Slashdot Mirror
White House Lied About Iraq Nuclear Programs
An anonymous reader writes "This New York Times article reports that in 2002, the Bush Administration's assertions that Saddam Hussein was rebuilding his nuclear weapons program were based on evidence that was doubted by the government's foremost nuclear security experts. Specifically, aluminum tubes most likely meant for small artillery rockets were interpreted by the administration as parts for uranium centrifuges." In a nutshell: while Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld were announcing to the American public that these tubes were slam-dunk evidence of Iraq's nuclear ambitions, they already knew that there was completely overwhelming evidence that the tubes were just for artillery rockets (as Iraq said) and that the tubes were totally unsuitable for use in centrifuges.
.... is what it said when I first clicked on comments? Oh, and like it's a big suprize to any of us? Bush et al lied!
Tibbon
tibbon.com
and you want to trust something coming from the new york times? That's just shy of the reliability of CBS news. They're a totally liberal news source with a rather smudged record regarding reliability... Them bashing the white house is not a new thing. Why does this suddenly get reported? nuff said
on the front page? what is slashdot coming to?
How does this have anything at all to do with computing, science, gaming, linux, or even microsoft for that matter. It's offtopic liberal bullshit like this that's making /. get worse and worse.
I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
You must be from france, pussy boy.
And wasn't Mr. John Flip-flop Kerry an advocate of disarming Iraq? And he saw the same intelligence as well.
It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
I moderate therefore I rule!
--
This coming from an AC. Who is the pussy now? Typical right wing bullshit. "YOUR WRONG FRENCH BASTARD!" But america is a safer place now, just dont get too far from your gas mask.
-William
God is everything science has yet to explain.
I find it interesting (thought not shocking) how a newspaper, such as the NYT, will pull anything out of context to extract the best headline possible. I somehow doubt that Aluminum Tubes were the single piece of evidence that the current Administration had. It is more likely that this information was used as a small piece of evidence along with other information. Also, I think it is quite interesting that this is considered a Republican story. As I recall Democrats and Republicans had access to the same evidence that Bush did. Then again, that wouldn't make for a juicy headline for the masses. What was I thinking, honest news ? That would never sell (at least in NY).
... that the New York Times should be considered an unbiased and balanced source for all of our political news.
Funny, they haven't had a single anti-Kerry piece so far.
- no coverage of political campaign contributions being misappropriated and illegal
- little to no coverage of the backlash against Fahrenheit 9/11
- no coverage of George Bush interview with Bill O'Reilly
- next to zero coverage of CBS evidence mistake
And let me just say - slashdot - you are REALLY polarizing your users, I know this makes no difference and will be modded into flamebait oblivion. But how about a pro Bush post - like computers for education plans that he's signed - or an Anti Kerry story - about how the military is actually using the best technology and they needed more funds for it and Kerry voted against sending more money to fund it. (Yet says he's for removing Saddam and completing the job in iraq)
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
They did NOT know they were lying, IF they were lying. This is liberal Bush bashing by the NY times, slanted even MORE to the left by a communist /. editor. Don't believe anything you read on slashdot. It's just never true.
The only difference between Kerry's plan and Bush's plan for Iraq is the name on the top of the page saying who wrote it, and some minor differences, such as they way things are worded. I honestly think that Kerry is trying to use the Hitler plan, hoping that people will believe what they want to believe, and tune everyone and everything else out. I hope that the American people are smart enough to realize that the BS that Kerry and the Liberal media is spouting off is just that, BS. But then again, I was always told one thing, and that is to never underestimate the stupidity of people.
Well let's see you American poisonous shit, you killed the natives of your own country with biological weapons and started the whole nuclear weapons thing... Hmmm, I'd say we should lock you up because you could start again, you hypocritical American piece of fuckshit.
Sitting in your living room with your high cholesterol and furniture bought on credit, trying to rationalize your brutality.
What options did we not exhaust? And don't say inspections, we tried that for OVER A DECADE and it wasn't working. When diplomacy fails, you can't just try it again, you have to move on to different options.
But it never happens. Richard Clarke, the 9/11 commision, Abu Ghraib, whatever.
Wow. TrentL, you're one hell of a case of projection. Life must suck to be you. I've read the 9/11 commission report. I've followed Mr. Clarke's testimony. Unlike people of your ilk, I believe critical thinking requires actual examination of hard data. There's nothing I or any other reasonable person can say to you to get you to think critically. Fortunately for society, your type tends to end itself rather quickly in your nihlistic pursuits. Unfortunately for us, we have to listen to this blather until you finish your lemming-like quest.
If you don't wish to think, please save us the annoyance and get it over quickly. Oh... and for those that are curious why all those "red states" in what many refer to as fly-over country don't fall for irrational leftist scams, much of it has to do with our proximity to organic systems. For instance, we can't wish or will food crops to grow. If we don't respect nature, action and consequence, we lose. The crop fails. We go broke. You leftist parasites can appeal to a politician who will steal someone elses money and give it to you when you screw up.
Just remember when you eat that we've fed you, clothed you and provided the source of money of which you've stolen. Wouldn't it be great if Kerry gets elected so we can all get pissed off enough to do something about it.
The real question nobody's asking is, "Why the FUCK does slashdot.org even HAVE a 'Republicans' icon? If I wanted to read the leftist political journalism of a worthless rag like the NY Times, I'd go there. Someone, quick, please tell me something I don't know about the X-Prize launch coming up tomorrow. Or maybe something about a new wiz-bang motherboard.
/. less and less.
If they can't produce, slashdot can eat balls of shit rolled up in the pages of the NY Times all day. Meanwhile, I'll be reading my nerd news from the outlets they USED to point me to.
Dear lord. No wonder I've been checking
Strong?! They lied! And then we invaded Iraq, where we're bogged down in a miserable catastrophe built on lies. Isn't that "a bit strong"? This isn't TV, this is WAR. LIES!
--
make install -not war
For your information: The Clinton Administration did not sell nuclear missles, nor any other US military technology, to China. That's Israel's job.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.
Why not write something that shows us you read the article, dickhead?
It's no use, there's a looney republikan fringe that share the same brain and refute facts because Faux didn't report it. I can't wait for W to narrowly win and then let Congress loose on Galileo's clearly liberal gibberish.
If you think
That's right, you stupid, gullible prick, that "positive world view" that the US was held in was so valuable that it ensured that France's military support in Afghanistan came pront-o. Whoops! No it didn't! France didn't send shit for help til late(?) 2002 and then they sent a ship. To a land-locked country.
I pity all the big fucking nerds who apparently care so much about popularity that they're willing to sell their home country down the river for the illusion of it!
Get a fucking date and a life then you won't care so much about popularity cuz you'll see it's illusory anyway. Only ethics are forever.
Everyone seems to get all over the Bush administration on the issue of Iraq. Al Gore says he betrayed this country; Kerry says he mislead this country. You know what. Everyone had the exact same military intelligence; that includes Kerry, Clinton, and Bush. Everyone came to the exact same conclusion, and Kerry, along with most other Democrats voted to authorize the war in Iraq. Now, a vocal minority think the war is a bad idea; you know, people who know a lot about such things, actors and actresses for example. So, Kerry has been back pedalling ever since. He's now against the war, and claims his vote was not a vote to authorize war; it was just an authorization to lay down the gauntlet, so to speak; it was to give our threats some teeth. He also claims the administration is not doing enough to get our troops essential supplies and body armor, after he had just voted against $87 billion that is tagged for just such items. I have not agreed with every policy of President Bush over the past four years. However, I know exactly where he stands on the issues. I don't care what political tendencies one has. You have to agree that the only thing consistent about Kerry is his inconsistency. Fortunately, Kerry cannot get away from his senate record. Looking at Kerry's twenty year senate record shows me that I would never agree with Kerry, and it is a good thing that Kerry is usually on the losing side of a vote. I have never felt as though President Bush lied to me. I have always felt as though he made a tough decision with what information was available. The WMDs were not in Baghdad when we rolled in. However, they were there, and there has never been a full account given of where they all went. On the other hand, Kerry has shown me throughout this campaign that he is willing to try to deceive me with half-truths about his convictions, his policies, and the Bush administration. For me, that is enough to eliminate Kerry as an option come November 2nd. Yeah, I know. Off topic, blah, blah.
I am so sick of this kind of thing. Each time someone discovers a coinage like this they think themselves clever. But it's not clever, it's trite and juvenile, and it's been done a million times before.
Bushshit, BusHitler, Sheeple, Shrubya, Chimpy, etc. They've all been beaten into the ground.
Lay off the name calling, present your ideas calmly and without the rhetoric and hysteria and people might start to take your ideas seriously. Keep it up and you'll be instantly dismissed as just another radical lefty wacko.
Oh, it's absurd on so many levels.
First of all, "lied?" I'm so fucking sick of that word being thrown around. I know that there are some people out there who are just so consumed by hate that they refuse to think. I know this, you know this, everybody knows this. But do there have to be so many of them?
Did we invade Iraq over aluminum tubes? No, no we did not. People who fixate on aluminum tubes or yellowcake or bioweapons trailers or any other single aspect of the situation are like Johnny Cochrane pulling the ridiculous and phenomenally successful glove defense: "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit."
Guys, we didn't go to war over one thing. We didn't go to war over a single breach of a treaty or a single act of terrorism or a single anything at all. We went to war because the sum of the available facts and inferences led to the conclusion that Saddam Hussein was a threat that we could no longer tolerate.
Is that too hard for you to wrap your heads around? Is that too complicated for you? Fine, let me put it in the simplest way I know. The very simplest. Ready? Here it is:
We invaded Iraq because Saddam Hussein had close ties to all sorts of international terrorist organizations and active weapons programs that either already had or would soon give him weapons that, if used in a terrorist attack, would result in devastation on a scale that has only ever been associated with total war.
I'm really sorry that it's not any simpler than that. I'll try to break it down for you.
1. Saddam Hussein was a terrorist. This is a partial list of terrorist acts that Saddam was personally involved with. It is not a complete list. Do not look at this list and go "is that all?" because it isn't.
a. Up until the very week before the invasion, Saddam was making large cash payments to the families of Hamas terrorists. He wasn't even trying to hide it. The presentations of the checks was shown on Iraqi state-run television like Saddam was fucking Ed McMahon.
b. Saddam used the Iraqi diplomatic corps to pass messages back and forth to Abu Sayyaf, an Islamist terror group that operates in and around the Philippines.
c. After Tunisia expelled terrorist Abu Abbas over the hijacking of the Achille Lauro and the murder of Leon Klinghoffer, Saddam gave him safe haven in Iraq. Abu Abbas was captured outside Baghdad last year.
d. After the defeat of the Taliban and the destruction of al-Qaida training camps in Afghanistan in the winter of 2001, members of al-Qaida relocated to Iraq and set up shop in the mountains south of Kirkuk. One of these was Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi who was known to have spent a lot of time at al-Qaida camps in 2000 and 2001.
e. Sometime in the 1990s --we do not know precisely when--Saddam gave terrorist Abu Nidal permission to enter and leave Iraq at will, including setting him up with a Baghdad safehouse. Ironically, it was Saddam who ordered Abu Nidal's execution in 2002. Why? Because he refused to train the al-Qaida terrorists who set up shop inside Iraq in early 2002.
The list just goes on and fucking on. Saddam Hussein was a terrorist himself, a friend of terrorists, a supporter of terrorists. That alone is enough to make all non-head-up-asses Americans really fucking nervous, because of the whole thing with that chunk of real estate in lower Manhattan that's not there any more.
But that's not all there was, you see. What really took it from "we're nervous" to "this can't be allowed to continue" was Saddam's weapons programs. His chemical program is thoroughly documented. His nuclear program is thoroughly documented. His biological program is thoroughly documented. His ballistic missile program is thoroughly documented. His UAV and drone programs are thoroughly documented. These things aren't even in dispute. Nobody's suggesting that Saddam wasn't actively seeking weapons of mass destruction.
What people are saying is that he didn't actually have weapons of m
I write in my journal
This is liberal Bush bashing by the NY times
So. I guess YOU have found the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Irak.
Will you be so kind to show to the rest of the world where the NUKEY-LAR weapons are!!!!!
You should get you facts straight before you open your hole and start to secrete vomit and more...
You can fool other stupid americans and other cock suckers as Blair, Aznar and the dutch, australian prime ministers but not the whole world.
Stupid Fuck,
I remember there was another fuck that was also showing EXACTLY where those weapons were...
To make this war legit.
I think I really know where those nuclear weapons are: the USA.
Do you think that country should be bombed too?
As for Clinton, nobody really cared if he was boning his interns. That was just a way to get at him. He was accepting millions of dollars from Chinese and other Asian donors and making any policy they saw fit. Another point is that he was being paid to look out for the United States and he was completely AWOL. Madeline Albright admitted she and the Clinton adm. knew the North Koreans were cheating on the nuclear deal and they didn't do anything about it! US foreign policy then was more about propping up Tyson Foods than anything, else.
So what specifically do you challenge? Because from where I sit it looks like yet another variation on the "don't believe your lyin' eyes" mem that conservatives love to trot out whenever the facts are against them. You have a specific rebuttal, then speak up. Until then, shut yer whining yap.
University.. You mean that place where professors that didn't know anything outside of campus life tried to brainwash me with liberal and communist ideals?
Brainwashing you would be like trying to perform a hysterectomy on a worm.
Professors are liberal because they are informed, educated, and intelligent. The lack of those three qualities is precisely why you are not liberal.
...and what do we do to people who endanger national security? we arrest them without charge and dump them in cuba. Go on, someone make my day! please be sure the media get a good position to catch him being taken away in a police cruiser. Bush is certainly up there as one of Americas worst presidents, I really want to see him loose badly, it would definately boost respect for America.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
SlashDot kept off its main page the #1 Internet story of 2004, never telling us how a handful of blogs run by "guys in PJs" took on one of the most powerful new outlets in the world--CBS-- and won. With that the Internet came of age as a news source and Slashdot revealed itself as either technologically clueless or horribly biased.
If Slashdot wants to be taken seriously as a news source, it need make some major changes in how it handles and reports news.
--Mike Perry, Inkling blog , Seattle
"Lord, grant that I may always be right, for Thou knowest that I am hard to turn" -- A Scots-Irish prayer
I think people are taking the whole "global test" thing a little too literally
If you're going to hammer my guy on what he says, hold your guy to what he says -- assuming he means what you hope he means is just duck-n-cover with your own dick in your mouth.
Writers imply. Readers infer.
It must suck to be a democrat.
It is SICKENING the way the original post has now been modded down. It was 100% insightful. Nice way to bolster the idea of free speech there, guys.
Blaming all conservatives (like you Democrats do--I notice your link to "Air America") is covering your eyes to avoid the blame on the Democrats who also voted for this war--INCLUDING JOHN KERRY! He saw the same intelligence reports Bush did. Open your eyes from behind the partisan blinds you have yourself cozily wrapped in and take a breath of the free, objective air...
Face facts. A lot of people got us into this war on BOTH sides of the partisan fence. Modding down posts that point out that fact is hypocrisy. Claiming some sort of half-assed "difference" between Democrats supporting the war and Republicans supporting the war is even worse. There's a reason people are turning to third-party candidates these days.
Mr. Clinton sent his representatives to various forums (including the UN) in 1997 and 1998 during the height of the Iraq disarmament crisis in the 90s. In fact, the stated goal of Operation Desert Fox was to "degrade" Saddam Hussein's Weapons of Mass Destruction capabilities. Secretary Albright actually stated several times that Iraq had WMDs and that Hussein should be taken out - see Albright's March 1997 speech to Georgetown University on the subject
When? When did John Kerry know that aluminum tubes were not capable of being used in nuclear weaponsmaking, but claimed they were so capable anyway, and did so in front of Congress? Do tell.
Typical liberal, spinning what I said. The "lies" I was referring to was that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Senator Kerry actually helped author and signed a letter to Clinton in 1998 which state [W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.". Hmm... 1998? Yeah, that's right, I'm pretty sure Bush wasn't given any intelligence on Iraq in '98, seeing as how he wasn't President and all... There are more quotes where that came from.
They were stating what they believed. When the Bush admin officials testified in front of Congress, they were intentionally LYING. Big difference. They had information beforehand that contradicted what they were saying, and can be proven to have known it.
The article doesn't really state anything new. It just says the administration embraced a disputed theory, and there's really nothing wrong with that. Saying that the 9/11 Terrorists were arabs and followers of Osama bin Laden is a disputed theory, as there are some out there that are silly enough to believe that the MOSAD did it. Bush Sr, Clinton, and Dubya all believed there were WMDs in Iraq, and unlike his father and BJ Boy, he took action after we were attacked on 9/11. Yes, I know, Iraq was not involved in 9/11. However, the policy of this administration is that if you support ANY form of terrorism, expect your ass to be taken out. The case can be argued that Hussein supported Palestinian suicide bombers by paying their families, and actually on occasion trained terrorists. In addition, some members of al-Qaeda received medical treatment in Baghdad. And oh yes, did you know there was a camp outside of Baghdad that contained a Boeing 707 that Iraqi Special Forces used to practice hijacking planes?
I'm not even going to go into the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, passed by President Clinton, which actually made the policy of the United States that of regime change in Iraq. I'm not going to go into the 16 UN Resolutions that the United States pushed since 1991 which stated Hussein was a threat.
Shyah? Conservatives alwas find it so easy to find a hole to crawl into when the rhetoric fails to be convincing.
I'm not going to go into the rest of the evidence out there, because you're just a blind ideologue. It was obvious that you are one when you made the Halliburton comment. At least I can see the other side, and I've proven that by campaigning for Democrats in the past (and currently in the Baton Rouge Mayor-President race). Stop being an ideologue with spun arguments and maybe people will listen to you.
you mean 9/11?
;-P
;-)
i see what you mean then
how can you filter out the negative actions others take on you and only see the negative actions you take others?
it's stupid to see only your heroic acts and be blind to your sins, no?
well, it's equally stupid to see only your sins and be blind to your capacity for good
you can only characterize the us in the middle east as a crusade only if nothing came before: that the us just launched into iraq on religious reasons, and the middle east was just minding it's own business
when the truth is, it was largely religious reasons that caused some middle eastern madmen to execute 9/11.
which perciptated iraq and afghanistan
but not in your mind: you filter out all that obvious cause and effect and come to the breathtaking conclusion: the us is on a crusade
and that you can say "sounds like a grand crusade" and not see the irony of your maladaptive pov, that the opposite is the truth
wow
jokes on you
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Why do the liberals in this country totally and absolutely ignore 9/11, like it never happenned? I fully support the president's decision to invade Iraq, regardless of faulty intelligence, or not; so does John Kerry. If 9/11 did not happen, then we would not be in Iraq. Put simply, we gave Saddam 18 months of dipomacy, he ignored it, WTF is the president to think after 9/11 when a ruthless dictator refuses to let inspectors into verify the existence of WMD, after an attack on the USA? It's Saddam's fault for being so stupid and arrogant. If he let the Weapons inspectors in, none of this would have happenned. Having a prescence in Iraq is not a bad thing right at this moment. Iran is actively pursuing a Nuke program and essentially telling the world "F.U." If we were not so hopelessly bogged down with Iraq, we should just invade Iran. The president would have a much better leg to stand on as Iran is most certainly a terrorist state.
"Jeremy, you need to get to an internet cafe and cut and paste some appropriate sentiments about me from the world wide
GW & co are an insult to the elephants. As if it is not enough that they are endangered species.
you have an interpersonal issue
because you are incapable of understanding other people's actions without understanding how they relate to you
you can't conceive that someone would do something because of their own agenda, regardless of what you did or did not do
example: what happened in bali to the australian tourists and the balinesians? in madrid on 3/11? in chechnya in the schoolhouse?
how do those relate to to the us?
exactly, they don't
get it?
i don't think you do, i think your understanding of the world speaks volumes about your own maladative psychology: "people only do this or that because of me"
you have issues, you don't have solutions to these problems
you can't conceive that al qaeda does not revolve around the us, that it has its own agenda, and it invovles the us, but is not centered on the us
you are centered on the us
i am centered on the world, i see many players
you see nothing until it has to do with you
you have issues
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
> Or if you're Israel and trying to stomp out somebody else, that's just swell and peachy
My good sir, if the Israelis were trying to kill all the Palestinians, then all the Palestinians would be dead.
But regardless, you weren't paying attention. Anything Israel does (like defending themselves from terrorist groups) does not have the United Nations seal of approval. Not by a long shot.
[PowerPoint] is a tool for capitalist presentation
Fuck you all sand niggers
no really, i mean you're kind of low intelligence
there's no nuance in your words or arguments
just "kill all the palestinians!"
wo said that? who remotely was talking about that?
japan, germany- once scary, unstoppable forces in the world. did we kill every japanese, or german to stop them?
i feel as if saying any words past that obvious simple observation is wasted breath on you, that any more nuanced arguments might be wasted, because you are so prone to simplistic hyperbole and jumping to frankly downright stupid conclusions ("kill every palestinian!"=just plain stupid) that you're almost not worth talking to, because you can't seem to talk in reasonable tones, only jump to idiotic extremist simplsitic things: "kill every palestinian!"
who is even remotely talking about that?
only you
you're kind of... dumb
really, your observations seem genuinely low intelligence
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
As you said, the lies are extremely extensive. The Bush administration corruption is the worst in U.S. history. Read the reviews of 3 movies and 35 recently published books that say the corruption is extremely intense: Unprecedented Corruption: A guide to conflict of interest in the U.S. government.
It is not possible to develop an accurate opinion by listening to the carefully crafted phrases from media employees who would lose their jobs if they seemed to indicate a preference for one candidate over another. Remember, the media exists to make money. Unfortunately, we don't have directly supported media, only ad supported media, and advertisers, understandably, are careful not to alienate anyone.
--
Bush: Borrowing money to try to make his administration look good.
To balance your decidedly un-funny characterization of republican supporters, here is my own summarization of Kerry supporters (or really, Bush Haters).
*michael* *michael* *michael*
I'd have to say there may be at least a grain of truth to the rumours circulating about George's mental health.
Although it certainly isn't PC to say it about a sitting president, his observed behavior sure fits the bill for clinical sociopathy. I'd love to get that guy alone for day-long interview to see if my armchair analysis is correct.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
Iraq is(was) not islamic, it's secular.
You must be american - knowing so little about the world and still using BIG WORDS.
(BTW, it's becoming more islamic _thanks to_ the US invasion)
it's in my head
so what's new ? it's allready been obvious to europeans since back then, that this entire war is based on lies, another excuse to benefit the american rich class, hell what's new ? we know how america likes to play its game for many decades now
"No need to RTFA. Consider the source."
Right, that's what the whole world says every time GWB opens his holy mouth...
I think, therefore I am...I think.
Bad news for you, Joseph Wilson, Kerry-Edwards, foriegn-policy advisor (well, he was as of the end of July, not sure as of today), was completely discredited by the bi-partisan Senate Itelligence Commitee's report. It's pretty bad when his wife won't even back up his testimony.
/.? Times like these with so many geeks falling for conspiracies
and out right lies, makes it so hard to be identified as a geek in public.
Do you have any more shrilled loony left propaganda to spread on
I suppose 9/11 was a worst case scenerio too.
P.S. Nice to see you at -1, fucktard. I can't wait to see you in your next account denying that you ever had other accounts. Don't you think that the fact that you end up at -1 in every one of your accounts is a strong indicator that you are, in fact, a troll?
Kerry is a flaming moron, and if i hear of his "combat" experiences one more time i'll puke, hahaha my favorite quote by Kerry is "certainty, can sometimes get you in trouble" what in the world??? so basically we should all just not stand for anything but rather just make whoever happens to be listening to us at the time happy and side with them. i'm voting Bush because the thought of Kerry in any position higher than white house cafeteria janitor just scares me to death. i also love how so many people believe democratic nominees when they say they are "from and for the people" implying their down to earthness -- when in actualty they are about as "down to earth" as the British Royal family. -- in Kerry's case-- yea i think being married to 2 different multimillionaire wives is very "down to earth". just look at the issues, and vote your conviction, yes all politicians fudge fib and flat out lie. its their nature, Bush at least appears to have some sense of morals, he's not afraid to use the word God and prayer and he sounds like he means it unlike Kerry who sounds like the spawn of satan when he briefly mentions anything pertaining to religion. (yea i'm exaggerating, but as do we all when making out soap box ridden points.) God help us all.
Let's appologize to Saddam (and to liberals), put him back in power, so that he can continue on his mass murdering rampage.
This whole story is bullshit. If I wanted to read liberal idiot propaganda then I'd visit moveon.org, NOT slashdot.
Posting a BS story like this has only one purpose - to try to get people to vote for Kerry. Browse all the comments here at +4 and you'll see a patern of modding even the most insane "BUSH=HITLER" liberal looney tunes up, while any dissenting opinion at all is modded down.
Guess what guys, it's not going to work. People aren't falling for the BS of either side - you aren't convincing anyone to change their vote, you're just wasting your time and looking like fools.
If you're going to keep posting stories like this then change your slogan to "Leftist politics for nerds. Stuff that matters."
Michael Moore's movie Faranheit 9/11 is nothing but propaganda. There are countless examples where he has taken clips from one interview and led the viewers to believe it was from another..just to make his point.
I haven't seen the film. But how is this different from the President of the US blatently lying to the US public about Iraq's WMD programs?
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
You got taken to school, why don't you just shut the fuck up and die?
Hey dipshit, try actually looking at the fucking quiz. It was multiple choice, and the questions were not ambiguous at all.
See you at the polls, moron.