More Tall Tales From the Bush Administration

[sam h]

[ QUOTE ]
Quit trying to use unfounded justification to win an argument that is sorely made.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, let's take a look at how well your argument is made.

[ QUOTE ]
the man is doing a fine job as president but since you, sir, are more capable of filling the job as president you should run.

[/ QUOTE ]

You seem to be implying that Andy shouldn't criticize anybody in a position he's not qualified to fill. I guess most of us should lay off all politicans, as well as sports coaches and others. Grady Little, I take it all back! Who am I to say you should have pulled Pedro?

[ QUOTE ]
Quit being critical on the man, hes got a difficult job and i am pleased at the effort puth forth as of now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, I get it. We shouldn't criticize anything or anybody you happen to be pleased with. To avoid further mistakes like this, why don't you post a list of those issues and people that do and don't please you, so that the rest of us know what we should and should not discuss here.

[Chris Alger]

"Also are you denying Iraq had chemical weapons?"

You mean that had something to do with the war? Bush's hand-picked weapons inspector, David Kay, did exactly this yesterday.

The man you think is doing a "fine job" has murdered roughly twice as many civilians as the Kurds Saddam killed with chemical weapons (not anthrax) in Halabja. Hajabja preceded efforts by Republican leaders like George Schultz, Bob Dole, Alan Simpson, Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld to strengthen U.S. ties to Saddam and keep him in power, which shows how much they (and you) give a damn about mass murder in Iraq.

I take it that if you lived in Iraq you'd have the same sort of emotional attachment to the national leader and sing praises about his "fine job" with as much understanding as you've shown about Bush.

[andyfox]

When I visited Boston several years back, our guide pointed out a very famous fire hydrant that had been moved around the corner, so that Mrs. Heinz/Kerry did not have to see out her window. It pays to have pull.

I watched Kerry speaking in New Hampshire today. Stilted and overscripted. His hair looked good though. And he's tall and perhaps vaguely Kennedyesque (in the good sense of the term).

Stranger things have happened. Ask the president's father.

[andyfox]

"You are an idiot."

When Krushchev was running the Soviet Union, he told JFK this joke: A man was running around the Kremlin shouting, "Krushchev is an idiot! Krushchev is an idiot." So we arrested him and tried him, Krushchev said, and sentenced him to 30 years of hard labor in Siberia: ten for insulting the Party Secretary, and twenty for revealing a state secret.

It is not I who said they didn't have WMDs, it is the chief weapons inspector appointed by the president who is doing such a fine job, difficult as it may be.

Unfounded justification is the specialty of the administration.

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
You are an idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Andy is not an idiot. You can disagree with his assertions and politics but there is no need to attack him personally, if indeed you were serious about your statement. Attack the soundness of his arguments or logic or other statements that you disagree with and leave it at that. This forum already has enough acrimony. If you do not think his arguments hold water then say Andy's arguments are idiotic, which by the way they are not.

Overreaching perhaps.

And as others pointed out, chemical weapons, not a biological agent, killed the Kurds though I do not know the specific chemical gas used.

-Zeno

[Zeno]

I just saw your post - better job than I did. Great story.

I'm voting for Bush by the way in case you didn't know. I have my reasons but I can't reveal them as they are all State Secrets. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

-Zeno

[Cyrus]

That the regime of Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons, i.e. poison gas, against the Iranians and the Kurds, no one except Baghdad Bob will deny. (What a lot of people in this forum will deny, though, is that when Saddam was using WMDs against the Iranians, he had the enthusiastic approval of the folks back in Washington!)

The point is that Saddam had the West worried sick about his WMDs (witness Clinton's numerous statements to that effect; witness the Congress resolution passed during Clinton's term that supported "regime change in Baghdad"). But that worry was NOT over the threshold of considering Iraq such a threat as to warrant a new crusade over there, in order to remove him.

The West knew only that Saddam MAYBE still had WMDs at the time Wolfowitz and the gang started thumbing their chests. The UN inspectors were finding nothing, though, the intellligence agencies of the West were feeding their political superiors with intel that did not show any WMDs whatsoever, there was no reliable and probable evidence of any Iraqi danger for the West's security coming out from anywhere, nobody had anything , except for an orchestrated hysteria over a war that just had to be carried out!

Even a hawk such as Zbignew Brzezisnky stated that if the President did have (even secretly) strong evidence that Saddam had WMDS and that he was a threat to national security, then the Prez should act immediately and unilaterally. Otherwise, there should be no war without the consent of the western community!

And, lest we forget, this was about the War on Terror. (Something which we forget, conveniently.) The link between Saddam's regime and any terrorist act of the last ten years has yet to be made. Outside of Limbaugh's drug-infested mind.

[jokerswild]

He is a real war hero. not a deserter. Bush is the first deserter ever appointed President by a 5-4 proclamation.

[MMMMMM]

On Jan. 25, 2004, David Kay also said this:

(excerpt)
Saddam's WMD hidden in Syria, says Iraq survey chief
By Con Coughlin
(Filed: 25/01/2004)

David Kay, the former head of the coalition's hunt for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, yesterday claimed that part of Saddam Hussein's secret weapons programme was hidden in Syria.

In an exclusive interview with The Telegraph, Dr Kay, who last week resigned as head of the Iraq Survey Group, said that he had uncovered evidence that unspecified materials had been moved to Syria shortly before last year's war to overthrow Saddam.

"We are not talking about a large stockpile of weapons," he said. "But we know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam's WMD programme. Precisely what went to Syria, and what has happened to it, is a major issue that needs to be resolved." (end excerpt)

http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai.../25/wirq25.xml

[Norm]

Some of us Massachusetts residents are not looking forward to the term "Massachusetts Democrats" being used in the same way "San Francisco Democrats" was in 1988. The perils of having the convention in this state.