Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

SIGN OF THE TIMES: This woman is in charge of US security and IRAQ!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
ShaneGR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 02:27 AM
Original message
SIGN OF THE TIMES: This woman is in charge of US security and IRAQ!


Isn't it ironic, don't you think, that the woman who failed to prevent 9/11 is now in charge of your security and the rebuilding process in Iraq? This is the same woman who has repeatedly lied about pre-9/11 warnings and basically everything about Iraq.

Basically, she's supposed to be in charge of making you safe. But somehow she's also in charge of rebuilding a country on the other side of the planet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
JohnKleeb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 02:28 AM
Response to Original message
1. *screams*
Then goes in to trance, thank god for music, this scares me, if they put her as head of security at my school, y'all better pray for this sob because he may not make it. BTW sgr she looks very evil in that picture, I am :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eleny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 02:30 AM
Response to Original message
2. Looks like the shrub's team doesn't have much depth on the bench
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 02:31 AM
Response to Original message
3. She lied about the 45 Minute Attack
She came out and "implied" that we could have mushroom clouds over American cities created by Iraq. She's an academic that should have remained one. She has been a total joke as National Security Advisor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eleny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 02:35 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Well, she was the protege of Poppy's NSA...
so she's been around administrations.

Seems like this administration can't go outside the BFEE for expertise. It's got to be the tight cadre of insiders.

Maybe that group is starting to implode on itself? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #6
15. Perhaps "Going Septic" Might Be Another Way
to phrase it...

"Maybe that group is starting to implode on itself?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissMarple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 02:40 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. She also said they had, no one had, any idea that 9/11could happen.
Does no one else read Tom Clancy? The woman lies. What else can I say, except to ask why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neuvocat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 02:33 AM
Response to Original message
4. Very miserable and angry.
Look at this photo. It isn't one that's been taken spontaneously. She's sitting there waiting for it to be taken and clearly she doesn't give a damn that she isn't smiling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kat 333 Donating Member (312 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 02:04 AM
Response to Reply #4
17. I always wonder
if she is a man who had one of those operations to become a woman. Something is, quite seriously, NOT right about this "woman". She screams "Severe Issues"

Then again maybe she is just a bitch with an attitude that needs a reality check. Ah well no worries. Hell hath no furry on her judgement day. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scairp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 04:09 AM
Response to Reply #17
22. I think what we have going on is...
...a little "social concern" in the White House. Because she is a woman AND a minority, they are giving her credit for being better than she really is. Hmm, where have we heard that before? Is it true here? Is Condi getting a pass on her shortcomings as NSA to make the administration seem more socially conscious? You gotta wonder. Being a woman myself, I want to see more women in positions of real power, but not incompetent ones. That only hurts our cause in the end. Condi, along with her male collegues and her boss, all need to hit the road.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ugarte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 02:34 AM
Response to Original message
5. Now she's on the hot seat
Iraq's going to take her down just like Herr Rumsfeld.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpaceCatMeetsMars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 06:08 AM
Response to Reply #5
23. Beep Beep Beep
That's the sound my automatic rice cooker makes when the Rice is cooked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 02:48 AM
Response to Original message
8. Think about how the Iraqis feel about this. In their Islamic society,...
...no woman is supposed to hold leadership positions at any level. And for them to be told that they now must deal with a non-muslim woman from another country is highly inflammatory/insulting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 02:59 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. actually
until we invaded women were in prominent possitions in
Iraq since this was one of the most secular societies
in the middle east. Don't count on it remaining that way though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neebob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 03:03 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Good point
But then everything they've done in Iraq is highly inflammatory and insulting.

Incidentally, earlier this evening I caught Morton Kondracke and some other guy on Fox - are they the Beltway Boys? I was just flipping channels - yacking about the administration falling apart and someone saying Condi was Bush's choice for Secretary of State in 2004.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 05:55 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. First, Window dressing. Then Excuses, Now, a Set up to take the hits
Condi, like Arnie and Bush, are being used. Most of them are being used by the Master Pubs.

It sure is an ugly picture of a drab woman. Rather homely.

Oh well, :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 06:15 AM
Response to Original message
12. she is in waaaay over her head as the national security adviser.
with these added duties, you can expect the situation iraq to get even more fucked up.

shows how puckered this admin. is that they couldn't reach out and find someone more quailified, rather than piling more duties on this moron?

and she's such an unconvincing liar. oy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpaceCatMeetsMars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 06:46 AM
Response to Original message
13. It is so strange
how Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and now, Condi have been photographed recently with these extremely angry, petulant, defiant expressions. They are such exaggerated expressions. Yet they are at the top of power and are still pretty much getting their way with everything.

You see the same attitude and expressions with the conservatives like the Fox News people and Ann Coulter and O'Reilly and other such people. They get everything they want and yet are still angry. It's like something is eating these people up inside. Poor little bullies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pretzel4gore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 07:15 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. the saintly Che said it best...
'northing fail like success when working for the devil'
(and the bush crims know alot of the real nasty secrets, the stuff that would make a psychopath blanch!)
:-0
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JNelson6563 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-12-03 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
16. this picture shows how ugly she is
on the inside.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salmonhorse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 02:10 AM
Response to Original message
18. That's the look of someone who has just become Bush's firewall...
...and in that process given (by the Bush family) a chance to clean up the whole freaking mess out from under the highly destructive Rumsfeld.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blkgrl Donating Member (234 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 02:22 AM
Response to Original message
19. I haven't seen any evidence to indicate that this woman
is as evil as Cheney and Rumsfeld. Maybe I haven't seen enough, but it seems as though she really believes in what she's doing and is simply misinformed. I do see your point though about the hypocrisy/inconsistencies within the Bush administration (hinting that she caused 911 but then appointing her to this position).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 02:53 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. Too generous with BENEFIT OF DOUBT
LOL, way too generous. Think the way Pubs do for a moment. Think cynical. the truth perhaps, lies inbetween.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-03 03:55 AM
Response to Reply #19
21. evil? how about inept
she has done a terrible job, but everyone in the mainstream media seems to overlook it. over at the dailyhowler, I did a quick search and here is what I got:

Last Friday, the White House released eight pages from the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate about Iraqi WMD. We congratulate the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank and Dana Priest for stressing the most remarkable fact from the press corps’ Friday briefing. Their article led the Saturday Post. Headline: “Warning in Iraq Report Unread/Bush, Rice Did Not See State’s Objection.” Here was the startling first paragraph:

MILBANK/PRIEST: President Bush and his national security adviser did not entirely read the most authoritative prewar assessment of U.S. intelligence on Iraq, including a State Department claim that an allegation Bush would later use in his State of the Union address was “highly dubious,” White House officials said yesterday.
As the transcript of the session shows, the “senior official” who briefed reporters did say that neither President Bush nor Condoleezza Rice had read the entire 90-page document.
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh072103.shtml
see also: http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh073003.shtml

Then look here for the uranium/Africa stuff:
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh071403.shtml

Then this:
After September 11, Rice said that no one could have imagined airplanes being deliberately flown into buildings. (There were long-standings security warnings about that.) When the flap about the uranium-from-Africa broke, the White House explained that Rice hadn’t completely read the National Intelligence Estimate in which the State Department’s doubts were expressed. (Once the heat was off, Rice changed the story, saying that she had read the crucial report.) Now we’re told—unless Kamen is joking—that Rice was misled in pre-war planning by the fact that the palaces were so big and shiny.
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh091003.shtml

And on and on. Maybe it's not evil to avoid responsibility and to lie about what American intelligence knew. I don't know. But Dr. Rice has shown herself to be less than adequate and she is getting rewarded for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 13th 2024, 06:15 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC