For Bush*t, It All Depends on the Meaning of 'Imminent'

[papau]

For Bush*t, It All Depends on the Meaning of 'Imminent'

"The White House today denied it ever warned that Saddam Hussein posed an 'imminent' threat to the United States. It is already smarting from the failure so far to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. 'I think some in the media have chosen to use the word 'imminent'. Those were not words we used. We used 'grave and gathering' threat,' spokesman Scott McClellan said. But if US President George W. Bush never called Saddam's Iraq an 'imminent threat' in so many words, he said it was 'urgent'... On January 26, 2003, CNN television asked White House communications director Dan Bartlett 'is he (Saddam) an imminent threat to US interests, either in that part of the world or to Americans right here at home?' 'Well, of course he is,' Bartlett replied." Bush keeps lying and soldiers keey dying - Impeach Bush Now!

http://www.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=19112

[GumboYaYa]

1. Aaaarrggghhhh! I'm getting so sick of no one in the press calling

this for the BS it is.

In the National Security Strategy of the United States George W. Bush declares that the United States is expanding its concept of "imminent threat" to include gathering dangers. Here is the link:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html.

Also, if there was no imminent threat then we violated the UN Charter and international law in invading. Which is it Georgie?

[CityZen-X]

2. Threat To Bu$h*t......

was in reality an eminence threat!

[grannylib]

3. Oh this lying sack of excrement...what a bastard. They used the word

"imminent" specifically and often; I am sure they have scrubbed the transcripts of his speeches but they're on tape/digital/whatever, and they can be found.
WMDs/WMD Programs...what's the difference, the Chimp asks belligerently??
Fucker.

[bearfartinthewoods]

12. 50 bucks donation to DU or the candidate of your choice

in your name if you find a tape with bush saying iraq or saddamn was an immenent thhreat

[treepig]

13. he basically says it in this speech

The set-up: who are rogue nations?

At the time of the Gulf War, we acquired irrefutable proof that Iraq’s designs were not limited to the chemical weapons it had used against Iran and its own people, but also extended to the acquisition of nuclear weapons and biological agents. In the past decade North Korea has become the world’s principal purveyor of ballistic missiles, and has tested increasingly capable missiles while developing its own WMD arsenal. Other rogue regimes seek nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons as well. These states’ pursuit of, and global trade in, such weapons has become a looming threat to all nations.

blah blah blah (deleted)

For centuries, international law recognized that nations need not suffer an attack before they can lawfully take action to defend themselves against forces that present an imminent danger of attack. Legal scholars and international jurists often conditioned the legitimacy of preemption on the existence of an imminent threat—most often a visible mobilization of armies, navies, and air forces preparing to attack.

We must adapt the concept of imminent threat to the capabilities and objectives of today’s adversaries. Rogue states (i.e., Iraq, as set-up above) and terrorists do not seek to attack us using conventional means. They know such attacks would fail. Instead, they rely on acts of terror and, potentially, the use of weapons of mass destruction—weapons that can be easily concealed, delivered covertly, and used without warning.

on edit, the link to the whitehouse page where this speech is referenced:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss5.html

on second edit, i'm not trying to get you to make any donations (so no need to nit-pick on that account, but if anyone can find a case of how this speech is NOT claiming an imminent threat from iraq on sound logical principles, i'd be interesting in hearing them)

[bearfartinthewoods]

14. sorry...i need an tape of him saying it.

i have no interest in trying to decipher bush logic this early in the AM

[treepig]

16. that's exactly what they're counting on

they use obtuse wording confident that no one will take the effort to put 2 and 2 together.

on edit, just to make it clear, this comment is not aimed at you, but rather at the media who should be fulfilling their responsibility to do this type of analysis.

[lovedems]

4. Does anybody understand why we are even arguing about the specific

words the chimp used? I don't care if he said IMMINENT or not. I don't give a shit if he said GRAVE AND GATHERING. The words he used are not the issue, it is the action. Good God chimp, you took us to war based on lies, I don't give a shit how you phrased the lie, it doesn't make it any less of a lie.

Stoopid POS. Your not smart enough to weasel your way out of this one.

End of rant. Just sick to death of the ignorance that comes from the highest office in the world.

[asjr]

8. And the

media just keeps on covering up for him. That is what sickens me. Wolf Blitzer and his ass kissing cronies at CNN make me want to puke.

[NoKingGeorge]

5. No Imminent = NO authorization = Crime.

The authorization from Congress states that it is to be used against an Imminent Threat. No Imminent = no authorization.

[TahitiNut]

6. Absent an "imminent" threat, what justifies a "preemptive" strike??

There can be no other justification for a unilateral, preemptive attack on a sovereign nation. Even that is arguably against US law as established by our accord with the United Nations Charter, to which we're bound. The Busholinis merely erode the legitimacy of their own actions by disclaiming their pretense that a threat was "imminent." Congress even emphaisized this in making the imminence of a threat a specific requirement for Executive War Powers.

[KansDem]

7. He sure as Hell knows what "imminent domain" means...

From his questionable military career, to his laughable attempts to present himself as a "rags-to-riches" oil industry entrepreneur, to his invocation of imminent domain for the purpose of taking land away from Arlington homeowners to build his baseball stadium, Molly Ivins cuts to the chase and calls 'em like she sees 'em.

http://www.bartcop.com/060203shrub.htm

[Wapsie B]

9. Don't worry about it.

They'll "find" WMD and OBL just about the time of the Democratic Convention, just in time to take the wind out of the sails of the Dem nominee, or so they hope.

[maggrwaggr]

10. McClellan is 100% right. The only thing imminent

was the threat to Bush that the inspectors were gonna find nothing and that we wouldn't have any justification to invade.

We all know that.

McClellan knows that. Bush knows that. That's the only reason we were in such a fucking hurry to invade the country.

Because they knew they might not have anything.

[ElementaryPenguin]

11. The Dem nominee should merely run an ad with this denial - every hour

from the time the Dem convention ends - until election day!! This is the most blatant lie every hoisted upon the American public! Americans may be dumb and uninformed - but they ain't THAT dumb and uninformed!! Yet another gargantuan miscalculation by ChimpCo - right up there with believing Paul O'Neill would fall in line with the idiot ideologues!!

:puke:
:argh:

[OneTwentyoNine]

15. All one has to do is replay the SOTU from 2003....

Spin this anyway they want but the truth of what Bush said is in that speech. Unfuckingbelievable......


David