O'Neil, Clarke and Woodward

[Palestinian Jew]

Does anyone else think it is odd that 3 people working independently of each other last year all come to the same conclusion that this administration would stop at nothing to go to war with Iraq?

Do you believe they all decided to lie and just happened upon the same lie?
Could it be that the publishers got together to generate success?
Or, and I know this will seem farfetched to a lot of you, could they actually be telling the truth?

 

[Zhukov]

Does anyone think its odd that the publishers of all three books are owned by Viacom?

O'Neil has recanted on quite a bit of the more controversial items he wrote about.

Clarke has been caught in several lies.

With Woodward it's a matter of seperating the facts he is reporting from the opinion that he quietly inserts in between them. For example he reports a metting with Prince Bindar, and then provides his opinion of what the meeting must have been about.

(After Powell had refuted it, and when Bindar personally refuted Woodward's claims, I believe Woodward's response was "that's preposterous")

 

[nycflasher]

lol... I heard some journalist on TV say that Cheney wanted to invade Iraq since he was 13 years old.

Now that is a bit of an exageration I am sure.

However, the Iraq situation may get worse(well, we have already lost some 700 American soldiers) before it gets better and as we spend the next couple of decades dealing with the ramifications of this war, I find it deeply relevant who and why was so determined to go to war with Iraq and in this manner.

How about the fact that not only Americans feel betrayed by elected officials.... but many soldiers feel they have been lied to? This is not good. And didn't Bush cut veteran benefits just as we were going to war? Way to go...

I know too many people(uncles, etc... I wasn't born until 1975) who fought in Vietnam only to be forgotten once they returned. And now we have this pussy who all but went AWOL from the National Guard leading fine men and women into harm's way.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Palestinian Jew
Does anyone else think it is odd that 3 people working independently of each other last year all come to the same conclusion that this administration would stop at nothing to go to war with Iraq?

Do you believe they all decided to lie and just happened upon the same lie?
Could it be that the publishers got together to generate success?
Or, and I know this will seem farfetched to a lot of you, could they actually be telling the truth?

I'm sorry pj but everything here indicates they're all on the same page of the democratic lie campaign playbook. It's hilarious that to you all these coincidences ADD legitimacy. hahah. Unreal.

 

[Palestinian Jew]

So the "democratic lie campaign playbook" is coincidentally created by three different people, all wanting to come up with their own lie, but they all happen to decide that saying the Bush Admin was obsessed with going to war in Iraq is the right one.

 

[YellowBirdy]

Originally posted by Palestinian Jew
Does anyone else think it is odd that 3 people working independently of each other last year all come to the same conclusion that this administration would stop at nothing to go to war with Iraq?

Do you believe they all decided to lie and just happened upon the same lie?
Could it be that the publishers got together to generate success?
Or, and I know this will seem farfetched to a lot of you, could they actually be telling the truth?

I don't understand why this is new news. I am quite suprised that the media pays little attention to PNAC.

In 1998 the members drafted a letter to President Clinton calling for increased military presence and ridding the planet of the Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein. The letter called for unilateral US involvement in the Middle East because “we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition” to enforce the inspections regime. “The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power,” which foreshadowed the current US operation in Iraq. Of the original 18 signatories of this letter, 10 are now involved in the Bush presidency, further reinforcing the notion that this president’s foreign policy was drafted before he even took office. (Check out their site at http://www.newamericancentury.org) Even Jeb Bush is a member.

 

[jimnyc]

Old news, been posted here about 500x now.

 

[JIHADTHIS]

2 of the 3 could be viewed as disgruntled ex-employees, the 3rd (Woodward) a "journalist" who adds his own spin to fill in space

You don't really believe All the Presidents Men was a complete factual representation of Watergate do you?