What is Digg?Sponsored by Bing
Need a Vacation? view!
bing.com - Bing(tm) scans 1 billion+ airfares to locate the ones that meet or beat the record low. Check every day.
631 Comments
- schroeder, on 11/06/2007, -22/+759Everyone's saying it but no one has the balls to do it.
- inactive, on 11/06/2007, -23/+289Ralph Nader says Congress is afraid to take action because they fear the president will take complete control of government and put us under martial law (which he is probably planning anyway). People, put pressure on your elected officials now. We hired them to represent us, even when it is tough and not popular.
- ImTheManWhoRU, on 11/06/2007, -19/+150He would probably get off the hook by pleading mental illness
- swrostmore, on 10/19/2007, -21/+151From a Speech on October 7, 2002
Bush: “Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof, the smoking gun that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.” [Bush remarks, 10/7/02]
* FACT: Duelfer Report: Saddam Was Not Planning to Restart Nuclear Program. “Saddam Husayn ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program. Although Saddam clearly assigned a high value to the nuclear progress and talent that had been developed up to the 1991 war, the program ended and the intellectual capital decayed in the succeeding years.” [Duelfer Report, Key Findings]
* FACT: Senate Intelligence Committee Reported That Intelligence Estimates Said Iraq Did Not Have Nuclear Weapons. The Senate Intelligence Committee reported, “After reviewing all of the intelligence provided by the Intelligence Community and additional information requested by the Committee, the Committee believes that the judgment in the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear program, was not supported by the intelligence. The Committee agrees with the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) alternative view that the available intelligence ‘does not add up to a compelling case for reconstitution.’” [Senate Intelligence Committee Report, Conclusion #27]
* FACT: Bush Administration Rhetoric Was “Significant Shift” From Intelligence Estimate. “The [Senate Intelligence Committee] report said the CIA made a ‘significant shift’ in its position two months after Cheney began stating publicly that Iraq had actively reconstituted its nuclear weapons program. The intelligence estimate, which echoed the administration’s public claims, ‘was not supported by the intelligence’ and relied on misstatements, concealment of doubts and suppression of evidence.” [Washington Post, 7/10/04]
Saddam Had WMD
Bush: “[Iraq] possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons…Saddam Hussein is a homicidal dictator who is addicted to weapons of mass destruction.” [Bush remarks, 10/7/02]
* FACT: Duelfer Report: Saddam Was Not Planning to Restart Nuclear Program. “Saddam Husayn ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program. Although Saddam clearly assigned a high value to the nuclear progress and talent that had been developed up to the 1991 war, the program ended and the intellectual capital decayed in the succeeding years.” [Duelfer Report, Key Findings]
* FACT: David Kay Said No WMD Stockpiles In Iraq. Weapons Inspector David Kay told the US Senate that “… it is highly unlikely that there were large stockpiles of deployed militarized chemical and biological weapons there… I think there are no large — were no large stockpiles of WMD.” [Kay Testimony, 1/28/04]
* FACT: Duelfer Report: Iraq Had No Strategy or Plan After Sanctions. Duelfer: “The regime had no formal written strategy or plan for the revival of W.M.D. after sanctions.” [CNN, 1/12/05]
Iraqi Scientists Reconstituting Nuclear Weapons
Bush: “The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his ‘nuclear mujahedeen,’ his nuclear holy warriors.” [Bush remarks, 10/7/02]
* FACT: Scientists Were Working On Non-Nuclear Projects. Despite Bush’s allegation that Hussein met often with Iraqi scientists, he “did not disclose that the known work of the scientists was largely benign. Iraq’s three top gas centrifuge experts, for example, ran a copper factory, an operation to extract graphite from oil and a mechanical engineering design center at Rashidiya.” [Washington Post, 8/10/03]
* FACT: Scientist Said Weapons Didn’t Exist After 1991. “A scientist who headed Iraq’s nuclear programme said deposed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had given up all weapons of mass destruction in the wake of the 1991 Gulf War. ‘There was no capability. There was no chemical or biological or any what are called weapons of mass destruction,’ Jaffar Dhia Jaffar said in what BBC television called his first-ever broadcast interview. Speaking in Paris, where he now lives, Jaffar — who ran Saddam’s nuclear programme for 25 years — said there was ‘no development’ of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons ‘at any time after 1991.’ He said he knew that for a fact ‘because I am in touch with the people concerned.’” [Agence France Press, 8/12/04]
Aluminum Tubes To Produce Weapons
Bush: “Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons.” [Bush remarks, 10/7/02]
* FACT: Senate Intelligence Report Found Aluminum Tubes Were Not Being Used To Reconstitute Nuclear Weapons. The Senate Intel Committee found, “Numerous intelligence reports provided to the Committee showed that Iraq was trying to procure high-strength aluminum tubes. The Committee believes that the information available to the Intelligence Community indicated that these tubes were intended to be used for an Iraqi conventional rocket program and not a nuclear program.” [Senate Intelligence Committee Report, Conclusion #29]
* FACT: No Evidence That Iraq’s Nuclear Program Was Being Reconstituted. According to a study by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, “Iraq’s nuclear program had been dismantled and there was no convincing evidence of its reconstitution.” [CEIP: “WMD In Iraq,” 1/2004]
* FACT: Duelfer: Aluminum Tubes Not For Nuclear Weapons. Duelfer: “That is my judgment that those — those tubes were most likely destined for a rocket program.” [Duelfer hearing, 10/7/04]
Iraq Developing UAVs
Bush: “We’ve also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical and biological weapons across broad areas. We’re concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs for missions targeting the United States.” [Bush remarks, 10/7/02]
* FACT: Air Force Reported That It Was Not Convinced About Drones. The Wall Street Journal reported that, “In making its case for war with Saddam Hussein, the Bush administration painted a much more threatening picture of Iraqi drones than was justified, according to Air Force intelligence estimates now coming to light….The Air Force, which has expertise in designing such unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs, was never convinced Baghdad had developed drones capable of effectively distributing chemical and biological weapons as the White House claimed.” [Wall Street Journal, 9/10/03]
* FACT: UN Chief Weapons Inspector Said No Evidence of Iraqi UAV Program Existed. The Washington Post reported, “The United Nations’ chief weapons inspector has concluded there is no evidence that Saddam Hussein’s government ever developed unpiloted drones capable of dispersing chemical and biological weapons agents on enemy targets.” [Washington Post, 9/5/04]
Iraq/Al Qaeda Relationship
Bush: “We know that Iraq and the Al Qaida terrorist network share a common enemy: the United States of America. We know that Iraq and Al Qaida have had high-level contacts that go back a decade.” [Bush remarks, 10/7/02]
* FACT: 9-11 Commission Report: No “Collaborative Operational Relationship” Between Iraq/al Qaeda. “We have seen no evidence that these or the earlier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Nor have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States.” [9-11 Commission Final Report, 7/22/04]
* FACT: Senate Intelligence Committee: No “Established, Formal” Relationship Between Iraq/al Qaeda. “The Senate Intelligence Committee’s report said CIA analysts were reasonable in their conclusion that there was no ‘established, formal’ relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda, nor proof that the two had collaborated in attacks. The committee noted that no new information had emerged since the CIA’s key reports to suggest otherwise.” [Los Angeles Times, 7/10/04]
Zarqawi Presence In Iraq
Bush: “Some Al Qaida leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq. These include one very senior Al Qaida leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks.” [Bush remarks, 10/7/02]
* FACT: Zarqawi Operated In Area Outside Saddam’s Control. Zarqawi was widely regarded to be the “leader” of Ansar al-Islam prior to the war against Iraq. However, according to the AP, “Ansar al-Islam operated in a region of northern Iraq that was outside of Saddam’s control before the war. It was bombed by U.S. warplanes during the fighting.” [AP, 1/24/04]
* FACT: Zarqawi Operated Independently of Saddam. In a statement to the Senate Armed Services Committee in March 2004, “CIA Director George J. Tenet described Zarqawi’s network among other groups having ‘links’ to al Qaeda but with its own ‘autonomous leadership… own targets [and] they plan their own attacks.’ Although Zarqawi may have cooperated with al Qaeda in the past, U.S. officials say it is increasingly clear he had been operating independently of Osama bin Laden’s organization.” [Washington Post, 6/16/04]
Bush Linking Iraq to 9/11
Bush: “Some citizens wonder, ‘After 11 years of living with this problem, why do we need to confront it now?’ And there’s a reason. We have experienced the horror of September the 11th.” [Bush remarks, 10/7/02]
* FACT: Bush Distanced Himself From Connection Between Saddam and 9/11.
Bush: “This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and Al Qaida.” [Bush, 6/17/04]
Bush: “We’ve had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th.” [Bush, 9/17/03]
Plan For War
Bush: “If we have to act, we will take every precaution that is possible. We will plan carefully.” [Bush remarks, 10/7/02]
* FACT: Secret Joint Chiefs Report: Pentagon Planners Not Given Time To Plan for Reconstruction In Post-War Iraq. In August 2003, a Joint Chiefs of Staff prepared a secret report called “Operation Iraqi Freedom Strategic Lessons Learned.” The report, described by the Washington Times, blamed “setbacks in Iraq on a flawed and rushed war-planning process that ‘limited the focus’ for preparing for post-Saddam Hussein operations.” The Washington Times noted that the Joint Chiefs report “reveals discrepancies in the planning process. It says planners were not given enough time to put together the best blueprint for what is called Phase IV—the ongoing reconstruction of Iraq.” [Washington Times, 9/3/03]
* FACT: Pentagon Ignored Early State Department Predictions Of Post-War Problems. A New York Times report found that, “A yearlong State Department study predicted many of the problems that have plagued the American-led occupation of Iraq.” The study was produced by experts on Iraq from various fields, yet “several officials said that many of the findings in the $5 million study were ignored by Pentagon officials” until after the war. [New York Times, 10/19/03]
* FACT: Bush Admitted Miscalculations. George Bush admitted in an interview that “he made a ‘miscalculation of what the conditions would be’ in postwar Iraq.” [Washington Post, 8/31/04]
War With Iraq Link To War on Terror
Bush: “Some have argued that confronting the threat from Iraq could detract from the war against terror. To the contrary, confronting the threat posed by Iraq is crucial to winning the war on terror.” [Bush remarks, 10/7/02]
* FACT: War In Iraq Hurt War On Terror. Former Bush counterterrorism coordinator Richard Clarke believes that by going to war in Iraq, “we delivered to Al Qaeda the greatest recruitment propaganda imaginable.” Clarke testified before the 9/11 commission and said that “by invading Iraq, the president of the United States has greatly undermined the war on terrorism.” [Newsweek, 4/12/04; Clarke 9/11 Commission Testimony, 3/24/04]
Al Qaeda Members Trained In Bomb-Making In Iraq
Bush: “We’ve learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases.” [Bush remarks, 10/7/02]
* FACT: 9-11 Commission Report Said Iraq-Al Qaeda Link Was False. “Although there have been suggestions of contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda regarding chemical weapons and explosive trainings, the most detailed information alleging such ties came from an Al Qaeda operative who recanted much of his original information.” [9-11 Commission Report, footnote p.470]
* FACT: Bush Admin Questionable Rhetoric Cited As Facts. A Senate report prepared by the C.I.A. in September 2002 on “Iraqi Ties to Terrorism” described claims that Iraq had provided “training in poisons and gases” to al Qaeda members, but “it cautioned that the information had come from ‘sources of varying reliability.’” By contrast, “Most public statements by Mr. Bush and other administration officials on the matter described the assertions as matters of fac - inactive, on 10/19/2007, -12/+104i care what he thinks. he has wonderful ideas and lots of support among hard-core political activists. which candidate do you support?
- tenrec, on 10/19/2007, -9/+87Man, he doesn't know about the "Former Presidents Club". They protect each other, regardless of party. Watch and see!
- mrASSMAN, on 10/18/2007, -4/+75Well Kucinich does. He's been doing everything in his power to get Bush impeached for over a year.
- Acewrap, on 10/22/2007, -11/+65Facts have a well known liberal bias.
- adam2112, on 10/19/2007, -5/+59"and being a Christian (serious crime in my opinion)"
Bush is not a Christian. He just plays one on TV. - zeitgueist, on 10/19/2007, -4/+56Also: He's nailing a woman hotter than either of us will probably ever get.
- relaxeder, on 04/17/2009, -7/+59I agree with Kucinich.
- obelisky, on 10/19/2007, -14/+65puny liberal... wtg internet tough guy...
- whoadave, on 10/16/2007, -23/+73I really wish there were more Kucinich supporters! He stands for all the things people love about Ron Paul, plus all the things Ron Paul doesn't support which we all wish he would (like pro-choice).
- jbus, on 11/06/2007, -46/+96This is another reason more people need to support Kucinich and get off the ridiculously OVER-HYPED Ron Paul bandwagon.
- TheShadowKnows, on 11/06/2007, -9/+52The challenge for us citizens is *getting a Presidential candidate who'd have the balls to do it.* The people who believe they own and run the country work hard to make sure anyone like that gets crushed early in the primaries. The goal from their standpoint is to give the hoi polloi something that looks like a choice so it appeases the desire for change, but doesn't really change anything at all. By the time the population notices, well, democracy will ensure it'll all be better real soon now - it's time for another "election."
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Ever wonder why Bill Clinton and Bush the Elder get along so well? It's because they're not that different.
"News" is for people who know wrestling is fake but think politics is real. - janeuner, on 10/16/2007, -9/+50Kucinich for President. Bukowsky for County Dogcatcher.
- BedPost, on 10/19/2007, -7/+46Unfortunately, we didn't hire them. The corporations did. Politicians no longer represent their constituents; just the people that put them in power.
- zeitgueist, on 10/16/2007, -9/+48PUNY LIBERAL....YOU SHALL BE BROKEN BY BIG STRONG BEAR OF CONSERVATISM!!!!!
- inactive, on 10/16/2007, -12/+49***** Bush, I hope he chokes to death on a pretzel along with the King of Saudi Arabia and president Ahmedinijad.
- kaytrio, on 10/22/2007, -7/+43He'd have to prove that he has a brain first...
- pigfister, on 10/18/2007, -6/+39Bush has already signed out of the Geneva Convention and granted himself and his cronies immunity from prosecution "war crimes bill".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGnaSN5Twq8 - jeffchuck, on 10/16/2007, -8/+39I don't know the specific names of the laws, but how about spying on US citizens, going to war illegally, war crimes (torture) in his illegal war, deliberately misleading congress and the public about the reasons for war (I don't know if that's a crime, but it should be. Maybe treason.), et cetera, et cetera.
- neodem, on 10/16/2007, -5/+36the original post is here : http://www.newsandpolicy.com/news/2007/10/kucinich ...
- Frei, on 10/16/2007, -5/+35Who uses the puny these days?
- BabyWookie, on 10/17/2007, -12/+41Kucinich might not shrink the government, but he just might change it so that it back to the "by the people, for the people". Government is not such a bad thing, when it works for you instead of itself and the corporate lobby.
- freezeout, on 10/18/2007, -8/+37Bush is just a mascot. a Ronald McDonald if you will for the greedy cabal that put him in power. If you want real justice go after the real masterminds.
- Heracles, on 10/19/2007, -6/+34I'm sure his successor will grant him amnesty. All part of the deal. It's been done before.
- obelisky, on 10/16/2007, -8/+36ya, why punish those guilty of some of the worst crimes imaginable? will set a great example for future generations.. idiot.
- LucidOne, on 10/16/2007, -3/+31Judge him by his size, do you?
- Neiby, on 10/24/2007, -7/+34You honestly think any of the people in the current administration are Ron Paul's buddies?
- BabyWookie, on 10/22/2007, -4/+30We can get around that by reminding how many retarded people were executed in Texas when he was the guv'ner.
- mwalker05, on 10/16/2007, -2/+26remember when the new congress took office and was boasting about "the first 100 hours" and they were paralleling FDR's first 100 days for new legislation and reform? what ever happened to that?
- oqm4, on 10/19/2007, -8/+32I mean, I'm not going to waste my vote on him either; but you all know a Kucinich presidency would kick ass. This guy has the guts to say what we all know is best (end the war, hold Bush accountable), he is a total peacenik (which is what we desperately need in the face of bellicose fanaticism on both sides), and he's consistently steady on what I think is the "right," progressive path. And you know he's got drive. Have you see his hot wife? The man's clearly got stones and personal aplomb to have won her.
He's the lone man in the wilderness, crying out like our nation's conscience in the face of greed, corruption, and imperialism; and I think he'd make a great president which is why, of course, he doesn't stand a chance. Contemporary America loves mediocrity and stasis over FDR-style improvement and war and expansion over enlightenment.
Dennis, you're going to lose, of course. But keep the faith, and thank you for running. Shout as loudly as you can for as long as you can. - Darksidevoid, on 10/19/2007, -4/+28I see this repeated all over Digg, so I'm going to have to give you a reality check. A DK/RP or RP/DK ticket could not work, because they reside on opposite ends of the more/less government spectrum. It's true that they both represent the purest ideologies of their parties, without corporate strings, but they are vastly different.
- Carv, on 10/19/2007, -4/+27If you don't know who Kucinich is, you should probably review all your options before so confidently supporting one candidate.
- YouandWhoseArmy, on 10/19/2007, -12/+35Elected officials need to learn that they are NOT above the law. Bush and much of his staff are war criminals plain and simple.
- obelisky, on 10/16/2007, -11/+33you fail at life.
- Misinformant, on 10/19/2007, -22/+43Kucinich > Paul
- Elranzer, on 10/16/2007, -4/+24B-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-but... CLINTON!!
- BabyWookie, on 10/16/2007, -4/+24She just got a tongue piercing, I hear. We need this woman as our first lady! :)
- pintomp3, on 10/19/2007, -2/+21most people do, they just don't know it.
- BabyWookie, on 10/17/2007, -9/+28Whatever you say, Ayn. I don't need the government to take care of me either, but I do need it to protect me - from hostile foreign powers, criminals and the unscrupulous, greedy, immoral people and entities that just want to take advantage of me. I also like a good public infrastructure and having a safety net, if something happens and I am no longer able to take care of myself. Human nature is flawed and the market is not this magic entity that will always straighten itself out. People will not always choose to help someone who genuinely needs it. The government is a great public insurance policy, just as long as it stays under the control of us, the people and not the other way around.
- fangorious, on 10/24/2007, -1/+19"I mean, I'm not going to waste my vote on him either; but you all know a Kucinich presidency would kick ass."
YOU are part of the problem. Vote for who you think is the best candidate. Write in your choice if he or she is not on the ballot. Anything else is a wasted vote. - TheTaoOfBill, on 10/16/2007, -4/+22Ron Paul even said himself that he wouldn't even accept a blessing from Bush. It's very clear that Ron Paul thinks Bush is a criminal against the constitution.
- MacEnvy, on 10/16/2007, -2/+19If you educate yourself, you'll sound less like a douchebag:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Kucinich
This message brought to you by the letters F and U. - BabyWookie, on 10/19/2007, -13/+30Well, a lot of the Ron Paul's support base are genuinly right wing, in a paleo-conservative way, but Dennis is a great a choice for those of us who like social progress.
- inactive, on 10/16/2007, -2/+19Are you making that assumption based on what your Digg buddies have told you? You obviously haven't even read Ron Paul's website which clearly outlines his view:
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/life-and-liberty ...
"I am also the prime sponsor of HR 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn"
So, you see, Ron Paul is against choice and it IS something he would try to mandate. His own words.
Furthermore his "personal position" would affect all of us if he were president. - CivicTV, on 08/14/2009, -2/+18He has been doing this longer then just a YEAR.
- dannychen16, on 10/16/2007, -7/+231960's
-YOU'RE A COMMIE!
2007's
-YOU'RE A TERRORIST! - blackjack75, on 10/16/2007, -2/+18Disgraced the Bush name? You mean down from the beautiful repuation is nazi-hugging grandfather made for his name?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 641 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is