Steven Douglas wrote:
I'm curious to know if you are aware of my position on the

European genocide of the late '90's? And my position on the war to stop
it? I have clearly stated my position on that in the past.

I don't think there are too many people that care about or especially
keep track of what Steven Goebbels thinks.

SOOOOO WHAAAAT??? You think I care what a couple of fringe leftist
kooks (you and Doc) think of me?

Screaming in CAPS. You obviously care very much.

You need to drop the "I don't care" tactic too. Nobody buys it.

Steven Douglas wrote:

Woodswun wrote:

I think lying to go to war so that the Veep can collect higher
retirement benefits is much, much more of a scandal than
a zipper problem.

Why don't you specify exactly which lie was used to go to war. But
first, define what a "lie" means to you.

Distortion that built a case for the war.

Volumes, reams of UN reports that showed Saddam's capabilities
destroyed, information that were plainly disregarded by the
Administration.

The reference to Niger yellowcake that British Intelligence came up
with and endorsed by Mr. Bush in a State of the Union speech. Mr. Bush
should have mentioned in that speech that Mr. Tenet and the CIA, his
OWN intelligence people, refused to endorse that information.

Reliance on a source that was firmly reported as being mentally
defective by German Intelligence that was used to establish "evidence"
of mobile biological labs.

Reliance on evidence concerning "aluminum tubes for centrifuges" that
were sourced to a minor intelligence analyst that in turn inspired a
massive heated debate among senior intelligence and energy department
analysts. A debate that was kept from public knowledge.

All this, of course, needs to be investigated further. After 18 months
of foot dragging by Republicans the Democrats in the Senate forced the
issue into a closed session debate.

If they win one or both sections of Congress they'll be forcing a lot
more.

Apparently a majority of the American public feels investigations are
justified. It's just a matter of time. Look at the poll results I've
posted at the bottom.

And then maybe you can explain
how Democratic Leader Gephart said he didn't rely on Bush for his
intelligence,

Mr. Gephart, even tho he had Mr. Tenet's council, said he never thought
an invasion of Iraq was necessary.

but went directly to the Clinton appointed CIA director,

Mr. Tenet served at the President's discretion.

Apparently Mr. Bush also felt that Mr. Tenet was the best man for
the job.

It's endlessly fascinting to me that Mr. Bush, unlike you, has heaped
lavish praise on Mr. Tenet after perhaps the worst "failure" in the
history of the CIA. He even gave Mr. Tenet a magnificent medal and
patted him on the back when Mr. Tenet trucked off into the private
sector to make better money. I believe it's because Mr. Tenet was a
fine team player.

If you'd like to compare quality hiring let's compare James Lee Witt
and Michael Brown.

and to former Clinton administration officials before voting to
authorize the war. >And then maybe you can explain how Leaders Daschle
and Gephart, along with John Kerry, John Edwards, and many other Democr=

Let me insert a recent quote by another Clinton, Hillary:

"I take responsibility for my vote, and I, along with a majority of
Americans, expect the president and his administration to take
responsibility for the false assurances, faulty evidence and
mismanagement of the war," the New York senator said in a lengthy
letter to thousands of people who have written her about the war.


"Based on the information that we have today, Congress never would have
been asked to give the president authority to use force against Iraq,"
she said. Clinton stopped short of saying her vote was a mistake, the
political path chosen by two other potential Democratic candidates -
former vice presidential candidate John Edwards and Sen. Joe Biden,
D-Del

The venerable John Murtha has admitted that his vote was a mistake
also.

And maybe you can explain how
Saddam Hussein so conveniently chose to not cooperate with the UN
inspectors.

I think it's because Saddam knew he had nothing, the inspector's pretty
much knew he had nothing and that Saddam, after ten years of having
foreigners rifling thru his drawers wanted the situation ended.

It's clear now, and should have been back in Spring 2003, that the
sanctions were working, by the way. That evidence was plainly there.

Recent poll results:


Newsweek Poll, November 10-11, 2005
"Do you think ***** Cheney deliberately misused or manipulated pre-war
intelligence about Iraq's nuclear capabilities in order to build
support for war with Iraq, or did not deliberately misuse pre-war
intelligence?"

52% Misused | 33% Did not misuse

NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll, November 4-7, 2005
"Do you think President Bush gave the country the most accurate
information he had before going to war with Iraq, or do you think
President Bush deliberately misled people to make the case for war with
Iraq?"

57% Misled | 35% Most accurate

Pew Research Center Poll, November 3-6, 2005
"Before the war the U.S. and Britain claimed that Iraq had weapons of
mass destruction. These weapons have not been found. Why do you think
they made this claim? Was it mostly because they were themselves
misinformed by bad intelligence, or was it mostly because they lied to
provide a reason for invading Iraq?"

43% They lied | 41% They were misinformed

ABC News/Washington Post Poll, October 30 - November 2, 2005
"In making its case for war with Iraq, do you think the Bush
Administration told the American public what it believed to be true, or
intentionally misled the American public?"

55% Intentionally misled | 44% What it believed to be true

From the San Diego Union-Tribune