If it's wrong, it's wrong.
Names and/or party affiliation only matter to partisan hacks.
The crew of the ship probably did it and maybe cleared it with the WH liaisons beforehand.
Case in point.
Early today I heard Glenn Beck say he just read a Tweet which said the Queen had died. I immediately posted a thread to that effect. And then after posting it, I looked online for substantiation.
Then, to my horror, I discovered that the Tweet was a false alarm.
The excuse was that a BBC reporter was making a "Test Tweet" in preparation for when the Queen actually DOES die.
I amended the thread as quickly as I could to reflect what happened, but it was an example of how someone who may have esteemed the truth too lightly caused ripples felt thousands of miles away and by maybe hundreds of thousands of people.
Words have impact.
Facts determine others' actions.
You guys are too young, inexperienced, dumb and so often so persistently unconcerned about the important things in life that you treat facts as options to be used or not or paid attention to or not, as it pleases you.
And that means I, who value veracity, feel compelled to correct inaccuracies for the record.
Because it matters.
And that I am quite serious about.
Online, all we have is our credibility.
Last edited by Tazmanian Devil; 06-05-15 at 09:49 PM.
And none of US, who aren't privy to the facts which only he and a select few others in Govt., had at the time, have all the pertinent facts.
Did the PNAC have a plan to dethrone Saddam?
I believe they did and I believe they were pushing it on W to implement.
But was that the sole or the deciding factor behind the decision to invade?
I frequently go to the bathroom with more than one reason in mind, so to think that the POTUS actually invaded Iraq for one reason and a nefarious reason at that, is ludicrous.
The last time I bothered counting maybe 7 or 8 years ago, there were about seven or eight good reasons I'd thought of which justified our invasion.
How about you thinking of just ONE.