It's worse than that!

[Ibby]

Actually, I didnt read your post. Only commented on the length.

[glatt]

tw, I tried to read your post, but kept getting confused about what you were quoting, and if the Bush lies were new ones from yesterday or just the same old ones.

Here's what I do understand:

Some info from the intelligence report was leaked a few days ago. That info was very negative for Bush's Iraq war.

Yesterday, Bush declassified much more of the report to try to put a positive spin on things again. The little coverage I have seen has made this declassified info also seem really negative for Bush.

What spin is Bush trying to put on the partially declassified report? What's his version of things? I didn't see that in your post, and I haven't seen it in the press.

[Undertoad]

Press conference yesterday (presented w/o opinion)

PRESIDENT BUSH: I, of course, read the key judgments on the NIE. I agree with their conclusion that because of our successes against the leadership of al Qaeda, the enemy is becoming more diffuse and independent. I'm not surprised the enemy is exploiting the situation in Iraq and using it as a propaganda tool to try to recruit more people to their -- to their murderous ways.

Some people have guessed what's in the report and have concluded that going into Iraq was a mistake. I strongly disagree. I think it's naive. I think it's a mistake for people to believe that going on the offense against people that want to do harm to the American people makes us less safe. The terrorists fight us in Iraq for a reason: They want to try to stop a young democracy from developing, just like they're trying to fight another young democracy in Afghanistan. And they use it as a recruitment tool, because they understand the stakes. They understand what will happen to them when we defeat them in Iraq.

You know, to suggest that if we weren't in Iraq, we would see a rosier scenario with fewer extremists joining the radical movement requires us to ignore 20 years of experience. We weren't in Iraq when we got attacked on September the 11th. We weren't in Iraq, and thousands of fighters were trained in terror camps inside your country, Mr. President. We weren't in Iraq when they first attacked the World Trade Center in 1993. We weren't in Iraq when they bombed the Cole. We weren't in Iraq when they blew up our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. My judgment is, if we weren't in Iraq, they'd find some other excuse, because they have ambitions. They kill in order to achieve their objectives.

You know, in the past, Osama bin Laden used Somalia as an excuse for people to join his jihadist movement. In the past, they used the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It was a convenient way to try to recruit people to their jihadist movement. They've used all kinds of excuses.

This government is going to do whatever it takes to protect this homeland. We're not going to let their excuses stop us from staying on the offense. The best way to protect America is defeat these killers overseas so we do not have to face them here at home. We're not going to let lies and propaganda by the enemy dictate how we win this war.

Now, you know what's interesting about the NIE -- it was a intelligence report done last April. As I understand, the conclusions -- the evidence on the conclusions reached was stopped being gathered on February -- at the end of February. And here we are, coming down the stretch in an election campaign, and it's on the front page of your newspapers. Isn't that interesting? Somebody has taken it upon themselves to leak classified information for political purposes.

I talked to John Negroponte today, the DNI. You know, I think it's a bad habit for our government to declassify every time there's a leak, because it means that it's going to be hard to get good product out of our analysts. Those of you who have been around here long enough know what I'm talking about. But once again, there's a leak out of our government, coming right down the stretch in this campaign, -- to create confusion in the minds of the American people, in my judgment, is why they leaked it.

And so we're going to -- I told the DNI to declassify this document. You can read it for yourself. We'll stop all the speculation, all the politics about somebody saying something about Iraq, somebody trying to confuse the American people about the nature of this enemy. And so John Negroponte, the DNI, is going to declassify the document as quickly as possible. He'll declassify the key judgments for you to read yourself. And he'll do so in such a way that we'll be able to protect sources and methods that our intelligence community uses. And then everybody can draw their own conclusions about what the report says.

Thank you.

Q My question --

PRESIDENT BUSH: What was that question?

Q Why is that declassification not --

PRESIDENT BUSH: Because I want you to read the documents so you don't speculate about what it says. You asked me a question based upon what you thought was in the document, or at least somebody told you was in the document. And so I think, Jennifer, you'll be able to ask a more profound question when you get to look at it yourself -- (laughter) -- as opposed to relying upon gossip and somebody who may or may not have seen the document trying to classify the war in Iraq one way or the other.

I guess it's just Washington, isn't it, where, you know, we kind of -- there's no such thing as classification anymore, hardly. But, anyway, you ought to take a look at it and then you'll get to see.

[glatt]

Thanks UT. I'm sure I could have found that if I tried, but it's nice to have it spoonfed to me.

At least you can count on Bush to be consistent in his positions.

I find his accusations about the leak being politically motivated to be a little hypocritical. His administration is the most secretive one in memory, but he has no problem declassifying secrets when they will help him gain politically. If he can play that game, then he shouldn't complain when others do as well.

[Happy Monkey]

You know, to suggest that if we weren't in Iraq, we would see a rosier scenario with fewer extremists joining the radical movement requires us to ignore 20 years of experience. We weren't in Iraq when we got attacked on September the 11th. We weren't in Iraq, and thousands of fighters were trained in terror camps inside your country, Mr. President. We weren't in Iraq when they first attacked the World Trade Center in 1993. We weren't in Iraq when they bombed the Cole. We weren't in Iraq when they blew up our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.

I don't think anyone ever claimed that terrorism was invented because we invented Iraq.

Originally Posted by glatt

I find his accusations about the leak being politically motivated to be a little hypocritical. His administration is the most secretive one in memory, but he has no problem declassifying secrets when they will help him gain politically.

And the other direction, too. There's another part to this report, reportedly even more damaging to his position, that they are forcing to be kept in draft form until after the election.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by glatt

...I find his accusations about the leak being politically motivated to be a little hypocritical. ...

Did you hear the leak that John McCain has a love child with an African American woman? Or the leak that Valerie Plame is a CIA agent?

It's even worse when the "leak" isn't accurate.

[Flint]

Originally Posted by Bush

...to create confusion in the minds of the American people...

ha ha ha
Shouldn't we be asking: Under what type of circumstances would more information create "confusion" ???

Corollary:
a) How low is his opinion (openly stated here) of the critical thinking skills of the American people ???
b) How high is his confidence in whatever it is that will create "confusion" when mixed with this report ???

[tw]

Originally Posted by glatt

What spin is Bush trying to put on the partially declassified report? What's his version of things? I didn't see that in your post, and I haven't seen it in the press.

Difficult to list so many George Jr lies in a short post because George Jr lied so many times. For example, from George Jr:

You know, to suggest that if we weren't in Iraq, we would see a rosier scenario with fewer extremists joining the radical movement requires us to ignore 20 years of experience. We weren't in Iraq when we got attacked on September the 11th.

Clearly he thinks you are dumb. 1993 WTC and 11 September happened because we were in the most holy Islam nation - Saudi Arabia. We were there because George Jr subordinates (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfovich, etc) did not do their job ten years earlier. An extremist George Jr would have you forget that fact. George Jr lies just like Nixon.

We attacked a greatest enemy of extremists and promised to leave. Because we were attacking Saddam - a greatest enemy of religious extremists - and because we promised to leave, then extremists were willing to accept American occupation.

But we did not remove Saddam AND we did not leave the most holy nation in Islam. We are not targets only because of Iraq - as George Jr lies. We were targets because Americans did not leave Saudi Arabia - as promised. And we did not leave because George Jr's people did not do their job in the George Sr administration.

George Jr associates 'bin Laden type' attacks with Iraq because he thinks you are that dumb. He even told you that Saddam conspired to create 11 September when Saddam was doing everything possible to avoid conflict with the US. George Jr lies again so that you forget that reality - Saddam wanted to be a friend of the US. George Jr must have you forget that fact.

Meanwhile a declassified assessment does not say they will come after us if we leave Iraq. It implies otherwise. It says Americans are targets because we continue to occupy Muslim nations and kill Muslims such as in Iraq. It provides four reasons why jihadists, terrorists, and insurgents all get stronger.

The post quotes four points that make Americans targets of jihadists. Those four point bluntly contradict what George Jr says. Jihadist easily recruit and grow stronger only because of what we are doing in iraq and because of what we had done elsewhere.

In another lie, George Jr says Americans are safer. 'Safer' is one of his many sound byte responses - for those who never ask why. We even torture innocent people and somehow Americans are safer? Even the declassified report says, ... well read it. Where does the declassified report imply that Americans are now safer? It does not. George Jr lied. It does not say or even imply that America is safer - no matter how many times the mental midget president spins this and other lies.

Apparently my post included too many George Jr lies and was therefore confusing.

Provided are two hyperlinks to that declassified April intelligence report - that says opposite of what George Jr claims:
Declassified Key Judgments... or
Declassified Key Judgments...

There is no other way to conclude and still be honest. George Jr lies - even claims today before cameras that the US is safer because we invaded Iraq. Notice the silence from so many Cellar dwellers that approve of this president. They cannot defend him because this time his lie is that obviously egregious.

Meanwhile, notice the silence from a loyal George Jr supporter and a strongest advocate of the Iraq war - Rick Santorum. The man is as religous extremist and anti-American as George Jr. In 30+ days, Pennsylvanians can vote to promote the war in Iraq - by voting for Rick Santorum.

Those outside of PA should understand that Santorum is preaching ads to paint Casey as corrupt. My phone does not stop rining with Republican party propaganda. From what I am hearing on phone and seeing in mail, the Republican party is spending something like 4 or 8 times more money to defend Santorum - with negative ads. Do they mention Iraq - and Santorum's approval of torture? No. Why do they forget what George Jr and Rick Santorum both approve of? We are making the world even more dangerous for all Americans. The president violates the 8th Commandment and Rick Santorum (religious extremist Senator) encourages it.

[tw]

UK intelligence leaks confirm what American intelligence leaks also reported (no matter how the mental midget spins it). From the BBC of 28 Sept 2006:

Leak highlights a complex relationship
Many of the statements contained in the officer's notes, for example that the war in Iraq has not gone well and has served as a "recruiting sergeant" for extremists, are in line with other recently published assessments.

However, in some areas the Defence Academy's paper is quite opposed to Downing Street's world view, suggesting that "the UK has followed US policies on the global war on terror at the perceived exclusion of its own interests".

The officer suggests the Pentagon lacks a strategic big idea and that "the US/UK cannot begin to turn the tide until they identify the real enemies... and seek to put in place a better and more just vision".

... the writer does not suggest what that larger vision of prosecuting these conflicts might be.

Instead, he argues that British forces in Iraq "are effectively being held hostage... we are now fighting (and arguably losing or potentially losing) on two fronts".

Of course, this was so obvious even to Cellar Dwellers in May 2004:

The heads may roll.
We had a window of oppurtunity, typically three or six months, to prove we could improve their plight. Instead we have only replaced a tryrant with streets so unsafe that Iraqis can only hope things will get better. Wwe could not even get the electricity fully restored. Had we installed intelligent leaders in Iraq (ie Gen Garner), then Iraqis would have been building their own country. But instead we even violated principles clearly spelled out in "The Art of War" - a 500 BC book. The principles were that well proven which tells you something about the government that is running this war. We fired anyone who could make the utilities even work. Dear god. Did anyone even bother to learn the lessons of post war Germany? No. The president's knowledge of the world was a one year crash course headed by Conduleeza Rice. He is that mentally ignorant of this world.

And later that May 2004 in Exit Strategy

Originally Posted by tw

We had 6 month to get it right. Instead we sent in people so mentally deficient as to even disband the Iraqi Army and Police. And yes I do mean so mentally deficient as to not even learn how a WWII American army avoided same problems in Germany. We fired anyone (out of stupidity and political rhetoric reasons) who could have made the electricity and other utilities work. Why? Only because to have such jobs, they had to be Baath party members. Therefore they were not good enough to make the country work again.

Originally Posted by kitsume

What? Let me get this straight: You expected the US to deploy an army overseas, overthrow a dictator, rebuild the infrastructure we blew to pieces, and restore civillian happiness in a mere six months?

That is exactly what had to happen and that is exactly why planning for the peace must be ongoing before hostilities begin. That was also what a State Department analysis group noted when they also warned of looting. Remember the looting that Rumsfeld and George Jr denied? In thirty some years when another president lies to America, I hope you youngsters remember these 'Deja Vue Vietnam' lessons.

We broke it. Now we own it. But a mental midget president had no idea what Colin Powell was warning. We and Powell did not realize how dumb this president really is.

So how long ago did we know things were getting that bad? Well it depends on whether you were listening to propaganda (especially Fox News) or were listening to facts (with contempt for any logic justified by political rhetoric). Posted even in Oct 2003 were Iraqi conditions (that only get worse) created because "Americans don't do nation building". Undeniable even to the Cellar's most politically extreme because they cannot deny leaked American and British intelligence reports:

Liberating them against their will.
Bottom line is that Iraqis more want what they once had under Saddam. Security, jobs, and basic services are more important to Iraqis than freedom of speech and no Saddam in their text books. And what did we not provide? Electricty for up to 6 months. Jobs for unemployed army troops - who could have been providing the security and restoring basic services. And security. As far as Iraqis are concerned, each bombing is just another reason to blame Americans.

Tonight on PBS Newshour, what does every Iraqi say they want? Number one want in Iraq is "Security". What did America not provide for half a year in Iraq? Security. Too few troops. No plans. Then we made it even worse by disbanning all soldiers and police. Now Iraqis are suffering from something that they never knew - *kidnappings*. One family has lost both kids for a second time in three months! Kidnapping never happened in Iraq until the Americans liberated crime! It does not matter what Dave thinks. This is want Iraqis see. They don't like what America has forced on them.

Even three years ago in The Cellar was posted the problems in Iraq - if reading factually and not with extremist political bias. We had six months to accomplish what we did not even start until the seventh month. Yes, kitsume, that much must be done that quickly or military victory is lost. Instead, we did nothing as our right wing extremists said we should. We did zero and then made it worse by disbanding the military and police. Only an extremist ignorant wacko would have done that.

Let's see. The United States and UK invaded and conquered all of western Europe in half this "Mission Accomplished" war. We then got European utilities working again in only months. Big difference - then compared to now. Back then our leaders had basic intelligence, did not have an extremist political agenda, learned lessons from history, and did not lie repeatedly.

When do we talk about impeachment?

[xoxoxoBruce]

I wonder if Bush is taking one for the team? Make the public aware how bad things are so they'll get nervous and elect the congressmen he wants.

Makes Bush look bad, but hey, he's not up for election.