Rumsfeld called out in Atlanta

[chomerics]

Here is a video of a retired CIA intel analyst going after Rumsfeld in Georgia today. . .

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/CNN-Rumsfeld-McGovern-Question.wmv

If the video doesn;t work, go here. . .

http://www.crooksandliars.com/

[NoCalMike]

Yeah Rumsfield denying he said this...

"MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Finally, weapons of mass destruction. Key goal of the military campaign is finding those weapons of mass destruction. None have been found yet. There was a raid on the Answar Al-Islam Camp up in the north last night. A lot of people expected to find ricin there. None was found. How big of a problem is that? And is it curious to you that given how much control U.S. and coalition forces now have in the country, they haven't found any weapons of mass destruction?

SEC. RUMSFELD: Not at all. If you think -- let me take that, both pieces -- the area in the south and the west and the north that coalition forces control is substantial. It happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat"

Rumsfield = One of the Lying Liars.

Oh and Chom, you have GOT TO LOVE, how CNN, the supposed "liberal hippy networks" Refers to a CIA member, as a "Protester" LOL......

[#98QBKiller]

Gotta' love how Rumsfeld outright dodges a simple question and tries to change the subject with his tired-ass "men and women in uniform" patriotic rhetorical garbage.

No one's protesting our troops. People are protesting an administration that made a premature decision that is costing our troops their lives....real patriotic.

[Larry]

Actually looked to me like Rummy handled it pretty well. (Granted, he should have lots of practice with those lines by now.)

One thing I liked was when he told the off-camera goons not to drag the questioner from the room to "protect" him from uncomplimentary questions. Helps put his impromptu question session into context.

[#98QBKiller]

Actually looked to me like Rummy handled it pretty well. (Granted, he should have lots of practice with those lines by now.)

One thing I liked was when he told the off-camera goons not to drag the questioner from the room to "protect" him from uncomplimentary questions. Helps put his impromptu question session into context.

True. That was a bold thing to do on his part.

[Guest Gichin13]

Actually looked to me like Rummy handled it pretty well. (Granted, he should have lots of practice with those lines by now.)

One thing I liked was when he told the off-camera goons not to drag the questioner from the room to "protect" him from uncomplimentary questions. Helps put his impromptu question session into context.

I agree -- I thought Rumsfeld handled this very well.

[Teller]

What I particularly enjoyed was seeing this on Channel 4. Yep, there sure were four people who protested. Sadly, I couldn't understand what they were saying as they were shouted down by the other thousand people in attendance.

Hmm...

Four against me, a thousand for me. Yeah, I'd feel pretty good about that.

[brewdogmike]

Here is a video of a retired CIA intel analyst going after Rumsfeld in Georgia today. . .

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/CNN-Rumsfeld-McGovern-Question.wmv

If the video doesn;t work, go here. . .

http://www.crooksandliars.com/

By the way, here's "retired CIA intel analyst" Ray McGovern's views on Israel and 9/11:

That Israel pulls the strings of American foreign policy is not the only conspiracy theory propounded by McGovern. While maintaining that the Bush administration manipulated intelligence information to justify the war against Iraq, McGovern has allowed for the possibility that WMD may be found in Iraq. But he hastens to add that any weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq will likely have been “planted” by American forces. “Some of my colleagues are virtually certain that there will be some weapons of mass destruction found, even though they might have to be planted,” he told Agence French Presse in April of 2003, darkly insisting that “that would justify the charge of a threat against the U.S. or anyone else.”

Here's a bunch more.

The fact is that in 2003 Rumsfeld, the Bush administration, the overwhelming majority of the intelligence agencies of the United States as well as the western world, the other governments in the region, and Saddam Hussein himself according to videotapes from that time, thought that Iraq had WMD. But when they're not found, it's a "lie." To accuse someone of lying when they believe what they are saying is true is idiocy. Does a child lie when he talks about Santa Claus coming on Christmas eve? According the left, the answer is yes.

[Thiebear]

WOW the CIA guy is a loon, and motivated to attack thats for sure..

His question wasn't off, just some other views he has...

[Midnight Judges]

The fact is that in 2003 Rumsfeld, the Bush administration, the overwhelming majority of the intelligence agencies of the United States as well as the western world, the other governments in the region, and Saddam Hussein himself according to videotapes from that time, thought that Iraq had WMD. But when they're not found, it's a "lie." To accuse someone of lying when they believe what they are saying is true is idiocy. Does a child lie when he talks about Santa Claus coming on Christmas eve? According the left, the answer is yes.

This paragraph is riddled with inaccuracies. Take the aluminum tubes for example. The only intelligence agency that thought they were appropriate for WMD production was the neo-con-controlled DIA. Every other defense agency disputed this claim but Bush cherry-picked the DIA report for some reason despite the advice of some of his top security advisors.

The UN weapons inspectors who were on the ground in Iraq before Bush kicked them out did not believe Saddam had WMD's but they did not publish a definitive conclusion simply because one can not definitively prove a negative.

If Bush was so sure about his weapons intelligence he would have shared it with the UN as he was bound to do by the UN resolutions agreed to by the USA. Then the inspectors would have gone there and instead of us fighting this war virtually alone, we would have had the entire world on our side.

You claim the entire western world knew Sddam had WMD's, then why didn't they support the war? They signed the UN resolutions just like we did, difference being Germany, France, etc chose to obey them.

Bush did not have the convictions of his own intelligence. The Downing street memo, the aluminum tubes, the locations of the WMD's not being shared with the UN Inspectors who were on the ground in Iraq, and the profiteering by Cheney and Bush personally off this war=Indisputable evidence that George W. Bush and his administration lied to take us to war. The CIA agent in question said it himself, any reasonable American can see that the Bush administration lied to take us to war, and he is right. Bush knew the intelligence was wrong. He conducted intelligence agencies with a desired outcome and any intelligence gathering with a desired outcome is going to be seriously flawed. The Bush administration is well-aware of this fact unlike it's voting base. The only people who think Bush didn't lie are staunch Republican supporters.

[Redskins Diehard]

The only people who think Bush didn't lie are staunch Republican supporters.

Or the people that listened to ever US administration between 1990 and 2003.

[Prosperity]

I agree -- I thought Rumsfeld handled this very well.

he smoothed it out fairly well for being a lying piece of ****

[@DCGoldPants]

Or the people that listened to ever US administration between 1990 and 2003.

Then why didn't anybody else decide to march into Baghdad?

Were they smart and weren't convinced? or just lucky to be right?

[Midnight Judges]

midnight judges:

The only people who think Bush didn't lie are staunch Republican supporters.

Or the people that listened to ever US administration between 1990 and 2003.

Case in point: Redskins Diehard

[Midnight Judges]

The inteligence agencies thought Saddam might and I say MIGHT be working on chemical or bio weapons. The Bush administration translated this to mean Saddam had a well-developed Nuclear weapons program and they scared America into believing Saddam had the capacity to Nuke us with all their deliberate mushroom cloud talk.

Exaggerating intelligence is lying. Any statement with intent to mislead is lying. Politicians lie but I can understand why so many people have such a hard time digesting this fact. To think that 2400 Americans and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi's are dying for nothing more than a President's political gain is too horrible to fathom.

[vinva]

Let me pose a question to you all...who was the burden of proof on concerning WMDs, Iraq or the US?

[@DCGoldPants]

I think Saddam wanted the world, and most importantly, his neighbors to believe that he had something.

But, the burden of proof is on the folks who rolled in there.

[Cdowwe]

Then why didn't anybody else decide to march into Baghdad?

Were they smart and weren't convinced? or just lucky to be right?

Bush 41 should have

Clinton didnt have the balls

Bush 43 did

[Kilmer17]

IRaq was bound by the Gulf War surrender agreement to prove they DIDNT have them.

[@DCGoldPants]

Bush 41 should have

Clinton didnt have the balls

Bush 43 did

Maybe Bush 41 and Clinton agreed, but without a coherant exit strategy, they understood it wasn't the correct route.

Bush 41 had the greatest reason I believe, and KNEW that if we marched in there back in the early 90's. We'd still be there in 2006.

43 should have tried talking to his human father, rather than his other one.

[Midnight Judges]

IRaq was bound by the Gulf War surrender agreement to prove they DIDNT have them.

...and Saddam was largely cooperating with the most recent round of UN inspections until Bush kicked the inspectors out of Iraq. Did you know Bush had an obligation to share his intelligence on WMD locations with the inspectors? Instead, he broke that specific UN resolution among others that stated only the UN security councel had the authority to enforce the resolutions, insulted the integrity and competence of Dr. Blix and his team, and then invaded only to find out they were right and he was wrong. :doh:

[Chief skin]

Maybe Bush 41 and Clinton agreed, but without a coherant exit strategy, they understood it wasn't the correct route.

Bush 41 had the greatest reason I believe, and KNEW that if we marched in there back in the early 90's. We'd still be there in 2006.

43 should have tried talking to his human father, rather than his other one.

Scowcroft and other competent advisers told Bush 41 if we contiuned on into Baghdad we would most likely be involved in a quagmire thus, they decided against it. Obviously they were right and junior was wrong

[Zguy28]

...and Saddam was largely cooperating with the most recent round of UN inspections until Bush kicked the inspectors out of Iraq. Did you know Bush had an obligation to share his intelligence on WMD locations with the inspectors? Instead, he broke that specific UN resolution among others that stated on the UN had the authority to enforce the resolutions, insulted the integrity and competence of Dr. Blix and his team, and then invaded only to find out they were right and he was wrong. :doh:

I'd like substantiation on that one please, if you don't mind. And I'm not talking about the www.Democraticunderground.org.

[Zguy28]

The way I see it, Bush was convinced Saddam had WMD. I think Saddam even thought that. BUt he probably didn't, Saddam's own people were feeding him lies to not get locked in a room with a swarm of angry bees while their family had to watch. So they pulled off this lie to the extent that the people in power believed it.

[Midnight Judges]

I'd like substantiation on that one please, if you don't mind. And I'm not talking about the www.Democraticunderground.org.

Gladly. It's all in Dr. Blix's book, "Disarming Iraq"

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0375423028/sr=8-1/qid=1146845898/ref=sr_1_1/104-8890383-5478369?%5Fencoding=UTF8

It's a quick read, but since you're probably not going to run out and buy it I will quote relevent sections from it this weekend. I'm at work right now and have the book at home.