Bush: 'We Don't Torture'

President Tells Katie Couric That Connecting Iraq To War On Terror Is Hardest Part Of His Job

(CBS)  It was one of the worst-kept secrets in the world — and on Wednesday, President Bush confirmed it: In a major speech about the war on terror, the president, for the first time, acknowledged the existence of secret CIA prisons around the world.

He said 14 terror suspects held in them have been moved to Guantanamo Bay — and he's asking Congress to change the law so they can be tried by special military tribunals. The 14 include men allegedly behind the worst terror attacks against the United States, including 9/11.

The President also defended the way terror suspects are being interrogated. CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric sat down with the President for an exclusive interview at the White House, and she asked him about this transfer to Guantanamo.

"The reason why we're moving them there is we want them to go through a military tribunal. We want them to receive the justice that they denied other people," Mr. Bush said. "But the other thing is that we have to have the capacity to interrogate — not torture, but interrogate people to learn information."

The President says information already obtained from interrogating terror suspects has protected the country from attack.

Couric asked the President if he could give any indication about the kind of information he was able to glean from the "high-valued targets."

"We uncovered a potential anthrax attack on the United States. Or the fact the Khalid Sheikh Mohammed had got somebody to line up people to fly airlines, to crash airlines into I think the West Coast, or somewhere in America, and these would be Southeast Asians," Mr. Bush said.

"This is pretty rich data that has been declassified, so that I'm capable of telling America the importance of the interrogation program, and I'm going to call upon Congress to make sure the interrogators has the capacity to do so without breaking the law. See we're not interrogating now, because CIA officials feel like the rules are so vague that they cannot interrogate without being tried as war criminals. That's irresponsible."

Couric asked Mr. Bush if this is a tacit acknowledgement that the way these detainees were handled was wrong.

"No. Not at all. It's a tacit acknowledgement that we're doing smart things to get information to protect the American people," the President said. "I've said to the people that we don't torture, and we don't."

President Bush also insisted that the war in Iraq is a key part of the war on terror, and that it must be won. Couric asked the President what exactly he means when he says that the country can't cut and run, that the United States must stay to win — otherwise, we'll be fighting the terrorists here at home on our own streets.

"I mean that a defeat in Iraq will embolden the enemy, and will provide the enemy more opportunity, to train, plan to attack us, that's what I mean. One of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror," Mr. Bush said. "I believe it, but the American people have got to understand that a defeat in Iraq, in other words if this government there fails, the terrorists will be emboldened, the radicals will topple moderate governments. I truly believe that this is the ideological struggle of the 21st century. And the consequences for not achieving success are dire."

Mr. Bush added that when he thinks about potential threats, his biggest fear is that "somebody will come in, slip into this country and kill Americans.

"And I can't tell you how. You know, one way to look at it is we have to be right 100 percent of the time in order to protect this country, and they got to be right once," he said.

You can see much more of Couric's interview with President Bush on our CBS News 9-11 Special — "Five Years: How Safe Are We?" tonight at 10 (9 p.m. Central).

[liberalkelly]

LIAR. we do torture. that has come to be the american way in war. just another lie to the american people from the lips of a liar. he claims to be the leader of a just and fair nation when i would say that he is the only this causing it not to be so. they torture, they lie, they abuse our freedoms. tell me, with all of the democracy that we are bringing to the world- when do we get some??

[wbrisol]

Our president is a liar!

[thebrandon1]

I feel that in a country where you can't trust the validity of the leader's comments you can't help but question whether or not you are being told the truth. When he says that rich data has been declassified so that the American people can know the justification for 'interrogation' I can't help but wonder if that 'rich data' was merely just another excuse on a long list of excuses to justify what is morally and ethically wrong. Among other things.
I hate being told lies. And Americans shouldn't have to stand for it. But we do.

[nynative1340]

Well, if Bush said it, it must be true. He truly believes if he says it, it's got to be true, and everyone will believe it, because he lives in 'Bushworld'.

[truthquest]

We. Don't. Torture. Hmm, would that include those who are under indictment for doing just that while on guard duty at Abu Ghraib in Iraq? Under whose watch Iraqi prisoners, er, detainees, died in custody? This from a man who only this week likened terrorist activities to fascism, but failed to recognize the same fascist-like activities in his own administration, including suppression of information, one-party rule, detention without a fair trial, etc.
p.s. The reason in saying, "the hardest part of my job is to link Iraq to the war on terror" is because nobody is buying it anymore. Karl Rove needs to come up with some new material, because the tail is beginning to wag the dog.

[sensinoss]

If you really belive that what he says is true then you need a reality check and if you are that blind to the truth to whats really going on go to google video and look up TERROR STORM and get your real view of your president.

[janet804]

What is the matter with you all? Are you so stupid and blind to see this country is in big trouble. Does is take another 9/11 to wake all of us up? I hope not.
President Bush is doing a great job and the news is not telling the real story. If you are an American then start acting like one and defend this country. Grow up before it is too late.

[sammy062]

When will the American people wake up these people killed 3000 of our people in one morning what are we supposed to do say OOPS we know you didn't mean that. Our people that are over there voluntered to serve there country with dignity and what support do they get. Were like a bunch of grade school kids fighting over whose team is the best. It's just I didn't vote for you so I will oppose anything that you do. Grow up!!!

[thebrandon1]

The weakness for most people is that they tend to be too blind to see the big picture. It's always about who is better than who. It's never about doing things together. That must not be what this country is about. It's never about the big picture. Yes, 3000 people died almost five years ago. Yes, maybe our country does torture its prisoners of war (what country doesn't?). Yes the majority of the hijackers were citizens of Saudi Arabia. And yes, the Bush family and the Saudi Royal family are closer than most blood relatives. But it's not about that. It's not about the floods of Saudi nationals allowed to flee the US on the night of the attacks. It's about who's better than who, right? My guy is better than your guy, right? I mean, if I were to form my opinion on my leader, I would look at things like the economy and his approval rating and how good a job he keeps on his promises of education and keeping his own citizens from drowning to death whenever levees break. That's what I would do. I mean, it's not his fault. Iraq needed to be invaded. Hurricane Katrina was Sadaam's fault anyway.

[truthquest]

No offense, sir, but it was mainly Saudis (our allies, btw) who committed the atrocities on 9/11. And it is Pakistan (another ally) who is harboring Bin Laden. Iraq had nothing to do with it, sir. In addition, my post wasn't criticizing the valor of our armed forces. The criticism is of the failed policies of the Bush Administration, for having placed our troops in harm's way in Iraq, in the middle of a civil war without enough body armor, ammunition, or an exit strategy. Your schoolyard comments to "grow up" might include some homework on your part, and not in parroting the shrill sounds of opining talk radio pundits.

[kenwillmore]

Whenever I see our President I get sick to my stomach. I can't believe there are those who continue to defend this guy. He has done nothing for the poor or the middle class and the reset of the world hates us.

Your scare tactics with not work this time.

[trogers713]

Come on people....we have troops fighting to keep this country safe and some of you just don't get the real picture. Sure we lose a few good men and women over seas but we lose alot more here at home. Why don't we get upset or should I say (mad as hell) with all the men and women killed in auto accidents here at home. Last year alone we lost 39,189 compared to a few hundred in uniform. Hey come on think about it...do you want to blame that on President Bush as well? Keep the fighting over seas....He has done a good job and I support him...

[wn5l]

Bush's war in Iraq is a miserable failure.
Bush's war on terror is failing.
However, Bush's war on the middle class is going very well!!

[thebuldge]

Katie is a true AMATEUR. She doesn't belong on the Nightly News no more than I do. You could tell by the way she was kissing up to Bush. He should be impeached, arrested and given the death penalty. He is the mass murderer who has killed thousands of innocent people and the mastermind behind 9/11 but, of course you are too scared to report that.

[jastewrt]

This man is so unqualified to be the leader of anything that it is pathetic to realize he is the President.
Anyone who believes anything he says is too bogged down with their own daily lives to be paying attention even though I am sure they mean well. I wish they could see the truth.

[carolbaty]

Katie,
What a great interview. I think the President really related to you as much as the viewers do.
Kudos to CBS fpr knowing that you are a truly great broadcaster who can touch the souls of everyone from the President of the United States to the farmer in the Midwest. Keep the faith,
keep us honsest, keep us informed.

[pj_ter]

It's amazing how the War on Terror and the 9/11 attacks have become so blended this past five years. Instead of Bin Laden being called out as he was 5 years ago, now it's just "the enemy" in interviews. Why isn't this war called the War in Afghanistan not the War in Iraq? I understand a war in Afghanistan. I'm still unclear about Iraq. Why are we there and where are those weapons?? Don't confuse the two. Saddam didn't attack on 9/11 - Bin Laden did. We should be fighting a full out war in Afgahnistan not Iraq. That is where the President has failed this country and the people.

[siansimon]

I don't understand why this is a "war". I was born and lived in Europe for years with all kinds of terrorist attacks. We never graced terrorist attacks with the honor of being a "war". Wars are when trained professionals combat each other from different countries. Calling this a "war" is just a Bush White House ploy to rally Americans, who have never been invaded or had a war in their home country in anyone's memory, into some kind of jingoistic re-election of Republicans. Come on America - wake up, smell the coffee, and realise how much this policy is making you hated in the rest of the world. You may dismiss rest of the world as unimportant, but that's what the Holy Roman Empire did too.

[wilkeske]

Katie,

I thought your interview with the President was disappointing. I imagine it is probably intimidating talking to an individual as powerful as the President of the United States, but it is your responsibility to ask tough questions. You should have asked President Bush tougher questions.

Here's an example of some tough questions: "Mr. President, if it is true that nothing inappropriate was going on in those secret prisons, then why was it necessary to keep the prisons secret? If everything that was occurring in those secret prisons was proper, then why was it necessary to hide the existence of those prisons? Clearly, Mr. President, you believe the prisons still have value in spite of the fact they are no longer secret, otherwise you wouldn't insist on keeping the prisons operational. Why then did you hide the existence of those prisons if the prisoners were being treated properly and there was nothing inappropriate pertaining to the existence and operation of those prisons?"

[siansimon]

Oh and IMHO Bush would be a funny idiot if he wasn't so dangerous. He is REALLY SCAREY. I wouldn't be surprised if, in future, he wasn't credited with starting WW3, and lets hope that isn't "the war to end all wars" because I would like my kids to be alivdee and able to read a history book in High School.

[tapatio]

Those here, who think that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are the only places we should be concentration on during this war, are fooling themselves.If you use that kind of logic,then why during WW2 were we fighting in Europe and Africa,when we were attacked by Japan?

[tapatio]

consentration=consentrating

[siansimon]

wilkeske - great questions. Sadly the wimpy American news media will never ask them.....

[siansimon]

tapatio3 - its concentrating :-)

[wilkeske]

Our media is disappointing. I'm worried CBS chose Ms. Couric so she would improve relations between CBS and the Whitehouse. Ms. Couric, we need to start asking the tough questions, the safety and health of this country depend on our media informing the public. In order to inform the public, you must ask difficult questions. He's the President and should be able to answer a tough question.

Here is my question one more time:

"Mr. President, if it is true that nothing inappropriate was going on in those secret prisons, then why was it necessary to keep the prisons secret? If everything that was occurring in those secret prisons was proper, then why was it necessary to hide the existence of those prisons? Clearly, Mr. President, you believe the prisons still have value in spite of the fact they are no longer secret, otherwise you wouldn't insist on keeping the prisons operational. Why then did you hide the existence of those prisons if the prisoners were being treated properly and there was nothing inappropriate pertaining to the existence and operation of those prisons?"

[revgrljoan]

I know I'm in the minority, but I feel that Katie Couric was barely able to contain her contempt for our President. I know some of you may cheer at this, but I feel that this sort of media bias is extremely harmful to our country. I do not always agree with everything that our President decides, but I don't think that his motivations are unjust. There are many people in our country at this time who seem to want the US to fail in this war against terror. Iraq, Iran, Syria etc. all have had leaders/governments who openly oppose and threaten the US. Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan etc. have leadership that is not in support of the jihadists but they don't seem able to control them.

[revgrljoan]

Typical liberal navel-gazing.... Katie Couric's the perfect spokesperson for you. Whiny, silver-spoon, dingbat. As usual: All carping, but not a solution in sight.

[t-a-roof]

The current administration has clouded the issue of why we declared war on Iraq. consider, A. Halliburton%u2019s no bid contracts.(Former employer of *** Chaney)B. GW is an Oil Man and Iraq has a very lucrative oil deposit. C. His father%u2019s %u201Cmistake of not entering Bagdad%u201D (quoting Gen Norman Schwarzkopf Army Ret.)and finishing Saddam in the first Gulf war. I think the %u201CWar on terror%u201D has been stretched into an all encompassing catch phrase hiding the real agenda. 1st and foremost, Iraq did not attack the Twin Towers! Why has the emphasis shifted to Iraq? Is it because the administrations views don%u2019t fit the political views of the majority of the American public? Ask yourself this, is it to far from the realm of possibility to think that G.W.%u2019s agenda might be 1. To control the oil fields of Iraq with a permanent U.S. presence in the Gulf, 2. Complete his fathers legacy of a job left undone in the 1st Gulf War and 3. Help line the pockets of special interest groups? I firmly believe that the American people in general don%u2019t know the underling reasons behind the decisions of this commander in chief. My opinion,%u201CTo serve the will of the people%u201D has been de-facto changed by the %u201CG.W.'s regime%u201D to "serve the people that matter to the White House and Blow Off the constituency%u201D. What do you think?

[wilkeske]

Katie: you should have challenged Bush to explain why our policies in Iraq have made the United States a safer and stronger nation. Strong nations have willing allies. More than 50,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed. Nearly 2,700 American troops have died on Iraqi soil. We've spent hundreds of billions of dollars. The situation on the ground in Iraq is deteriorating. Due in part to Bush's policy in Iraq, our list of allies grows thin and the number of nations who wish us harm has increased. Given these tremendous costs, what do United States and Iraqi citizens have to show for their efforts? What have we gained?

[wilkeske]

Katie,

In addition you should not settle for Bush's traditional responses, which are really non-responses. Before 9/11, in the 225 years of its existence, the United States was never attacked as it was on 9/11. Therefore, President Bush, cannot say that simply because the United States has not suffered a similar attack in the 5 years since 9/11 his policy in Iraq was effective. Correlation does not prove causation. For 225 years before 9/11, the United States was never attacked as it was on 9/11, and during those 225 years we had not embraced Bush%u2019s "bomb first and ask the tough questions later" foreign policy. Therefore, that we have not been attacked as we were on 9/11 in the last 5 years is not evidence Bush%u2019s policy in Iraq has made us safer. In fact, the number of attempted attacks seems to be increasing. While we fight in Iraq, the terrorists are free to continue planning, and brainstorming. Bin Laden is free and we are bogged down in Iraq. Why hasn%u2019t Bush devoted more resources to securing Afghanistan and catching Bin Laden?

[t-a-roof]

Interesting, I didn't know that our Vice President's name was a bad word. I see CBS still likes to be a Censor!

[t-a-roof]

What a shame

[tank611]

QUOTE:

'I was born and lived in Europe for years with all kinds of terrorist attacks. We never graced terrorist attacks with the honor of being a "war".'

And look where it got you. More and more terrorists attacks. For instance the London subway bombings of July 2005 and the Madrid railway attacks of March 2004.

QUOTE:

' I'm still unclear about Iraq. Why are we there and where are those weapons?? Don't confuse the two. Saddam didn't attack on 9/11 - Bin Laden did.'

Iraq is part of the Middle East. The Middle East ,as a region,has been waging a terror war against the United States since 1979 which gives the United States the right to wage war against the Middle East.

Terror War Against the USA:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2006_record&docid=cr23jn06-52

[reyesron]

there was somewhat less fluff tonight than last night, some actual news made it on the show. I think I have become immune to George W. Bush. His condescending and snitty manner towards Katie Couric, in days past, would have really gotten under my skin. Now it is so incredibly difficult to take anything he says as being honest or truthful, I just flip the channel. As we approach the November elections, we now have this guy saying almost off the cuff, "oh, yeah, we stopped an anthrax attack." What is really scary is the press doesnt even bother to discredit him anymore. why should they?, it does no good. I have little fondness for Ms. Couric in this role, however, when Bob Schieffer interviewed the prez last year, he also let him skate the issues, and I like Bob. There has to be some precondition to an interview with this particular president that you cant ask the guy tough questions and you cant say there are preconditions.

[newsjeff-2009]

If we are going to spend money and manpower to fight "The War on Terrorism" I feel that the United States should keep its focus on Bin Laden and his followers the people that attacked America on Sept.11,2001. I do not feel like we should continue waging war in Iraq if there isn't any more weapons to worry about. What happens in Cuba and Iran should not be our concern unless they are bothering us. If President Bush and the entire GOP want to promote world freedom and a democratic,elected government for everyone, well there is lots of countries we could invade or quarrel with China,Cuba,India, and many others. I think it would be a wonderful thing to have freedom and a public elected government in all countries and continents, but if America wants to be the country that offers military and foreign aid to any country trying to rid themselves of a dictator or communist rule, America will have a lot of work to do. I support promoting freedom and democracy to all nations and countries America and Bush can help, but we have to focus on Bin Laden and our own domestic problems here, rising crime rate,poverty,unemployment,illegal drug abuse,illegal drug dealing, etc.

[emhawks]

Bush said his biggest fear is that " somebody will come in, slip into this country & kill Americans." I doubt that's his biggest fear, don't you? I think his biggest fear might be that someone will come in, & actually bring he & Cheney ( the real President) to task by impeachment. I agree with T-A-Roof's posting. I would add to that to read about Project for the New American Century, the Caryle Group, Halliburton, Brown & Root& the Bush families history with Mid-East oil connections.
There has been corruption in almost all American presendential adm., but this is by far the worst of any. For the record, I'm an Independent; I would feel the same way if this was a Democrat adm.

[alphaa10-2009]

For five years, Bush rejected an understanding of prisoner rights consistent with American tradition-- first and foremost, the right to know the evidence against the prisoner, and to be tried on the basis of that evidence.

The Founding Fathers, themselves, insisted on the right of habeas corpus to counter arbitrary acts of the English king in ruling the colonies. George Bush, himself, however, clearly sides with King George on that issue.

Bush also fought the sense of the Senate ban on torture passed-- despite open Bush protests-- in December, 2005. If opposed to torture, why did he fight the measure? As Sen. McCain, himself, pointed out, banning torture is not about the enemy and lack of ethics, it is a statement to the world about America, and who we are.

Bush clearly doesn't understand the issues at stake, even when he has had months to develop an artful cover story. In contrast, some of Bush's own party do get it-- Sen. Graham, among them, says Bush military tribunals threaten the safety of American servicemen around the world. Without an open trial on the basis of evidence, Bush military trials become only an American version of the secret jihadist tribunal already used againt American captives in the past.

Bush wants us to further drain our treasury fighting a fruitless war in Iraq because, he says, it will embolden the enemy if we cut our losses. All we are going to do with this approach is further drain our treasury chasing the illusory victory. On top of that, it sounds as though he suggests that torture is the key to getting good intelligence. Experts maintain that such methods do not achieve their ends. This president has made the world hate and fear us. He has cost us world prestige...he has set the Middle East on fire with his policies. We are not fighting the terrorists---we are creating more terrorists every day, every time he opens his mouth.

[grumpy1963]

I'm growing a might wary of the left trying to play the keep-us-safe card and veiled implications that, somehow, they're more capable of keeping us safe than the right. And, it's absurd that the left seems to harbor eagerness in the possibility of another attack in thinking they're going to be able to hop on the bandwagon and somehow criticize, saying: "See, I told you so. President George W. Bush and Republicans haven't kept you safe."

Here's a newsflash -- and, I know this is something scores of folks don't like to hear, especially, sniveling folks from the left side of the political spectrum -- you aren't 100% "safe"...and, you'll never BE 100% "safe". No one can GUARANTEE your safety and you'll NEVER be 100% safe...period. And, it doesn't matter who is in power.

However, if anyone thinks they can cajole me into believing that, somehow, the left are more capable of keeping us safe than the right? That's just plain and simply absurd, laughable and, absolutely without merit. I can't be bothered by some lefty whining and criticizing the right, claiming the right isn't "keeping us safe". First, among several other reasons, we haven't, in fact, been attacked again. And, second, the left have no shining record in "keeping us safe". So, when I hear a lefty implying the left are somehow more capable of "keeping us safe"...this does nothing but ring hollow and compel me to laugh enthusiastically.

[mboss1957]

As a Middle America American, I am so sick of this conversation about why we went to war in Iraq and who is to blame. I was not for the War in Iraq, I thought we should stay in Afghanistan and take care of building a new government there. I think Bush was wrong to invade Iraq; however, we are there now and we must stay and finish the job. He is right when he says....that if we leave without establishing a government that is able to defend itself...that terrorists all over the world will be greatly stengthened as they believe that Americans do not have the stomach for real war. I do not for a minute believe that every decision the President of the United States makes is based on special interest groups such as the oil companies. The world is a very complicated place and we in the West are certainly addicted to oil, but I think the President is trying to do the best for the American People. It is a very tough and demanding job. We should all take a little less time to criticize and a little more time to show our patriotism to our own country. We are America and we are a great nation. We are not perfect and sometimes we do more harm than good in our intentions to do good works; however, anyone who know this great nation knows that for right or wrong, we are always pursuing good works around the world.

[alphaa10-2009]

<b>revgrljoan said-- "Typical liberal navel-gazing.... Whiny, silver-spoon, dingbat. As usual: All carping, but not a solution in sight.</b>

Careful with the whining, carping sneers, yourself-- it smears your combat lipstick gloss, and offers no solution, itself.

Not a "solution" in sight, you say? Actually, the first part of any solution is to cease the brain-dead behavior that caused the problem. This relatively simple act is something that escapes most who side with Bush on his un-American approach to prisoners (see my post later in this thread)-- not to mention the fraudulent, failure-ridden policy debacle known as Iraq.

When you finally understand that hitting your head with a hammer doesn't work, I can assure you your first act is to cease that behavior. It clears the mind wonderfully, as other Republicans opposed to Bush on torture-- and Iraq-- can attest.

[grumpy1963]

QUOTE: >I don't understand why this is a "war". I was born and lived in Europe for years with all kinds of terrorist attacks. We never graced terrorist attacks with the honor of being a "war". Wars are when trained professionals combat each other from different countries. Calling this a "war" is just a Bush White House ploy to rally Americans, who have never been invaded or had a war in their home country in anyone's memory, into some kind of jingoistic re-election of Republicans. -- Posted by siansimon at 11:10 PM : Sep 06, 2006<

What part of Europe? And, considering Europe's past with the likes of Adolph Hitler, Mussolini, et. al.? I can't take seriously the views of yourself with respect to policies of which ensure America's safety.

QUOTE: >Come on America - wake up, smell the coffee, and realise how much this policy is making you hated in the rest of the world. -- Posted by siansimon at 11:10 PM : Sep 06, 2006<

You mean, no one "hated us" before President George W. Bush and the launching of Operation Iraqi Freedom?

QUOTE: >You may dismiss rest of the world as unimportant, but that's what the Holy Roman Empire did too. -- Posted by siansimon at 11:10 PM : Sep 06, 2006<

You mean, the Holy Roman Empire, that was located in Europe?

[grumpy1963]

QUOTE: > ... We are not fighting the terrorists---we are creating more terrorists every day, every time he opens his mouth. -- Posted by sesanders1 at 01:37 AM : Sep 07, 2006<

Although, this message board won't allow me to explain this in more detail with its limitation on typed characters...this cliche of "creating terrorists" is getting old, worn out, and boring. Terrorists aren't something that roll off an assembly line. They are -- presumably -- living, thinking people who are capable of choosing to endeavor in terrorism or, not choosing to endeavor in terrorism. You can no more "create" a terrorist as you can "create" a child molester or wife beater, or "create" a murderer. These people didn't just suddenly wake up one day and say: "Oh...well, I think I'll be a terrorist today." They were, in fact, terrorists years ago and, my bet is, with the Middle East's art of indoctrination, nearly since birth. And, if a terrorist wants to justify his/her behavior, he/she can find any excuse he/she can possibly think of under the sun, even if he/she has to make it up, to find reasons to endeavor in their vile, despicable behavior.

[golferling]

You are right...go after him a little, Katie...
the only true thing he REALLY cares about is the elections...WHY now is he on a new kick to "sell" the war..because he knows he will be judged as the worst president ever.No WMD's...Katrina, lack of cooperation with the 9-11 investigations, prison abuse, etc etc..it IS A CIVIL WAR, a mess, and most journalists are STILL letting hin get away with ANOTHER SPIN on the politics of FEAR...I, and most Americans, are finally waking up to his ***, Help them. Our country needs a change of course...in leadership..he is STILL connecting 9-11 to Iraq and getting away with it...somebody please stop him...

[alphaa10-2009]

Grumpy-- Your caricature of the American public isn't true to the facts-- most Americans think Iraq is a failure. And despite your disingenuous suggestion, no one expects to be safe. However, Americans do see through Bush and are tired of his incompetence, deceit and lame excuses.

In contrast, you yourself desperately seek refuge from the point that a right-winger-- neocon George Bush-- put America much further into jeopardy. You are dragged screaming to the realization 911 happened on Bush's watch. Ignoring many, many warnings about al Qaeda, Bush obsessed about Iraq until he was blindsided by 911 (talk about a slow learner). When 911 hit, Bush had racked up more vacation time than any other president, just as he was caught napping, again, by Hurricane Katrina (talk about a slow learner).

And speaking of slow learners, you assure us you won't place your confidence in anybody but Bush. This reminds me of people who <b>still</b> can't believe the Enron stock they bought from that nice man, Ken Lay, is completely worthless. Try something different, Grumpy, take stock in America, not the neocons who sold you a bill of goods, and want you to keepf on buying into their worthless IPO (idiotic public offering).

[alphaa10-2009]

Grumpy said-- <b>"Terrorists aren't something that roll off an assembly line. They are -- presumably -- living, thinking people who are capable of choosing to endeavor in terrorism or, not choosing to endeavor in terrorism.</b>

Despite your Panglossian explanations about human will and the notion of choice, the point another poster made remains valid. Those who need reinforcement to begin a personal jihad or join a collective one get a huge boost from Bush, just as Hezbollah (and al Qaeda) get all the video of "Crusader Terror" they need for a lifetime from the Israeli invasion of Lebanon.

Even Bush recognizes this is a war for hearts and minds, but he acts as though he lacks one.

[genxwomen]

I'm sorry that someone like Katie Couric had the oppourtinity to interview George W. Bush! She bleeds, Kerry, Gore, Kennedy, Johnson, FDR. Presidents that care more about them selves than their country, however they all spoke the spoke. I would rather be indebted to George Bush for having strength and viligiance vs. the others. Katie can take her altra liberal sense and move to China. Than just maybe she'll appreicate the hard work our fathers made for this country.

She's not pretty, she's not nice, and the only reason why people like her is that she's katty like most of American Women.

She'll never read this cause she doesn't ever want to know, she'll never be respected.

Kind Regards,
Realistic in Global Sense
PS I'm sorry you missed Oprah's spot, she'll always be better than you ever could on a pinky!

[alphaa10-2009]

Mboss said-- "<b>As a Middle America American, I am so sick of this conversation about why we went to war in Iraq and who is to blame.</b>"

Most who side with Bush are indeed sick of the debate, because daily it becomes more evident Bush made a huge miscalculation at great expense ($320 billion) and cost in American lives (2700 dead, 20,000 wounded) to the American people-- those who should have been able to trust his intentions and his judgment.

Instead, America got a lackluster con-man, a third-rate Texas dictator wanna-be, who told members of his own party-- after they criticized his illegal spying on Americans-- "Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It's only a GD#$@%! piece of paper!"

[grumpy1963]

Grumpy said-- "Terrorists aren't something that roll off an assembly line. They are -- presumably -- living, thinking people who are capable of choosing to endeavor in terrorism or, not choosing to endeavor in terrorism.

alphaa10 said -- <b>"Despite your Panglossian explanations about human will and the notion of choice, the point another poster made remains valid. Those who need reinforcement to begin a personal jihad or join a collective one get a huge boost from Bush, just as Hezbollah (and al Qaeda) get all the video of "Crusader Terror" they need for a lifetime from the Israeli invasion of Lebanon."

Only if you yourself take on the persona of a jihadist and find common ground with them.

alphaa10 said -- <b>"Even Bush recognizes this is a war for hearts and minds, but he acts as though he lacks one."

Says the guy/gal who is NOT President of the United States. <yawn>

[grumpy1963]

Grumpy-- Your caricature of the American public isn't true to the facts-- most Americans think Iraq is a failure. And despite your disingenuous suggestion, no one expects to be safe. However, Americans do see through Bush and are tired of his incompetence, deceit and lame excuses. ... -- Posted by alphaa10 at 02:33 AM : Sep 07, 2006

<B>Well, I'd really enjoy educating you on a few things and putting many of your fallacies to rest. However, considering the character limitation constraints with respect to this board and being unable to address the full content and context of your drivel, I'll have to refrain and allow you to continue with your fallacious delusions. However, thanks for your time and attention.<-B>