Saddam Wanted Out, Bush Lied About It
By Nicole Belle Thursday Sep 27, 2007 7:33pm(guest blogged by Bill W.)
Download | play 
Download | play
How much money does Bush think a US soldier's life is worth? How much money does Bush think the lives of our allies' soldiers or innocent Iraqis are worth?
As we're finding out, not very much. On March 17, 2003 President Bush issued the warning: "Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict commenced at a time of our choosing ," yet now thanks to a transcript leaked to the Spanish newspaper El Pais, we learn that more than three weeks prior to that Bush had told former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar that "The Egyptians are speaking to Saddam Hussein. It seems he's indicated he would be prepared to go into exile if he's allowed to take $1 billion ..." When confronted about the leaked transcript yesterday, Whitehouse spokeswoman Dana Perino did not dispute its accuracy.
Just last week we learned from former Fed Chair Alan Greenspan that the real reason behind the war in Iraq was oil , and now we are finding out that the entire war could have been averted for letting him get away with $1 billion. That's just than one tenth of 1% of what this insane invasion and occupation of Iraq, that continues claim the lives of our country's bravest men and women, has now been forcast to cost. Think about that just for a second. Every single death, Iraqi and American coalition alike, could have been saved and Bush could have had Saddam's oil, but apparently he didn't even seriously consider it. Topping that, he then lied in public to the entire world about it just so he could have his war regardless. How's that for compassionate conservatism?
Login or Register to post comments.
...-
Because Bush wanted what every leader wants, a small victorious war.
Better a trillion for war than a single penny for Saddam...unless he's fighting the Iranians.
This should be made widely exposed and understood, but will one politician make this an issue, I bet not.
All because Bush wanted to one-up his Daddy! No other reason!
What a goddamned waste!
I swear, the public is so saturated with Republican and Bush Administration corruption and wrongdoing that even if we had hard evidence that aliens abducted Bush's brain and it was all over the news, it wouldn't make a difference. whoops, sorry to be so cynical!
Yeah, but Commander CockPiece wanted to be a 'War Preznint'....sure hope all the fat, dumb fucks who voted for this 'piece of human waste', way to go Maradona, are real, real happy with this.
And ya know what?
The worst hasn't happened yet.
Speechless. I'm simply speechless.
Think of all the lives that could have been saved.
Fight Media Consolidation, everyone, this story should be MUCH more huge in the US than it is.
Oh, that silly Wolf Blitzer! "...another what if story..." Good stuff!
Here's a funny what if : What if we invade Iraq with too few troops- troops who are under-equipped at that- then decide to stick around fer another 5 or 6 years while a civil war- with divisions along so many fault lines ya can't possibly count 'em all!- boils over. Imagine all of the wacky possibilities!
But it could never happen. Right, Wolf?
George Bush is no better than a cheap assassin hiding behind a fake mission. He's no better than Saddam, and it's just a damn shame that millions will suffer for Bush's arrogance. History will remember him as a spoiled, reckless mass murderer.
OK, we're nothing but slime now (i.e., America) in the eyes of the rest of the world.
Now the rest of the world is getting the truth.
This was an attack on humanity for the benefit of oil companies and related parties.
Now is the time for the rest of the world to rise up and charge the United States with crimes against humanity.
When are we going to see this happen?
Or is the whole world complicit?
Why am I unsurprized? Yawn.
Oh, and I believe the proper term is codpiece, not cockpiece. But, perhaps it was meant that way. Every cock has his dughill.
Just when you think you've seen the lowest most disgusting thing a human can do, Bush goes one lower. Why this festering piece of filth has not been impeached and imprisoned is beyond me.
Cheney wanted the oil, Bush wanted revenge, a perfect fit.
Bush is a psychotic coward of a worthless frat-pledge. That's why he did this. He and his Administration; I am not letting those criminals off the hook by pinning it all on one moneky, much as they'd like us to do just that.
ckerst @ 13:
In our hearts, I think we know the answer. Or have some ideas, at least.
Eh, well, he was a different, simpler kind of stupid than you're accusing him of, here. I'm sure he didn't think the war would cost as much as it has, so $1 billion would've seemed extravagant at the time. And really, how could he ever just give the guy a billion bucks to walk?
It's like when people say "just think of all the _____ we could have done with 500 billion dollars", but the truth is, absent the war, you'd never be able to go to congress and say "hey, we're gonna spend 500 billion dollars on _____".
I agree the war's been a total waste of money and effort, but comparing it to what we could have done with the money is largely a false analogy.
This war was never about Saddam, he was just a convenient boogy man, this was is and has always been about theft. and Bush and Cheney and their cohorts have stolen BILLIONS of dollars. It also has been about developing and training a civilian army, call them the Blackwater SS. That is what this war is and always has been about.
Wow.
It doesn't say WE would give Saddam a billion, it says he would be allowed to TAKE a billion with him when he left. In other words, he wanted to be able to take some of HIS LOOT WITH HIM. It wouldnt have cost us a PENNY.
The response to this on the right will be:
"So you think we should be blackmailed by brutal dictators who support terrorists?!!??! Why do you hate America?!?! 9/11!!!"
Count on it.
No, Lollimom. the rest of the world isn't complicit. Chirac of France refused to go with this charade, and France was labeled in the U.S. media - remember "Freedom Fries". The United Nations refused to go along and they were labeled cowards and useless. Those countries who were not complicit, but who have natural resources that Corporate America covets, refused to go along, but have seen what this administration does when they are thwarted in their global corporate imperialism. The U.S. still has the mightiest military machine in the world, the most nukes, and a nutjob with his finger on the red button. Strangely, Bush has undone what Reagan made his name on. Reagan's legacy rests on the dissolution of the soviet union. Bush has overseen the re-emergence of the Russian Bear and has sold America to the Chinese. Strange times we live in.
Why is Michael O'Hanlon allowed to comment on this? He is just another Bush mouthpiece not an "expert."
spinn @ 17:
You're entirely missing the point.
We were not told "he says he'll leave, but only if he can take a billion with him, we are not willing to accept this."
We were told "He won't leave."
The dishonesty used to sell this invasion betrays a dishonesty about the real motivations for this invasion.
GonzoD @ 5:
Nope. Not because of his father. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is about world domination which is why they are taking the Constitution away, so we can't interfere with their plans.
I guess this means childrens can't learn after all.
aquarius2 @ 14:
Exactamundo! There's nothing else to it.
Why am I suspicious about the "and be allowed to take his weapons of mass destruction information with him" part?
Not surprised, of course, but I am speechless. Bush could have had everything he wanted without going to war. Now this has to be an impeachable offense!
Uh. Wow.
I just read the actual article.
Bush looks bad enough without discrediting yourselves by using selective quotes.
"The Egyptians are speaking to Saddam Hussein. It seems he's indicated he would be prepared to go into exile if he's allowed to take $1 billion and all the information he wants about weapons of mass destruction,"
Sure, its probably not TRUE, but don't resort to selective editing to spin the story.
""The Egyptians are speaking to Saddam Hussein. It seems he's indicated he would be prepared to go into exile if he's allowed to take $1 billion and all the information he wants about weapons of mass destruction"
That latter part is kind of a curious thing to leave out of the original post.
Is anyone surprised by this?
Haven't you all seen "Why We Fight"?
Eisenhower wasn't kidding in his farewell address when he warned us about the military-industrial-complex.
These vampires mean bloodsucking business.
I guess it simply didn't turn up in the American media, but in Europe, at the time, Saddam's request to be allowed to go into exile in a country which would accept him and to be allowed to take $1 billion of his money was quite widely publicized, so this revelation was no revelation to me.
Craig @ 20:
...or a LIFE.
instead, the rich are getting richer, the poor are dying and the rest are paying through the nose in every direction.
I hate these criminals in DC.
don't kid yourselves, bush is an insane megalomaniac on a par with the worst dictators that the world has ever seen.
More lies of the Bush Administration:
WMD's - check
Iraq war would pay for itself
Tax cuts would pay for themselves
No Child Left Behind working marvelously - check
Katrina Response - check
Pat Tillman - check
Jessica Lynch - check
Iraqi bodycounts - check
Quality Medical care for veterans - check
Didn't out a CIA officer and her cohorts - check
Enron - check
Election fraud - check
Federal Prosecutors scandal - check
9-11 - We got the truth on this one.
I have a hard time believing this is only about oil and revenge, given the mountain of domestic despotism that has drowned our sense of historical context.
The worst is yet to come. We all know it.
Tony @ 31:
If by 'curious,' you mean, obviously deliberate, then agreed.
'It would have been cheaper to just buy the damn oil' - heard on Bill Maher...PJ Rourke?
"Every single death, Iraqi and American coalition alike, could have been saved and Bush could have had Saddam’s oil, but apparently he didn’t even seriously consider it."
...and saved a ton of money, too. Enough to fund a smooth transition in Iraq, train an army (in peacetime), organize a government, create a constitution, hold elections, with far less death-related consequences.
And funded, say, a task force to find Saddam and recover the $ 1 billion. Or Osama. Whichever. And still have money left.
But see #18, they stood to make far larger personal fortunes doing it this way.
And look, they lost eight or ten billion dollars cash (that we know of) and it's no big deal.
xoites defends Constitution @ 25:
I have to disagree on that one. Bush jr was so pissed when Daddy lost to Clinton, he vowed that if he ever got to the White House, he'd get a 2nd term and show up his Daddy!
Poppy had trouble with that "vision thing" and junior wasn't going to let that be his downfall. He was going big!
Gekke @ 35:
Trust me. I am well aware.
Now do you think they could have perpetrated 9/11?
I have said this before, the night the US started bombing Iraq or the night that the US bombed Iraq before the official start of the war, remember when we were told that we had credible evidence on Saddam's whereabouts,there were reports on ABC & NBC that Saddam wanted to surrender. He tried calling the US embassies in a few middle east countries but our embassies would not take the call.
If you don't believe me watch, again, the network coverage of the first bombings. It was reported several times....never since.
GonzoD @ 41:
Well, i have to disagree with you!
In 1994 Bush walked out of a meeting with Paul Wolfowitz and PNAC and said OUTLOUD that if he was ever the President of the United States he would invade Iraq. In my opinion that is both the why and how he got to be appointed in the first place.
BDM @ 43:
No.
Numerous reports on this 1 billion dollar amount for Saddam imply or come right out and say that the USA would need to give Saddam this $ in order for him to leave.
But the deal would have been that Saddam would be allowed to take $1 Billion of Iraqi money. Money that probably ended up in corrupt hands anyway, or was used to buy weapons to kill Americans.
I think this is another important point in this story.
Why would Saddam want to leave with "information on weapons of mass destruction"?
A. He wanted to build a "nukular" program in his new basement;
B. He was not internet savvy and couldn't find an on-line recipe for chlorine gas; or
C. He didn't, and Bush knew that by saying "weapons of mass destruction," all of the frightened little rabbits on the right would have an excuse to rally to war.
Noone could write this stuff.
BDM @ 43:
I've alwaysthought they could have perpetrated 9/11. I just hope they didn't.
xoites defends Constitution @ 45:
OK. I didn't say he didn't have this in his head long before he got to the White House. In '94, Poppy was out of office and Shrub was still seething. He was going to out do his father, and finish what the old man didn't!
Duh!!
How would have Bush and Cheney line their pockets
and the fellow coup culprits pockets if they would
have let Saddam go?!
There was literally tons of money to be taken out
of the National Treasury, tax payers pockets.
And the war profiteers wanted it.
Bush Cheney company couldn't give two
5hits about killing people. Even if they are Americans.
In their twisted minds the poor is fodder for war.
It's just business to them.
is impeachment still off the table nancy?
fiver @ 48:
I don't disagree.
However, I still think its pathetic to omit that portion of the story in the original post.
There were no REAL profits to be made in allowing Saddam to escape. Oh, sure, we would get the oil. But that deal was already likely sealed, and our energy concerns were going to get first dibs on, or complete access to that oil regardless.
On the other hand, look at how many billions of dollars the Military-Industrial Complex has gotten since this debacle began. Look at the consolidation of power in the Executive Branch. Look also at the establishment of mercenary forces with no oversight, and no accountability. Look then at the breaking of our military, and more specifically, of our National Guard. Once our National Guard is broke, who will we have to PAY (top dollar, mind you) to "protect us" should some disaster occur?
Yeah. Mission A-f*cking-ccomplished.
They ran the numbers, used "THE Math", and came up with endless war for endless profits. Slimy, rat bastards.
48-
I'm always suspicious when the translation from Arabic comes up with one of those phrases- "weapons of mass destruction," etc.
Cythraul @ 54:
Then watch the video; it's in there.
GonzoD @ 51:
Perhaps it was both, but i really think he is in office not because he wanted so desperately to outdo his dad but because he told the "right" people if he became President he would do what they wanted. He could never have done anything on his own. He never has.
I'm sending this to everyone on my list! It's an outrage, the Gold Star families s/b up in arms.
XO & Gonzo...
Revenge was enough for George, and World Domination was enough for Dick. Stop fighting, girls, you're both pretty.
xoites defends Constitution @ 58:
True! I think he had people pushing him towards attacking Iraq for a very long time.
Why is CNN airing this story now? Do they expect us to think they didn't know about this back in '03?
jane @ 60:
My girlfriend would take offense at that, but i see what you are saying. :)
oscar @ 53:
A headline in rawstory stated DEM MAY FORCE IMPEACH CHENEY VOTE
http://rawstory.com//news/2007/Kucinich_seriously_thinking_about_forcing...
So maybe we start w/Darth and then go to the chimperor.
JasonS @ 3:
And the deaths of thousands of Americans??? Burn in hell you jerk off...
Moderation @ 55:
Exactly.
But don't forget, the reason why they felt (and continue to feel) they could get away with doing all of this...
IS BECAUSE THEY CAN.
[...] Saddam Wanted Out, Bush Lied About It [...]
leslie @ 64:
Darth is the real prez anyway.
sorry Xo, I always pictured you as a woman./
jane @ 60:
I disagree- both of those girls are wrong! ;)
Wanna know Stupor Mundi's motivation? As always, FOLLOW THE MONEY!
They're ideologues. They had a mission. Nothing could sway them from it. This is the "New American Century". How's it looking to you so far? Just 93 more years to go.
jane @ 69:
Must be the dress...
Cythraul @ 54:
I think pathetic is the wrong word.
It may have been misleading, but not pathetic.
The lives lost - now that's pathetic. More than pathetic - it's tragic.
Or should I have said, just 5 more countries to go (see Wolfowitz).
The democrats are going to get us out.
The DNC does not want us out.
The Democrats are not going repeal Patriot ACT I & II nor The War Powers Act.
The Democrats will not stop rendition program( it started under Clinton) nor torture in our name.
The is only "THE WAR PARTY" folks.
The Democrats are not the solution.
The solution takes all of us to get in the streets
to stop this slip away from Democracy.
The solution will take sacrifice and more than
just blogging and voting.
I myself have very little hope that the average
American knows how broken this Government is.
Not sure what will wake them up.
I hope whatever it is comes soon.
best
jane @ 69:
ROTFLMFAO!!!
Oh yeah thats right, but there was so much intelligence going around, no one knew what to believes.
So Now Rummy cansay he was right about the WMD.
Because Rummy said that Saddam's WMD was north,west and east of Tirkrit ! "He knew exactly where"!
Well with Saddam talking with Egypt. Egypt is west of Tirkrit. So lets invade Egypt before Iran? What do ya say folks. It would be cowboy like to occupy the land of the pyramids. Bush really liked that movie "Hidalgo". Cowboy in the desert.
So where was this reporting when the American public, Actually the world's public needed it?
Frantictimes @ 22:
Complicity exists in many forms, and a response to US thuggery doesn't necessarily mean a military strike.
France. Does GE (General Electric), a US defense contractor and corporate media monopoly, still have facilities in France?
it was never proven that saddam had anything to do with an assasination attempt on bush I. saddam had billions and i imagine he might take out a billion dollar contract on bush jr. in the event of an invasion. prison might be a safe place for bush in his retirement. he'll be looking over his shoulder for the rest of his life if i'm right about saddam.
Andy K @ 70:
You got it. Getting the oil isn't half as good as gaining control of it (in "difficult" circumstances) so you can keep it off the market and raise the price of oil already in the pipeline. You get more for your existing supplies and still have Iraqi oil to sell later. Also, no profits for defense contractors it you don't need shiny new bullets.
Stupor Mundi?
GonzoD @ 61:
Those same people, that did the pushing, have other countries in their crosshairs too. Iran looks to be next. Then Syria???
Sadly, the Democratic leadership will not take hold of this like a pit bull.
Swiftboats and smears from the right.
From the left..... Yawn (Blogs excluded)
Here's the impeachable offense Nancy, Harry.
Here's the Impeachable offense Hillary,Barack...
....Hello? .............hello?
Edwin @ 74:
I just heard Wes Clark talk about this on the Bill Press Show last week.
Do you have any more info on your statement?
how 'bout a link?
I can't remember amynore than we were to have conquered 7 countries in 5 years of Bush government. Iraq and Syria, Iran and Lebanon. Don't know as I wasn't listening that closely.
When the Preznit said.."After all this the guy that tried to kill my dad"..I looked at my father and said"Tell me the Pres of the US didn't just say that"....Then I said "Well we're going into Iraq"......................The Preznit wanted to go into Iraq long before he was selected.
I sense that things are soon to get ugly. Nothing like a bit of civil disobedience to whet the old appetite. Certainly hope the country can find ways to come together, rather than being pulled apart. We need to somehow change the dialog and force feed some of the right siders. Any ideas?
Lollimom @ 78:
Slow down.
Followin' yer logic, I support the war because I use Pilot pens, because Pilot (as well as Bic) is a French company. I mean, if I support a company that pays taxes to a government that allows a subsidiary of a corporation that makes weapons systems fer another country....
Face it: France rejected the invasion of Iraq.
Is there still any doubt that this was about the oil?
It just supports why both the Dems and GOP aren't in any hurry to get out of Iraq.
world domination=money=world domination
hate2haggle @ 85:
oh sure, Let's remind them about Bush... "I'm a uniter, not a divider....I'm gonna bring dignity and honor back to the White House"
And then ask them just how close they feel to the "Gentleman and Gentlewoman across the aisle" from them.
About the money: from what I understand, Saddam already HAD the dough. He just wanted us to let him take it with him, along with his "How I Got My WMD Program" papers, which probably bore some extremely embarrassing signatures.
ok. Now can we impeach these criminals?
leslie @ 83:
I'll look around a bit more, but I found this:
Crooks and Liars » Wolfowitz and his 1992 Strategy of World ...7. GonzoD Says:. Orangutan. @ 5:. Boy these goofy smiles of Wolfowitz, Kristol, Bush, ... We’re going to take out seven countries in five years! ...
www.crooksandliars.com/.../wolfowitz-and-his-1992-strategy-of-world-domi... - 146k - Cached - Similar pages
Google finds just about everything. Even people's profiles at sex sites ---I heard ;)
Edwin @ 92:
Thanks..... I think ;)
........ but impeachment is "off the table".
jb
America should demand justice for this needless genocide.
a guy @ 91:
If we could it would have been done. Unfortunately Congress seems to like things the way they are.
John H. Farr @ 90:
You are probably correct. Every single time I hear about Saddam gassing the Kurds I wait, in vain, for someone to mention where he got the gas.
92 leslie Says: No. What I meant is, Google even finds it's way into our comments here, not just headlines. It's surprising. You type it, Google can find it. I think that story can be found here on C&L. It's fairly common knowledge, I thought (??). Or I spend too much time in blogs.
Not one Republican would vote for Impeachment, and several Dems wouldn't either. Sadly...
Want to stop the war, bring back the draft.
fiver @ 79-
Stupor Mundi was what the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II was called. It's Latin for "Wonder of the World" (Frederick II was a Renaissance man before the Renaissance). Many of the later Holy Roman Emperors used Stupor Mundi in the long string of titles followin' their names. The man frontin' our Country's corporatocracy is (if I remember correctly):
The Holy Christian Emperor George IV, King of America, Archduke of Connecticut, Viscount of Texas, Knight of the Golden Fleece, Protector of Wall Street, Stupor Mundi.
And while our Stupor Mundi ios a half-wit, that half has learned that if he does exactly as told by his masters then he will be financally rewarded- and handsomely.
I'm getting sick of hearing you all calling for impeachment.
What part of "off the table" do you not understand?
OBTW, the Democrats in the House, say, "Down with Moveon.org".
Learn to live with it.
Stupid Mundi.
Edwin @ 71:
LOL. Sorry Edwin, but that just raps up a beautiful week. The fun's just begun!
Whoever said "they" do it because nobody is there to stop them anymore is spot on. Nearly all government oversight or responsibility has been abdicated, the looting is in full progress. I'm just waiting for the big hand that turns us all upside down and shakes the coins out of our pockets, that's about all that's left...
On September 11, 2001, I was in New York City. Fortunately, I was far enough away from the Twin Towers, that I learned about the first plane crash from the television set. I was brushing my teeth, getting ready for work, thinking to myself, "My, what an unfortunate accident." Needless to say, I would learn how wrong I was as the day's events quickly unfolded, and I would go through alternating stages of fear, anger and grief.
Fear because I was not so far from the Towers that could not step outside my building and witness first hand the terror on the horizon. Anger because anger is only natural. But the grief was the most profound. So many slaughtered innocents -- and not in some remote part of the world, but in my home.
I admit, I wanted very much to rally around our dimwitted president. I did not believe his residence in the Oval Office was legitimate, but now wanted him to be successful anyway. When I heard we would retaliate in Afghanistan, I admit, I supported the military action. I understood the emotion that drives such support, and was even, to my shame now, nonplussed by the peace demonstrations taking place in Washington Square Park.
I have never been, nor am I now, a pacifist. But I was naive enough to think that we would seek to capture Osama bin Laden, and try him for thousands of murders. I suppose I wanted to be that naive. But as I watched with horror as the evil idiots in charge managed a "war effort" that slaughtered so casually innocent Afghanis, all seemingly to secure an oil pipeline that had previously eluded them, evidence quickly mounted, illuminating for anyone rational, that justice was not on the neo-cons' minds.
In the age of the Internet, information is not hard to come by, and I suppose, having just worked in a news organization, I was adept at evaluating it. When we were told Hussein had WMD, I adopted a skeptical stance, and an open mind. I studied the various reports, and it was painfully obvious that our illegal president was lying. As the years progressed, the pain only became more and more acute. This maladministration lied about everything. And it was obvious to anyone rational.
I've suffered considerably through these Bush years -- my time in law school was made incredibly difficult by serious, debilitating illnesses, and our health insurance system only made things worse. Despite my health, despite the rigors of law school, I was as politically active as I could be. Because my fear had now focused on what my country was becoming, and my anger focused on what we were doing to the world. I used those emotions productively, writing articles, working on campaigns, etc.
But today, upon reading this news, I'm back to profound grief. I'm not surprised, but somehow, that only makes the grief worse. I understood the bloodlust and avenging rage Americans felt after 9/11. I felt it too. But this maddeningly casual approach to war, the desire for it, when even Hussein himself offered a politically face-saving way out of it is something I never hope to comprehend -- on any level.
Mr. Bush, had you allowed Hussein to flee, you would have likely been treated as a hero. He'd have run screaming like a baby merely at the thought of facing the mighty American military, and you could have milked that political narrative for all it was worth. You could have thought to yourself, "Hey, we just might acquire the kind of power and image and wealth we want without a new war."
But no. You and your despicable comrades are enjoying yourselves.
Mr. Bush, any lightweight, less-than-great president could have and would have harnessed the international sympathy and goodwill toward the United States 9/11 generated. For a brief moment, you even had me on your side, and I hated, hated, hated watching you take the oath of office I knew you had no right to take, and which you would soon violate.
But only someone as depraved as you could bring us to where we are today! Only you could transform grief that a massacre had been inflicted upon us into grief that massacres were being committed by us -- and transform it again into grief that we were committing those massacres because you enjoy it!
In 2009, you (I hope) will step down. You will have left the world covered in blood, left our republic in tatters, and left your people to grieve. You'll do it all with a smile on your face, pretending to be a retired rancher, or playing in your new Paraguayan pen.
I have never hoped that someone else experience grief, Mr. Bush. Only you, you developmentally-stunted degenerate, could make me do that. And I do. I hope against hope that you will have a moment of sobriety one day, and realize what you have done. And then you can live in fear -- that justice might one day find you. And if it does, after you overcome your initial anger at having been convicted of crimes against humanity, I hope that you grieve.
If YOU are not OUTRAGED. YOU are not PAYING ATTENTION. Bottom Line.
What else is the mainstream news failing to report on. These guys are not doing their jobs. Thanks C&L, and other blogs!!!
Thanks Andy K, but isn't that title a little cumbersome to say every time we raise our hand and shout "Heil"?
I wonder what it feels like to have voted for the Worst President Ever twice?
The 29% are welcome to respond to what that feels like.
They would vote for him again and again and again, party before Country everytime.
jane @ 102:
I'll stick with Stupor.
I just think of the guy and I just wonder. How? Why?
It's more intriguin'- and of course, much more frightenin'- than the platypus.
fiver @ 106:
That's why I call him Stupor Mundi! Ya save the lenghty titles fer special occasions.
Like trials.
Andy K @ 109:
:lol: :lol: :lol:
BDM @ 62:
If CNN is airing the story it may mean that the wheels are coming off the bus.
Dolpfan @ 99:
Impeachment is the easy part. It takes a simple majority vote in the House. Impeachment= indictment.
But yer correct when it comes to conviction. No way that there'd be 17 or 18 who'd cross the aisle to convict Bush, even if they watched him strangle a toddler. It's called Republican Solidarity. Or a pack of lemmings, headed toward a cliff. Either way, it's good fer the Nation. Or so says the GOP.
And by strangle a toddler, I mean strangle a toddler. To death. In the well of the Senate. On C-Span II. While shoutin', "Hey, I'm George W. Bush, President of the United States of America, and I'm stranglin' this toddler to death in the well of the Senate, on C-Span II! Bring it on!"
Karen....on 9/11 when the first plane hit the towers...I looked at my wife and said.." this doesn't look like an accident ....but it might be"....then I took a shower.When I got out of the shower my wife was glued to the tv..and the look on her face spoke volumes.She then told me that another plane had just hit the other tower..."This is no accident". Was it a breakdown of intelligence?...or was it ignoring the intelligence?......we both know the answer to that..
Hi ya Andy K...good to see ya again....as we both can see the Congress has their own agenda.....(sigh)...sometimes I wonder.
You're right Andy, they would never vote for conviction, unless he was gay. He could kill a billion people and Neo cons would defend it. But if he was gay IMPEACHMENT. How sad is that.
For the few comments above that complained that I edited out the “and be allowed to take his weapons of mass destruction information with him” part, well, yes I did. Guilty as charged, but I didn't alter anything. It was an exact quote. That's what the ellipses in a quote is for. Besides, if anybody was ever really guilty of selective editing with regards to Saddam's wmd, it was Bushco not me (they didn't share with us the 'ellipses'). If you watched the video, CNN even discounts that part of Bush's claim: "Analysts say he may not have had much technical knowledge of wmd to escape with." (then they cut that P.O.S. Hanlon).
Bush refused to give Saddam any guarantees for any exile deal. That's the whole point of this post. and if you are of the mind that letting Saddam skip out with a couple boxes full of notes on how to make wmd's wasn't preferable to what has happened instead (he could have always been caught and brought to trial in the Hague later), well, you must share the same irrational hubris as the chimperor.
Dolpfan @ 116:
Sadly, not even if he were gay. They'd talk about how he just needed help, and how he'd turn to Jesus for guidance. And the most intolerant bigots among them would preach tolerance for Bush, and call us hypocrites for not being tolerant of Bush.
Their double standards are absolute.
Of course, that doesn't mean impeachment isn't worthwhile anyway. I still think the House ought to impeach him. And Cheney. And Condi. And everyone in this maladministration. I don't care anymore that they won't be convicted. If nothing else, I want the House to show the world that we care about justice, and that the body most directly derived from the people of the U.S. disapproves of those somewhat removed.
I listened the other day to Robert Kennedy Jr. interview Chris Dodd. I like Chris Dodd. I'm still considering voting for him for president. However, when asked about impeachment, he mentioned that conviction was unlikely, and that he'd rather get important things done now so that the country could move on. I might have agreed with him years ago, but now I agreed with Kennedy -- the country should not be allowed to move on! We are going to be remembered as the generation that did nothing, allowing evil to prevail, just as Orwell warned.
Who knows, maybe the deal did go through. How do we know that was the real Saddam??
Pardon me while I sit down at my Ouija board .... Leeee Harrrrvey Ooooswaallld ... can you heeeeaaaarrrr meeeee?
mudshark @ 114:
I'm sure there were similar discussions in closed private rooms during the night of the Reichstag fire and on the day after the radio broadcasts of Operation Himmler.
I can't believe anything anymore, so I'll hold this new revelation in check.
For me to believe this, I really need the following question answered.
Since when can Bush speak spanish sufficiently to require a transcript to be translated???
can they play the tape??
[...] when you read something like THIS and the White House Spokesperson confirms it, how can anyone with any sense of integrity support [...]
Bush didn't care about Saddam.
Bush Wanted War!
duncanidho @ 122:
Bush speaks Spanish. Granted, I'm sure he mangles it with the same regularity that he mangles English, but he does speak Spanish. It was one of his campaign angles when he ran for governor of Texas. And his campaign mentioned it a lot in 2000.
About a hundred comments later, but...yeah oops, I misread. I thought t was saying Saddam was giving a price for his leaving.
I doubt the country at the time would have considered that a valid proposal really, but...yeah, would've been good to hear about it.
duncanidho @ 122:
Most likely both Aznar and Bush were speaking in english, and one of Aznar's aides was doing the translating/transcribing during Aznar's stay at Bush's ranch in Crawford.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_con...
Aznar speaks english better than Bush.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLAv5A1yM8I
It continues to amaze me that with the overwhelming body of evidence that this war (and virtually every other initiative this administration has undertaken) is a huge fraud
that there are seemingly never going to be any consequences for these clowns. It's shameful.
None of this matters anymore. The only people who are with Bush are people who want war and they are generally made up of religious nuts that think that this is a crusade against Islam and your garden variety fruitcake moonbat who just likes the idea that there are people dying in a war. The only other type is the idiots that truly believe that there is something that will come after them if we are not involved in the middle of the civil war in Iraq. So no matter what we say or what evidence comes out suggesting that there corruption is and has occurred during this administration, they get their war and revert back to the fear factor when we say anything against their talking points.
justabill @ 128:
btw, what the f$%%@# is Aznar on about? He sounds like rush limbaugh's submissive boyfriend, repeating gop misconceptions about europeans, in this clip at least.
nRon @ 131:
lol! Aznar always was the jealous puppy that wasn't allowed up on daddy Bush's lap because Blair the poodle was always there first. That's why Spain kicked Aznar out of office after the Madrid bombings.
Bush needed to be "daddy" to talk radio hosts and the connie bloggers and columnists and have fawning books written about him by Bill Sammon so thousands of troops had to die and tens of thousands wounded
And yet the Congress continue to allow the President, VP and his administration to continue to run our nation and government without pressing them for EXPLANATIONS.
Silence and the attempt of this administration to duck and run away from these piercing revelations of deception without any immediate response is a sign of GUILT and buying time to collect suggested rebuttle to control the already damaged credibility and integrity of the BUSH administration. In effect it appears that they are structuring a strategy on how to contain such damaging revelation that seems to be factual that will inevitably convict this administration to high crimes and in effect subject them to future trial for war crimes in the high courts of our domestic and the world's international court systems.
The longer they wait with out any response, will appear as though they are guilty that they have to device a ANSWER that the public will accept. The problem is the PUBLIC will not accept any less than the TRUTH.
The TRUTH in this case may not save these criminals free if they are found to be intentionally decieving the WORLD.
When Bush had the choice of either letting Saddam skip out with a billion dollars or risking thousands and thousands of lives on a war, he chose the latter. all of the lives weren't worth $1 billion.
At thie time Bush and his neocon nutjobs around him thought the war would pay for itself.
That's the easiest impeachment case right there. Saddam offered to step down. We invaded anyway.
Oh, and Fed Kaplan at Slate explains that Anzar and Bush were speaking in English. But the article is in Spanish, so we don't have an original English translation of what Bush said. But read Kaplan's piece. That's an amazing exchange.
http://www.slate.com/id/2174857/nav/tap3/
I see a lot of you guys saying "He had a choice between".
I'll remind you that Bush was over-over-optimistic about the war. Remember he said to someone that there wouldn't be ANY casualties. The troops would be welcomed as liberators. Etc.
So the choice, in Bush's mind, wasn't between trillions of dollars and thousands of deaths / the fleeing of a dictator with $1billion and his WMDs.
It was, as others said, between a victorious war, a captured dictator, a new democracy etc./ the fleeing of a dictator with $1billion and his WMDs.
Certainly, if he really bought the liberator story, his choice was logical.
A few months ago I read the Naomi Wolf’s 10 steps to fascism (http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html) and it bothered me the way a nagging truth usually does. The article has been reproduced all over the place since then, and Naomi made it to the big time (Comedy Central?). Still, today, it bothers me – the way a nagging truth usually does.
If this article simply expressed the view that our Executive Administration was fascist, or that our country was on the road to fascism as John Dean’s last three books do, I don’t think I would be as bothered. I already know this. The nagging truth behind Naomi’s article is the how – and she nails it. Step by step, we have followed a spiraling freefall into fascism – 10 steps to national repression. And what has been bothering me the most is not the how, but the why.
As I reread the 10 steps, I realize these consecutive actions are not taken by a single boogey man. George Bush is not single-handedly building Abu-Ghraib, controlling the press, harassing dissidents, spying on enemies, or disbanding the rule of law. He couldn’t do these things on his own. So why are so many doing so much to harm so many more? Is it money? Is it power? Is it bloodlust, or fear?
Yes, it is all of these things. But above all else, “they” do these things because “they” can – and it works.
The 10 steps to fascism are used because they are the path of least resistance to these goals of domination. Like corporate hatchet-men out to crush competition by any means necessary, and school-yard bullies out to beat-up the little guy to show the tough-guys they can’t be bullied, these 10 fascist tactics work best establish, procure, and sustain “political/monetary/power domination”. When you’ve accepted the “by any means necessary” idea – these steps are those means. They work – and this bothers me.
The stars all have to align just right for these tactics to be allowed. Sadly, it is better known today what this alignment is; and this too can be manipulated. Sadder still, is the fact that the results of these tactics never last for long. If those that pursue such tactics could be shown that the results have always failed, perhaps they would alter course. But some never learn – and this bothers me.
From Herod, to Caligula, Genghis Khan and then to Stalin, Adolph, Pol-Pot and PapaDoc, these regimes have all used the same methods. These regimes all experienced limited initial success. And these regimes all failed in the end– leaving in their wake the suffering of hundreds of thousands, if not millions.
Now our country is in the grip of these tactics “that work.” We are not a fascist regime in the mold of Stalin or Pol-Pot, but the “by any means necessary” idea is ingrained in this administration, and we will suffer because of it. This administration has seen limited initial success for 6 years because of these tactics. And this administration will fail in the end – leaving in its wake the suffering of hundreds of thousands, if not millions – and this bothers me. The way a nagging truth usually does.
god help us all
How is that news?
German Spiegel online wrote about rumors that Saddam will go into exile at 01/31/2003. Bush´s meeting with Saudi Arabian foreign minister prince Saud al Faisal at that time was further feeding these speculations. The unsolved question was where Saddam could go.
At 02/19/2003 Spiegel online wrote about Egyptian president Mubarak´s visit to Berlin. Mubarak was sure the invasion of Iraq will start in about two or three weeks. He made clear his country wouldn´t allow Saddam to enter Egypt for exile.
At 03/03/2003 Spiegel online wrote the United Arab Emirates were suggesting to allow Saddam into exile. Bahrain, Kuweit and Saudi-Arabia and a few Gulf States signalled their agreement.
German DIE ZEIT online wrote in it´s issue 07/2003 (in February 2003) that Bush hopes his threats will either force Saddam into Swiss exile or lead to his removal from office.
I suspect Americans could have known that as well but in the raging 9/11 hysteria they didn´t want to know.
Since impeachment if "off the table" here, is there any kind of International Court of Justice to try this case? There is more than enough evidence to convict!
We don't need impeachment, we simply need war crimes hearings. Throwing Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the other people in the Republinazi party in chains and putting them on trial will do wonders in improving our image in the world.
Amy Basso @ 10:
Actually Bush is worse than Saddam, and BinLaden for that matter, for he has killed more Americans than either one, he has killed more innocent civilians than either one, and he has done what neither Saddam or BinLaden could have done by bringing down America. Even our allies recognize Bush for what he is, part of the new axis of evil http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1938434,00.html
Bin Laden killed over 3,000 Americans on 911 and the Bush Regime used those attacks to bring this nation down. Bin Laden must me estatic, he couldn't have planned it better himself. BushCo has been so good at bringing America down they could be an Al-Queda sleeper cell.
how long do you think it take for the iraqis to figure out how to blow up the 8 billion
dollars worth of up armored vehicles coming off the assembly line? my guess is about 3 weeks.
truthfinder @ 141:
The more you learn about these criminals and the criminal GOP the more you come to realize why they are dead set against the international criminal court. It's because their asses would be the first ones hauled before it. Of course they always hide behind the flag and the average American saying they are against an international court because the average American or American soldier could be falsely accused....as if BushCo and the GOP actually give two shits about the average American or American soldier.....being against the international criminal court is all about keeping their sorry, crooked murderous, war profiteering asses out of The Hague, nothing more.
tr @ 144:
Not to worry. The GOP is shifting the tax burden further away from the rich and onto to us. We will just all have to work a little harder to pay for the Bush/GOP wars for big oil and Halliburton, that's all.
aquarius2 @ 14:
AIPAC wanted 'security' for Israel - would US be interested at all in the Middle East had it not been for our addiction to oil ?? No serious research on energy has been done in the US since 60-70-ties (commercial nuke applic.).. WHY ?
regardless who were in charge: dems or repugs, US oil dependence was cultivated. Solar and inefficient wind-farms are a joke for the wastefull economy of our size, and the wind turbine farms are destructive to the environment in many other ways.
There would be no way to brainwash sheeple as well abt Israel without our insane oil dependency.
As much as existence of Israel seems to be a necessity for many reasons, without Iraqed hysteria tied to 9/11 there would be no way for billions of US taxpayer $$$$ sent every year to Israel (upon approval by our pols, on AIPAC pay) , to finance Israeli land grab and atrocities against Palestinians, and for the 'wall''. Cheney and Bush were incidental - the weakest of the bunch (being a bully is a weakness, not strenghth !), sick abt ego, therefore secured by AIPAC as the easiest to buy/manipulate.
That's why they love Hillary - she is the most "for SALE' of dems, w/the worst ego. Should she get the dems nomination (secured by Rahm Emanuel, AIPAC agent), ANY repug will beat her in general election: AIPAC rules anyway. The war was to fill the hungry pockets w/ military open end contracts. The primary Isareli money-maker: military industry, totally enmeshed w/the US mil manufacturer's.
CappuccettoRosso @ 147:
BUT....it wasn't the Dem who went into Iraq under false pretenses, or the Rethugs before this one, it was the current Rethugs.
2 things
1) the MIC wouldn't have made all that money if we just allowed Saddam to leave
2) one agenda is to get the people in the middle east to kill each other off. That's why those two British intel guys were going around dressed up like muslims shooting innocent civilians. That's why Blackwater was giving Iraqis weapons. They want to inflame the middle east, kill them and have them kill each other and gradually the entire middle east will become part of the new world order.
bush is a c*nt
Login or Register to post comments.