| Author | Message | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 99 Registered: 8-2003 |
Cheers Art :-) OK, I'm out of here for now, have a great weekend all. Best, | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2707 Registered: 6-2001 |
Dan: What he did, was to post facts supporting his position and some pretty funny cartoons. Some of the conservatives here, don't like to deal with specific facts of lying. The cartoons, in my humble opinion are the flip slide of Dave's very funny cartoons. Their trying to shut him up because they don't like what he's saying. Art | ||
| Bruce Wellington (Bws88tr)
Advanced Member Username: Bws88tr Post Number: 3225 Registered: 4-2002 |
JUST AS I WAS HAVING A NICE FRIDAY MORNING MR KKK SHOWS UP......... | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 93 Registered: 8-2003 |
 "The New York Times Save Our Spooks By Nicholas D. Kristof Op-ed columnist, The New York Times Friday, May 30, 2003 Posted: 7:19 AM EDT (1119 GMT) On Day 71 of the Hunt for Iraqi W.M.D., yesterday, once again nothing turned up. Maybe we'll do better on Day 72. But we might have better luck searching for something just as alarming: the growing evidence that the administration grossly manipulated intelligence about those weapons of mass destruction in the runup to the Iraq war. A column earlier this month on this issue drew a torrent of covert communications from indignant spooks who say that administration officials leaned on them to exaggerate the Iraqi threat and deceive the public. "The American people were manipulated," bluntly declares one person from the Defense Intelligence Agency who says he was privy to all the intelligence there on Iraq. These people are coming forward because they are fiercely proud of the deepest ethic in the intelligence world � that such work should be nonpolitical � and are disgusted at efforts to turn them into propagandists. "The Al Qaeda connection and nuclear weapons issue were the only two ways that you could link Iraq to an imminent security threat to the U.S.," notes Greg Thielmann, who retired in September after 25 years in the State Department, the last four in the Bureau of Intelligence and Research. "And the administration was grossly distorting the intelligence on both things." The outrage among the intelligence professionals is so widespread that they have formed a group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, that wrote to President Bush this month to protest what it called "a policy and intelligence fiasco of monumental proportions." "While there have been occasions in the past when intelligence has been deliberately warped for political purposes," the letter said, "never before has such warping been used in such a systematic way to mislead our elected representatives into voting to authorize launching a war." Ray McGovern, a retired C.I.A. analyst who briefed President Bush's father in the White House in the 1980's, said that people in the agency were now "totally demoralized." He says, and others back him up, that the Pentagon took dubious accounts from �migr�s close to Ahmad Chalabi and gave these tales credibility they did not deserve. Intelligence analysts often speak of "humint" for human intelligence (spies) and "sigint" for signals intelligence (wiretaps). They refer contemptuously to recent work as "rumint," or rumor intelligence. "I've never heard this level of alarm before," said Larry Johnson, who used to work in the C.I.A. and State Department. "It is a misuse and abuse of intelligence. The president was being misled. He was ill served by the folks who are supposed to protect him on this. Whether this was witting or unwitting, I don't know, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt." Some say that top Pentagon officials cast about for the most sensational nuggets about Iraq and used them to bludgeon Colin Powell and seduce President Bush. The director of central intelligence, George Tenet, has been generally liked and respected within the agency ranks, but in the last year, particularly in the intelligence directorate, people say that he has kowtowed to Donald Rumsfeld and compromised the integrity of his own organization. "We never felt that there was any leadership in the C.I.A. to qualify or put into context the information available," one veteran said. "Rather there was a tendency to feed the most alarming tidbits to the president. Often it's the most ill-considered information that goes to the president. "So instead of giving the president the most considered, carefully examined information available, basically you give him the garbage. And then in a few days when it's clear that maybe it wasn't right, well then, you feed him some more hot garbage." The C.I.A. is now examining its own record, and that's welcome. But the atmosphere within the intelligence community is so poisonous, and the stakes are so high � for the credibility of America's word and the soundness of information on which we base American foreign policy � that an outside examination is essential. Congress must provide greater oversight, and President Bush should invite Brent Scowcroft, the head of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board and a man trusted by all sides, to lead an inquiry and, in a public report, suggest steps to restore integrity to America's intelligence agencies. http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/05/30/nyt.kristof/  | ||
| Mike B (Srt_mike)
Member Username: Srt_mike Post Number: 373 Registered: 12-2002 |
I WISH I WAS AN OSCAR MEYER WIENER THAT IS WHAT I WISH THAT I COULD BE 'CAUSE IF I WAS AN OSCAR MEYER WEINER EVERYONE WOULD BE IN LOVE WITH ME!!! Telson, you might want to invest in a psychologist - not because you are anti-Bush, but because you have some deep rooted issues we're seeing played out here. | ||
| Admiral Nelson (Chihuahuatrader)
New member Username: Chihuahuatrader Post Number: 1 Registered: 10-2003 |
        | ||
| Dan (Bobafett)
Intermediate Member Username: Bobafett Post Number: 1536 Registered: 9-2002 |
Bruce, Clearly I missed something. Will look for the others... --Dan | ||
| Ralph Koslin (Ralfabco)
Member Username: Ralfabco Post Number: 919 Registered: 3-2002 |
Anyone else get a glimpse of the news while checking out at the supermarket ?? | ||
| melo yelo (Meloyelo)
Junior Member Username: Meloyelo Post Number: 113 Registered: 5-2002 |
Washington Post - NUFF SAID! my | ||
| Bruce Wellington (Bws88tr)
Advanced Member Username: Bws88tr Post Number: 3212 Registered: 4-2002 |
OK DAN READ THE OTHER POSTS, THATS WHY................ | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Advanced Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 2959 Registered: 1-2002 |
Telson, either up your Lithium drip or  | ||
| ross koller (Ross)
Intermediate Member Username: Ross Post Number: 1370 Registered: 3-2002 |
yea i guess your right telson, we really should have a guy like good ol' bill never-told-a-lie clinton in the whitehouse again. telson stop taking the drugs - they aren't working. | ||
| Dan (Bobafett)
Intermediate Member Username: Bobafett Post Number: 1526 Registered: 9-2002 |
Interesting article, although I can't make any comments as to whether what's presented is truth, exagerration, etc. I do not, however, doubt it as such. --Dan PS: Bruce: what did he do? Post an article? What's the issue? | ||
| Bruce Wellington (Bws88tr)
Advanced Member Username: Bws88tr Post Number: 3201 Registered: 4-2002 |
JESUS H CHRIS#@$$%T...GET OFF THE CRACK AND GO AWAY... MAYBE WWW.KKK.COM SUITS YOU BETTER....... YOUR A WACKO..........GO HOME MORON....... | ||
| Telson (Pitbull_trader)
Junior Member Username: Pitbull_trader Post Number: 90 Registered: 8-2003 |
 "Washington Post For Bush, Facts Are Malleable Presidential Tradition Of Embroidering Key Assertions Continues By Dana Milbank Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, October 22, 2002; Page A01 President Bush, speaking to the nation this month about the need to challenge Saddam Hussein, warned that Iraq has a growing fleet of unmanned aircraft that could be used "for missions targeting the United States." Last month, asked if there were new and conclusive evidence of Hussein's nuclear weapons capabilities, Bush cited a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency saying the Iraqis were "six months away from developing a weapon." And last week, the president said objections by a labor union to having customs officials wear radiation detectors has the potential to delay the policy "for a long period of time." All three assertions were powerful arguments for the actions Bush sought. And all three statements were dubious, if not wrong. Further information revealed that the aircraft lack the range to reach the United States; there was no such report by the IAEA; and the customs dispute over the detectors was resolved long ago. As Bush leads the nation toward a confrontation with Iraq and his party into battle in midterm elections, his rhetoric has taken some flights of fancy in recent weeks. Statements on subjects ranging from the economy to Iraq suggest that a president who won election underscoring Al Gore's knack for distortions and exaggerations has been guilty of a few himself. Presidential embroidery is, of course, a hoary tradition. Ronald Reagan was known for his apocryphal story about liberating a concentration camp. Bill Clinton fibbed famously and under oath about his personal indiscretions to keep a step ahead of Whitewater prosecutors. Richard M. Nixon had his Watergate denials, and Lyndon B. Johnson was often accused of stretching the truth to put the best face on the Vietnam War. Presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy, too, played with the truth during the Gary Powers and Bay of Pigs episodes. "Everybody makes mistakes when they open their mouths and we forgive them," Brookings Institution scholar Stephen Hess said. Some of Bush's overstatements appear to be off-the-cuff mistakes. But, Hess said, "what worries me about some of these is they appear to be with foresight. This is about public policy in its grandest sense, about potential wars and who is our enemy, and a president has a special obligation to getting it right." The White House, while acknowledging that on one occasion the president was "imprecise," said it stands by his words. "The president's statements are well documented and supported by the facts," Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer said. "We reject any allegation to the contrary." In stop after stop across the country, Bush has cited an impressive statistic in his bid to get Congress to approve terrorism insurance legislation. "There's over $15 billion of construction projects which are on hold, which aren't going forward -- which means there's over 300,000 jobs that would be in place, or soon to be in place, that aren't in place," is how he put it last week in Michigan. But these are not government estimates. The $15 billion figure comes from the Real Estate Roundtable, a trade group that is leading the fight for the legislation and whose members have much to gain. After pleas earlier this year from the White House for "hard evidence" to make its case for terrorism insurance, the roundtable got the information from an unscientific survey of members, who were asked to provide figures with no documentation. The 300,000 jobs number, the White House said, was supplied by the carpenters' union. But a union official said the White House apparently "extrapolated" the number from a Transportation Department study of federal highway aid -- not private real estate -- that the union had previously cited. The president has also taken some liberties as he argues for his version of homeland security legislation. He often suggests in stump speeches that the union covering customs workers is blocking the wearing of radiation detectors. "The leadership of that particular group of people said, 'No way; we need to have a collective bargaining session over whether or not our people should be made to wear these devices,' " he said in Michigan last week. "And that could take a long period of time." The National Treasury Employees Union did indeed argue in January that the radiation devices should be voluntary, and it called for negotiations. But five days later, the Customs Service said it saw no need to negotiate and would begin to implement the policy, which it did. After a subsequent exchange between the union president and Customs Service commissioner, the union wrote in April that it "does not object" to mandatory wearing of the devices. The Customs Service said the delay had less to do with the dispute than the fact that customs lacks enough devices (about 4,000 are on order). The White House and Customs Service said the dispute was settled in part because Bush had the authority to waive collective bargaining, although he did not exercise it. On Sept. 7, meeting with British Prime Minister Tony Blair at Camp David, Bush told reporters: "I would remind you that when the inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied, finally denied access, a report came out of the Atomic -- the IAEA -- that they were six months away from developing a weapon. I don't know what more evidence we need." The IAEA did issue a report in 1998, around the time weapons inspectors were denied access to Iraq for the final time, but the report made no such assertion. It declared: "Based on all credible information to date, the IAEA has found no indication of Iraq having achieved its program goal of producing nuclear weapons or of Iraq having retained a physical capability for the production of weapon-useable nuclear material or having clandestinely obtained such material." The report said Iraq had been six to 24 months away from nuclear capability before the 1991 Gulf War. The White House said that Bush "was imprecise on this" and that the source was U.S. intelligence, not the IAEA. In the president's Oct. 7 speech to the nation from Cincinnati, he introduced several rationales for taking action against Iraq. Describing contacts between al Qaeda and Iraq, Bush cited "one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year." He asserted that "we have discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet" of unmanned aircraft and expressed worry about them "targeting the United States." Bush also stated that in 1998, "information from a high-ranking Iraqi nuclear engineer who had defected revealed that despite his public promises, Saddam Hussein had ordered his nuclear program to continue." He added, "Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists," an alliance that "could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." In each of these charges, Bush omitted qualifiers that make the accusations seem less convincing. In the case of the al Qaeda leader receiving medical treatment, U.S. intelligence officials acknowledged that the terrorist, Abu Musab Zarqawi, was no longer in Iraq and that there was no hard evidence Hussein's government knew he was there or had contact with him. On the matter of the aircraft, a CIA report this month suggested that the fleet was more of an "experiment" and "attempt" and labeled it a "serious threat to Iraq's neighbors and to international military forces in the region" -- but said nothing about it having sufficient range to threaten the United States. Bush's statement about the Iraqi nuclear defector, implying such information was current in 1998, was a reference to Khidhir Hamza. But Hamza, though he spoke publicly about his information in 1998, retired from Iraq's nuclear program in 1991, fled to the Iraqi north in 1994 and left the country in 1995. Finally, Bush's statement that Iraq could attack "on any given day" with terrorist groups was at odds with congressional testimony by the CIA. The testimony, declassified after Bush's speech, rated the possibility as "low" that Hussein would initiate a chemical or biological weapons attack against the United States but might take the "extreme step" of assisting terrorists if provoked by a U.S. attack. White House spokesmen said in response that it was "unrealistic" to assume Iraqi authorities did not know of Zarqawi's presence and that Iraq's unmanned aircraft could be launched from ships or trucks outside Iraq. Some of the disputed Bush assertions are matters of perspective. Bush often says, as he did Friday in Missouri, that "because of a quirk in the rules in the United States Senate, after a 10-year period, the tax-relief plan we passed goes away." There is a Senate rule that required a 60-vote majority for the tax cut, but the decision to let the cuts expire was based on pragmatic considerations. Proponents of the cut from the House and Senate -- both under GOP control at the time -- decided to have the tax cut expire after nine years to keep its price tag within the $1.35 trillion over 10 years that had been agreed between lawmakers and Bush. Other times, the president's assertions simply outpace the facts. In New Hampshire earlier this month, he said his education legislation made "the biggest increase in education spending in a long, long time." In fact, the 15.8 percent increase in Department of Education discretionary spending for fiscal year 2002 (the figures the White House supplied when asked about Bush's statement) was below the 18.5 percent increase under Clinton the previous year -- and Bush had wanted a much smaller increase than Congress approved. Earlier this month, Republican moderates complained to Bush's budget director, Mitchell E. Daniels Jr., that the administration was not spending the full amount for education that Congress approved. Daniels said it was "nothing uncommon" and decried the "explosively larger education bill." www.washingtonpost.com  |