NEWS: Report Gagged By Britain Alleges Bush Planned To Target Arab Television

Originally posted by John bull 1
If it was a joke then why was it included in an official memo ? A memo isn't a transcript.

If those who accept it was a joke can explain these two points away then I'll laugh along with them.

Here's an explanation for one of the points:

The Mirror based its story on a transcript of the conversation between the two leaders, leaked to it by an unidentified source.

First comes a transcript of a conversation. If it eventually becomes a memo, that happens later on down the line. That is what happened here. It seems that some are using the terms transcript and memo interchangeably.

Imo the unidentified source that leaked this should be severely punished. Life imprisonment.

[edit on 23-11-2005 by jsobecky]

Question:
So even if it were a joke, that makes it ok?

Answer:
YES

It's as simple as that..

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Firstly, the story is not really a story. Bush was making a joke.

Where do you get this was a joke? Perhaps he finds killing innocent civilians funny. I don't think the rest of the world would share that view. Somehow I doubt it was said as a joke. There wouldn't be a gag place on it if it were a joke. Chances are he meant what he said.

just another example of a "Good Ol' Boy" shootin' off his mouth and havin' a rip-roarin' FANDANGO!!!

No offense to my Republican Brothers, but ... What ... a .... Dimwit....

The lead off article did say the memo was "TOP SECRET" and the definition of Top Secret is information, the disclosure of which would cause severe and irreparable harm to the country. Whoever first published anything from the memo should be prosecuted, as should anyone who provided them the information. And yes, that means the media is not free to say, print, or show anything they want and they never have been. There are limitations on "Freedom of the Press" and disclosing classified information is one of those limitations. You may argue that the "Memo" was wrongly classified (and it might have been), but it was classified and so printing anything from it is a crime.

[edit on 23-11-2005 by Astronomer68]

Originally posted by spacedoubt
Question:
So even if it were a joke, that makes it ok?

Answer:
YES
It's as simple as that..

according to U and George W Bush ?


I am seeing a trend emerging, the people who are justifying that this man inparticular is implicated in such nonsence think it's "ok"

well 'ok then"


sick, just sick.

[edit on 23-11-2005 by ImJaded]

C'mon ImJaded.
Making a joke is a far cry from doing the deed.
Jokes are made all the time about the war in Iraq, whether it be politcal satire,
or a soldier on the ground. It's a survival mechanism.


You may be Jaded, but I'm sure you aren't THAT uptight.

Originally posted by Astronomer68
The lead off article did say the memo was "TOP SECRET" and the definition of Top Secret is information, the disclosure of which would cause severe and irreparable harm to the country. Whoever first published anything from the memo should be prosecuted, as should anyone who provided them the information. And yes, that means the media is not free to say, print, or show anything they want and they never have been. There are limitations on "Freedom of the Press" and disclosing classified information is one of those limitations. You may argue that the "Memo" was wrongly classified (and it might have been), but it was classified and so printing anything from it is a crime.

[edit on 23-11-2005 by Astronomer68]

Excelleant point Astronomer. According too News Max they found out who the individuals were charged under section 3 and 5 of the Official Secrets Act and will go to trial.

www.newsmax.com...

Cabinet Office civil servant David Keogh is accused of passing it to Leo O'Connor, who formerly worked for former British lawmaker Tony Clarke. Both Keogh and O'Connor are scheduled to appear at London's Bow Street Magistrates Court next week.

According to the Crown Prosecution Service, Keogh was charged with an offense under Section 3 of the Official Secrets Act relating to "a damaging disclosure" by a servant of the Crown of information relating to international relations or information obtained from a state other than the United Kingdom.


O'Connor was charged under Section 5, which relates to receiving and disclosing illegally disclosed information.

Originally posted by spacedoubt
C'mon ImJaded.
Making a joke is a far cry from doing the deed.
Jokes are made all the time about the war in Iraq, whether it be politcal satire,
or a soldier on the ground. It's a survival mechanism.


You may be Jaded, but I'm sure you aren't THAT uptight.

U honestly mean to say U find it funny ? which part exactly ? please, I am curious because I find that truly disturbing.
I don't think I am being uptight when I express my disgust at finding murder-for-no-damn-reason humorous in any way.

Honestly, and we are to take this man seriously on his WOT ? Let Mohammed say something he finds "funny" about blowing up something and we'll laugh it off shall we ? Pfffft He'll have the cops knockin down his door before he can finish his sentence.
Let me see these same people defending this appalling behaviour of the President be surprised if/when some fool retaliates to this.

This 'memo' does not even need to be real for some extreme idiot to do some extreme shi*, and this kind of BS is all it takes. so what now ? Is he trying to bait them ?

spacedoubt, this is in no way a personal attack on U, I am just having trouble understanding this train of thought... and please do keep in mind a large majority of people feel as I do from what I have been reading and hearing.


[edit on 24-11-2005 by ImJaded]

For those that are claiming this was a joke, maybe you can explain why Tony Blair felt he had to dissuade Bush from following through with his plan?

The Mirror story said British Prime Minister Tony Blair dissuaded Bush from attacking Al-Jazeera's headquarters in Doha, Qatar, when the two leaders met in early 2004.

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
For those that are claiming this was a joke, maybe you can explain why Tony Blair felt he had to dissuade Bush from following through with his plan?

The Mirror story said British Prime Minister Tony Blair dissuaded Bush from attacking Al-Jazeera's headquarters in Doha, Qatar, when the two leaders met in early 2004.

another very good question, I can't believe this hasn't been of more interest lol I myself was distracted by the shock of it just being said period.

Well, U don't gotta convince me, hell I'm waitin on that answer too This should be good ...

Originally posted by Flinx
If this is real, which we could find out if they released the rest of the document, I'd really have to question Bush's sanity (even more). If it wasn't a joke and he was actually considering an airstrike on a news network, albeit one that's biased against the US, that's just... The truly crazy thing about it is that the HQ is in a "friendly" country. I'd think blowing up something in the middle of a Qatari city would be akin to declaring war on them.

Come on, Bush's sanity has been in question for quite sometime now. The old days when Bush was a heavy drinker and some say an illegal drug user too, has to have taken it's toll on his brain-cells, fried a few circuts, .

I would not put it pass the GW Bush to have said that to Blair and meant every word of it. The world is doomed as long as the Bush Administration is in the Oval Office, there's enough "wack-jobs" running around causing trouble and breaking the laws without having this one run our country too,

Update!


Now, why would the Attorney General THREAT Newspapers, if this is all one big Hoax, hmmmm?

Anyway, here is the Mirror Article.

Originally posted by Mayet
This is an important story that people do deserve to know about it seems that Bush has tried to stop the other side of the story being told and to control the actual stories coming out of the Iraq conflict to those with with pro USA views only.

There is two sides of every story and the people have a right to hear both sides and make up their own minds on matters.

My guess is that this memo contains a lot more than Bush's ignorant remarks about bombing Al-Jazeera and they have used the Official Secrets Act to keep the memo and all forthcoming legal proceedings surrounding it under wraps.

Our immoral and false 'war on terror' gets compounded by more lies and deception. . .

So many people are so concerned whether or not what Bush said was a joke. Why does it matter if he was serious or not? Does it only matter when it's Bush who says stuff like this?

For everyone in this thread who is certain that Bush meant it, I have a question: what was your response to this thread:

Iran Leader Calls for Israel's Destruction - "wiped off the map" was the actual phrase…

Without naming names, the most scathing response I found was this:

I have witnessed the little battles you partake in on here on matters concerning Iran, I for one never suspected this was some big plan of all the top guns in Iran to invade Israel or anything, although I was shocked to hear it. Honestly, my first thought when I heard it was "He's just saying what alot of people are scared to say" but I for one was quick to condemn it.

Whomever wrote that, you know who you are.

So it seems to me that it only matters to many of you when it's Bush. The president of Iran can vow to push an entire nation into the sea, and you are silent about it.

That is hypocrisy, pure and simple.

The issue here is freedom of the press, and the rights of voters to be informed.

IMO - all this prattle about the "need for secrecy and confidentiality" can be found in any psychology 101 text that describes the abuse dynamic and identifying signs.