Featured Stop It Liberals: Bush Didn’t Lie About Iraq Having WMDs

Interesting article Rev. The author is using number 14 on this list of propaganda techniques.

14. CHERRY PICKING or CARD STACKING or DISTORTION OF DATA or OUT OF CONTEXT: This technique is used to convince the audience by using selected information and not presenting the complete story. Examples: "A study was done that showed eating peanut butter causes liver cancer" (the fact that later the study was later shown to be flawed or funded by the peanut butter haters and therefore suspect, is not revealed). A variation would be "Raising the speed limit to 65 mph resulted in many fewer traffic fatalities". Such statements need to be checked with how many people were driving before and after the change in speed limit. Fewer people may be driving after the speed limit change, even though the fatality rates (deaths per 100,000) may be higher, leading to the overall result of fewer fatalities.
[1]

He doesn't do it especially well though. :smilewinkgrin:

 

The Libs will stop about the same time the GOP stops with Benghazi.

Fight on.:thumbsup:

 

The easy and honest answer is No. But knowing what we knew then, Yes. Hillary has to agree. She voted for it.

 

It has been extensively documented that the White House decided to invade Iraq before 9/11:

Former CIA director George Tenet said that the White House wanted to invade Iraq long before 9/11, and inserted “crap” in its justifications for invading Iraq. Former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill – who sat on the National Security Council – also says that Bush planned the Iraq war before 9/11. Top British officials say that the U.S. discussed Iraq regime change even before Bush took office. And in 2000, Cheney said a Bush administration might “have to take military action to forcibly remove Saddam from power.” And see this.

Cheney made Iraqi’s oil fields a national security priority before 9/11. And the Sunday Herald reported: “Five months before September 11, the US advocated using force against Iraq … to secure control of its oil.” (remember that Alan Greenspan, John McCain, George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, a high-level National Security Council officer and others all say that the Iraq war was really about oil.)

Indeed, neoconservatives planned regime change in Iraq – and throughout the Middle East and North Africa – 20 years ago.

George W. Bush, John McCain, Sarah Palin, a high-level National Security Council officer, Alan Greenspan and others all say that the Iraq war was really about oil.

But war is sold just like soda or toothpaste … and so a false justification needs to be concocted.

Read More At: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/02/newly-released-memos-of-donald-rumsfeld-prove-knowing-iraq-war.html

 

Regime change was a Clinton policy.

Just another conspiracy theory. :sleeping_2:

 

Poncho, regimes change in Iraq was official Clinton/Gore/U.N. policy. I know you know this.

 

I know you know that the Rev's article leaves a whole lot of the story out to make the neocons seem honest.

As well he should if his aim is to cover for them. The rest of the story could get them indicted on fraud charges if politicians weren't above the law.

 

Yeah, I'm not him, and I didn't read his link. Talk to me.

 

I know the Iraq war was planned well in advance of 9/11, the government and media hyped the alleged "Iraqi" threat, played on our fears and made claims proven to be false at the time they were made.

 

Were all those speeches made by Clinton, Gore, Kennedy, Albright, Powell, demanding we invade Iraq, starting in about 1993, a figment of my imagination ?

 

No. So what is your point here?

 

No. Regime change in Iraq was official government policy long before Bush was a blip on the horizon. No one will be brought up on charges for anything.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

My point ? What's yours ? You posted something that's not true. I'm correcting you.

 

Let's see if that's true.

You say regime change is a Clinton policy. Yes?

Liberals say regime change is a Bush policy. Yes?

I say it's neither a Bush or a Clinton policy and I've been saying that here since 2004.

I know you know that.

"Regime change" did not begin with the administration of George W. Bush, but has been an integral part of U.S. foreign policy for more than one hundred years. Starting with the toppling of the Hawaiian monarchy in 1893, the United States has not hesitated to overthrow governments that stood in the way of its political and economic goals. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 is but the latest example of the dangers inherent in these operations.

http://www.amazon.com/Overthrow-Americas-Century-Regime-Change/dp/0805082409

The Truman Doctrine, 1947

With the Truman Doctrine, President Harry S. Truman established that the United States would provide political, military and economic assistance to all democratic nations under threat from external or internal authoritarian forces. The Truman Doctrine effectively reoriented U.S. foreign policy, away from its usual stance of withdrawal from regional conflicts not directly involving the United States, to one of possible intervention in far away conflicts.

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/truman-doctrine

An updated summary of the charming record of US foreign policy. Since the end of the Second World War, the United States of America has …

Attempted to overthrow more than 50 governments, most of which were democratically-elected.[1]
Attempted to suppress a populist or nationalist movement in 20 countries.[2]
Grossly interfered in democratic elections in at least 30 countries.[3]
Dropped bombs on the people of more than 30 countries.[4]
Attempted to assassinate more than 50 foreign leaders.[5]

In total: Since 1945, the United States has carried out one or more of the above actions, on one or more occasions, in the following 69 countries (more than one-third of the countries of the world):

http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2011/07/29/we-came-we-saw-we-destroyed-we-forgot/

I know you know about the CIA's violent false flag terror campaign that "regime changed" Mossadegh with the Shah in Iran in 1953.

All that was a little before Clinton and Bush's time so it can't be a Clinton or a Bush policy. If it's not their policy then who's policy is it?

You said I posted something that is untrue? Show me where.

 

Your post #8 is not clear. First you say Bush planned to invade Iraq, then in the next sentence you say he didn't have to because it was already in the works. Yeah, I really do apologize for not being able to follow that.

What I say is the war was planned while Clinton was in office. With the UN. Bush pressured congress for an AUMF which they gave to him all too willingly. But regime change in Iraq started with Clinton. You can't deny this.

 

Bush did plan to invade Iraq.

The proof is we invaded Iraq while he was president. He did take part in the planning did he not?

http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB328/II-Doc14.pdf

The plan to invade Iraq was being worked by the neocons before and during Clinton's administration. To me that would seem to be a plan to invade Iraq that was "already in the works". For years.

Below is a segment of the timeline leading up to the Iraq invasion.

8/14/92 Defense Secretary Dick Cheney declares President Bush Sr. wise not to invade Baghdad and "get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq."

4/15/93 Saddam Hussein reportedly tries to assassinate Bush Sr.

1/26/98 Project for a New American Century (PNAC)—founded by Cheney, Scooter Libby, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush, Paul Wolfowitz, and other top neocons—demands President Clinton undertake the "removal of Saddam Hussein's regime."

6/23/98 "The good Lord didn't see fit to put oil and gas only where there are democratically elected regimes friendly to the United States."—Halliburton CEO Cheney

8/7/98 Al Qaeda bombs US embassies in Africa, killing 220 and injuring some 4,000.

10/31/98 Clinton signs the Iraq Liberation Act. Regime change becomes official US policy. * See note below.

Late 1998 Gen. Anthony Zinni, head of US Central Command, examines Iraqi exile Ahmed Chalabi's military plan to overthrow Saddam with 1,000 men. He warns Congress it is "pie in the sky, a fairy tale."

Nov 1999 Chalabi-connected Iraqi defector "Curveball"—a convicted sex offender and low-level engineer who became the sole source for much of the case that Saddam had WMD, particularly mobile weapons labs—enters Munich seeking a German visa. German intel officers describe his information as highly suspect. US agents never debrief Curveball or perform background check. Nonetheless, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and CIA will pass raw intel on to senior policymakers. [Date the public knew: 11/20/05]

8/27/00 America must not act as "an imperialist power, willy-nilly moving into capitals in that part of the world, taking down governments."—VP candidate Cheney

10/3/00 Debating Al Gore, George W. Bush says he'd commit troops only with an "exit strategy," and he'd be "very careful about using our troops as nation builders."

10/11/00 In a subsequent debate, Bush says: "If we're an arrogant nation, they'll resent us. If we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us."

10/12/00 Al Qaeda attacks USS Cole in Aden, Yemen, killing 17 and injuring 39.

11/6/00 Congress doubles funding for Iraqi opposition groups to more than $25 million; $18 million is earmarked for Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress, which then pays defectors for anti-Iraq tales.

11/7/00 Election night: Indecision 2000 begins.

Nov 2000 Future Chief Justice John Roberts flies to Florida to advise Jeb Bush during recount.

12/12/00 Supreme Court hands presidency to George W. Bush.

Early 2001 Enron CEO Ken Lay named to Bush Energy Department transition team. Jack Abramoff appointed to Interior Department transition team.

1/30/01 Saddam's removal is top item of Bush's inaugural national security meeting. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill later recalls, "It was all about finding a way to do it. The president saying, 'Go find me a way to do this.'" [Date the public knew: 1/10/04]

read More At: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline

Like I said there's a whole lot of information missing from the Rev's article.

* Note, as I have shown above regime change was "un-offical" U.S. policy years before Clinton signed any document. One unaware of the U.S. history of regime change might be convinced that Clinton dreamed up the policy all by himself by listening to certain people that seek to defend their own team member by placing blame on another team's member or the other team itself.

* Note, I ain't pointing the finger at you Bro.

 

Not saying it was Bubba's idea alone.

And you're my brother, Poncho. Sometimes I need a finger pointed at me.

 

Good info you've been posting ponch.

"...Senator Ernest Hollings....took up the question of why are we in Iraq, and came up with this answer:

“Now everyone knows what was not the cause. Even President Bush acknowledges that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. Listing the 45 countries where al-Qaida was operating on September 11 (70 cells in the U.S.), the State Department did not list Iraq. Richard Clarke, in Against All Enemies, tells how the United States had not received any threat of terrorism for 10 years from Saddam at the time of our invasion. … Of course there were no weapons of mass destruction. Israel’s intelligence, Mossad, knows what’s going on in Iraq. They are the best. They have to know. Israel’s survival depends on knowing. Israel long since would have taken us to the weapons of mass destruction if there were any or if they had been removed. With Iraq no threat, why invade a sovereign country? The answer: President Bush’s policy to secure Israel.”...

...“Spreading democracy in the Mideast to secure Israel would take the Jewish vote from the Democrats. You don’t come to town and announce your Israel policy is to invade Iraq. But George W. Bush, as stated by former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill and others, started laying the groundwork to invade Iraq days after inauguration. And, without any Iraq connection to 9/11, within weeks he had the Pentagon outlining a plan to invade Iraq. He was determined.”..."

Senator Hollings Is Right

 

And anyone would believe Hollings about anything why? He' s a crook and known habitual liar.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk