Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Go Back   Dallas-Mavs.com Forums > Everything Else > Political Arena

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-03-2009, 01:01 PM   #1
Underdog
Moderator
 
Underdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 41.21.1
Posts: 36,143
Underdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond repute
Default Is Dick Cheney high on drugs???

Two separate cases of "too little too late" from the ex-VP within 24 hours of each other...

Why didn't he PUBLICLY take these stances when he was in a position of power and why is he pulling a 180 all of a sudden?

***I'd like this thread to focus more on Dick Cheney's sudden flip-flop, rather than the issues themselves (we already have threads for the Iraq War and Gay Marriage...)***


Quote:
Cheney: No 'evidence' of Iraq, 9/11 link

link

Former Vice President Dick Cheney says there was “never any evidence” that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq played any role in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.

“On the question of whether or not Iraq was involved in 9/11, there was never any evidence to prove that,” Cheney said during an interview Monday night with Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren.

“There was some reporting early on, for example, that Mohammed Atta had met with a senior Iraqi intelligence official,” Cheney said. “But that was never borne out.”

In a 2003 interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Cheney said that “the Czechs alleged that Mohamed Atta, the lead attacker, met in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official five months before the attack.”

But Cheney added, “We’ve never been able to develop any more of that yet, either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don’t know.”

Cheney said Monday that former CIA Director George Tenet brought to the Bush White House information pertaining to potential links between the hijacker and Iraq as “it became available.” But Cheney pointed out that Tenet “did say and did testify that there was an ongoing relationship between al Qaeda and Iraq, but no proof that Iraq was involved in 9/11.”

The former vice president explained away the early uncertainty of the connection by insisting that intelligence gathering is “more an art form than a science,” pointing to several examples of past CIA failures.

“They misread Saddam Hussein's intent when he invaded Kuwait in 1990,” Cheney said. “They underestimated the extent of the Iraqi program to try to acquire nuclear capability back in '90 and '91. They missed 9/11.”

Cheney did not list the never-found Iraqi weapons of mass destruction as an intelligence failure, saying only that the CIA and the broader intelligence community have done a “magnificent job as part of the effort to keep the United States safe these last seven and a half years.”

“The intelligence community has had some enormous successes in the last few years,” he said. “You usually don't hear about the successes. What you hear about are the train wrecks, the things that didn't work out quite right.”
Quote:
Cheney on gay marriage: 'Freedom for everyone'

link

WASHINGTON – Former Vice President Dick Cheney said Monday he supports gays being able to marry but believes states, not the federal government, should make the decision.

"I think, you know, freedom means freedom for everyone," Cheney said in a speech at the National Press Club. "I think people ought to be free to enter into any kind of union they wish, any kind of arrangement they wish."

Cheney, who has a gay daughter, said marriage has always been a state issue.

"And I think that's the way it ought to be handled today, that is, on a state-by-state basis. Different states will make different decisions. But I don't have any problem with that. I think people ought to get a shot at that," he said.
__________________

These days being a fan is a competition to see who can be the most upset when
your team loses. That proves you love winning more. That's how it works.

Last edited by Underdog; 06-03-2009 at 01:13 PM. Reason: haste messes up copy/paste
Underdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 06-03-2009, 01:20 PM   #2
alexamenos
Diamond Member
 
alexamenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Basketball fan nirvana
Posts: 5,625
alexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond repute
Default

I think his baboon heart is probably malfunctioning.

The Saddam-Osama connection was a false pre-text from Day 1. I'd say the reason he's flipped on the subject is simply because it's no longer because it's necessary to maintain the lie.
__________________
"It does not take a brain seargant to know the reason this team struggles." -- dmack24
alexamenos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 01:44 PM   #3
Mavdog
Diamond Member
 
Mavdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
Mavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud of
Default

it's a bit odd that cheney has made himself so visible lately, when he was so invisible most of his tenure in office.

the backpeddling on iraq is just attempting to be revisionist, and hopefully he will be held accountable and meet no success. there were clear and direct statements on iraqi links (mentioned in the article) that will make it impossible for cheney to rewrite the past.

the gay marriage thing isn't too surprising actually, first there's his lesbian daughter and family situations do tend to change many people's viewpoints, second if indeed he is a true political conservative the idea that limits on an individual's rights by denying them the right to marry who they choose shouldn't be supported nor embraced.

but again, what's up with all this desire for publicity? is he (ahh, tell me it isn't so...) thinking he may run for office again? does he just miss all the attention?
Mavdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 02:27 PM   #4
Flacolaco
Rooting for the laundry
 
Flacolaco's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 21,342
Flacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond repute
Default

For those familiar with Futurama, I am pretty sure a Dick Cheney administration would look a lot like future Nixon's does

__________________
Flacolaco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 02:35 PM   #5
Underdog
Moderator
 
Underdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 41.21.1
Posts: 36,143
Underdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond repute
Default

__________________

These days being a fan is a competition to see who can be the most upset when
your team loses. That proves you love winning more. That's how it works.
Underdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 02:43 PM   #6
Underdog
Moderator
 
Underdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 41.21.1
Posts: 36,143
Underdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog View Post
the gay marriage thing isn't too surprising actually, first there's his lesbian daughter and family situations do tend to change many people's viewpoints, second if indeed he is a true political conservative the idea that limits on an individual's rights by denying them the right to marry who they choose shouldn't be supported nor embraced.
Actually, that's the part that gets me the most - Cheney had a chance to turn Gay Marriage into a non-issue in 2004, but he opted to stay mum about it while his party turned it into a crusade...

Of course, the stance somewhat backfired when gay unions were brought to the forefront of the national psyche - suddenly everybody in the country had an opinion, not just homosexuals (and I say "somewhat backfired" because the whole point of bringing up Gay Marriage in the first place was to detract attention from the Iraq War during the 2004 Presidential Debates - they certainly succeeded in that regard...)
__________________

These days being a fan is a competition to see who can be the most upset when
your team loses. That proves you love winning more. That's how it works.

Last edited by Underdog; 06-03-2009 at 02:46 PM. Reason: typoez
Underdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 03:22 PM   #7
alexamenos
Diamond Member
 
alexamenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Basketball fan nirvana
Posts: 5,625
alexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond repute
Default

The whole osama-saddam link thing was absolutely fascinating to watch on so many levels that it's hard to even know where to begin. The whole thing was just freaking insane. I mean...

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Powell and all those other dickheads didn't actually spend much time (if any) saying that Saddam was behind 9-11. At most they'd say that Saddam and Osama had a relationship of some sort (...a terse, brief meeting between iraqi field agents and wahibi wannabe terrorists generally being the extent of the alleged relationship). But the case was all about Saddam and dubya emm dees and liberating the shit out of the iraqis.

on a rational, explicit level at least....

The case for connecting Saddam and Obama was made on an implicit and emotional level, not on a rational and explicit level. It was some darkly genius propaganda, IMO. Everyone believed that Saddam was behind 9-11 ....

....at one point, several years after the fact, something like 60% of the US still thought that Saddam was behind 9-11...I'd bet money that 92bdad still believes this is the case. But insanely large numbers of people nonetheless believed something which a) was silly on it's face; and b) was never alleged by anyone other than crackpot conspiracy theorists and a handful of hi-vis neocons.

...but I digress...

....everyone believed that Saddam was behind 9-11 even though Bush and Co never said this was the case. Instead of saying that Saddam did it, Bush would start a sentence with Saddam and finish the sentence with planes flying into the World Trade Centers....'saddam is an evil guy, and let us not forget the memory of what evil guys can do when they fly big planes into big buildings' blah blah blah. It wasn't that he said that Saddam masterminded the attacks, but instead he just constantly reinforced an emotional connection between Saddam and 9-11.

darkly genius propaganda....

....So Cheney never had to so much argue that there was a connection as he had to be careful to argue that it was possible that there was a connection to avoid any cognitive dissonance between the emotional connection between Saddam and Obama and the intellectual absurdity of a connection between the two.

anyhoo...those were crazy times. I kind of miss them, because I think the economic shit from the present administration is far more disturbing (and has more dire long term implications) than anything Bush and his band of miscreaant criminals pulled in the early oughts.
__________________
"It does not take a brain seargant to know the reason this team struggles." -- dmack24

Last edited by alexamenos; 06-03-2009 at 03:28 PM.
alexamenos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 03:30 PM   #8
Flacolaco
Rooting for the laundry
 
Flacolaco's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 21,342
Flacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond reputeFlacolaco has a reputation beyond repute
Default

I guess I never paid close attention...but...really? I totally missed that.

I never thought Saddam was behind 9/11 in the slightest bit and never heard anyone say they thought he was. I only ever heard things like "weapons of mass destruction" and "harboring terrorists".
__________________
Flacolaco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 03:31 PM   #9
dalmations202
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Just outside the Metroplex
Posts: 5,539
dalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexamenos View Post
The whole osama-saddam link thing was absolutely fascinating to watch on so many levels that it's hard to even know where to begin. The whole thing was just freaking insane. I mean...

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Powell and all those other dickheads didn't actually spend much time (if any) saying that Saddam was behind 9-11. At most they'd say that Saddam and Osama had a relationship of some sort (...a terse, brief meeting between iraqi field agents and wahibi wannabe terrorists generally being the extent of the alleged relationship). But the case was all about Saddam and dubya emm dees and liberating the shit out of the iraqis.

on a rational, explicit level at least....

The case for connecting Saddam and Obama was made on an implicit and emotional level, not on a rational and explicit level. It was some darkly genius propaganda, IMO. Everyone believed that Saddam was behind 9-11 ....

....at one point, several years after the fact, something like 60% of the US still thought that Saddam was behind 9-11...I'd bet money that 92bdad still believes this is the case. But insanely large numbers of people nonetheless believed something which a) was silly on it's face; and b) was never alleged by anyone other than crackpot conspiracy theorists and a handful of hi-vis neocons.

...but I digress...

....everyone believed that Saddam was behind 9-11 even though Bush and Co never said this was the case. Instead of saying that Saddam did it, Bush would start a sentence with Saddam and finish the sentence with planes flying into the World Trade Centers....'saddam is an evil guy, and let us not forget the memory of what evil guys can do when they fly big planes into big buildings' blah blah blah. It wasn't that he said that Saddam masterminded the attacks, but instead he just constantly reinforced an emotional connection between Saddam and 9-11.

darkly genius propaganda....

....So Cheney never had to so much argue that there was a connection as he had to be careful to argue that it was possible that there was a connection to avoid any cognitive dissonance between the emotional connection between Saddam and Obama and the intellectual absurdity of a connection between the two.

anyhoo...those were crazy times. I kind of miss them, because I think the economic shit from the present administration is far more disturbing (and has more dire long term implications) than anything Bush and his band of miscreaant criminals pulled in the early oughts.
Agreed.

Now to the BIG question? Is there any major difference in this Administration and the last ones since at least the 60's that we have had?
__________________


"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have". Gerald Ford

"Life's tough, it's even tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne

There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
-Capt. Bob "Wolf" Johnson
dalmations202 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 03:50 PM   #10
dude1394
Guru
 
dude1394's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 40,410
dude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Underdog View Post
Actually, that's the part that gets me the most - Cheney had a chance to turn Gay Marriage into a non-issue in 2004, but he opted to stay mum about it while his party turned it into a crusade...
Yea...if he'd had spoke up maybe the dems would have run a pro-gay-marriage candidate instead of the current one.
__________________
"Yankees fans who say “flags fly forever’’ are right, you never lose that. It reinforces all the good things about being a fan. ... It’s black and white. You (the Mavs) won a title. That’s it and no one can say s--- about it.’’
dude1394 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 04:03 PM   #11
alexamenos
Diamond Member
 
alexamenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Basketball fan nirvana
Posts: 5,625
alexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flacolaco View Post
I guess I never paid close attention...but...really? I totally missed that.

I never thought Saddam was behind 9/11 in the slightest bit and never heard anyone say they thought he was. I only ever heard things like "weapons of mass destruction" and "harboring terrorists".
yeah....an astounding number of folks believed Saddam did it even after the 9-11 commission report said that Saddam didn't do it.
__________________
"It does not take a brain seargant to know the reason this team struggles." -- dmack24
alexamenos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 04:03 PM   #12
alexamenos
Diamond Member
 
alexamenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Basketball fan nirvana
Posts: 5,625
alexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dalmations202 View Post
Agreed.

Now to the BIG question? Is there any major difference in this Administration and the last ones since at least the 60's that we have had?
he's black.
__________________
"It does not take a brain seargant to know the reason this team struggles." -- dmack24
alexamenos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 04:18 PM   #13
92bDad
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: TX
Posts: 2,505
92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future
Default

That's funny, I never heard that anyone pointed to Sadam as the one behind 9/11, I always thought that 9/11 was the result of Osama Bin Laden.

But hey if Alexamenos says its so then it must be so...

If anything, Sadam was presumed to be behind WMD's and that he was loosely tied to Osama, perhaps more of a kindred spirit and influence to Osama but not any direct involvment.

I had read a report at one point in time that the Intellegence being fed the USA and its Allies was more of a manipulation by those needing our help in Iraq. Many pointed to the dismantling of our Intellence capabilities by the Clinton administration lead to the ease of manipulating us into the liberation of Iraq.

Now, thanks to the Bush administration we have a much stronger Intellegence community and thus some more reliable information to process.

At the end of the day, we can see that the Allies did liberate Iraq and removed an evil dictator...the results have been positive. Today, at least from those on the ground, we read and hear some positive stories of rebuilding.

Sadam brought his demise onto himself, but he was not directly involved in 9/11, that came as a result of Osama.
92bDad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 04:35 PM   #14
alexamenos
Diamond Member
 
alexamenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Basketball fan nirvana
Posts: 5,625
alexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond repute
Default

you guys talk like I'm making this shit up...

Quote:
Poll: 70% believe Saddam, 9-11 link

WASHINGTON (AP) — Nearly seven in 10 Americans believe it is likely that ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the Sept. 11 attacks, says a poll out almost two years after the terrorists' strike against this country.

Sixty-nine percent in a Washington Post poll published Saturday said they believe it is likely the Iraqi leader was personally involved in the attacks carried out by al-Qaeda. A majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents believe it's likely Saddam was involved.

The belief in the connection persists even though there has been no proof of a link between the two.
this is why I said to underdog that this stuff was fascinating...70% of the country believed something which is absurd....so absurd that now it seems I'm the absurd one because I correctly recall that a bunch of people really believed it once upon a time.
__________________
"It does not take a brain seargant to know the reason this team struggles." -- dmack24

Last edited by alexamenos; 06-03-2009 at 04:36 PM.
alexamenos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 04:35 PM   #15
Mavdog
Diamond Member
 
Mavdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
Mavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 92bDad View Post
If anything, Sadam was presumed to be behind WMD's and that he was loosely tied to Osama, perhaps more of a kindred spirit and influence to Osama but not any direct involvment.
wow, you did buy the bag of bs they were peddling. as the previous administration was prone to say, "mission accomplished"....

Quote:
I had read a report at one point in time that the Intellegence being fed the USA and its Allies was more of a manipulation by those needing our help in Iraq. Many pointed to the dismantling of our Intellence capabilities by the Clinton administration lead to the ease of manipulating us into the liberation of Iraq.
oh, really? here is the correct wording:

"I had read a report at one point in time that the Intellegence being fed the USA and its Allies was more of a manipulation by those in the bush administration who were hell bent on invading Iraq. Many pointed to the dismantling of our Intellence capabilities by the bush administration lead to the ease of manipulating us into the liberation of Iraq"
Mavdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 04:39 PM   #16
alexamenos
Diamond Member
 
alexamenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Basketball fan nirvana
Posts: 5,625
alexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 92bDad View Post
hey if Alexamenos says its so then it must be so...
i think it's time for me to get a new sig.
__________________
"It does not take a brain seargant to know the reason this team struggles." -- dmack24
alexamenos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 04:50 PM   #17
FINtastic
Diamond Member
 
FINtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 8,668
FINtastic has a reputation beyond reputeFINtastic has a reputation beyond reputeFINtastic has a reputation beyond reputeFINtastic has a reputation beyond reputeFINtastic has a reputation beyond reputeFINtastic has a reputation beyond reputeFINtastic has a reputation beyond reputeFINtastic has a reputation beyond reputeFINtastic has a reputation beyond reputeFINtastic has a reputation beyond reputeFINtastic has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Is the "on drugs" part of this thread title maybe a little bit redundant? I mean, does anyone think that Dick Cheney is the type of guy who would be high on life?
__________________


"Ok, Go Mavericks!"
-Avery Johnson

Last edited by FINtastic; 06-03-2009 at 05:33 PM.
FINtastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 04:57 PM   #18
92bDad
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: TX
Posts: 2,505
92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexamenos View Post
i think it's time for me to get a new sig.
I am thrilled I can help...it's got to be worth a positive Rep from Alexamenos to 92bDad, where's the luv?
92bDad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 05:15 PM   #19
Underdog
Moderator
 
Underdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 41.21.1
Posts: 36,143
Underdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond repute
Default

I'm glad 92bDad is here to sh!t on another thread with personal attacks and paranoid delusions...

Once again - can someone ban this guy???
__________________

These days being a fan is a competition to see who can be the most upset when
your team loses. That proves you love winning more. That's how it works.

Last edited by Underdog; 06-03-2009 at 05:24 PM.
Underdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 05:18 PM   #20
Underdog
Moderator
 
Underdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 41.21.1
Posts: 36,143
Underdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexamenos View Post
you guys talk like I'm making this shit up...

this is why I said to underdog that this stuff was fascinating...70% of the country believed something which is absurd....so absurd that now it seems I'm the absurd one because I correctly recall that a bunch of people really believed it once upon a time.
I guess you're not as quick on the draw as revisionists like Cheney...

(those with short attention spans are doomed to repeat the past...)
__________________

These days being a fan is a competition to see who can be the most upset when
your team loses. That proves you love winning more. That's how it works.

Last edited by Underdog; 06-03-2009 at 05:23 PM.
Underdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 07:45 PM   #21
Arne
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,851
Arne has much to be proud ofArne has much to be proud ofArne has much to be proud ofArne has much to be proud ofArne has much to be proud ofArne has much to be proud ofArne has much to be proud ofArne has much to be proud ofArne has much to be proud ofArne has much to be proud ofArne has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexamenos View Post
you guys talk like I'm making this shit up...



this is why I said to underdog that this stuff was fascinating...70% of the country believed something which is absurd....so absurd that now it seems I'm the absurd one because I correctly recall that a bunch of people really believed it once upon a time.
That's really the absurd part of this.
__________________

"Truth is treason in the empire of lies." - Ron Paul The Revolution - A Manifesto
Arne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 08:21 PM   #22
Usually Lurkin
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,195
Usually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond repute
Default

yes. Dick Cheney controlled everyone's thoughts for much of the 2000s, or 70% of those polled, at least.
Usually Lurkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 08:24 PM   #23
dude1394
Guru
 
dude1394's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 40,410
dude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

He is a Jedi after all.
__________________
"Yankees fans who say “flags fly forever’’ are right, you never lose that. It reinforces all the good things about being a fan. ... It’s black and white. You (the Mavs) won a title. That’s it and no one can say s--- about it.’’
dude1394 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 11:00 PM   #24
Underdog
Moderator
 
Underdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 41.21.1
Posts: 36,143
Underdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dude1394 View Post
He is a Jedi after all.
Sith, actually...



"Tell your sister.....you were riiiiight"
__________________

These days being a fan is a competition to see who can be the most upset when
your team loses. That proves you love winning more. That's how it works.

Last edited by Underdog; 06-04-2009 at 12:06 AM.
Underdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2009, 06:44 AM   #25
dalmations202
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Just outside the Metroplex
Posts: 5,539
dalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin View Post
yes. Dick Cheney controlled everyone's thoughts for much of the 2000s, or 70% of those polled, at least.
Question? If Dick Cheney controlled the minds of the sheeple, so that 70% of them believed a lie --- then what percentage of the masses are believing a lie from the current administration?

I mean, let's face it Cheney has very little charisma, and is hard pressed to get people to follow him, yet he and Bush had 70% of the people believing them. This is with a media that historically favors the other side.

So if Cheney got 70% to believe a lie, what percent CAN/WILL/IS the new administration get to believe?

Personally since Reagan (and probably including him and before -- I just wasn't paying attention at that time in my life) ---- ALL of them have been crooked. They all treat the American citizens like sheep, and lead them around by their noses - off to slaughter. People are just too stupid to realize that their bickering about it just keeps them from realizing the truth. IMO, there is more false information out there, that there is truth. Truth is extremely hard to find these days.
__________________


"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have". Gerald Ford

"Life's tough, it's even tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne

There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
-Capt. Bob "Wolf" Johnson
dalmations202 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2009, 08:31 AM   #26
dalmations202
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Just outside the Metroplex
Posts: 5,539
dalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

UD brought up a good point. After 9/11 and watching the buildings come down, we were willing to believe anything.

What about when the building fell in OKC, but somehow all the FBI there were touring their home city? Isn't that a little strange.

How about the bombing of the ship in Yemen? Then the bombing of an aspirin factory.
Refusal to act with target in sight?

Whitewater deaths?

Oliver North?

the Electronic Surveillance plane that went down and China sent back -- later?

Clinton's relationship with the Chinese.
Both Bush's relationship with the Saudis.

First mission in Iraq was what?
Ever wonder why France and Russia were so against the US invading Iraq? It wasn't because they liked Saddam.

Osama trapped in Tora Boras, yet how did he escape?

What else was found in the Tora Boras mountains?

Too many questions, too many lies by the government.
__________________


"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have". Gerald Ford

"Life's tough, it's even tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne

There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
-Capt. Bob "Wolf" Johnson
dalmations202 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2009, 08:40 AM   #27
Usually Lurkin
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,195
Usually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dalmations202 View Post
So if Cheney got 70% to believe a lie, what percent CAN/WILL/IS the new administration get to believe?.
I don't know, but if I could cross up threads a bit, maybe instead of a poll tax, we really should implement a poll poll: "Do you make logical leaps off of official government statements? No? Come vote. Yes? Go home."
Usually Lurkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2009, 09:21 AM   #28
alexamenos
Diamond Member
 
alexamenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Basketball fan nirvana
Posts: 5,625
alexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dalmations202 View Post
Question? If Dick Cheney controlled the minds of the sheeple, so that 70% of them believed a lie --- then what percentage of the masses are believing a lie from the current administration?

I mean, let's face it Cheney has very little charisma, and is hard pressed to get people to follow him, yet he and Bush had 70% of the people believing them. This is with a media that historically favors the other side.

So if Cheney got 70% to believe a lie, what percent CAN/WILL/IS the new administration get to believe?
The big reason I found the Darth Cheney / 70% thing so interesting is because before the run-up to Iraq War (v2.0) I had really been studying up on my propaganda. Operation Iraq Liberation was an amazing piece of propaganda.

Of course, the US Government doesn't engage in homeward propaganda... (the devil's best trick was convincing people he doesn't exist, or something like that). If you step back far enough it's almost comical -- we're talking about the world's largest government, a government which routinely hires armies and armies of pr consultants and marketing firms and then brags after the fact about spin jobs and 'psy-ops'....

...one event comes to mind -- the toppling of Saddam's statue. Remember that? The mainstream dolts we're virtually breathless that day describing it as some historic event in the history of freedom....it was wall to wall freedom and flagwaving day as they played over and over and over again the historic out-pouring of spontaneous liberty love .... and a few months later some army psy-ops group issued a reporting saying, 'we did it and this is how we did it', so now you don't see the downfall of Saddam's statue in the highlight reels.

That's one of the more egregious examples, but the point is that propaganda by and for the US Government is constant and quite good (good meaning effective and skilled, not good meaning not evil).

How good is it? Anyone who uses the phrase "US Government propaganda" is immediately moved into the kook category, because only someone teetering on the edge of mental instability could imagine that our beloved government engages in something which has been a very high priority for every other government since the dawn of man.

anyhoo...to answer your question, the Bush administration was very good with their propaganda, better than Obama has been thus far imo -- the fawning deference by the msm to Obama doesn't really help him in this regard because...well...because they're just preaching to the choir by this point.

....for instance....when Darth Cheney and the boys fed Judith Miller all kinds of Dubya Emm Dee stuff so that she'd run one NY Times article after another on the horrors of Saddam's Dubya Emm Dees, that 'worked' because NY Times had the reputation of being the anti-Bush (deserved), anti-War (decidedly undeserved) paper of record. Doesn't work this way for Obama....

....so I don't think it's a given that Obama can march us willingly over a cliff any faster than Bush. If he effs things up badly enough (as he's doing with the economy), I think you might see things turn on him pretty quickly.
__________________
"It does not take a brain seargant to know the reason this team struggles." -- dmack24
alexamenos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2009, 10:07 AM   #29
Usually Lurkin
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,195
Usually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexamenos View Post
Anyone who uses the phrase "US Government propaganda" is immediately moved into the kook category,
I think you oversell yourself. Everyone knows that every government uses propaganda. It's the assumption of propaganda for fitting your political motives that's kooky. It's the "Cheney is a propagandist! OOOhh Boogedy Boogey" rather than "Cheney may have preferred that a unified message come from the high political offices" that is kooky.
Usually Lurkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2009, 10:28 AM   #30
alexamenos
Diamond Member
 
alexamenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Basketball fan nirvana
Posts: 5,625
alexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin View Post
I think you oversell yourself. Everyone knows that every government uses propaganda. It's the assumption of propaganda for fitting your political motives that's kooky. It's
my assumption* is that the propaganda, in the case under discussion, was for the purposes of selling a war.

is that an unreasonable assumption in your view?

(btw....I use "Darth Cheney" as a symbol of the Bush Administration/Military-Industrial-Complex, etc., etc... out of laziness, not because I think the funny dark little man with the baboon heart was pulling all of the strings)
__________________
"It does not take a brain seargant to know the reason this team struggles." -- dmack24

Last edited by alexamenos; 06-04-2009 at 10:42 AM.
alexamenos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 11:52 AM   #31
alexamenos
Diamond Member
 
alexamenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Basketball fan nirvana
Posts: 5,625
alexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond repute
Default

A really interesting primer here....

The Technique of a Coup d'Etat

A dry and laborious read for most, but fun stuff for anyone interested in propaganda or epistemology.
__________________
"It does not take a brain seargant to know the reason this team struggles." -- dmack24
alexamenos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 12:19 PM   #32
Usually Lurkin
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,195
Usually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexamenos View Post
my assumption* is that the propaganda, in the case under discussion, was for the purposes of selling a war.

is that an unreasonable assumption in your view?
no, not unreasonable. It's so reasonable that I don't understand why you are trying to make boogymen out of people who use propaganda. I'd be more afraid of a government that went to war without propaganda than one that goes to war with it.

What I find unreasonable are your leaps of logic: If it can be polled, it must be successful propaganda. If it is propaganda, it must be feared. Dick Cheney (Bush-Military Complex) use propaganda any differently (or more evilly) than anyone else. People don't think the government uses propaganda (that one's hard to fathom even as a leap. What did you leap off of to get that?)
Usually Lurkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 12:52 PM   #33
92bDad
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: TX
Posts: 2,505
92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future
Default

Let's look at information that has been provided.

*Iraq invaded Kuwait and Iraq under Sadam viewed the U.S. as an enemy and thus promoted the ideology of hatred towards the U.S.
*Bin Laden was behind 9/11 and a part of the ideology of that Hatred towards the U.S.
*Al Quida has been observed in various parts of the middle-east, to include locations in Iraq.
*Terrorists are located and being harbored by various local regions, to include parts of Iraq.
*WMD's was the big trigger that launched the U.S. into liberating Iraq
*Gathering of information was at it's worst at the end of the Clinton era and Start of the Bush era.
*Victims of Sadam, used and manipulated information to facilitate the trigger of the "WMD" storyline. In essence they used the fear that had been launched on 9/11 by Bin Laden to facilitate having the USA come in and liberate them.

Bush, like nearly everyone who could've been President at the time, acted on the information that he was provided, as did the Congress...both Democrat and Republican.

Once we started and engaged with the enemy, there was no turning back, regardless of how the story unfolded.

My question, is similar to Underdog who asks why Dick Cheney didn't stand up when he was in a position of power...thus why didn't Democrats rise up before the war, rather than after it was started?

What we see here are politics being waged, and those politics are effecting the moral and lives of our men and women fighting for freedom.

No doubt the troops are starting to trickle their way home, and hopefully the mission was indeed completed. Hopefully, we are not pulling out of Iraq too soon, and the people of Iraq are developed enough to stand up for themselves and can face off against the terrorists who remain within their country.

As for the topic on this thread, I don't see how Cheney has flip flopped...he is saying the same thing he has always said.

About Iraq and 9/11 as well as Gay Marriage should be decided on by the states.

Again the issue with the Iraq war comes down to the destruction of our intelligence community under the Clinton watch, it's been clear since day 1, but so little coverage as it comes off as a blame game. Instead President Bush took the cards he was dealt and ran with it...unlike the current administration who is enjoying playing the blame game.

As for Gay Marriage, I am against it, but ultimately I believe it is up to the individual States to decide and I also believe that if a marriage is recognized in one state, it does not mean that all other states should be forced to recognize it in their state.

State's rights should take precedence over federal issues.
92bDad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 12:54 PM   #34
Mavdog
Diamond Member
 
Mavdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
Mavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud of
Default

everybody spins....
Mavdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 01:02 PM   #35
MX425
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Addison
Posts: 339
MX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to all
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 92bDad View Post
State's rights should take precedence over federal issues.
wow. I think this is the first thing I have seen close to ee to eye with you on. That and loving the Mavs I guess.
__________________
F@*K THE SPURS!!
MX425 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 02:31 PM   #36
alexamenos
Diamond Member
 
alexamenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Basketball fan nirvana
Posts: 5,625
alexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin View Post
What I find unreasonable are your leaps of logic: If it can be polled, it must be successful propaganda. If it is propaganda, it must be feared. Dick Cheney (Bush-Military Complex) use propaganda any differently (or more evilly) than anyone else. People don't think the government uses propaganda (that one's hard to fathom even as a leap. What did you leap off of to get that?)
I think you make alot of leaps of logic regarding my ostensible leaps of logic. In reverse order...

Quote:
People don't think the government uses propaganda....
Yes, lot's of people don't think the government uses propaganda, but more importantly even more people underappreciate the scope and ....ummm.... hegemony of government propaganda.

So let's go back a few years, to the time when Saddam Hussein's statue was toppled. I'm not bragging on myself when I say that it literally took me one viewing of the event to become quite suspicious, two viewings and a quick click on the 'net to be certain. It was as obviously propaganda as when american flag waving Kuwaitis lined the streets in '91 to greet US soldiers. To be blunt, the event was comical in its transparency.

Straight up, how long did it take you to recognize that this was a government staged event? 10 minutes? A day? Five or six years? Never?
How many folks recognized it as propaganda at the time? I'd venture to say a very small minority....point being, people may 'know' that governments engage in propaganda, but if they don't know it well enough to recognize it when they're being slapped in the face with it they may as well not know it at all.

Quote:
Dick Cheney (Bush-Military Complex) use propaganda any differently (or more evilly) than anyone else.
I don't think I've said anything to this effect other than they're quite good at it...and that's a tactical assessment not a value judgement. I will gladly concede the point that Darth Cheney and Bush don't use propaganda more evilly than Goebbels.

Quote:
If it is propaganda, it must be feared.
I don't think I've said anything to this effect at all. I'd sooner say that a used car salesman's pitch is something to be feared--I'd say instead that it's something to be recognized. If a used car salesman tells you that a little old lady owned the car and she only drove it to church on Sundays, you might bear in mind that the dude has a vested interest in selling you a car.

Quote:
What I find unreasonable are your leaps of logic: If it can be polled, it must be successful propaganda.
and this would be your most unreasonable leap of logic in that you wrongly jump to the notion that i've made such a leap of logic.

I base this opinion on months and months of very careful observation, not on some ad hoc leap of faith.

.
.
.


fwiw....one of my favorite tactics by Darth Cheney et al was this thing where they'd "anonymously" leak a story to a reporter and then go on TV to "admit" that the leak was "true" (in Karl Rove's faith-based world, that is).

You could damn near set your calendar by it -- the senior official would leak the story to NY Times on Wednesday, it'd get a couple of days of play before it was 'verified' on Sunday politico shows, then the story would get shot down quietly on Monday and Tuesday of the following week...damage done.

--------------

...another interesting propaganda tidbit / trivia on Operation Iraqi Liberation....when did the war begin?

If you said February something in 2003 when Comical Ari Fleischer announced that we were ridding the world of the evil yrant Saddam, then I think you're off by a few months. For months before that, including when those twits in congress were pretending to debate the matter, we were flying all sorts of missions into Iraq...knocking shit out, killing people, fighting with Iraq's military...you know, war kind of stuff. The overt kind of thing may have started in Feb 2003, but for all intents and purposes we were waging war on Iraq by October of 2002.

I actually think the full scale attack was delayed for a couple of months for logistical reasons more than haggling at the UN or in Congress....the saud's had to make a show of not letting US attach from Mecca and then the freaking turks did their thing...but that's a whole 'nother story.

sorry for the ramble...just kind of interesting stuff imo.
__________________
"It does not take a brain seargant to know the reason this team struggles." -- dmack24
alexamenos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 08:01 PM   #37
Usually Lurkin
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,195
Usually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexamenos View Post
So let's go back a few years, to the time when Saddam Hussein's statue was toppled. ... american flag waving Kuwaitis lined the streets in '91 to greet US soldiers. To be blunt, the event was comical in its transparency.
that comedy would mean they are bad at it, not good at it. Just because something is staged does not mean it doesn't capture or generate something real. You know the flag raising at Iwojima was staged, right? I think pretty much all flag raising and flag razing is propaganda.

Quote:
I don't think I've said anything to this effect at all. I'd sooner say that a used car salesman's pitch is something to be feared--
well, you're tales are full of Darth Cheneys and Goebelses and baboon hearts, so I'd say your propaganda is saying exactly what you here are saying you don't say.


Quote:
For months before that, including when those twits in congress were pretending to debate the matter, we were flying all sorts of missions into Iraq...knocking shit out, ....
I thought we'd been flying missions in Iraq and occasionally bombing stuff since the whole Kuwait thing.
Usually Lurkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 08:50 PM   #38
chumdawg
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cowboys Country
Posts: 23,336
chumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Straight up, how long did it take you to recognize that this was a government staged event? 10 minutes? A day? Five or six years? Never?
How many folks recognized it as propaganda at the time? I'd venture to say a very small minority....point being, people may 'know' that governments engage in propaganda, but if they don't know it well enough to recognize it when they're being slapped in the face with it they may as well not know it at all.
I think it shows a bit of individual interpretation to label this propaganda. The cynic in me shrugs it off as nothing more than "To the victor go the spoils."
chumdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 12:08 AM   #39
Underdog
Moderator
 
Underdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 41.21.1
Posts: 36,143
Underdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond reputeUnderdog has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chumdawg View Post
I think it shows a bit of individual interpretation to label this propaganda. The cynic in me shrugs it off as nothing more than "To the victor go the spoils."
The perception of "victory" was the propaganda in the first place...
__________________

These days being a fan is a competition to see who can be the most upset when
your team loses. That proves you love winning more. That's how it works.
Underdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 12:21 AM   #40
chumdawg
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cowboys Country
Posts: 23,336
chumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Underdog View Post
The perception of "victory" was the propaganda in the first place...
Gimme a break. Victory in that sense would have been however they wanted to paint it.
chumdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.