A380, or yellowcake?

N2272V · 11-03-2005, 06:39 PM

The Clare Luce Democrats
How they're lying about "he lied us into war."

WSJ, Thursday, November 3, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST

Harry Reid pulled the Senate into closed session Tuesday, claiming that "The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really all about, how this Administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq." But the Minority Leader's statement was as demonstrably false as his stunt was transparently political.

What Mr. Reid's pose is "really all about" is the emergence of the Clare Boothe Luce Democrats. We're referring to the 20th-century playwright, and wife of Time magazine founder Henry Luce, who was most famous for declaring that Franklin D. Roosevelt had "lied us into war" with the Nazis and Tojo. So intense was the hatred of FDR among some Republicans that they held fast to this slander for years, with many taking their paranoia to their graves.

We are now seeing the spectacle of Bush-hating Democrats adopting a similar slander against the current President regarding the Iraq War. The indictment by Patrick Fitzgerald of Vice Presidential aide I. Lewis Libby has become their latest opening to promote this fiction, notwithstanding the mountains of contrary evidence.
To wit:
• In July 2004, the Senate Intelligence Committee released a bipartisan 500-page report that found numerous failures of intelligence gathering and analysis. As for the Bush Administration's role, "The Committee did not find any evidence that Administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction," (our emphasis).

• The Butler Report, published by the British in July 2004, similarly found no evidence of "deliberate distortion," although it too found much to criticize in the quality of prewar intelligence.

• The March 2005 Robb-Silberman report on WMD intelligence was equally categorical, finding "no evidence of political pressure to influence the Intelligence Community's pre-war assessments of Iraq's weapons programs. . . .analysts universally asserted that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments. We conclude that it was the paucity of intelligence and poor analytical tradecraft, rather than political pressure, that produced the inaccurate pre-war intelligence assessments."

• Finally, last Friday, there was Mr. Fitzgerald: "This indictment's not about the propriety of the war, and people who believe fervently in the war effort, people who oppose it, people who are--have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution of how they feel or any vindication of how they feel."

In short, everyone who has looked into the question of whether the Bush Administration lied about intelligence, distorted intelligence, or pressured intelligence agencies to produce assessments that would support a supposedly pre-baked decision to invade Iraq has come up with the same answer: No, no, no and no.

Everyone, that is, except Joseph Wilson IV. He first became the Democrats' darling in July 2003, when he published an op-ed claiming he'd debunked Mr. Bush's "16 words" on Iraqi attempts to purchase African yellowcake and that the Administration had distorted the evidence about Saddam's weapons programs to fit its agenda. This Wilson tale fit the "lied us into war" narrative so well that he was adopted by the John Kerry presidential campaign.

Only to be dropped faster than a Paris Hilton boyfriend after the Senate Intelligence and Butler reports were published. Those reports clearly showed that, while Saddam had probably not purchased yellowcake from Niger, the dictator had almost certainly tried--and that Mr. Wilson's own briefing of the CIA after his mission supported that conclusion. Mr. Wilson somehow omitted that fact from his public accounts at the time.

He also omitted to explain why the CIA had sent him to Niger: His wife, who worked at the CIA, had suggested his name for the trip, a fact Mr. Wilson also denied, but which has also since been proven. In other words, the only real support there has ever been for the "Bush lied" storyline came from a man who is himself a demonstrable liar. If we were Nick Kristof and the other writers who reported Mr. Wilson's facts as gospel, we'd be apologizing to our readers.

Yet, incredibly, Mr. Wilson has once again become the Democrats' favorite mascot because they want him as a prop for their "lied us into war" revival campaign. They must think the media are stupid, because so many Democrats are themselves on the record in the pre-Iraq War period as declaring that Saddam had WMD. Here is Al Gore from September 23, 2002, amid the Congressional debate over going to war: "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

Or Hillary Rodham Clinton, from October 10, 2002: "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. . . ."

Or Senator Jay Rockefeller, the Democratic Vice Chairman of the Intelligence Committee, who is now leading the "Bush lied" brigades (from October 10, 2002): "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. . . .We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." If Mr. Bush is a liar, what does the use of the phrase "unmistakable evidence" make Mr. Rockefeller? A fool?

The scandal here isn't what happened before the war. The scandal is that the same Democrats who saw the same intelligence that Mr. Bush saw, who drew the same conclusions, and who voted to go to war are now using the difficulties we've encountered in that conflict as an excuse to rewrite history. Are Republicans really going to let them get away with it?

Carry on Looney tunes. I am calling for a FULL investigation of Valerie Plame and her husband who didn't have to put a written report of his trip to Niger together against CIA standard operating procedures and did not have to sign a non-disclosure agreement which is also SOP for the CIA. Also, why send someone with his experience? If the CIA truly wanted to get to the bottom of it, why not send an "expert?". Yes my Liberal friends, a FULL disclosure and nothing less about how Valerie Plame assigned her husband and did not follow CIA SOP.

Carry on.

richie154 · 11-03-2005, 08:38 PM

Suggest deletion.

DavidMich · 11-03-2005, 09:15 PM

Suggest higher dosage of Lithium Dibromide for the thread starter.

N2272V · 11-03-2005, 10:19 PM

I would suggest you both get a room and have a circle jerk and whine about how bad George Bush has been for America.

Dismissed, you're both stuck on stupid.

Gawd I love watching mental midgets get in a tissy.

Hapag-Lloyd · 11-04-2005, 08:09 AM

Jim, please refrain from dragging the A380, or any other Airbus product for that matter, into your neo-conservative posts.

Airbus is a fine, if not superior or even supreme, product of European provenience. It has absolutely nothing to do with USA politics, especially since a number of major US carriers have "special" "agreements" with Boeing to solely purchase their products. I kindly request from you to respect that.

Thank you!

Takeo von Tucher · 11-04-2005, 06:47 PM

Hapag, it´s not Airbus - it's Airbush!!!

Takeo von Tucher · 11-04-2005, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by N2272V

The Clare Luce Democrats
How they're lying about "he lied us into war."

The scandal here isn't what happened before the war. The scandal is that the same Democrats who saw the same intelligence that Mr. Bush saw, who drew the same conclusions, and who voted to go to war are now using the difficulties we've encountered in that conflict as an excuse to rewrite history. Are Republicans really going to let them get away with it? [/b][/font][/size][/color]

So you are trying to defend Republican's Stupidity with Democratic Stupidity??? Just because they are stupid, we can also be stupid???

Franklin D. Roosevelt was forced into a massive World War by a massive Attack occured in Pearl Harbour - George W. Bush acted like a hysterical Housemaid: Whom should we attack after 09/11??? Let´s try Saddam...

I

Hapag-Lloyd · 11-04-2005, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeo von Tucher

Hapag, it´s not Airbus - it's Airbush!!!

Gott bewahre! Niemals!!!

DavidMich · 11-04-2005, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by N2272V

I would suggest you both get a room and have a circle jerk and whine about how bad George Bush has been for America.

Dismissed, you're both stuck on stupid.

Gawd I love watching mental midgets get in a tissy.

Jackboot, I think it's time you gave up autofellatio, it's killing what's left of your already emaciated brain.

Dr Evil · 11-05-2005, 05:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hapag-Lloyd

Jim, please refrain from dragging the A380, or any other Airbus product for that matter, into your neo-conservative posts.

Airbus is a fine, if not superior or even supreme, product of European provenience.

Without throwing mud.
Do you have any work related experience with both Boeing or Airbus planes?

Hapag-Lloyd · 11-05-2005, 01:57 PM

No, I don´t. My gf works for Airbus, though.

N2272V · 11-05-2005, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeo von Tucher

.....George W. Bush acted like a hysterical Housemaid: Whom should we attack after 09/11??? Let´s try Saddam...

I

As is typical with your intellectually weak arguments, there isn't ONE fact to show that Bush acted hysterical. Your postings diplay hysterics and absurdities for sure, but nothing Bush did was hysterical.

Another LIE posted by the King of absurdity. Dismissed looney tune, you're seriously stuck on stupid.

N2272V · 11-05-2005, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hapag-Lloyd

Jim, please refrain from dragging the A380, or any other Airbus product for that matter, into your neo-conservative posts.

I bet you can't even define what you mean by "neo-conservative".

I'd love to see your definition. The way I read it, your definition would have to be someone who seeks out the truth and refuses to swallow Left Wing BS.

And no, I wont refrain from attaching anything with my posts just as you refuse to refrain from lies and absurdities. The day you decide to start being intellectually honest, will be the day I leave DAC.

I won't be holding my breath for that day. Carry on.

Chansen · 11-05-2005, 04:35 PM

Wierd thread title! A380 or yellowcake? This isn't logical.

Magnesium Overcast · 11-28-2005, 09:36 PM

None of the above. But you are a YELLOWBELLY!

Hapag-Lloyd · 11-29-2005, 04:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by N2272V

... The day you decide to start being intellectually honest, will be the day I leave DAC.
I won't be holding my breath for that day. Carry on.

Chapeau! Jimbo kept his promise.

11-03-2005, 06:39 PM	#1
N2272V Insane Collector Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Ventura Age: 54 Posts: 2,110	A380, or yellowcake? The Clare Luce Democrats How they're lying about "he lied us into war." WSJ, Thursday, November 3, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST Harry Reid pulled the Senate into closed session Tuesday, claiming that "The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really all about, how this Administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq." But the Minority Leader's statement was as demonstrably false as his stunt was transparently political. What Mr. Reid's pose is "really all about" is the emergence of the Clare Boothe Luce Democrats. We're referring to the 20th-century playwright, and wife of Time magazine founder Henry Luce, who was most famous for declaring that Franklin D. Roosevelt had "lied us into war" with the Nazis and Tojo. So intense was the hatred of FDR among some Republicans that they held fast to this slander for years, with many taking their paranoia to their graves. We are now seeing the spectacle of Bush-hating Democrats adopting a similar slander against the current President regarding the Iraq War. The indictment by Patrick Fitzgerald of Vice Presidential aide I. Lewis Libby has become their latest opening to promote this fiction, notwithstanding the mountains of contrary evidence. To wit: • In July 2004, the Senate Intelligence Committee released a bipartisan 500-page report that found numerous failures of intelligence gathering and analysis. As for the Bush Administration's role, "The Committee did not find any evidence that Administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction," (our emphasis). • The Butler Report, published by the British in July 2004, similarly found no evidence of "deliberate distortion," although it too found much to criticize in the quality of prewar intelligence. • The March 2005 Robb-Silberman report on WMD intelligence was equally categorical, finding "no evidence of political pressure to influence the Intelligence Community's pre-war assessments of Iraq's weapons programs. . . .analysts universally asserted that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments. We conclude that it was the paucity of intelligence and poor analytical tradecraft, rather than political pressure, that produced the inaccurate pre-war intelligence assessments." • Finally, last Friday, there was Mr. Fitzgerald: "This indictment's not about the propriety of the war, and people who believe fervently in the war effort, people who oppose it, people who are--have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution of how they feel or any vindication of how they feel." In short, everyone who has looked into the question of whether the Bush Administration lied about intelligence, distorted intelligence, or pressured intelligence agencies to produce assessments that would support a supposedly pre-baked decision to invade Iraq has come up with the same answer: No, no, no and no. Everyone, that is, except Joseph Wilson IV. He first became the Democrats' darling in July 2003, when he published an op-ed claiming he'd debunked Mr. Bush's "16 words" on Iraqi attempts to purchase African yellowcake and that the Administration had distorted the evidence about Saddam's weapons programs to fit its agenda. This Wilson tale fit the "lied us into war" narrative so well that he was adopted by the John Kerry presidential campaign. Only to be dropped faster than a Paris Hilton boyfriend after the Senate Intelligence and Butler reports were published. Those reports clearly showed that, while Saddam had probably not purchased yellowcake from Niger, the dictator had almost certainly tried--and that Mr. Wilson's own briefing of the CIA after his mission supported that conclusion. Mr. Wilson somehow omitted that fact from his public accounts at the time. He also omitted to explain why the CIA had sent him to Niger: His wife, who worked at the CIA, had suggested his name for the trip, a fact Mr. Wilson also denied, but which has also since been proven. In other words, the only real support there has ever been for the "Bush lied" storyline came from a man who is himself a demonstrable liar. If we were Nick Kristof and the other writers who reported Mr. Wilson's facts as gospel, we'd be apologizing to our readers. Yet, incredibly, Mr. Wilson has once again become the Democrats' favorite mascot because they want him as a prop for their "lied us into war" revival campaign. They must think the media are stupid, because so many Democrats are themselves on the record in the pre-Iraq War period as declaring that Saddam had WMD. Here is Al Gore from September 23, 2002, amid the Congressional debate over going to war: "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." Or Hillary Rodham Clinton, from October 10, 2002: "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. . . ." Or Senator Jay Rockefeller, the Democratic Vice Chairman of the Intelligence Committee, who is now leading the "Bush lied" brigades (from October 10, 2002): "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. . . .We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." If Mr. Bush is a liar, what does the use of the phrase "unmistakable evidence" make Mr. Rockefeller? A fool? The scandal here isn't what happened before the war. The scandal is that the same Democrats who saw the same intelligence that Mr. Bush saw, who drew the same conclusions, and who voted to go to war are now using the difficulties we've encountered in that conflict as an excuse to rewrite history. Are Republicans really going to let them get away with it? Carry on Looney tunes. I am calling for a FULL investigation of Valerie Plame and her husband who didn't have to put a written report of his trip to Niger together against CIA standard operating procedures and did not have to sign a non-disclosure agreement which is also SOP for the CIA. Also, why send someone with his experience? If the CIA truly wanted to get to the bottom of it, why not send an "expert?". Yes my Liberal friends, a FULL disclosure and nothing less about how Valerie Plame assigned her husband and did not follow CIA SOP. Carry on. Last edited by N2272V; 11-03-2005 at 06:40 PM.

11-03-2005, 08:38 PM	#2
richie154 Retired Hookah Master Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Valley of Heart's Delight Age: 24 Posts: 3,718	Suggest deletion. __________________ The Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose. An evil soul producing holy witness is like a villian with a smiling cheek, a goodly apple rotten at the heart. Oh, what a goodly outside falsehood hath! Private Pilot: 10/20/2005 Private Multi Engine: 05/09/2008 The more things change, the more Mesa still sucks.

11-03-2005, 09:15 PM	#3
DavidMich Registered User Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Back in MCO! Posts: 3,626	Suggest higher dosage of Lithium Dibromide for the thread starter. __________________ "So if man is 5, and the devil is 6, then that must make me 7,,,this honky's gone to heaven!"

11-03-2005, 10:19 PM	#4
N2272V Insane Collector Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Ventura Age: 54 Posts: 2,110	Duh I would suggest you both get a room and have a circle jerk and whine about how bad George Bush has been for America. Dismissed, you're both stuck on stupid. Gawd I love watching mental midgets get in a tissy.

11-04-2005, 08:09 AM	#5
Hapag-Lloyd Insane Collector Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 40 Posts: 2,395	Jim, please refrain from dragging the A380, or any other Airbus product for that matter, into your neo-conservative posts. Airbus is a fine, if not superior or even supreme, product of European provenience. It has absolutely nothing to do with USA politics, especially since a number of major US carriers have "special" "agreements" with Boeing to solely purchase their products. I kindly request from you to respect that. Thank you! __________________ THIS SPACE 4 RENT!!!

11-04-2005, 06:47 PM	#6
Takeo von Tucher Senior Collector Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 419	Hapag, it´s not Airbus - it's Airbush!!!

11-05-2005, 01:57 PM	#11
Hapag-Lloyd Insane Collector Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 40 Posts: 2,395	No, I don´t. My gf works for Airbus, though. __________________ THIS SPACE 4 RENT!!!

11-05-2005, 04:35 PM	#14
Chansen Complete Wacko! Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Parker, CO Posts: 3,024	Wierd thread title! A380 or yellowcake? This isn't logical.

11-28-2005, 09:36 PM	#15
Magnesium Overcast Collector Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: St. George, Utah Age: 24 Posts: 102	None of the above. But you are a YELLOWBELLY! __________________ The only Bullsh#t Detector on DAC; here to expose hippocracy & lies, and defend against it! Right now there's a lot of it coming from Federal Way, China, and Guelph, Ontario!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread: