It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Keith Olberman: Bush 'Lying about Iraq'

page: 2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 05:57 PM
reply to post by FlyersFan

Amazing, and I'll bet you if I had posted a similar rant from Rush Limbaugh painting a grand image of the war and the Bush administration there would be members who would post from the left perspective exactly as you have done here.

Why can't anyone on either side simply put aside partisan views, bias and preconceived notions and actually examine the war, the failures, the lies, the good and the bad?

There is a lot of truth in what Olberman has to say, the fact that he had to say it the way he did to get people to listen is a real shame.

[edit on 5-9-2007 by UM_Gazz]

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 07:32 PM
reply to post by TruthWithin

You are right again, we the people know that he is lying, we know that his generals will not let him down on the reports on Iraq because if they do they will be retiring soon.

We know also that trying to portrait Olbermant for freedom of speech like a crazy liberal is wrong, wrong and down dirty.


Because he is telling the truth.

BTW FlyersFan I think Ann Coutler is worst.

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 07:36 PM
Those of us who served in Vietnam know all about being lied to by Presidents..... Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon...... soldiers are a commodity, nothing more than that to a politician. All the glad handing, back slapping, good 'ole boy routine..... seen it all before.... numerous times. GI may mean "Government Issue"..... but a GI is a human being on planet earth.... and his or her life should not be used to further ones legacy or career. Sorry, they are ALL a bunch of idiots.

I once saw a shirt that pretty much sums up my feelings about it.... and will clean it up a bit......

If buttock holes could fly.... Washington would be a major airport.


Cam Ranh Bay 1968-69

Phan Rang 1969-70

Saigon 1970-71

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 07:44 PM
reply to post by Dave Rabbit

Thanks for that post Dave, you being there and done, heard and seen all, that is going on right now, back then in your time.

You more than anybody else knows the deceptions.

So I applaud when somebody has the guts to say to this administration, what we all know is the truth, that It lied to the American people.

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 07:51 PM
Personally I applaude the guy for standing up and saying what most people are thinking but don't have the stones to come right out and say for fear that it is unpopular. Political views aside, the war is a failure. It is not working and we have no business being there to begin with. The country was lied to so we could invade and we are being lied to now about what is/has been going on there. Just cause you say it does not make you a radical left wing nut. It makes you observant.

I can understand the point of view that he is "sinking to their level" but IMO it's about time someone did. Ignoring it and hoping that others "get it" has not been working. Fact is, in the absence of true leadership people will listen to almost anyone who will step up to the podium.

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 08:02 PM
He's just about the only one who can look directly into the camera...and give his discourse like nobody's business.
I admire him for that. He tells the truth and he knows its the truth.

Unlike the other shifty eyed people, he is being honest to his audience. Try to find that on the Bill OReilly show or Hannity or anyone else.

I like the fact he ADDRESSES THE PEOPLE, actually looks at us. That's honesty and integrity and excellent reporting/viewpoint on his part.

We need more people like him.

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 08:13 PM

Originally posted by dgtempe
Unlike the other shifty eyed people,

Shifty DG, you mean butoxed, salon tanned and over sprayed stiffly hairdos.

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 08:49 PM
link one here cares that W's intentions are to keep our troops over there till one of the nominees are "comfortable" with keeping them there? How is that not holding our troops political hostages? I have family over there right now; he is serving a third deployment so that the leader of the GOP can make his nominee "comfortable"?
Why is this man still the "leader of the FREE world"?

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 09:44 PM

Originally posted by shooterbrody one here cares that W's intentions are to keep our troops over there till one of the nominees are "comfortable" with keeping them there? How is that not holding our troops political hostages?

Shooter - you bring up a VERY important facet of this tape. Bush, by implying in this biography that political leaders will be comfortable with the troops staying in Iraq can be meant to mean a couple of things.

1 - The troop surge will yield results that indicate that success is attainable in Iraq (which so far isn't really convincing anyone).

2. Something will occur that will completely validate the US troop present in Iraq and reengage the American public in the war in Iraq.

On the second point, I immediately thought of what Rick Santorum said on that radio interview:

In an alarming display of fearmongering, former Republican Senator Rick Santorum has suggested that a series of "unfortunate events," namely terrorist attacks, will occur within the next year and change American citizen's perception of the war.

Did Olberman catch Bush suggesting that something will happen to dramatically alter people's perception of the war? Or are we to believe that the troop surge will make this case?


posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 09:55 PM
The Santorum info I referred to above is in this thread, which is appropriately entitled October False Flag?

I gotta get this biography...

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 10:12 PM
Right now I don't care about any "flase flags".
Right now I am stunned at the lack of outrage at the "leader of the FREE world" admitting he is keeping our troops over there not for "democracy", not for "stopping terrorists",not for "wmd's",not for "oil", not for "security"; he is keeping them there till he is sure they will stay. He admits this with over a year left in office. To me, this is VERY upsetting.

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 10:26 PM
Forgive my tangent Shooter. I was merely adding to your list. Of course it is INCREDIBLY outrageous. I was only suggesting that Bush perhaps knows something that we do not, and that gives him the certainty to say something like that.

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 10:44 PM
Gotta say. Olberman was successful in tugging on heartstrings.
But it was a legless rant.

He took something that Bush ALMOST said, and made turned it into something that Bush DID say..He interpreted the remarks FOR us..
thanks Keith. you liar.

Olberman lied, just as he accused Bush as doing.
He lied to make a point. But in this instance, the entire lie occurred in one place.
MSNBC studios.

Thanks, but I'll think for myself Kieth. Why don't you run for office?
Your TV gig will be over soon.

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 10:54 PM
reply to post by spacedoubt

I fail to see how Olberman lied. According to what Bush said in the book, Bush was playing for October or November that the current candidates would become comfortable with a continued troop presence in Iraq. This points to the fact that Bush is so head strong about keeping the troops there that he is relying on certain perspectives to change around that time to support a continued troop occupancy in Iraq.

This in itself illustrates some premeditation on Bush's behalf that troops will remain in Iraq REGARDLESS of any news or intel on the ground that point to the contrary. It points to premeditation on Bush's part that the course will not change.

Besides - Olberman was doing an OPINION piece. Just as it is your OPINION that he is wrong. Ain't America grand?

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 11:06 PM

ok Misrepresented, if you wish.

Mainly because it is possible to pull troops, yet remain longer.
Kieth was yammering on that remaining in IRAQ, means that it would have to be done without reducing the number of troops present.
It actually made no sense. And yes, it was an opinion.
but it was presented using non-facts.

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 11:45 PM
One line from Olberman's rant that stood out to me and may be seen as over the top by some is this:

"this president has ceased to listen, this President has decided that night is day and death is life and enraging the world against us is safety"

Out of everything he said, this one to me has some serious elements of truth, and offers dire speculation to consider for the future.

[edit on 6-9-2007 by UM_Gazz]

posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 12:09 AM

For now, though, Mr. Bush told the author, Robert Draper, in a later session, “I’m playing for October-November.” That is when he hopes the Iraq troop increase will finally show enough results to help him achieve the central goal of his remaining time in office: “To get us in a position where the presidential candidates will be comfortable about sustaining a presence,” and, he said later, “stay longer.”

but it was presented using non-facts.

How is it a "non fact" when it is a quote from the book? He is using our soldiers as a political tool and openly admitting it.

posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 12:25 AM
If y'all think Keith Olberman's special comment the other night was powerful, then check out this one he did last year, Oct. 19th. Talk about POWERFUL!!! He shames Bush like I've never heard before or since

Mod Edit: Fixed video embed.

[edit on 6-9-2007 by UM_Gazz]

posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 01:54 AM
The only NUT I've ever seen is Bill 'Orally'. That's right. GO KEITH !!!
He tells the truth. I'm sorry if some can't see the truth. Too bad for them.
Someone needs to tell it like it is and Keith is doing it!!!!
This war will be over some day and we can only hope very few soldiers will be killed in addition to the thousands that have already died as well as many thousands more, seriously injured. I am only speaking of the American casualities as well. There are hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who would be alive who are NOT the enemy who were innocent as well. Victims of war, as they say. STOP THE WAR. Use your brain, everyone. It's our neighbors and friends who are dying. On the other hand, if you're a rich republican I doubt if your friends really are even there. The poor always do the fighting. Anyone with an IQ above 25 knows that's the truth as well. Ask yourself this: HOW MANY SENATORS SONS AND DAUGHTERS ARE THERE IN IRAQ? HOW MANY CONGRESSMANS SONS AND DAUGHTERS ARE THERE? VERY FEW, my friends. Wanna know how you can tell? Because the war would be OVER if they were sent to do the fighting. We all know that, now don't we !!!!!!!! Peace, Shaman

posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 02:30 AM
I watched Olberman rant and at best its a logical fallacy and at worst its false reporting. Of course Bush is going to want Republican candidates to support the continuation so they can all go down on the same sinking ship . Yes there is the real possibility of troop levels returning to pre surge levels so Bush is hardly lying when he says this .

This is just another of the media shocking coverage of the Iraq civil war. If were not hearing that Bin Ladin cronies are responseible for every attack then its idiots like Olberman ranting on about how 2+2 =5.

Originally posted by UM_Gazz
Why can't anyone on either side simply put aside partisan views, bias and preconceived notions and actually examine the war, the failures, the lies, the good and the bad?

You should know by now that people either follow there emperor blindly or demand that US troops be withdrawn immediately that aren't going to change.

[edit on 6-9-2007 by xpert11]

top topics

<< 1    3  4 >>

log in