READER COMMENTS ON
"VIDEO - Senator Levin Responds to Bush's Pre-War Excuses"
(44 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 6:30 am PT...
Levin did a good job in general.
However he bought into the misinformation that "everyone believed Sadaam had WMD".
It is patently absurd to make that statement. In the context of an immiment threat to the US, which is what the president and cabinet set forth, most of the world rejected that.
There were both individuals and nations that did not believe that.
That is why the UN did not approve of the invasion of Iraq. The Security Counsel did not buy Powell's presentation.
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 6:53 am PT...
The fact that W is now attacking any Americans who disagree with him, many of whom are moderates and conservatives who are actually fighting his war, just shows that the spin machine is losing it.
Clearly, he has fewer and fewer supporters. So now he is just swinging blindly at the masses. What was that comment so long ago...
oh, "the final throws".
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 7:01 am PT...
History is this: "a majority of House Democrats voted against the resolution" to give the president the authority to invade Iraq.
"The House earlier rejected, by 270-155, the main challenge to the White House-backed resolution: a proposal, backed by a majority of Democrats, that obliged the president to return to Congress for a second vote on the use of American force against Iraq if he decides that cooperative efforts with the United Nations are futile." (link here).
Maybe the link meister, Kira, can link to the vote in the Senate ... those who voted against the war?
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 7:03 am PT...
Perhaps we should torture #43 and his regime to get the info we need. Well the whole world has been tortured by their deceit destruction and death squads, so why not- eye for an eye?
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 7:27 am PT...
Like any wild dog backed into a corner it becomes very dangerous and will bite anything.
Keep your eyes open tho because the GOP tactics are such that when they're under the microscope, they divert attention away with other events and character slander
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 7:46 am PT...
Anyone notice how testy that news anchor was with Levin? I've never seen her before, but it seems like she's cut from the same cloth as Kyra Phillips.
"Do you have any information that the Bush administration mislead the public?" (blink...blink...pause...blink...blink...)
What's with these American news people? Has she ever heard of several documents called "The Downing Street Minutes and Briefings"?!!!
That question that she posed goes to show you that the American corporate media will not change. I could do a google search and find 1000's of links directing me to the evidence that Bushco. lied and manipulated the American public for war. And here she is asking this stupid question! Has she no shame?!
O'Reilly? O'Really! --- that explains it!
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 7:49 am PT...
I think that there may be neoCons in the democratic party too. The obvious one is Zel Miller, however, I suspect Gephardt and Hillary. I hope I am wrong.
But since we are revisiting history (not rewriting it), concerning the lead up to the Iraq war:
"While Bush hailed the strong House showing, a majority of House Democrats voted against the resolution --- even though their leader, Dick Gephardt of Missouri, was one of its authors" (link here).
Now ... once again ... who says "everyone thought Saddam was an imminent threat to the security of the United States and voted accordingly"?
I predict that those in the MSM who helped deceive then will help Bush deceive now.
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 7:50 am PT...
I thought her name was O'Reilly. My bad. (scratch that last thought from #6)
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 8:02 am PT...
RE my #3
I can't wait for Kira. Here is the list of senators who voted against the resolution to allow the president to invade Iraq:
Akaka (D-HI), Bingaman (D-NM), Boxer (D-CA), Byrd (D-WV), Chafee (R-RI), Conrad (D-ND), Corzine (D-NJ), Dayton (D-MN), Durbin (D-IL), Feingold (D-WI), Graham (D-FL), Inouye (D-HI), Jeffords (I-VT), Kennedy (D-MA), Leahy (D-VT), Levin (D-MI), Mikulski (D-MD), Murray (D-WA), Reed (D-RI), Sarbanes (D-MD), Stabenow (D-MI), Wellstone (D-MN), Wyden (D-OR) (link here).
Lets revisit the statement "everyone believed Saddam was an imminent threat to the US" based on having the same "intelligence"?
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 8:05 am PT...
Do you mean that the evil bushitler fooled all those democrats in the Senate too? Ok, but how did he fool all the yes voters on the UN resolutions. As to #6's point I can google up 1000s of websites that say the Holocaust never happened - complete with "proof" of how arial photos were "doctored" to falsely accuse the peace loving nazis of genocide. That someone make an allegation is not proof of anything. #5 makes his own little slander while saying nothing
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 8:19 am PT...
I do not know who you are addressing in your question "Do you mean that the evil bushitler fooled all those democrats in the Senate too?".
There was never an "everybody agreed" based on the same "intelligence". That is a gross exaggeration inspired by fanciful notions.
In the Senate there were non-democrats as well as democrats who voted against Bush on the issue.
See my post #9 for a link.
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 8:19 am PT...
#9, Thank you for the list. No one from my state is on it. My state is blue tho, so I quess they all had their hands out on this one as they sold us out.
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 8:29 am PT...
911 is the real deal.
did you know there WERE bombs in the building.
check out the actual video from news reports on that day.
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 8:30 am PT...
COMMENT #15 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 8:32 am PT...
You are welcome.
If you want to know how I got my info, I hacked into the drone flying over Washington DC (link here).
The drone is owned and operated by Big Brother's One Intelligence For All, Inc.
COMMENT #16 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 8:33 am PT...
COMMENT #17 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 8:46 am PT...
Dantastic Danimal you are becoming a one trick pony.
Why not ask Brad to give you a thread where the subject matter is the 9/11 report and its failures?
Then you can stop being off topic on every thread on this blog.
COMMENT #18 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 9:06 am PT...
#15 lol, didn't go there, I used too, sad to admit, I bought into all the Clinton Crap that the repubs were touting. Don't get me wrong (I have now seen the error of my ways) I still believe Clinton has some answering to do...don't like his cozy relationship with bushco, and always questioned how he managed to go as far as he did w/o some help, from someone. Another part of the puzzle I devoted some time on, during his years in office. I have some 'tin foil hat' theories but won't go there. M4 (OT again...when will I ever learn)
COMMENT #19 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 9:17 am PT...
"I can google up 1000s of websites that say the Holocaust never happened - complete with "proof" of how arial photos were "doctored" to falsely accuse the peace loving nazis of genocide."
Are you suggesting that The Downing Street Minutes & Briefings are "doctored"?
Or perhaps your suggesting that the high-ranking officials in those transcripts & memos were delusional.
Are you suggesting that there wasn't an offensive air-war July 23, 2002 prior to congress (October, 2002) authorizing the president to use force AS A LAST RESORT?
These are not far-fetched conspiracy theories, Castro. These are the facts. It's time you dealt with them.
COMMENT #20 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 11/14/2005 @ 9:25 am PT...
Even if it were true that "everyone believed Saddam had WMD," that doesn't excuse the invasion of Iraq, because U.N. inspectors were responding to widespread suspicion (not knowledge)
of such weapons by investigating.
George W. Bush made the unliteral decision to invade the country (in the most cowardly fashion, by dropping bombs at night) because he was too impatient to wait for the inspectors to finish their work. If anyone wants to try to defend Bush's decision on moral grounds, good luck...but don't pretend that it makes a difference how many Democrats supported the invasion (conveniently called a war to add legitimacy to it).
COMMENT #21 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 10:19 am PT...
Here's some more information for you, Soledad.
From today's Raw Story:
Rediscovered testimony given by CIA director in 2001 suggests manipulation of pre-war intelligence
Tenet told Congress in February 2001 that Iraq was “probably” pursuing chemical and biological weapons programs but that the CIA had no direct evidence that Iraq had actually obtained such weapons. However, such caveats as “may” and “probably” were removed from intelligence reports by key members of the Bush administration immediately after 9/11 when discussing Iraq.
Between 1998 and early 2002, the CIA’s reports on the so-called terror threat offered no details on what types of chemical and biological weapons Iraq had obtained. After 9/11, however, these reports radically changed. In October 2002, the agency issued another report, this time alleging Iraq had vast supply of chemical and biological weapons. Much of that information turned out to be based on forged documents and unreliable Iraqi exiles.
COMMENT #22 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 10:31 am PT...
i think you dredd me because i'm so Dantastic. Don't dredd the danimal Dredd man.
im sorry for posting off topic. But i think 911 is the real issue we should expose, because once it is exposed to the american people, all shit will break loose. And i don't see why you have such a problem with my posting.
you're just trying to incite arguments on the board.
COMMENT #23 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 10:57 am PT...
More testimony is showing up concerning CIA testimony pre invasion.
Raw Story has this (link here).
COMMENT #24 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 11/14/2005 @ 11:29 am PT...
Soledad O'Brien has a Spanish first name, an Irish last name, and a Bulgarian level of competence.
But she sure is multicultural, that's the second most important thing to the networks, after glamour-girl looks.
COMMENT #25 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 11:54 am PT...
Dantastic.. i think the point is, we're discussing "specific things" in this thread, and the constant bombardment of your Sept. 11, 2001 info distracts from the issue being discussed in the thread.
Most of us here believe there were problems with the official Spet. 11, 2001 investigation, and fully call for a "real" investigation.. however, some here might not agree that the Government was involved, or that revalation may be too much for them to handle. As you pointed out several times now, there is an abundance of info to look at, and people should do that. And, you may well be right.. if we could -prove- that Bushco was involved with Sept. 11, 2001, that would unravel a LOT of knots.. but, again, -this- thread (and perhaps most of them you post this info to) is NOT the "proper" place for your info (unless you tie it in and explain how it makes sense to the thread).
Dredd is not trying to start an argument, he was being polite. You are trying to start an argument by not posting on topic, and being thick-headed about the Sept. 11, 2001 connection.. in so much as, you seem to think only your take on the world matters, and are content to hijack threads to make your point.. Sorry, that doesn't give you creedence, it makes you look arrogant and irresponsible. Please stay on topic (for the most part).. As Dredd suggested, perhaps asking Brad for your own thread would be appropriate, but hijacking dozens of other threads is -not-..
Back to the thread.. I don't care HOW many "politicians" bought into this mess.. And, you have to look at the timeline, and OTHER factors.. First, the vote was made 2 days after getting the report, which wasn't complete and had a summary that was not "accurate".. Yes, all politicians that didn't FULLY read it were wrong not to do so. That doesn't excuse the "misleading summary", does it? Also, the vote was in OCTOBER of 2002.. the "invasion" wasn't until March 2003.. that's a long time later, and during that time, all the lies from the Administration were coming out. When the U.S. decided to illegally invade a sovergein country, I was making a loud rucus about how we had "no proof" and no "credible" evidence to be there, based on the INFO AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC at -that- time, but the vote was done, had been for 6 months (or so).. it was too late to do anything then, and the vote (seemingly) required all "peaceful means" to be exhasted first.. that wasn't done as Bush invaded -while inspectors were in country inspecting-... remember that bit? Saddam WAS COMPLYING when we invaded... which makes this all the more bothersome, doesn't it?
COMMENT #26 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 12:45 pm PT...
COMMENT #27 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 12:56 pm PT...
there is no room for debate. the towers came down because of controlled demolitions. examine the video evidence. all i'm doing is wasting a few lines of the internet page. skip on by if you want.
but ignoring 911 or leaving it up for debate, isn't a luxury afforded to the victims of 911. we owe it to them to expose this piece of shit administration and get to the truth. the neo-con national security bullshit apparatus that brought us 911 and the fake war on terror needs to be exposed. It is the most important issue period.
COMMENT #28 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 1:07 pm PT...
Again, YOU consider it "the most important issue, period".. and -that- IS up for debate. And, again, YOU are looking for an argument, no one else. Stay on topic.. it's that simple, really.
I agree that the evidence points (starkly) to our leaders having been involved in Sept. 11, 2001.. but that's not the point. The point is showing respect on other people's blogs. If you can't do that, you lose credibility with a lot of people, and therefore do HARM to your cause. Get it?
COMMENT #29 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 1:10 pm PT...
COMMENT #30 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 2:45 pm PT...
Just quickly --- I'm running low on time to do my favorite thing --- blogging at BradBlog
Make sure you include some kind of current & relevant comment for the thread or current topics. If you want to include a relevant comment about 9/11, that will be helpful. You have to understand that people read your posts even though they don't always answer them, therefore a constant barrage of the same thing is annoying. You lose readership if you annoy folks.
As we've said --- we have a great deal of interest in 9/11 because it is very integral to the whole ball of wax. For instance - I believe a lot of people were swayed into pro-war thinking by the neoCON misinformation that was drummed out constantly by the complicit/compliant media ... remember the rolling terror bars and the terror alerts 24/7. Remember the mantra - Saddam - 9/11 - terror - Iraq - terror - mushroom clouds - (etc.)
Yes - a lot of people were manipulated by the terror alerts and they believed the lies. It will take a little more time for those people to connect the dots --- but it helps that the media is finally reporting on the misinformation and allowing Democrats some time to talk.
Ok --- here's my addition:
Anthrax Sent Through Mail Gained Potency by the Letter
Remember Senator Daschle received an Anthrax laced letter dated 9/11/01. The Anthrax in his letter was extremely pure and potent. The other letters stated "take pennicillin." Daschle's letter stated "you die now." The Anthrax was traced to a US lab. The person who was blamed by the FBI is currently suing the government. In short --- Daschle, a powerful Democrat in the Senate, was intimidated. Also need to research Anthrax - Leahy.
COMMENT #31 [Permalink]
said on 11/14/2005 @ 2:47 pm PT...
Dredd Here are some links:
Senate Roll Call On the Joint Resolution (H.J.Res. 114 )
Project Vote Smart - Synopsis and Links - Bill Number: H J Res 114
Center for Cooperative Research --- Dick Durbin
Quote, October 2002
“It's troubling to have classified information that contradicts statements made by the administration. There's more they should share with the public.” [Knight Ridder 10/7/02] "
Integral Journalism --- A New Paradigm
This could be a worthy site ... I admit I haven't had time to fully review it. /Kira
[snip] My Echo Chamber Hypothesis proposes that the "He Said/She Said" objectivity constraints of journalistic production broke down after there was a consensus within the political leadership in Congress to authorize military intervention in Iraq.
After October 2002, the media served as an uncritical Echo Chamber to the Executive Branch's countdown towards war.
* How can this dichotomous objectivity constraint be overcome without resorting to a partisan press?
* Is there a new paradigm of journalistic production that can more comprehensively cover the complex issues of the day?
... Conventional objective mainstream media juxtaposes partisan conservative perspectives with partisan liberal perspectives, and it feels like a debate where the reader feels obligated to chose one side or the other. But sometimes both perspectives can be right or both can be wrong --- or most often both perspectives are half-right and half-wrong.
Moving beyond a bi-partisan juxtaposition of intersubjective perceptions and including non-partisan perspectives would provide a check and balance on the two political monopolies whenever Democrats and Republicans agree on issues. [snip]
hj res 114 house
[from http://clerk.house.gov Click here for original (not cached) page]]
Scroll down about halfway --- the resolution links are highlighted in yellow.
COMMENT #32 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 11/15/2005 @ 5:01 am PT...
One good news item: The lead editorial in today's New York Times slams Bush for saying his critics are rewriting history, and states emphatically that it's Bush who's doing the rewriting.
Long overdue from "Friends of Judy Miller"...but better late than never.
COMMENT #33 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 11/15/2005 @ 5:13 am PT...
For Kira: The mainstream media have failed us twice with their "He said, she said" paradigm of balanced views on an issue.
First, they abandoned it where WMD in Iraq were concerned. Instead of balancing Chalabi's lies to Judy Miller and intelligence sources against other opinions (which were readily available) that no WMD existed, the media simply bought the administration's case hook, line, and sinker. Toadyism, not objective reporting.
Second, whenever a Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rice lie is revealed, instead of investigating to discover the actual truth, the media have simply asked Scottie McClellan for a counterpoint. Thus, a "lie vs. truth" dichotomy becomes "Republican/Democrat"
or "conservative/liberal" or even "patriot/traitor." Result...Bush can lie through his teeth, and it's all just a matter of political differences.
COMMENT #34 [Permalink]
said on 11/15/2005 @ 7:20 am PT...
I can't forget, just months ago, this senator Levin, standing with Norm Coleman, who just pissed his pants because George Galloway just handed Coleman his ass on a platter.
Galloway told the senate about the 'pack of lies' that started the war. At the press conference afterwards, Coleman could only stutter "unreliable witness" and Levin helped Coleman, basically saying "yeah, Galloway is an unreliable witness"
I guess we should thank Levin for at least pretending to represent Americans, which is better than the GOP.
COMMENT #35 [Permalink]
said on 11/15/2005 @ 1:03 pm PT...
Brad: What a ruckus about being off topic is going on here! Since there is no open thread on this web, please urge whomever you have left in charge to try to be more respectful of others opinions especially when they are with you, not against. It is a real turn-off!
COMMENT #36 [Permalink]
said on 11/15/2005 @ 1:19 pm PT...
Nov. 14, 2005 TUCKER CARLSON MSNBC
Millions of people watched the horror of 9/11 right before their very eyes, live on television. Two planes, crashing into the World Trade Center. Less than a couple of hours later, both towers, of course, collapsing.
On Monday, Tucker Carlson welcomed Brigham Young University Professor Steven Jones to the 'Situation.' Jones, a professor of physics, believes that the hijackers may not have brought down the towers by themselves.
To read an excerpt of their conversation, continue to the text below. To watch the video of the towers, click on the "Launch" button to the right.
TUCKER CARLSON: Well, just sum up this-obviously
your theory, just the one sentence that I just explained, in the intro,
contradicts what we all think we know about how these towers collapsed.
Quickly sum up your explanation for what's happened.
. . .
COMMENT #37 [Permalink]
said on 11/15/2005 @ 1:23 pm PT...
Well, it seems the launch button doesn't work, but you can certainly go to the link at msnbc to see it if you so desire.
Have a great day, everyone! I have an appointment!
COMMENT #38 [Permalink]
said on 11/15/2005 @ 3:13 pm PT...
Lindy #35 I'm embarrassed I joined in on the off-topic topic. I have been one of the most off-topic commenters on BradBlog --- I ADMIT IT!
I just re-read my comment #30 and it does sound uppity and controlling. I apologize to you all.
COMMENT #39 [Permalink]
Yank Had Enuf
said on 11/15/2005 @ 3:50 pm PT...
Thank You Senator Levin, for pursuing the truth for all Americans. Just one little thing... next time you're on the air , could you please mention the PNAC?
COMMENT #40 [Permalink]
said on 11/16/2005 @ 9:20 am PT...
Here is a link to some of the transcript of what happened.
I hope that Brad, if he deems it worthy, will give a thread on this subject.
The danger, as the transcript shows, is that people will associate us here at this BLOG with nuts.
People do not generally want to believe the professor's story because it is a severe blow to their world view.
Let Brad calculate the risks and BLOG accordingly.
COMMENT #41 [Permalink]
said on 11/16/2005 @ 11:27 am PT...
But Dredd, aren't we already the rebels? The True American Patriots in the fashion of Thomas Jefferson who said dissent is the highest form of Patriotism.
I've noticed on Democrat blogs that people who comment about the possibility of fraud with eVoting machines are called tin foil hatters and conspiracy theorists. I guess that labels us already with a lot of folks.
Are we afraid of a sour grape? I'm not. Damn 'em.
I'm not afraid of their fascist labels. WooHoo!
COMMENT #42 [Permalink]
said on 11/16/2005 @ 7:37 pm PT...
Thanks Kira for your kind words.
Dredd: As to 9/11 article, I was pointing out that it is amazing that Tucker Carlson would have that on his new show. I don't watch him unless the Daily Show is not on. Many of us who have been labeled as nuts in many other matters have been proven not to be as nutty as people thought before as indicated by the recent polls on the Bush administration. "Conspiracy theorists" is a nasty pr word that stuck when Rove threw it out in the past, though untrue.
Brad's main focus is on election fraud, and that's as it should be, but he does have other topics on this site, though we sometimes see other perhaps related articles that are shared. The topic here could have easily have been "Bush's Pre-War Excuses" as it is part of the title.
If we all agreed with each word that appeared here, we would not learn. And, if all thought the exact same, how boring would that be?
COMMENT #43 [Permalink]
said on 11/18/2005 @ 10:09 am PT...
To think that so many people are still so blind and do not believe that this administration would mislead us into war...wake up brain washed fools!
Two good examples of this administrations b.s. are the storys about Jessica Lynch and the death of Pat Tillman.
These...people in the White house had viewed other intelligence, intelligence that was never shown to the congress or senate. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize if they heartlessly lie about Tillman or Lynch they would intentionally lie or cover up the truth....to the truth of WMD's
COMMENT #44 [Permalink]
said on 11/19/2005 @ 7:42 am PT...
I sent this email to the professor. It illustrates that we can find ways to get around being called nuts by being tactical and strategic:
I enjoyed your paper. Thank you. I like the approach you take in your paper. You point out that the official reports did not attempt to definitively solve some of the questions you take on. They merely pointed out the questions without attempting to solve them.
So, your paper is not an 'in your face' attack, it is a moderate and reasonable inquiry.
Some of the media, e.g. Tucker Carlson, attack your paper because they are afraid. Some do not have intellectual courage and therefore attack the messenger. Please do not be discouraged by their fear.
One thing I offer as a tactic for moving forward with this paper of yours, in the sense of finding a forum for its discussion in a broader sphere, is to not jump to conclusions on a certain issue.
That issue is that even if demolition is shown to be a factor, that does not rule out terrorism. I mean all that needs to be said is that it only proves demolition was used ... not who did the demolition.
This way one avoids the obvious challenge to the prevailing world view that our government absolutely and uncategorically would not do that. This is a powerful sentiment and should not be taken on directly.
And honestly, it is possible that the government did not have a part in it and that it was agents of another government, etc.
The demolition theory is worthy of its own investigation, and should go forward unattached to any theory of 'who done it'. Leave that to another investigation.
Anyway, thank you for having the intellectual courage and honesty to take on a controversial subject."