George Bush shut the fuck up!

[World_Eater]

@duffer

Wow. Once again the left-wingers display the spirit of tolerence, inclusiveness, and understanding of the “world community.”

I guess multiculturalism and dialogue only count when you agree with them. :rolleyes:

And once again, Duffer comes in and adds absolutely nothing to this thread. Go away, the grown ups are talking.

[ArrMatey]

@Binarydrone

I hereby sentence you to toss Brutus’ salad.

Gah! Hrm… okay…

tosses it out the window

Defenestration. Good enough?

[ElvisL1ves]

@Bricker

Because I think you made it up, or repeated it from someone else who made it up.

That was silly even for you.

@FinnAgain

Unfortuantely I can’t search the dope for “OSP” as it’s too few letters.

“Office of Special Plans” has enough, though. Unfortunately there are gaping holes in the archives. But yeah, Bricker, you can easily educate yourself on the subject if you ever decide to take up an interest in the world of fact.

@catsix

And a citizen of New Zealand is supposed to do what about the United States President, exactly? Not vote for him?

Not directly, no. But if the NZ government’s actions IHHO are for whatever reason unduly influenced by the wishes of the US government, against what he considers to be the interests of the NZ people or the world at large, that’s a respectable basis to vote against them, and vice versa too.

[rjung]

@duffer

Wow. Once again the left-wingers display the spirit of tolerence, inclusiveness, and understanding of the “world community.”

And here I thought you wanted us to stop appeasing evil tyrants…

[FinnAgain]

So now that you can do some research into the OSP, can we count on your voice added to the chorus who demand accountability for the administration’s deliberate and/or bungled ‘errors’?

[MrFantsyPants]

@Hentor the Barbarian

No, no. It is more like talking to a shit smear left in the potty. Not only are you not likely to make any meaningful conversation with it, it’s even more crazy than talking to the wall and there is a greater element of disgust involved in the whole endeavor.

Actually, I find that talking to Brutus is more like talking to festering boil on one’s own ass. It’s fairly predictable when it will spew forth, and you can be pretty damn sure that nothing of value is going to come out.

[rjung]

@MrFantsyPants

Actually, I find that talking to Brutus is more like talking to festering boil on one’s own ass.

Surely you mean a festeroing boil on Karl Rove’s ass. I know my ass doesn’t produce anything half as idiotic as a typical Brutus post.

[SolGrundy]

@LadySybil

Uptight homosexual haters are lousy in bed.

For the last time: I am not, dammit!

[Brutus]

@rjung

Surely you mean a festeroing boil on Karl Rove’s ass.

There you go, advertising your fetish again. Admit it, you have a Rove and GW photos plastered all over your room, don’t you?

I know my ass doesn’t produce anything half as idiotic as a typical Brutus post.

But your posts are twice as idiotic as anything I could produce. Sure, you seem to have a free pass to blatantly insult people up in GD, using the mysterious power of :), but don’t let that fool you into thinking that you ever contribute anything worthwhile to any conversation.

Still, it is rather amusing that you drooling lefties are trying to deflect the thread to anything but the fact that one of your own was not bright enough to change the channel. I know that most of you can be outwitted by a bucket of warm water, but surely pushing a button is not beyond you?

[Rashak_Mani]

hehe… I feel the same way whenever I see Bush repeating the same old beaten words of “Freedom… democracy… bla bla bla…”

[Bryan_Ekers]

Funny, I’d’ve expected something called “OSP” to be producing bionic spies, or whatnot.

[ArrMatey]

@Brutus

But your posts are twice as idiotic as anything I could produce. […] Still, it is rather amusing that you drooling lefties are trying to deflect the thread to anything but the fact that one of your own was not bright enough to change the channel. I know that most of you can be outwitted by a bucket of warm water, but surely pushing a button is not beyond you?

Wow. Brutus manages to say he’s disliking what’s being said, then insults others for not just turning aside when they hear something they don’t like. Do as I say, not as I do, B?

[Brutus]

@ArrMatey!

To be summed up susinctly:
TROLL.

Troll, huh? I’ll be damned if I can figure out how you guys seem to get away with that crap. Is it the pretending to apologize a post or two later? Does that really work on the mods?

Regardless, I didn’t start some loopy ‘OMG I lost my antipsychotics’ thread over anything. Nor, in fact, did I ever say I ‘dislike’ anything, like you claim I did. I simply pointed out the blazingly obvious truth: **rjung[/b is a idiot.

[Bricker]

@FinnAgain

Fixed links.

Sunday Herald

It’s unclear to me, from reading this article, what the source of information is. The author confidently asserts:

That was the policy blueprint, but to deliver it Rumsfeld turned to the Office of Special Plans. Put simply, the OSP was told to come up with the evidence of WMD to give credence to US military intervention.

There’s no footnote. No one is quoted, even as a background or an off-the-record source.

I agree that you didn’t make it up. You read it here. My question is: how did the article’s author know what the OSP was told to do?

Second link - same objection. These are opinion pieces. They are written as certain pronouncements - but with no indication what the source is.

HOW DOES THE AUTHOR KNOW?

[Bricker]

@ElvisL1ves

“Office of Special Plans” has enough, though. Unfortunately there are gaping holes in the archives. But yeah, Bricker, you can easily educate yourself on the subject if you ever decide to take up an interest in the world of fact.

I have researched and educated myself, and my opinion hasn’t changed, so I’m afraid you’re going to have to actually produce some real citations.

[Banquet_Bear]

@catsix

And a citizen of New Zealand is supposed to do what about the United States President, exactly? Not vote for him?

The solution for someone who has absolutely no say whatsoever in who the President of the United States is would be to not listen to his speeches. Especially if they’re making that person extremely upset.

…you see, thats the problem, over here in little New Zealand we don’t get a chance to vote for President Bush or not. Yet, Bush chooses to speak for us. And the people of Iraq. And for the people of Iran, and North Korea, and Australia, and Samoa. Whenever he talks about freedom and ridding the world of tyranny, and the Axis of Evil and bringing democracy to the world, he’s talking about us. And if he decides that a country is worthy of invasion, there is little we can do to stop him.

World Eater is exactly right regarding Powell’s presentation to the United Nations. It was a load of horse shit. The amazing thing from this little corner of the world was how few people saw it as horse shit. I couldn’t understand how chickenshit the US media were-you had a presentation that was the equivilent of “The Emperor’s New Clothes”, and there were no critical questions asked prior to the invasion at all. Sanitised sites? Withn days we knew this was horseshit. Equally laughable were the radio intercepts: “We evacuated everything. We don’t have anything left.” or the equally laughable: " The Al Kendi (ph) Company: This is a company that is well known to have been involved in prohibited weapons systems activity." However, Powell knew that the Al Kindi facilities had already been checked by the inspectors, and come up clean. More horse shit.

The whole presentation was horseshit. HORSESHIT. Withn days of Powell’s presentation, myself, and many others had gathered enough information to debunk the whole thing using the INTERNET. Yet, still, no questions from the media. Noone raised a stink, questioned anything, they just let it go…

So as much as the “if you don’t like him, don’t watch him” appeals to us over here, unfortunately we can’t do it, you see. What President Bush does affects us over here, and although we can’t vote for him, we do what we can. I did vote for the government here that didn’t support the war, that didn’t supply troops for the war, but did supply troops to help out with the rebuilding stage until it got too dangerous to keep them in Iraq. I do watch Bush when he comes on TV, and I absolutely reserve the right to rant, complain, and criticize his actions. New Zealand troops served in Iraq, New Zealand troops are in Afghanistan, New Zealanders died alongside many other nations in the Bali bombing, and New Zealanders are under threat thanks to the newly formed “breeding ground for terrorists” aka Iraq…

@Sam Stone

What a bastard! Next, the asshole will talk about something truly horrible like love and compassion.

Those goddamn Republicans, with their talk of peace and freedom. When will they learn that tyrants are people too?

To be honest Sam Stone I very much doubt that anyone in New Zealand, let alone Canada, gives a shit if President Bush is a Republican or a Democrat. Clinton was loved by kiwi’s not because of his political affiliation, but because he was an extremely charismatic person. Bush (1) was well respected, and Gulf War One was generally regarded (by most kiwi’s) as a legitimate war. But Bush Jr’s administration clearly had an agenda (PNAC, anyone?), and the will, to push through a war, regardless of evidence. They set up a prison on foreign soil so their own laws could be circumvented, and locked people away for years with no legal recourse. My feelings for the Bush administration have absolutely nothing to do with his party affiliation, and would say the same goes for calm kiwi, who, to be fair, is anything but calm in this thread!

[Banquet_Bear]

@Bricker

I have researched and educated myself, and my opinion hasn’t changed, so I’m afraid you’re going to have to actually produce some real citations.

…this report, from journalist Seymor Hersh, contains many references to an “unamed Pentagon Advisor.” If you have any evidence that Seymor Hersh has invented anonymous sources before, feel free, however, I believe that generally he has been found to be more than reliable.

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030512fa_fact

Rumsfeld and his colleagues believed that the C.I.A. was unable to perceive the reality of the situation in Iraq. “The agency was out to disprove linkage between Iraq and terrorism,” the Pentagon adviser told me. “That’s what drove them. If you’ve ever worked with intelligence data, you can see the ingrained views at C.I.A. that color the way it sees data.” **The goal of Special Plans, he said, was “to put the data under the microscope to reveal what the intelligence community can’t see. **Shulsky’s carrying the heaviest part.”

He went on to say, “You don’t know what you don’t know. So in comes the daily briefer”—from the C.I.A.—“and she walks through the daily brief. And I ask questions. **‘Gee, what about this?’ or ‘What about that? **Has somebody thought of this?’” At the same briefing, Rumsfeld said that he had already been informed that there was “solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of Al Qaeda members.”

The I.N.C., an umbrella organization for diverse groups opposed to Saddam, is constantly seeking out Iraqi defectors. The Special Plans Office developed a close working relationship with the I.N.C., and this strengthened its position in disputes with the C.I.A. and gave the Pentagon’s pro-war leadership added leverage in its constant disputes with the State Department. Special Plans also became a conduit for intelligence reports from the I.N.C. to officials in the White House.

“You had to treat them with suspicion,” another former Middle East station chief said of Chalabi’s people. “The I.N.C. has a track record of manipulating information because it has an agenda. It’s a political unit—not an intelligence agency.”

Last October, in a speech in Cincinnati, the President cited the Kamel defections as the moment when Saddam’s regime “was forced to admit that it had produced more than thirty thousand liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents. . . .

-snip-

The full record of Hussein Kamel’s interview with the inspectors reveals, however, that he also said that Iraq’s stockpile of chemical and biological warheads, which were manufactured before the 1991 Gulf War, had been destroyed, in many cases in response to ongoing inspections.

… “cherry picking” the evidence, would you not agree?

A former C.I.A. task-force leader who is a consultant to the Bush Administration said that many analysts in the C.I.A. are convinced that the Chalabi group’s defector reports on weapons of mass destruction and Al Qaeda have produced little of value, but said that the agency “is not fighting it.” He said that the D.I.A. had studied the information as well. “Even the D.I.A. can’t find any value in it.” (The Pentagon, asked for comment, denied that there had been disputes between the C.I.A. and Special Plans over the validity of intelligence.)

…the Pentagon denies disputes between the CIA and the OSP, however, does this surprise you?

“They see themselves as outsiders, ” a former C.I.A. expert who spent the past decade immersed in Iraqi-exile affairs said of the Special Plans people. He added, “There’s a high degree of paranoia. They’ve convinced themselves that they’re on the side of angels, and everybody else in the government is a fool.”

On April 22nd, Hans Blix, hours before he asked the U.N. Security Council to send his team back to Iraq, told the BBC, “I think it’s been one of the disturbing elements that so much of the intelligence on which the capitals built their case seemed to have been so shaky.”

There is little self-doubt or second-guessing in the Pentagon over the failure to immediately find the weapons. The Pentagon adviser to Special Plans told me he believed that the delay “means nothing. We’ve got to wait to get all the answers from Iraqi scientists who will tell us where they are.” Similarly, the Pentagon official who works for Luti said last week, “I think they’re hidden in the mountains or transferred to some friendly countries. Saddam had enough time to move them.”

“It appeared that they understood that to get the American people on their side they needed to come up with something more to say than ‘We’ve liberated Iraq and got rid of a tyrant.’ So they had to find some ties to weapons of mass destruction and were willing to allow a majority of Americans to incorrectly conclude that the invasion of Iraq had something to do with the World Trade Center. Overemphasizing the national-security threat made it more difficult to get the rest of the world on our side. It was the weakest and most misleading argument we could use.” Kerrey added, “It appears that they have the intelligence. The problem is, they didn’t like the conclusions.”

*all bolding mine. *

Just reading that article, forget about the Office of Special Plans… how stupid did you have to be to believe any of this horseshit!!!

[Bites_When_Provoked]

@Banquet Bear

I very much doubt that anyone in New Zealand, let alone Canada, gives a shit if President Bush is a Republican or a Democrat.

Your entire post was great, Banquet Bear, but I’ve highlighted this bit because it bears repeating.

It’s utterly irrelevant to us - speaking as an Australian - what political party a particular president is affiliated with. We make up our minds based on what he actually does and says.

I can’t understand how people can let their political leanings completely blind them to the right or wrong of a president’s actions. Yes, this includes people who hate GWB just because he’s not leading ‘their’ party, without having actually researched the ‘why’. Despising someone just because they’re ‘the opposition’ is equally as moronic as supporting them because they’re with ‘your’ party.

This isn’t football, people. Doing a little kneejerk ‘rah rah rah’ pom-pom dance every time ‘your’ team steps out is not a laudable response.

@catsix

And a citizen of New Zealand is supposed to do what about the United States President, exactly? Not vote for him?

The solution for someone who has absolutely no say whatsoever in who the President of the United States is would be to not listen to his speeches. Especially if they’re making that person extremely upset.

As has been stated before, New Zealand, Australia, and a whole bunch of places that aren’t * directly ruled (and yes, that’s a deliberate phrasing) by GWB are nonetheless putting their citizens on the line.* I think that gives us a perfect right to criticise, fuck you very much.** Clearly the tactic of ‘turn off the TV until the bad stuff goes away’ works for you, but some of us feel we should actually see what’s going on.

[rjung]

@ArrMatey!

Wow. Brutus manages to say he’s disliking what’s being said, then insults others for not just turning aside when they hear something they don’t like. Do as I say, not as I do, B?

What do you expect from a guy whose best retort is a Johnny-come-lately version of “Yeah? Well, same to you, too, pal!”?

[Rune]

@Mr. Svinlesha

Yes, indeed.

Peace is War.
Freedom is Slavery.
Love is Hate.

Just ask George!

yup, indeed… and

Wisdom is Stupidity.

Just ask Mr. Svin!

You can be all miserable and pathetic and bitch and whine about Bush to your hearts content since it seems to give you such pleasure, but I really fucking hate it when you take the masters words in vain. There really ought to be an amendment to Godwin’s law, about abusing 1984.

btw. Kiwi I always preferred fucking twats. How’s yours doing? Kicked her out yet? The stupid bitch.