Bush Admin LIES...again..so what else is a LIE? - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-09-2003, 11:02 AM   #1
Ghost of Love
 
gvox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: In The Ballroom of The Crystal Lights
Posts: 19,834
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Bush Admin LIES...again..so what else is a LIE?

From Reuters yesterday:

"ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, disputed U.S. assertions that Iraq had attempted to buy uranium in Niger, saying the documents used by Washington to support its contention were fraudulent."

What else has Bush and his admin been lying about?

Just who IS playing a charade here?
__________________

__________________
ACROBAT - U2 Tribute on Facebook


http://home.cogeco.ca/~october/images/sheeep.jpg

Don't push this button:
 
I'm serious, don't!

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyagu_Anaykus View Post
Interference is my Earth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gvox View Post
Consequently, Earth is an experimental disaster.
 

If you keep going, you have only your self to blame

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Best Interferencer On The Damn Planet View Post
Edge:
too sexy for his amp
too sexy for his cap
too sexy for that god-damned headset
I told you








gvox is offline  
Old 03-09-2003, 11:21 AM   #2
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Interesting, Colin Powell just reaffirmed our beliefs on this issue and stated that other nations have come forward with more information that supports the US allegations.

When the transcript of the show is posted, I will put up his exact words for you.

BTW, I am not happy that these documents are allegedly fraudulent. I also place more faith in Colin Powell than any person in our current governement. If he says there is other evidence to support the US position, then I believe him.
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 03-09-2003, 11:34 AM   #3
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Why do you put so much stake in Powell.

A quote from an article By Dennis Hans

Withholding the key fact that destroys the moral underpinning of an argument (and, in Powell's case, reveals him to be a blood-drenched hypocrite): "Iraq's weapons of mass destruction are controlled by a murderous tyrant, who [has already used chemical
weapons to kill thousands of people.]" (Bush's October speech) Comment: The problem here is that much of Bush's national-security team aided and abetted those crimes. After the worst attack, on Halabja in 1988 near the end of the Iran-Iraq war, the Reagan team covered for Saddam by implicating Iran, then prevented Congress from imposing tough sanctions on Iraq. Joost R. Hiltermann, an official with Human Rights Watch, shows in a recent column for the International Herald Tribune (http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0117-01.htm) that
Saddam was likely emboldened to use ever more lethal concoctions to polish off the Kurds because he knew from past gassing experience in 1983, 1984 and 1987 that he could always count on the support of Reagan, Powell and George H. W. Bush. The latter's son has yet to mention this in any of his righteous condemnations of Saddam. There are any number of governments who have the moral standing to condemn Saddam's gassing of the Kurds. The one headed by George W. Bush does not. Powell, of course, is the current administration's knight in shining armor, the trusted figure who commands the respect even of the European leaders who cannot stomach Bush. But give a listen to Peter W. Galbraith, former U.S. ambassador to Croatia and now professor of national-security studies at the National War College in Washington, D.C.: "the Kurds have not forgotten that Secretary of State Colin Powell was then the national security adviser who orchestrated Ronald Reagan's
decision to give Hussein a pass for gassing the Kurds."
http://www.boston.com/globe/magazine...ory_entire.htm
__________________
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 03-09-2003, 12:25 PM   #4
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 02:17 PM
I don't trust these guys. They *want* this war too much, way too much. I'm not trying to be an hole, but they just want this too much. It's to hell with what the American people and the European people and any other lowly person thinks or wants.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-09-2003, 03:00 PM   #5
Acrobat
 
Zooropa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Long Island, New York, USA
Posts: 421
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Scarletwine
Why do you put so much stake in Powell.

A quote from an article By Dennis Hans

Withholding the key fact that destroys the moral underpinning of an argument (and, in Powell's case, reveals him to be a blood-drenched hypocrite): "Iraq's weapons of mass destruction are controlled by a murderous tyrant, who [has already used chemical
weapons to kill thousands of people.]" (Bush's October speech) Comment: The problem here is that much of Bush's national-security team aided and abetted those crimes. After the worst attack, on Halabja in 1988 near the end of the Iran-Iraq war, the Reagan team covered for Saddam by implicating Iran, then prevented Congress from imposing tough sanctions on Iraq. Joost R. Hiltermann, an official with Human Rights Watch, shows in a recent column for the International Herald Tribune (http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0117-01.htm) that
Saddam was likely emboldened to use ever more lethal concoctions to polish off the Kurds because he knew from past gassing experience in 1983, 1984 and 1987 that he could always count on the support of Reagan, Powell and George H. W. Bush. The latter's son has yet to mention this in any of his righteous condemnations of Saddam. There are any number of governments who have the moral standing to condemn Saddam's gassing of the Kurds. The one headed by George W. Bush does not. Powell, of course, is the current administration's knight in shining armor, the trusted figure who commands the respect even of the European leaders who cannot stomach Bush. But give a listen to Peter W. Galbraith, former U.S. ambassador to Croatia and now professor of national-security studies at the National War College in Washington, D.C.: "the Kurds have not forgotten that Secretary of State Colin Powell was then the national security adviser who orchestrated Ronald Reagan's
decision to give Hussein a pass for gassing the Kurds."
http://www.boston.com/globe/magazine...ory_entire.htm
Note: Mr. Galbriaith supports a pre-emptive war on Iraq, and after returning from northern Iraq, he asserts that The Kurds, while leary of past betrayals, trust the current adminastration and some of their fears have been alliviated through negotiations and assurances from the US Govt.
__________________
Zooropa is offline  
Old 03-09-2003, 05:15 PM   #6
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Scarletwine
Why do you put so much stake in Powell?

Scarletwine, I put more faith in Powell than the person who wrote the article you cited.

Let's say I am biased.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 03-09-2003, 05:24 PM   #7
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 09:17 AM
What I find amusing about all this (SARCASTIC AMUSING) is that every screems the US is not providing information. The US provides information, because everyone is screaming, and boom, the information is bad. Now we can accuse the US of lying and of being decietful. Every think that the information was not fabricated by the US? Ever think it may have been a bad source? No, we will assume the worst of you even though we have been saying you do not share information.

As it stands, I still believe that Iraq is not innocent in the development of nuclear weapons. Again, most peopel here forget he built one already, but was missing only one component.
Thanks to his "murdered" son-in law, the inspectors found out a lot about Iraq's WMD programs. Let's not forget, Saddam might have had a clean bill of health, had his son-in law not ratted him out.

Anyway I promised the Powell response. We can now begin tearing his character apart as well. I promised the clip from the show, here it is:

MR. RUSSERT: Your testimony before the United Nations has now been directly challenged by members at the United Nations. This is what the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency Mohammed ElBaradei said. “In recent months, the administration and Britain have alleged Iraq illegally sought high-strength aluminum tubes for a centrifuge-based uranium enrichment program and had sought uranium from Niger.” He said “Experts had concluded the tubes were for a rocket engine program, as Iraq had said, and that the documents used to allege the connection between Iraq and Niger were fabricated. Overall, he concluded, there is no evidence that Iraq has revived a nuclear weapons program.”
Mr. ElBaradei saying that you and the president misled the world on the aluminum tubes and that the documents in terms of Niger and Iraq were fabricated. Those are very serious charges.
SEC’Y POWELL: Well, with respect to the aluminum tubes, we still believe the case is out. The CIA has done a great deal of analysis on those tubes. They are not persuaded that they’re just for rockets. In fact, another nation this week, a European nation, came forward with additional information that still I think leaves it an open question as to what the purpose of those tubes was.
With respect to the uranium, it was the information that we had. We provided it. If that information is inaccurate, fine. We’re continuing to examine this issue, and as Dr. ElBaradei said, it’s still an open issue to be looked at. Well, we have to be a little careful about the nuclear weapons program. We saw the IAEA almost give Iraq a clean bill of health in the early ’90s only to discover that they had a robust nuclear weapons program that they had not discovered.
And if you just looked at Iran this week, right now, the IAEA is discovering, as a result of information and intelligence made available, that Iran has a far more robust program for the development of nuclear weapons program than the IAEA thought. So while I respect Dr. ElBaradei’s opinion—he’s a very dedicated international civil servant—I think we have to keep an open book on this as more information comes forward.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 03-09-2003, 06:40 PM   #8
War Child
 
UKTan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 883
Local Time: 02:17 PM
Didn't the previous report from Dr Blix undermine other intelligence passed on to the inspectors too tho?
__________________
UKTan is offline  
Old 03-09-2003, 06:57 PM   #9
War Child
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 754
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
What I find amusing about all this (SARCASTIC AMUSING) is that every screems the US is not providing information. The US provides information, because everyone is screaming, and boom, the information is bad. Now we can accuse the US of lying and of being decietful. Every think that the information was not fabricated by the US? Ever think it may have been a bad source? No, we will assume the worst of you even though we have been saying you do not share information.

As it stands, I still believe that Iraq is not innocent in the development of nuclear weapons. Again, most peopel here forget he built one already, but was missing only one component.
Thanks to his "murdered" son-in law, the inspectors found out a lot about Iraq's WMD programs. Let's not forget, Saddam might have had a clean bill of health, had his son-in law not ratted him out.
I don't believe Iraq is innocent for a second, either. But neither do I feel that way of Bush, his administration, Colin Powell, and the other players in this game. The best way I can describe seeing it is: Two sides (PNAC, et al. vs. Saddam) playing the middle (the world, and the American people)
__________________
elfyx is offline  
Old 03-10-2003, 08:45 AM   #10
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 09:17 AM
I think Bush has been unable to get Turkey on board because he won't give them Northern Iraq after the war. They have a horrible human rights issue in regards to Kurds and want their old territory back. It will be interesting to see if Bush caves to get those bases.
__________________
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 03-10-2003, 11:50 AM   #11
Ghost of Love
 
gvox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: In The Ballroom of The Crystal Lights
Posts: 19,834
Local Time: 09:17 AM
The point is, we asked for FACTS, not fraudulent conjecture.

So far the US has proven nothing.

Yet they hypocritically demand proof of same.

Liars, thats all, plain and simple.
__________________
ACROBAT - U2 Tribute on Facebook


http://home.cogeco.ca/~october/images/sheeep.jpg

Don't push this button:
 
I'm serious, don't!

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyagu_Anaykus View Post
Interference is my Earth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gvox View Post
Consequently, Earth is an experimental disaster.
 

If you keep going, you have only your self to blame

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Best Interferencer On The Damn Planet View Post
Edge:
too sexy for his amp
too sexy for his cap
too sexy for that god-damned headset
I told you








gvox is offline  
Old 03-10-2003, 12:53 PM   #12
Purgatory
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,445
Local Time: 08:17 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
I also place more faith in Colin Powell than any person in our current governement.
i used to, but then he picked up a pair of sticks to beat on the war drum along with bush and fellow nut rumsfeld.
__________________
Gickies Gageeze is offline  
Old 03-10-2003, 08:11 PM   #13
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 02:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Gickies Gageeze


i used to, but then he picked up a pair of sticks to beat on the war drum along with bush and fellow nut rumsfeld.

I did too. I'm disappointed that he's in cahoots with Bush and that Rumsfeld.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-10-2003, 08:13 PM   #14
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 02:17 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Scarletwine
I think Bush has been unable to get Turkey on board because he won't give them Northern Iraq after the war. They have a horrible human rights issue in regards to Kurds and want their old territory back. It will be interesting to see if Bush caves to get those bases.
This is true. Turkey has an imperfect human rights record, to say the least.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-14-2003, 12:14 AM   #15
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,760
Local Time: 03:17 PM
To play devils advocate


Does the US have to prove anything??? at all???



All they have to prove is non compliance...technically when saddam kicked teh inspectors out the first time..he should have been invaded the next day.

People forget there were 4 years where iraq defied inspections..and the UN did NOTHING.


again...it's iraqs job to come clean...not the US's job to let iraq dictate terms to the international community.






that aside lets get to what I really feel..I really think this administration fucked up...our president is sooo incompetant he can't even seem to get along with our allies.....I want him out of office so bad....gimme clinton any day...he may have committed adultery..but he served his country with competance and respect for our allies.
__________________

__________________
V Nura is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com