Libs lied, people died...

Purple Hawk

FredFlintstone wrote:

they may not ever have said "saddam ordered 9/11" but they very subtly and cleveryly INFERRED he was behind the attacks.

here is just a small sample of our criminal VP's comments:

Question: "The Washington Post asked the American people about Saddam Hussein, and this is what they said: 69 percent said he was involved in the September 11 attacks. Are you surprised by that?"

Cheney: No. I think it's not surprising that people make that connection." [NBC, Meet the Press, 11/14/03]

Cheney: "If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11." [NBC, "Meet The Press," 9/14/03, emphasis added]

uh...do you realize those quotes were months AFTER we enforced the UN resolutions? like 6 to 7 months after?

also, do you realize that you are quoting poll results and a question to the VP about them. direction of causality...can you provide any evidence that any evil neo-cons put that idea out there to cause public opinion?

normally, people draw conclusions about causality when someone does X, and y occurs. the left is seeing that Y happened, so X must have preceeded. and there's no evidence of it...but if it fits the template.

Rushlimbo

Purple Hawk wrote:

also, do you realize that you are quoting poll results and a question to the VP about them. direction of causality...can you provide any evidence that any evil neo-cons put that idea out there to cause public opinion?

normally, people draw conclusions about causality when someone does X, and y occurs. the left is seeing that Y happened, so X must have preceeded. and there's no evidence of it...but if it fits the template.

Seems rather obvious he was quoting a poll and the VP's response because it says it was a poll and then had Cheney's response. As for causality, it is your opinion that the "left" saw Y happen therefore X must have preceeded it. That does not make it so. Templates -- hehehe. The Neonutjobs thrive on taling points and templates.

Rushlimbo

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.html

WASHINGTON - In his prime-time press conference last week, which focused almost solely on Iraq, President Bush mentioned Sept. 11 eight times. He referred to Saddam Hussein many more times than that, often in the same breath with Sept. 11.

Bush never pinned blame for the attacks directly on the Iraqi president. Still, the overall effect was to reinforce an impression that persists among much of the American public: that the Iraqi dictator did play a direct role in the attacks. A New York Times/CBS poll this week shows that 45 percent of Americans believe Mr. Hussein was "personally involved" in Sept. 11, about the same figure as a month ago.

Sources knowledgeable about US intelligence say there is no evidence that Hussein played a role in the Sept. 11 attacks, nor that he has been or is currently aiding Al Qaeda. Yet the White House appears to be encouraging this false impression, as it seeks to maintain American support for a possible war against Iraq and demonstrate seriousness of purpose to Hussein's regime.

"The administration has succeeded in creating a sense that there is some connection [between Sept. 11 and Saddam Hussein]," says Steven Kull, director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland.

Purple Hawk

Rushlimbo wrote:

Seems rather obvious he was quoting a poll and the VP's response because it says it was a poll and then had Cheney's response. As for causality, it is your opinion that the "left" saw Y happen therefore X must have preceeded it. That does not make it so. Templates -- hehehe. The Neonutjobs thrive on taling points and templates.

congrats, you just typed 57 words (58 if you consider Neonutjobs 2 words) and said absolutely nothing.

Purple Hawk

Rushlimbo wrote:

Bush never pinned blame for the attacks directly on the Iraqi president.

and this is the main point, isn't it? thanks for making my case

Rushlimbo

Purple Hawk wrote:

congrats, you just typed 57 words (58 if you consider Neonutjobs 2 words) and said absolutely nothing.

Thanks !! I'm sure everything is babble to you unless it confirms your beliefs.

Rushlimbo

Purple Hawk wrote:

and this is the main point, isn't it? thanks for making my case

If you want to ignore the fact that their connection was inferred then that is your right but you are ignoring reality. Good luck in your box. Welcome back from your little vacation, btw.

Purple Hawk

Rushlimbo wrote:

Thanks !! I'm sure everything is babble to you unless it confirms your beliefs.

in all seriousness...babble is a funny word babble...hehe

Purple Hawk

Rushlimbo wrote:

If you want to ignore the fact that their connection was inferred then that is your right but you are ignoring reality. Good luck in your box. Welcome back from your little vacation, btw.

inferred? dude, tell me i have blinders on and am living in a box, all i'm asking is for you or anyone else is to provide any quote by Bush, or anyeone else in the admin. saying that Saddam was responsible for 9/11. It didn't happen. THAT'S REALITY. If there was inferred connections...the quotes I've provided by the dems are equally to blame.

thanks for your welcoming comments though

RolandTD20Kdrummer

I heard some stupid shit before but...why exactly are we fighting in Iraq again? What was Bush's response to 9/11? Bomb Iraq.

wake the fuck up...

Purple Hawk

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

I heard some stupid shit before but...why exactly are we fighting in Iraq again? What was Bush's response to 9/11? Bomb Iraq.

wake the fuck up...

no comment on the democratic quotes?

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Purple Hawk wrote:

no comment on the democratic quotes?

I don't have to pick a piece of shit apart and taste it to know what it is...lol

FredFlintstone

Purple Hawk wrote:

no comment on the democratic quotes?

The Dems are spineless no doubt.
However, the charge to invade Iraq was driven completely and wholely from the Defense Dept and the VPs office. It was their idea and their "grand vision". The Democrats didnt have the stones to confront them.

And the way the Bill was presented in Congress and the subsequent campaigning around the Iraq war bill was utterly shameful but I certainly dont put that past the Bush admin.

The bottom line is this. They wanted to invade IRaq. They shaped intel to fit the policy. The fucked up the handling of the war thanks to Rumsfeld. It is a massive catastrophe. Attemtping to project GWBs failures on the Dems is lame and revisionist.

FredFlintstone

Purple Hawk wrote:

uh...do you realize those quotes were months AFTER we enforced the UN resolutions? like 6 to 7 months after?

also, do you realize that you are quoting poll results and a question to the VP about them. direction of causality...can you provide any evidence that any evil neo-cons put that idea out there to cause public opinion?

normally, people draw conclusions about causality when someone does X, and y occurs. the left is seeing that Y happened, so X must have preceeded. and there's no evidence of it...but if it fits the template.

Honestly - its a lost cause.
I didnt even mention the "Mohammed Atta met with a senior Iraqi Intelligence offiicial in Prague" BULLSHIT that Cheney spouted (used the term "pretty well confirmed") on MTP BEFORE the invasion in another subtle attempt to link the two.
He KNEW it was false. But I am sure you will deflect again so I will stop now.

gue_barium

"Our Capital lied and people died" is fine by me, however, a fact that is largely ignored is that the President is commander-in-chief of the armed forces. He gives the final authorization on where the troops go, what they do, and the motive for such.

boxwine_in_hell

Purple Hawk wrote:

let's not derail the thread my anti-capitalist friend....

the point of this thread is that the "bush lied" bumper sticker slogan is poop.

this whole backwards logic that lots of people think iraq was behind 9/11 so bush must have said it mentality...it never happened. and the thing is...liberal democrats made connections that bush did.

i'm just engaging in a dialogue my friend

The U.S. government is full of idiots, thanks for the newsflash. Purple Hawk's next thread is "Ice is cold."

inmytree

Purple Hawk wrote:

i reckon times are tough when you ignore his references that he provides from apparently "legitimate" sourcs and instead make fun of the guy.

more proof that dialogue is not the goal.

um....you're saying you're seeking "dialogue"....

ha ha ha....

ok, in the quote referenced, where did clinton say "that Saddam was responsible for 9/11"...?

come on, open the dialogue...please explain...

monkey spanker

Purple Hawk wrote:

my point is is that anyone saying that "bush lied" is lying.

thats really all that needs to be said right there. but the libs that cry about bush lying are just playing to their base. and they eat it up, even though its a lie. and they actually think we're the ones being fooled.

macgyver06

MrBrian wrote:

nah bro, I get it. I'm just saying that I agree, the dems are as backwards as the republicans. It's wrong to only blame bush and co when = blame should be put on the dems.

i think your missing something here..

your president and his staff lied to the world..and keep lying...and keep lying..who cares what he supposedly represents...and if you look at history and party affiliations you will understand he doesnt represent republicans..he represents his fortune.

macgyver06

monkey spanker wrote:

thats really all that needs to be said right there. but the libs that cry about bush lying are just playing to their base. and they eat it up, even though its a lie. and they actually think we're the ones being fooled.

are you saying the administration and bush never lied about anything?