BLOG VIEW | HEADLINE VIEW

ALL

GEEK

One Democratic Asshole, A Bunch of Republican Assholes

WEDNESDAY DECEMBER 5 2007 9:00 AM

Submitted by FearTheReaper. Edited By erin_broadley.

TAGS: Hillary Clinton, Bush, Steven Hadley, Iran, NIE

Two days ago we learned that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003. This fact came to light because of a leaked National Intelligence Estimate report, which was created by 16 different American spy agencies.

"We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program," reads a declassified version of the National Intelligence Estimate key findings.

The really exciting part of this news is that Bush kinda, sorta knew in August. The reason I say kinda, sorta, is because the administration is attempting to spin this in a way that can only be described as completely retarded. When questioned about when Bush was told of the information, National Security Advisor (lied about Iraq) Steven Hadley broke it down.

Hadley said the President was told in August-Sept to keep using the same talking points as he was using before when speaking on Iran. "Bush was not told to stop talking about Iran's nuclear weapons program. He was not told to change what he says about it. What he was told was, we have new information; it is interesting; it is going to take us some time to understand it," Hadley explained.

Uh, yeah. So, you have 16 American spy agencies who all come to the conclusion that Iran has halted its nuclear weapons program and you kids decide not to tell the guy who is apparently making a total and complete fucking asshole out of himself in front of the country and the world. I�m just trying to break this down in a way that I can understand it. You allowed the President and Vice President and Secretary of State to lie to the American public repeatedly for months � because you wanted to keep reading something that was already complete. Okay.

Now based on that information, Steven, I am going to have to call you a total fucking liar and asshole. Sorry. Yesterday Bush was asked directly about the report and when he knew what it contained.

Heyoooo! That�s hilarious. Now we have two huge fucking liars. Although, he could also be totally detached, insulated and incompetent. It is really, really hard to choose. Wait! He�s all four!

This is such an astounding level of either willful ignorance or lying that it should be an impeachable offense. Joe Biden pretty much summed it up.

Are you telling me a president who is briefed every single morning, who is fixated on Iran, is not told back in August that the tentative conclusion of 16 intelligence agencies in the United States government said they had abandoned their effort for a nuclear weapon in �03?

That�s not believable. I refuse to believe that. If that�s true, he has the most incompetent staff in � modern American history and he�s one of the most incompetent presidents in modern American history.

Can't really argue with that. But Bush is not alone in his stupidity.

Last night's Democratic debate on NPR also covered the Iran situation. If you remember, Hillary Clinton decided to take the position of hawk on Iran when she voted to declare Iran�s Revolutionary Guard a foreign terrorist organization. Hell, she was even calling Bush a pussy on Iran back in 2006. In light of the new NIE, Clinton was obviously going to be called out on her idiotic vote during last night�s debate.

INSKEEP: Senator Clinton, as some of your opponents have noted, in September you voted on a resolution involving the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, which, among other things, called them proliferators of mass destruction. In view of this latest intelligence estimate, which says Iran�s nuclear program was stopped in 2003, do you believe that�s still true?

SEN. CLINTON: Well, there were other purposes for that resolution. It does label the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization, and there is evidence that they do support Hamas and Hezbollah, as Senator Obama just said, and in addition have, until recently, been supplying weapons and technical advisers to various factions within Iraq�.

Clinton kept yammering on until moderator dude stepped in.

INSKEEP: Forgive me, are the Revolutionary Guards proliferators of mass destruction?

SEN. CLINTON: Well, many of us believe that.

"Many of you" just doesn't include 16 government intelligence agencies. Hey, Hillary, there�s a fella named George Bush I�d like to introduce you to. You kids have a lot in common when it comes to being assholes.

30 Comments

PAGE:

1 | 2

AmbientLight

Huntington Beach, CA

March 2005

DEC 05, 2007 09:35 AM

Well, one upside might be... that this could gut any attempt to initiate a war with Iran.

One can hope anyway...

WADO

Brooklyn, NY

March 2006

DEC 05, 2007 09:54 AM

What more can we do? Reporters have grown a pair finally and started asking pointed questions backed up by research, dates, names, figures etc., and still we have to watch them squirm, dance, dodge, and finally walk out of the room. But they never say they are wrong.

That's all I want.

Nothing else matters to me anymore. Just someone stepping up to say they were wrong. I do it all the time. I am wrong fucking constantly, and I'm not dumb. I'm pretty insightful I think, able to analyze and issue and form opinions, which I am always willing to amend or change in the light of new information.

When did politicians start to believe they have to be infallible? When did they start thinking that if they admit they are wrong, then all of existence will wink out? When did they start to believe we don't think they are liars, retards, and utter fucking incompetents?

I'm going to go listen to the new Ghostface and hopefully never read the news again.

ericwine

Charlotte Hall, MD

January 2007

DEC 05, 2007 09:55 AM

AmbientLight said:
Well, one upside might be... that this could gut any attempt to initiate a war with Iran.

One can hope anyway...

Even before this, he was going to have trouble selling the idea to Congress and the people. After this, Iran would have to attack someone for him to get much support for the idea.

Is anyone else bothered by the fact that it took four years to figure this out?

_kungfoo_

Los Angeles, CA

April 2005

DEC 05, 2007 09:56 AM

AmbientLight said:
Well, one upside might be... that this could gut any attempt to initiate a war with Iran.

One can hope anyway...

That's true, and while it's a very positive upside, it's about the only upside. The major downside, is that our creditability on a international level is somewhere between the boy that cried wolf and a being looked upon as outright liars.

Truth is, Iranian nuclear research and development is a very serious issue, but beating the war drums and hyping this to the level of a episode of "24" detracts from reaching a potent and fair resolution for Iran and the rest of the world.

strndniowa

Grimes, IA

May 2007

DEC 05, 2007 09:58 AM

It is amazing just how far we have gone into the middle east on bad information- or doctored information- or lack of information...the fact that Bush is mis-informed..at best...is just old news...the fact that Clinton is looking like both a front runner for the election...and just as informed as our current administration...just disturbing...this is where this election is looking like it belongs...

meggle

Berkeley, CA

November 2002

DEC 05, 2007 09:59 AM

Look, these people were liars and thieves from Florida to 9/11, from Osama to WMD's, from Mission Accomplished to bin Ladan who? Tack on from Katrina to Ohio, Plamegate to torture and and suspension of habeas corpus to the surge...on and on and on. All lies and illegality. And to boot, on this one, they sat on the NIE report for a year to try to change the conclusion to match the neocon ideology...but then look at Clinton. She has no excuse, other than being a tool herself. I've lost track of the impeachable offenses of these brownshirted rogues, and I have been paying attention. If someone would just give oral to one of these scum, maybe then we could impeach...but I bet there are no takers.

"Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, IT IS THE LEADERS of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING ATTACKED, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. IT WORKS THE SAME IN ANY COUNTRY."

--Goering at the Nuremberg Trials, 1946

Sorry, couldn't resist that one.

StopSnitchin

Hudson, NH

February 2004

DEC 05, 2007 10:01 AM

As an Iranian-American, THANK GOD ... something finally uprooted itself to show that Iran is not a terrororrorrorist country and the focus should be shifted to human rights suffering instead of nukes But, seeing our basic rights and liberties are FUCKED in this country, I highly doubt anything will alter Bush-Mc Nasty's push for an all-Christian world!

Zarth

Seattle, WA

December 2004

DEC 05, 2007 10:12 AM

ericwine said:
Is anyone else bothered by the fact that it took four years to figure this out?

Bothered, but not surprised. That's what happens when you politicize intelligence collection. You destroy competence.

ericwine

Charlotte Hall, MD

January 2007

DEC 05, 2007 10:20 AM

Zarth said:

ericwine said:
Is anyone else bothered by the fact that it took four years to figure this out?

Bothered, but not surprised. That's what happens when you politicize intelligence collection. You destroy competence.

Absolutely. And it won't be fixed by either frontrunner for '08, either. Clinton and Giuliani mean more of the same. *sigh*

_kungfoo_

Los Angeles, CA

April 2005

DEC 05, 2007 10:42 AM

ericwine said:

Zarth said:

ericwine said:
Is anyone else bothered by the fact that it took four years to figure this out?

Bothered, but not surprised. That's what happens when you politicize intelligence collection. You destroy competence.

Absolutely. And it won't be fixed by either frontrunner for '08, either. Clinton and Giuliani mean more of the same. *sigh*

Out of all of the Democratic presidential candidates, there's no one less than Clinton as the nominee, but to be fair, I highly doubt her administration would be as partisan as some past Bush appointees have been.

Coyotemike

Kearney, NE

May 2006

DEC 05, 2007 10:50 AM

Since when do intelligence reports have anything to do with how this administration is run?

"Mr. Bush, we have come to the conclusion that there are NO WMDs in Iraq."
"Really? How nice. Now, back to our plans to invade Iraq to look for WMDs."

And now, the warmongering faction (Rush Limbaugh listeners) are saying that the report is in error, and that we should still invade Iran, "just in case."

Here's a solution: Anybody who believes there are WMDs over in Iran, go look for them yourselves. If you're so sure they are over there, I'm sure you can find them with no problems. And just as soon as you find them, let the rest of us know. We'll be waiting for your call.

No, we don't need to believe the most extensive intelligence service in history: we have Rush Limbaugh's gut feeling to go on. Git the guns, we got us some Ay-rabs to hunt!

Fucking Warmongering Assholes!!!

I'm so tired of politicians.

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

DEC 05, 2007 11:49 AM

Zarth said:

ericwine said:
Is anyone else bothered by the fact that it took four years to figure this out?

Bothered, but not surprised. That's what happens when you politicize intelligence collection. You destroy competence.

But the really amusing and disturbing thing about this entire episode is that now THEY are claiming the people who wrote the NIE politicized the report. I just heard John Bolton call it a "coup" on the radio.