Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Can we assimilate the Bob Woodward interview on 60 Minutes?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 08:55 PM
Original message
Can we assimilate the Bob Woodward interview on 60 Minutes?
I am reading several different interpretations of what was shown. What is the real story? Is Bush really insane? Why couldn't any of his people tell him "no"? Either you were with him or you were against him?

What is the real story about Bandar? Why was he told about the "plan' before Powell and Rumsfeld? Is he the same Saudi "official' that requested the bin Laden family flown out of the country right after 9/11?

Does he have a "Messianic" complex or is he a megalomaniac or both? Or is he doing the bidding of Dick Cheney? That is not clear.

Are the present high gas prices permitting the Saudis to make a huge profit now to make up for the "shortfall" when they lower the gas prices just before the November elections? Are we being "played" at this very moment?

Just what did Tenet mean by his remarks about a "slamdunk"? Did he mean that they knew Saddam had the WMDs or did he mean it would be an easy sell to the gullible American public?

And just where do the 28 pages relating to Saudi Arabia that were redacted by the White House come into the story? What is in those pages? And where does the Cheney energy meeting records figure into this story?

I think we need to analyze this story very closely before we assume that it means nothing...or that Woodward is a Republican shill...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 09:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. saudi arabia is under attack
by bin boy and his friends,how far they will get-who knows- but it puts alot of pressure on the royals-will they dump bush to save their skin?maybe the three cars with thousand pounds of explosives will make them think bush is`nt the right horse to bet on....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. Bush is a narcissist. He is NOT legally insane.
The proof that he knows right from wrong is that his administration is so secret.

Of course, one could argue that telling Woodward about Bandar and the 700 million proves he can't possible distinguish right from wrong, and I think a diligent attorney might prove it, unless other members of BushCo sourced those stories.

Kinda cute the way the Lord Almighty has replaced father George for him. Not a mention of Mommy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Not A Mention Of Mommy? Wonder If Junior Was An Immaculate Conception.
hard to imagine anyone having a roll with Barbara.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcuno Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Completely egocentric.
He was interviewed by Woodward and quoted saying something about how history didn't matter because we'll all be dead. Some have suggested he's talking about armageddon, but I think that he cannot imagine a world in which he does not exist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
drthais Donating Member (771 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. right from wrong>>??
you think he knows RIGHT from WRONG?
what is THAT about?

he doesnt know a damned thing

and he thinks he is fighting a war for JESUS!

this is creepy, in my opinion
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ilsa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. I am wondering if more people will begin to whisper about
this as well. Bush is beginning to be reflected more and more as a religious lunatic, and a narcissistic one at that. But are people talking about htat, or are they too afraid of offending people with their comments? When was the last time we had a pResident take us to war on the advice of "God" and no one else, not even his Cabinet? Is Shrub hearing voices in his head, or is he all wrapped up with an Armageddon-style manifest destiny?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ilsa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'm wondering about the "slam dunk" comment myself.
Edited on Sun Apr-18-04 09:24 PM by Ilsa
From the transcript of the show:

What did Woodward think of Tenets statement? Its a mistake, he says. Now the significance of that mistake -- that was the key rationale for war.

This seems to be about the presence of WMD. I think Tenet thought they were there.

As for the Saudis playing us, I feel like they've always played us to some degree. And I think this is treasonous for Bush to be dealing on this basis. It's dishonest and manipulative, to say the least. Maybe collusion to influence an election. I can only hope people will see through it and not give Bush credit for lower gas prices when the elcetion rolls around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. I think they're setting up Tenet for a fall.
ALL accounts prior to this book show Tenet as trying to restrain the WMD hysteria, not fanning it.

Is this book misdirection? Does he bring up the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans? The Chalabi dirt?

Or are we being manipulated into scapegoating the CIA and Tenet, while the real truth gets obcured?

Not to mention, if Tenet gets shunted aside, they'll no doubt find a new director who will think that a recommendation from the 9/11 Commission for a brand new domestic intelligence agency is just a dandy idea. Hey, how about Feith? How lucky IS bushco?

sw

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WFF Donating Member (277 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. My original thought was that it was letting Bush* off the hook
I saw this on the CBS Evening News the other day as a teaser. I thought it meant that Tenet was telling Bush* that there were indeed WMD so go ahead and start the war. After watching the full interview, it came across a little more like Tenet was telling Bush* that he would be able to convince the public that it was OK to invade Iraq.

I'm still not sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ilsa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I think you both (WisconsinforFreedom and Scarlet) are right about this.
I think they are setting up Tenet to take the fall also, and at the same time, Woodward is letting Shrub off the hook for the WMD fiasco. He just looks ill-advised and incompetent at worst, not a liar. Cheney looks more determined, and like he's making a concerted effort to push the WMD issue. I wonder if he could be taken down as well.

Geez, could Saddam have set this in motion? Letting them think there was WMD, knowing they already were looking for any excuse to go after him, maybe this is a play from Saddam to make sure that if Saddam is ousted, Bush will be also.

Naaaaahhhhh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jade Fox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. What will be interesting is if they don't ask Tenet to resign now....
It has been speculated here at DU that Bushco must be afraid of Tenet or else
they would have ask him to resign awhile ago. He was the clear choice for fall
guy, even before this.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hornito Donating Member (460 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
9. As far as Bandar goes, I posted this on another thread....
Very interesting, that in Bob Woodward's new book (see 60 Minutes this evening), he states that even before Colin Powell (and many others in the administration) was told about the decision to invade Iraq, Cheney and Rumsfeld briefed Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia about it, and provided him top secret documents that were specifically marked as "prohibited for viewing by foreigners".

I have questions:

1. Why was this allowed to take place, especially in view that most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis?

2. Why were the Saudis, when no other planes were allowed in the skies of the U.S. after the 9/11 attacks, allowed to fly around the country and pick up assorted Saudis, including the bin Laden family, and then spirit them out of the country, before the FBI had a chance to interview any of them? This question has not been properly asked by the 9/11 commission, nor answered by the administration, which leads me to conclude that the commission is simply a whitewash, formed to protect the administration.

The thing that is really scary, is that many top Dems have to be in on this too. Are they too scared to broach "certain questions" for fear of their lives (the anthrax "killer" is still on the loose), or are they actually in on it?

Frankly, I think this lends weight to the theory that certain high-level Saudis were in on the execution of the 9/11 atrocities, acting in concert with certain high-level U.S. administration operatives (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Libby, Feith, and the rest of the PNAC neocons). And I'll bet anything that Sharon was also told.

Hundreds of millions in the world sit astonished at the stupidity and gullibility of people in the U.S. (you would be amazed to read commentary and news from other parts of the world on this subject, as I regularly do) that certain factions in our own government were/are allowed to have perpetuated 9/11, apparently, without retribution.

I think our democracy ended on 9/11, and I am no longer sure a change at the helm will bring it back. Even scarier, is that I am no longer sure these fascist neocons (remember, they have captured all branches of government now, and control the military) will relinquish control of our government in November, if they lose. What will they do between now and then, to keep the reins of power? If in fact they so willingly killed 3000 or so on 9/11, and tens of thousands since in Iraq and Afghanistan, what will they then capable of if they think they will lose control, and then perhaps be subject for prosecution for their crimes?

I think it would be a very smart thing, as the election nears, to prepare ourselves for the worst.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Why would it be (NOFORN) prohibited for view by foreigners ???
When it couldn't be viewed by Powell or others in the Cabinet?? Oh, Powell was born in Jamaica??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hornito Donating Member (460 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Also interesting, is the realization of the overwhelming....
influence Mid-East parties are playing in our politics. Woodward reveals that Bandar was planning on "manipulating" oil prices (up) prior to the election, but would lower them just BEFORE the election to help Bush. Add this crap to the influence that the Israeli backed neocons have, Sharon has (vis-a-vis pro-Likud groups like AIPAC and JINSA, not to mention in the mass media), and it seems OUR politics are not our own, but in part, controlled from the M.E..

I say, that anyone who practices dual loyalty (listen up Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, Libby, et al) that adversely affects the interests of this nation, and this goes for Bush, who has slavishly betrayed our nation's interests to the Saudis, are traitors in the finest sense of the term. They should all be rounded up, tried for high crimes against the nation, and treason, and given the severest penalty allowed by law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. I'm sure you are not the only person that thinks like this....
We should never tie our nation's security to the fortunes of another...and leaders whose loyalties are confused should be carefully scrutinized... I'm sure many are thinking the same thing...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hornito Donating Member (460 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. I hope I'm not the only person who thinks like this.... (kidding)
The problem is though, our media, being controlled, is hiding the truth, so only a small minority of people in this nation understand the facts. The rest, are blissfully ignorant. The gravest danger to our nation, and our founding fathers understood this, is from outside influences.

The BFEE have been Saudi pawns for ages, and most of the top Dems worship at the feet of AIPAC. Witness Kerry's support for Sharon today. It makes me sick, and our current two party system is made to perpetuate the crimes. After getting rid of Bush, job number one must become a complete overhaul of our election processes,....and government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 10:09 PM
Response to Original message
12. I think it was a "teaser" for a "crap book." I won't buy it based on what
I saw and the "sneak preview" where the only statement of significance, which wasn't an "apologia" for the Shrub was that Congress didn't approve his use of Afghani funds to be used on Iraq Invasion.

Other than that little tidbit which was revealed to Press days ago...why the heck should I buy his book? He doesn't even quote the Chimp the way the Chimp actually speaks.

I think it's a re-hash of his old book praising the Chimp with only one real "blockbuster" revelation thrown in to get us all worked up.

And, if anyone thinks a Repug House and Senate is going to go after the Chimp for telling a huge lie about budget appropriations then they are smoking some strong stuff. There's more to get the Chimp on that this aggregious revelation...and yet no one moves against him.

No...better to have watched John Dean's case against him in case Kerry wants to go after him when he gets in office than to watch "Whore Woody" spinning stuff that would have come out later from other sources. :-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 19th 2014, 09:29 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC