BUSH LIED IN HIS SPEECH ON THE IRAQ WAR PLAN

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/01/embedded-time-reporter/

The lie is one more piece of evidence that the Fake President is getting ready to cut and run. In his speech, he lied that Iraq forces led an assault. In fact, an eyewitness says the assault was led by American troops and that the Iraqis "led nothing."

Not that any of this will matter to the Greyhaws and his Jawohl! crowd, who have long since proven themselves to be in the Republican propaganda business.

Spin, spin, spin ... Mr. Pratt, or is it Mr. Whitney?

who was first "in the door" Wilson? The Iraqis. So what if the SF was pointing the way ... when it came time for the bullets to fly, the Iraqis led the way where it counts -- WITH THEIR BODIES, with over twice as many men as we provided to the operation.

Once again, you only tell "your half" of the story. You'll twist the truth any way you can to support the Big Lie, Herr Goebbels.

Wilson wanna cracker?

And, the above comment assumes that the embedded Time reporter, and the left-wing site ThinkProgress, were ACCURATE and TRUTHFUL in their reporting ... both quite subject to question, as even honest people can misinterpret events in the light of their own biases.

OTOH, given your lack of respect for the TOTAL truth, and your unequivocal support of their position, it is prudent to question their truth, as well, since you consistently support falsehood.

Wilson wanna cracker?

Wilson, to non-military folks who aren't really paying attention that might seem like a real story, but to us its not.

Three years ago Iraqi forces didn't exist.

Two years ago they broke and ran at every opportunity - this is true of the April '04 battle in Fallujah.

Last November they fought in Fallujah, and none have broken and run since.

Now those units are in the lead. As your quoted reporter notes, they have Special Forces advisors with them, calling the shots, directing, etc. That is why the advisors are there.

His argument that they were not "in the lead" because they had Special Forces advisors with them is rather ridculous. No one - certainly not the president - is claiming the Iraqis are ready to go without our help. This is the whole reason we're still there. When the Iraqis are ready to go without Special Forces advisors is when we come home - victorious.

Your argument is why people like you aren't in charge of National Security.

More shockers: Special Forces troops are paid! Special Forces Troops are "ordered by the Pentagon" to fight in Iraq! None are really volunteers! It's true!

First, we can dispense with Rich's lame-ass argument that Think Progress had anything to do with the content of the report. Apparently, Rich can't read. If he could, he'd see that the Think Progress site merely passed the Time report along.

Now, as for Greyhawk's Jawohl! spin, it boils down to what the definition of "IS" is. Oops, the definiting of "primarily in the lead." The Time reporter says that the U.S. forces led the attack. The Liar in Chief says otherwise.

Now, I would agree that it's a toughie to figure out who lies more often, the Fake President or the controlled media. I guess in this case I'm more inclined to believe Time, because they don't lie each and every time about everything, like the military and the Fake President do.

If ThinkProgress is a true journalistic site, why did they give only "your" side of the story, Wilson ... just like you always do?

You ... and they ... can have summer jobs in the cherry orchards. Your skills in picking should earn you a lot of extra cash.

BTW, I see that Greyhawk has shredded your position on this matter, for all to see ... and that you still don't have an original thought to give us. (Well, except for Bush attacking Iraq because Saddam thought about switching to Euros ... that was a conspiracy theory worthy of a new tinfoil hat for you!)

Wilson wanna cracker?