"And To Think That They Said It About Downing Street"

[Demit]

Good smackdown on the Chimp by Rude Pundit! When all most of us can do is stare gape-mouthed at something like yesterday's press conference, thank god there are people already busy forming the thoughts that we would if we were as articulate, and rude...


"Chimpanzees engage in what we call "speech" - that is, a discernible series of sounds that are meant to communicate some idea. Chimp speech is not universal among chimps; indeed, much chimp speech is individual, as if they are all little Adams and Eves in shrinking Edens, creating names for things, for actions. Some chimp speech is spread, from mother to child, and some among members of an entire troop of chimps. So, like, Big Ass Alpha Chimp can start screeching high and then low to mean, "I'm-a gonna throw this pile of shit at you." Pretty soon, the sound and the shit-tossing go together and every chimp in the group is screeching high and low before heaving a load.

One must wonder, then, if linguistic misunderstandings on a very basic level cause those vicious chimp wars that break out between various groups of chimps. 'Cause one chimp's verbalizing of the intention to toss shit could be another chimp's phrasing that means, "Look at my enormous erection with which I'm-a gonna fuck you." Ahh, sweet mysteries of animal languages. But if we humans study the same group of chimps for an extended period, we can recognize repeated patterns and gain some insight into the interactions of chimps.

So it was that President George Bush, in a press conference with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, had one of those startling moments where the synapses in his brain, so addled by years of cocaine, alcohol, and the occasional cogent thought, went fuckin' bananas, and he just started babbling a barely coherent series of memorized phrases. It happened when Bush was asked about the Downing Street Memo, where British intelligence officials reported in July 2002 that Bush had decided to go to war with Iraq, even though it really wasn't a "threat," and was "fixing" intelligence around that goal.

Both leaders were asked, "On Iraq, the so-called Downing Street memo from July 2002 says intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy of removing Saddam through military action. Is this an accurate reflection of what happened? Could both of you respond?" Blair responded, essentially, "Yes, yes, quite, now I'll talk about something else that doesn't actually discredit the memo and you can all jolly well go fuck yourselves." Because Li'l Tony denied "facts" were being fixed, and then blathered on about going to the U.N., Saddam being bad, and who the fuck cares. ..."

more at http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/

[MsUnderstood]

1. BAH! my work blocks the blog!

and it was funny too!

[Demit]

3. Don't know if this is kosher, but...

Here's the next 4 grafs:

Bush, though, oh, christ. First he started with conspiracy theories: "Well, I -- you know, I read kind of the characterizations of the memo, particularly when they dropped it out in the middle of his race. I'm not sure who 'they dropped it out' is, but -- I'm not suggesting that you all dropped it out there." So, let's see here: Bush is making the accusation that someone passed the memo on to the Times of London in order to undermine Tony Blair's bid for re-election, but he has no idea who it might have been. And he doesn't deny the validity of the memo (except for vague, blindingly confusing "somebody said, well, you know, we had made up our mind to go to use military force to deal with Saddam. There's nothing farther from the truth"). That's like saying, "Those pictures of me with my cock in Tony Blair's mouth and a Union Jack hanging out of my ass were only made public to hurt his election chances."

Bush then went into blanket denial mode, relying on phrases that he's used a million fuckin' times before: "Nobody wants to commit military into combat. It's the last option. The consequences of committing the military are -- are very difficult. The hardest things I do as the President is to try to comfort families who've lost a loved one in combat. It's the last option that the President must have -- and it's the last option I know my friend had, as well." His brain is like a refrigerator filled with those fuckin' poetry magnets, and you can arrange them any goddamn way you like and find meaning in the words, even if it's just moving the same words around over and over and over.

That great line, about war being "the last option," has been batted around since, oh, let's say, October 2002, when Bush was denying that he was planning a war. Ari Fleischer, in December of that year, told reporters that war was Bush's "last option" and it might become "the only option to protect and to save American lives." And if he had saved American lives, there might not be so many to comfort.

Because this is not to mention the rampaging ego of a man who has to tell us that it's so hard for him "to comfort families." Aww, poor President Bush. Has to give a hug to a widow with three kids whose Army Reserve 35 year-old husband had his intestines ripped out by a roadside bomb blowing the shit out of his poorly armed Hummer. God, the burdens that man has to carry for all of us, for all of us. ..."

:)

[knowbody0]

2. their eyes glazed over

and they said 1441, 1441, 1441, 1441...........and no one asked.
Steve was an obvious plant. the answers were rehearsed.

[JDPriestly]

4. Read the May 2005 Vanity Fair article entitled

The Path to War. It's long but I discuss some of it at http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3812626&mesg_id=3812960

Resolution 1441 was a fall back that Bush and Blair relied on after they realized that their usual allies in the U.N. were adamantly opposed to signing on to an additional authorizing resolution. 1441 was not sufficient to justify the war. If it had been, Blair would not have insisted that Bush try to get another resolution passed in the first place. See the Vanity Fair article as cited above.

Here is what an unidentified U.S. official said about 1441 according to the Vanity Fair article at page 293:

"The mistake that we made . . . was that we should never have offered an additional resolution past 1441. On 1441, they gave us a wink and a nod. Our mistake was trying to drag them to be more explicit." page 293.

And here is what Sir Christopher Meyer said "At the time, 1441 looked like a triumph. In hindsight, it was a trap." page 293.

Bush and Blair were bluffing at the press conference. We have them by the you-know-whats. Let's keep the pressure up. It is just a matter of time.

And, by the way, if Vanity Fair is correct, the techniques the U.S. applied to try to get an additional resolution through the UN were so despicable, that Bush and Blair probably made a few enemies at the UN in the process. No wonder Bush wants to send a bully to the UN. He's at war with it too. Bolton is the diplomatic equivalent of a violent invasion of he UN. Don't misunderstand me. I don't expect him to physically blow the place up, but I do expect him to intimidate and to disregard the normal diplomatic niceties -- that's what I mean by the diplomatic equivalent to war. Bush is in big trouble at the UN, and he wants someone in there who will incite so much Resistance from other members of the UN that he can make it look like its the resisters that are causing the trouble.


Does that tactic remind you of his method in dealing with Democrats in Congress? Sorry for my rambling, but you get the gist.

[cyberpj]

5. House Panel Approves Threat to Withhold Dues to United Nations

Speaking of UN - I just got this blurb in email this afternoon -

House Panel Approves Threat to Withhold Dues to United Nations

The House International Relations Committee today approved a bill that would withhold U.S. dues from the United Nations if the organization does not make a series of changes in how it does business.
Members narrowly rejected, 24-25, an alternative by Tom Lantos, D-Calif., that would authorize but not mandate the withholding of U.S. funds.
The vote comes on the heels of an oil-for-food scandal that has damaged the United Nations’ reputation and brought intensified scrutiny from congressional investigators.
The bill suggests a wide range of “reform” ideas, including an independent oversight board, new codes of conduct for U.N. peacekeeping operations and stricter rules that would keep human rights violaters off the agency’s Human Rights Commission.
Since Congress cannot force changes at the United Nations, International Relations Chairman Henry J. Hyde, R-Ill., wrote a bill that would mandate withholding of up to 50 percent of U.S. assessed dues if the United Nations does not reach 39 goals laid out in the bill.
Full story for CQ.com subscribers | Get free trial

[BigBearJohn]

6. The only part of the Bible I hope comes true:

"Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord" (Romans 12:19),

[rkc3]

7. I guess this explains why he hasn't attended any funerals -

"Nobody wants to commit military into combat. It's the last option. The consequences of committing the military are -- are very difficult. The hardest things I do as the President is to try to comfort families who've lost a loved one in combat."

Consoling families is hard work - explaining that he sent your son to die based on a lie would probably make his frickin' head explode.