"Making people struggle a little bit is not necessarily the worst thing." Unless they're wealthy.

[BOBDN]

"MR. RUSSERT: There are reports that the investigation Congress did does show a link between the Saudi government and the hijackers but that it will not be released to the public.
VICE PRES. CHENEY: I don?t know want to speculate on that, Tim, partly because I was involved in reviewing those pages. It was the judgment of our senior intelligence officials, both CIA and FBI that that material needed to remain classified. At some point, we may be able to declassify it, but there are ongoing investigations that might be affected by that release, and for that reason, we kept it classified. The committee knows what?s in there. They helped to prepare it. So it hasn?t been kept secret from the Congress, but from the standpoint of our ongoing investigations, we needed to do that."

Uh huh. Another lie.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: BOBDN
"MR. RUSSERT: There are reports that the investigation Congress did does show a link between the Saudi government and the hijackers but that it will not be released to the public.
VICE PRES. CHENEY: I don?t know want to speculate on that, Tim, partly because I was involved in reviewing those pages. It was the judgment of our senior intelligence officials, both CIA and FBI that that material needed to remain classified. At some point, we may be able to declassify it, but there are ongoing investigations that might be affected by that release, and for that reason, we kept it classified. The committee knows what?s in there. They helped to prepare it. So it hasn?t been kept secret from the Congress, but from the standpoint of our ongoing investigations, we needed to do that."

Uh huh. Another lie.

Are you going to prove those things you're calling lies or are you just going to say it?

 

[BOBDN]

"MR. RUSSERT: Joe Lieberman, the senator from Connecticut, running for president, had this to say: ?...what President Bush gave the American people on Sunday night was a price tag??$87 billion??not a plan. And we in Congress must demand a plan.?
What is our plan for Iraq? How long will the 140,000 American soldiers be there? How many international troops will join them? And how much is this going to cost?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, some of those questions are unknowable at present, Tim. It?ll depend on developments. It?ll depend on how fast it takes us to achieve our objectives. Remember when we went there, that we went there specifically to take down the Saddam Hussein regime, to wrap up all WMD capability he had possessed or developed, to deal with the threat that his regime represented to the region, and the United States."

:Q

What can I say? Lie.

 

[BOBDN]

"We?ve got Iraqis now in charge of each ministry in the government. We?ve got 90 percent?over 90 percent of the cities and towns and villages of Iraq are now governed by democratically elected or appointed local councils."

Lie.

 

[Corn]

Are you going to prove those things you're calling lies or are you just going to say it?

You're gonna have to dumb that down a little bit, I don't think he understood what you were asking.

 

[BOBDN]

"MR. RUSSERT: We, in fact, have about 140,000 troops, 20,000 international troops, as well. Did you misjudge the number of troops necessary to secure Iraq after major combat operations?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, you?re going to get into a debate here about?talking about several years, several hundred thousand troops for several years. I think that?s a non-starter. I don?t think we have any plan to do that, Tim. I don?t think it?s necessary to do that. There?s no question but what we?ve encountered resistance. But I don?t think anybody expected the time we were there to be absolutely trouble-free. We knew there were holdover elements from the regime that would fight us and struggle. And we also knew al-Qaeda was there, and Ansar al-Islam, up in northeastern Iraq, which we?ll come back to, talk about in a minute."

Lies

 

[BOBDN]

"MR. RUSSERT: The Congressional Budget Office said that: ?That the Army lacks sufficient active-duty forces to maintain its current level of nearly 150,000 troops in Iraq beyond next spring. In a report that underscores the stress being place on the military by the occupation of Iraq, the CBO said the Army?s goals of keeping the same number of troops in Iraq and limiting tours of duty there to a year while maintaining its current presence elsewhere in the world were impossible to sustain without activating more National Guard or Reserve units.?
Can we keep 150,000 troops beyond next spring without, in effect, breaking the Army?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: Tim, we can do what we have to do to prevail in this conflict. Failure?s not an option. And go back again and think about what?s involved here. This is not just about Iraq or just about the difficulties we might encounter in any one part of the country in terms of restoring security and stability. This is about a continuing operation on the war on terror. And it?s very, very important we get it right. If we?re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it?s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it?s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11. They understand what?s at stake here. That?s one of the reasons they?re putting up as much of a struggle as they have, is because they know if we succeed here, that that?s going to strike a major blow at their capabilities."

Lies.

Falsely equates Iraq with being a threat to the US which it wasn't since there is no WMD or satanic Iraqi drones spewing chemicals all over the US. No nuclear weapons either.

Also equates Iraq with being a safe haven for terrorists (never proven and in fact the administration on several occassions has publicly backed down from that claim), and equates Iraq with being the base of the heart of terror that has had us under assault for a number of years and then goes on to tie it al to 9/11 again even though there is absolutely NO evidence to tie Iraq and 9/11. (The real people behind 9/11 are being protected by the US government. Read above.)

 

[BOBDN]

" MR. RUSSERT: So the resistance in Iraq is coming from those who were responsible for 9/11?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: No, I was careful not to say that. With respect to 9/11, 9/11, as I said at the beginning of the show, changed everything. And one of the things it changed is we recognized that time was not on our side, that in this part of the world, in particular, given the problems we?ve encountered in Afghanistan, which forced us to go in and take action there, as well as in Iraq, that we, in fact, had to move on it."

Wow. Even Tim was believeng after all those associations in the same sentence that Iraq had something to do with 9/11.

This is really bordering on some new diabolical form of lying. Republicanspeak.

 

[BOBDN]

" MR. RUSSERT: In terms of costs, Mr. Vice President, there are suggestions again?it was a misjudgment by the administration or even misleading. ?Lawrence Lindsey, head of the White House?s National Economic Council, projected the ?upper bound? of war costs at $100 billion to $200 billion.?
We?ve already spent $160 billion after this $87 billion is spent. The Pentagon predicted $50 billion: ?The administration?s top budget official [Mitch Daniels] estimated that the cost of a war with Iraq could be in the range of $50 billion to $60 billion...he said...that earlier estimates of $100 billion to $200 billion in Iraq war costs by Lawrence Lindsey, Mr. Bush?s former chief economic adviser, were too high.?
And Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of Defense, went before Congress and said this: ?We?re dealing with a country that can really finance its own econstruction, and relatively soon. The oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years.? It looked like the administrations truly misjudged the cost of this operation.
VICE PRES. CHENEY: No, I didn?t see a one-point estimate there that you could say that this is the administration?s estimate. We didn?t know. And if you ask Secretary Rumsfeld, for example?I can remember from his briefings, he said repeatedly he didn?t know. And when you and I talked about it, I couldn?t put a dollar figure on it.
MR. RUSSERT: But Daniels did say $50 billion."

OK, come on. For god's sake do I have to explain that one to you?

Talk about dumbing down. You're friggin' brainwashed. Nothing left to dumb down. You clowns will believe ANYTHING they tell you.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: Corn

Are you going to prove those things you're calling lies or are you just going to say it?

You're gonna have to dumb that down a little bit, I don't think he understood what you were asking.

Evidently those multi-syllable words I used were too much for him.

 

[BOBDN]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet

Originally posted by: Corn

Are you going to prove those things you're calling lies or are you just going to say it?

You're gonna have to dumb that down a little bit, I don't think he understood what you were asking.

Evidently those multi-syllable words I used were too much for him.

Evidently you have no excuse for your VP's lies.

 

[BOBDN]

"MR. RUSSERT: Is the $87 billion the end of it? Will the American people be asked for any more money?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: I can?t say that. It?s all that we think we?ll need for the foreseeable future for this year. I guess people shouldn?t be surprised that the request is coming now either. What we?ve done consistently since we started this enterprise, working with the Congress, is we did not want to incorporate the Iraq cost within the baseline DOD budget. So we?ve always dealt with it on the side as a separate appropriation. That?s what we?re doing here. The reason we?re going now is because we?ve had the work done in Iraq. Bremer?s been there long enough to put together a good budget looking over the next year. He?s got a pretty good idea of what it?s going to cost him. We?ve got more information now than we?ve had before about what our continuing needs and requirements are going to be. So now we?re making the request.
We have not tried to hide it under a bush. The president has been very direct. We?re working closely with the Congress in putting a request together, but I come back again to the proposition of what?s the cost if we don?t act, what?s the cost if we do nothing, what?s the cost if we don?t succeed with respect to our current interest operation in Iraq? And I think that?s far higher than getting the job done right here."

Strange analogy. Freudian.

They did try to hide the cost of Iraq. That's why it's so shocking now. When people first said it would cost hundreds of billions of dollars the Bush administration said that was vastly inflated. But when asked no one would give even an estimate. The nuns used to beat children for lying. Including lies of ommission.

 

[BOBDN]

"MR. RUSSERT: Why is there no bidding?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: I have no idea. Go ask the Corps of Engineers."

As Secretary of Defense Cheney knew nothing of LOGCAP?

I'm certain Cheney as a former Defense Secretary has knowledge of the Pentagon bidding process at least in parameters broad enough to know about LOGCAP. What's he hiding?

 

[BOBDN]

"MR. RUSSERT: You also told me, Mr. Vice President, in March that you thought Saddam would be captured or killed, turned in by his own people. Why hasn?t that happened if they view us as liberators?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, we?re working on it, and we?ll continue to work on it. His sons were turned in by the Iraqi people."

So what did they write on the $25 million check? "THE IRAQI PEOPLE"?

Lie.

 

[BOBDN]

"MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn to weapons of mass destruction. I asked you back in March what you thought was the most important rationale for going to war with Iraq. There?s the question, and here is your answer:
?...the combination of [Saddam?s] development and use of chemical weapons, his development of biological weapons, his pursuit of nuclear weapons.?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: And the tie to terror.
MR. RUSSERT: Where are they?"

Ouch.

Someone on this forum tried to argue, you can't lie about events in the future. I disagreed.

Here Cheney lied about events in the future. And his lies are now in the past.

The future becomes the past very quickly.

 

[BOBDN]

"Same on biological weapons?we believe he?d developed the capacity to go mobile with his BW production capability because, again, in reaction to what we had done to him in ?91. We had intelligence reporting before the war that there were at least seven of these mobile labs that he had gone out and acquired. We?ve, since the war, found two of them. They?re in our possession today, mobile biological facilities that can be used to produce anthrax or smallpox or whatever else you wanted to use during the course of developing the capacity for an attack."

What can I say? Just an outright lie.

 

[BOBDN]

" MR. RUSSERT: There?s real debate about those labs. But I want to talk about something very specific. And that was the president?s State of the Union message when he said that the British had learned that Saddam was acquiring uranium from Africa. That was in January. In March the head of the International Energy Atomic Agency, ElBaradei, issued this statement: ?A key piece of evidence linking Iraq to a nuclear weapons program appears to have been fabricated, the United Nations? chief nuclear inspector said in a report...Documents that purportedly showed Iraqi officials shopping for uranium in Africa two years ago were deemed ?not authentic? after carefully scrutiny by U.N. and independent experts, Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told the U.N. Security Council. Also, ElBaradei reported finding no evidence of banned weapons or nuclear material in an extensive sweep of Iraq using advanced radiation detectors. ?There is no indication of resumed nuclear activities,? ElBaradei said.?
Eight days after that, you were on MEET THE PRESS, and we...
VICE PRES. CHENEY: Right.
MR. RUSSERT: ...talked about that specifically. Let?s watch:
(Videotape, March 16, 2003):
MR. RUSSERT: And even though the International Atomic Energy Agency said he does not have a nuclear program, we disagree.
VICE PRES. CHENEY: I disagree, yes. And you?ll find the CIA, for example, and other key parts of our intelligence community, disagree.
And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons. I think Mr. ElBaradei, frankly, is wrong. And I think if you look at the track record of the International Atomic Energy Agency and this kind of issue, especially where Iraq is concerned, they have consistently underestimated or missed what it was Saddam Hussein was doing. I don?t have any reason to believe they?re any more valid this time than they?ve been in the past.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: Reconstituted nuclear weapons. You misspoke.
VICE PRES. CHENEY: Yeah. I did misspeak. I said repeatedly during the show weapons capability. We never had any evidence that he had acquired a nuclear weapon."

I should have tried that BS with the nuns. "I misspoke, Sister."

They would have beat me twice.

Lie.

 

[Corn]

I see BOBDN quoting much, not never once proving anything was actually a "lie"....like an empty bag of wind. You are a perfect huckster for the 'crats. Carry on.

 

[BOBDN]

Originally posted by: Corn
I see BOBDN quoting much, not never once proving anything was actually a "lie"....like an empty bag of wind. You are a perfect huckster for the 'crats. Carry on.

Well a few posts back one of you Bush/Cheney team leaders told me I wasn't providing any proof they were lies. Instead of refuting my comments you people just keep doing the only thing you can do to defend Bush/Cheney. You attack people instead of trying to refute the facts.

Carry on.

 

[BOBDN]

" I guess the intriguing thing, Tim, on the whole thing, this question of whether or not the Iraqis were trying to acquire uranium in Africa. In the British report, this week, the Committee of the British Parliament, which just spent 90 days investigating all of this, revalidated their British claim that Saddam was, in fact, trying to acquire uranium in Africa."

The Hutton commission DID NOT validate ANY claims of nuclear material in Iraq.

Go read the Hutton commission's report.

I think the VP would at least be briefed on it since it did carry some amount of interest in parts of Washington DC.

Lie.

 

[BOBDN]

All these damn lies Cheney told are making me tired. I'm gonna' take a break from these damn lies.

 

[Bigdude]

Cheney incoherent!

Ha! He makes Clinton look like a complete idiot! Wait, Clinton is a complete idiot, and so is anyone that supported his presidency!

 

[Corn]

All these damn lies Cheney told are making me tired. I'm gonna' take a break from these damn lies.

Multiple personalities? These lies are all in your head.........

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Bigdude

Cheney incoherent!

Ha! He makes Clinton look like a complete idiot! Wait, Clinton is a complete idiot, and so is anyone that supported his presidency!

Yeah well I bet Republicans are cringing at the thought of you representing yourself as one of them! You are the right wing version of sillyTIM, just a little less verbose and entertaining.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: BOBDN
All these damn lies Cheney told are making me tired. I'm gonna' take a break from these damn lies.

Truth! Truth! Truth!

There, I've said as much as you have said, and supported it as much. I'm worn out myself.

Edit: I'm sorry, I forgot to fully support it.

Everyone knows it is the truth!

There, now I've matched you.