Ex-Bush Spokesman: Propaganda Used to Push War

Originally Posted by cneasttx

Well I hate to burst your little bubble, but I am not loyal to any administration or party. But I am also not stupid. No matter which side it comes from propaganda is propaganda.

Well...let's see what unfolds. I pray you're right...because if you're wrong...well...most likely y'all wont care then either. lol

[Cindy]

Originally Posted by Grasshopper

Well...let's see what unfolds. I pray you're right...because if you're wrong...well...most likely y'all wont care then either. lol

Nope, I won't. I just like to post with you and mess with you a little. Sometimes I even agree with you, but don't tell anybody.........

Originally Posted by cneasttx

Nope, I won't. I just like to post with you and mess with you a little. Sometimes I even agree with you, but don't tell anybody.........

Jeesh...lol Don't be afraid to mention it sometimes. I've gotten to the point where I've considered not calling myself Christian because I'm not a Republican any more. Most I talked to about it pretty much tell me such. Oh well...let time unravel it. There's nothing hidden that won't be revealed. And I have a feeling when we see what all this Administration has done it's going to be down right shocking. And it won't be just liberals pointing back to it...it will be significant conservatives too.

And maybe I'll chime in with a little "I told y'all so!" LOL

[Cindy]

Originally Posted by Grasshopper

Jeesh...lol Don't be afraid to mention it sometimes. I've gotten to the point where I've considered not calling myself Christian because I'm not a Republican any more. Most I talked to about it pretty much tell me such. Oh well...let time unravel it. There's nothing hidden that won't be revealed. And I have a feeling when we see what all this Administration has done it's going to be down right shocking. And it won't be just liberals pointing back to it...it will be significant conservatives too.

And maybe I'll chime in with a little "I told y'all so!" LOL

I hear ya.........

[chosenbyone]

Originally Posted by Grasshopper

I believe the war to uproot the Taliban and al Queda was necessary. I don't think Iraq was based on the things I've studied. Wolfowitz was pushing to invade Iraq under the first Bush Presidency and then H. W. Bush rebuked him for being to radical and ordered then Secretary of Defense, Dick Cheney to re-write the policy papers. I think that our military action in Afghanistan was absolutely called for...however, I'm convinced that Iraq was pushed on us by men with an agenda. While I could be wrong...I firmly believe that once Bush is gone men will come out of the woodwork about how deceptive, secretive, and corrupt this regime has been. And I feel these men will be prominent Republicans who are currently quiet because it would be political suicide to speak out right now.

We'll have to revisit this in a few years. I'm convinced you'll look back at your position here and be amazed that you're lock step behind President Bush.

And bro...radical Islam is bigger right now than it was prior to Bush's invasion of Iraq. As a matter of fact this Administration's policies have united various Islamic factions that used to be at odds in addition to having motivated widespread sympathy and devotion to radical Islam throughout the Middle East and Asia.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11...plain and simple. The night of 9/11, Rumsfield and the other neocons immediately tried to connect the two in order to overthrow Saddam.

Leading up to the war, the Bush Administration made claims that Iraq was helping Al Queda and was sponsoring terrorism...oh, yeah, and they warned of an attack from Iraq using WMD. Remember, the mushroom cloud statement that Bush and Rice stated in order to create more fear in the American public.

A year and a half after the invasion of Iraq, Bush, Cheney and others backed off from the connection between Iraq and 9/11. In fact, they did a 180 and stated that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, but Saddam was a tyrant and he was a brutal dictator and he had to be removed for the sake of his people.

If we would have kept our focus in Afghanistan were we have lost ground in rooting out the Taliban in recent months we would have accomplished our objectives in our war on terrorism. When Bush stated a few years ago that he wasn't really that concerned with Osama Bin Laden and the lack of public outrage lead me to believe that we would never win this "war".

Funny how this administration would send a diplomatic envoy to meet with the leader of Sudan who allowed the people of Darfur to be slaughtered by the millions yet felt it necessary to intervene in Iraq where under Saddam the Iraq Christians had more freedom than in Sudan (the majority of those that were slain in Darfur were Christians killed by the muslims).

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by chosenbyone

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11...plain and simple. The night of 9/11, Rumsfield and the other neocons immediately tried to connect the two in order to overthrow Saddam.

Leading up to the war, the Bush Administration made claims that Iraq was helping Al Queda and was sponsoring terrorism...oh, yeah, and they warned of an attack from Iraq using WMD. Remember, the mushroom cloud statement that Bush and Rice stated in order to create more fear in the American public.

A year and a half after the invasion of Iraq, Bush, Cheney and others backed off from the connection between Iraq and 9/11. In fact, they did a 180 and stated that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, but Saddam was a tyrant and he was a brutal dictator and he had to be removed for the sake of his people.

If we would have kept our focus in Afghanistan were we have lost ground in rooting out the Taliban in recent months we would have accomplished our objectives in our war on terrorism. When Bush stated a few years ago that he wasn't really that concerned with Osama Bin Laden and the lack of public outrage lead me to believe that we would never win this "war".

Funny how this administration would send a diplomatic envoy to meet with the leader of Sudan who allowed the people of Darfur to be slaughtered by the millions yet felt it necessary to intervene in Iraq where under Saddam the Iraq Christians had more freedom than in Sudan (the majority of those that were slain in Darfur were Christians killed by the muslims).

Bush and Cheney have just tried to stay functional with the onslaught of the pacifiers and defeatist from every corner being overwhelming. I don't know how our government could be functional with all the division and derision from every corner, absolute chaos. Bush has done well to keep the radicals at bay in this country, and I give him high marks for doing so.

The radicals are so pervasive in the Middle East that solid base from which to attack them was very important. Saddam's cup was full to overflowing and God directed his downfall, I would be very careful about condemning what God has bought to pass to remove Saddam and his murderous sons that had persecuted the Iraq people for decades. Bush may not have even known why Iraq was his focus. The bigger picture is the US has been at work taking out the leadership of radicals from our bases in Iraq, there is much more going on than meets the eye. Sudan's day is coming, God will not allow evil men to persist indefinitely. He raises up leaders and He brings down leaders His purpose to accomplish, and that includes Bush and the Republicans if necessary.

Oh, btw, why did Saddam have a jetliner being used for training, he was solidly involved and would have funded and helped in anyway possible to hurt the US. Paying for suicide bombers lives for attacking civilians in Israel, and generally promoting radicalism, we should not be so generous with him, he does not deserve to be let off the hook.

[Pressing-On]

What Scott had to say:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...e_today_s.html


What Michael Regan had to say:

A Matter of Loyalty

(excerpt)
As David Horowitz and his co-author Ben Johnson write in "Party of Defeat," George Bush acted solely to enforce a United Nations ultimatum blatantly ignored by Saddam Hussein.

Wrote the authors: "The United States went to war because it had concluded that Saddam Hussein could not be trusted to observe the arms agreement embedded in the UN resolutions. Twelve years of defiance and obstruction leading up to, and including the December 7 deadline had established that fact. Even then, the Bush administration was prepared to forego war if Saddam and his sons left the country and went into exile, thus allowing the terms of the UN resolutions to be met."

Scott McClellan surely knew this but chose to ignore it, preferring to give ammunition to those who want to advance a false view of the conflict's genesis.

In the end, it's all about money.

When I wrote my first book, "On the Outside Looking in," I had publishers waving huge royalties in my face if I would only sling mud at my father. They couldn't understand that there was simply no mud in his life and work, and I wasn't willing to create any for them for the sake of big bucks.

Too bad Scott McClellan, blinded by the glitter of those 30 pieces of sliver, didn't see it that way.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/M...loyalty?page=2

Originally Posted by crakjak

Bush and Cheney have just tried to stay functional with the onslaught of the pacifiers and defeatist from every corner being overwhelming. I don't know how our government could be functional with all the division and derision from every corner, absolute chaos. Bush has done well to keep the radicals at bay in this country, and I give him high marks for doing so.

The radicals are so pervasive in the Middle East that solid base from which to attack them was very important. Saddam's cup was full to overflowing and God directed his downfall, I would be very careful about condemning what God has bought to pass to remove Saddam and his murderous sons that had persecuted the Iraq people for decades. Bush may not have even known why Iraq was his focus. The bigger picture is the US has been at work taking out the leadership of radicals from our bases in Iraq, there is much more going on than meets the eye. Sudan's day is coming, God will not allow evil men to persist indefinitely. He raises up leaders and He brings down leaders His purpose to accomplish, and that includes Bush and the Republicans if necessary.

Oh, btw, why did Saddam have a jetliner being used for training, he was solidly involved and would have funded and helped in anyway possible to hurt the US. Paying for suicide bombers lives for attacking civilians in Israel, and generally promoting radicalism, we should not be so generous with him, he does not deserve to be let off the hook.

Do you really believe that only the Buss/Cheney Administration wants to protect America? Bro...disagreement and a desire to take a different approach isn't appeasement or being a pacifier.

And the issue isn't the war on terror. That's a war we must definately fight and defend ourselves from. But Iraq wasn't al Queda. Bush used the public trust and fear to launch an unnecessary war in Iraq instead of focusing on al Queda and Islamic radicals in Afghanistan. Osama ben Laden is still sending us videos. Bro...we should have stopped at nothing to kill that guy.

In my mind this is like if we were bombed by Japan during WWII and we dispatched the Navy to attack Japan...and just for good measure invaded another country...well...just because of some false weapons we claimed they had.

Bro...you really need to read Buchanan's new book. Bush is making some colossal mistakes and Iraq is one of them.

Dont' equate questioning Iraq with questioning Afghanistan or the War on Terror. It's two different subjects. Iraq was sold to us under false pretenses.

Originally Posted by crakjak

Bush and Cheney have just tried to stay functional with the onslaught of the pacifiers and defeatist from every corner being overwhelming. I don't know how our government could be functional with all the division and derision from every corner, absolute chaos. Bush has done well to keep the radicals at bay in this country, and I give him high marks for doing so.

The radicals are so pervasive in the Middle East that solid base from which to attack them was very important. Saddam's cup was full to overflowing and God directed his downfall, I would be very careful about condemning what God has bought to pass to remove Saddam and his murderous sons that had persecuted the Iraq people for decades. Bush may not have even known why Iraq was his focus. The bigger picture is the US has been at work taking out the leadership of radicals from our bases in Iraq, there is much more going on than meets the eye. Sudan's day is coming, God will not allow evil men to persist indefinitely. He raises up leaders and He brings down leaders His purpose to accomplish, and that includes Bush and the Republicans if necessary.

Oh, btw, why did Saddam have a jetliner being used for training, he was solidly involved and would have funded and helped in anyway possible to hurt the US. Paying for suicide bombers lives for attacking civilians in Israel, and generally promoting radicalism, we should not be so generous with him, he does not deserve to be let off the hook.

So would a dozen other countries. Let's just nuke everyone preemptively. You guys are crazy.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

What Scott had to say:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...e_today_s.html


What Michael Regan had to say:

A Matter of Loyalty

(excerpt)
As David Horowitz and his co-author Ben Johnson write in "Party of Defeat," George Bush acted solely to enforce a United Nations ultimatum blatantly ignored by Saddam Hussein.

Wrote the authors: "The United States went to war because it had concluded that Saddam Hussein could not be trusted to observe the arms agreement embedded in the UN resolutions. Twelve years of defiance and obstruction leading up to, and including the December 7 deadline had established that fact. Even then, the Bush administration was prepared to forego war if Saddam and his sons left the country and went into exile, thus allowing the terms of the UN resolutions to be met."

Scott McClellan surely knew this but chose to ignore it, preferring to give ammunition to those who want to advance a false view of the conflict's genesis.

In the end, it's all about money.

When I wrote my first book, "On the Outside Looking in," I had publishers waving huge royalties in my face if I would only sling mud at my father. They couldn't understand that there was simply no mud in his life and work, and I wasn't willing to create any for them for the sake of big bucks.

Too bad Scott McClellan, blinded by the glitter of those 30 pieces of sliver, didn't see it that way.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/M...loyalty?page=2

Riiigggghhhht. Bush is Jesus and McClellan is Judas. Give me a break. You're so blind. Just wait...people, sound conservatives, will come out of the woodwork on this one and you'll look real bad. Just wait. You'll find that the only one being sold for 30 peices of silver is the truth.

Go ahead and defend defend defend this Administration. Bush isn't no Regan and as soon as he doesn't have the power to destroy political adversaries and people feel safe enough they'll come clean.

And Pressing...you'll have egg all over your face.