baldguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 10:08 AM
Original message |
Rumsfeld: Iraq Wasn't a Distraction |
|
snip Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld insisted Sunday that Iraq (news - web sites) was not a distraction for the Bush administration in the days before and after the Sept. 11 attacks. more http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040328/ap_on_re_us/sept_11_commission&cid=519&ncid=716Iraq wasn't a distraction for Bush after 9-11. 9-11 was a distraction from Iraq.
|
hang a left
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 10:10 AM
Response to Original message |
1. nope, not a distraction. |
leesa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 10:17 AM
Response to Original message |
2. 9-11 was to allow an invasion of Iraq (and Afghanistan). |
Jim Sagle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 10:24 AM
Response to Original message |
3. 911 was a good inside job well done. |
nolabels
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 10:32 AM
Response to Original message |
4. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld is also a failure |
|
in the article
Asked if Bush should apologize to the Sept. 11 families for the government's failure to prevent the attacks, Rumsfeld said the president has made clear his sorrow.
"I think the president has recognized the failure that existed and the concern he has for those people and the fact that the government, our government, was there and that attack took place. I don't know quite what else one would do," the defense secretary said on "Fox News Sunday."
With a budget in the 500+ billion (probably close to a trillion when you consider all the periphery required to keep it in place)the guy has nothing but few detached words. I never ever considered the fool to be protecting anything except other peoples fraud or ill gotten profits for his personal friends
Shouldn't they just call him Secretary of Traitors Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld
|
truthisfreedom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 10:33 AM
Response to Original message |
5. "nope nope. not a distraction. nope. umm... distraction from which?" |
|
"you were talking about Clinton's thingie, right?"
|
sniffa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 10:35 AM
Response to Original message |
|
distraction wouLd be seLective 'Leaking' of cLassified info. distraction wouLd be a phoney mars iniative. distraction wouLd be donaLd 'bumbLes' rumsfeLd giving answers to questions not asked. distraction wouLd be bumbLes' overuse of hand gestures.
i couLd go on.
a top distraction though, is indeed attacking iraq.
|
radfringe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 10:49 AM
Response to Original message |
7. Iraq wasn't the distraction |
|
9-11 and Afghanistan distracted them from Iraq
threw their little time-table off by a year or so
|
boobooday
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-28-04 10:59 AM
Response to Original message |
8. The terrorists were the distraction |
|
For Rummy. But hey, what a convenient smokescreen for his evil plans! http://www.wgoeshome.com
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat May 04th 2024, 03:46 PM
Response to Original message |