August 22, 2006

Nobody's ever said Saddam ordered up the attacks via homunculus
posted by Wolof 18 years ago
  • I am not an advocate of death as a means of vengeance, so let's talk in terms of life imprisonment as the ultimate penalty. On 9/12/2001 and for many days, weeks and months thereafter, if I had a magic wand and could have imprisoned either Bin Laden or Bush, it would have been Bin Laden. These days, I think I'd let him go. I'd incarcerate Bush instead. Were it Bush & Cheney there would be no hesitation.
  • @$)&*@$@)*&!!!!
  • which do you think would go prison gay first? who would be the top (cheney...ak!!!)
  • Cheney would be the victim of an unfortunate heart attack before he ever made it to prison, like Ken Lay. I hear they have an operating room in Hell reserved for his eternal sans anesthetic open heart surgery.
  • For a second I thought, do I really mean that? And then I remembered what Cheney said about people who are against unauthorized wiretaps, and against the war in Iraq. Yeah, I meant that, he deserves worse.
  • What Vertex said.
  • There's no contrition, no sense of having wronged anyone.
  • Of course it's s psychopathic regime so I don't suppose one should expect it.
  • At first, I though you meant the attacks against his former subjects, and thought "huh?" As for the 9/11 attacks, thank Mothra that he finally said what he should have said years ago. But, knowing our tendency toward progressive amnesia, I have to wonder how much this will change opinion. Polls have still recently shown that people think that Saddam had WMD and had something to do with 9/11.
  • We have always been at war with Eastasia.
  • So telling the truth and saying that Iraq did not have anything to do with the attacks is a bad thing to do? Isn't that what people have wanted him to say? If he claimed there to be a connection between the two, wouldn't that be more outrageous? I may be mistaken, but I believe that Bush gave a similar answer two or three years ago about Iraq and September 11th. I may be confusing that with a statement about WMD. Whatever it was, it was another instance of Bush admitting a truth that he doesn't really want people to know.
  • It's a good thing to do, but it's too little, too late, and done in the wrong spirit. Telling the truth after you've gotten what you wanted through lying, and then pretending you never lied in the first place... that's just plain wrong. The admission should have come with an apology.
  • >>So telling the truth and saying that Iraq did not have anything to do with the attacks is a bad thing to do? Lying in the hopes of escaping the consequences of earlier lies is not really the same thing as telling the truth. >>If he claimed there to be a connection between the two, wouldn't that be more outrageous? He already claimed there was a connection between the two. He wasn't confused about it; it just suited his purposes at the time. And now, it's not that he doesn't remember what he said earlier; it just suits him to lie differently in order to distance himself from his earlier lies. In short- no; sorry, no points for honesty.
  • Who would go prison gay first? George is already gay (not that there is anything wrong with that.)
  • Buck Fush! Oh, wait. I've must have gotten confused. Carry on.
  • I guess Neil Young's got another snippet to add to "Let's Impeach the President".
  • He told the truth, but then followed it up with a classic misrepresentation. When he said "Nobody ever claimed Saddam ordered the 9/11 attacks," that is true...but that's not what was being asked, and furthermore nobody has ever accused them of saying that Saddam ordered the attacks. It's a rhetorical deflection, trying to make the audience believe that the questioner is implying something blatantly false, when no such thing has been implied. Everyone knows that Saddam didn't order the 9/11 attacks--but everyone also knows that Bushco spent an insane amount of energy and screen time trying to convince people that Saddam and Al Qaeda were connected. In closing, anybody else think the prez might be drinking again? I've seen a couple of Q&As lately where he seems even loopier than usual.
  • Well, we have to remember Bush is pretzel intolerant.
  • Maybe he has celiac disease.
  • Drinking again? I wonder if he ever did stop... In 2003, 70% believed in the Saddam/9-11 link. One would hope that percentage is lower today.
  • Yeah, considering Mr. Bush never made the connection, I can't fathom why so many people think they were connected.
  • This article points out a few more inconsistencies for those who haven't had their inconsistency quota filled at the pump recently.