Bush Talks About Explosives

tunaman

I think most people realise that Bush is just a puppet, as his speeches are obviously written for him.

So why would he be told to talk about explosives and plane attacks on buildings in US?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,,-6083135,00.html

As soon as Congress acts on this bill, the men our intelligence believed helped orchestrate the 9/11 attacks can face justice.

The bill would also provide clear rules for our personnel involved in detaining and questioning captured terrorists.

The information that the Central Intelligence Agency has obtained by questioning men like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has provided valuable information and has helped disrupt terrorist plots, including strikes within the United States.

For example, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed described the design of plane attacks on building inside the U.S. and how operatives were directed to carry them out. That is valuable information for those of us who have the responsibility to protect the American people.

He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping.


The whole speech is right out of 1984, by George Orwell.

Unfortunately, the recent Supreme Court decision put the future of this program in question. It's another reason I went to Congress. We need this legislation to save it.

I have one test for this legislation. I'm going to ask one question, as this legislation proceeds, and it's this: The intelligence community must be able to tell me that the bill Congress sends to my desk will allow this vital program to continue. That's what I'm going to ask.

The principle behind this program is clear.

Time's running out. Congress is set to adjourn in just a few weeks. Congress needs to act wisely and promptly, so I can sign good legislation.

Black Swan

Just curious. Does the Geneva Convention already address this? Although I do not care for the politics of US Senator John McCain, he has raised an interesting objection to the passage of this bill. He contends that if the USA does this, then it will throw open the door for every nation to reinterpret the Convention in terms of serving their own interests.

tunaman

Alarmingly yes.

Here is another excerpt from his incredible speech...

Now, this idea that somehow, you know, we've got to live under international treaties, you know - and that's fine; we do. But oftentimes the United States government passes law to clarify obligations under international treaty.

White House to revise terror proposal

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060919/ap_on_go_pr_wh/congress_terrorism

The president's measure would go further than Warner's bill, allowing classified evidence to be withheld from defendants in terror trials and allowing coerced testimony. Bush also favors a narrower interpretation of the Geneva Conventions that would make it harder to prosecute U.S. interrogators for using harsh techniques.

Neither side is saying how an agreement can be achieved on whether to allow the CIA to use highly controversial methods such as disorientation, forced nakedness and waterboarding, in which a subject is made to think he is drowning. Without confirming any specific techniques used by the CIA, the Bush administration says the agency's program has foiled terror plots. Opponents say the techniques verge on torture.


They want this barbaric law to go global...

Hobbes

I don't think they want every country copying thier torture on other people (especially not americans), its just that Bush is an idiot and rather then answer the question his way to weasel out of it basically said that he would have no problem with other countries citizens using the same methods of interrogation/torture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ag3QsL2hbXI

That explains it a bit better. Basically if Bush admits to waterboarding hes fuk'ed unless they can get the US law changed.

lostexpectation

didn't Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the man who scruffy photo we see all the time, hand himself in and spill why did he need to abused?

tunaman

Hobbes wrote:

I don't think they want every country copying thier torture on other people (especially not americans), its just that Bush is an idiot and rather then answer the question his way to weasel out of it basically said that he would have no problem with other countries citizens using the same methods of interrogation/torture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ag3QsL2hbXI

That explains it a bit better. Basically if Bush admits to waterboarding hes fuk'ed unless they can get the US law changed.

Bush is just a puppet...

When he says the following, we should really be asking what the intent is?

For example, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed described the design of plane attacks on building inside the U.S. and how operatives were directed to carry them out. That is valuable information for those of us who have the responsibility to protect the American people.

KSM was reported killed...

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/DJ30Df01.html

He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping.

Who are these unknown operatives?

Explosives went off high to limit casualties?

They have been denying the existence of explosives in the buildings for the last 5 years, now this...

Sounds like they now want to be known as moderate terrorists...

Victor

tunaman wrote:

He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping.

I have a cunning plan. Put the explosives near the bottom of the building and kill everyone. :rolleyes:

lostexpectation

tunaman wrote:

Bush is just a puppet...


http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/DJ30Df01.html

He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping.

thats a strange thing to say, a non sequiter to what he was saying before.

tunaman

Victor wrote:

I have a cunning plan. Put the explosives near the bottom of the building and kill everyone. :rolleyes:

We are now being told, by the mastermind, that the attacks were designed to minimize the number of casualties...

I thought Al-Qaeda's MO was to try to kill as many people as possible?

tunaman

lostexpectation wrote:

thats a strange thing to say, a non sequiter to what he was saying before.

Do you not think he is implying that the planes alone were not the cause of the buildings coming down?