Iraq was free of torture chambers after invading? Bush lie got bigger.

“Iraq is free of rape rooms and torture chambers.”—President Bush, remarks to 2003 Republican National Committee Presidential Gala, Oct. 8, 2003

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002199231

It is time to say that the “a few bad apples” excuse was bullshit. It is painfully clear that if there were orders not to torture they were relaxed or not enforced regarding the interrogation of suspects.

Here you have to take into account that more than half of the captured ones that ended in Abu Ghraib were falsely accused or the evidence was crap.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0405/14/asb.00.html

No wonder Torture Boy Cheney wanted to get torture exemptions to the intelligence agencies.

…________
…|…|
…| PUTZ!…|
…|_______|
/
.:mad:

Want to take a guess how much effect this will have on the way our government works?

-Joe, thinking of a number between zero and zero

Ahem… why do you hate America GIGObuster?

Having gone through this song and dance with some of our resident locksteppers I wouldn’t hold out much hope that reality will penetrate their thick skulls. Expect evasions along the lines of “This wasn’t torture, it was ‘only’ abuse!”

I guess I’d have more outrage, but my outrage meter is busted and I’ve known about stuff like this for quite some time now.

Hardly surprising that the US will not sign up for the international courts of justice, the fear of ‘political’ prosecutions must be a real obstacle eh ?

No, they’ll simply say “So what. We don’t cut off their heads, thus we’re better then them”. No matter what we do.

Wow. Must be a slow day for Bush-Bitchers if you have to dig a quote out from THREE FUCKING YEARS AGO just to have an angle for a pitting. Got anything on Nixon? How about George Washington? Bring it all out!

I think Bush is the worst president to come down the pipe in US history, and I’m active duty military, but I think these pittings are fucking lame. Christ, 3 years ago? You couldn’t find something he said in the recent past?

I’m entirely confused by this. It’s not his statement from 3 years ago that’s being pitted. It’s the new findings that there are torture rooms, which prove that earlier statement to be a lie.

Should we just forget about anything politicians said after a time limit? “Why, yes, I did claim that <something> was the case, but that was years ago! Who cares if I lied about <something>! Let’s draw a line and move on.”

Stinkpalm, I think you’re missing the point that the three-year-old quote has just been definitively proven incorrect.

When Clinton said “I did not have sexual relations with that woman”, was the impeachment invalid because he had said it in 1998, not 1999 when he was prosecuted?

The only thing this lacks is, “Yeah, but Bill Clinton…!” :rolleyes:

Oh bollocks, I swear Revenant Threshold’s post wasn’t there when I previewed, yet it seems to have been posted 10 minutes before mine. But since that’s in the past, it’s invalid. :wink:

Anyway, his is a more eloquent way of putting it.

The “statute of limitations” on this sort of thing is shorter than the term of office, now?

Anyway, Stinkpalm has a point. Maybe the thinking has changed in the past two-and-a-half years, and Bush has been speaking truthfully on the subject since then.

Last year he said:

They aren’t torture chambers!

When the US does the exact same thing in the exact same place it is ‘assertive intelligence gathering’ or somesuch.

You think this is a joke or throwaway? No, this is the pissant wordplay that the actual US follows to be able to state hand-on-heart that it doesn’t engage in torture & etc.

See further:

  • torture memos - Ashcroft and Gonzales
  • extraordinary rendition
  • Guantanamo Bay - camp x-ray

Pffft.
Just like You Libruls [sup]tm[/sup], you think that just because you can show a history of deliberate lies made by the President, year after year after year, that it means anything?

Get with the program. Unless he said it yesterday it doesn’t count. And if he did say it yesterday, it must be true. To think otherwise means that you hate the US military and freedom, apple pie, and your mother.

You don’t hate your mother, do you?

Wow, The TAS* in action. :rolleyes:

That quote was indeed from three fucking years ago because that is what Bush was saying back then and it was after the time when this started, the news reported today deals with a different torture place that was not Abu Grahaib, meaning that the previous excuse that it was “just a few bad apples” does not fly.

But let me show how silly you are:

Iraq is more free every day. The lives of the citizens are improving every day. And one thing is for certain; there won’t be any more mass graves and torture rooms and rape rooms.
George W. Bush
Remarks to Reporters
January 12, 2004

Helen Thomas questions McClellan in the White House, Nov. 8, 2005::

  • Time line Avoidance System, method #1: purposely ignore when it happened.

I think you need to recheck your history. You should have said:

Unless he said it yesterday it doesn’t count. And if he did say it yesterday, it must be true. If there’s reason to suspect it’s not true, we need to wait until all the facts are in. Three years later, when the investigation is complete, it will be ‘ancient history’ and we have ‘more important things to worry about now’.

-Joe

Y’know, after reading the transcript GIGObuster posted, I’m going to go out on a limb and predict that Scotty “Weasel” McClellan will snap and machine-gun the East Wing before Bush’s second term is over. They’ll eventually find him hiding behind the lectern in the press room rocking and muttering to himself, “Thrown to the wolves, four times a week…thrown to the wolves…”

Man, I love that crabby old broad.

Damn, you’ve got it nailed!

You might enjoy this “ancient” commentary about President Bush’s moral compass from two years ago. It was written by philosopher Pete Singer.

I like this quote from the NYT article

Emphasis added.

There are patriots within the US government. But they are not in charge.
Wild idea: as an alternative to sleep deprivation, beatings and simulated drownings, maybe we could try standard police investigative techniques. It worked with the Shining Path’s founder, Abimael Guzman, when electro-torture had failed. It just might work with al-Zarqawi. Hey, it’s worth a try.

Again with the fallacy. Sure, sure, this standard investigation like the police it would work if it was the information you wanted. But no look at this, the depriving sleep, those beatings and oh yes too, those drownings; those are the object and purpose of the interrogations. It’s all part of the wider reason for to go and invade into that country. What? You think there was some benevolent reasons, like father Christmas. Is that what it looks like to you?

It was about the beatings. All about it, that’s what I’m telling you.