Monday, September 11, 2006

Williams Offers Ridiculous "Truthiness" For Conservative 9/11 Revisionists

Armstrong Williams may be off the Bush Administration's payroll, but he apparently still likes shilling for the commander in chief.

On his New York-based morning radio show, conservative pundit Williams tried to revise what President Bush did on Sept. 11, 2001, after then-Chief of Staff Andrew Card whispered into his ear, "The nation is under attack."

"We don't know what he said (to Card)," Williams countered to liberal co-host Sam Greenfield, after Greenfield had chastised a caller defending the Bush's actions that morning.

We don't know what he said? Umm. He didn't say anything.

Americans know this because there's video footage. Bush sat in the Sarasota, Fla., classroom, looking like a nervous student unprepared for a pop quiz. He didn't communicate anything to Card or any other member of his staff, at least until he excused himself from participation in the reading of My Pet Goat.

Who exactly does Williams think he can fool with this sort of "truthiness?"

***

Williams gained notoriety nearly two years ago when it was learned that, via a subcontract from public relations firm Ketchum Inc., he had been paid to tout for the Department of Education's "No Child Left Behind" program.

The payment was one of several events that the non-partisan Government Accountability Office found to be "covert propaganda," and in violation of "governmentwide" anti-propaganda rules.

I guess old habits die hard.

56 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Was any of this money he was legally paid in Congressman William Jefferson fridge?

11:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So the President didnt speak to Andrew Card behind closed doors or when the cameras werent on him? It amazing you libs can walk upright.

11:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Liberals...terrorist's greatest weapon in America.

12:23 PM  
Anonymous trinity said...

David R. Mark said...
"We don't know what he said? Umm. He didn't say anything.

Americans know this because there's video footage. Bush sat in the Sarasota, Fla., classroom, looking like a nervous student unprepared for a pop quiz. He didn't communicate anything to Card or any other member of his staff, at least until he excused himself from participation in the reading of My Pet Goat."


Anonymous, just when you think these libs cannot get any more petty and nasty, they seem to effortlessly break all of their previous records for being vile and vicious. Why do I keep underestimating their capacity for hate?

When I watch the footage of President Bush, I see something entirely different from what they see. I see a man who is absorbing the significance of what he has just been told, and who is already preparing himself mentally for the tremendous job of taking on the terrorists. He understood then what some morons have yet to grasp.

12:41 PM  
Anonymous Ditto said...

Anyone that can read can see WHO is petty and nasty here.

"I see a man who is absorbing the significance of what he has just been told, and who is already preparing himself mentally for the tremendous job of taking on the terrorists." Yeah for ten minutes.

That's the funniest f-ing thing you've said in days, T. Kudos for the deer-in-the-headlights-humor!

So he started thinking about terrorism on 9/11? Thanks, Trin. I guessed you answered my question about what your AWOL War President did about the 17 American lives lost on the USS Cole days before he was appointed! Nothing. Zero. Zip. Not one single meeting on the terroist threat. Not one! Instead he instituted Operation Ignore.

TRINITY IS A PAID HACK - just like Williams and DOZENS of other exposed...

Please have a nice day, all.

12:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So, Trinity is a paid hack for the President? Well, I guess that makes Ditto a paid hack for terrorists and murderers. Probably been a paid hack for Marxists and pedophiles as well.

Maybe if you buddy Clinton had do something effective about terrorism during HIS administration instead of chasing interns and molesting women, just maybe, we wouldn't have had 9/11. CLinton WAS the CinC of Operation Ignore, as well as Operation Pervert.

1:06 PM  
Anonymous trinity said...

Ditto said...
"Anyone that can read can see WHO is petty and nasty here."


Just calling them as I see them, Ditto. You guys are a very petty bunch, and I don't have much patience for this type of tripe. Nor for jerks like yourself I might add. Behave yourself or I may put your obnoxious self on ignore. lol You're that close.

1:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ditto
Clintons response to the Cole which happened on his watch was what. Please enlighten us all with your stupidity. While you ae at it what did Clinto do whenever we were attacked. ANSWER...Not a fucking thing you piece of shit.

1:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Funny thing I was reminded this morning that her thighness Shrillary Klinton didnt want the 911 commission going back any further than 6 months. Gee I wonder why?

1:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, didn't Clinton visit the WTC after the '93 terrorist bombing? Oh, wait...No!

And he was just over the river in NJ....

Yeah, he cared...

1:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And another thing. Your hero, the rapist, BJ Klinton didnt even have the respect to come to NYC after the 93 bombing. I guess it was too much to travel all the way from NJ where he was. What a great leader he was. Led us right into the path of destruction and now this great president, George W. Bush has to clean up his mess. I guess Monica wasnt the only one that had to clean up after him.

1:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yup, but Monica only had a blue dress and her chin to clean. But she couldn't even clean the dress...

1:45 PM  
Anonymous Proud and Red said...

I see the same yahoos are out in force, talking about everything but the subject at hand. I've been hitting this site for the past week (since David wrote about my home turf), and I'm amazed at the anger from what I have to assume is the fringe right.

You guys don't represent me or true Republicans.

FACT: The video shows Card whispering in Bush's ear, and Bush sitting there for several minutes.

You want to say he was absorbing the information? Fine. I can buy that argument. But Bush certainly didn't whisper anything back to Card. He didn't text-message anyone while he was sitting there.

So:

FACT: Williams' comment is ridiculous.

Either you agree with the premise of David's post or you don't.

Either Bush didn't whisper something back to Card in the classroom, or propose an alternate theory. Come up with a rationale -- the video must have turned off, or the tape is looped by Michael Moore to make it look like Bush sat there longer than he really did.

The rest is just stupid rants, and extremely tiresome to read. It doesn't strengthen the conservative cause; it weakens it.

Out here in Wyoming, you'd be laughed at for ranting this way. You should all be ashamed.

1:55 PM  
Anonymous Warpy said...

He sat there slackjawed, Binky
Didn't say a word, didn't do a damned thing.

No conservative has ever managed to come to terms with that.

Admitting it would mean admitting there are only two possibilities: either he's the stupidest man on the planet and can't function unless somebody hands him a script; or he knew it was coming and that he needed to let it all play out.

My money's on the latter.

1:56 PM  
Anonymous fasttense said...

He sat like an actor without direction blinking and wondering what he should do. He did not, and does not, know the appropriate response is/was to an attack of the US because Rove didn't script it for him. We all saw him on TV, many times over. A ridiculous, useless, powerless man with Out a genuine concern.

1:56 PM  
Anonymous ProfessorGAC said...

What A Genius Armstrong Is!
I wonder how much research time and deep thought was required to come to the conclusion that we don't know what we don't know. Gee, such a multifaceted mind!

What a tool!
The Professor

1:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow! Terrorism's greatest weapons are answering. LOL!!

Just because he didn't say anything right then and there he must be stupid. Ok, sure, right, Whatever you say...

2:05 PM  
Anonymous Angelina's Evil Twin said...

THAT'S NOT THE ARGUMENT!!!!

CAN'T YOU WINGERS READ?

DID ARMSTRONG WILLIAMS LIE WHEN HE SUGGESTED THAT BUSH SAID SOMETHING TO CARD IN THE CLASSROOM???

YES OR NO!!!!!!!!!

2:36 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

Terrorism's greatest weapons >>

Terrorism's greatest weapon is our folly in Iraq, which has given young men throughout the region a rallying cry to hate the United States, and to turn to an organized central leadership -- Al Qaeda and its derivatives.

In the midst of chaos, Germans rallied around Hitler and Italians rallied around Mussolini. They didn't know where else to turn, so they turned to a person who they felt could speak on their behalf and give them strength.

The same thing is happening now. These people have been indoctrinated since birth to think that the United States and Israel are the devil. They see bombs dropping on Iraq, they see the casualties, they see that Iraq didn't have WMD or real ties to Al Qaeda, they think the U.S. (tied to Israel) are imperialists.

In Lebanon, they see the dead bodies, they think Israel attacked Lebanon, and that the U.S. supported Israel. They think the same in defense of the Palestinians.

They aren't correct in these assessments. But they've been given propaganda for so long, that it's easy for them to use these news events to spur their hatred.

These are Al Qaeda's recruits.

Now before 9/11, there were other reasons for these men to join Al Qaeda. U.S. support for Israel. Our ships and bases throughout the region. Before Al Qaeda, there was the Iranian hostage taking. Before that, there were PLO bombings galore. There was the U.S. troops killed in Lebanon in 1982 -- during Reagan's watch.

This is a long-term problem. Both Republican and Democratic presidents have failed to stop terrorism.

But it's absolutely moronic to say that the left is "terrorism's greatest weapon." Someone who says that is either dumb as a tree stump, or someone who hates everything America stands for.

You can't just ignore the Bill of Rights, and the freedoms it grants into law, because it's inconvenient to your world view, anonymous.

2:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Angelina, don't get your panties in a wad. Look again what he said...

"We don't know what he said (to Card)," Williams countered to liberal co-host Sam Greenfield, after Greenfield had chastised a caller defending the Bush's actions that morning.

Look what you said...

DID ARMSTRONG WILLIAMS LIE WHEN HE SUGGESTED THAT BUSH SAID SOMETHING TO CARD IN THE CLASSROOM???

Clearly you are trying to put words in Mr. Williams' mouth and "extend" his comments. He clearly stated that we don't know WHAT the President said. No mention of when something was said; you added the when.

Think about it; what was your first reaction when you heard the towers were hit. Kind of left you a little speachless. Does that make you stupid, a moron, unable to lead?

Maybe it means you are trying to get a full grasp mentally, the full scope of what this means before you react.

Remember, the President was in a classroom full of children. Would you expect him to jump up right there, start barking orders and perhaps frightening the kids? Once it was appropriate, he calmly did what was necessary. He didn't lose his head and freak out. And thank God for that.

I really hope this helps to clarify the issue.

2:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah Rob, you are a moron, sir.

islamo-facists were rallying around their murderous, anti-American/anit-Isreal leaders for years; not just since were freed 50 million between Afghanistan and Iraq.

Your belief that President Bush caused all this terrorism is blatant crap and demonstrates your abject hatred for the President...and probably this country. The war in Iraq has just given the world a chance to consolidate this murderous scum in one area and kill more efficiently.

And the comment mad by an anonymous earlier is quite accurate...you libs ARE terrorisms greatest weapon in American; you are their greatest asset. You libs want to protect these killers...these same killers who would separate you empty little head from your scrawny little neck. You want to ties the hands of those volunteering to protect us; those willing to lay their very lives on the line for you to be a imbecile. You libs are trying desperately to get America to forget what happened on 9/11; to blame it on US for these atrocity. Yes, you ARE the terrorist’s most effective weapon. You ARE America's enemy.

3:15 PM  
Anonymous Angelina's Evil Twin said...

Maybe you NEED TO IMPROVE your reading comprehension:

"Williams tried to revise what President Bush did on Sept. 11, 2001, [b]after then-Chief of Staff Andrew Card whispered into his ear, "The nation is under attack."[/b]

"We don't know what he said (to Card)," Williams countered to liberal co-host Sam Greenfield, after Greenfield had chastised a caller defending the Bush's actions that morning.

......

To me, that means the discussion was, what did Bush do IMMEDIATELY AFTER CARD WHISPERED IN HIS EAR. That's how David took it, too, it seems.

Williams didn't say, "He sat poised for a few minutes to collect his thoughts, but then we don't know what Bush did next when he was off-camera."

If he had said that, I would agree with you completely.

As far as I can see, by the way, David DID NOT SUGGEST THAT BUSH WAS "STUPID, A MORON, UNABLE TO LEAD."

As for your question, "Would you expect him to jump up right there, start barking orders and perhaps frightening the kids?"

HE COULD HAVE POLITELY EXCUSED HIMSELF, then SPRUNG INTO ACTION. Maybe THINGS WOULD BE DIFFERENT TODAY.

Just one gal's thoughts ...

3:21 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

islamo-facists were rallying around their murderous, anti-American/anit-Isreal leaders for years; not just since were freed 50 million between Afghanistan and Iraq. >>

I didn't say that.

Your belief that President Bush caused all this terrorism is blatant crap and demonstrates your abject hatred for the President...and probably this country. The war in Iraq has just given the world a chance to consolidate this murderous scum in one area and kill more efficiently.

I didn't say that.

And the comment mad by an anonymous earlier is quite accurate...you libs ARE terrorisms greatest weapon in American; you are their greatest asset. You libs want to protect these killers...

Untrue. And you can't defend that argument with any factual statement involving any Democratic leader. You can't find a single piece of legislation written by a Democrat to suggest that.

these same killers who would separate you empty little head from your scrawny little neck. You want to ties the hands of those volunteering to protect us; those willing to lay their very lives on the line for you to be a imbecile. You libs are trying desperately to get America to forget what happened on 9/11; to blame it on US for these atrocity. Yes, you ARE the terrorist’s most effective weapon. You ARE America's enemy.

Democrats want the U.S. government to follow the law as it seeks to fight the war on terror. The Supreme Court and lower courts have on several occasions said that the Bush Administration, in its efforts to fight the war on terror, have violated the law.

Dissent does not equal disloyalty.

Read an American history book sometime.

3:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here's another take on things. This is what the students in the classroom thought:


The president visited the students' classroom to promote his education bill. But then, at 9:07 a.m., White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card interrupted the class.

"I just remember one of his staff members walk up to him, and he turns back and looks at us, and his face starts to turn red," (second-grader Tyler) Radkey said. "So I'm thinking to myself that he has to go to the bathroom."

Another student in that classroom, 12-year-old Natalia Jones, who's now a seventh grader at Booker Middle School had a different take.

"I thought he was mad at us or something because his face was red and he was staring in one spot," Jones said.


http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2414248&page=1

3:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rob, liberalism in it's form today, the anti-Americanism it stands for, the un-American comments from the left, the lies and false accuisations from the lib leaders, the vile hatred spewing from you libs, is disloyal and evil. You obviously fit this bill...YOU are disloyal, you are un-American. There is nothing Constitutional about you brand of evil. You are disgusting.

3:38 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

Anonymous, you can make wild accusations all you want. Spew your hate. Until you come up with specifics, it's just a load of steaming, hot bullshit.

What you are basically saying is that when the law is inconvenient, screw it. How American of you.

3:51 PM  
Anonymous trinity said...

I think this whole premise is just so very dumb.

The way I remember things, President Bush and those with him that morning all had seen the news about the first plane hitting the North Tower on a tv set prior to the president entering the children's classroom.

So to believe that there was no discussion at that time between the president and his people with regard to whether or not this was a terrorist attack, and what should be done if that fact could be confirmed, is just sheer ignorance on the part of people who want to nitpick and/or take cheap shots.

4:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Actually, I see more libs blowing off "inconvenient" laws. Don't project your little un-American values on me. You are the disloyal traitor.

And yes, you fanatical lib-tards, yes I dispise you for what you want to do to this country. You would destroy this country to get back into power. You are the epitome of evil.

4:15 PM  
Anonymous trinity said...

rob of wilmington, del. said...
"The Supreme Court and lower courts have on several occasions said that the Bush Administration, in its efforts to fight the war on terror, have violated the law."


Could I see a source for that claim, rob, other than one that cites the single, very recent August ruling that came down, not from the SCOTUS, but from that very liberal U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor?

That ruling, btw, has been given to an Appellate Court for review, and in all likelihood, the SCOTUS will reverse that misguided decision. Want to bet?

4:25 PM  
Anonymous Dave G. said...

Shorter Anonymous: Me say libruls bad. Me smash libruls! Eat them! Blarg blarg blarg blarg.

4:36 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

The way I remember things, President Bush and those with him that morning all had seen the news about the first plane hitting the North Tower on a tv set prior to the president entering the children's classroom.

>>

That's incorrect. There was no real-time video of the first plane hitting the WTC. That was only uncovered a day or so later, from the Greek television crew.

>>

So to believe that there was no discussion at that time between the president and his people with regard to whether >>

The question, again, is whether Bush said anything to Card at the time. That's the logical interpretation of what Williams said. I agree with Angelina above, and I'll even suggest that Williams might not have been his question very clear.

But what Williams says, as is, makes very little sense, and smacks of revisionist history.

4:38 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

Could I see a source for that claim, rob, other than one that cites the single, very recent August ruling >>

what about the Hamdan ruling by the Supreme Court. The court ruled against the Bush Administration, no?

4:40 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

Actually, I see more libs blowing off "inconvenient" laws. Don't project your little un-American values on me. You are the disloyal traitor.

And yes, you fanatical lib-tards, yes I dispise you for what you want to do to this country. You would destroy this country to get back into power. You are the epitome of evil. >>

Anonymous, you can make wild accusations all you want. Spew your hate. Until you come up with specifics, it's just a load of steaming, hot bullshit.

What you are basically saying is that when the law is inconvenient, screw it. How American of you.

4:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I see none of the Levinite cult have dared respond to Proud and Red above.

Makes sense. Mindless hatred is so much easier to having a real debate.

4:47 PM  
Anonymous Ezlivin said...

Your wife is being raped - Your ranch is on fire - Your daughter's missing

"Your country is being attacked" should provoke the same startled response.

Walk into any room, go up to any person and whisper to them that their family is being attacked.

I guarantee that they won't just sit there and do nothing.

The "Commander in Chief" should act like it matters that his "family" is being attacked.

4:50 PM  
Anonymous FrenchieCat said...

Wow......what a Lie!

we don't know what Bush did in the Florida classroom .....mmmm, yes we do.

We have it on film!

Duh, Armstrong.....are we supposed to be that stupid to where we should not longer believe what we have seen with out own eyes? Well maybe your audience is......

4:51 PM  
Anonymous Ditto said...

Your slipping, Trinster. You've contradicted yourself twice within a single thread! At least keep your BS cohesive... Or go for thrice!

And again, how many meetings did your AWOiL War President hold on the terrorist threat before the buildings fell 5 years ago?

How many?

How many paid GOP propoganda hacks have been exposed?

How many?

Please feel free to ignore these questions! It's your strong suit!

Trinity, Anonymous, Anonymous, Anonymous, Anonymous, Anonymous, Anonymous, and Anonymous... if that is your real nom de plume, you all are more fun they you know! I usually have to wait until 11:30PM to see that lying bastard, S.O.B. conservative Stephen Colbert to get this many laughs. Thank you again for brightening our day!

Sorry, David M., for the repetiton here but I cannot help myself...

"If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they would be robbed of half their arguments... This is how six-year-olds argue: They call everything 'stupid'." Ann Coulter

4:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Leave to the french libs to say something utterly moronic. But, hey, that's par for the cowardly frenchies...

4:59 PM  
Anonymous trinity said...

rob of wilmington, del. said...
"That's incorrect. There was no real-time video of the first plane hitting the WTC. That was only uncovered a day or so later, from the Greek television crew."


True, but that is not at all what I meant, rob. Or for that matter, what I wrote, either. What I wrote was, "President Bush and those with him that morning all had seen THE NEWS about the first plane hitting the North Tower". Not the footage. Isn't that a fact that they were already aware of the first plane hitting? Or am I not remembering this correctly?

rob of wilmington, del. said...
"what about the Hamdan ruling by the Supreme Court. The court ruled against the Bush Administration, no?"


I was focusing more on the NSA Surveillance program etc, but yes, sadly, you are correct about that disastrous Hamdan ruling.

Wasn't that the ruling that gave Geneva Conventions protections to unlawful combatants? The basest of animals who enjoy cutting the heads off of innocents? Now we must treat them like we treat our own soldiers, even though these men don't represent a state government? Even though they don't wear a uniform, but hide amongst innocent civilian populations? Even though they have never signed on to the Geneva Conventions themselves? And you favor this ruling, rob? Just asking.

Frankly, the mere thought that SCOTUS got this one so wrong is very troubling. Never before in the history of our country have we had to deal with such clueless Supreme Court Justices. This is why it's so important to appoint constitutionalists to the bench, and not former ACLU lawyers.

5:18 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

"all had seen the news"

Bush soon thereafter had misspoken about seeing the video footage of the first plane hitting the WTC. That's what I thought you meant.

5:22 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

trinity, let me say this as clearly as possible.

I think that the vast majority, if not all, of the people at guantanamo are guilty of something. either they are terrorists, communicated information to terrorists, learned about terrorists plots but didn't do anything to stop them, etc.

i'm not joking. I think that it's very possible that all 400 or so are guilty, and certainly the 14 transferred from the secret prisons.

but what if one or two aren't guilty of anything? What if we made a mistake? Even an ardent supporter of Bush would agree with Bush that mistakes have been made along the way.

So, for that sake, I'm glad the Supreme Court ruled as it did. Let them have a day before a military tribunal, and let's hope that 99% of them get found guilty, quickly, so that the question can be put to rest.

But if it turns out that the administration doesn't have a good argument (and tangible evidence) against a lot of them -- again, I don't think this will happen -- then the administration will have a lot of explaining to do.

5:26 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

Isn't that a fact that they were already aware of the first plane hitting? Or am I not remembering this correctly?

>>

I think they knew a plane had hit the tower, but were under the mistaken impression that it was a small plane (a one-person plane) rather than a jet. I think by the time Card went to Bush, that had been cleared up.

There was a story at the time that said that when Bush heard about the first plane, before he went into the classroom, he was overheard saying something like "that's one awful pilot."

5:30 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

Never before in the history of our country have we had to deal with such clueless Supreme Court Justices. This is why it's so important to appoint constitutionalists to the bench, and not former ACLU lawyers.

>>

How many of the Supreme Court justices are former ACLU lawyers? Did any of them other than Ginsburg?

How many of the Supreme Court justices were appointed by Republican presidents? Seven.

-- Roberts (Bush II)
-- Alito (Bush II)
-- Thomas (Bush I)
-- Souter (Bush I)
-- Scalia (Reagan)
-- Kennedy (Reagan)
-- Stevens (Ford)

5:38 PM  
Anonymous trinity said...

rob of wilmington, del. said...
How many of the Supreme Court justices are former ACLU lawyers? Did any of them other than Ginsburg?


Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was the one I had in mind, rob.

rob of wilmington, del. said...
"How many of the Supreme Court justices were appointed by Republican presidents? Seven."


Your point being? Don't forget that Harry Blackmun, the author of Roe v. Wade, was appointed by President Nixon, so it's not like mistakes aren't made.

And some, like Justice Kennedy for example, appointed by none other than Pres. Reagan, evolved, veering hard to the left, and seems to crave the approval of his European counterparts.

Four of those seven are truly exceptional justices though, imo. The others have for the most part been disappointments. And I think that President G.H.W. Bush really got snookered with Souter, thanks to Warren Rudman. Souter is pretty much a liberal activist on the court.

Of course, Justice Stevens, appointed by Pres. Ford is probably the most liberal member of the SCOTUS.

6:44 PM  
Anonymous trinity said...

rob of wilmington, del. said...
"So, for that sake, I'm glad the Supreme Court ruled as it did. Let them have a day before a military tribunal, and let's hope that 99% of them get found guilty, quickly, so that the question can be put to rest."


I think it's a very safe bet that by this time, all the detainees our government wasn't sure of have already been sent back to where they came from. They are very sure that the ones still detained, are not just unlucky saps who just happened to be on the battlefield at the wrong time.

There was one instance where one detainee was actually treated and fitted with a prostetic. A leg I think. He was then released, and ended up going back to fight our guys a second time. How do they know? He got picked up again.

7:02 PM  
Anonymous trinity said...

Another reason the Hamdan ruling is such a bad idea, rob, is that it's going to become a litigation nightmare for our counter-terrorism agents.

Already they're trying to buy insurance policies to protect themselves from being sued by terrorists who accuse them of human rights violations, real, imagined, or completely made up. What a can of worms that is going to be. Al Qaeda members suing our guys because they didn't like the way they were interrogated. That's just great. Let's get all those murdering thugs the best ACLU lawyers we can find. What a circus we're going to be seeing.

http://washingtontimes.com/upi/20060911-102315-8924r.htm

7:38 PM  
Blogger thewaronterrible said...

Trinity, Enough already with the ignorance.
"Al Qaeda members suing our guys because they way they were interrogated."
I'm so glad, Trinity, you're bought th Bush spin and are so sure they are Al Queda members. How the hell do you know all of them are? If even one of them were innocent, do you think he or she should have recourse for being thrown in prison unjustifiably for months, shut off from family, subjected to waterboard tortures and what not else.
Hey why were at it, the Bush Administration has decided a member of Trinity's family had visited Pakistan and hung out with the wrong crowd. "Lock 'em up. Let 'em feel those drowning sensations. Tell their family members what has happened to them? Forget about it. They were caught with an Al Queda group. What's a little bit of collateral damage in the name of rounding up so many Al Queda terrorists?
What makes our country GREAT is that we assume even the most vile criminals are innocent until proven guilty. It is the moral prominence that makes us both respected and feared throughout the word. We set an example for all nations.
Discard these principals even in the least we open up a can of worms even conservatives admittedly would want to fall into.
That's the problem with such nieve Bushie thought, whether it be about imprisoning and torturing alleged terrorists or spying on Americas. These conservatives CANNOT SAY WHERE THE LINE SHOULD BE DRAWN.
Because they are unwilling or unable to do so, because they would rather sheepishly place faith in their Ruler and Master Bush, incapable of deciphering the establishment of precedents for all further administrations of whatever party, we can disregard them entirely.
And in the name of preserving our great Democracy, so it must be.

10:23 PM  
Anonymous whoop4467 said...

This a little off topic, but due to the responses by the repuks on these post I would like to post excerpts from Johne Dean's new book "Conservatives Without Conscience".

In the introduction: "Over the past two decades American Electoral Politics has been transformed by the rise of a newly energized conservative movement - a movement that is highly organized, extremely well funded, and confidently ambitious in achieving its goals for both governemnt and the culture. The result has been not only a shift in the program and politics of the Republican Party, but a decisive change in the nature of political discourse, which has become disturbingly confrontational, vicious, and hypocritical. Demagoguery is increasingly supplanting responsible dialogue, self-righteousness is replacing conscientousness, and the victom is democracy."

"Dean presents a compelling portrait of leaders who are indifferent to the founding principles of liberty and equality, and who cloak their actions in moral superiority while pushing the country further and futher from its constitutional foundations."

In the preface:
"Contemporary Conservatives have become extremely contentious, confrontational, and aggressive in nearly every area of politics and governing. Today they have a tough-guy(and, in a few instances, a tough-gal - I add here "Trinity") attitude, an arrogant and antagonistic style, along with a narrow outlook intolerant of those who challenge their extreme thinking. Incivility is now their norm. Norman Ornstein, of the American Enterprise Institute, observes - we lost it under Clinton when conservatives relentlessly attacked his Presidency and then the present President Bush deliberately chose a strategy of being a divider, rather than a uniter."

"The current administration has taken positions that are in open defiance of international treaties or blantant violations of domestic laws, while pushing the limits of presidential power beyond the parameters of the constitution. It is aided and abetted in these actions by a conservative Repulican Congress that refuses to check or balance the president. The bellicose response to the events of 911 has escalated into a false claim of legitimacy. Many authors (and journalists) have described the extreme hubris now present in Washington, along with the striking abuses of power. While some of this activity has ostensiibly been undertaken in the name of fighting terrorists, much of it is just good old-fashioned power corruption."

This is plain and simple the same things I have been saying on these post with the repuke responses similiar to the ones of these comments. John Dean, an ex-republican, knows repuks much better than I do and I know repuks very well by their statements(mostly lies, spin on top of spin on top of spin on top of spin) - all little Ann Coulters, Rush Liebaughs, Mark Levins, Sean Hannities, and little devils, only they think with halos.

2:09 AM  
Anonymous trinity said...

I can't take you libs. Where's the duct tape? My head is going to explode! Talk about living in Bizarro world. There are a lot more ex-Democrats than ex-Republicans. Besides, whatever party, John Dean has always been a creep.

2:21 AM  
Anonymous whoop4467 said...

trinity said... I can't take you libs. Where's the duct tape? My head is going to explode! Talk about living in Bizarro world. There are a lot more ex-Democrats than ex-Republicans. Besides, whatever party, John Dean has always been a creep.

Was John Dean a creep when he was helping Nixon get elected? He is a creep only when he disagrees with you. My point about the real person that you are. Speak of Bizarro, you make Charles Manson look sane.

Even if 99% of Americans think like you , we should still have a democratic form of governement for the remaining 1%.

2:44 AM  
Anonymous Dave G. said...

Whoop, you should know that Trinity is a weak human being, as weak as the people she supports so vehemently. We are not descended from weak people, but those who want power just for power's sake at the expense of our institutions are fearful, sad, weak people, and they're running the country now.

8:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's all very simple.
Bush says: "9-11 changed everything" and, in so many words: Our constitutional principals can no longer withstand the post 9-11 world.
Wrong.
Our constitutional principals can withstand the post 9-11 world or we've validated the terrorists' argument a government ruled by individual freedoms cannot stand.
And the terrorists know a better way to destroy America from within is not to use bombs and attacks, rather with fears, prejudices and political division.
Bush and his apologists play into the terrorists' plans wonderfully. They could not have found better mascots.

9:04 AM  
Anonymous trinity said...

whoop4467 said...
"Was John Dean a creep when he was helping Nixon get elected? He is a creep only when he disagrees with you."


As a rule, with regard to character, people don't usually change all that much over the years, so I suspect John Dean was a creep going back to college, probably going back to high school, and maybe even throughout his formative years in grade school. He was very likely the insincere "Eddie Hascal" type that nobody really liked.

4:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why, we learned of Trinity's deep analytical skills as a "Leave it to Beaver" fan.
That gives me an idea for a new sitcom "Leave it to Chimp."

7:45 PM  
Anonymous whoop4467 said...

TO TRINITY - In John Deans new book "Conservatives Without Concsience" he explains his political history. He said the most influencial person for him was Barry Goldwater. John said he read several of Goldwaters books and other authors while in college and law school on conservatism and he was hooked. He also said that he had many meetings with Goldwater before his death about the topic of this book and Goldwater left permission to John Dean to have access to all of his writings. John said he is currently registered as an independent voter and has voted for both Republicans and Democrats, but did not vote for Bush II either time.


You say people do not change much over the years. I guess once a drug addict always a drug addict, like GWB. I guess that means you do not believe he really had a Chritian conversion ( says so just for political benefit). Once a creep, always a creep is your motto! What I have read about GWB, I agree with you that he has not changed much from his childhood days, except he used stronger drugs as he got older. GWB was born with a silver foot in his mouth.

8:56 PM  
Anonymous liberalism IS treason said...

Hmmmm...

clinton; once a drug addicted rapist, always a drug addicted rapist.

"KKK" Byrd; once a racist, always a racist.

Sen Kennedy; once a fat drunk, always a fat drunk.

Sen; Biden; once a moron, always a moron.

Liberals; once a traitor, always a traitor.

10:01 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Listed on BlogShares