ZOMBIE FORUMS

It's a stinking, shambling corpse grotesquely parodying life.
It is currently Sat Jun 06, 2020 1:21 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Sorry to rehash this, but...the truth comes out!
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2003 5:52 pm 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 448
Location: Yet another city of degenerate fools
Powell was under pressure to use shaky intelligence on Iraq: report
Fri May 30, 8:42 PM ET Add Mideast - AFP to My Yahoo!



WASHINGTON (AFP) - US Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) was under persistent pressure from the Pentagon (news - web sites) and White House to include questionable intelligence in his report on Iraq (news - web sites)'s weapons of mass destruction he delivered at the United Nations (news - web sites) last February, a US weekly reported.


AFP/File Photo




Latest news:
· Weapons controversy targets US and Britain
AFP - 1 hour, 32 minutes ago
· Report: No Signs of Iraq Weapons Found
AP - 2 hours, 7 minutes ago
· New Prison Opens in Postwar Southern Iraq
AP - 2 hours, 36 minutes ago
Special Coverage





US News and World Report magazine said the first draft of the speech was prepared for Powell by Vice President Richard Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, in late January.


According to the report, the draft contained such questionable material that Powell lost his temper, throwing several pages in the air and declaring, "I'm not reading this. This is bullshit."


Cheney's aides wanted Powell to include in his presentation information that Iraq has purchased computer software that would allow it to plan an attack on the United States, an allegation that was not supported by the CIA (news - web sites), US News reported.


The White House also pressed Powell to include charges that the suspected leader of the September 11 hijackers, Mohammed Atta, had met in Prague with an Iraqi intelligence officer prior to the attacks, despite a refusal by US and European intelligence agencies to confirm the meeting, the magazine said.


The pressure forced Powell to appoint his own review team that met several times with Central Intelligence Agency (news - web sites) Director George Tenet and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) to prepare the speech, in which the secretary of state accused Iraq of hiding tonnes of biological and chemical weapons.


US News also said that the Defense Intelligence Agency had issued a classified assessment of Iraq's chemical weapons program last September, arguing that "there is no reliable information on whether Iraq is producing and stockpiling chemical weapons."


However, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told Congress shortly after that that the Iraqi "regime has amassed large, clandestine stockpiles of chemical weapons, including VX, sarin, cyclosarin, and mustard gas," according to the report.

_________________
"I have asked God for only one thing in my life
and that is that he should make people laugh at my enemies.
"And he did."
-Voltaire


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2003 7:46 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
Yeah, we shouldn't have liberated Iraq. Lets pull out and put Saddam back in there.

In addition, since I havn't seen the respective articles, I am quite distrustful of anything that comes out of those rags. Really, its so amusing when people distrust the government so much, but trust the media quite easily. O_o;;

Unless I have some accessable information that can prove this, I'm gonna chalk this up as yet another news article that goes in the pile of "anonomous source in the pentagon"

Look, if the government needs so much proof to convince you its okay to overthrow a dictator and liberate a people, why does the media need so little to convince you the government is bad?

-MiB

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2003 7:54 pm 
Offline
PostWhorePornStar
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2001 5:00 pm
Posts: 5768
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
If getting Saddam out was the only justification needed for the war, then when the Administration was trying to sell the war to the American people, why did they keep on telling us that if we didn't go in, Iraq would develop anthrax-powered hydrogen bombs and sell them to terrorists who will kill you and everyone you care about? Why didn't they just say, "This man is evil, and it's our duty to get rid of him,"?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2003 9:57 pm 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 7:12 pm
Posts: 731
Location: Central Coast, Colanirfia
The Man In Black wrote:
Look, if the government needs so much proof to convince you its okay to overthrow a dictator and liberate a people, why does the media need so little to convince you the government is bad?


Two reasons:
1)Governments have been acting on their own fro several millinia, while the media has only done so for a couple-hundred years, if that.

and

2) As a rule the media doesn't shoot/bomb/slice/otherwise kill people.

Otherwise, MiB's point is well taken, though not in the way I think he meant it. I think we should trust the media less, not trust the government more.

_________________
Quote:
"In real life, you don' have a Subterfuge skill above one." - Phill
"What?! You spent THREE YEARS believing that I didn't masturbate!" - Steven


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2003 11:34 pm 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 918
Location: Elsewhere
*whistles innocently*


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Can you tell I'm in a bad mood?
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2003 11:40 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2003 1:42 pm
Posts: 1793
Location: Still Alaska
First it was because he was a terrorist. Then he was funding Al-Qaeda. Then he was going to develop nukes. Bloody fucking everything to get the public accepting it, one reason after another as soon as the previous was proved idiotic, because the public is not capable of understanding the better reasons why to go in, and how to weigh the choices. Or maybe because the admin wasn't entirely capable either, but I prefer thinking the public is stupid (how many Iraqis were in the 20 responsible for 9/11? Answer: 0, you moronic public fooled by the sometimes equally stupid media) rather than the admin (which has already seen far too many stupid people in its ranks).

The "reasons," we went in were kinda poor, but it probably had to happen eventually (at least if we pretend to give a shit about the rest of the world). Would have preferred to get UN support, and have the UN actually mean something, but there was stupidity all around. The anti-french sentiment that went around was especially stupid, I think.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:40 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
No Spei, you fucking moron, thats the way I meant it.

Dickhead. Give me some fucking credit.

And I don't see the "age" of each institution matters, if thats the case then if I recall several news agencies outdate the USA by some time, does that make them "less" trustworthy?

The point I was making is that if you're going to hold the government up to these standards, which are not nessesarily bad, then hold EVERYTHING up to it. If you think the media isn't a political institution then you need to take a large dose of reality.

And, it is worthy of note, any political institution is interested first and foremost with...itself. Thats why "media bias" cannot be pinned down one way or the other...mainly because to do so would imply it is ideologically motivated. The media is no more ideologically pure than any politician or business, and probably less. This is why I trust the media very little, perhaps even less than I trust the government, which many people mistake for a very naive, pro-gov't view...its just myself seeing the reality of the comparitive trustworthiness of the media. While the government is always pro-gov't, and you can judge things on that, the media is harder to judge...since it isn't held to the same spotlight as the gov't, they also don't have to have the same even semblance of integrity or backchecking of facts as other institutions. For both good and bad reasons, its always a bigger story when a gov't person lies than when a media person does.

And Abunai, you have an unhealthy lack of respect for the "common man." I'll tell you strait out, the "common man" is a lot better than you make him out to be. You also misrepresent EVERYTHING THAT FUCKING HAPPENED. I also hate this condescending attitude- "the common person sucks, only someone of MY caliber can see through the OBVIOUS lies of TEH ADMINISTRATION!!!1111111ONE."

How many Germans were responsible for 12-7? Different circumstances, you say? I really don't think you can say so after looking at available data.

Thats the end of my rant. Lates.

-MiB
lashlash

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 6:06 am 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 7:12 pm
Posts: 731
Location: Central Coast, Colanirfia
The Man In Black wrote:
No Spei, you fucking moron, thats the way I meant it.


Alright, fine, suit.



The Man In Black wrote:
Dickhead. Give me some fucking credit.


I was. I think trusting the government is a perfectly reasonable option, seeing as my personal experiances with it have been good. In fact, the only bad things I've heard about the gov't come from the media, and if I don't trust them, then all reliable indicators point towards the gov't being the same. I choose to be more cynical, but there's nothing wrong with being trusting, and you make an egregious mistake if you think that that is not an accreditable charicaristic.

The Man In Black wrote:
And I don't see the "age" of each institution matters, if thats the case then if I recall several news agencies outdate the USA by some time, does that make them "less" trustworthy?


That't not what I meant; governments as governments (in whatever form you choose) have been around for millenia, and as a race (for some reason species doesn't sound right, a little too Darwinish?) we've grown o accustomed to them and their faults. On the other hand, we haven't had enough time to read media sources as thoroughly. Besides, I meant the point in a joking manner, for the most part.

_________________
Quote:
"In real life, you don' have a Subterfuge skill above one." - Phill
"What?! You spent THREE YEARS believing that I didn't masturbate!" - Steven


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: This probably sounds like shit....
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 7:41 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2003 1:42 pm
Posts: 1793
Location: Still Alaska
Dammit, it's way too early/late. Oh well, here I go.

The Man In Black wrote:
And Abunai, you have an unhealthy lack of respect for the "common man." I'll tell you strait out, the "common man" is a lot better than you make him out to be. You also misrepresent EVERYTHING THAT FUCKING HAPPENED. I also hate this condescending attitude- "the common person sucks, only someone of MY caliber can see through the OBVIOUS lies of TEH ADMINISTRATION!!!1111111ONE."

How many Germans were responsible for 12-7? Different circumstances, you say? I really don't think you can say so after looking at available data.


Let me rephrase every mention of the public I've ever said as "the voting public." Significantly cuts down on the number of people I'm insulting, you see.

Many that vote are often easily led around by the charismatic politicians or spokemen for causes that have a vested interest in seeing certain things happen. In fact, it's often only this person that gets the person off their butt to do what little they can for such-and-such a cause or whatever (including voting). Thus the seemingly stupid things the public does as a whole.

Those that know what's going on tend to be some of the more cynical people in my experience. The informed and realistic people often aren't in denial about how little their individual vote counts.

Basically, stupid/uninformed/easily led people tend to do what they're told, and that includes voting.

Those that are in denial aren't the only ones that vote, but I'd say it's a big enough percentage to matter.

Teh OBVIOUS lies of TEH ADMINISTRATION!!! : I'm going to try to clarify my position a bit. Most would understand it quite easily. And then understand something else just as easily. Critical thinking is lacking, pretty much. I honestly don't know whether TEH ADMINISTRATION1!!1! believed such things could be true or not, but I bet they thought were possibilities (justified or not, again I don't know). But so many of their points turned into so much shit that they just tried to ignore and move on, instead of saying, "Oh right, we were a bit hasty saying this, apparently, or something." It's stupid to be pissed off about this, yeah, but I am anyways. Maybe I'll get tired enough by this shit that I'll just ignore it all in the future.

With the 9/11 thing I was referring to the poll about how many people could correctly answer the question. The results were sad, and somewhat justifying of cyncisism.

And yes, I'll freely admit I have somewhat of a superiority complex. It's pretty much only been reinforced until I came here to the boards. I've been working on it, though, and I've gotten a lot better in recent years. No longer in an ivory tower, I'm now just in a little ivory bungalow. Still pisses me off to the extreme whenever I'm wrong, or didn't think of something important, though. Like all the times I've been fooled by the media, the administration, or even just people in general.

I'll also freely admit I can't think of what 12-7 you are talking about. Go me.

Heh. With every passing rant, you remind me of my friend Nathaniel (the one who said if it was old testament days, he'd have to kill me). And I mean that in a good way.

So sorry if I offended you somehow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: hmm...
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 7:50 am 
Offline
PostWhorePornStar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2003 5:00 pm
Posts: 7672
Location: Tallahassee, FL
I personally don't expect politicians to do what they say or even mean what they do. Politically, they needed an excuse to go over there. Whatever the actual reasons are, it doesn't matter. Honesty and politics rarely go hand in hand. The phrase honest politician is an oxymoron. The simple fact of the matter is, we helped out some people and are more than likely going to make a large oil profit from doing so...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 8:07 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 6:38 pm
Posts: 3148
Location: Gay bar at the end of the universe
"LOVE AND PEACE! LOVE AND PEACE!" -the Stampede, Vash

The media is a bunch of over-dramatized crap these days for the most parts. They are like a kid with ADD they become completely obsessed with some things for a little while then forget about it entirely and don't follow up.

The government is the same as it has always been. They do what they do when they want to. They decide what they want to do and come up with reasons to tell the public later. Heck sometimes they even convince themselves.

I am not saying the government always does "bad", heck I am quite glad to see Saddam's ass out of there. They quite often do "good" things. However, sometimes they need to learn how to show humility and be blunt. Too much appealing to emotions leads to an emotional people. If they had just sad that Saddam tortures his people, slaughters the Kurds and Shi'ites, and wastes his nation's money then he would have gotten worldwide support I am quite certain. Just as his father did for Desert Storm. Unfortunately he had to coin that new term: WMDs. Suddenly it became a race to tie the act to the reason.

Whether or not the government was correct they made some very bad decisions and political moves that lowered their standing in many ways.

As for the media well... it's the media, we expect sensationalized crap out of them.

EDIT: Just a nice quote that some of you should appreciate.
"Ninety percent of politicians give the other ten percent a bad name." -Kissinger, Henry


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 8:39 am 
Offline
PostWhorePornStar
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 10548
Location: Bris-Vegas Australia
http://billmon.org.v.sabren.com/archives/000172.html

Everytime Weapons of Mass Destruction is mentioned in the media, drink a beer.
Everytime George Bush makes up a work, drink a beer.
Everytime a flame war starts over a newpaper article which has unconfirmed sources, drink a beer.
Everytime the government starts a foreign policy discussion over unconfirmed reports, drink a beer.

Its that easy.

Actor.

_________________
"Why can't we go back to living like cavemen? I know it was a rough and ready existence - the men where always rough and the women were always ready! " - Santa.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 9:02 am 
Offline
PostWhorePornStar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2003 5:00 pm
Posts: 7672
Location: Tallahassee, FL
With all that drinking, one would be eternally wasted...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 1:24 pm 
Offline
Native

Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 903
Radio wrote:


Except for the fact that that article uses a misquotation of what he actually said. But hey, who expects journalistic integrity these days?

Quote:
The media is a bunch of over-dramatized crap these days for the most parts. They are like a kid with ADD they become completely obsessed with some things for a little while then forget about it entirely and don't follow up.


I agree with this absolutely.

As for the WMDs, Hans Blix himself agreed that they had existed, and that Iraq had shown no signs of their destruction. Tony Blair, the Australian P.M., and Japanese P.M. Koizumi (who made the rounds drumming up support for the U.S.) were convinced that there was a great enough threat to risk their political livelyhoods, and (for Blair and whoever the Australian one is) the lives of their soldiers by invading Iraq and dealing with the problem.

I say, something convinced them, some information that wasn't given out to the general public. They didn't follow the U.S. out of blind loyalty.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 3:50 pm 
Offline
PostWhorePornStar
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2001 5:00 pm
Posts: 5768
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Kylaer wrote:

As for the WMDs, Hans Blix himself agreed that they had existed, and that Iraq had shown no signs of their destruction. Tony Blair, the Australian P.M., and Japanese P.M. Koizumi (who made the rounds drumming up support for the U.S.) were convinced that there was a great enough threat to risk their political livelyhoods, and (for Blair and whoever the Australian one is) the lives of their soldiers by invading Iraq and dealing with the problem.

I say, something convinced them, some information that wasn't given out to the general public. They didn't follow the U.S. out of blind loyalty.


Why wasn't it given out to general public? If this secret information is so convincing, why aren't we allowed to know about?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:52 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 6:38 pm
Posts: 3148
Location: Gay bar at the end of the universe
Rincewind MoG's Ghost wrote:
Why wasn't it given out to general public? If this secret information is so convincing, why aren't we allowed to know about?


/shows up on Rincewind's doorstep in a black suit, beats him up, throws him in the back of a van, drives off, Rincewind is never seen again


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 5:05 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
Er...because information without sources is not reliable, right?

What, give the name and address of A FUCKING SPY out to the public? Thats a good idea, I need to write that down. Or better yet, some SUPAR-SEKREET method of detecting WMDs, we should publicise that too.

-MiB

PS- Spei, sorry for the lashout, I was agitated.

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: This probably sounds like shit....
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 5:23 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3236
Location: Allentown, PA
Abunai! wrote:
I'll also freely admit I can't think of what 12-7 you are talking about. Go me.


Uhm, how about "the date that shall live in infamy"?

_________________
I'm too damn pretty to die.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 8:17 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 6:38 pm
Posts: 3148
Location: Gay bar at the end of the universe
The Man In Black wrote:
Er...because information without sources is not reliable, right?

What, give the name and address of A FUCKING SPY out to the public? Thats a good idea, I need to write that down. Or better yet, some SUPAR-SEKREET method of detecting WMDs, we should publicise that too.

-MiB

PS- Spei, sorry for the lashout, I was agitated.


Calm. He didn't say that the spy should be named. That would be ludicrus. He merely thinks that the information the spy provided should be made known if it would help the world to justify in their minds the deaths of those in Iraq.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 8:31 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
Like, for example, "Iraq is making and hiding chemical and biological weapon, and persuing the creation of a nuke."?

I mean, really. If Bush had just said THAT, then everything would have been okay.

-MiB

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group