Bush Caught In A Major Lie

[castille]

Ooh he made a widdle lie oooh poor Bwushy its such an evil conspiracy!


Grow up....so he fucked up a few words. Well you probably lie all the time in your life.

[gem]

Now, hang on a minute please. The president, who as a candidate said Gore could not be trusted because he is a serial exaggerator, is supposed to get a pass for screwing up and saying things that don't square with the facts.
Here's what Bush said on July 14th.

The President:
"The larger point is, and the fundamental question is,
did Saddam Hussein have a weapons program? And the
answer is, absolutely. And we gave him a chance to
allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in.
And, therefore, after a reasonable request, we decided
to remove him from power, along with other nations, so
as to make sure he was not a threat to the United
States and our friends and allies in the region. I
firmly believe the decisions we made will make
America more secure and the world more peaceful."

Saddam Hussein wouldn't weapon inspectors in, so Bush said.
I recall seeing the inspectors looking in Saddam's refrigerators in his palaces.
Does anyone remember things the way Bush recalled them on July 14th?

And the video that I find most disturbing is the video of Bush in the Emma Booker classroom as Andy Card tells him "America is under attack". Now I thought that Bush, having taken an oath to defend our country from enemies, foreign and domestic, might have ended his visit with the second graders and become involved in the struggle to preserve American lives. But in the video he reaches for a book. He continues to participate in the reading program. Now some say that I am too critical when I suggest that this is not competent performance of the duties of the president of the United States during an attack. They say that it was all so traumatic. Bush was mindful of the children. Didn't want to frighten them. Was that the most important consideration? People were throwing themselves out of very high windows and falling to their deaths in numbers, and Bush sat and sat and sat and took no action at all until it was too late.

Thomas Keane, head of the commission to investigate 9/11 and a former governor and a Republican, has said that the attacks of 9/11 were preventable. He has said that, had it been his decision, he would have fired those whose failures allowed the attacks. Bush has only expressed support for those who failed.
The loyalty of those here to Bush is depraved, when it seeks to excuse him for the responsibility he has refused to recognize.

gem

[Impenitent]

you recall the inspectors being given unfettered access to all of saddam's palaces? when? does the UN know they had permission? they were kicked out... looking in saddam's referigerator... yes, the wmds must have been only stashed there... please...

too late? of course, bush could have had immediately ordered every air force base to shoot down every plane because we wouldn't want them flying into buildings... and since bush was in florida he could have opened his door and held a net for the jumpers to fall into... fire department in NYC? hell no, blame bush!

[gem]

Bush has frequently referred to the unamnimous resolution 1441 which required Iraq to allow inspectors full access. If you are not aware that inspectors had to leave Iraq last year because Bush declared he was about to invade Iraq, I really am not sure how to help you. The disagreement with France and Germany and others was whether or not to continue inspections. Bush said they weren't working. Read his speech announcing war. I am sure a review of network news will lead to the footage taken of mamalade from Saddam's palace refrigerators.

As to Bush's actions on 9/11, the record is clear. There were many warnings, many specifics. Bush's crew lied saying that there were no warnings. Under the Bush administration Salmon Rushdie was prevented from flying (as of Sept 3, 2001) but the terrorists, several of which were on terrorists watch lists from the 26th of Sept. 2001, were not stopped from flying. They could have been.


The president didn't even ask someone to call the FAA to get the facts on what happened at the WTC that morning. He told the principal that it was an accident. He sat and sat and sat. The vice president admitted that there is a line opened bewteen the Secret Service (with the president) and the FAA in the event of any hijacking. Yet nothing of the kind, no report to the president of the first hijacking took place that day. Why not? The president should have addressed the failures of others and his own by now.

9/11 was preventable. That is what Keane, a Republican, has said. He sure knows more about it that Bush does.

Bush can't even remember (July 14, 2003) that there were inspectors in Iraq and that they had to leave because he told them that he was invading Iraq and ending the weapons inspections. Bush wouldn't let the inspectors stay and work. That is the fact. Bush, under pressure or things not going as he has expected. (everyone was supposed to see the wmd Saddam had within a couple of days after Saddam's statue coming down) So Bush became delusional and told us how Saddam had refused to allow inspectors in and we had to invade as a result.


gem

[Major Billy]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by ([ÄK)
LËGÖLÄS]I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, "There's one terrible pilot."

WELL ...There is a problem with the above statement. There was no live video
coverage of the first plane hitting the tower. There couldn't be. Video of
that first plane hitting the tower did not surface until AFTER the second
plane had hit.
Bush is lying through his teeth here.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

How do you know he didn't see the second plane hit the tower?

[Mia]

Saddam did refuse inspections for 11 years. He only finally allowed them under direct threat of immediate invasion, and then only under certain circumstances in certain places. Never the full access they were supposed to have. You are having a little bit of fuzzy memory here.

The way the inspections were finally allowed, he could easily be moving them from place to place. "OK, you can look here now" "OK, you can look there now".

It was a joke.

As to letting highjackers fly, I thought our conspiracy theory was that they are still alive and never flew anywhere? I'm getting confused...

[Impenitent]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (gem,)
Bush has frequently referred to the unamnimous resolution 1441 which required Iraq to allow inspectors full access. If you are not aware that inspectors had to leave Iraq last year because Bush declared he was about to invade Iraq, I really am not sure how to help you.

:rolleyes: they left under clinton so clinton could bomb... saddam had a history of letting the inspectors "do their job"

The disagreement with France and Germany and others was whether or not to continue inspections. Bush said they weren't working.

:rolleyes: they weren't working... if they were, saddam would have allowed them unfettered access which he did not

Read his speech announcing war. I am sure a review of network news will lead to the footage taken of mamalade from Saddam's palace refrigerators.

** the point was that saddam was denying the inspectors the ability to inspect any place BUT saddam's refrigerators

As to Bush's actions on 9/11, the record is clear. There were many warnings, many specifics. Bush's crew lied saying that there were no warnings. Under the Bush administration Salmon Rushdie was prevented from flying (as of Sept 3, 2001) but the terrorists, several of which were on terrorists watch lists from the 26th of Sept. 2001, were not stopped from flying. They could have been.

:rolleyes: no, there were no warnings that the intelligence at the time could have done anything about

The president didn't even ask someone to call the FAA to get the facts on what happened at the WTC that morning. He told the principal that it was an accident. He sat and sat and sat.

:rolleyes: what else could he have done?

The vice president admitted that there is a line opened bewteen the Secret Service (with the president) and the FAA in the event of any hijacking. Yet nothing of the kind, no report to the president of the first hijacking took place that day. Why not? The president should have addressed the failures of others and his own by now.

9/11 was preventable. That is what Keane, a Republican, has said. He sure knows more about it that Bush does.

:rolleyes: no, it was not preventable because it happened... if it were preventable, it would have been prevented...

Bush can't even remember (July 14, 2003) that there were inspectors in Iraq and that they had to leave because he told them that he was invading Iraq and ending the weapons inspections. Bush wouldn't let the inspectors stay and work. That is the fact.

the ones that were kicked out under clinton?

Bush, under pressure or things not going as he has expected. (everyone was supposed to see the wmd Saddam had within a couple of days after Saddam's statue coming down) So Bush became delusional and told us how Saddam had refused to allow inspectors in and we had to invade as a result.

no, the delusion is not bush's...

gem<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

[gem]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,)
you recall the inspectors being given unfettered access to all of saddam's palaces? when? does the UN know they had permission? they were kicked out... looking in saddam's referigerator... yes, the wmds must have been only stashed there... please...

too late? of course, bush could have had immediately ordered every air force base to shoot down every plane because we wouldn't want them flying into buildings... and since bush was in florida he could have opened his door and held a net for the jumpers to fall into... fire department in NYC? hell no, blame bush!<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Impenitent, "bush could have had immediately ordered every air force base to shoot down every"
Offering absurd extremes in place of rational and realistic actions is not getting anywhere with me. As I said, stopping the terrorists from getting on planes, those who on the terrorist watch lists, was possible. Like Condoleezza Rice, you expect me to believe that reasonable options did not exist. She said that they couldn't shut down the entire air travel industry. But Condoleezza - that wasn't necessary. An unnecessary extreme was offered to hide the fact that Bush let this happen when it could have been prevented. Reasonable options did exist. The facts have been made public and more will be.

gem

[dotcoma]

[quote=Major Billy,]

Quote by: [ÄK LËGÖLÄS] How do you know he didn't see the second plane hit the tower?

Because he was sitting and reading to children when the second plane hit and was told "America is under attack..." and he continued reading. At least that is what we were originally told by Bush and Co...Besides, if he saw the SECOND plane hit that would be TWO horrible pilots. That would also mean he's a moron, which anyone with a brain already knows.

[Impenitent]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (gem,)


Impenitent, "bush could have had immediately ordered every air force base to shoot down every"
Offering absurd extremes in place of rational and realistic actions is not getting anywhere with me.

:rolleyes: there were no other options at that point, the planes were in the air and the hijackers were on them...

As I said, stopping the terrorists from getting on planes, those who on the terrorist watch lists, was possible.

:rolleyes: no, not possible. we didn't know who the terrorists were before they struck... but we'll lock YOU in prison tomorrow because you might be a terrorist who will drive your car into a gas station pump...

Like Condoleezza Rice, you expect me to believe that reasonable options did not exist. She said that they couldn't shut down the entire air travel industry. But Condoleezza - that wasn't necessary. An unnecessary extreme was offered to hide the fact that Bush let this happen when it could have been prevented. Reasonable options did exist. The facts have been made public and more will be.

:rolleyes: not at all... but we'll lock YOU in prison tomorrow because you might be a terrorist... that is the "facts"...

gem<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

[dotcoma]

First off, Saddam threw the inspectors out when he discovered a plot by the CIA to have him killed. The CIA was using the UN inspection team to gather intelligence on Saddam (by the way, political assassination is a violation of International Law. I don't give a shit about the UN but just so you know).

Second, Rumsfeld, Powell and Bush all said they had the evidence, had the intel, and knew where the weapons were. All the while, the UN inspection team that had been there on and off since the first modern wave of middle eastern colonization said their were no weapons. By the way do you know who sold Saddam his WMD capability before it was destroyed 10 years ago? The gas he used against the "poor Iranians" (which the govt. is foaming at the mouth waiting to invade). Do you know which one of our govt. agencies armed and put him into power?

Just because you've heard one side of a story doesn't make anything you say valid.

I'm asking VALID questions about FACTS. You and our government don't seem to have too many answers but you seem to have LOTS to say about how crazy we are for asking them.

(I understand you are confused)

[gem]

Thank you roxdog,

I am amazed. 9/11 wasn't preventable because if it had been preventable, it would not have happened. It would have been prevented. The word preventable is not a synonym of impossible in my mind, but to keep up with impenitent, it has to be. I am astonished. The flight from reason is swift and strong. Farewell. That is too far out for me. What strength the hold of depraved loyalty has on some.

gem

[gem]

This discussion began with an illustration of how Bush says things sometimes that are not true. I added the example of what Bush said in a prepared speech to the nation the evening of 9/11. I added that because, in a prepared speech, there is not the excuse of a momentary lapse or a slip that there is is in the example that began this discussion.
Bush lied when he said that "immediately after the first attack" he acted to make sure our response plans were activated. That was not a little slip it was a lie and calculated. It contradicts Bush's other statements about what happened. And Bush loyalists think we are not justified in asking that the contradictions and statements that are unsupported by fact be addressed. We are castigated for asking that Bush be honest, that he be truthful.

Who agrees with this summary?

gem

[Impenitent]

you are castigated for making unfounded accusations... you are interpreting events through a very narrow lens and seeing only the "evil" bush that you wish to see...

[dotcoma]

I think it is you with narrow lens. You've already demonstrated your allegiance to das furor.

[Impenitent]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (roxdog,)
I think it is you with narrow lens. You've already demonstrated your allegiance to das furor.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

:rolleyes: not at all... I don't accuse bush of being a nazi... your hyperbole is getting thick and this is precisely the "back and forth" that sean warned about

[gem]

impenitent,

My summary is my basic accusation that Bush lied. It is founded in fact. Go to the White House site for the speech he gave on September 11, 2001 from the White House. There he makes the false statement I have accused him of making. The statement that contradicts Bush claim that he acted immediately appears at least twice on the White House site as well. One of them began this discussion. In response to Jordan, Bush says he thought the first strike was an accident.
Look also for the video and news reports of that day at Emma Booker school. Added Cheney's weekend following appearance on television. All of this shows that Bush did not do anything immediately to activate our respond plans.

In fact, as reported in Newsweek January 10, 2002, two hijackers had been on the terrorist watch list in a big way since August 26, 2001.

My accusation is backed by fact. Bush's statements contradict one another. He proves himself a liar. I quoted Bush's delusional statement about how Saddam refused to let inspectors in and how that caused the war. Clearly a totally inaccurate statement. The facts have been presented. Bush makes outrageous statements and you are unwilling to admit it.

You say "we'll lock YOU in prison tomorrow because you might be a terrorist".
A president who lies and fails to take action when the country is under attack is not a problem, but a citizen who expects honesty and dedication to national security is a problem. Because I care about the truth and the safety of my country, you think I should be locked up. That is what I mean by depravity. You make threats because you cannot make sense.

gem

[Zeebadee]

"... might have ended his visit with the second graders and become involved in the struggle to preserve American lives..."

Hey, give the guy a break. Like the kids, he was pretty well engrossed in the excitement of the book they were reading, and besides, it was almost Bush's turn to read out loud.

[Impenitent]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (gem,)
impenitent,

My summary is my basic accusation that Bush lied. It is founded in fact. Go to the White House site for the speech he gave on September 11, 2001 from the White House. There he makes the false statement I have accused him of making. The statement that contradicts Bush claim that he acted immediately appears at least twice on the White House site as well. One of them began this discussion. In response to Jordan, Bush says he thought the first strike was an accident.
Look also for the video and news reports of that day at Emma Booker school. Added Cheney's weekend following appearance on television. All of this shows that Bush did not do anything immediately to activate our respond plans.

*** immediately? what was he to do? launch an attack as I suggested? WHAT WAS HE TO DO? he did act immediately

In fact, as reported in Newsweek January 10, 2002, two hijackers had been on the terrorist watch list in a big way since August 26, 2001.

:rolleyes: watch list? it is a damn good thing that accusations alone don't prove guilt...

My accusation is backed by fact. Bush's statements contradict one another. He proves himself a liar.

*** no he does not

I quoted Bush's delusional statement about how Saddam refused to let inspectors in and how that caused the war.

:rolleyes: it was not delusional and it was the legal cause for the war

Clearly a totally inaccurate statement. The facts have been presented.

:rolleyes: no, the "facts" you present are falsehoods and inaccuracies

Bush makes outrageous statements and you are unwilling to admit it.

*** outrageous statements? yeah he does... but lies? no, you have to do better...

You say "we'll lock YOU in prison tomorrow because you might be a terrorist".
A president who lies and fails to take action when the country is under attack is not a problem, but a citizen who expects honesty and dedication to national security is a problem.

:rolleyes: bush did not lie, and he did take the actions he could

Because I care about the truth and the safety of my country, you think I should be locked up. That is what I mean by depravity. You make threats because you cannot make sense.

:rolleyes: no, that is how you would have "prevented" the terrorism... by jailing innocents... they hadn't committed ANY crimes and yet you want them tried and convicted...

gem<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

[Mia]

"no, there were no warnings that the intelligence at the time could have done anything about"


Really? So the huge scandall in the FBI that led to many people being fired and one to end up a Time Magazine "person of the year" for revealing the mistakes was in my dreams?

There was intelligence that if followed up on could have prevented the attacks. And Bush did exaggerate, possible outright lie, just not about the inspectors as it was stated here.

He told us at the onset that Iraq was 6 months away from being capable of striking us with a nuclear weapon. within days, the source of this intelligence said "No, that is NOT what was in my report."

I stopped listening to Bush from that moment on for the most part since I didn't believe anything he said. I am not a Bush defender by any means, just looking for accuracy.