LMAO "fixed" means "focused"????

[helderheid]

From
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1424154/posts?q=1&&page=51

I have just read the latest memo that is the basis for Michael Smith's story. It actually is a pretty clear and concise summary of the thinking that should precede any major military action. Its constant and unequivocal focus on WMD are very important. There is no sign whatsoever that this concern was part of an excuse - the Brits believed the WMD were there and represented a major destabilizing factor. Of course, the issue of regime change is not straightforward - but it is also clear that Blair and his cabinet had zero, absolutely zero belief (or trust) in Annan's ability to get Saddam to agree to full UN inspections.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1650822_2,00.html

IMHO we should make sure these memos get seriously read. AFAICS the Dems are pointing at the word "fixed" and interpreting it as "made up" as opposed to "focused". Lets encourage the original writer to say what he means in words the Dems will not be able to twist and distort.

:rofl:

[blm]

1. And do they define "Cooking the intel books on Iraq" as reported by CIA

analysts interviewed in Oct 2002 as stirring occasionally over low heat?

[Lex]

7. Yeah, and LYING HIS ASS OFF

means his body was prone and his butt became separated from it.

[The Doctor.]

10. Ah... a recipe for good intelligence!

And besides, books are too tough and chewey if they are not properly stewed and seasoned.

[libertypirate]

2. delusional nitwits

[wryter2000]

3. Thin?

So, what does he think the case was "thin" meant? How about military action was seen as "inevitable"?

Someone posted a link to a Newsmax article about how the original memos were destroyed (which they weren't, of course). IMHO, this means they're really worried. Good sign.

[The Doctor.]

4. It looks as if the Freepers refuse to "focus" on the overt context

of the documents.

How amusing it is that everything about those minutes makes clear the intent to go to war no matter what and yet these poor stunted creatures are arguing the meaning of the word 'is'.

[helderheid]

6. heheheeh

:rofl:

[TahitiNut]

5. OK ... let's take them all to the doctor and get them "focused".

:evilgrin:

[helderheid]

9. you're killing me!!

:rofl:

[MojoXN]

8. They tried this before..

By claiming that the British use the word "fix" in an alternative sense, as in drawn together. Total BS. The British use fix just as we Americans do: as in fix a fight, or a fixed football game, i.e. fraudulent or fabricated.

MojoXN

[The Doctor.]

12. And the context is unmistakable-

The intelligence was being fixed "around" the policy.

The policy - military invasion.

Oh wait, now I get it! They mean that the administrattion was only "focused" on intelligence that would support the policy, Ok that explains it - Bush is exonerated for only cherry-picking intelligence to convince Americans to illegally invade Iraq. That's all these freepers are saying - that they were 'focused' on intel that supported their policy... which was to invade... all along.

So what the hell did they need the Office of Special Plans for?

[LynnTheDem]

11. Wow. Rightwingnuts hit a new high in total stupidity. I'm amazed.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Burried News]

13. Did they say Focus or Fuck us? Dumbass ducks.

[chopper]

14. heh

i'm surprised they're not arguing about what the definition of 'is' is.

[Terran]

15. "The Brits believed the WMD were there..."

Bzzzt! Oh, sorry, sorry, wrong answer. See this thread, Sparky.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1565074