14-06-2005 18:09									#211
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Fixed and forged are different things in the context. Forging requires deliberate actions of creating false evidence, fixing requires ignoring things you don't like in order to paint the picture you want.

	14-06-2005 18:10									#212
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Dauphin What's the chances of the Liberal Left Communist Conspirator Media (i.e FOX) not mentioning that there are troops in Iraq and hoping Joe Public forgets that they haven't been brought home?

I seriously thought they might do that - pretend the war was over - Fox has got pretty close to doing that a couple of times - when Bush claimed mission accomplished and immediately after the election when there was a bit of a lull.

Let's not forget the 10,000 US troops wounded, many surviving in spite of horrific wounds thanks to body armour.

Oh yeah we forgot them from day one

	14-06-2005 20:41									#213
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Agathon No. It stated it was being fixed.

Kudos to you. Reading is a plus. Next week maybe you can translate that tome of knowledge named "My Pet Goat" for us.

Fixed implies any number of connotations. In my estimation it speaks primarily to the sad state of intelligence all were feeling circa 2001/2002 and how that intelligence gap was being FIXED.

quote: It must be terrible to be a hair's breadth from complete humiliation on this matter, as you and your side are Ogie.

You need a better score card/program, one that has the team members rightly defined before you continue with your ohh so typical open mouth insert both feet routine I come to expect from you.

Point of the matter is I was against resuming hositilities in Iraq and said so in these forums. I further stated that if and when the US did engage in hositlites if no WMD's were found there would be hell to pay. I felt the attempts to use WMD as a causus belli were a transparent ploy. I felt the die was cast early on and that the going to to the UN for coalition building was a mere ploy to enlist additional aid and moreover to placate and give cover to the Brits. What I am fuzzy on is the time frame that W made the unbreakable decision in his mind that military action was going to take place. Certainly the military planning and advisors were preparing, but who actually knows what was going (if anything according to the likes of you and yours ) on and more to the point when in W's head.

All that being said, I also said they had no need for trumping up such a case as the continual material breaches of UN resolutions were all that were required for action. (An action by the way that I for the record was against doing).

Finally, once the decision was made, I do feel it important for all parties to bring a peaceful resolution as soon as possible. So quelling insurgencies and bringing peaceful self rule to Iraq are something that I support and will continue to do. If that puts me on a particular team, perhaps you would be so kind as to tell me which one it is as then I can pass the ball off to the appropriate wide receiver. Last time I checked my posts were written by me and not Joe Postpattern.

	14-06-2005 20:43									#214
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Dauphin Fixed and forged are different things in the context. Forging requires deliberate actions of creating false evidence, fixing requires ignoring things you don't like in order to paint the picture you want.

Agreed which is why I want a link to the second memo to understand further the context of FIXED.

	14-06-2005 20:47									#215
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe Kudos to you. Reading is a plus. Next week maybe you can translate that tome of knowledge named "My Pet Goat" for us.

Nice try... perhaps you could come up with something wittier, although I doubt it.

quote: Fixed implies any number of connotations. In my estimation it speaks primarily to the sad state of intelligence all were feeling circa 2001/2002 and how that intelligence gap was being FIXED.

No.

"fixed around" means to any reasonably competent English speaker that the policy was dictating the facts rather than the other way around.

As for any other interpretation... sorry, that dog don't hunt.

quote: You need a better score card/program, one that has the team members rightly defined before you continue with your ohh so typical open mouth insert both feet routine I come to expect from you. Point of the matter is I was against resuming hositilities in Iraq and said so in these forums. I further stated that if and when the US did engage in hositlites if no WMD's were found there would be hell to pay. I felt the attempts to use WMD as a causus belli were a transparent ploy. I felt the die was cast early on and that the going to to the UN for coalition building was a mere ploy to enlist additional aid and moreover to placate and give cover to the Brits. What I am fuzzy on is the time frame that W made the unbreakable decision in his mind that military action was going to take place. Certainly the military planning and advisors were preparing, but who actually knows what was going (if anything according to the likes of you and yours ) on and more to the point when in W's head. All that being said, I also said they had no need for trumping up such a case as the continual material breaches of UN resolutions were all that were required for action. (An action by the way that I for the record was against doing). Finally, once the decision was made, I do feel it important for all parties to bring a peaceful resolution as soon as possible. So quelling insurgencies and bringing peaceful self rule to Iraq are something that I support and will continue to do. If that puts me on a particular team, perhaps you would be so kind as to tell me which one it is as then I can pass the ball off to the appropriate wide receiver. Last time I checked my posts were written by me and not Joe Postpattern.

Sorry, I mistook you for some other evil fascist pig. You all look and sound the same to me, so you'll forgive me my honest mistake, I hope.

	14-06-2005 20:52									#216
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Agathon No. "fixed around" means to any reasonably competent English speaker that the policy was dictating the facts rather than the other way around. As for any other interpretation... sorry, that dog don't hunt.

Considering it was a poorly crafted sentence the assumption that it is a competant English speaker is a faulty one. That being said context is everything and the overriding concerns of the day in that time frame were our absolutely horrid intelligence failures of 9/11 and elsewhere.

It is absolutely reasonable to expect the lack of intelligence was what was being referred to and that the siutuation was being fixed around Iraq in particular.

Good Dog. Bang!

	14-06-2005 20:57									#217
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe Considering it was a poorly crafted sentence the assumption that it is a competant English speaker is a faulty one. That being said context is everything and the overriding concerns of the day in that time frame were our absolutely horrid intelligence failures of 9/11 and elsewhere. It is absolutely reasonable to expect the lack of intelligence was what was being referred to and that the siutuation was being fixed around Iraq in particular. Good Dog. Bang!

I find your interpretation to be a crime against the English language. That's not what it says. I realize that you Yanks have a problem with spelling and stuff, but I didn't realize it had got quite this desperate.

	14-06-2005 22:16									#218
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe 2nd memo link? 'cause the 1st one didn't state explicitly or implicily intelligence was being forged

That is so sad! Oggie is trying to deny th perfectly obvious and fully STATED facts from the memo.

	14-06-2005 22:21									#219
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

NBC News has verified the memos; please notice the use of plural so more memos have been uncovered. The British press is just working their asses off on this story where as ours is a bunch of lazy tossers who want to be spoon feed. NBC has put Andrea Mitchell on the story so this could be the main stream media break we've been waiting for:

quote: More British memos on pre-Iraq war concerns Officials deny intelligence that facts were fixed to invade Iraq By Andrea Mitchell Correspondent WASHINGTON — It started during British Prime Minister Tony Blair's re-election campaign last month, when details leaked about a top-secret memo, written in July 2002 — eight months before the Iraq war. In the memo, British officials just back from Washington reported that prewar "intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy" to invade Iraq. Just last week, President Bush and Blair vigorously denied that war was inevitable. “No, the facts were not being fixed, in any shape or form at all,” said Blair at a White House news conference with the president on June 7. But now, war critics have come up with seven more memos, verified by NBC News.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8207731

	14-06-2005 22:22									#220
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I have to agree with Ogie here that when I read fixed I do not think "made up". I think much the same way Dauphin does- speak in half truths, not in full lies. Ignore the inconvinient and always trump the parts that back your arguement.

Like on the Aluminum tubes. Saddam did buy them. The way you "fix that" is to claim that any evidence they might have non-nuclear uses is obviously an Iraqi cover story because the ONLY possible use is in a nuclear program, DUH! and then just hope the press is too stupid or spineless never ever to question your questionable statements.

And, well, that is exactly what went on.

	14-06-2005 22:25									#221
	Get a bigger avatar today!

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/artic.../worldviews.DTL

More news about the second Downing Street Memo from the San Francisco Chronicle.

	14-06-2005 22:27									#222
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin I'm still a bit unclear how a clear family involement from a part of the world where family is everything isn't meaningful. Can you you please explain?

The sons followed the father's jihadist footsteps years later, one into al Qaeda and one just a routine Afghan-Arab. The fact that they're engaged in the family trade isn't the same as saying they all worked under the direction of the same organization going back to the father's original actions.

The sons' later actions don't create a backward link to the original action of the father. The father's actions predated by years the association between bin Laden and al Zawahiri, and there's no other evidence that connects EIJ with AQ back in 1992-93.

	14-06-2005 22:27									#223
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten How exactly? If you're saying I'm ignorant of Limbaugh's views on Kosovo (or Limbaugh's views in general), then I must admit to being guilty as charged.

:b

quote: I guess its a good thing I never made that disingenuous comparison, then.

Yes you did, when you made a little "scorecared" of Bush Vs. Clinton when dealing with AQ.

Lets add of course that politically Clinton had little flexibility during both of the big AQ attacks. The embassy bombings occured just at the time he was in the process of being impeached or close to it. What little he did was called a distraction- no way could he had gotten more support at that point. BY the time the impeachement mess was done for, political will for big action was gone. Then the Cole attack happens less than a month beofre a presidential election with Clinton as a lame duck. Not much political will there, specially during the Florida mess. Bush came to office 4 months after the Cole attack- never heard a peep about taking military action to avenge that at that point.

quote: I never said that. I believe I said pretty much the exact opposite... See, this is why I don't even bother with you anymore.

Given your record of trying to disown previous posts, you are as credible as the bUsh admin.

	14-06-2005 22:33									#224
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten So, replace "Al Qaeda" with "Al Qaeda and its ideological and real world allies" in my previous post and the point stands.

So in other words, it's the Russian goverment under Putin who was responsible for the Stalinist purges, because we're going to attribute past actions of a different entity to the current successor entity, to justify an increased threat perception after the fact?

Until 9/11, we dismissed Islamic fundamentalists as wackos who couldn't do any real damage. They pull off a one-off operation because we had our heads up our collective asses, and now they're the uberenemy responsible for everything under the sun?

If you want a war against all Islamic fundamentalists, cool, but at least admit that's how you define it rather than expand the definition of al Qaeda to Orwellian proportions (are they Eurasia or Eastasia? )

	14-06-2005 22:38									#225
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Hmm,I wonder how one spins it to show that the reason the US media is not playing up the Downing Street memos proves they are a liberal cabal out to get Bush...

Some conservative out there must know, cause we ALL KNOW the media is made up of anti-Bush commies, and they could not possibly be ginoring such a nice "story", right??



While having the ability to say "I told you so" is sometimes sweet, its not when the results of being able to say "I told you so" are so crappy.

	14-06-2005 22:41									#226
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten Well, I was going to bring up the fact that the Republican controlled Senate supported Clinton's war in Kosovo, but why bother? It's not like you're actually going to listen.

Not much of a war, was it?

	14-06-2005 22:56									#227
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by GePap I have to agree with Ogie here that when I read fixed I do not think "made up". I think much the same way Dauphin does- speak in half truths, not in full lies. Ignore the inconvinient and always trump the parts that back your arguement. Like on the Aluminum tubes. Saddam did buy them. The way you "fix that" is to claim that any evidence they might have non-nuclear uses is obviously an Iraqi cover story because the ONLY possible use is in a nuclear program, DUH! and then just hope the press is too stupid or spineless never ever to question your questionable statements. And, well, that is exactly what went on.

But

quote: But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.

"fixed around" does not mean the same as "fixed". It indicates that the policy was being used to drive the facts, not the other way around.

	14-06-2005 23:10									#228
	Suffering from ads?

I don't see the distinction you are trying to draw in the use of the word 'fixed'. Mainly because I agree with both parts and do not understand why they are not the saying the same thing.

	14-06-2005 23:20									#229
	Got spare money?

Because in England people do not use the term "fixed around" that way in contexts like this. More importantly, they don't tolerate that kind of ridiculous ambiguity in memos like this.

If I'm fixing the facts around the policy that means that I am arranging them around it to suit it, not that I am fixing up some facts that happen to be around the policy.

Saying that it is a "fix up" of the facts (as some on the left have said) is also not entailed by what it says. All it says is that the facts were being determined or arranged to suit the policy, not the other way around. That is what the sensible critics claim - not that the facts were being deliberately altered to suit Bush, but that they were not directing the policy.

But we knew this already. Powell had some pics of trucks which could have been there for any reason - they were interpreted in the light of what the US wanted to believe, rather than on their own merits.

	14-06-2005 23:37									#230
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Agathon If I'm fixing the facts around the policy that means that I am arranging them around it to suit it, not that I am fixing up some facts that happen to be around the policy. Saying that it is a "fix up" of the facts (as some on the left have said) is also not entailed by what it says. All it says is that the facts were being determined or arranged to suit the policy, not the other way around. That is what the sensible critics claim - not that the facts were being deliberately altered to suit Bush, but that they were not directing the policy. But we knew this already. Powell had some pics of trucks which could have been there for any reason - they were interpreted in the light of what the US wanted to believe, rather than on their own merits.

You aren't making the distinction clear to me because I am of the opinion that Bush and co had an idée fixe that meant that any facts would either be interpreted as proof of their believes, or ignored. Facts being altered is forging not fixing.

I'm not trying to be difficult, I really don't get your point.

	14-06-2005 23:42									#231
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Either the policy is fixed around the facts (i.e we use the facts to determine what to do) or we fix the facts around the policy (arrange the facts so that they seem to support a policy we have already decided on, whatever the facts themselves might tell us). I'm not claiming that they did any more than the latter.

	15-06-2005 02:24									#232
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin That is so sad! Oggie is trying to deny th perfectly obvious and fully STATED facts from the memo.

I defy you to show where in the memo it was STATED that the inteligence data was FORGED.

Rather than jump to the conclusions as you seem more than willing to do, can you please humor me and provide a link to memos 2-7 so that I can read for myself myself the context of the "linked around" statement given the content of the supporting documents.

I'ld be happy to say the Brits were claiming the US was forging info if the content and context in the other memos supports it. But to date your ranting that Bush had intelligence FORGED, FORGED mind you rings quite hollow.

Dauphin's opinion that the data was selectively chosen is probably more on the money and much more likely.

Even Aggie makes the distinction that the data was selectively chosen for a given agenda vs. out an out FORGED as you claim.

Whats truly sad is how reading skills have become a preciously scarce commodity.

	15-06-2005 02:30									#233
	Tired of ads?

quote: Even Aggie makes the distinction that the data was selectively chosen for a given agenda vs. out an out FORGED as you claim.

Don't trust me Ogie. I'll stab you in the back!!!

No. I don't think that the intel was forged, although I'm open to the possibility. The memo doesn't say that though.

	15-06-2005 02:33									#234
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

It absolutely turned my stomach to use your statements to show rationality.

Gonna have to shower now.

	15-06-2005 02:38									#235
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe I defy you to show where in the memo it was STATED that the inteligence data was FORGED.

If you are suck a jackass that you're still trying to deny such a well proven fact then you simply are a hack who isn't worth wasting time on. This has been showen time and again including in a memo in this very thread. Why not try your hand at halocaust denial ot claiming the sun won't rise tomorow because that would be easier then denying Bush lied and fixed his "proof" to justify his illegal war. That's simply the facts and one day you will accept them if you stop being such a hack.

	15-06-2005 02:40									#236
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I take that as a "I can't show you the proof because I don't have any". Fair enough.

	15-06-2005 02:44									#237
	Support Apolyton

In other good new the number of google hits for the "Downing Street Memo" keeps on growing and growing. Soon even the lazy lap dogs of the US press will be forced to pick this up. Not that they'll do much with it since that would mean exposing illegal and unethical behavior by a sitting President and they're far to worried about him using his anti-trust powers against their corporate empires.

Number of Google hits for “Downing Street Memo”, 6/5/05: 267,000
Number of Google hits for “Downing Street Memo”, 6/9/05: 575,000
Number of Google hits for “Downing Street Memo”, 6/14/05: 874,000

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/m...order=0&thold=0

	15-06-2005 02:49									#238
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe I take that as a "I can't show you the proof because I don't have any". Fair enough.

There was the 7 memos you jack ass. There was the word for word which you continue to make fantasy claims about. You and I both know that fixing evidience means fabricating or at least selectively choosing & ignoring evidence to justify a policy. The numerous CIA leaks show that the administration was out right fabricating its case about WMD since the CIA said there was little or no WMD in Iraq. Not that the Bush Administration stopped making the claims just because every intellence source said they were full of shite. then we have the fact that not one creditable intelligence source ever claimed Saddam was helping Al Qaeda but still we had Rumsfield telling bold faced lies that Saddam was Osama's best friend.

It was a fabricated lie the day they said it and it is a fabricated lie today. Everyone with integrity knows this to be true and only a hack like you would continue to deny the truth.

	15-06-2005 07:29									#239
	Suffering from ads?

quote: If you want a war against all Islamic fundamentalists, cool, but at least admit that's how you define it rather than expand the definition of al Qaeda to Orwellian proportions (are they Eurasia or Eastasia?)

I'd prefer to define it as a war against Islamism as well, but that's not a term that has come into common use. One side calls it a war on "terror", the other side calls it a war on "Al Qaeda". I'd personally rather dump both terms, as they're both misleading, but I don't really have enough pull to frame the debate.

I did make a mistake in attributing the '93 WTC attack to Al Qaeda and I corrected it in a later post. It was an error on my part, not some attempt to expand Al Qaeda into some all-encompassing bogeyman.

Of course, you could argue that attributing nearly any attack to Al Qaeda is misleading, given the extremely nebulous nature of that organization. Such is the problem with using commonly accepted, but ultimately inaccurate terms.

quote: Not much of a war, was it?

I prefer to say that it was an appropriate amount of effort given the importance of the conflict to America.

	15-06-2005 08:38									#240
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...1300982_pf.html In other news a second British memo has been uncovered which basically confirms what the other Downing Street Memo said. Bush had evidence forged to justify his rush to war, that the decision to go to war was made months if not years ahead of time, and that the administration knew there was little to no WMDs in Iraq.

Damn

The truth is plain for everyone to see.

What else do people need before they face up to the truth?