To be absolutely fair, I believe one has to read exactly what was said, at least in several instances. It's called Poli-Speak. Easy enough to discern if tuned in well. A bit like going to the town council meeting and hearing promises that a matter will be "addressed."
Well, yeah (in my best "valley speak")! Like, ya' know,.... anyone can address an envelope, but... like... will they ever put a stamp on it, much less put it in the mailbox? Words like "insignificant" rank right up there as well - all a matter of who's opinion, who's sources, who's preferred outcome, who's loss, who's gain. One corporation's part per billion is another commoner's death nail. So, when Mr. Bush says "could," one has to examine if there is a "possibility," not necessarily whether there is a "probability" or not. When Mr. Bush speaks words like "if" or Rumsfeld says "I'm confident" or "We have sources...," etc, etc, almost ad infinitum, one has to read in all the latitude that they write in for themselves. I too can be as "confident" as I want in my "sources" that tell me that "if" I sprinkle pixie dust on my parsnips that they will all turn into pumpkins. Question is are those sources voices in my head, books of fables from the children's section of the library, exiled Iraqis who have nothing to lose and everything to gain from lieing, or a tidy little disinformation office in the bowels of the White House propaganda machine whipping up lies and pandering them as truth. Same thing happens in commerce, where corporations hire labs and experts whom they are reasonably confident will tell them whatever they want to hear, so they can in turn make declaration and embellishment to the rest of the world about this "documented" "data" without having lied or deceived, at least upon superficial examination. And do you wanna' know the truth? It's always "possible" that "if" I had a softball sized chunk of refined plutonium, technically I too "could" have a nuclear bomb by the end of the year. Likely? Not. But I "could." Of course if UN weapons inspectors were permitted to continue their regular visits to my farm, it's rather doubtful that I "would" develop them even if I had the desire or capability. And you (or perhaps only I) really have to like the thought of a bunch of "nuclear mujahideen" sitting around the table sipping tea and eating crumpettes discussing "what if." Is one to suppose that nuclear physicists are expected to discuss the latest Rolling Stone release? Only in America is thinking a crime. Actually, probably not just in America, but only America adjudicates such a crime by military invasion. (Doubtful that Bush's contingency crew spends all its time discussing gardening tips during executive level meetings, or that engineers at Los Alamos consume endless hours discussing the latest Harry Potter release, much less the tacticians at West Point laying down marathon sessions of Stratego. But in the meantime? I'll continue to be "confident" that the moon is made of swiss cheese (trusting upon my "sources," of course) and hope that everyone else will continue to question all those "iffy" words that give the worms what they apparently believe is enough room to wriggle, while at the same time demanding examination of all those declarations of absolutes that have proven to patent fabrications and lies. Todd Swearingen ----- Original Message ----- From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <biofuel@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2003 8:54 PM Subject: Re: [biofuel] The Road To Coverup - In Bush We Trust? An Unnecessary War > I hadn't thought of it that way Todd. > > > When I read > > > The Road To Coverup Is The Road To Ruin > > Robert C. Byrd is a Democratic Senator from West Virginia. > > Editor's Note: The following remarks were delivered on the U.S. Senate floor on June 24, 2003. > > http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/8216 > > I was also thinking about, impart, what Senator Byrd had said elsewhere -- > > "President Bush also elaborated on claims of Iraq's nuclear program when he said: "The evidence indicates that > Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi > nuclear scientists, a group he calls his 'nuclear mujahideen' -- his nuclear holy warriors.... If the Iraqi > regime is able to produce, buy or steal an amount of highly enriched uranium a little larger than a single > softball, it could have a nuclear weapon in less than a year." [Cincinnati Museum Center, Oct. 7, 2002, pg. 3-4] > > This is the kind of pumped up intelligence and outrageous rhetoric that were given to the American people to > justify war with Iraq. This is the same kind of hyped evidence that was given to Congress to sway its vote > for war on Oct. 11, 2002." > > And -- > > "The President told the American people that we were compelled to go to war to secure our country from > a grave threat. Are we any safer today than we were on March 18, 2003? Our nation has been committed > to rebuilding a country ravaged by war and tyranny, and the cost of that task is being paid in blood and > treasure every day." > > > Being within mixed company this (impart) reminded me of what the other side said about -- > > > An Unnecessary War > > Pat Buchanan [a two time candidate for the Republican U.S. presidential nomination] > > June 4 2003 > > http://www.theamericancause.org/patanunnecessarywar.htm > > "Iraq, in retrospect, was no threat whatsoever to the United States. We fought an unnecessary war, > and now we must rebuild a nation at a rising cost in blood and treasure. > > Before the war, many who opposed it argued that no matter the evil character of Saddam, > Iraq had not attacked us, did not threaten us, did not want war with us, could not defeat us. > Why then were we about to invade Iraq?" > > Mr. Buchanan went on to say -- > > "Came the administration answer: Saddam has ties to al-Qaida. He has an arsenal of weapons of > mass destruction. He is a year or so away from being able to build a nuclear bomb, and he will use > these weapons on us or our allies, or give them to terrorists who will use them in the United States. > And these weapons will kill not just the 3,000 who perished on Sept. 11, but tens and even hundreds > of thousands of innocent Americans. > > Do you want to risk that? Do you want to do nothing and risk a "mushroom cloud" in an American city? > Or do you want to remove this mortal threat, now? > > So went the clinching argument for war." [more] > > > This drew me back to think about what was posted in the beginning -- > > "And yet, seven weeks after declaring victory in the war against Iraq, > we have seen nary a shred of evidence to support his claims of > grave dangers, chemical weapons, links to Al Qaeda or nuclear weapons." > [more - from] > > > The Road To Coverup Is The Road To Ruin > > Robert C. Byrd is a Democratic Senator from West Virginia. > > Editor's Note: The following remarks were delivered on the U.S. Senate floor on June 24, 2003. > > http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/8216 > > > I'd like to know why the U.S. coalition forces preemptive War On Iraq was necessary > since it doesn't seem that WMD such as nuclear where the reason. > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > Biofuel at Journey to Forever: > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > > Biofuels list archives: > http://archive.nnytech.net/ > > Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. > To unsubscribe, send an email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
