Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Help Debunking Some Stuff From "The Dark Side"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Sugarcoated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-06-06 10:26 PM
Original message
Help Debunking Some Stuff From "The Dark Side"
"One of Dick's direct lies: 'there is no doubt Saddam has amassed weapons of mass destruction'" - Me

One of Bill Clinton's direct lies way before Dick Cheney came into the picture: "The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists...." - President Bill Clinton, 1998

"The aluminum tube story - another one of Dick's lies." - Me

According to the Iraq Survey Group, "Dr Huwaysh attributes his pursuit of 81mm rockets to the delivery of some launchers to the military shortly after he became the head of MIC in 1997....In early 2002, Dr. Huwaysh sought two shipments of high strength aluminum from an Iraqi procurement firm in Syria."

"It has revealed that Powell was kept from knowing that 'Curveball' was the single source and that 'Scooter' Libby directed Powell what to say in his speech to the UN - all directed by Dick." - Me

According to Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, a former top aide to Colin Powell: "Wilkerson and Powell spent four days and nights in a CIA conference room with then Director George Tenet and other top officials trying to ensure the accuracy of the presentation...'There was no way the Secretary of State was going to read off a script about the serious natters of intelligence that could lead to war when the script was basically unsourced,' Wilkerson says." CNN Special Report August 23, 2005

If Cheney is as all powerful as you claim, I'd start looking over my shoulder if I were you. Remember, all public communications are being monitored by the NSA and all collected info goes back to VP Dick Cheney.lol
_____________

I know the Clinton part is a dodge, but do any knowledgeable DU'ers know what the frig this asshole is talking about? I have never heard any of it before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-06-06 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. Powell: "I'm not reading this! This is bullshit!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
INDIA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-06-06 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. THAT website
can go F itself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-06-06 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Plenty more from Google
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Redstone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-06-06 10:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. It doesn't MATTER what he say. None of it is true. But you'll be
wasting your time arguing the points; rightwingers are NOT smart enough to understand when their favorite talk-show host's "talking points of the day" are fraudulent.

Save yourself the trouble. Those people wouldn't know the truth if it jumped up and bit them on the nose.

Redstone
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sugarcoated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-06-06 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I trying to quit
but went back over "there". Something about this fucker makes me want to prove him wrong. And I KNOW he is. Sigh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Redstone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-06-06 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. You know he is. But he will never know he is, no matter how much
you try. Better to spend that time working for you local Dem candidate, than beating your head against a wall.

Plus, rightwingers like that are beneath contempt. Arguing only makes them feel empowered.

Redstone
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magellan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-06-06 10:47 PM
Response to Original message
5. On the aluminum tubes
This is a a great example of taking a paragraph out of context. Here's the full quote from the Iraqi Survey Group:

ISG has found that high-level Iraqi interest in aluminum tubes appears to have come from efforts to produce 81-mm rockets, rather than a nuclear end use. (Emphasis THEIRS.) Multiple reports indicate Dr. Huwaysh was keenly interested in high-strength, high-specification aluminum tubes for rocket production. Dr. Huwaysh attributes his pursuit of 81-mm rockets to the delivery of some launchers to the military shortly after he became the head of MIC in 1997. As a result, Dr. Huwaysh claims he was bound by requests from the Minister of Defense to produce rockets for those launchers—a task he regularly pressed on MIC leadership at quarterly meetings.

* Dr. Huwaysh’s advocacy of 81-mm rockets appears to explain why he sought the delivery of items that were probably sample aluminum tubes. In early 2002, Dr. Huwaysh sought two shipments of high-strength aluminum from an Iraqi procurement firm in Syria.

You have to read the whole thing to see how misleading that tiny quote sent to you really is. It's here: Iraq Survey Group Final Report
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skids Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-07-06 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. Allow me to use this...

...to illustrate a point about responding to these asswipes.

You might be tempted to write something like:

"You miss the point -- the aluminum tubes were not for centrifuges like Dick Cheney claimed.
They were for normal, run of the mill, rockets."

That's about 30 seconds of typing.

Instead, you should respond:

"Thank you for proving my point."

That's 5 seconds of typing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magellan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-07-06 03:31 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Agreed
When dealing with freepers, there's no sense wasting time to explain where they went wrong. They're either stupid and are passing along information they never bothered to check themselves (for fear they might be struck by a lightning rod of TRUTH), or they hope you're too stupid to check.

However, I recently found that it's always worthwhile to pursue clarification with non-freeps, and I mean average, intelligent Americans who are simply misled. Last week I met another independent like myself -- hates Bush**, the whole nine yards -- who still surprised me by stating she believed a) Colin Powell was a trustworthy man and b) we'd find WMD in Iraq.

Pretty calmly (for me, anyway) I asked if she'd heard that Powell had only a month or two ago publicly acknowledged that he'd never believed that Iraq posed a nuclear threat. She looked shocked, said she hadn't heard. Then I asked her to consider: if the government could get stunning spy satellite photos of so-called "biolabs", why don't we have even one photo of WMD being buried or trucked out of Iraq? Did she think we weren't looking for this, that we wouldn't want to catch them in the act?

She said she hadn't thought of that before. And her desire to believe that our government would never lie us into a war crumbled on the spot. Then she was REALLY ticked off with BushCo. Very worth the time.

But with freepers your time is better spent watching your toenails grow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC