Bush *jokes* about not finding WMD...

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Tasteless.



Self-deprecating humor is fine. In fact, it's the whole point of the address the President usually gives at the White House Correspondents Dinner. But to joke about the now defunct rationale for invading another country- to joke about the reason for sending in hundreds of thousands of troops, killing nearly 600 of them and wounding thousands, killing thousands of Iraqi civilians- to joke about that is beyond reprehensible.



The President disagrees. (article here



\
«13456715

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 286
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,780member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ShawnJ

    Tasteless.



    Self-deprecating humor is fine. In fact, it's the whole point of the address the President usually gives at the White House Correspondents Dinner. But to joke about the now defunct rationale for invading another country- to joke about the reason for sending in hundreds of thousands of troops, killing nearly 600 of them and wounding thousands, killing thousands of Iraqi civilians- to joke about that is beyond reprehensible.



    The President disagrees. (article here



    \




    Isn't the point of the Correspondants Dinner to poke fun at the year's headlines? Here in Canada we have the Press Gallery Dinner, which is our equivalent. Seems to me to not mention WMDs at the dinner would have been odd, as they featured prominently in the biggest story of the year.
  • Reply 2 of 286
    fellowshipfellowship Posts: 5,038member
    And then you have This



    Then you have:



    "Pakistan's president pardoned the country's top nuclear scientist Thursday for leaking weapons technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea."



    And you have this:

    "Musharraf was unapologetic about pardoning Khan, whom he referred to as a "hero" many times in a two-hour news conference at army headquarters Thursday. "Whatever I have done, I have tried to shield him," he said."



    Taken from This Link



    Where are Bush and Blair on this? Funny they do not demand our "US friendly" partner Pakistan to seize Kahn's home and assets and put him in prison or worse.



    Double FREAKING Standards. Bush has no integrity. The war in Iraq was not about WMD. If WMD were the concern Kahn would either be dead or in prison today not keeping his millions and his mansions in Pakistan.



    Yes this pisses me off.



    Fellowship
  • Reply 3 of 286
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 16,937member
    You know, at this point it really doesn't matter what Bush does...the Bush haters will attack him for everything. God forbid the President shows a sense of humor about what is surely an embarrassment for him (and it is whether you think he lied or not).



    Get over it.
  • Reply 4 of 286
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 16,937member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Fellowship

    And then you have This



    Then you have:



    "Pakistan's president pardoned the country's top nuclear scientist Thursday for leaking weapons technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea."



    And you have this:

    "Musharraf was unapologetic about pardoning Khan, whom he referred to as a "hero" many times in a two-hour news conference at army headquarters Thursday. "Whatever I have done, I have tried to shield him," he said."



    Taken from This Link



    Where are Bush and Blair on this? Funny they do not demand our "US friendly" partner Pakistan to seize Kahn's home and assets and put him in prison or worse.



    Double FREAKING Standards. Bush has no integrity. The war in Iraq was not about WMD. If WMD were the concern Kahn would either be dead or in prison today not keeping his millions and his mansions in Pakistan.



    Yes this pisses me off.



    Fellowship




    Of course it does. Fellowship, I find your flopping on Bush almost hilarious. And who will you vote for? Kerry?
  • Reply 5 of 286
    fellowshipfellowship Posts: 5,038member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by SDW2001

    You know, at this point it really doesn't matter what Bush does...the Bush haters will attack him for everything. God forbid the President shows a sense of humor about what is surely an embarrassment for him (and it is whether you think he lied or not).



    Get over it.




    I don't hate Bush because he is conservative. I don't hate Bush because he is from Texas. I don't hate Bush because he declares he is "Christian" (true or not).



    I am Upset at Bush because what he does is not ringing true with this reasoning behind the Iraq war.



    Funny who Bush considers friends of the US and get to fly freely just after 9/11



    And funny Bush feels it is ok for Kahn to be pardoned and does nothing to put pressure on this THUG.



    Yet we focus on Iraq and create more reasons for terrorists to hate the US.



    I don't "Hate Bush" I just don't believe what he says and for good reason.



    I think on my own and you should do likewise or one day if not already we will lose our freedom to do anything about it.



    Fellowship
  • Reply 6 of 286
    wrong robotwrong robot Posts: 3,907member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by SDW2001

    You know, at this point it really doesn't matter what Bush does...the Bush haters will attack him for everything. God forbid the President shows a sense of humor about what is surely an embarrassment for him (and it is whether you think he lied or not).



    Get over it.




    I'm still pissed at him over that sandwich he had last week, didn't he see Dave?! doesn't he know how to make a damn sandwich
  • Reply 7 of 286
    fellowshipfellowship Posts: 5,038member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by SDW2001

    Of course it does. Fellowship, I find your flopping on Bush almost hilarious. And who will you vote for? Kerry?



    Honestly they both make me sick to my stomache.



    I may not vote



    Fellowship
  • Reply 8 of 286
    jobjob Posts: 420member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Fellowship

    Where are Bush and Blair on this? Funny they do not demand our "US friendly" partner Pakistan to seize Kahn's home and assets and put him in prison or worse.



    If Pakistan isn't going to extradite him, there is little Bush or Blair could do.



    They could "demand" all they want, but the end result is that Musharraf will pardon him anyways. Hell, international pressure didn't stop our President from going to war, so how can we expect that same pressure to work in our favor.



    Musharraf isn't exactly known for his integrity either. He took over in a military coup FFS.



    Libya is getting rid of it's WMDs anyways and I'm pretty sure the US has a close watch on both North Korea and Iran.
  • Reply 9 of 286
    jobjob Posts: 420member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Fellowship

    And funny Bush feels it is ok for Kahn to be pardoned and does nothing to put pressure on this THUG.



    Do you even have an official statement from the Administration backing this claim?



    How on Earth do you know Bush's personal views on this matter, especially when this happened today?



    [edit: typo]
  • Reply 10 of 286
    argentoargento Posts: 483member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Fellowship

    Honestly they both make me sick to my stomache.



    I may not vote



    Fellowship




    Nader
  • Reply 11 of 286
    fellowshipfellowship Posts: 5,038member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by job

    If Pakistan isn't going to extradite him, there is little Bush or Blair could do.



    They could "demand" all they want, but the end result is that Musharraf will pardon him anyways. Hell, international pressure didn't stop our President from going to war, so how can we expect that same pressure to work in our favor.



    Musharraf isn't exactly known for his integrity either. He took over in a military coup FFS.



    Libya is getting rid of it's WMDs anyways and I'm pretty sure the US has a close watch on both North Korea and Iran.




    The point is this:



    A person that has done what Kahn has done has no business being pardoned PERIOD.



    "Strongly worded criticism of Khan's pardon came Thursday from former U.S. chief weapons inspector David Kay.



    "I can think of no one who deserves less to be pardoned," Kay said in Washington. He called the disclosures "a wake-up call" and said Khan was "running essentially a Sam's Club" of weapons technology.




    Taken from This Link



    How I agree with David Kay in this matter. What kind of message do we send when we slap this guy on the wrist?



    What kind of integrity do we speak with when we talk about Iraq and WMD when we let this guy make millions off this distribution of WMD technology and parts / materials to enemies of the West and then he is allowed to keep his millions and is pardoned???



    Shameless and not only that the world is more dangerous due to this lack of real leadership.



    Kahn needs to be put away.



    Fellowship
  • Reply 12 of 286
    crazychestercrazychester Posts: 1,339member
    He's a bit of a frickin' worry your president, isn't he?



    I saw the footage of George "being funny" on the news this morning. It was like something out of a British pantomime. I felt like yelling at the TV "LOOK BEHIND YOU GEORGE!"



    Don't give up your day job George. No hang on, that's not right. DO give up your day job George. Oh hell now I've confused myself.
  • Reply 13 of 286
    fellowshipfellowship Posts: 5,038member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by job

    Do you even have an official statement from the Administration backing this claim?



    How on Earth do you know Bush's personal views on this matter, especially when this happened today?



    [edit: typo]




    Funny you should ask:



    "White House spokesman Scott McClellan sidestepped repeated questions about whether the Bush administration wants Pakistan to join the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.



    "President Musharraf provided us assurances that the government of Pakistan was not involved in any kind of proliferation activity," McClellan said."




    Taken from This Link



    Does that assure you personally? Speaking for myself I have to say not one bit am I assured. Just the opposite.



    Fellowship
  • Reply 14 of 286
    jobjob Posts: 420member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Fellowship

    The point is this:



    A person that has done what Kahn has done has no business being pardoned PERIOD.



    How I agree with David Kay in this matter. What kind of message do we send when we slap this guy on the wrist?



    What kind of integrity do we speak with when we talk about Iraq and WMD when we let this guy make millions off this distribution of WMD technology and parts / materials to enemies of the West and then he is allowed to keep his millions and is pardoned???



    Shameless and not only that the world is more dangerous due to this lack of real leadership.



    Kahn needs to be put away.



    Fellowship




    Except we arn't the ones "slapping him on the wrist." (See emphasis above.)



    If you want to be ticked off at anybody, I'd be mad at Musharraf, not Bush.



    It's not as if Bush was the one who pardoned him.



    It's an odd way of getting mad at Bush. I find it rather odd that you can get peeved at Bush for not speaking out on the day it happened, yet not say a word about the person who actually pardoned him.



    I don't quite see how you can get angry at Bush for the actions of another person.



    Anyways, this is probably why I don't get involved in the political threads.
  • Reply 15 of 286
    fellowshipfellowship Posts: 5,038member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by job

    Except we arn't the ones "slapping him on the wrist." (See emphasis above.)



    If you want to be ticked off at anybody, I'd be mad at Musharraf, not Bush.



    It's not as if Bush was the one who pardoned him.



    It's an odd way of getting mad at Bush. I find it rather odd that you can get peeved at Bush for not speaking out on the day it happened, yet not say a word about the person who actually pardoned him.



    I don't quite see how you can get angry at Bush for the actions of another person.



    Anyways, this is probably why I don't get involved in the political threads.




    This did not happen today. The story says thursday but this is old news.



    And NO I am upset at Bush because if we can go to Iraq we can target Kahn.



    One way or another. Bush has found himself in a corner with his bedfellows in the Middle East and now we bow, wink and pardon the real threats in the world.



    Sickening.



    Fellowship
  • Reply 16 of 286
    baumanbauman Posts: 1,248member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Fellowship

    Honestly they both make me sick to my stomache.



    I may not vote



    Fellowship




    Not voting says nothing. If anything, vote for a third party. A write in. Something.



    So much of America doesn't vote it's ridiculous, and abstaining means nothing.
  • Reply 17 of 286
    jobjob Posts: 420member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Fellowship

    Does that assure you personally? Speaking for myself I have to say not one bit am I assured. Just the opposite.



    Fellowship




    I'd say this might be the reason why Musharraf pardoned him:



    Quote:

    But Khan is regarded by many of Pakistan's 150 million people as a national hero. Trained in Europe, he founded the program that made Pakistan the Islamic world's first nuclear-armed state in 1998, to rival the military might of its historic enemy and larger neighbor, India.



    "From Musharraf's standpoint, it's far preferable to try to draw a line under the issue by accepting Khan's confession, rather than run the political risks of a full-scale investigation and trial," said Gary Samore of the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London.



    "They do not want to embarrass him further and make his job more difficult," said Talat Masood, a Pakistani military and political analyst. "Without Musharraf, the whole war on terror would be compromised."



    The quote was taken from the link you provided.



    We may not like Musharraf's actions, but he is looking out for his political future.



    Anyways, I'm not trying to change your opinion or anything. I just thought it was odd that you could get mad at Bush because of what someone else did.



    I've found online political discussions to be somewhat of an oxymoron. They arn't discussions, just tennis matches, back and forth, back and forth..and they don't really do much of anything, besides annoy people.
  • Reply 18 of 286
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bauman

    Not voting says nothing. If anything, vote for a third party. A write in. Something.



    So much of America doesn't vote it's ridiculous, and abstaining means nothing.




    Spare a thought for the stay?at?home voter

    His empty eyes gaze at strange beauty shows

    And a parade of the gray suited grafters

    A choice of cancer or polio





    ROLLING STONES - SALT OF THE EARTH
  • Reply 19 of 286
    naderfannaderfan Posts: 156member
    well, for me personally, I am not suprised that Musharraf only slapped him on the wrist. I understand that we needed an ally over there and so we were willing to let some things slide in Pakistan. But I agree with Fellowship. Bush has made WMD a huge thing and even though this country is our ally (for the time being), something should have been said or done, in public from our President. I'm not saying we need to cut ties with Pakistan or invade them, but this guy was not only selling plans, materials, etc., he even set up a help line in case you couldn't figure it out on your own! Now, in my book, that's a LOT more dangerous than Saddam possibly trying to get a nuclear weapon. This guy was willing to sell to whoever would pay him money...a lot better chance that OBL would get weapons from him than there ever was of him getting it from Saddam. No, we can't punish him. But we could at least pretend to do something.
  • Reply 20 of 286
    jobjob Posts: 420member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bauman

    So much of America doesn't vote it's ridiculous, and abstaining means nothing.



    Well, abstaining might suggest a lack of confidence in our democratic process, but I don't quite think that's what people are going for when they don't vote.



Sign In or Register to comment.