Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Lying fucking Bitch

I actually wrote the headline before I heard what spin Rice has to regurgitate. I'm watching CNN wating for her to come on.

Rice did tell us some big lies in the past. She said the famous PDB didn't contain new information or information about a domestic attack. She said this because it was classified at the time and no one could call her on it. Well I call Rice, you were under oath. You deserve to be in jail for your lies. "Osama Bin Laden determined to attack inside the US". Present tense, in the US. Lair!

Rice told us "We do not torture". Lair! I've seen the pictures. You boiled people alive!!

CNN went to commerical, CNN mentioned that Rice will say that Clinton didn't give her info on Bin Laden, so it is Clinton's fault. But I have read Richard Clark's book. I know that Clinton told Bush personally that he had to keep an eye on Bush. Personally to his face, told him the importance of this nut job. Also Clinton fired 62 missles into Afganistan. That is 62 more missles than Bush fired. I also know that Clinton had the idea of men jumping out of heilocopters with machine guns and shooting up the training camps. So I already know that Rice is going to lie. The only spin the Bush machine could make without a direct lie is to say Clinton was so determined to kill Bin Laden that it pissed off that Bin Laden decided to get revenge-- and yet even that spin falls apart - why the WTC?

Rumsfled is a complete failure, this administration has led us to more terrorism, more instability, and death. All due to Iraq a complete distract from Bin Laden. Translators have been pulled out of Afganistan to go to Iraq. The Bush machine has spent 7 times more resources on Iraq than on keeping us safe.

So what can Rice possibly say to spin this in to good news?
(Tired of waiting for CNN, and hating them anyway I do a search for her spin http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1110AP_Rice_Clinton.html)

"What we did in the eight months was at least as aggressive as what the Clinton administration did...". "The notion somehow for eight months the Bush administration sat there and didn't do that is just flatly false - and I think the 9/11 commission understood that"

Bullshit lie. Michael Moore once called Bush's plan Operation Ignore. That sounds like less than Clinton. Also you fired 0 missles, 62 less. Also you had 0 meetings with the CIA.

"We were not left a comprehensive strategy to fight al-Qaida,"
I don't believe you. You've lied to many times before. And Richard Clark a person your administration demoted also gives an alternate story.

"I think this is not a very fruitful discussion"
Then why did you bring it up? Clinton was the first to make this statement.

Lets consult the 9/11 commission report.
Page 197 (paperback edition- Chapter "Threat To Threat, Sec. 6.3 Attack on the Uss Cole"):
"As the Clinton administration drew to a close, Clarke and his staff developed a policy paper of their own, the first such comprehensive effort since the Delenda plan of 1998. The resulting paper, entitled "Strategy for Eliminating the Threat from the Jihadist Networks of al Qida: Status and Prospects" reviewed the threat and record to date, incorporated the CIA's new ideas from the Blue Sky memo, and posed several near-term policy options".

page 201
"Within the first few days after Bush's inauguration, Clarke approached Rice in an effort to get her- and the new President- to give terrorism very high priority and to act on the agenda that he had pushed during during the last few months of the previous administration. After Rice requested that all senior staff identify desirable major policy reviews or initiatives, Clarke submitted an elaborate memorandum on January 25, 2001. He attached his 1998 Dlenda Plan and the December 2000 strategy paper. "We urgently need... a Principals level review on the al Qida network", Clarke wrote."

LAIR!

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home