digg

Join DiggAbout

Bush asked if he was mislead on Iraq... watch him squirm! watch!

cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com — In his interview with the Politico today, Bush is asked if he was mislead on Iraq. He claims he was served flawed intelligence. But his body language may tell a different story.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • EllieElliott, on 05/14/2008, -13/+30watch the next one, why he doesn't bother golfing anymore.
    • bjornski, on 05/14/2008, -0/+10What a sacrifice, huh?
      • cklein121, on 05/14/2008, -3/+2What do you want him to do? He's certainly isn't going to stop the war..
    • SATURN, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Not a golfer anymore, yet he still likes to do his Dr. Evil impressions.
    • CrazedLeper, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2I can't look at him long enough to assess his body language. He should be taken for a drag and then fed to something--or a swarm of something.
    • txdv48, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1Can't do it. I tried, but listening to this guy say as much as "hello" raises my blood pressure and makes my skin crawl. Even on video have never been in the presence of such a disingenuous human being. I'd rather be locked in a room with a televangelist.
  • yellowcakewalk, on 05/14/2008, -49/+165Lying piece of *****.
    • paperclipsNsoup, on 05/14/2008, -6/+14"Mislead is a-a strong word, ya know"
    • diggit83, on 05/14/2008, -3/+37At the end....he basically calls the war a mistake.

      "They analyzed the information, and came up with the wrong conclusion."

      Funny, considering hes always stood behind the reasons going to war in the first place.
      • wasabimonster, on 05/14/2008, -4/+22Vote McCain and we can stay there for 100 more years based on Bush's mistake.
        • jmpeagle, on 05/14/2008, -8/+11you realize both Obama and Clinton want us to keep a military presence there especially arounf Baghdad
          • seventoes, on 05/14/2008, -2/+8Only for the campaign trail I'm sure, thats how you get the most votes. We'll see what either of em do once they are in office.
        • allan17, on 05/14/2008, -5/+10It was a stupid idea to invade Iraq, but leaving now will ***** things up much worse. Try to think about what will happen if the US leaves. All those who showed any loyality to the US will be killed. Innocent citizens who were friendly towards British troops were slaughtered in Afganistan for the same reason.

          The US should leave Iraq ASAP, but not until the government there can stand on its own.
          • Waiting2awake, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1take them with you? I know it is a sacrifice, but maybe for those that will be killed between now and the hypothetical "standing on own feet" day comes around. There can't be more than a few thousand loyalists. They have stuck with the US through their mistake... seems like a fair sacrifice?
          • popfrogs, on 05/14/2008, -1/+8This is an unproven conclusion that warhawks like to bring up when anyone says "why not just pull out". The same retarded mentality kept us bleeding troops and money in Vietnam even after it was clear we could never "win". As a matter of fact, we haven't really won any wars since WW2 but this country has been at war, somewhere, for well over a century now.

            I hope people see through this argument and come to their senses. If you can't win, why keep fighting? You're basically saying "well if we don't keep fighting the country will tear itself to pieces" which is unproven. What IS proven, however, is that if we do keep fighting, we'll tear the country to pieces, kill more civilians and our troops, waste *****-tons more money in deficit spending that we can never repay in our lifetimes, etc.

            The only time pulling out isn't a guaranteed win is when you're talking about birth control.
        • senorsubagua, on 05/14/2008, -2/+6The government in iraq shows no interest in standing on its own... and yes, it will be horrible for those who supported us, and that's why you pick your wars far more carefully than this pack of buffoons did -- THAT was the lesson of Vietnam... Hate to contradict fearless leader, but there were millions of people who didn't believe the "evidence" for WMD, not the least of which were the inspectors, but UN and our own, who actually were in there looking around. Claiming that we were justified attacking Iraq in retrospect because "everybody believed they had WMD" is perhaps the biggest and most insidious lie of all. Make no mistake, the Iraqis haven't even begun to pay for our ***** up.
        • nofrickenway, on 05/14/2008, -6/+2I'm not a McCain supporter, but, that 100 years comment was taken out of context. He was talking about keeping a presence, not fighting a long-term battle. Look at the examples he gave- South Korea and Japan.

          Or maybe Kerry really does hate the troops?

          “You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.”
          • Loonacy, on 05/14/2008, -1/+8Even without context, it's VERY obvious he's talking about our presence in Iraq being stupid, not being in the military. If he were actually trying to insinuate that not doing your homework gets you in the military, he wouldn't have singled out Iraq. Anyone who tried to say he was disrespectful to the troops with that quote is either stupid or just trying to make some controversy.
          • senorsubagua, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1In south korea and japan, our troops are stationed in culturally unified countries that do not have centuries-long histories of internecine strife culminating in civil war (and yes, i know that south korea is engaged in a civil war with north korea, but we don't have troops stationed in north korea). mccain is a twit.
      • blazes816, on 05/14/2008, -1/+3He means that they thought they were there, and for that, he believes he was right to go in. I'm not supporting it, just putting his thoughts into more well put words. Like most people have to do.
    • CrazedLeper, on 05/14/2008, -6/+4Taking it easy on him a little, aren't you?

      /sarcasm
    • boogie606, on 05/14/2008, -8/+7as with all the other left wing extremists, you hate the man when he's telling the truth. Clinton was, and is, a lying piece of *****.
      he didn't squirm or ask anyone to define the word is. he merely states that the intelligence was wrong but that he didn't believe that anyone deliberately misled him.
    • Berkana, on 05/14/2008, -1/+17He was not misled; he knew from the very beginning. The war was planned from the very first days of his administration:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWkGhV3PsLo
      • kitsua, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2Nice. Cheers.
      • directedition, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2nice, but I'd rather have just the video, and not the pointless texts and music cues.
    • crackberri, on 05/15/2008, -2/+2I wouldn’t let Clinton near my dog.
    • txdv48, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1It's not about Clinton. Didn't your mother ever teach you anything about straw men and obsification?
  • plimpton777, on 05/14/2008, -20/+12I can haz moar warz plez?
  • JeffreyLloyd, on 05/14/2008, -49/+27The President should have added, it was the world wide intelligence community on top of the fact Saddam would not let the UN weapons inspectors inside Iraq to prove us all wrong. If Bush had backed down, like Clinton did for the past 8 years and he had used WMD against us (like he did against his own people) Bush would be attacked for letting it happened when he could have stopped it.

    Every one thought he had WMD, it wasn't cowboy Bush on his own.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLRAdLdUBOI
  • dmark77, on 05/14/2008, -16/+61Doesn't matter if he was misled - Hussein took a shot at his Daddy, and it was time for revenge.
    • macweirdo42, on 05/14/2008, -0/+22Which is strange, because his Daddy kicked Saddam's ass all over the place. The only reason he didn't take out Saddam was that he didn't want to have to deal with the implications of the U.S. occupation of Iraq (plus he was convinced that with Iraq's army so soundly defeated, the people themselves would rise up and overthrow Saddam).
    • natchiketa, on 05/14/2008, -9/+3dude, you forgot the < /sarcasm>. your comment is broken ;)
    • EpicSelekta, on 05/14/2008, -7/+5saddam hussein never took a shot at the HW. Saddam invaded Kuwait and we helped save their asses.
      • dmark77, on 05/14/2008, -1/+10Bush calls Saddam 'the guy who tried to kill my dad'

        http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/27/bus ...
        • dmark77, on 05/14/2008, -1/+3Comment system cutting off URL:

          cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/27/bush.war.talk/
        • Apocrypha, on 05/14/2008, -2/+4And you think that's proof? Because Bush says it's so? Well, let me let you in on a secret to blow that out of the water because I say that was a lie. Saddam did NOT try to have HW killed. There is no proof of that to be found ANYWHERE.
      • bjornski, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2Poppy Bush also told Saddam to go ahead and do it.
    • insanebrain, on 05/14/2008, -3/+2dumbass
      • dmark77, on 05/15/2008, -1/+5Hello Mr. Troll.

        You sure have been busy today.

        Is that the best you have from your experiences of being a jerk? One liners, antagonistic replies, and an anger issue you haven't quite figured out yet?

        I bet right now... its just you... alone, in your room, reading article after article - thinking up witty remarks as you have nothing better to do with your time.

        Me? I'm going to do a happy dance - screw being anything like you.
    • CrazedLeper, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1Close. They didn't go into Iraq at the end of the Gulf war because they *knew* that he had chemical weapons. This they knew because they had sold them to him hoping he would use them against Iran. They were unwilling to risk the firestorm of public opinion by sending US soldiers home with chemical weapons burns--not with a second term potentially on the line. Therefore, it was decided to lie to the American people about their goals in Iraq.

      Bush41 secretly tried to kill Sadaam with bunker busters while telling everyone that they were just trying to get him out of Kuwait. Meanwhile, they had already told him that they didn't care if he went into Kuwait but that's another story. When he failed on both killing Sadaam *and* getting re-elected his sons became governors over the 2 red states with the most electoral votes and the seeds of 9/11 were planted.
  • shyboy2008, on 05/14/2008, -45/+17I cant wait till Obama becomes president and put us white people in concernation camps. Than will get 100's of articles on how Obama sucks.
    • floppyparty, on 05/14/2008, -1/+14I can't tell if you are joking or not.
    • ArchieAndrews, on 05/14/2008, -2/+15Please don't reproduce.
    • bjornski, on 05/14/2008, -0/+5Did you take too much Oxycontin this morning?
    • Dumbledorito, on 05/14/2008, -1/+4Why aren't you and xen0blue working for Dennis Miller? You guys are thrice the comedian he is.
    • shondell, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3NO! not the concernation camps!
    • TylerL82, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2...you mean we'll still have the Internet (or at least printing presses) in our concentration camps?
      Sweet!
  • Anonemousk, on 05/14/2008, -16/+37If there was any justice, he would be charged for his blatant crimes against humanity.
    • jftitan, on 05/14/2008, -1/+11Ummm.... I know for some odd reason, intelligence communities around the world did NOT agree on Weapons of Mass Destruction.

      *****, I remember for months before the start of the Iraq war, that the UN was telling us that NO, they didn't find anything. I call total ***** on him when he says intelligence communities around the world agreed together. More like Everyone else was telling us "No, don't do it, because your doing it for the wrong reasons" But we didn't listen... then we made up new reasons, and we still didn't listen. For Bush to say, everyone around the world agreed he had WMDs, is total and utter *****.


      (damnit... I just noticed I screwed up and posted this under your post...)

      CHARGE BUSH for TREASON! HE'S LYING AGAIN.
      • crackberri, on 05/15/2008, -2/+0You would be actually scary if you had any facts, moron...................
    • JAFFA, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1To my (limited) knowledge of American politics/law, a President cannot be tried for war crimes. Even after leaving office. In fact I dont think they can be charged retrospectively for 'any' crimes. It has something to do with Nixon and the incoming President granting him and future Presidents immunity from prosecution.

      Am I right? Or talking bollox?
  • fudged71, on 05/14/2008, -20/+162I thought it was quite an intelligent response, actually.
    You probably disagree
    • xcheats, on 05/14/2008, -3/+11I agree. I love how people conjure up loaded questions, then when they get a loaded answer they get all up in arms.
    • simulastral, on 05/14/2008, -11/+4he's probably only practiced it once or twice. with that in mind, could have been much better.
    • johnomaz, on 05/14/2008, -5/+23I gotta say, I didn't have the balls to make the post, but yes, I do agree with you, it was an intelligent response. Bush isn't known for his intelligent answers, but he pulled one out of his hat here.
    • LiquidRAM, on 05/14/2008, -5/+12I also agree... funny... it's the ONLY time that he has appeared intelligent, or sincere in my opinion. He's still an idiot. lol.
    • bokep, on 05/14/2008, -10/+27Intelligent? Are you kidding me?

      I guess everyone's so used to him being so dumb, now that when he gives a slightly less stupid answer than the usual he suddenly appears intelligent.
      • bjornski, on 05/14/2008, -1/+17The power of low expectations.
      • Dumbledorito, on 05/14/2008, -0/+12Yet another example of why we need Oxford-style presidential debates with actual scoring on factual presentation instead of someone "winning" by not melting down into the fetal position while gibbering the lyrics to "Petticoat Junction."
        • sodade, on 05/14/2008, -0/+8Couldn't agree more. It is criminal to call the theater we see "debates."
      • sodade, on 05/14/2008, -2/+3Same reason why people are so impressed with Obama - our expectations have been so low for so long.
        I'm voting Obama more for the message that it sends about not allowing corporations to buy our govt.
        • Thuktun, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Do you have a tangible reason to expect him to perform poorly?
    • exronin, on 05/14/2008, -3/+8Yeah I have to say, in the last almost 8 years now, this is the most intelligent conversation I have seen him having with another human being. If he used the same kind of intelligence as he did in that interview, and approached the war intelligently, over the past 8 years, 4000 US troops and 100,000 Iraqis might still have been alive.
      • JoeRW, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4Intelligent? He took no responsibility, he put blame on his vassals, he had the gall to smile while contradicting himself regarding 'intention to mislead'. He said most countries supported the idea of WMD when it was only really Britain through the dodgy dossier.
        • exronin, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1Well Intelligence is a very relative term when you are talking about GWB. He has always been a puppet, I don't think he is evil, just really really stupid most of the time and really really scared like the people who support him. The response after me correctly sums up what I was trying say, Intelligence and GWB should never be used in the same sentence again.
    • Risti, on 05/14/2008, -0/+32It's important to make the distinction between an intelligent answer and a honest answer.
    • db0255, on 05/14/2008, -4/+6I think he's actually representing himself well in these questions...he appears honest, intelligent, and sincere. This is what the American public wants! If he did this in the first place, I feel like he wouldn't be in half the hot water he is now.
    • IAmTheGuy, on 05/14/2008, -4/+12Agreed. I did not notice him "squirm" as the title suggested would happen.
    • Quizboy, on 05/14/2008, -1/+2Maybe not intelligent, but logical and thought out, which may seem intelligent compared to everything else he says.
    • shondell, on 05/14/2008, -3/+4I also agree. Bush isn't as dumb as some people make him out to be. About the only time you ever hear of him in the media is when he makes a dumb comment or remark.
    • Cnat, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1Ya, he didn't look like he was squirming much to me, as much as I would enjoy seeing that.
    • Garmonbozzia, on 05/14/2008, -1/+5Let me preface by saying that I feel Bush should be impeached.

      Having said that, that was actually the best interview I have seen him give. He presented his argument, and did it surprisingly well. However, just as the captain of a ship is still responsible for driving his ship into an iceberg, even if his crew told him the course was clear, Bush is responsible for leading us into this quagmire and he must be held responsible.
      • Thuktun, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Unless he does something even worse in his last year, I'd prefer they wait until after he's no longer in a position to try to pardon himself. (Yes, it was discussed briefly in some parts of the media whether that was allowed by the Constitution and, if not, whether he'd try it anyway.)

        I'm also hoping we send him on an all-expense paid vacation to The Hague.
    • SuminderJi, on 05/14/2008, -5/+3Doesn't the guy have a 125 IQ?

      If you put stock in IQs
      • Thuktun, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1Measured when he was a child, or after the binge drinking he did in his 20s and 30s? That can't have helped.
    • freqk, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3correction: Intelligent for Bush.
    • OneAndOnlySnob, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2He seemed collected and intelligent, but his answer is a lie. International intelligence, specifically UNMOVIC, suspected that Saddam had WMDs, but after inspecting Iraq in 2002, prior to our invasion in 2003, it concluded that his weapons program had been dismantled in the '90s.
    • Soave, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2Meh I agree. I didn't interpret that as squirming. People are just seeing what they want to see.
    • eleete, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1Too many Nobama kool aid drinkers on this site to respect that opinion, but I agree, I thought I'd see him squirm... I thought he answered well too.
      eleete
    • JAFFA, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Whether you thought it was an intelligent response or not the sad thing is that he doesnt appear to have any regrets about his foreign policy in regards to this this poor information supplied by the intelligence services. And he certainly doesnt suggest that they took any necessary precautions to stop such poor intelligence being supplied again.
    • rockybullwinkle, on 05/18/2008, -0/+1I didn't see any squirming either. I wouldn't squirm either if I had been telling the same lie for the past five years. By now, he has learned to tell it so well that it comes off as credible.

      Look at the Downing Street Memo. The Bush Administration fixed the intelligence to support their assertions. QED.
  • tinkafoo, on 05/14/2008, -13/+73Whoever voted for him had faulty intelligence.
    • FeloniusMonkey, on 05/14/2008, -1/+7*crowd goes "ooooh"*
    • blazes816, on 05/15/2008, -2/+1I know I'm going to get severely dugg down for saying this, but as a Bush non-hater (not so much of a supporter though. Neutral.), that was the funniest thing I've read all day.
    • CrazedLeper, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2Well told, sir.
  • mattbdavis, on 05/14/2008, -20/+7[Political comment to be dugg down]
  • coachmcguirk, on 05/14/2008, -14/+141I know I'll be dugg down for this, but that actually seems like a feasible answer to the question..
    Whether it is true or not, only he knows, but I didn't see him "squirm" per se...
    • roaringone, on 05/14/2008, -3/+29Agreed, he actually gave an intelligible answer to the question.
      • ByteGuerilla, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2Got to admit... that doesn't happen often :P
    • GreenGrassyNoel, on 05/14/2008, -3/+26agreed, i thought he handled the question very well. (I hate Bush)
    • johnomaz, on 05/14/2008, -1/+12/agree. I dont' care for bush, but I am not in his shoes. I feel the president these days is more of a puppet, so what he says may not really be what he wants/means/proposes. But here, i think he answered the question properly, and I too didn't see much squirming.
    • clickx, on 05/14/2008, -1/+7Agreed. He handled that better than he thought.
    • Suzilla, on 05/14/2008, -1/+3Remarkable that when he's lying ("other countries told us") he's able to do so with composure, with little stammering and no mangled words (i.e. "Bush-isms".)
    • twiztedambience, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3He admits the intelligence came to the wrong conclusion in this interview. Though I liked the straightforwardness of the reporter's questions, he should have asked him more about how strongly the president checked that information. Really nothing new is said here otherwise.

      I think in this interview you're seeing the words of a president who doesn't care anymore about his opinion, he's not stuttering, not being a retard (all that comes when he does his job). I think he's basically falling on his sword for the party and trying to use this first interview with Yahoo news to emphasize his personality rather than the hard topics themselves.
    • CryoNine, on 05/14/2008, -1/+4Agreed. He actually handled it well. No squirming, it was a tough question.
    • smoger, on 05/14/2008, -0/+4agreed. he handled it a lot better than i'd expect from him.
    • makkaveli19, on 05/14/2008, -1/+2Agreed. He handled it very well, no squirming was spotted.
    • vanguardanon, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3It's not that squirmed, it's just that he lied. If you repeat that every intelligence community around the world agreed on WMD often enough it will not become true. Hans Blix, the man running the UN investigation, said they weren't they and Bush portrayed him as a worthless bureaucrat. Our own intelligence agencies had conflicts. He acts like he had enough intelligence to declare war and his proof wasn't even good enough to convict a single capital punishment case.
    • TicoTico, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Is it only me or all the people in this thread are brainwashed or republican party PR ?
    • thecheat1, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1When I first saw the video I showed some completely NON affiliated people and asked their opinion. These people don't care about politics AT ALL and as such were fair in their answering. I showed them the clip and asked them if he was "squirmish" none of them though he was.
  • CYR1X, on 05/14/2008, -15/+28Bush: "Why-I-I-uhh"
    Bush: "No-no-uh-wah-no I was told by people they had weapons of mass destruction"

    Wow, reading that makes it sounds 10x worse.
    • brightshadow525, on 05/14/2008, -4/+3Well when you have a nation full of mislead democrats it's kind of hard to answer questions like that... He has to watch what he says because a nation of idiots already hates him...
      • chrisaug18, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2And makes me feel about 10x dumber as well.
  • lazerus9, on 05/14/2008, -8/+6His body language makes more sense than what comes out of his mouth!
  • hiro, on 05/14/2008, -7/+8misled
  • petrodollar, on 05/14/2008, -16/+9"I felt like there were WMD."

    People who voted to re-elect this guy, please shoot your mom in the womb before taking your own life.

    TYIA
  • birkoph, on 05/14/2008, -20/+36You're the idiots that elected him... TWICE, now you're all bitching that he's doing a ***** job. Well, what did you expect?

    Dumbasses vote for dumbasses. Next time think things thought. Be smart don't' be a retard.
    • OneEyeJack, on 05/14/2008, -3/+12he didn't win the popular vote either time he was elected, hence why everyone hates him.
    • x0rcist, on 05/14/2008, -0/+11I didn't vote for him.
    • johnomaz, on 05/14/2008, -4/+6Retard you say, at least I know the difference between thought and through.
    • Yuska, on 05/14/2008, -3/+8Yeah, guys. We really need to think things thought next time.
    • phrenzy, on 05/14/2008, -0/+4You do have to wonder how many people here that are bitching and screaming about him are the same ones that voted for him not once but TWICE!
    • ByteGuerilla, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2It's not the people who voted against a candidate who get to bitch about him doing a ***** job, it's the people who voted at all.
    • KUKBAHLAM, on 05/14/2008, -1/+4I voted against him twice.... not that I voted FOR anyone either time. We keep getting ***** candidates. Did anyone else think his "members of congress voted for the war and are now trying to hide" comment was a jab at hillary?
    • bobartig, on 05/14/2008, -0/+4I voted against him twice, and the electoral colleges for the states that I voted in (1st time) went republican, and (2nd time) went democrat. I certainly didn't elect him to anything.
      • crackberri, on 05/15/2008, -1/+0what a bunch of tards................
  • esaun, on 05/14/2008, -6/+67no offense, but he doesn't seem to be squirming at all.
    • DirtPile, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2I second this motion. I believe he was cogent.
    • TicoTico, on 05/15/2008, -3/+1You are right he's not squirming, he's just stuttering and nervously shaking his legs - BTW that means that he's lying
      Also in another video he gets so relieved when the interviewer ask him a baseball question, watch his body language.
      • blazes816, on 05/15/2008, -1/+5I always shake my legs, and stutter if I'm trying to speak on the spot. Doesn't mean I'm lying.
  • alecsputnik, on 05/14/2008, -15/+17i can't stand to watch him speak anymore.
    • shondell, on 05/14/2008, -2/+4then sit down.
    • CrazedLeper, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1I feel the same way. I can't turn my head toward or focus my eyes upon something so disgusting.
  • Rossoneri22, on 05/14/2008, -5/+42Is it me or does he seem less dumb? I mean still totally incompetent as a president, but less preschooler sounding.
    • Raptor007, on 05/14/2008, -0/+4I think his dismal approval ratings have subdued him somewhat.

      This title was quite misleading. It wasn't that bad of a response, really, and I'm a pretty anti-Bush guy.
    • BuckleButt, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1That's what happens when you hang around Digg too much.
    • OneAndOnlySnob, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Sometimes it takes a few years to get your story straight, eh?
  • usgovterrorists, on 05/14/2008, -24/+13The terrorist United States Government invaded Iraq based on 1000 LIES!

    United States Government are terrorists, war criminals, and horrific liars.

    Where's the evidence that kerosene fires melted steel?
    How did the huge molten pools of metal get under the twin towers and building 7?
    9-11 was an inside job! 9-11 official story was a lie! What happened to building 7?

    Depleted uranium is a weapon of mass destruction!

    Play Wall Street like a PONZI SCHEME!

    The elections are rigged, unsecure voting machines & ballots!

    Terrorist United States Government mandated a fivefold increase in the use of biofuels.
  • diggingaround, on 05/14/2008, -10/+16He can't look interviewer straight into the eyes and lie... he is constantly looking at his right... he is lying..
    • Bisqwit, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Or just horribly out of his comfort zone.
      In Conan O'Brien's words, all the charms of a Nuremberg trial.
  • grodrigu, on 05/14/2008, -6/+7Th Th th th th th th.... that's all folks!
  • HypocriteDigg, on 05/14/2008, -7/+27So he mentioned WMDs and getting rid of Saddam, now WHY ARE WE STILL THERE you ***** murdering neocon fascist monkey!!!!?
    • dkapuchino, on 05/14/2008, -10/+5Because to leave Iraq in total chaos, would be a ***** war crime. Shame you have complete disregard for the lives of the Iraqi people. And you ***** claim to be liberal.
      • JAFFA, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1I think you've failed to comprehend whats actually going on in Iraq.
    • robthom, on 05/14/2008, -1/+6^^ watch the shifting definitions of war crimes. Invading Iraq is okay, but leaving is a war crime. Pretty slick talk there jewish guy, but you aint foolin me.
      Aren't you the one who was defending isreal setting up palestinians for a massacre yesterday?
  • truckee, on 05/14/2008, -2/+9I am far from a Bush supporter but I agree with fudged71 and coachmcguirk. A fairly good response, with little squirming.
  • helliottlaw, on 05/14/2008, -6/+4I also thought it was way too cogent a response for good 'ol Dubya...they probably rehearsed the exchange a few times before this was recorded.
    • smoger, on 05/14/2008, -2/+1..or the answers were being piped into his ear,.. hence the momentary fumbling before each response
  • babylonian, on 05/14/2008, -3/+15I'm about as far from a Bush fan as you can get, but I wouldn't really consider that "squirming". What he said in this clip was pretty much typical Bush question-avoiding and dodginess.
  • BingoPower, on 05/14/2008, -4/+11Hey, I'll bash Bush as much as the next guy, but I don't see him squirming and the answer wasn't non-sensical.

    Buried as innacurate.
  • rjullom, on 05/14/2008, -13/+8Bush didn't lie, he was given the best intelligence available at the time. Screw you unknowing idiots, you know nothing of intelligence or why we went in, only what the liberal media has told you.
    • smoger, on 05/14/2008, -1/+6when i was new in college, i asked someone where one of my classes was, and they accidentally told me the wrong room.

      ..when i found out, i left.
      • clickx, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1was that supposed to be some kind of comeback?
      • NotFake, on 05/14/2008, -0/+0Leaving the classroom in chaos with rioting in the aisles, of course, since you were the only one holding that class together, right?
    • zmjone2992, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2what liberal media?
    • Vet4Peace, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1What part of the media would that be?
  • mnemy, on 05/14/2008, -5/+20He's right. He wasn't misled. He chose to ignore the lack of evidence of weapons, and attack anyway.
  • patrick1047, on 05/14/2008, -6/+4Buried...he's not squirming, he's just dumb.
  • madcowan, on 05/14/2008, -6/+10he didn't squirm. that's dumb. I agree with JeffreyLloyd. Bush, along with many Democrats in the whitehouse made the best decision based on what the information indicated. Obviously there was a margin for error. Until you actually see the WMD's, there's always the possibility that they don't exist. Half the people who are now criticizing the move supported it when the action was originally taken.
    • smoger, on 05/14/2008, -2/+3thats called adjusting for new information, and theres nothing wrong with that. what's that quote? "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result." ..something like that
      • Gregbertt, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Wait - you posted that same thing in another story...
  • LukasSmith, on 05/14/2008, -13/+12Actually he didn't look like he was squirming. You people are idiots. So filled with hate you can barely see. OMG. I would so vote for Bush if he could run again. He just admitted Iraq was a mistake. Flawed intelligence. BUt nooo the digg users cry ITS a conspiracy!! the jews Hitler and Big oil conspired to make this happen. Get a life nuts. Bush's explanation is about the most rational I've ever heard. must have spent too much time on digg.com. Rational is not rational here. Thats how the democrat party likes it. After all they have people to get elected.
    • KhanneaNL, on 05/14/2008, -2/+7Hate? You have no idea. I sure as hell hate this particular kind of corporate fascist evil.

      But that's nothing to the intense seeting hatred in the middle east, a region of the world driven by generation-long fueds and counterfueds, blood wars and vendetta's. The US will reap several nuclear terrorist strikes in the next decades for what this monstrosity has wrought.

      I PITY the US.

      In case you want to know, no I am not a US citizen. Europe, the netherlands fwiw.
    • AceKicker, on 05/14/2008, -5/+1Lol, you are so getting dugg down. 10 bucks say you'll get dugg down the most!

      PS. i dugg you up because i agree
      PSS. and for making the above statement i will be dugg down with you =) Together we fall!
    • BuckleButt, on 05/15/2008, -3/+2So true Lukas. Sad part is, the Digg community believes they're a majority in the real world too.
  • KhanneaNL, on 05/14/2008, -6/+18This man is a liar. I know liars, I grew up with liars and he is one and a miserable one.
    Bush is what we call an interim manager - clean house, torture the workforce into action, scare em a little. Keeps the juices going. However he is so indescribably dense and stupid he

    1- is only now starting to realize what a pawn in the hands of the Real Owners he is...
    2- destroyed the US imperial status for good, reducing the US to a oil-begging two bit thug state
    3- is only now starting to realize his legacy is one of the worst president of the US ever.

    I am willing to bet he will die under suspicious circumstances, shortly after stepping down. Suicide, probably sleeping pills, the coward's way out. Or maybe the powers that be will assassinate him, to make sure he isnt indited in a lengthy, painful trial for war crimes. The press will claim it's a heart attack or brain aneurism, but we will all know better. Just watch.

    If there was a hell, he would get a special place in the icey regions, in the center bolgia, with a good view of Lucifer himself - the ring of traitors.
  • hmalik, on 05/14/2008, -3/+11No! they did not lie to me, It's just, I am ***** moron!
    • crackberri, on 05/15/2008, -1/+0I couldn’t agree more, you are a moron.
  • nvillalobos, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1It's not so much that he squirms as it is that he repeats himself. You'd think that a man with that much public speaking experience would be more eloquent when it came to a subject that has dramatically affected the United States, his 8 year presidency, and the culture of a foreign nation.
  • purplesawdust, on 05/14/2008, -11/+4Why is whenever Bush udders a sentence people are there to criticize him on every thing he says? Digg has a mob mentality when it comes to political topics.

    And for the main story why are people still asking Bush the same questions over and over again?
    • helliottlaw, on 05/14/2008, -3/+2Digg has a mob mentality when it comes to anything.
  • moolaismyfriend, on 05/14/2008, -7/+14The people who pulled the lever for him in 2004 deserve more of the blame. They are the true traitors to our Nation.
    • KhanneaNL, on 05/14/2008, -1/+3Nazi collaborators belong in prison. Those guilty of crimes should have their neurenberg. Period.
    • usgovterrorists, on 05/14/2008, -2/+5DIEBOLD
    • artface, on 05/14/2008, -2/+7As well as all the democrats and republicans that gave him their vote to go to war.
      • moolaismyfriend, on 05/15/2008, -3/+4Agreed, yet the fact people voted for him in 2004 long after it was proven we went to war on false pretenses is worse.
        • jtucker65, on 05/15/2008, -2/+2Because many people disliked John Kerry even more than George Bush
  • x0rcist, on 05/14/2008, -6/+14Countries all around the world shared the same assessment? I don't think sooooooooo....
  • AceKicker, on 05/14/2008, -5/+8Maybe this time you hippies 'll vote
    • DirtPile, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Plus a ***** thousand diggs.
    • 4321234, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2Does that take the blame off you for voting FOR him?
  • SittinSidewayz, on 05/14/2008, -9/+14I dislike Bush as much as the next guy but that answer was A-OK in my book. I still don't like him
    • AceKicker, on 05/14/2008, -2/+3Good thing you put that you didn't like him, other wise you would be dugg down instantly. I think Pro-Bush comments automatically start off with -5 diggs
      • blazes816, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1I love President Bush!

        EDIT: -8 actually,
    • icantdenythis, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1you just said what I came here to say. I felt like the answer was adequate.
    • EpicSelekta, on 05/14/2008, -1/+6It wasn't a good answer. His body language was great, but his facts were off. Especially when he said that intelligence communities around the world agreed with our opinion. You know, like when the UN sent inspectors in, didn't find anything, and most of the world decided that Saddam isn't a threat to anyone but his own people.
      • AceKicker, on 05/14/2008, -3/+2Read up on how the inspections took place before assuming just because they went there and didn't find anything means he was not hiding anything. Not sayhing there was anything to hide, just saying that the inspections were a bit shady.
        • EpicSelekta, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2Well we've been there for over 4 years without finding anything, so shady or not, the inspectors pretty much nailed it.
  • xodex, on 05/14/2008, -9/+3They came up with the wrong conclusion, That's all... Gosh.
  • BuckleButt, on 05/14/2008, -7/+7Squirm? I actually thought he handled that quite well. By all means, digg this up.
    • 4321234, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2If you mean he didn't come up with any words nobody had heard before or didn't choke on a pretzel, yeah, he did better than usual.
  • calantus, on 05/14/2008, -3/+6He did handle the answer well, but i don't believe him.
  • madcowan, on 05/14/2008, -3/+1check out the video where he's asked about his daughter, Jenna's wedding. I swear, if anyone is squirmy and fidgety, check out the REPORTER! haha
  • cheetohman, on 05/14/2008, -4/+8Was he misled? HELL NO! He already KNEW the intellegence was cooked. F#cking prick.
    • Apocrypha, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2Exactly how he can say with a straight face that he wasn't misled. Because they knew exactly what was and wasn't there. The only misleading being done was to the American people and Congress.
      • inane, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1So you're telling me that the intelligence community knew exactly what was and wasn't housed in every military installation in all of Iraq? A dictatorship that gave UN weapons inspectors the runaround for years. A government that thought nothing of killing citizens just because they were suspected of speaking unfavorably about Saddam. And somehow intelligence agencies all around the world had a list of every weapon in Iraq's arsenal and where it was kept and still decided to commit billions of dollars and how many troops to a trumped up war? That all these nations just went along to back Dubya and his war to make up for daddy's shortcomings? I honestly can't believe people actually think that.
  • bratterscain, on 05/14/2008, -4/+9Who cares? I'd think of myself as a liberal but if it weren't for war and our insatiable appetite for competition and overcoming others and other things, what would we do all day? It's our nature to give to the self and it's loved ones. Whether it's a mother's maternal love or the spoils of war. Nobody here is any different.
    I know, you're going to say some words that conflict with mine as to promote conflict instead of trying to understand my views and where I'm coming from. I might be dugg down or called a name or two instead of taking the peaceful route and I accept that. Why can't anyone else. War is always inevitable and so is conflict. Everyone likes conflict or else we would have no urge to overcome. To overcome nature, the elements or each other for which we think is doing "evil". I don't like ***** excuses about going to war. It's so much easier to admit, we want to fight because it's our nature, because it promotes us if we are the victor, and when we have too many resources and too much time, we look for conflict. We also do it because we lack resources sometimes. Conflict is inevitable.
    There is nothing illogical in the universe if at the very root, it is logical or else the sum wouldn't add up. Sometimes we don't understand the cause of war but we can't say it's not logical or doesn't make sense.
    Man has gotten to where he is today and advanced to where he is today due in part to war and conflict to make a better, more robust human. War is sometimes as the pulling of teeth. It must be done sometimes to make the world see what peace really is and what distress really is. It is the on-going dividend to advance the calculation. The universe is synonymous with an on-going calculation and war as well as peace both advances it.

    And as usual, I may be buried for speaking of how it is and not how some want it to be.
    • kitsua, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2Props for a bold statement.
      I wouldn't use it to justify this war, but it's an important philosophical point, regardless of how uncomfortable and unpopular it may be.
    • mcturdTheThird, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2Cute.
      This war has nothing to do with primal emotions or an innate need to fight, We are civilized. We don't need to fight to solve our problems.
      It has everything to do with business. Our government put Hussein in power and supported him and called him a good guy all through the 80's. The second t he stopped playing by our government's rules, making it difficult on private interests, our government destroyed the country and caused it's people to suffer just like it does with many many countries around the world and has done for generations. Our government is a ruthless Imperial power that doesn't give a flying ***** about me, you, or your adolescent need to fight.
      • bratterscain, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2You and yours, if you or yours work in government, are the government. Or if you're a citizen, doesn't matter, we are the government. It's not us and them. It's only us and them because you see a conflict and want to fight whether you think you're peace loving or not. You could be just as content as anyone else but you choose not to. You are even calling my "need" to fight "adolescent" when I expressed no need. Just reporting as I see it. I knew there would be people at least one comment person here to try tospeak out for peace while causing conflict. It's like trying to get grape juice out of a raisin. You're trying to squeeze out hatred and fury in the name of peace, it seems to me. Everyone does it sometimes, you are no exception. You see, no matter what, conflict wins. If you wanted true peace, you wouldn't be name calling and you would not be so dramatic.
  • Groller, on 05/14/2008, -3/+4Not sure if what he said there is the truth about the whole intelligence community agreeing with that assessment. I'm still kinda in shock that he made such a good response that was actually phrased like a person with at least half a brain. I'm wondering if maybe he had a little earbud in his ear and was getting answers from someone in another room.
  • jdorenbush, on 05/14/2008, -2/+2I didn't see any "squirming"... Hm. Boring.
  • grooviekenn, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1Didn't really seem like he was "squirming" but his body language kind of portrayed him as not giving a rat's ass about making a horribly miscalculated decision based on the wrong intelligence that has cost many of hundreds of thousands of lives.
  • groone, on 05/14/2008, -1/+2damnit man
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 115 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.