Campaign Lies - 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 08-11-2002, 10:28 AM   #1
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
kobayashi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: the ether
Posts: 5,142
Local Time: 07:56 AM
Campaign Lies

i'm quite certain the common retort to this article will be that every administration participates in underhanded activities-it's unavoidable. while that may be true(i wonder if anyone has ever tried not to participate in underhanded activities) this seems to be underhanded on a whole new level.


Quote:
August 6, 2002
The Memory Hole
By PAUL KRUGMAN


Winston Smith, the protagonist of George Orwell's "Nineteen Eighty-Four," was a rewrite man. His job was to destroy documents that could undermine the government's pretense of infallibility, and replace them with altered versions.

Lately, Winston Smith has gone to Washington. I'm sure that lots of history is being falsified as you read this there are several three-letter agencies I don't trust at all but two cases involving the federal budget caught my eye.

First is the "Chicago line." Shortly after Sept. 11, George W. Bush told his budget director that the only valid reasons to break his pledge not to run budget deficits would be if the country experienced recession, war or national emergency. "Lucky me," he said. "I hit the trifecta."

When I first reported this remark, angry readers accused me of inventing it. Mr. Bush, they said, is a decent man who would never imply that the nation's woes had taken him off the hook, let alone make a joke out of it.

Soon afterward, the trifecta story became part of Mr. Bush's standard stump speech. It always gets a roar of appreciative laughter from Republican audiences.

So what's the Chicago line? In his speeches, Mr. Bush claims to have laid out the criteria for running a deficit when visiting Chicago during the 2000 campaign. But there's no evidence that he said anything of the sort during the campaign, in Chicago or anywhere else; certainly none of the reporters who were with him can remember it. (The New Republic, which has tracked the
claim, titled one of its pieces "Stop him before he lies again.") In fact, during the campaign his budget promises were unqualified, for good reason. If he had conceded that future surpluses were not guaranteed, voters might have wondered whether it was wise to lock in a 10-year tax cut.

About that 10-year tax cut: It basically takes place in two phases. Phase I, which has mainly happened already, is a smallish tax cut for the middle class. Phase II, which won't be completed until 2010, is a considerably larger cut that goes mostly to the richest 1 percent of taxpayers.

That two-phase structure offers substantial opportunities for misdirection. If someone suggests reconsidering future tax cuts, the administration can accuse him of wanting to raise taxes in a recession implying, falsely, that he wants to reverse Phase I rather than simply call off Phase II. On the other hand, if someone says that tax cuts have worsened the budget
picture, the administration can say that tax cuts explain only 15 percent of the move into deficit. This sounds definitive, but in fact it refers only to the impact of Phase I on this year's budget; by the administration's own estimates, 40 percent of the $4 trillion deterioration in the 10-year outlook is due to tax cuts.

There is, however, an art to this sort of deception: you have to imply the falsehood without actually saying it outright. Last month the Office of Management and Budget got sloppy: it issued a press release stating flatly that tax cuts were responsible for only 15 percent of the 10-year deterioration. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities noticed, and I reported it here.

Now for the fun part. The O.M.B. reacted angrily, and published a letter in The Times attacking me. It attributed the misstatement to "error," and declared that it had been "retracted." Was it?

It depends on what you mean by the word "retract." As far as anyone knows, O.M.B. didn't issue a revised statement conceding that it had misinformed reporters and giving the right numbers. It simply threw the embarrassing document down the memory hole. As Brendan Nyhan pointed out in Salon, if you go to the O.M.B.'s Web site now you find a press release dated July 12 that
is not the release actually handed out on that date. There is no indication that anything has been changed, but the bullet point on sources of the deficit is gone.

Every government tries to make excuses for its past errors, but I don't think any previous U.S. administration has been this brazen about rewriting history to make itself look good. For this kind of thing to happen you have to have politicians who have no qualms about playing Big Brother; officials whose partisan loyalty trumps their professional scruples; and a press corps that, with some honorable exceptions, lets the people in power get away with it.

Lucky us: we hit the trifecta.



Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company
__________________

__________________
im the candyman. and the candyman is back.
kobayashi is offline  
Old 08-11-2002, 11:35 PM   #2
Refugee
 
Danospano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,415
Local Time: 06:56 AM
Kudos for re-printing this article. It really makes one think about what the government's 'higher ups" knew about September 11th, 2001. The government had a motive to attack itself. You can't deny the facts.
I'm not saying the Bush Administration did any of these things, but I am saying that it's sad that we haven't pondered the possiblity.
__________________

__________________
Danospano is offline  
Old 08-12-2002, 04:09 AM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 04:56 AM

ok i pondered it.
still no sale..

sorry-
have u tried..tabloid tevision?

db9
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 08-12-2002, 04:43 AM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: MD
Posts: 7,572
Local Time: 06:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Danospano
Kudos for re-printing this article. It really makes one think about what the government's 'higher ups" knew about September 11th, 2001. The government had a motive to attack itself. You can't deny the facts.
I'm not saying the Bush Administration did any of these things, but I am saying that it's sad that we haven't pondered the possiblity.
Um...I can understand attacking Bush for using 9/11 as an after-the-fact excuse for breaking the budget.

But any allegations of the government staging the attacks of 9/11 go out the window for one simple reason: two of the planes were headed for Washington. Sending planes to attack the World Trade Center would be incredibly sinister. Sending planes to attack the Pentagon/Capitol/White House/etc. would be idiotic.
__________________
speedracer is offline  
Old 08-12-2002, 11:28 AM   #5
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 130
Local Time: 11:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by speedracer


Um...I can understand attacking Bush for using 9/11 as an after-the-fact excuse for breaking the budget.

But any allegations of the government staging the attacks of 9/11 go out the window for one simple reason: two of the planes were headed for Washington. Sending planes to attack the World Trade Center would be incredibly sinister. Sending planes to attack the Pentagon/Capitol/White House/etc. would be idiotic.
But the ones headed for Washington were shot down. Except fo the "plane" that hit the pentagon, which probably wasn't a plane. There was no wreckage of the wings or fuselage, no damage to the building from the wings, etc.
__________________
KingPin is offline  
Old 08-12-2002, 01:37 PM   #6
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 07:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by KingPin

Except fo the "plane" that hit the pentagon, which probably wasn't a plane. There was no wreckage of the wings or fuselage, no damage to the building from the wings, etc.
Well. What was it, then, if not a plane?
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 08-12-2002, 02:31 PM   #7
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Popmartijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 32,542
Local Time: 12:56 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by paxetaurora


Well. What was it, then, if not a plane?
Is it a bird?
Is it a plane?
No, it's ...

SUPER GROVER!!!

(sorry, couldn't resist. I mean, I like some conspiracy theories on its time, but sometimes they get too far)

Marty
__________________
Popmartijn is offline  
Old 08-12-2002, 02:37 PM   #8
you are what you is
 
Salome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 22,016
Local Time: 12:56 PM
no kidding
__________________
“Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.”
~Frank Zappa
Salome is offline  
Old 08-12-2002, 04:40 PM   #9
I serve MacPhisto
 
z edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: the HORROR
Posts: 4,022
Local Time: 05:56 AM
TOP SECRET

Quote:
Originally posted by KingPin


But the ones headed for Washington were shot down. Except fo the "plane" that hit the pentagon, which probably wasn't a plane. There was no wreckage of the wings or fuselage, no damage to the building from the wings, etc.
You are so right Kingpin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And so are you Dannospano!!!!!!!!!


I must confess, that I have been working on a top-secret project with black ops that I really shouldn't even talk about here. But what the hay! We have genetically engineered a super species of birds to fly undetected and attack "objects" without suspicion of our enimies. This has been going on for years and years, without the knowledge or support of our President (who is against this type of genetic enhancements too btw).

In fact it was through our super blue-jays that we gained knowledge of Florida voter fraud and ballot-box rigging (shhhhh don't tell) but we swept that under the rug of course! On September 11, the only birds we had left were our experimental fleet of parakeets, which were a bit fiesty and triggerhappy. When we launched the fleet after the highjacked jetliners, they went to attack but accidentally slammed into the pentagon instead.

And to complicate matters even worse, some of them are still out roaming the skies. So next time you see evidence (birdshite) on your car, I urge you to examine the feces closely for any remanents of the Pentagon or military armament.

And Dannospano, I urge you to notify your Movement Commander Michael Moron of this! And tell him to be careful because we unleashed some crazy hummingbirds after him!

Those of you who heard of this new disease transmitted by mosquitos called West Nile Virus, yep BINGO thats us again. See we tried to figure out a way to get the birds and this seems to be working, though the mosquitos too seem to have gone crazy and are targeting humans as well as birds!

I think next we are working on some mutant frogs to target the mosquitos, though we are worried that certain princesses might try to capture and kiss our frogs in search of a prince. But, we are still hopeful at the least.

Thank you, and take care of yourselves. And please watch out for the militant birds / mosquitos, etc..


(I am also known as LOVE MUSCLE and Spyplane )
__________________
z edge is offline  
Old 08-12-2002, 04:58 PM   #10
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 130
Local Time: 11:56 AM
People, come on.

If it wasn't a plane, it could have been a bomb. It could have been a bomb in a truck. There are more ways to make a big crash and bang than just a plane.

Have you seen photos of the Pentagon when it was hit? Did you see a plane anywhere? Or the wreckage of a plane? Or any oil? if a plane hit as hard as it supposedly did, then:

a) it would have wiped out several floors. A 747 is just as tall as the pentagon. however, what actually happened was the first 2 floors were demolished, and then the ones above collapsed. This can be verified through pictures.

b) there'd be flames all over the place, from the explosion hitting the jet fuel. Instead there were just flames inside the building and a little bit outside.

c) at the speed of a 747, the nose of the plan would have gone clear through the building, so the nose was inside the open area... and the wings would have hit the outer walls. When in fact the explosion only affected the outside of the building and the area wasn't even close to the wingspan of a plane.

d) there would be wreckage EVERYWHERE. but there was none.

I don't know what it was . A bomb is just as likely as it was a plane, in my opinion. Although I don't know what happened to that 4th plane. It just doesn't make sense that it hit the pentagon... unless it vaporized on impact.
__________________
KingPin is offline  
Old 08-12-2002, 05:23 PM   #11
BAW
The Flower
 
BAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The OC....!!!!
Posts: 11,094
Local Time: 03:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by KingPin

It just doesn't make sense that it hit the pentagon... unless it vaporized on impact.

Yeah, pretty much like the one in Pennsylvania did. Not much was left of that wreckage and there was no doubt it was a plane.

It would have to be a pretty extensive conspiracy involving phony flight numbers and passenger lists. And it would also mean that everyone on the phony passenger list would have to be a government agent sworn to secrecy. Where are they hiding all those poeple if they weren't on that plane?
__________________
BAW is offline  
Old 08-12-2002, 05:34 PM   #12
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 06:56 AM
I do get a serious chuckle from this thread. Conspiracy theories from either the right or the left are pretty hysterical.

My thoughts:

1) The government did not create 9/11. Sure, there were some serious holes in security, but with a long-running mantra of "government is evil" and presidents cutting taxes haphazardly over the last couple decades, you often get what you pay for.

2) Bush, certainly, has found his shelter with the "war on terrorism," albeit that shelter is crumbling. Before 9/11, you had a president that everyone was laughing at. Then came the aftermath of 9/11, where anyone who laughed at him was a potential "terrorist." How convenient, right? After enough economic stagnancy, he can't continue to rely on 9/11 to deflect inevitable criticism of his domestic policies...or lack thereof. Of course, there is Iraq, which I imagine will be launched right around when that shelter of 9/11 collapses.

Regardless of political disagreement, I find it disheartening that some will continue to insist some vast government conspiracy on 9/11. Until I see compelling evidence otherwise (let's not forget "innocent until proven guilty"), I will continue to brush aside such claims as hysterics.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-12-2002, 05:37 PM   #13
Refugee
 
oktobergirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: the middle
Posts: 1,874
Local Time: 03:56 AM
This is the stupesting thing I have read all day........

__________________
oktobergirl is offline  
Old 08-12-2002, 05:42 PM   #14
BAW
The Flower
 
BAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The OC....!!!!
Posts: 11,094
Local Time: 03:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon

Regardless of political disagreement, I find it disheartening that some will continue to insist some vast government conspiracy on 9/11. Until I see compelling evidence otherwise (let's not forget "innocent until proven guilty"), I will continue to brush aside such claims as hysterics.

Melon
My thoughts exactly. I refuse to believe that the US government would allow the slaughter of 3000+ innocent people for ANY reason. Lax security, yes...conspiracy, no.
__________________
BAW is offline  
Old 08-12-2002, 05:42 PM   #15
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: MD
Posts: 7,572
Local Time: 06:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by KingPin
People, come on.

If it wasn't a plane, it could have been a bomb. It could have been a bomb in a truck. There are more ways to make a big crash and bang than just a plane.

Have you seen photos of the Pentagon when it was hit? Did you see a plane anywhere? Or the wreckage of a plane? Or any oil? if a plane hit as hard as it supposedly did, then:

a) it would have wiped out several floors. A 747 is just as tall as the pentagon. however, what actually happened was the first 2 floors were demolished, and then the ones above collapsed. This can be verified through pictures.

b) there'd be flames all over the place, from the explosion hitting the jet fuel. Instead there were just flames inside the building and a little bit outside.

c) at the speed of a 747, the nose of the plan would have gone clear through the building, so the nose was inside the open area... and the wings would have hit the outer walls. When in fact the explosion only affected the outside of the building and the area wasn't even close to the wingspan of a plane.

d) there would be wreckage EVERYWHERE. but there was none.

I don't know what it was . A bomb is just as likely as it was a plane, in my opinion. Although I don't know what happened to that 4th plane. It just doesn't make sense that it hit the pentagon... unless it vaporized on impact.
Uh, except you don't claim to be an eyewitness while there are plenty of other people who claim to have seen the plane hit the Pentagon.
__________________

__________________
speedracer 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 06:56 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