Paul O`Neil is talking

[Aurel]

The former Treasury Chief Paul O`Neil who was fired by GW Bush for opposing his stupid taxcut has some very interesting things to say about the Bush administration.

The first one, which is not news, is that
Bush "was like a blind man in a roomful of deaf people" during their meetings

The second one, which I find much more interesting, is that the war on Iraq was planned 8 months before 9/11 happened.
Therefore, the argument that the invasion is part of the war on terror falls appart. As will many more lies that Bush and his cronies have been serving us since 9/11. More

Aurel

[speeder]

I do not doubt the guy, but it's a case of mutual disloyalty, so there you have it.

Team Bush will quickly discredit his story, then the man. Should start today, Monday by the latest. No, make that Sunday AM on the Pol talk shows.

[Aurel]

So we have very little time for a cool sunday debate unbiased by the media
It is pretty cold outside anyways, so I am not planning any work on the porsche

Aurel

[WOODPIE]

O'Neill might have his head handed to him on a stick, metaphorically speaking. Actually, I'd be surprised if this story gets the press coverage it deserves. Tomorrow morning's talking heads have many other subjects to delve into; pictures of rocks on Mars and how it relates to the expansion of the Bush empire, and of course George Will has to have his say regarding Pete Rose.

I bet this story gets buried by network/syndicate news.

Ed

[Aurel]

I would bet that too. people do not like to dig a little more than the surface, and the public loves simple stories where good always wins against evil. I`ll buy his book, it will certainly give a very interesting insight on the White House.

Aurel

[dd74]

Yes, Aurel: wishful thinking that this will get any coverage. Look for a blurb on CNN with Aaron Brown on Monday 10PM EST. He's no Bush fan - his emotes himself fairly well for an anchor.

I agree with the others about Sunday morning. We've got Mars, an American woman found in the rubble in Bam, Iran, and, as if it has any political relevance, cougar attacks in Orange County, Ca.

[Aurel]

And a flight that was detourned from its original route due to terrorist threat... I hope I will come back from snowbording early enough tomorrow night to watch 60 minutes.

Aurel

[turbo6bar]

I admit Bush isn't as pretty as I once thought.

[island911]

Let's see . . .
Paul O`Neil was fired by GW Bush.
Paul O`Neil then said Bush "was like a blind man in a roomful of deaf people" during their meetings . . among other things.

Just wait until Paul O`Neil drops the biggest bombshell of them all:
"GW Bush is a big fat meany . . .and his mother wears armyboots"

I mean, really! . . "like a blind man in a roomful of deaf people" during their meetings" . . . what does that mean other than, "nah nah n'nah-nah"?

Was Bill Clinton, during their meetings, 'like a Michael Jackson in a room full of kids'?

[island911]

Originally posted by speeder
I do not doubt the guy, but it's a case of mutual disloyalty, so there you have it.
. . .

Yeah, his upcoming book, "The Price of Loyalty," . .. whom does Paul-O think he is being loyal to? He is not being loyal to the US, that's for sure.

I guess Paul-O figures he can sell more books,, and hurt Bush more, if he comes out with "the truth" now (election year) rather than later (after Iraqi stability)

[cowtown]

Originally posted by Aurel

The second one, which I find much more interesting, is that the war on Iraq was planned 8 months before 9/11 happened.

Aurel

This isn't really anything new either...it was revealed in the book "Bush at War" about a year ago. I always wondered why it did not get more play.

As to O'Neil, I kind of liked him for his forthrightness, but I never could figure out why he took a spot w/ the Bush admin. He had to know going in that Bush employees toe the Bush line.

I won't get into your statements about Bush lying and his tax cut being unnecessary, because we'll never agree.

[WOODPIE]

Well, to me it means more than "nah nah nah".

Sounds to me that Mr. O"Neill took away the impression, from his meetings with the president, that Bush neither had the interest, communication nor cognitive skills to understand the issues being presented, or to express his own directives. One could also infer that O'Neill's motivations are non-political, as he has swiftly alienated many blind and deaf people by using their plight to allude a stumbling, bumbling manner.

I would purchase his book first before I came to the conclusion that he equates loyalty to the USA with loyalty to its president.

Yes, I think O'Neill might very well be capitalizing on the fact that we are in an election year, and his book might sell better now than twenty years from now, or however long it takes to stabilize Iraq. Something wrong with capitalism?

I will read this book, if only to find out more about O'Neill's and Alan Greenspan's plan to somehow quash Bush's second wave of tax cuts.

Ed

[emcon5]

Originally posted by Aurel
The second one, which I find much more interesting, is that the war on Iraq was planned 8 months before 9/11 happened. Therefore, the argument that the invasion is part of the war on terror falls appart. As will many more lies that Bush and his cronies have been serving us since 9/11.

So what exactly do you think the guys in the Pentagon do all day? Play Risk?

I would not be suprised at all if there are plans in existance for attacks on lots of places that we will never invade, created just as strategic exercises. That is what military strategic planning guys do. "If we had to invade Madagascar, how would we do it?

I would bet that an invasion plan for Iraq existed as far back as the early 90s, whin it bacame clear to everyone that Hussein had no intention of complying with UNSC resolutions. I also bet there were several plans, depending on when (summer/winter), who was on our side, and where an invasion could jump off from. If you remember this was changing constantly the few months before the invasion.

The fact that a war plan for Iraq existed just means the Military was doing it's job.

Tom

[ronin]

Originally posted by island911
Let's see . . .
Paul O`Neil was fired by GW Bush.
Paul O`Neil then said Bush "was like a blind man in a roomful of deaf people" during their meetings . . among other things.

Just wait until Paul O`Neil drops the biggest bombshell of them all:
"GW Bush is a big fat meany . . .and his mother wears armyboots"

I mean, really! . . "like a blind man in a roomful of deaf people" during their meetings" . . . what does that mean other than, "nah nah n'nah-nah"?

Was Bill Clinton, during their meetings, 'like a Michael Jackson in a room full of kids'?

LMAO. how true, how true

and emcon, you're exactly right. analogy: repair manuals aren't written for pre-planned breakdowns, but for guidance when they do occur

[CJFusco]

Paul O'Neill looked like such a jackass when he would hit a pop fly and then beat the water cooler with his bat.










oh, different guy.

[350HP930]

It certainly explains why bush has joked 'Lucky me, I hit the trifecta' multiple when referring to 9/11 and its aftermath.

[Moses]

Originally posted by Aurel
... stupid taxcut ...
Aurel

That's an oxymoron.

[dd74]

Saw the 60 Min. interview and came away unimpressed. Maybe I'll buy the book, but it sounds like a case of former employee bitterness. I'm not amazed about the Bush cabinet planning Iraq from the get-go and more importantly, before 9/11. But just as has been stated, Iraq and al Queda are unrelated. So what's his point other than he seemed to be a square peg in a round hole with the rest of Bush's guys.

[stealthn]

Gotta throw my two cents in (even though I'm Canadian), what the 60 minutes report showed was that they were looking for companies (non-iraqy) to divi up the oil reserves and land holdings of the country. This was the main reason for the invasion. ...Oil

[emcon5]

Originally posted by stealthn
were looking for companies (non-iraqy) to divi up the oil reserves and land holdings of the country. This was the main reason for the invasion. ...Oil

So, what non-Iraqi companies now own the land and the oil?