Has anyone else noticed...

[hnumpah]

...that the administration has gone from 'Iran is enriching uranium to make nuclear weapons' to 'Iran is supplying weapons to the insurgents in Iraq', much the same way they went from 'Iraq has WMD's' to 'Iraq has ties to Al Qaeda'? Seems they are very good at coming up with new reasons to convince the American people we should go to war when the old reasons don't pan out.

I hope the American public, and their senators and representatives in Washington, have learned their lesson and set the bar for proof very high before deciding we should go to war in Iran.

[Plane]

...that the administration has gone from 'Iran is enriching uranium to make nuclear weapons' to 'Iran is supplying weapons to the insurgents in Iraq', much the same way they went from 'Iraq has WMD's' to 'Iraq has ties to Al Qaeda'? Seems they are very good at coming up with new reasons to convince the American people we should go to war when the old reasons don't pan out.

I hope the American public, and their senators and representatives in Washington, have learned their lesson and set the bar for proof very high before deciding we should go to war in Iran.

Has Iran quit enriching urainium?
Have they stopped testing new Naval wepons?
Is it untrue that the Iranians are provideing arms to death squads in Iraq?

Is all of the negative information comeing from the Bush administration?
Has the Bush administration ever lied to us? (no ...I am serious)

Has the Bush administation even once asked for a war with Iran?

[sirs]

...that the administration has gone from 'Iran is enriching uranium to make nuclear weapons' to 'Iran is supplying weapons to the insurgents in Iraq', much the same way they went from 'Iraq has WMD's' to 'Iraq has ties to Al Qaeda'?

Has anyone noticed they can do both??

[Xavier_Onassis]

Has the Bush administration ever lied to us? (no ...I am serious)

Has the Bush administation even once asked for a war with Iran?
==============================================
What best characterizes the Juniorbushies is that they have ALWAYS lied or put a major spin on every bloody thing they have said.

They will not ask for a war on Iran. They believe that the supposed authorization to make war on Iraq allows them to make war anywhere in the area. They have said so. They believe that they can simply attack Iran covertly and provoke a counterattack and. being as US troops are then in danger,  attack overtly.

They are not to be trusted, ever, about anything.

[Plane]

Has the Bush administration ever lied to us? (no ...I am serious)

Has the Bush administation even once asked for a war with Iran?
==============================================
What best characterizes the Juniorbushies is that they have ALWAYS lied or put a major spin on every bloody thing they have said.

Oh? quote ONE...
Shuld be easy eh?

They will not ask for a war on Iran. They believe that the supposed authorization to make war on Iraq allows them to make war anywhere in the area. They have said so. They believe that they can simply attack Iran covertly and provoke a counterattack and. being as US troops are then in danger,  attack overtly.

Why attack Iraq covertly ? Weare already finding them attacking us. This is only the truth that you are denying.

They are not to be trusted, ever, about anything.

So when President Bush does thigs you agree with are you totally katzenjammered?

[Michael Tee]

<<Has anyone noticed they can do both??>>

I've noticed that the Bush administration sure as hell can LIE about both.  Easily.  Hands down.

BTW, in answer to plane's question from another thread, is the Bush administration asking for war on Iran, what does this look like?

<<New York Times
<<February 12, 2007
<<U.S. Says Arms Link Iranians to Iraqi Shiites
<<By JAMES GLANZ
<<BAGHDAD, Feb. 11 — After weeks of internal debate, senior United States military officials on Sunday literally put on the table their first public evidence for the contentious assertion that Iran supplies Shiite extremist groups in Iraq with some of the most lethal weapons in the war, and said those weapons had been used to kill more than 170 Americans in the past three years.
<<Never before displayed in public, the weapons included squat canisters designed to explode and spit out molten balls of copper that cut through armor like butter. The canisters, called explosively formed penetrators or E.F.P.’s, are perhaps the most feared weapon faced by American and Iraqi troops here.
<<In a news briefing held under strict security, those officials spread out on two small tables an E.F.P. and an array of mortar shells and rocket-propelled grenades with visible serial numbers that the officials said link the weapons directly to Iranian arms factories. The officials also asserted, without providing direct evidence, that senior Iranian leaders had authorized the smuggling of those weapons into Iraq for use against the Americans. The officials said such an assertion was an inference.>>

There's lots more.  Check it out - - the anonymous sources, the lack of evidence, the sudden front-paging of "news" that was known for at least a couple of years . . .

from the same paper that brought you Judith Miller and the first round of lies that led to the invasion of Iraq comes . . . wait for it folks! . . . Target Iran!!  YAAAAY!!  Another war you can't lose.  They'll greet you with flowers!  Get the purple dye ready, it's coming, folks!  It's unstoppable.  We're going to Teheran!!

[sirs]

<<Has anyone noticed they can do both??>>

I've noticed that the Bush administration sure as hell can LIE about both.  Easily.  Hands down.

So says Tee, at least. 

More rational minds say things like: The National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) is the intelligence community's authoritative written judgment on specific national-security issues. The 2002 NIE provided a key judgment: "Iraq has continued its [WMD] programs in defiance of U.N. resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of U.N. restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade."

The bipartisan Silberman-Robb Commission, which investigated the causes of intelligence failures in the run-up to the war, we now know that the President's Daily Brief and the Senior Executive Intelligence Brief "were, if anything, more alarmist and less nuanced than the NIE".  We also know that the intelligence in the PDB was not "markedly different" from that given to Congress.

Beyond that, intel agencies from around the globe believed Saddam had WMD. Even foreign governments that opposed his removal from power believed Iraq had WMD: Just a few weeks before Operation Iraqi Freedom, Wolfgang Ischinger, German ambassador to the U.S., said, "I think all of our governments believe that Iraq has produced weapons of mass destruction and that we have to assume that they continue to have weapons of mass destruction."

In addition, no serious person would justify a war based on information he knows to be false and which would be shown to be false within months after the war concluded. It is not as if the WMD stockpile question was one that wasn't going to be answered for a century to come.

Then there's Tee

[Plane]

<<Has anyone noticed they can do both??>>

I've noticed that the Bush administration sure as hell can LIE about both.  Easily.  Hands down.

BTW, in answer to plane's question from another thread, is the Bush administration asking for war on Iran, what does this look like?

<<New York Times
<<February 12, 2007
<<U.S. Says Arms Link Iranians to Iraqi Shiites
<<By JAMES GLANZ
<<BAGHDAD, Feb. 11 — After weeks of internal debate, senior United States military officials on Sunday literally put on the table their first public evidence for the contentious assertion that Iran supplies Shiite extremist groups in Iraq with some of the most lethal weapons in the war, and said those weapons had been used to kill more than 170 Americans in the past three years.
<<Never before displayed in public, the weapons included squat canisters designed to explode and spit out molten balls of copper that cut through armor like butter. The canisters, called explosively formed penetrators or E.F.P.’s, are perhaps the most feared weapon faced by American and Iraqi troops here.
<<In a news briefing held under strict security, those officials spread out on two small tables an E.F.P. and an array of mortar shells and rocket-propelled grenades with visible serial numbers that the officials said link the weapons directly to Iranian arms factories. The officials also asserted, without providing direct evidence, that senior Iranian leaders had authorized the smuggling of those weapons into Iraq for use against the Americans. The officials said such an assertion was an inference.>>

There's lots more.  Check it out - - the anonymous sources, the lack of evidence, the sudden front-paging of "news" that was known for at least a couple of years . . .

from the same paper that brought you Judith Miller and the first round of lies that led to the invasion of Iraq comes . . . wait for it folks! . . . Target Iran!!  YAAAAY!!  Another war you can't lose.  They'll greet you with flowers!  Get the purple dye ready, it's coming, folks!  It's unstoppable.  We're going to Teheran!!

..." what does this look like?"

The truth.

[Michael Tee]

<< "Iraq has continued its [WMD] programs in defiance of U.N. resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of U.N. restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade.">>

And yet strangely enough, the UN Security Council was not persuaded to act.  Russia wasn't persuaded.  China wasn't persuaded.  France and Germany weren't persuaded.  Canada wasn't persuaded.  Go figure.

<<The bipartisan Silberman-Robb Commission, which investigated the causes of intelligence failures in the run-up to the war, we now know that the President's Daily Brief and the Senior Executive Intelligence Brief "were, if anything, more alarmist and less nuanced than the NIE".  We also know that the intelligence in the PDB was not "markedly different" from that given to Congress. >>

<<intel agencies from around the globe believed Saddam had WMD. >>

sirs knows this because they all report to him with their findings.  Tell him things they won't even tell their own governments.

<<Even foreign governments that opposed his removal from power believed Iraq had WMD: Just a few weeks before Operation Iraqi Freedom, Wolfgang Ischinger, German ambassador to the U.S., said, "I think all of our governments believe that Iraq has produced weapons of mass destruction and that we have to assume that they continue to have weapons of mass destruction." >>

"We have to assume . . . "  Sure we do.  HAVE TO assume.  No choices here.  If that's what the German ambassador says, that's what it has to be.  Funny how even the "assumed" continued possession wasn't certain enough to push for invasion.  BTW, was that ambassadorial quote BEFORE or AFTER Saddam had in fact given his accounting to the UN as demanded?   (just askin)



LMFAO.  Bipartisan.  As if THAT were some guarantee of probity when BOTH parties approved the decision to go to war.  Now they're white-wahing themselves with their own committee.  Well, sirs still falls for it.

[sirs]

<< "Iraq has continued its [WMD] programs in defiance of U.N. resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of U.N. restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade.">>

And yet strangely enough, the UN Security Council was not persuaded to act.  Russia wasn't persuaded.  China wasn't persuaded.  France and Germany weren't persuaded.  Go figure.

Yea, best figure on the lucrative $$$$ contracts they had, that would get really messed up, if they were to act.

<<The bipartisan Silberman-Robb Commission, which investigated the causes of intelligence failures in the run-up to the war, we now know that the President's Daily Brief and the Senior Executive Intelligence Brief "were, if anything, more alarmist and less nuanced than the NIE".  We also know that the intelligence in the PDB was not "markedly different" from that given to Congress. >>

<<intel agencies from around the globe believed Saddam had WMD. >>

sirs knows this because they all report to him with their findings. 

Actually, because they're been reported in various media sources

[Plane]

We know now more about Saddam giveing bribes to UN officicals, none of whom need to be punished at all.

[Michael Tee]

<<Yea, best figure on the lucrative $$$$ contracts they had, that would get really messed up, if they were to act.>>

Sure.  They figured Iraq would beat the U.S. and their contracts would be secure.  Acting in alliance with the U.S. and adding their own forces into the mix would only mean ALL OF THEM would be soundly thrashed by mighty Iraq and all their contracts would be lost.  BTW, since you are so proud of your FACTS that you like to CAPITALIZE the word, where are the FACTS that show us the "lucrative $$$$ contracts" the Chinese, Indians, French, Germans, Russians, Belgians and Canadians all had with Saddam's regime.  Honest to God, I never realized what a veritable United Nations the Iraqi oilpatch was, till I started reading your gar - - uh, I mean, posts.

<<Actually, because they're [all the intelligence agencies of all the other countries in the world] been reported in various media sources>>

Well, I don't know about you, sirs, but I find it downright heartening that all those intelligence agencies are so open and truthful that they publish their real findings in the world press.  We hear so much talk about an "Open Society" but so few governments are willing to make any moves in that direction.  Who would have suspected that it would be the intelligence agencies, usually so secretive and reclusive, who would lead the way to an Open Society?  And I guess, since they've been so wonderfully open about it all, that you wouldn't have any trouble finding out where exactly all this formerly secret info has been published?  It would be so helpful to those of us who want to clear the good name of "President" Bush of these awful and nasty allegations of lying and of cooking the books.   Eeeewww, how could they?

[Amianthus]

where are the FACTS that show us the "lucrative $$$$ contracts" the Chinese, Indians, French, Germans, Russians, Belgians and Canadians all had with Saddam's regime.

Been following the "oil for food" scandal, and attendant bribery cases, that have been wending their way through the various court systems?

[sirs]

where are the FACTS that show us the "lucrative $$$$ contracts" the Chinese, Indians, French, Germans, Russians, Belgians and Canadians all had with Saddam's regime.

Been following the "oil for food" scandal, and attendant bribery cases, that have been wending their way through the various court systems?

OUCH, Ami with the 1st volley of facts.  Tee's ship staggers, and turns hard about, but can it recover?     

[Michael Tee]

<<Been following the "oil for food" scandal, and attendant bribery cases, that have been wending their way through the various court systems?>>

THAT'S an answer?  The question was, "where are the FACTS that show us the "lucrative $$$$ contracts" the Chinese, Indians, French, Germans, Russians, Belgians and Canadians all had with Saddam's regime?"  Want to try again?