Originally Posted By Darkbeer <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/11/11/D8DQDLJ8A.html" target="_blank">http://www.breitbart.com/news/ 2005/11/11/D8DQDLJ8A.html</a> >>President Bush forcefully attacked critics of the war in Iraq on Friday, accusing them of trying to rewrite history and saying they are undercutting American forces on the front lines. "The stakes in the global war on terror are too high and the national interest is too important for politicians to throw out false charges," the president said in his combative Veterans Day speech. Defending the march to war, Bush said that foreign intelligence services and Democrats and Republicans alike were convinced at the time that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. "Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and mislead the American people about why we went to war," Bush said. He said those critics have made those allegations although they know that a Senate investigation "found no evidence" of political pressure to change the intelligence community's assessments related to Saddam's weapons program. He said they also know that the United Nations passed more than a dozen resolutions citing Saddam's development and possession of weapons of mass destruction. "More than 100 Democrats in the House and the Senate who had access to the same intelligence voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power," Bush said. The president's remarks at the Tobyhanna Army Depot were part of the administration's effort to bolster waning U.S. public support for the war in which at least 2,059 U.S. troops have died. Bush offered a forceful defense of the war in Iraq, saying it is the central front in the war on terror and that extremists are trying to establish a radical Muslim empire extending from Spain to Indonesia. "We will never back down. We will never give in. We will never accept anything less than complete victory," he said Friday. <<
Originally Posted By Darkbeer <a href="http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/11/101039.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.newsmax.com/archive s/ic/2005/11/11/101039.shtml</a> >>Saying its "amazing it took the White House this long to get it back together and fight on this issue,†Fred Barnes said President Bush and his administration are ready to state their defense for fighting the war on terror and liberating Iraq from Saddam Hussein. Barnes, executive editor of The Weekly Standard, told Fox News that the president and his team will launch an aggressive defense against the misleading and vicious attacks - primarily by hypocritical Democrats - that "Bush lied†about the war in Iraq. "Steve Hadley, the national security adviser, certainly refuted the critics Thursday,†Barnes said. "He told the critics who said the president manipulated WMD intelligence that they are mistaken, citing all of the comments made by high-ranking Democrats [such as Sens. Clinton, Kennedy, Kerry, Schumer, Reid, Rockefeller etc.] who backed the war based on the same information.†The negative comments by Democrats about the war in Iraq have damaged President Bush’s credibility, as reflected in his plummeting poll ratings. Barnes is confident that those numbers will rise as Americans are reminded that Saddam was a killer and his history of possessing and using weapons of mass destruction made it essential that he be removed from power. "If you’ll notice, Democrats say ‘Bush Lied’ but they never cite specific examples,†Barnes said. "That’s because they were saying the same things and many of their comments are captured on tape. "To say that the president lied about the reasons to liberate Iraq is just incorrect. Ask the people of Iraq and they'll tell you that Saddam had to be removed. There is no doubt about that."<<
Originally Posted By TomSawyer I think that deck chair would look better over there, under the Salon window. Oh, would you mind asking the band to play "Nearer My God to Thee?"
Originally Posted By Darkbeer <a href="http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=20&issue=20051110" target="_blank">http://www.investors.com/edito rial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=20&issue=20051110</a> >>The president has a goal — to win the war on terror. His opponents have a goal, too — to sink his presidency. So where does this leave them on the war? Good question. We hoped partisanship still stopped at the water's edge, that neither party is so obsessed with winning that it will put our security at risk. But recent days have left us wondering if President Bush's foes have any sense of limits. Democrats want to win — there's nothing wrong with that. But party leaders have lately turned a legitimate goal into an obsession. Exhibit A is Sen. Harry Reid, playing Capt. Ahab in pursuit of Moby Dick Cheney. As the Senate minority leader, Reid is the highest-ranking elected official in the Democratic Party (if you accept the Senate's "Upper House" pretensions). So his words carry some weight, even when they make him sound like a whacked-out conspiracy buff. Here's what he said about Cheney earlier this week: "The manipulation of intelligence, to sell the war in Iraq, Vice President Cheney is involved in that. The White House energy policy that puts Big Oil ahead of the American consumer, Vice President Cheney is behind that. Leaking classified information to discredit White House critics, the vice president is behind that. Halliburton, contracting abuse, the list goes on and it goes on." Reid also claimed the indictment of Cheney's former top aide Scooter Libby showed "this administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq." In fact, Libby is charged with lying to the FBI and a grand jury about his conversations with reporters over the "outing" of CIA agent Valerie Plame; special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has taken pains to point out that this prosecution isn't about the war. Meanwhile, leading Democrats scoff at calls to investigate a leak that may have done real damage to the war effort — the release of classified information about secret prisons run by the CIA.<<
Originally Posted By cmpaley Ah, the old, "You don't support me 100%, so you're not patriotic and you love the terrorists!" trick.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I'm not one who says "Bush lied." But it sure seems like they listened to liars. Interesting segment on Hardball last night regarding Chalibi. Infuriating reading, and more than ever underscores part of the reason why we got involved in this damn war, and how he lied to an administration already predisposed to war. (Scroll down the page to read about it). Check it out. <a href="http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10003305/" target="_blank">http://msnbc.msn.com/id/100033 05/</a>
Originally Posted By TomSawyer 2oony, you're doing it wrong. You're supposed to just link large parts of the article without making any comments. And then find the same article in a different place and post that.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I'm new at this. Sorry. Honest to goodness, when I saw part of his speech this morning, I thought it was footage of an old speech at first, part of a news report or something. This current "you're with us or you're against us" speech is simply more of the same old, same old. And only a dyed in the wool supporter of anything this administration dishes out would see it as anything approaching "forceful." I don't enjoy seeing the president struggling this way. But this one-note administration keeps a-playing the same old tune in spite of whatever evidence to the contrary exists. The polls show it isn't working, yet they keep at it, in order to "appeal to their base." Shouldn't their base be well appealed to by now? It's the rest of us they ought to be focusing on.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> He said those critics have made those allegations although they know that a Senate investigation "found no evidence" of political pressure to change the intelligence community's assessments related to Saddam's weapons program. << Bush is lying when he says this. The investigation had very specific prohibitions against examination of their use (and suppression) of intelligence. Good thing too ... <a href="http://www.robertscheer.com/" target="_blank">http://www.robertscheer.com/</a> >> Lying with Intelligence Declassified document shows yet again how Bush abused the facts to sell war November 8, 2005 – Who in the White House knew about DITSUM No. 044-02 and when did they know it? That's the newly declassified smoking-gun document, originally prepared by the Defense Intelligence Agency in February 2002 but ignored by President Bush. Its declassification this weekend blows another huge hole in Bush's claim that he was acting on the best intelligence available when he pitched the invasion of Iraq as a way to prevent an Al Qaeda terror attack using weapons of mass destruction. << >> Interesting segment on Hardball last night regarding Chalibi. << "Interesting" doesn't begin to cut it - appalling is more like it. And bush the bush administration is still chummy with this criminal to this day - even as he sells out our military to iran.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>the bush administration is still chummy with this criminal to this day - even as he sells out our military to iran.<< Isn't it sickening? They want to wave the flag and make patriotic speeches, while that is going on. What an insult to the people fighting and dying in Iraq right now.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>But this one-note administration keeps a-playing the same old tune in spite of whatever evidence to the contrary exists<< "Old George is playin' mouth harp, he plays it kinda sad He never took a lesson, he just picked it up from Dad"
Originally Posted By ecdc I don't think Bush lied either. But the administration is cleary so incompetent about this, and so influenced by their own biased beliefs about Iraq, that we're in the mess we have now. I also saw the report on Hardball. Amazing and appalling. This joker has a long history of telling the U.S. what it wants to hear, and he's one of our sources for Iraq?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan "Old George is playin' mouth harp, he plays it kinda sad He never took a lesson, he just picked it up from Dad"<< LOL!
Originally Posted By Dabob2 I've been hesitant to use the "L-word" regarding Bush as well, but that link gadzuux posted has me inching closer. The DIA completely debunks this informant in Feb. '02, and yet Bush uses his information in his Oct' 02 Senate speech just before the Senate votes on authorization? Mmmmmmmmmnnnmmnnnmm (Marge Simpson noise)
Originally Posted By TomSawyer Dabob, it takes two people to lie. One person to tell the lie, and the other person to listen. (from the great philospher Homer Simpson)
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 Except we have the Iraqi people have their freedom. As the high voting turnout the last two times have proven. While it's a shame that we've lost over 2,000 soldiers, how many people were free when we lost 2,000 at Normandy, Iwo Jima, Gettysburg? Am I a little miffed about the WMD's? Absolutely, but some of you say that Iraq never had them and that is just a flat out lie.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 I don't think anybody has said Iraq NEVER had them. Just that they didn't have them when we invaded. They were required to get rid of them, and the inspections worked.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy Nice link Gadzuux, a wanna be Michael Moore site? Come on, you can do better than this. Fact is, I spoke to 3 Army Corp of Engineer guys yesterday sho served 2 tours in Mosul Iraq each. Just like the Air National Guard guys I work with, they to a guy, as always hate liberals and feel the people who said "Bush lied" are morons who give the enemy ammunition to keep killing America soldiers. That's all I need to know. End of story, argument over. If the guys who are in Iraq feel they are doing great things and that Iraq is a key part of the war on terror, then I will listen to them. I won't listen to a bunch of liberals who want Saddam back in power and who do everything in their power to get us all killed by being so ignorant of reality that they give the enemy aid and comfort by insisting the president is corrupt. Also, I never did get an answer from you fine lefties on who you would replace Bush with if you could, that would win the war on terror and the troops would support as mush as they support the President. Wanna know why?? Because all you guys have are pacifict, appeasing losers who will have us go the way of France. Yet the left thinks they can ever get power back? I guess their plan now is to lie about Bush non stop until they can lose again in 08.
Originally Posted By FaMulan If Beaumandy's sources are current military, they're not allowed to say anyting but happy-happy, nice-nice about our spoiled CIC.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>I guess their plan now is to lie about Bush non stop until they can lose again in 08. << They are doing fine just being quiet and letting him do all the talking.
