Friday, September 10, 2004
Dan Rather Explains Everything
Investigative Genius
Those of you following the latest coup of Sixty Minutes are no doubt struck with awe at CBS amazing ability to sift through current world events to find the most important news events of the era to focus on. In case you missed it, CBS found mysterious lost documents from 1972 that prove that Bush is a scoundrel who refused to go to his annual physical examination. What gall! What a scoundrel. This is the fourth investigation conducted by Sixty Minutes on Bushes failure to report for his physical.
IN case you missed tonight's broadcast, here is a transcript for you to review:
http://www.mothering.com/discussions/showpost.php?p=2014729&postcount=93
Here is another view of Bushes National Guard service with a lot of boring facts.
http://www.hillnews.com/york/090904.aspx
Those of you following the latest coup of Sixty Minutes are no doubt struck with awe at CBS amazing ability to sift through current world events to find the most important news events of the era to focus on. In case you missed it, CBS found mysterious lost documents from 1972 that prove that Bush is a scoundrel who refused to go to his annual physical examination. What gall! What a scoundrel. This is the fourth investigation conducted by Sixty Minutes on Bushes failure to report for his physical.
IN case you missed tonight's broadcast, here is a transcript for you to review:
http://www.mothering.com/discussions/showpost.php?p=2014729&postcount=93
Here is another view of Bushes National Guard service with a lot of boring facts.
http://www.hillnews.com/york/090904.aspx
The Wrong War at the Wrong Time in the Wrong Place?
Kerry on Iraq, in his own words:
SEN. JOHN KERRY: "[I]t is something that we know-for instance, Saddam Hussein has used weapons of mass destruction against his own people, and there is some evidence of their efforts to try to secure these kinds of weapons and even test them." (CBS’ "Face The Nation," 9/23/01)
"He [Saddam Hussein] is and has acted like a terrorist, and he has engaged in activities that are unacceptable." (Fox News’ "The O’Reilly Factor," 12/11/01)
"[I] think we ought to put the heat on Saddam Hussein. I’ve said that for a number of years, Bill. I criticized the Clinton administration for backing off of the inspections, when Ambassador Butler was giving us strong evidence that we needed to continue. I think we need to put the pressure on, no matter what the evidence is about September 11 ..." (Fox News’ "The O’Reilly Factor," 12/11/01)
"I think we clearly have to keep the pressure on terrorism globally. This doesn’t end with Afghanistan by any imagination. And I think the president has made that clear. I think we have made that clear. Terrorism is a global menace. It’s a scourge. And it is absolutely vital that we continue, for instance, Saddam Hussein." (CNN’s "Larry King Live," 12/14/01)
MSNBC’S CHRIS MATTHEWS: "Do you think that the problem we have with Iraq is real and it can be reduced to a diplomatic problem? Can-can we get this guy to accept inspections of those weapons of mass destruction potentially and get past a possible war with him?" (MSNBC’s "Hardball," 2/5/02)
KERRY: "Outside chance, Chris. Could it be done? The answer is yes. But he would view himself only as buying time and playing a game, in my judgment. Do we have to go through that process? The answer is yes. We’re precisely doing that. And I think that’s what Colin Powell did today." (MSNBC’s "Hardball," 2/5/02)
KERRY: "September 11th. I mean, that’s changed the dynamic of this country and - and, I think, people’s perceptions of what people are willing to do." (MSNBC’s "Hardball," 2/5/02)
KERRY: "And I think we’ve all reached a judgment that obviously the United States has to protect our national security interests. And we have to do what we think is right." (Fox News’ "The O’Reilly Factor," 5/22/02)
"I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq ..." - John Kerry, 7/29/02 Remarks at the 2002 DLC National Conversation, NY (Senator John Kerry, Speech To The 2002 DLC National Conversation, New York, NY, 7/29/02)
"... Saddam Hussein is a renegade and outlaw who turned his back on the tough conditions of his surrender put in place by the United Nations in 1991." - John Kerry, 7/29/02 Remarks at the 2002 DLC National Conversation, NY (Senator John Kerry, Speech To The 2002 DLC National Conversation, New York, NY, 7/29/02)
"If Saddam Hussein is unwilling to bend to the international community's already existing order, then he will have invited enforcement ..." - Sen. John Kerry, Op-Ed The New York Times 9/6/02 (Sen. John Kerry, Op-Ed, "We Still Have A Choice On Iraq," The New York Times, 9/6/02)
"...even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act." - Sen. John Kerry, Op-Ed The New York Times 9/6/02 (Sen. John Kerry, Op-Ed, "We Still Have A Choice On Iraq," The New York Times, 9/6/02)
KERRY: "I would disagree with John McCain that it’s the actual weapons of mass destruction he may use against us, it’s what he may do in another invasion of Kuwait or in a miscalculation about the Kurds or a miscalculation about Iran or particularly Israel. Those are the things that - that I think present the greatest danger. He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat." (CBS’ "Face The Nation," 9/15/02)
"But the president, as I also wrote in that article, always reserves the right to act unilaterally protect [sic] the interests of our country." (MSNBC’s "Hardball," 9/17/02)
"George, I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him." (ABC News Democrat Presidential Candidates Debate, Columbia, SC, 5/3/03)
SEN. JOHN KERRY: "[I]t is something that we know-for instance, Saddam Hussein has used weapons of mass destruction against his own people, and there is some evidence of their efforts to try to secure these kinds of weapons and even test them." (CBS’ "Face The Nation," 9/23/01)
"He [Saddam Hussein] is and has acted like a terrorist, and he has engaged in activities that are unacceptable." (Fox News’ "The O’Reilly Factor," 12/11/01)
"[I] think we ought to put the heat on Saddam Hussein. I’ve said that for a number of years, Bill. I criticized the Clinton administration for backing off of the inspections, when Ambassador Butler was giving us strong evidence that we needed to continue. I think we need to put the pressure on, no matter what the evidence is about September 11 ..." (Fox News’ "The O’Reilly Factor," 12/11/01)
"I think we clearly have to keep the pressure on terrorism globally. This doesn’t end with Afghanistan by any imagination. And I think the president has made that clear. I think we have made that clear. Terrorism is a global menace. It’s a scourge. And it is absolutely vital that we continue, for instance, Saddam Hussein." (CNN’s "Larry King Live," 12/14/01)
MSNBC’S CHRIS MATTHEWS: "Do you think that the problem we have with Iraq is real and it can be reduced to a diplomatic problem? Can-can we get this guy to accept inspections of those weapons of mass destruction potentially and get past a possible war with him?" (MSNBC’s "Hardball," 2/5/02)
KERRY: "Outside chance, Chris. Could it be done? The answer is yes. But he would view himself only as buying time and playing a game, in my judgment. Do we have to go through that process? The answer is yes. We’re precisely doing that. And I think that’s what Colin Powell did today." (MSNBC’s "Hardball," 2/5/02)
KERRY: "September 11th. I mean, that’s changed the dynamic of this country and - and, I think, people’s perceptions of what people are willing to do." (MSNBC’s "Hardball," 2/5/02)
KERRY: "And I think we’ve all reached a judgment that obviously the United States has to protect our national security interests. And we have to do what we think is right." (Fox News’ "The O’Reilly Factor," 5/22/02)
"I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq ..." - John Kerry, 7/29/02 Remarks at the 2002 DLC National Conversation, NY (Senator John Kerry, Speech To The 2002 DLC National Conversation, New York, NY, 7/29/02)
"... Saddam Hussein is a renegade and outlaw who turned his back on the tough conditions of his surrender put in place by the United Nations in 1991." - John Kerry, 7/29/02 Remarks at the 2002 DLC National Conversation, NY (Senator John Kerry, Speech To The 2002 DLC National Conversation, New York, NY, 7/29/02)
"If Saddam Hussein is unwilling to bend to the international community's already existing order, then he will have invited enforcement ..." - Sen. John Kerry, Op-Ed The New York Times 9/6/02 (Sen. John Kerry, Op-Ed, "We Still Have A Choice On Iraq," The New York Times, 9/6/02)
"...even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act." - Sen. John Kerry, Op-Ed The New York Times 9/6/02 (Sen. John Kerry, Op-Ed, "We Still Have A Choice On Iraq," The New York Times, 9/6/02)
KERRY: "I would disagree with John McCain that it’s the actual weapons of mass destruction he may use against us, it’s what he may do in another invasion of Kuwait or in a miscalculation about the Kurds or a miscalculation about Iran or particularly Israel. Those are the things that - that I think present the greatest danger. He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat." (CBS’ "Face The Nation," 9/15/02)
"But the president, as I also wrote in that article, always reserves the right to act unilaterally protect [sic] the interests of our country." (MSNBC’s "Hardball," 9/17/02)
"George, I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him." (ABC News Democrat Presidential Candidates Debate, Columbia, SC, 5/3/03)
Thursday, September 09, 2004
Vietnam Retrospective
This is Bob's email
Interesting to look at one aspect of the antiwar debate of 1971 from the vantage point of 2004. In political debate, people are free to make predictions about the future. Predicting the future is risk free until the time when the predicted event comes to pass.[on the Dick Cavett tv show, during a debate between John Kerry and John O'Neill]"Cavett asked whether either of us believed in the "cliche" that a bloodbath would occur if the United States were to withdraw from Vietnam. I answered that I thought that there would be a bloodbath given the assassinations we saw in the Can Mau region and the executions by the Viet Cong of South Vietnamese solders whose bodies we recovered in rivers and canals. Kerry answered in substance that it would never occur, that at most there might be five thousand people killed-- a number so small that it was "lunacy" to talk about it.Some 3.5 million people are estimated to have died in the Communist purges at the end of the Vietnam war, including the 2.5 million in the killing fields of Cambodia. In Laos, whole peoples were eliminated. There were 1.4 million refugees, many of whom made it to the United States. Tens of thousand of "boat people" perished at sea trying to escape. I often wonder if Kerry is haunted (as I am) by his answer and by the thought of those lost souls, who once loved and lived and experienced the joys of life, but whom he so casually dismissed that day."from "Unfit for Command" by John O'Neill and Jerome Corsi Ph.D. (page 18)_____________________Nowadays, most people seem to assume that the Vietnam was was a dishonorable war, morally indefensible, and a disgrace to the United States. Kerry and his fellow antiwar activists seem to have prevailed in writing political history.Given the (perhaps unexpected) consequence of our withdrawal, is this common assumptions properly debatable? Perhaps these innocent victims might have survived if we had held firm as we did in Korea? Perhaps it is the fact that we gave up, withdrew and abandoned the promises we made to the South Vietnamese which is our real badge of dishonor?
Interesting to look at one aspect of the antiwar debate of 1971 from the vantage point of 2004. In political debate, people are free to make predictions about the future. Predicting the future is risk free until the time when the predicted event comes to pass.[on the Dick Cavett tv show, during a debate between John Kerry and John O'Neill]"Cavett asked whether either of us believed in the "cliche" that a bloodbath would occur if the United States were to withdraw from Vietnam. I answered that I thought that there would be a bloodbath given the assassinations we saw in the Can Mau region and the executions by the Viet Cong of South Vietnamese solders whose bodies we recovered in rivers and canals. Kerry answered in substance that it would never occur, that at most there might be five thousand people killed-- a number so small that it was "lunacy" to talk about it.Some 3.5 million people are estimated to have died in the Communist purges at the end of the Vietnam war, including the 2.5 million in the killing fields of Cambodia. In Laos, whole peoples were eliminated. There were 1.4 million refugees, many of whom made it to the United States. Tens of thousand of "boat people" perished at sea trying to escape. I often wonder if Kerry is haunted (as I am) by his answer and by the thought of those lost souls, who once loved and lived and experienced the joys of life, but whom he so casually dismissed that day."from "Unfit for Command" by John O'Neill and Jerome Corsi Ph.D. (page 18)_____________________Nowadays, most people seem to assume that the Vietnam was was a dishonorable war, morally indefensible, and a disgrace to the United States. Kerry and his fellow antiwar activists seem to have prevailed in writing political history.Given the (perhaps unexpected) consequence of our withdrawal, is this common assumptions properly debatable? Perhaps these innocent victims might have survived if we had held firm as we did in Korea? Perhaps it is the fact that we gave up, withdrew and abandoned the promises we made to the South Vietnamese which is our real badge of dishonor?
