Karen Hughes does it again

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
Karen Hughes. KKKarl Rove in drag.

Another incompetent lackey brought to you by George W. Bush. No experience and apparently no homework either. Just a salesperson in way over her head.

The mere fact that Karen Hughes actually believes her propaganda will play outside the USA is a perfect example of just how incompetent she is.

It's 0 and 2 for Hughes. I hope they get her safely back to Texas before she does any more damage.

What a dufuss.

U.S. diplmomat defends Iraq war

CHRIS BRUMMITT

Associated Press

JAKARTA, Indonesia - Karen Hughes, who has faced a rocky road since being named Washington's public relations chief, answered tough questions Friday about the invasion of Iraq, and wrongly stated that Saddam Hussein gassed to death "hundreds of thousands" of his people.

Although the U.S. undersecretary for public diplomacy twice repeated the claim after being challenged by journalists, Gordon Johndroe, a State Department official traveling with Hughes, later called The Associated Press to say she misspoke.

Hughes, a longtime confidante of President Bush, was in the world's most populous Muslim nation to improve America's battered image after the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

At a public debate with university students in Jakarta, she was repeatedly criticized over Washington's original stated rationale for the war in Iraq - Saddam's alleged weapons of mass destruction. No such arms were discovered.

"The consensus of the world intelligence community was that Saddam was a very dangerous threat," Hughes said.

"After all, he had used weapons of mass destruction against his own people," she told about 100 students in a small auditorium. "He had murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people using poison gas."

At least 300,000 Iraqis were reportedly killed during Saddam's decades-long rule, but only about 5,000 are believed to have been gassed - in a 1988 attack in the Kurdish north.

Hughes' three-day trip Indonesia came as the United States tried to limit damage from TV footage that purportedly shows U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan burning the corpses of two Taliban fighters.

The students did not ask her about the footage, but she later told reporters it was "abhorrent."

"The important thing that the world needs to know is that it is a violation of our policy," she said.

There has been little public reaction in Indonesia to the footage, but clerics in other Islamic nations expressed outrage and warned of a possible violent anti-American backlash.

Indonesia is a moderate Islamic country with significant Christian, Hindu and Buddhist minorities. It has a long tradition of secularism, but in recent years has seen a series of terror attacks by militants linked to al-Qaida, including blasts this month on Bali that killed 20 people.

Most of the 16 students selected to debate on stage with Hughes were women, and all wore brightly colored headscarves - some with tight jeans. They peppered her with questions on U.S. foreign policy, in particular the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and Washington's support for Israel.

One student said the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States should be taken as a warning to America for interfering in the affairs of other countries. Another compared Bush to Hitler.

"Your policies are creating hostilities among Muslims," student Lailatul Qadar told Hughes. "It's Bush in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and maybe it's going to be in Indonesia, I don't know. Who's the terrorist? Bush or us Muslims?"

Hughes, who has also faced tough questions in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey since taking up her post two months ago, said she was not surprised by the hostility toward the United States.

"I understand that there are a lot of young people around the world, and a lot of people in our own country, who don't agree with what we did in Iraq," she told reporters. "We have to engage in the debate. That is what America is all about."

Hughes spoke just days after Saddam went on trial in a U.S.-backed court in Baghdad for alleged atrocities during his rule.

The first case against the former Iraqi dictator is narrowly focused on the massacre of 148 Shiite Muslims in Dujail, a town north of Baghdad, following a failed 1982 attempt on his life.

Iraqi authorities have indicated Saddam may later face trial on charges stemming from a 1988 poison gas attack on the Kurdish border town of Halabja, in which about 5,000 guerrillas and civilians died.

When asked to elaborate on claims that Saddam had poisoned hundreds of thousands of Iraqis to death, Hughes told reporters: "I know it was upward of 200,000."

"I think it was almost 300,000. (That) is my recollection," she said. "They were put in mass graves."

Hughes wraps up her visit Saturday with a trip to the tsunami-wracked province of Aceh, where the United States has financed a $245 million two-lane road along with other projects. She will then go to Malaysia.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
What is your problem with her statements?

That she can't recall an exact figure on the dead?

Why don't you read Here and see what Saddam and his chemical attacks really have done over the years to the Iraqis.
 

RightIsWrong

Diamond Member
Apr 29, 2005
5,649
0
0
Originally posted by: Pabster
What is your problem with her statements?

That she can't recall an exact figure on the dead?

Why don't you read Here and see what Saddam and his chemical attacks really have done over the years to the Iraqis.

Surely you aren't saying that stating 300,000 when the number is 12,000 is simply a bad memory?

 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Perhaps she was confusing the number who were hit with chemical weapons, versus the number Saddam ordered executed (after being tortured or thrown in jail for a while first). You know, the ones who had their heads blowed off in the middle of the night after someone heard them saying a bad word or two about Saddam?

It's pretty asinine to argue about how many guys Saddam actually killed and by what method. The fact is, he killed, and whether it was 12,000 or 100,000 makes no difference.

Did you even take a look at the link I provided?
 
Jun 27, 2005
19,216
1
61
He may not have gassed them all... but they are all dead by his hands just the same.

It's amazing to me that someone would be upset that she said all 300,000 were gassed. It's not a secret that he murdered hundreds of thousands of people. So what if he didn't gas them all? Does that make him any less responsible for the other 290,000 dead people because he had them bombed or shot instead of gassed?

Libs go after stuff like this and try to act like the misstatement is more important than the fact that 300,000 people are dead. *ding* One more beloved patriot in the credibility armor.
 

maddogchen

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2004
8,903
2
76
people in the advertising industry exaggerate.

She has a tough sell, I don't think any of us want to be doing her job.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
He may not have gassed them all... but they are all dead by his hands just the same.

It's amazing to me that someone would be upset that she said all 300,000 were gassed. It's not a secret that he murdered hundreds of thousands of people. So what if he didn't gas them all? Does that make him any less responsible for the other 290,000 dead people because he had them bombed or shot instead of gassed?

Libs go after stuff like this and try to act like the misstatement is more important than the fact that 300,000 people are dead. *ding* One more beloved patriot in the credibility armor.

:thumbsup:

Perhaps they don't recognize those killed "by other means". Or maybe they'd just like to live under a rock and believe Saddam only killed 5000 people under his reign.

Or perhaps they just like to rag on Hughes. I suspect it's a bit of both.
 

3chordcharlie

Diamond Member
Mar 30, 2004
9,859
1
81
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
He may not have gassed them all... but they are all dead by his hands just the same.

It's amazing to me that someone would be upset that she said all 300,000 were gassed. It's not a secret that he murdered hundreds of thousands of people. So what if he didn't gas them all? Does that make him any less responsible for the other 290,000 dead people because he had them bombed or shot instead of gassed?

Libs go after stuff like this and try to act like the misstatement is more important than the fact that 300,000 people are dead. *ding* One more beloved patriot in the credibility armor.

:thumbsup:

Perhaps they don't recognize those killed "by other means". Or maybe they'd just like to live under a rock and believe Saddam only killed 5000 people under his reign.

Or perhaps they just like to rag on Hughes. I suspect it's a bit of both.

Or maybe they would like to see someone charged with disseminating information to the world manage to do it with some manner of accuracy?

Just a thought.
 
Jun 27, 2005
19,216
1
61
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
He may not have gassed them all... but they are all dead by his hands just the same.

It's amazing to me that someone would be upset that she said all 300,000 were gassed. It's not a secret that he murdered hundreds of thousands of people. So what if he didn't gas them all? Does that make him any less responsible for the other 290,000 dead people because he had them bombed or shot instead of gassed?

Libs go after stuff like this and try to act like the misstatement is more important than the fact that 300,000 people are dead. *ding* One more beloved patriot in the credibility armor.

:thumbsup:

Perhaps they don't recognize those killed "by other means". Or maybe they'd just like to live under a rock and believe Saddam only killed 5000 people under his reign.

Or perhaps they just like to rag on Hughes. I suspect it's a bit of both.

Or maybe they would like to see someone charged with disseminating information to the world manage to do it with some manner of accuracy?

Just a thought.

Seriously... what difference does it make if they were gassed or shot or beheaded or hung or beat to death or tortured or dismembered or thrown off a building or run over or stabbed or......... ???
 

raildogg

Lifer
Aug 24, 2004
12,892
572
126
You radical leftists have a huge double standard.

You constantly claim that we killed 100,000 or more Iraqis when the figure is below 20,000.

Now when anyone calims that the dictator Saddam killed 100,000 you all get up in anger.

Just come out and admit you guys love dictators, especially the ones that hate America.
 

3chordcharlie

Diamond Member
Mar 30, 2004
9,859
1
81
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
He may not have gassed them all... but they are all dead by his hands just the same.

It's amazing to me that someone would be upset that she said all 300,000 were gassed. It's not a secret that he murdered hundreds of thousands of people. So what if he didn't gas them all? Does that make him any less responsible for the other 290,000 dead people because he had them bombed or shot instead of gassed?

Libs go after stuff like this and try to act like the misstatement is more important than the fact that 300,000 people are dead. *ding* One more beloved patriot in the credibility armor.

:thumbsup:

Perhaps they don't recognize those killed "by other means". Or maybe they'd just like to live under a rock and believe Saddam only killed 5000 people under his reign.

Or perhaps they just like to rag on Hughes. I suspect it's a bit of both.

Or maybe they would like to see someone charged with disseminating information to the world manage to do it with some manner of accuracy?

Just a thought.

Seriously... what difference does it make if they were gassed or shot or beheaded or hung or beat to death or tortured or dismembered or thrown off a building or run over or stabbed or......... ???
She is supposed to be informed!

If you were to claim that Saddam gassed hundreds of thousands of people, I would probably say something to correct you, then evaluate the rest of your argument based on the corrected statements.

But this isn't an anonymous poster on an internet forum, this is someone who is suppsoed to know what's what, making herself look rather ignorant. The point is that while it doesn't matter how the people were killed, it does matter that someone in an offcicial position knows how they were killed.

I don't think it should be a career-ending error or anything like that, but I don't think it's something to be brushed aside, either; it's a significant error.
 

Darkhawk28

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 2000
6,759
0
0
BTW, why isn't Saddam on trial for all those gassings?

Oh that's right, we gave him the stuff to do it. Wouldn't want that to become open knowledge now would we?
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
BTW, why isn't Saddam on trial for all those gassings?

Oh that's right, we gave him the stuff to do it. Wouldn't want that to become open knowledge now would we?

More conspiracy theories. Evidence? Links? Proof?

I'll be waiting. . . . .
 

tommywishbone

Platinum Member
May 11, 2005
2,149
0
0
With regard to the facts in question; Karen Hughes is either a liar or just stupid. The truth is bad enough, I'm not sure why she would try to make it worse.
 

CanOWorms

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
12,404
2
0
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
BTW, why isn't Saddam on trial for all those gassings?

Oh that's right, we gave him the stuff to do it. Wouldn't want that to become open knowledge now would we?

More conspiracy theories. Evidence? Links? Proof?

I'll be waiting. . . . .

It's already open knowledge. Iraq received a lot of dual-use chemicals from the US. In fact, many countries provided Iraq with supplies.

Germany was the main provider of chemical weapons items to Iraq. Of the companies that were involved, 2/3 were German. Not surprising when Germany has historically been a leader in chemical warfare and genocides.
 

Strk

Lifer
Nov 23, 2003
10,197
4
76
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
BTW, why isn't Saddam on trial for all those gassings?

Oh that's right, we gave him the stuff to do it. Wouldn't want that to become open knowledge now would we?

I've never quite understood why they do that. Saddam isn't the first person to be charged with one violation at a time. (If you follow Pinochet's case(s), you'll notice they do something similar. It's screwy, to say the least)
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
46,875
10,686
147
C'mon folks, Pabster is right, the numbers don't matter if the charge is correct.

The 300,000 times Bush has been arrested for drunken driving are what concerns me.
 

DaveSimmons

Elite Member
Aug 12, 2001
40,730
670
126
The point is that she inflated WMD deaths by over 50 times (5,000 to 300,000) to help justify the invasion of Iraq.

"Although the U.S. undersecretary for public diplomacy twice repeated the claim after being challenged by journalists, Gordon Johndroe, a State Department official traveling with Hughes, later called The Associated Press to say she misspoke. "

Either she is ignorant, or is intentionally misleading people like Bush and co. do when they carefully interweave "Saddam Hussein" and "9/11" into statements to convice the publc that they are connected.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
Originally posted by: raildogg
You radical leftists have a huge double standard.

You constantly claim that we killed 100,000 or more Iraqis when the figure is below 20,000.

Now when anyone calims that the dictator Saddam killed 100,000 you all get up in anger.

Just come out and admit you guys love dictators, especially the ones that hate America.

:roll:

:cookie:
 

Polish3d

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2005
5,500
0
0
The problem with so many leftists that I see is that all they seem to do is viciously tear people down like a bunch of immature pissants on a playground and almost NEVER offer solutions.


That said I can't see Karen Hughes as being a good choice for this ... probably worse than no choice at all IMO, although I could be mistaken.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: Frackal
The problem with so many leftists that I see is that all they seem to do is viciously tear people down like a bunch of immature pissants on a playground and almost NEVER offer solutions.

:thumbsup:

They come across like little pimple-faced kids looking over their shoulder to see if mom or dad is coming.




 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
It's already open knowledge. Iraq received a lot of dual-use chemicals from the US. In fact, many countries provided Iraq with supplies.

Germany was the main provider of chemical weapons items to Iraq. Of the companies that were involved, 2/3 were German. Not surprising when Germany has historically been a leader in chemical warfare and genocides.

I didn't ask about Germany.

What evidence / proof have you that the US "gave" Saddam these chemical weapons which he then used to kill thousands of his own people?
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
It's already open knowledge. Iraq received a lot of dual-use chemicals from the US. In fact, many countries provided Iraq with supplies.

Germany was the main provider of chemical weapons items to Iraq. Of the companies that were involved, 2/3 were German. Not surprising when Germany has historically been a leader in chemical warfare and genocides.

I didn't ask about Germany.

What evidence / proof have you that the US "gave" Saddam these chemical weapons which he then used to kill thousands of his own people?
From your quotes surroundibg the word 'gave', I'm assuming you have a problem with that word? Are you in agreement that these chems "came form" the USA, and you're just saying that we didn't "give" them away, maybe "sold" them?