Skip

Lies and the Lying Liars.... you know the rest.
November 5, 2005 8:33 PM   Subscribe

Newsfilter: The NYTimes is reporting that the Democrats forced Congress into a closed session last week (previous MeFi discussion here) because of a recently declassified memo citing concerns by intelligence agencies over the source of information used to justify the Iraq war. Turns out the White House had been informed their source couldn't be trusted to tell the truth and were probably fabricating evidence. Knowing this, the Bush administration still presented the stories as absolute truth. The memo was apparently ignored. Of course, the administration has ignored important memos before.
This new evidence probably invalidates the conclusions (pdf) drawn by the Senate Intelligence Committee Report on the Intelligence Community's pre-war work on Iraq.
posted by zarq (70 comments total)

 
Oh, and Newsweek is reporting that Libi was tortured, thus invalidating the questionable value of that interrogation method.
posted by zarq at 8:43 PM on November 5, 2005


I'd be outraged if I didn't have a martini on hand.
posted by Rothko at 8:45 PM on November 5, 2005


yup
posted by es_de_bah at 8:46 PM on November 5, 2005


I too am drinking away my complete lack of shock.
posted by baphomet at 8:53 PM on November 5, 2005


I'm slightly drunk -- two pints to the wind -- but it still managed to piss me off.
posted by neek at 8:56 PM on November 5, 2005


No, wait, it gets better ...
posted by bhance at 8:56 PM on November 5, 2005


What is it with the liquor on Saturday night MeFi? I'm just finishing my second glass of Pinot Noir, but I'm still mustering some outrage on this one.

I keep flashing back to playing a show with my band on election night last year (weirdly almost 1 year ago to the day). At this show, a particularly politically active friend was ranting and raving drunk, convinced that even though GW and company won a second term, their house of cards would crumble before their second four years were up. Over the course of the past couple months, I've increasingly felt like he might be onto something. I certainly hope so, not for vindication, but for the good of the county.

Time for a third glass.
posted by almostcool at 9:01 PM on November 5, 2005


ever since i found out that i was an asshole for hating liars, thieves , and traitors, i've stayed drunk.
posted by nola at 9:04 PM on November 5, 2005


Oh, and Newsweek is reporting that Libi was tortured, thus invalidating the questionable value of that interrogation method.

Libby was tortured? I knew Fitzgerald was a hard-ass, but damn!
posted by delmoi at 9:08 PM on November 5, 2005


The dumbasses. The evil, lying dumbasses. Anyone who would betray America like it appears the Bush administration may have done should hang, after being properly tried and convicted in a court of law. (The Secret Service can't touch me.)

Oh, and the guy feeding them false information was named al-Libi? You've got to be kidding me.
posted by Faint of Butt at 9:09 PM on November 5, 2005


Yet I see several cars with "Bush/Cheney" bumperstickers every day. Some of the stickers look new. This is Ohio, but still ...
posted by words1 at 9:11 PM on November 5, 2005


/starts drinking

I want to be in the in-crowd!
posted by delmoi at 9:13 PM on November 5, 2005


I'm sober and I'm FUUUUURIOUS.


Is this story on any major TV news?

Oh, and when do we get to say, "told you so?"
posted by Jon-o at 9:21 PM on November 5, 2005


Im fober. suuriously.
posted by stbalbach at 9:37 PM on November 5, 2005


Hmm, I've having a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, 2 aspirins, and a glass of water... and yup... unbelievable.

Is it this simple: George senior told George junior he regretted not finishing Saddam off so "go git 'im"?
posted by scheptech at 9:38 PM on November 5, 2005


Shouldn't the duty Bush-apologist have got here by now?
posted by kaemaril at 9:43 PM on November 5, 2005


wishes he could drink as he's still at work, but promises himself absinthe when he gets home so he can be one of the cool kids too...
posted by Samizdata at 9:44 PM on November 5, 2005


If only this whole thing involved a blowjob so the majority of the American public could understand it well enough to be outraged, too.
posted by item at 9:49 PM on November 5, 2005


I need to go get a taco. and a full bottle of tequila.

These guys make me wish I was religious, just so I could be smugly confident that Bush would pay an eternal price for his actions.
posted by I Love Tacos at 9:51 PM on November 5, 2005


What's worse is that the guy who vouched for Al-Libi was named Al-Lias. I need a drink
posted by Popular Ethics at 9:55 PM on November 5, 2005


These guys make me wish I was religious, just so I could be smugly confident that Bush would pay an eternal price for his actions.

Haha, so true. The only thing that ever makes me wish that Christianity was true would be the thought of Bush, these neo-cons, and especial the fundy nut-balls that use god to promote un-godly things burning in hell forever

They sure as hell deserve it, IMO.
posted by delmoi at 10:04 PM on November 5, 2005


Meanwhile McCain vows to add anti-torture amendment to every single senate bill untill it passes.

With bush in the tank like this, there's a really chance that McCain could get the republican nod in '08. I personaly kinda like him, but his shilling for shrub-co in 2004 would be hard for me to forgive.
posted by delmoi at 10:12 PM on November 5, 2005


I personaly kinda like him, but his shilling for shrub-co in 2004 would be hard for me to forgive.



Same here.
posted by mr.curmudgeon at 10:23 PM on November 5, 2005


Funny how in zarq's Newsweek link, the FBI is portrayed as the good guys (compared to the CIA, I guess), while just one link away, we learn that they're up to quite a bit of data collecting...
posted by greatgefilte at 10:32 PM on November 5, 2005


Bourbon, here. I'm not angry, just sort of tired. Also, I don't really understand what's supposed to be surprising about this; hasn't it been obvious for a long time now that Bush was set on invading Iraq from the moment he set foot in the Oval Office, and that everything he ever said on the subject was merely pretext for the decision he'd already made? Of course he never believed any of the crap he tried to sell us, or he wouldn't have had to flip all the way through his phrase-book looking for a justification that would stick.
posted by Mars Saxman at 10:38 PM on November 5, 2005


Looks like McCain is starting his '08 electioneering. He bent over quicker than a $5 whore for the RNC when they needed him; I guess the price of integrity is another shot at the Oval Office. With the same Bush policies firmly in place, but with a kinder, less kid-raping and mother-killing face. I can see the slogan now: McCain '08: It's OK to like us again.

If history provides any cues, he'll give Bush a full presidential pardon. I just hope he has more personality than Ford.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:44 PM on November 5, 2005


"A top member of Al Qaeda in American custody was identified as a likely fabricator months before the Bush administration began to use his statements as the foundation for its claims that Iraq trained Al Qaeda members"

Great. If true, we really are suckers.
posted by homunculus at 10:57 PM on November 5, 2005


TV Funhouse McCain
posted by homunculus at 11:03 PM on November 5, 2005


It's easy to be furious and shake your righteous fist at the injustices of the world while safely ensconced in your home sipping an alcoholic beverage.
Good luck effecting any actual change though.
posted by nightchrome at 11:10 PM on November 5, 2005


Oh, that's not fair, nightchrome. I'm on my third glass of syrah, sure, but I do plenty of righteous fist-shaking during the day when I'm not drinking, too.
posted by Ruki at 11:32 PM on November 5, 2005


Don't be too hard on McCain. He was just being a good party member in '04, just as many Democrats supported Kerry, despite the fact they despised him.

But McCain seems to be one of the few politicians willing to do something substantial about torture and the corruption in the Republican party, and that more than makes up for a few hugs in front of the cameras.
posted by pandaharma at 11:38 PM on November 5, 2005


One more reason to like McCain...
posted by pandaharma at 11:42 PM on November 5, 2005


scotch, tequila, pinto noir, and a few more damn shots, and I'm wondering who the fuck is going to join me when I rush the gates of the whitehouse next spring.

physically disposing these god-damned assholes is the only way to go.

/IMHO
posted by wah at 11:50 PM on November 5, 2005


err, pino.

/not joking, email me.
//Howdy, SS.
posted by wah at 11:52 PM on November 5, 2005


It's easy to be furious and shake your righteous fist at the those shaking their righteous fists at injustices of the world while safely ensconced in your home sipping an alcoholic beverage.

Good luck effecting any actual change though.

Hypocrite.
posted by joe lisboa at 12:06 AM on November 6, 2005


Al-Libi? This is worse than that time that P. N. Guin bought that surplus nuclear submarine from the Navy.
posted by Josh Zhixel at 1:42 AM on November 6, 2005


If only this whole thing involved a blowjob so the majority of the American public could understand it well enough to be outraged, too.

I don't buy this theory that the American people cared more about Clinton's blowjobs than Bush's lies. While the Republicans in Congress and the right wing noise machine certainly cared more about Clinton's indiscretions, I don't think the public treated Clinton worse than Bush. Bush's approval ratings are much, much lower than Clinton's mid-impeachment. I think the approval ratings are a good indicator that the public do take this a whole lot more seriously than a blowjob from an eager chubby intern.
posted by [expletive deleted] at 2:02 AM on November 6, 2005


Unless Bush and Cheney are both impeached for their crimes against the people of the United States, approval ratings won't mean much for everyday Americans for — unbelievably — the next three years.
posted by Rothko at 2:25 AM on November 6, 2005


I think the approval ratings are a good indicator that the public do take this a whole lot more seriously than a blowjob from an eager chubby intern.

yes, but as the President himself said, there was a big accountability moment, a year ago, and the American people didn't fire Bush. just the opposite: they gave him the electoral college victory he wasn't able to get in 2000. heck, he didn't even need to have his five friends in robes hand him the Presidency, this time.

and in Nov 2004 everybody already knew about the failure of the Iraq invasion, the slaughter of American GI's, the busted budget, American torturers in American military prisons, Jose Padilla, etc. etc.

what the American people cared about, was that Kerry in Vietnam may not have bled enough for some of his opponent's taste (many of the same opponents had of course stayed behind as Kerry went to fight and risk his life)

Bush's approval ratings suck? tough shit, he's not up for reelection. Reagan's rating did suck, too, at the end of his presidency. that didn't change the fact that whenever I fly into DC, I have to land at Ronald Reagan airport (I won't discuss the Houston airport, but you get the point).

anybody here thinks that the average voter has actually followed the very complicated Plame outing thing? Libby Rove Novak Time NYTimes Miller Fitzgerald Niger memos Blair Libby Cheney etc etc etc zzzzzzzzzzzz.

the Plame affair, that's a big snore. cum stains on 20-year-old female interns dresses, instead, are an easier sell to the public. Cindy Sheehan? a grieving mother mad at Bush, and, bizarrely, at Israel, for the death of her kid. unless your heart is black as coal, you feel for the lady's loss, but come on, is she supposed to be the leader of the opposition? poor Democrats, then.
posted by matteo at 3:32 AM on November 6, 2005


Meanwhile McCain vows to add anti-torture amendment to every single senate bill untill it passes.

This makes sense, seeing as he himself was tortured as a POW.

Y'know, it's no wonder that Bush & co are tanking so badly as of late. Just think about their latest positions -

"Torture - it's not so bad!"
"Giving away a CIA operative's identity - it's no big deal!"

I mean, granted, they've been able to huckster the American people pretty good, but did they really think that people could get behind these positions?
posted by afroblanca at 4:09 AM on November 6, 2005



Down, down, down
.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:20 AM on November 6, 2005


Hey, you can still shoot people for treason in the U.S. :)
posted by jeffburdges at 4:22 AM on November 6, 2005


This makes sense, seeing as he himself was tortured as a POW.

no, according to Attorney General Gonzales own legal guidelines, McCain wasn't tortured in VietNam. and I quote, that for
"...an act to constitute torture, it must inflict pain that is difficult to endure. Physical pain amounting to torture must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death."
hence, according to AG Gonzales McCain wasn't tortured in VietNam. not tortured at all. maybe, you know, the Vietnamese just wanted to, and I'm quoting again American guidelines, "make sure" he had "a rough night", "soften" him up for interrogation. maybe they thought he was a terrorist, see. McCain just had a lot of rough nights, in VietNam, just that, according to the AG he voted for and the President he campaigned for.

me, I think he was horribly tortured. but I'm a liberal, and Vice President Cheney said we root for the enemy, so my opinion does not count. AG Gonzales' does: McCain wasn't tortured. if you say he was, you're a liberal.

McCain is a politician, guys. he's just funnier than the others when he talks to Jon Stewart.
posted by matteo at 4:25 AM on November 6, 2005


If the terrorists ever nuke Washington, it'll be a case of the chickens coming home to roost. Thanks, George & Co., for pissing away our birthright for expediency's sake. You've certainly made me proud to be an American.
posted by alumshubby at 7:08 AM on November 6, 2005


Hell, as I recall, Clinton's ratings actually went UP a bit during the impeachment.

Why? Because he lied about something EVERYONE would lie about. The feeling pretty much everywhere (except the far right) was that he was being beaten up by a bunch of buillies who couldn't hang him on anything but his sex life. So most folks felt sorry for him and their approvals went up accordingly.

Bush is going to get no such luck. If the MSM ever starts covering this for real, the population is going to go from being angry at him to the sort of rage that could inspire riots.

And that, I think, is the real reason America won't "wake up." If the press ever started REALLY covering this. I mean, front page every day / every-other-story-on-CNN sort of coverage, the people would get pissed off fast. But the media is STILL unwilling to turn that strongly against the powers that be, even as evidence mounts and mounts against them.

And given how much evidence there already is, I'm truly starting to believe this is completely deliberate on the part of the media.
posted by InnocentBystander at 7:23 AM on November 6, 2005


And given how much evidence there already is, I'm truly starting to believe this is completely deliberate on the part of the media.

I have similar suspicions. Arrianna notwithstanding, there's something wrong when the details of a scandal are being disseminated by an independent prosecutor rather than through the fourth estate. From Judy Miller, Tim Russert, Robert Novak on down, practically everyone on the press is running around like they have something to hide.
posted by psmealey at 7:32 AM on November 6, 2005


What is it with the liquor on Saturday night MeFi?

I don't think it is confined to Saturday nights.
posted by caddis at 8:24 AM on November 6, 2005


running around like they have something to hide.

they do, but it's not a huge a secret -- it's the "former Hill staffer" thing. it's the way-too-often corrupt relationship between the media and powerful people. what they have to hide is, they so often become stenographers in exchange for scoops/status/privileges/money. or all of the above.

if you choose to play that game, you can call AnonymousLibby "a former Hill staffer" and actually think you're being a journalist. see also the columnist who took money from the government to endorse legislation in their columns. see also the coverage of the Bush argument in favor of war in late 2002 - early 2003 weeks of war, the way embedded reporters worked in Iraq as opposed to the Vietnam era work, etc etc etc.
posted by matteo at 8:28 AM on November 6, 2005


Either the administration knowingly lied to the public or used bad intelligence which they knew was at best shaky to obtain consent for the war showing complete disregard for the American people and principles of democracy or they were just dupes for Al Qaeda who wanted the war in Iraq even more than the neocons.
posted by caddis at 8:29 AM on November 6, 2005


Hmm..wow. We're down to having to choose between malevolent fuckers or ignorant dupes. And thats for the administration. What does it say about the electorate?
posted by c13 at 8:44 AM on November 6, 2005


I don't buy this theory that the American people cared more about Clinton's blowjobs than Bush's lies.
Apparently, Editor and Publisher doesnt either.

Importance given to various scandals by Americans:

--Clinton-Lewinsky (1/98)
Great importance - 41%
Some importance - 21%
Little/no importance - 37%

--Plame Outing (11/05)
Great importance - 51%
Some importance - 33%
Little/no importance - 12%
posted by verb at 9:03 AM on November 6, 2005


My favorite spin is the 'crocodile tears' argument that the Dems are just trying to get out from under their pro-war vote.

This argument is perfect. Brazen in falsehood, and debunked only with 10 minutes' uninterrupted attention. It practically makes it untouchable, since no one on TV could dedicate that much time on it. It's a GOP talking point for a reason.

I'm thinking that the Part 2 of this investigation into Intelligence failures is going to fester througout 2006, crippling the GOP's ability to keep control of Congress.
posted by Busithoth at 9:04 AM on November 6, 2005


I'm still kind of in shock about Bush's attempt to exempt the CIA. Is it going to be impossible to get information out of POWs without torture or merely harder if they're aware we don't condone it? If just harder, than boo-hoo. If it takes another day to get relevant information, it's a small price to pay for the ability to say that America Finally Doesn't Torture People Anymore.
(capitalized because I imagine that when the threatened amendment finally passes, Bush will plaster it all over a backdrop at a press conference as though it were his plan all along to finally do something about this disgrace)
posted by hoborg at 9:13 AM on November 6, 2005


Just to note, this story appeared on page 14 of the NYT today. Apparently, it pales in comparison to the story of a "floating island" in Springfield, Mass.
posted by fungible at 10:25 AM on November 6, 2005


Springfield, Springfield, it's a hell of a town.
posted by papakwanz at 10:35 AM on November 6, 2005


Lot of issues here. For me, McCain is dead. In fact, I'll never vote Republican again as long as I live.

What bothers me about the torture thing is that I grew up believing we don't do that. We're better than that. That's what makes us the good guys. When a terrorist is captured, he should stop and think about how he is being treated, compare that with what he knows his people do, and maybe understand he's on the wrong side.

I don't get what happened to this country that this story isn't the leading story in the newspapers. It sure seemed like Whitewater and all that b.s. got a lot more play. The only conclusion I can draw is that a little more than half this country went crazy and is likely to stay that way.
posted by xammerboy at 10:37 AM on November 6, 2005


I too am disgusted by this whole thing while drinking my weekend allotment of two double margaritas and perhaps a shot or two. Then while poking around on the net I found 'drinking liberally' and am heading out next Tuesday eve to meet my fellow liberal drinkers. Let liberal drinkers unite and drunkenly overrun the incumbents! Torches! Pitchforks! Martinis and beers! On margaritas, pinots and highballs! (falls off barstool. . .
posted by mk1gti at 11:51 AM on November 6, 2005


Off-topic, but...
xammerboy- I certainly understand and sympathize with your statement that you'll never again vote Republican. Personally, I don't see myself doing it anytime in the near future, but you never know. I think one of the real problems with political discourse in the US today is the fierce loyalty to political parties rather than political ideals. I know more than a couple people who felt they'd never vote Democrat, but have changed their minds. On the other hand, it really breaks my heart to see people who won't jump off the Republican ship despite disagreeing with many of the actions of Bush and others, merely because they have "always been Republicans." Instead of tattooing elephants and donkeys on our foreheads, let's look at the politicians and their platforms and decide based on rationality, not team affiliation.

sorry for the derail...
posted by papakwanz at 1:55 PM on November 6, 2005


Sick fuckers. I hate seeing the proof come out confirming my paranoia. They cannot hang soon enough. I mean, up until recently I could sort of hang onto the idea that they were merely incompetent.

Ahh, the nostalgia... Good times, good times.
posted by Suck Poppet at 2:04 PM on November 6, 2005


Seems to me that if one wants to vote for the old-style Republican party (not this new, hijacked one), one shout vote for the Democrats. They pretty much define the proper Right at this time (fiscally conservative, don't like the new privacy-invading laws).

If one wants to vote for old-style Democrats, I think you're pretty much screwed. No one seems to have entered the gap that has been left by the Democrat's shift to the right.
posted by five fresh fish at 2:47 PM on November 6, 2005


Don't be too hard on McCain.

i'm just eaten up by how people are so eager to give mccain a pass. mccain is the king of cheap publicity stunt politicians. his so-called 'campaign finance reforms' have done more to fuck up public accountability than you can ever imagine. his voting record out and out sucks. he's the master of populist shell games.

and, by god, he bombed the fuck out of civilians. mccain, the terrorist. we feel so sorry for him being done in by his party of thugs and propagandists and that he actually got caught by the vietnamese. you think we're in budget trouble now? you haven't seen anything compared to what john mccain would do. he's definitely down with the slash and burn wing of the republican party.
posted by 3.2.3 at 2:55 PM on November 6, 2005


Look at this bs. All these pussy-ass democrats running around saying 'we were tricked'. You wern't tricked. The evidence for the war was being undermined every day by the inspectors on the ground. That much was obvious. You chose to go along with the neocon BS.

Bleh. All a bunch of worms.

I hope we get a dem nomine in 08 who voted against the war!
posted by delmoi at 3:46 PM on November 6, 2005


Considering what both sides will have to choose from for candidates in the next 'campaign' there may as well be an organized group of people who will go around their cities and states smearing excrement on *both* parties political posters, as well as throwing it at the candidates themselves. . .
Perhaps then they will finally get a clue that 'business as usual' is just a one way ticket to a shower of shit . . .
posted by mk1gti at 5:41 PM on November 6, 2005


I hope we get a dem nomine in 08 who voted against the war!

Careful what you wish for...
posted by soyjoy at 6:27 PM on November 6, 2005


There is so much in the way of lies and fabrication in this administration that I am beginning to wonder whether this "Iraq" actually exists... or for that matter, "President George W. Bush."
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 11:23 PM on November 6, 2005


*slaps nightchrome with glove and then shoots his hat off*
posted by warbaby at 8:02 AM on November 7, 2005


Unless Bush and Cheney are both impeached for their crimes against the people of the United States, approval ratings won't mean much for everyday Americans for — unbelievably — the next three years.

I read this weekend that the time George Bush has left in office is something like 5 months longer than all of John F. Kennedy's time in office.

Not especially relevent, but one of those "ugh" moments.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 9:07 AM on November 7, 2005


This is sooo last week. The issue is dead. Wake up, it's all about the trip to Panama and CAFTA. (NAFTA sucked, 'cause, y'know it was the Dems who wanted it, but now!...)

Or maybe I've been watching too much Fox news.
posted by Smedleyman at 9:39 AM on November 7, 2005


Shouldn't the duty Bush-apologist have got here by now?

I think, for the first time that I can recall on MeFi, the proof is so solid and indefensible that they're giving this thread a pass.

not that the proof is so solid for the first time, but for the first time they're not trying to spin it anyway
posted by davejay at 4:32 PM on November 7, 2005


er, I wrote that entirely wrong, and I'm not even drunk.

the proof is so solid and indefensible the proof is so solid and irrefutable
posted by davejay at 4:33 PM on November 7, 2005


« Older The Swing Years And Beyond   |   The origin of life?! Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post