Alliedassault - View Single Post - The Bush administration's Top 40 Lies about war & terror

TGB! · 08-20-2005, 11:33 PM

[quote:84ff1]1) The administration was not bent on war with Iraq from 9/11 onward.
[/quote:84ff1]

Shocking - that the Sec. of Defense would round up the usual suspects and want to know if one of the most oppresive regimes in the middle-east (among others) had anything to do with the towers falling. Just absolutely SHOCKING. Who the fuck are they going to look at - GREENLAND?

[quote:84ff1]Most notoriously, Dick Cheney's former energy-sector employer, Halliburton, was all over the press dispatches about the first round of rebuilding contracts. So much so that they were eventually obliged to bow out of the running for a $1 billion reconstruction contract for the sake of their own PR profile. But Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown Root still received the first major plum in the form of a $7 billion contract to tend to oil field fires and (the real purpose) to do any retooling necessary to get the oil pumping at a decent rate, a deal that allows them a cool $500 million in profit. The fact that Dick Cheney's office is still fighting tooth and nail to block any disclosure of the individuals and companies with whom his energy task force consulted tells everything you need to know.[/quote:84ff1]

The GAO - an agency that has ZERO reason to support the President audited EVERY contract awarded under Operation Iraqi Freedom - they found NO discrepancies that warranted any cronyism and any suggestion otherwise from the mewling left is NEVER backed up with facts other than "oh well its a GOVERNMENT agency - of course they didnt find anything". The myth of cronyism in contract awardings is the same myth that CHENEY will somehow someway profit from his former employ at HALLI - just more Blog-Bullshit oft-repeated and now fact.

[quote:84ff1]Paul Wolfowitz admitted to Vanity Fair that weapons of mass destruction were not really the main reason for invading Iraq: "The decision to highlight weapons of mass destruction as the main justification for going to war in Iraq was taken for bureaucratic reasons.... [T]here were many other important factors as well." Right. But they did not come under the heading of self-defense.]/quote]

Again - unsuprising that WMD's was highlighted for purely PR reasons - its the one that would resonate the most with the common man. The same shit has happened in EVERY war - from the CIVIL to IRAQ. . .you have to sell the war

[quote:84ff1]12) The U.S. has made progress against world terrorist elements, in particular by crippling al Qaeda. before you can go to Congress. Call it dirty pool - but its politics.[/quote:84ff1]

Only the most pessimistic anti-Bush-leaguer could look at the fracturing of AQ into smaller less cohesive pieces as somehow being a "failure". What was supposed to happen - we'd catch all these crooks in one fell swoop? This isnt ALIAS. Undoubtedly terror cells are popping up around the globe and certainly in response to AQ's asswhippings - but this was bound to happen and at BEST the ADMIN could be considered overconfident in being able to contain the threat. They are however more than willng to meet it - something the Clinton Admin. more than failed to do (how many chances did they have at UBL again? - seems like the count is now up to three).

[quote:84ff1]21) Saddam was planning to provide WMD to terrorist groups.[/quote:84ff1]

The VOLKER report proves otherwise. It should by now be common knowledge amongst the "learned" that SADDAM's grifting of the OFF program provided him the means to kick-start his weapons programs. Is it that hard of a leap of the imagination to presume that someday - maybe sooner than later - he would be in the position to arm and aid terrorists. Nevermind the fucks "payments" to the families of suicide-bombers.

[quote:84ff1]24) People detained by the U.S. after 9/11 were legitimate terror suspects.[/quote:84ff1]

"Suspects" - maybe the person who wrote this needs a dictionary. Suspect is just that - suspected terrorist. Many were let go. I dont know exactly what this "lie" is meant to prove/disprove.

[quote:84ff1]25) The U.S. is obeying the Geneva conventions in its treatment of terror-related suspects, prisoners, and detainees.[/quote:84ff1]

No idea the "point" this one is trying to prove.

[quote:84ff1]40) God told Bush to invade Iraq.[/quote:84ff1][/quote:84ff1]

And?

	(#22)
TGB! is Offline Command Sergeant Major Posts: 2,644 Join Date: Dec 2003	08-20-2005, 11:33 PM [quote:84ff1]1) The administration was not bent on war with Iraq from 9/11 onward. [/quote:84ff1] Shocking - that the Sec. of Defense would round up the usual suspects and want to know if one of the most oppresive regimes in the middle-east (among others) had anything to do with the towers falling. Just absolutely SHOCKING. Who the fuck are they going to look at - GREENLAND? [quote:84ff1]Most notoriously, Dick Cheney's former energy-sector employer, Halliburton, was all over the press dispatches about the first round of rebuilding contracts. So much so that they were eventually obliged to bow out of the running for a $1 billion reconstruction contract for the sake of their own PR profile. But Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown Root still received the first major plum in the form of a $7 billion contract to tend to oil field fires and (the real purpose) to do any retooling necessary to get the oil pumping at a decent rate, a deal that allows them a cool $500 million in profit. The fact that Dick Cheney's office is still fighting tooth and nail to block any disclosure of the individuals and companies with whom his energy task force consulted tells everything you need to know.[/quote:84ff1] The GAO - an agency that has ZERO reason to support the President audited EVERY contract awarded under Operation Iraqi Freedom - they found NO discrepancies that warranted any cronyism and any suggestion otherwise from the mewling left is NEVER backed up with facts other than "oh well its a GOVERNMENT agency - of course they didnt find anything". The myth of cronyism in contract awardings is the same myth that CHENEY will somehow someway profit from his former employ at HALLI - just more Blog-Bullshit oft-repeated and now fact. [quote:84ff1]Paul Wolfowitz admitted to Vanity Fair that weapons of mass destruction were not really the main reason for invading Iraq: "The decision to highlight weapons of mass destruction as the main justification for going to war in Iraq was taken for bureaucratic reasons.... [T]here were many other important factors as well." Right. But they did not come under the heading of self-defense.]/quote] Again - unsuprising that WMD's was highlighted for purely PR reasons - its the one that would resonate the most with the common man. The same shit has happened in EVERY war - from the CIVIL to IRAQ. . .you have to sell the war [quote:84ff1]12) The U.S. has made progress against world terrorist elements, in particular by crippling al Qaeda. before you can go to Congress. Call it dirty pool - but its politics.[/quote:84ff1] Only the most pessimistic anti-Bush-leaguer could look at the fracturing of AQ into smaller less cohesive pieces as somehow being a "failure". What was supposed to happen - we'd catch all these crooks in one fell swoop? This isnt ALIAS. Undoubtedly terror cells are popping up around the globe and certainly in response to AQ's asswhippings - but this was bound to happen and at BEST the ADMIN could be considered overconfident in being able to contain the threat. They are however more than willng to meet it - something the Clinton Admin. more than failed to do (how many chances did they have at UBL again? - seems like the count is now up to three). [quote:84ff1]21) Saddam was planning to provide WMD to terrorist groups.[/quote:84ff1] The VOLKER report proves otherwise. It should by now be common knowledge amongst the "learned" that SADDAM's grifting of the OFF program provided him the means to kick-start his weapons programs. Is it that hard of a leap of the imagination to presume that someday - maybe sooner than later - he would be in the position to arm and aid terrorists. Nevermind the fucks "payments" to the families of suicide-bombers. [quote:84ff1]24) People detained by the U.S. after 9/11 were legitimate terror suspects.[/quote:84ff1] "Suspects" - maybe the person who wrote this needs a dictionary. Suspect is just that - suspected terrorist. Many were let go. I dont know exactly what this "lie" is meant to prove/disprove. [quote:84ff1]25) The U.S. is obeying the Geneva conventions in its treatment of terror-related suspects, prisoners, and detainees.[/quote:84ff1] No idea the "point" this one is trying to prove. [quote:84ff1]40) God told Bush to invade Iraq.[/quote:84ff1][/quote:84ff1] And?