Richard Brockie said:Mark Hickey said:Richard Brockie said:http://www.comedycentral.com/mp/play.php?reposid=/multimedia/tds/headlines/8154.html
Comedy Central?
Yes. I find it a sorry state that holding a politician to statements
they have made seems to be beyond the capability of a lot of the US
media.
You're kidding, right? Like that hasn't been played over and over and
over by the mainstream media?
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:The "evidence" being Bush's statement that "when it
comes to terrorism, you can't distinguish between Saddam and Al
Qaeda"??? Wait... that means Saddam is linked to the USS Cole. To
the problems in Northern Ireland, and to the guy who torched a bunch
of SUVs in Arizona too, right?
You begin to see the point. Bush was making a specific, politically
expedient, inferrence given the events of September 2001 to justify
forthcoming actions, ie: a linkage between Hussain and bin Laden.
That inference was received by the American public as numerous recent
polls have shown.
Think about this for a minute...
We've seen the best attempts by the Bush-bashers to put up the
"smoking gun quotes". They obviously failed miserably, and are now
blaming it all on "inference", and evil mind control (first the
president is an idiot, then he's an evil genius).
The few comments that keep getting splashed across the TV screens come
from the middle of lengthy speeches in which it's contextually obvious
that Bush is NOT making a tie between 9/11 and Saddam. Not all that
many people watch those speeches anyway - and are certainly NOT going
to catch one comment and make the illogical leap being suggested.
It's nonsensical to believe that Bush could "hypnotize" millions of
people into believing something he didn't say in a few words.
Even though most people weren't influenced by the speech itself, they
DO see the evening news running over and over and over the same
ground, making THEIR own inferneces, and playing the out of context
sound bites that support their inferneces.
Now who's really to blame for the result? Bush for possibly
mentioning Saddam and 9/11 in the same sentence a couple times - or
the media for trying to GIVE that impression?
And if they weren't, how come the media doesn't continually play the
(many) available sound bites of Bush saying "I never made any
connection between 9/11 and Saddam"?
Quoted message said:As to Northern Ireland, a substantial part of the IRA's funding came
from sources within the US, and, er... Lybia.
Indeed it did - a shameful thing, IMHO. Anyone who contributed to the
terrorists in NI are no better than the Saudis who did the same when
they financed Al Qaeda.
Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
