Uncovered: The War in Iraq

[nakedemperor]

So I just watched the DVD documentary Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the War in Iraq. Prior to watching it I was opposed to the Bush Admin but in favor of the pre-emptive war in Iraq which I deemed necessary to prevent another 9/11 in the U.S. The only reason I mention that is because, having watched this thing, I am completely and utterly at a loss... The document boasts the most impressive series of interviewed experts, ranging from White House upper-echilons to UN Weapon Inspectors to (most importantly) CIA directives and analysts. The documentary reveals INNUMERABLE proven lies, embellishments, and falsifications that the administration made in their justification for war (which, had they been telling the truth, would have completely justify our invasion and occupation). I literally don't know where to start. But please, if you have true bipartisan patriotism in your hearts, please watch this comprehensive, diffinitive, unbelievably eye-opening indictment of the lies told by the Bush admin. and, most importantly, irrefutible evidence that they knew they were lying about countless justification claims.

Anyway I bought this sucker on Amazon, its very cheap, and it will change your entire perspective on the partisan hatred that exists in our singular, extraordinary country today.

 

[insein]

So was this before or after you wasted your money on Fahrenheit?

 

[nakedemperor]

Actually, despite making many salient points, I didn't think Farenheit was all that great. Especially the part about happy Iraqis dancing and playing and going to weddings and smiling under the Saddam regime and then BOOM the imperialistic cruise missles come crashing down. That was pretty ludicrous.

That being said, Michael Moore is a partisan ranter akin to Ann Coulter, Al Franken, Bill O'Rielly, et al.

So if you're looking for U.N. weapons inspectors, CIA administrators and analysts, White House officials, and others who themselves prepped CIA intel for Bush's administration specifically and systematically ripping to shreds, for example (and their are dozens), Colin Powell's visual-aid presentation to the U.N., piece by piece, difinitely, systematically, and unequivocally pointing out lies, fabrications and scare tactics, then you can watch this documentary, which is actually documentary and not partisan ranting like most of Farenheit is.

If people watch this and continue to stick ehind this neoconservative-run administration, then the blind partisanship that does not allow people to see the subversive, unpatriotic shortcomings of this administration is even stronger than I thought.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

If people watch this and continue to stick ehind this neoconservative-run administration, then the blind partisanship that does not allow people to see the subversive, unpatriotic shortcomings of this administration is even stronger than I thought.

Sure. Prior to seeing this, you supported the war and were open minded. And i'm jean claude van damme.

Moore is a proven liar. I challenge you to find a lie of either coulter or Oreilly. Moore is not worthy to lick crap off Coulter's shoes.

 

[Democrat4Bush]

You really want us to believe Robert Greenwald is bipartsian?

I have a bridge to sell you, cheap.

 

[DFresh]

This one goes out to all you right wing nut jobs.

www.earplugsandalcohol.com/MastersofWar.zip

This is a song by Dob Dylan. Download it now because it will be gone in a couple of days.

 

[nakedemperor]

The lies of Bill O'Rielly and Ann Coulter:

1. Bill O'Rielly was an "avowed" Independent when he joined Fox News. I say avowed because he was actually a registered republican. This is proven by a cursory glance at his voter registration card. He lied about it, and he lied about something that can be checked out incredibly easy.

2. When Dale Earnhardt died (feb. 18th, 2002) Ann Coulter wrote in her book that every newspaper carried it except for the New York Times which waited 2 days and then buried it, because the Times is too elitist and liberal to care about a NASCAR driver. In REALITY, the Times carried it on the FRONT PAGE, the DAY AFTER he died. To check this out read "Slander" and go to the Times front page archive for feb 19th, 2002.

3. Ann Coulter's old Connecticut drivers license says she was born in 1961. Her D.C. license says 1963. She lied about the D.C. age, and then told everyone THAT was her correct age. Which, incidentally, would have meant she commited voter fraud by voting at age 16 in 1979.

4. On page 8 of Slander, her book, she says Jesse Jackson's 1994 X-mas day speech was never reported on by the NY Times, again citing its liberal nature as cause. The only problem was, they DID, 5 days BEFORE the speech, which was pre-recorded for their convenience. Again, if you don't believe me this is insanely easy for you to see for yourself.

5. Slander, page 134 says that during Iran-Contra, Reagan's approval rating fell only 5 points from 80-75 percent, citing a Christian Science monitor article from January 7th, 1987. THAT SAME ARTICLE in REALITY says that his approval rating fell 63 to 47 percent. So I'd consider MAKING SHIT UP lying. Again, very easy to fact-check this shit.

6. Bill O'Rielly likes to tout how he "came from nothing" (his words), and grew up in the blue-collar town Levittown, Long Island. Problem is, he actually was born and raised in the affluent suburb, Westbury, and went to private school, took vacations in florida, etc. etc. So to cover up this lie O'Rielly said (in his own words) that he came from the "Westbury section of Levittown". Problem is, THERE'S NO SUCH THING. They are completely different towns far far apart. Again, go to Mapquest if you want to see just how true this is.

Ok I'll post more of their lies later, but my lunch break is over now.

 

[Annie]

Thanks to Naked Emperor for pointing me to look a little closer at posts, this belongs in USA chat.

 

[Hobbit]

The lies of Bill O'Rielly and Ann Coulter:

1. Bill O'Rielly was an "avowed" Independent when he joined Fox News. I say avowed because he was actually a registered republican. This is proven by a cursory glance at his voter registration card. He lied about it, and he lied about something that can be checked out incredibly easy.

2. When Dale Earnhardt died (feb. 18th, 2002) Ann Coulter wrote in her book that every newspaper carried it except for the New York Times which waited 2 days and then buried it, because the Times is too elitist and liberal to care about a NASCAR driver. In REALITY, the Times carried it on the FRONT PAGE, the DAY AFTER he died. To check this out read "Slander" and go to the Times front page archive for feb 19th, 2002.

3. Ann Coulter's old Connecticut drivers license says she was born in 1961. Her D.C. license says 1963. She lied about the D.C. age, and then told everyone THAT was her correct age. Which, incidentally, would have meant she commited voter fraud by voting at age 16 in 1979.

4. On page 8 of Slander, her book, she says Jesse Jackson's 1994 X-mas day speech was never reported on by the NY Times, again citing its liberal nature as cause. The only problem was, they DID, 5 days BEFORE the speech, which was pre-recorded for their convenience. Again, if you don't believe me this is insanely easy for you to see for yourself.

5. Slander, page 134 says that during Iran-Contra, Reagan's approval rating fell only 5 points from 80-75 percent, citing a Christian Science monitor article from January 7th, 1987. THAT SAME ARTICLE in REALITY says that his approval rating fell 63 to 47 percent. So I'd consider MAKING SHIT UP lying. Again, very easy to fact-check this shit.

6. Bill O'Rielly likes to tout how he "came from nothing" (his words), and grew up in the blue-collar town Levittown, Long Island. Problem is, he actually was born and raised in the affluent suburb, Westbury, and went to private school, took vacations in florida, etc. etc. So to cover up this lie O'Rielly said (in his own words) that he came from the "Westbury section of Levittown". Problem is, THERE'S NO SUCH THING. They are completely different towns far far apart. Again, go to Mapquest if you want to see just how true this is.

Ok I'll post more of their lies later, but my lunch break is over now.

I've seen all of these and concrete refutations of your claims. The only one I can remember right now is that Bill O'Reilly produced a deed to his parents' old house in Levittown. If they didn't live there, why'd they own a house there?

 

[DKSuddeth]

I've seen all of these and concrete refutations of your claims. The only one I can remember right now is that Bill O'Reilly produced a deed to his parents' old house in Levittown. If they didn't live there, why'd they own a house there?

slumlord?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

The lies of Bill O'Rielly and Ann Coulter:

1. Bill O'Rielly was an "avowed" Independent when he joined Fox News. I say avowed because he was actually a registered republican. This is proven by a cursory glance at his voter registration card. He lied about it, and he lied about something that can be checked out incredibly easy.

2. When Dale Earnhardt died (feb. 18th, 2002) Ann Coulter wrote in her book that every newspaper carried it except for the New York Times which waited 2 days and then buried it, because the Times is too elitist and liberal to care about a NASCAR driver. In REALITY, the Times carried it on the FRONT PAGE, the DAY AFTER he died. To check this out read "Slander" and go to the Times front page archive for feb 19th, 2002.

3. Ann Coulter's old Connecticut drivers license says she was born in 1961. Her D.C. license says 1963. She lied about the D.C. age, and then told everyone THAT was her correct age. Which, incidentally, would have meant she commited voter fraud by voting at age 16 in 1979.

4. On page 8 of Slander, her book, she says Jesse Jackson's 1994 X-mas day speech was never reported on by the NY Times, again citing its liberal nature as cause. The only problem was, they DID, 5 days BEFORE the speech, which was pre-recorded for their convenience. Again, if you don't believe me this is insanely easy for you to see for yourself.

5. Slander, page 134 says that during Iran-Contra, Reagan's approval rating fell only 5 points from 80-75 percent, citing a Christian Science monitor article from January 7th, 1987. THAT SAME ARTICLE in REALITY says that his approval rating fell 63 to 47 percent. So I'd consider MAKING SHIT UP lying. Again, very easy to fact-check this shit.

6. Bill O'Rielly likes to tout how he "came from nothing" (his words), and grew up in the blue-collar town Levittown, Long Island. Problem is, he actually was born and raised in the affluent suburb, Westbury, and went to private school, took vacations in florida, etc. etc. So to cover up this lie O'Rielly said (in his own words) that he came from the "Westbury section of Levittown". Problem is, THERE'S NO SUCH THING. They are completely different towns far far apart. Again, go to Mapquest if you want to see just how true this is.

Ok I'll post more of their lies later, but my lunch break is over now.

A woman's age? ratings? not really middle class? come on.

This all nitpicking crap. These things are of a wholly different nature than a career devoted to intentionally creating fraudulent crockumentaries, such as moore's.

 

[nakedemperor]

Yeah, or misleading people into war. But I was challenged to prove how Bill O'Rielly and Ann Coulter like, which is what I did. Of course its not nearly as bad as Moore or Bush lying. There's just more at stake.

 

[fuzzykitten99]

Yeah, or misleading people into war. But I was challenged to prove how Bill O'Rielly and Ann Coulter like, which is what I did. Of course its not nearly as bad as Moore or Bush lying. There's just more at stake.

but you pointed out PERSONAL things about those people. Plus, the thing with Coulter and her age...it either could have been a mis-print (my last DL card had my birth month as August, not September, and I went a whole year without noticing it).

the original challenge was most likely to ask where have the aforementioned lied about politics.

The whole thing about the liberals saying that BUSH lied about all the WMD's, and other stuff, have yet to read the following-and if you can refute any, be my guest. I even took the time to outline your former Prez., and your current candidate.
**************************
How Soon they Forget....

EVERY ONE OF DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED--THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION AND HE TOOK US TO WAR UNNECESSARILY!

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the Greatest security threat we face." - Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten time since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton N ational Security Adviser, Feb 18,1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry (D - MA), and others Oct. 9,1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engage! d in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." - Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a lic! it missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." - Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chem! ical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years .. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" - Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members.. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." -Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real" - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

 

[nakedemperor]

Its no secret that the Clinton administration was high on the war in Iraq idea as well, but their intelligence seems to have been wrong. As opposed to the Bush intelligence, which was correct, until Rumsfeld et al. kept badgering them to come to new conclusions on old data, and created their own department, the Office of Special Programs, to reanalyze their data, in an unprecidented form of unethical inclusion of political figureheads into Langley and their data. That's why the CIA is in Virgina, to be away from partisan interpreation of their data. The bushies came to their own conclusions about information that the CIA had decisively agreed was inconclusive, and in no way required preemptive military action.

But, obviously, I'm not equipped to show you WHY. Which is the reason I started this thread, just to ask people who are curious to watch Uncovered: The War in Iraq. I'm not going to participate in this link anymore because its underminind my original point: just watch it, THEN we'll talk about. Its really cheap 10 bucks on amazon.

 

[DKSuddeth]

As opposed to the Bush intelligence, which was correct, until Rumsfeld et al. kept badgering them to come to new conclusions on old data, and created their own department, the Office of Special Programs, to reanalyze their data, in an unprecidented form of unethical inclusion of political figureheads into Langley and their data.

Office of Special Programs? this is new to me. you have proof of this also? please post it.

 

[Annie]

But, obviously, I'm not equipped to show you WHY. Which is the reason I started this thread, just to ask people who are curious to watch Uncovered: The War in Iraq. I'm not going to participate in this link anymore because its underminind my original point: just watch it, THEN we'll talk about. Its really cheap 10 bucks on amazon.

Ok, you heard the man, until one of you watch this and comment, he's done on this thread!

DK, we'll all wait to see if he can find us something on that Office of Special Programs.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Yeah, or misleading people into war. But I was challenged to prove how Bill O'Rielly and Ann Coulter like, which is what I did. Of course its not nearly as bad as Moore or Bush lying. There's just more at stake.

Oh no. I'm afraid you've pushed my buttons, sir. Pistols, at twenty paces!

But seriosly. All the world leaders thought saddam had em. There's a difference between telling a lie and being wrong. DId you know that?

 

[fuzzykitten99]

Oh no. I'm afraid you've pushed my buttons, sir. Pistols, at twenty paces!

:rotflmao:

 

[freeandfun1]

DK, we'll all wait to see if he can find us something on that Office of Special Programs.

I looked up some stuff but the only references to such an "office" are on left-leaning websites like antiwar.com and they provide no source.

Well, here is the closest I found to a source:

The day after the September 11 attacks Wolfowitz authorized the creation of an informal team focused on ferreting out damaging intelligence about Iraq . This loosely organized team soon became the Office of Special Plans (OSP) directed by Abram Shulksy, formerly of RAND and the National Strategy Information Center (NSIC). The objective of this closet intelligence team, according to Rumsfeld, was to “search for information on Iraq's hostile intentions or links to terrorists.” (1) OSP's mission was to create intelligence that the Pentagon and vice president could use to press their case for an Iraq invasion with the president and Congress.

If you go to the Endnotes, you will note that in endnote (1) this is the source they give to confirm the existence and the mission of the "OSP".

ENDNOTES

1. Quoted by Seymour M. Hersh, “Selective Intelligence,” New Yorker, May 12, 2003.

I guess cuz good ole Seymour says it, it must be true!

Here is a LINK

 

[Annie]

I looked up some stuff but the only references to such an "office" are on left-leaning websites like antiwar.com and they provide no source.

Well, here is the closest I found to a source:



If you go to "footnote 1" this is the source for knowledge of the "OSP".



I guess cuz good ole Seymour says it, it must be true!

Here is a LINK

That must be what he meant by commonly accepted! :teeth: