King of photo op

Hobbes

Bad enough mess with the 'mission accomplished' photo-op but appears he made another boo-boo with this..



Turns out the turkey he brought to the troops is about as real as the weapons as mass destruction.

sceptre

Originally posted by Hobbes
Turns out the turkey he brought to the troops is about as real as the weapons as mass destruction.

You mean that the Mossad were sure the turkey was hidden underground somewhere and Bush has sent thousands of troops to blow up villages in an attempt to flush it out?;)

conZ

Same Turkey?

sceptre

Originally posted by conZ
Same Turkey?

Different turkey. That one (as the thanksgiving mascot) gets life imprisonment on an open prison for turkeys who were the thanksiving mascot. Oh yeah, it's not plastic either.

gandalf

Naw they are definately before and after piccies.

The 2nd Piccie is the Turkey before it was "liberated" and the 1st one.....................

Poor old George Jnr really doesn't take a good photo now does he

Gandalf.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

sovtek

Originally posted by Hobbes
Bad enough mess with the 'mission accomplished' photo-op but appears he made another boo-boo with this..



Turns out the turkey he brought to the troops is about as real as the weapons as mass destruction.

That's priceless...fake weapons...fake turkey...fake war on terror.
Is it just me and am I getting too jaded...but didn't some part of you just pray (to Allah or God or the Great Electron) for a Stinger attack on one of these idiots.

*Hint to Iraqi resistance...aim for anything two-tone blue and white....*

sovtek

Originally posted by daveirl
Is anyone following the other which is an even bigger cock-up? Part of one of the press releases that were issued by the White House said that Air Force One, while secretly flying to Iraq had been spotted by a BA flight.



You'd think fair enough sounds more than possible but it appears they lied.



So of course they had to come up with a new story - http://www.newsday.com/news/printedition/ny-usfly033568691dec03,0,3535588.story?coll=ny-news-print

I said jokingly to my friend that the next story was going to be "control tower denies talking to Air Force One!" and to even my utter amazment their is now a version 3 of the story!!!

Makes you wonder if they can be honest about ANYTHING.

But hey...I guess that's what you ask for when you put a bunch of non-functioning CEO's (two interchangeable terms really) in government.

Geromino

Originally posted by sovtek
Makes you wonder if they can be honest about ANYTHING.

But hey...I guess that's what you ask for when you put a bunch of non-functioning CEO's (two interchangeable terms really) in government.

Sovtek and Daveirl,
Tell me, if you were shipping a load of gold from point A to point B, would you 1) advtertize the route, 2) advertize the time, 3) advertize the security procautions, and 4) advertize the amount of gold being shipped. If you were in charge, I guess you would judging from you post.

On your previous point seriously, one could argue in your attempt as treason, Sovtek. If you feel that forceful about it, I do know the procedure in which you can renounce your citizenship. It is quite easy as long as you are not renouncing your citizenship based on avoiding taxes.

This post should have been in the political satire.

sovtek

Originally posted by Geromino
Sovtek and Daveirl,
Tell me, if you were shipping a load of gold from point A to point B, would you 1) advtertize the route, 2) advertize the time, 3) advertize the security procautions, and 4) advertize the amount of gold being shipped. If you were in charge, I guess you would judging from you post.

Seriously..what?

On your previous point seriously, one could argue in your attempt as treason, Sovtek. If you feel that forceful about it, I do know the procedure in which you can renounce your citizenship. It is quite easy as long as you are not renouncing your citizenship based on avoiding taxes.

This post should have been in the political satire.

Don't get your panties in a wad. Treason eh? Are you going to report my post to the Department of Homeland Security?
I wonder if sending 160,000 people to die (as well as kill tens of thousands of innocent people) for you and your buddies bank balance is treason.
Otherwise, I can say and dream whatever I want. Actions are different matter. And I will not be renouncing my citizenship any time soon.
But then there is the Declaration of Independence that reads...

"That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it."

Victor

Originally posted by Geromino
On your previous point seriously, one could argue in your attempt as treason

Just which law would he be breaking? Who is he betraying?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=treason

trea·son ( P ) Pronunciation Key (trzn)
n.
1. Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
2. A betrayal of trust or confidence.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sovereign

sov·er·eign ( P ) Pronunciation Key (svr-n, svrn)
n.
1. One that exercises supreme, permanent authority, especially in a nation or other governmental unit, as: A king, queen, or other noble person who serves as chief of state; a ruler or monarch.
2. A national governing council or committee.
3. A nation that governs territory outside its borders.
4. A gold coin formerly used in Great Britain.

sceptre

Originally posted by Geromino
in your attempt as treason, Sovtek.

That's got to be one of the more idiotic things I've ever read here.

Do you live in the deep deep dark South then? Is criticising your own government an act of treason where you live?

Geromino

Originally posted by sovtek
Makes you wonder if they can be honest about ANYTHING.

But hey...I guess that's what you ask for when you put a bunch of non-functioning CEO's (two interchangeable terms really) in government.

Tell me this Sovtek and Daithl1, if you were to ship a load of gold from point A to point B, would you 1) advertize the route taken, 2) advertize the time for such shipment, 3) advertize the security precautions, and 4) advertize the load of gold being shipped. Judging from your posts, I guess that answer would be yes. But then again, only in Europe where a pop star dangling a child over the balcony is considered chic.

Sovtek, your first post could be loosely considered as treason. Now, if you feel that strongly about it, I can give you the procedure on how to renounce your citizenship as long as it is not to avoid taxes. That way, the charge could be reduced to criminal mischief, a minor offense.

Fake Turkey

I guess Hobbes et al. have never been in through a chow line on a military post before. You do not have whole turkeys to carve up as you please. You go through the chow line and served your designated portion. The whole trip was to serve those soldiers in Iraq on a very important holiday.

Release of the Turkey

This is another tradition of Thanksgiving, although it has little to do with the original Thanksgiving dinner on Plymoth Rock. This year marks the 56th anniversary of the first National Thanksgiving Turkey presentation. Though live Thanksgiving turkeys were presented intermittently to presidents since the Lincoln administration, the current event dates to 1947, when the first National Thanksgiving Turkey was presented to President Harry Truman. If you want more:
http://www.turkeyfed.org/press/conspr/stars.html

The farm is a exact replica of a working farm of the 1930's during the Great Depression. It is a teaching conservatory, not a zoo. Here is the link to Kidwell Farms: http://www.co.fairfax.va.us/parks/resources/kidwell-1.htm

sovtek

Originally posted by sceptre
Do you live in the deep deep dark South then? Is criticising your own government an act of treason where you live? Idiocy obviously isn't.

Actually I'm from the not so deep south.
Criticising the government isn't a treasones act YET, but methinks El Bush isn't done yet.
I'm quite sure that post got me flagged somewhere in Virginia or Diego Garcias.

Capt'n Midnight

Gold ? Oh you mean something Dense, Incapable of thought and is associated only with very rich people.

dathi1

Tell me this Sovtek and Daithl1

?

Geromino

Originally posted by sovtek
Don't get your panties in a wad. Treason eh? Are you going to report my post to the Department of Homeland Security?
I wonder if sending 160,000 people to die (as well as kill tens of thousands of innocent people) for you and your buddies bank balance is treason.
Otherwise, I can say and dream whatever I want. Actions are different matter. And I will not be renouncing my citizenship any time soon.

Sovtek,
There is the right way to criticize and there is the wrong way to criticize. Your first post happen to be the wrong way to criticize. Putting a hint for certain groups to shoot down anything two tone and blue could cause innocents to get killed. There could be a two tone and blue single piston aircraft, twin engine aircraft, an Airbuss 340, or even a Boeing 777. That is the wrong way, Sovtek. Furthermore, there are limits to any freedom Sovtek. I cannot slander nor libel you, for instance, nor can you.

PS The Declaration of Independence has no legal nor Constitutional bearing. It is a seperate document that qualified the several states to break away from England.

Victor

Originally posted by Geromino
But then again, only in Europe where a pop star dangling a child over the balcony is considered chic.

I disagree with the word chic - "f***ing gobs****" was the attitude most people took. And wasn't it an American popstar.

mr_angry

Clearly the second pic is from a couple of years ago, when GWB was happily prepared to support and fund the Turkeys in their struggle for freedom against the terrible Russian chickens.

The first pic is then Bush demonstrating his supreme victory over the brutal Turkey dictatorship, which had gone unchallenged for too long.

bonkey

Originally posted by Geromino
Sovtek and Daveirl,
Tell me, if you were shipping a load of gold from point A to point B, would you 1) advtertize the route, 2) advertize the time, 3) advertize the security procautions, and 4) advertize the amount of gold being shipped. If you were in charge, I guess you would judging from you post.

I think that point being made was that having successfully transferred teh gold, you don't go about making up verifiably fake stories about how risky it was to try and gain some extra kudos for having done it.

I guess Hobbes et al. have never been in through a chow line on a military post before. You do not have whole turkeys to carve up as you please. You go through the chow line and served your designated portion. The whole trip was to serve those soldiers in Iraq on a very important holiday.

Again...you seem to be missing the point. Given that turkey is not served on a nice platter, who the hell was Bush posing for? If he served people going through the usual chow-line, then why not show it? Why show something that is - again - verifiably false, instead of what Bush allegedly went there for???

OK, if you read the various explanations which came out after the fact, it seems that the entire shot was just accidental, and that some photographer was lucky enough to catch this great pic at just the right moment (bit like the classic "closed binoculars" one). However, the question should then be asked....where are the pictures of Bush serving those soldiers in Iraq on a very important holiday (as you put it yourself)???

You can laugh it off as a funny incident, but there is a growing trend in the Bush Administration increasingly having to...ummm...refine its position on certain things as it becomes clear that their original position was a blatantly false one. The Turkey, the BA encounter, the "Mission Accomplished" banner, the "Made in America" boxes - these are the most recent gaffs.

However, as was pointed out in passing by someone else, this would appear to be a worrying trend...as we have also seen the administration refine its statements about WMDs, why the US went to war at all, and so on and so forth.

You may feel it belongs to satire, but the simple fact is that this is yet again an indication of just how important the truth would appear to be to the Bush Administration when compared to, say, public perception.

jc

Just want to point out the following, without connecting myself in any way with the previous banter, but the news pictures that I saw on Bushes visit to Baghdad on the tv news bulletins that night did show him on the chow line or whatever it's called dishing out the portions to the troops.

mm

Victor

Hang on. There's another version of the picture with no turkey - are we sure it wasn't photoshopped in? (doubtful with the BBC, but who knows - note Bert is Evil photos).

And 90% of the turkey used by the US military over Thanksgiving was "turkey parts" as opposed to whole turkey (it was in some piece of fluff PR on how they started planning Thanksgiving about 6 months ago).

Hobbes

Originally posted by Geromino
I guess Hobbes et al. have never been in through a chow line on a military post before. You do not have whole turkeys to carve up as you please. You go through the chow line and served your designated portion. The whole trip was to serve those soldiers in Iraq on a very important holiday.

Your absolutly right. I haven't been, and if you bothered to read the story you would see the reporters agree with you, which makes the photo-op with a fake turkey all the more lame.

Geromino

Originally posted by bonkey
I think that point being made was that having successfully transferred teh gold, you don't go about making up verifiably fake stories about how risky it was to try and gain some extra kudos for having done it.

When you are having the gold tracked by everyone and anyone, the accomplishment was keeping it a secret. It took fifteen security agencies to pull off the trip and shocked both Sen Clinton, who happen to be there at that time, and most others including the Presidents family up until or near the time of departure. Not to mention the bastion of White House correspondents who can accompany the President on every trip.

Again...you seem to be missing the point. Given that turkey is not served on a nice platter, who the hell was Bush posing for? If he served people going through the usual chow-line, then why not show it? Why show something that is - again - verifiably false, instead of what Bush allegedly went there for???

Newspapers will print pictures and stories in order to sell those newspapers, truth be damned. However, depending on whether you hate (figuratively of course) the President or not , then it all depends on the story line, now doesn't it. No one here acknowledges the great moral boost it did for the troops, regardless of your political stance. But that is another story and thread altogether.

OK, if you read the various explanations which came out after the fact, it seems that the entire shot was just accidental, and that some photographer was lucky enough to catch this great pic at just the right moment (bit like the classic "closed binoculars" one). However, the question should then be asked....where are the pictures of Bush serving those soldiers in Iraq on a very important holiday (as you put it yourself)???

See above statement.

Geromino

Originally posted by Hobbes
Your absolutly right. I haven't been, and if you bothered to read the story you would see the reporters agree with you, which makes the photo-op with a fake turkey all the more lame.

Um you did not provide a news link with the picture, Hobbes, unless of course you mean the Guardian (which I don't read).

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

sceptre

unless of course you mean the Guardian (which I don't read).

:rolleyes:
Try this for size then

BBC. Warning: it uses some of the same words that the Guardian article uses so don't read it if you don't want to go blind or lose your soul.

Last few paragraphs of this are interesting too.

Lovely lovely turkey

Geromino

Originally posted by daveirl
[Bemm... I never said they should do any of that. All I said is they shouldn't lie about what happened after the fact. Even right-wing nuts like Andrew Sullivan questioned the Bush administration on making this oops!!! [/B]

But what did they lie about? The fact that they were not there in Iraq? The fact that President Bush was going to bring enough bird to feed 600 troops? The fact how they went to Iraq? Even if that turkey was real, how many soldiers would a five or ten pound turkey serve. It would not serve 600. But then again, should the President have brought 35 turkeys to feed the 600 troops. Again, who cares about a fake turkey on a moral boosting trip. This is a non-story trumped up as a real story of truth.

bonkey

Originally posted by Geromino
When you are having the gold tracked by everyone and anyone, the accomplishment was keeping it a secret. It took fifteen security agencies to pull off the trip and shocked both Sen Clinton, who happen to be there at that time, and most others including the Presidents family up until or near the time of departure. Not to mention the bastion of White House correspondents who can accompany the President on every trip.

You're still missing the point.

I'm aware what a major coup keeping this secret was. I'm aware of how risky it was.

What I don't understand is that rather than playing to this, the White House PR department feels it mecessary to make up stories to say "and look how nearly it all fell apart".

Putting it very simply - what do verifiable lies gain the White House???

Newspapers will print pictures and stories in order to sell those newspapers, truth be damned. However, depending on whether you hate (figuratively of course) the President or not , then it all depends on the story line, now doesn't it.

You show me a single news story with that picture in it - after it emerged that the picture was faked - where the point being made was "hey - who cares that they lied to us again....he's still a great guy", and I'll concede you have a point.

Every article I've seen has basically said either "this lie was an astute political move to gain in the polls, and it worked", or "this is yet another lie from the Bush Administration".

Given that you're such a man for asking for links from others, I'm sure you'll have no problems illustrating your point on how some media who don't hate the President (figuratively speaking of course) actually appluaded him for faking the picture?

Yes?

No one here acknowledges the great moral boost it did for the troops, regardless of your political stance. But that is another story and thread altogether.

Exactly - we're not discussing why he went to Iraq, and no-one saw fit to start a thread about it yet, so it most certainly is another story and thread. This thread is about the Bush Administration - once again - being economical with the truth when it comes to PR.

If you want to discuss the message that Bush sent to his troops - standing on the soil of a foreign country for just over 2.5 hours, having arrived in complete secrecy in the most secure plane in the world, and then having gone on to make up lies about how dangerous it was on the flight over (as opposed to on the ground), and willfully backing an image of "spreading cheer" which every single troop on the ground will know from a glance was staged - you go right ahead.

Me, I'd question the morale boost that has given, as opposed to, say, a straight-up-front "yes, we put a lot of effort into doing this for the troops, and it all went according to plan, and it was all for them because they are the ones taking the real risks, and we knew theyd keep us safe, and here's a shot of the President scooping mash onto someone's plate wearing a serving-boy jacket" type of statement.

I think Bush began with the best of intentions, and someone - he and/or his PR department - decided that the morale boost could be coupled with some great poll-boosting stuff, and the lies and manipulations of the media have now overtaken any meaningful message he could have sent.

Then again, I am neither American nor in American (or Iraq), so perhaps I'm misjudging how critical you (as a nation) are of the honesty and integrity of the people who run your country, or of those who present them to the public (i.e. your media and/or the White House PR staff).

jc

Hobbes

Originally posted by Geromino
Again, who cares about a fake turkey on a moral boosting trip. This is a non-story trumped up as a real story of truth.

Oops forgot the link but someone else has posted one.

moral boosting? For a select few who were allowed see Bush, what about the ones who were kept outside the airport not allowed to eat until he left? o_O

It is like he does photo ops with absolute no thought behind what he is doing. Just creating his little photo album for the history books.

Geromino

Originally posted by bonkey


You're still missing the point.

I'm aware what a major coup keeping this secret was. I'm aware of how risky it was.

What I don't understand is that rather than playing to this, the White House PR department feels it mecessary to make up stories to say "and look how nearly it all fell apart".

Putting it very simply - what do verifiable lies gain the White House???[/B]

When you have to have something so secret in which the "cargo" is figuratively, like the largest gold shipment to be made, a single leak could pose that shipment in danger. And when it comes to the President, security is everything. Hence, a single leak on the trip, while on route or before, was the upmost importance. And if the leak occured, then this would have never been reported, or we may have well had another lie from the administration. The real story here is not about the President's trip, but how well, for once, the security agencies worked together with no one having a personal agenda to gain. It was not the picture of the faked turkey

You show me a single news story with that picture in it - after it emerged that the picture was faked - where the point being made was "hey - who cares that they lied to us again....he's still a great guy", and I'll concede you have a point.

Every article I've seen has basically said either "this lie was an astute political move to gain in the polls, and it worked", or "this is yet another lie from the Bush Administration".

Given that you're such a man for asking for links from others, I'm sure you'll have no problems illustrating your point on how some media who don't hate the President (figuratively speaking of course) actually appluaded him for faking the picture?

Yes?

My whole point was the faked turkey was basically a non-story to begin with. Let me give you another example, there have been news reports from newsmax (a source that I do not read by the way) claiming Sen Clinton made treasonous statements. The "truth" was she was making an observation that the battle is not over and it is unclear of the outcome (I am paraphrasing of course). It might shock you that I agree with this assessment and many foreign affairs experts have also agreed on that assumption. But again, it is a non-story to begin with and given its proper place in file 13.

Exactly - we're not discussing why he went to Iraq, and no-one saw fit to start a thread about it yet, so it most certainly is another story and thread. This thread is about the Bush Administration - once again - being economical with the truth when it comes to PR.

If you want to discuss the message that Bush sent to his troops - standing on the soil of a foreign country for just over 2.5 hours, having arrived in complete secrecy in the most secure plane in the world, and then having gone on to make up lies about how dangerous it was on the flight over (as opposed to on the ground), and willfully backing an image of "spreading cheer" which every single troop on the ground will know from a glance was staged - you go right ahead.

Me, I'd question the morale boost that has given, as opposed to, say, a straight-up-front "yes, we put a lot of effort into doing this for the troops, and it all went according to plan, and it was all for them because they are the ones taking the real risks, and we knew theyd keep us safe, and here's a shot of the President scooping mash onto someone's plate wearing a serving-boy jacket" type of statement.

I think Bush began with the best of intentions, and someone - he and/or his PR department - decided that the morale boost could be coupled with some great poll-boosting stuff, and the lies and manipulations of the media have now overtaken any meaningful message he could have sent.

Then again, I am neither American nor in American (or Iraq), so perhaps I'm misjudging how critical you (as a nation) are of the honesty and integrity of the people who run your country, or of those who present them to the public (i.e. your media and/or the White House PR staff).

jc

Bonkey, the whole trip was for morale boost of the troops. However, I wonder if the media is hyping this story up since they were snubbed. Perhaps their intentions are only that to potray themselves as "truth" which I hardly will agree. I have made known my disdain for newspapers, of any nation, and their lack of investigative reporting. In my view, any newspaper reporter is deemed a "useful idiot."