Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Ex-Treasury Chief O'Neill Rejects Price Of Loyalty - Helen Thomas

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 » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
TacticalPeek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-14-04 07:26 PM
Original message
Ex-Treasury Chief O'Neill Rejects Price Of Loyalty - Helen Thomas
Comments About Bush War Hopefully Motivates Other Whistleblowers

POSTED: 6:48 p.m. EST January 14, 2004
UPDATED: 6:49 p.m. EST January 14, 2004

WASHINGTON -- "I can't imagine I would be attacked for telling the truth."

That statement came from former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill during an interview with
CBS-TV'S "60 Minutes." He has learned differently since then.

...

A Jan. 7 New York Times profile on national security adviser Condoleezza Rice has a fascinating
nugget buried deep in the story.

When Richard Haass, then a top State Department official, came to see her in July 2002 to
discuss the pros and cons of making Iraq a priority.

She told him: "Save your breath -- the president has already decided what he's going to do on
this."

http://www.thelouisvillechannel.com/helenthomas/2765942...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Faygo Kid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-14-04 07:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. Great job, Helen. We thought Reagan was the teflon president.
All of us on DU have always seen through Bush for the freak he is; no matter how much evidence confirming what we have already known comes out, he still gets the support not only of the dittoheads, but of the "legitimate" media as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Printer70 Donating Member (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-14-04 07:45 PM
Response to Original message
2. By 2002, I think it was clear
...to most that Saddam was not cooperating with inspectors. We have to make a nuanced argument here. Most Americans supported the war and are glad Saddam is gone. The argument that may resonate with the mainstream is that early preparation for war may bolster the charge that we went in there for reasons other than national security.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fovea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-14-04 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Sorry
Edited on Wed Jan-14-04 10:39 PM by realpolitik
Call me irresponsible, but I believed at the time that Hans Blix was substantially correct, and doing a very good job. It turns out I was right.

At the time I believed that Bush was pursueing a separate agenda to the operation against al Qae'ida that had exactly zero to do with makeing us safer. Indeed, at the time I typified it as about oil and regional control. It turns out I was at least mostly right.

It took me a while to figure out the whole tank the economy to create a new class of military recruit, the unemployed downwardly mobile young urbanite. We are now being punished for letting Bill Clinton delay the Carlysle/Halliburton/Bechtel plan to bring in the era of oil scarcity for 9 long years. Barb is so proud.

But now we have planted the seeds of instablity in the region, indeed, the chance of nuclear exchange between two or more regional powers by the end of the decade seems almost inescapable. Sadly, so does the chance for one or more of them to nuke us, as well.
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 Nov 24th 2017, 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles 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