of public opinion" does not have any procedural rules. I know people use the word "court" but what you have to understand is that it is not a real court.

Bush truly believed that Saddam Hussein had WMDs and he used whatever tools he had to convince the American public of that. Where is the lie?

You may think cherry picking is "not cool" but that does not make it a lie. What makes it a lie is if Bush did or did not believe it. Obviously we can't read his mind, but do you really believe that Bush believed there were no WMDs?

"Disneyland" for this turkey = "going to the farm" for your childhood pet.
 

It is nice to see that you save your rare posts on this board for something substantive.

Catch 22
 

His belief needs to be objectively reasonable. Clinton might have truly believed that he didn't have "sexual relations" with Monica, but none of us bought that crap, either.

eta: Nice to see your tacit admission that W is less intellectually honest than the trial lawyers you love to bash.

Happy Thanksgiving
 

Millions of very grateful Iraqis, and I, would hardly call it "unnecessarily." "Bravely", and "in service to freedom", and, of course, "sadly", but not unnecessarily, unless you belong to the New Isolationist Party.

Oh, right. You do.

Yes, Tom, I hold the power of life, death, and the freezer compartment.
 

He didn't know what it was.

Right after this, he tripped and sqished the bird.

Catch 22
 

Most of us would have it no other way. Taking no action and then being wrong means we're going to find out about those weapons the hard way.

Happy Thanksgiving
 

Millions of Iraqis want us out, and the government just called for the U.S. to set a timetable for withdrawl. I thought you wanted democracy in Iraq. You support subverting the will of the people there, too?

The call for U.S. withdrawl also stated that "national resistance is the legitimate right of all nations." Sounds like the Iraqi people favor the insurgency over the U.S. occupation. Maybe we should think of getting out.

Catch 22
 

What weapons?

Happy Thanksgiving
 

What weapons?

Catch 22
 

It's your dissent that needs to be objectively reasonable. You're objecting that he took action when almost everyone around was convinced that Saddam had WMDs, and the price of NOT taking that action if he actually had them would have been horrific, for someone. Maybe even us. To not act in that situation would have been grossly negligent. As it is, the downside is that millions will not be killed by Saddam, the middle east may well become more stable (heck, look what's happened just since SH no longer pays islamikazee families the death bounty) and AQ has lost a financing and support base.

I think we got the right deal.

Catch 22
 

On what planet? On planet earth, when using the English language a lie requires intent. It requires belief. That belief does not have to be reasonable. If Clinton believed that he really did not have sex with that women then Clinton did not lie. But nobody believes that he really thought he did not have sex with her.

But if you believe that Bush thought Iraq had WMDS then you don't think he did lie - no matter how unreasonable you think his thinking was.

Happy Thanksgiving
 

Boy, do you read things from an uninformed base. I thought this was very cool - probably the most hopeful sign that the various factions are really going to work together to build something. For the majority to actually try to assuage the Sunni's like this means, to me, that they're seriously going to bargain with them, instead of telling them to go blow, which would, of course, lead to the feared civil war and make the whole thing a mess.

You should study the country a bit. Your posts would sound more . . . sound, I guess.

BTW, note the absence of a deadline in that resolution. If pressed, my guess is that they would pick a date in late 2006 or early 2007.

Catch 22
 

I believe what he said was that acting on incorrect information when you are aware that the information is most likely no longer correct is the functional equivalent of a lie.

To put it into an age-appropriate context, you now know the Earth isn't really flat. So, to repeat the advice you gave to Columbus a few years back would be less than honest of you.

Happy Thanksgiving
 

Begone. You're a sloganeering idjit. Go watch a Michael Moore movie.

Catch 22
 

I don't think he had factual information that would contradict the years-old CW. He had new analyses from sources he didn't much trust.

Face it - had Bush really believed there were none, there's no way he would fake it to this extent. Better info is always down the road a bit, and people historically tell what they spoke to the Prez about later. It would be a guaranteed loser for him to do that.

Make allegations of negligence. I can see that as an honorable, and supportable, position. But this "lie" crap is just that - partisan crap that just makes you all (meaning, those of you still parroting it) look stupid and venal.

Catch 22
 

Bush believed there were weapons of mass destruction. He tried to convince the public of that. Just because he did not use facts that didn't support his position does not mean that he lied. If we are in a argument and I don't use facts that support you position does that make me a liar: no.

What is so perplexing about this is I wouldn't really care if he did lie. It doesn't really matter. Therefore, if he had lied I would admit it. But he didn't lie. It just blows me away that the opposition is focusing on something that didn't occur. Why not focus on the mistake?

Happy Thanksgiving
 

And your a partisan suck-up with your tongue so firmly up W's anus that you can't see the world around you. Fuck off until you quit viewing the world through Rove-colored glasses.

lie
16 entries found for lie. The first 10 are listed below.
To select an entry, click on it. For more results, click here.
lie[1,intransitive verb]lie[2,noun]lie[3,verb]lie[4,noun]LieLie[1]big liegive[1,verb]lie bylie detector

Main Entry: 3lie
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): lied; ly·ing /'lI-i[ng]/
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English lEogan; akin to Old High German liogan to lie, Old Church Slavonic lugati
intransitive senses
1 : to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
2 : to create a false or misleading impression

Catch 22
 

I believe he had reason to believe there weren't. He didn't particularly care. He had made up his mind and he refused to discuss or consider any input that contradicted his chosen course.

I'm not sure whether he is so deluded that he was actually incapable of processing the negative information or he is so arrogant that he believes he can simply ignore it.

Catch 22
 

2. I keep trying to say stuff like this but you always seem to sum it up better.

Catch 22
 

Dissent. Strong dissent. The value of the goal notwithstanding, honor means something. Bush has given scant cause for worry about his honor, and there's no need to even concede what you do here.

As soon as you say "it doesn't matter anyway", you've given the shape shifters of the world another slogan for a year or two. It doesn't matter if it's substantive. Idiots will latch on to it, and it's not worth it.

Catch 22
 

Doesn't rhyme as well.

"Bush was negligent! People ... the war was a improper allocation of blood and treasure!"

Happy Thanksgiving
 

Ah, you've been reading my "spend like a drunken sailor" rants, haven't you?

God, you can't even insult without resort to overbroad inaccurate MoveOn.BS

Catch 22
 

I cannot remember your stance on the allegations of torture stuff re: waterboarding, CIA holding facilities in Eastern Europe, etc. What was it?




ETchange "holing" to "holding." Haven't seen that particular allegation yet.

Catch 22
 

I went out for lunch. Someone bought beer. What can I say?

Catch 22
 

See, I could look at a bumper sticker like that, and not even key the car!

Catch 22
 

The way to restore dignity and honor to the White House, in your view, must be to lie about another country in order to justify invasion.

As for the "shape shifters of the world," I wasn't one of those idiots out there protesting the war before it even started. I supported it. I only started talking about how WBush lied after it became apparent that Bush lied. And that's creating an awful lot of shape shifters in the world.

Happy Thanksgiving
 

I get it. The one thing they can agree upon is that they hate us. Sounds like our plan is working!

Catch 22
 

The record is well established that W regularly shuts out or ignores anyone or anything that is likely to be a source of contradiction. It isn't that he didn't trust the source of the new data; the same sources produced the old data. He simply didn't want to hear anything that conflicted with what he had already decided to do.

I'm not saying he lied, in the sense that he willfully and subjectively stated something he knew for certain to be a falsehood. But he was dishonest in the sense that he willfully shunned any person or report that objectively did or should have given him pause.

Catch 22
 

1. Waterboarding, like snowboarding, is easier than skiing after the first couple of lessons.

2. I don't think it's proper to speak of the sex lives of CIA people. It makes me think of Wilson in bed, and I have a nice dinner coming up and don't want to go there.

Catch 22
 

OK: since perceptions do matter.

But from a cost/benefit analysis I think it would have been beneficial to go in anyway. And whether Bush lied has nothing to do with whether it was a right decision to go in. The anti-war people keep referring to the lie, like somehow the lie effects the cost benefit analysis.

The lie may be relevent to Bush's character but it is not relevent when dicussing whether or not the war was the right action to take. Either the war was the right move or wrong move but whether or not he lied in no way figures into that analysis

Catch 22
 

No, really. When you write "The value of the goal notwithstanding, honor means something," I know you're talking about Bush's veracity in his public statements.

To me, the concept of honor also includes stuff like the treatment of prisoners. I can't remember if you're one of the "shit happens in war" guys or not, and if so, whether the prospect of our keeping interrogation facilities in Eastern Europe so that our CIA, military staff, and civilian contractors can do in our name the handy stuff that they can't in, say, Topeka, at least inspires a mild sense of irony.

Catch 22
 

Shut up.

Shut up.

I'm not saying it wasn't RED, in the sense that it reflected a wavelength pattern and frequency normally associated in the modern world with the concept of the color "red" . . .

Catch 22
 

I've yet to see any of this progress beyond "anonymous sources say . . ." Abu Graihb? Sicko individuals, not national policy. Do some people end up getting tortured in any war? Sure. We send marginally sane people with weapons and training into situations in which we cannot supervise them. It's gonna happen. We should fight to stop it whenever we can. But the distance between what's been shown, and what you think Bush is responsible for, is vast.

In WWI, it's estimated that we summarily executed tens of thousands of German prisoners of war. I remember, as a kid, sitting by a fire and listening to the old coot who lived down by the dump talk about how his unit was so pissed after losing half its men that they took several hundred prisoners and fried them in a barn in France. I know that shit goes on all the time. I remember getting high with my friends as they came back from Nam, listening to them talk about hosing entire villages.

It sucks. We need to stop it when we can. But, as you say, that IS war.

(ETA: Gone.)

Catch 22
 

2. He was given enough information with which a reasonable person would conclude that no weapons existed. There was probably more evidence that North Korea had weapons than Iraq.

He certainly did not have any reliable information that 9/11 and Saddam were linked.

Bilmore, I don't think he lied. I think he made a horrible decision based on flimsy data. He was grossly negligent. This isn't a case in which the prosecution used the information that bests supported its argument at trial. This is a case in which the prosecution completely skipped the grand jury (b/c there wasn't enough evidence to show probable cause) and prevented the defense from offering any argument whatsoever. Why does Bush hate due process? Who started this stupid trial analogy?

Catch 22
 

OK. McCain and the guy from SC and the guy from VA want to pass legislation that spells out what can and can't be done to prisoners/detainees, and stuff. The W Administration is pushing hard for an exclusion from this legislation for any actions taken by the CIA in covert stuff, or something (look it up, I don't feel like it). Does this not say to you that the Administration, from a policy standpoint, is saying that they want CIA personnel to be able to do whatever they want? Or not to be constrained by anything formal, which to me, is the same thing as "do whatever they want."

ETA to add summary of exemption White House (via Cheney) requested be added to McCain's blanket legislative provision barring "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment of detainees in U.S. custody, which has been passed by the Senate three (3) times.

White House exemption summary:

• The White House initially tried to kill the anti-torture provision while it was pending in the Senate, then switched course to lobby for an exemption in cases of "clandestine counterterrorism operations conducted abroad, with respect to terrorists who are not citizens of the United States." The president would have to approve the exemption, and Defense Department personnel could not be involved. In addition, any activity would have to be consistent with the Constitution, federal law and U.S. treaty obligations, according to draft changes in the exemption the White House is seeking.

"Disneyland" for this turkey = "going to the farm" for your childhood pet.
 

Hmm. Seems like y'all are discussing shit too.

Ya see, what actually happened was "Bush fried." First his brain in the Go-Go '70s, then the Texas Rangers, and now he is going to deep-fry a turkey. Oh, he also plied, denied, cried (wolf), Shanghaied, and relied, but mostly I think he Shaniaed.

Padilla
 

US citizen, arrested in US and held for three years w/o charges, finally indicted today (coincidentally, right before the SC considers his challenge to his being held seemingly indefinitely, contra to the US constitution). Charges -- engaged in "a plot to 'murder, kidnap and maim' people . . . " where? where are the people he was plotting to do bad things to? ". . . overseas."

• Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who announced the indictment here, said that Mr. Padilla had conspired as part of a "North American support cell" to send "money, physical assets and new recruits" overseas to engage in acts of terrorism and that he had traveled abroad himself to become "a violent jihadist."
  
  . . .
  
  The indictment, which was returned by a federal grand jury in Miami, said that Mr. Padilla had plotted with four co-defendants in South Florida and elsewhere from October 1993 to the fall of 2001 to promote terrorist activities overseas.
  
  Often speaking over the telephone in code, the indictment said, the defendants talked of getting money "to the soccer team in Chechnya or Bosnia," of "trade in Somalia," of going on a picnic in Egypt "God willing" and getting "green goods" to Lebanon, where they were "needed urgently," and of assisting "tourism" in Kosovo. The indictment says they traveled overseas to foster terrorism and sometimes funneled money to terrorists under the guise of charitable donations.
  
  . . .
  
  Although today Mr. Gonzales described Mr. Padilla as a violent jihadist, there was no mention of the earlier "dirty bomb" accusation, which was never the subject of formal charges. Nor was there a mention in the indictment of any violence that Mr. Padilla had hoped to wreak in the United States.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/22/po...rtner=homepage

I really hope that additional charges having to do with stuff directed at the US (even US citizens overseas, or whatever) are added.