@CrowleyTIME This is entirely irrelevant. Besides Bush NEVER said Hussein threat was imminent, as in immediate.
-
-
Replying to @JRubinBlogger
Of course he did http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/transcripts/bushtext_012803.html … RT
@JRubinBlogger:@CrowleyTIME Besides Bush NEVER said Hussein threat was imminent, as in immediate3 replies 3 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @speechboy71
@speechboy71@JRubinBlogger@CrowleyTIME Actually, in that speech he didn't. Read these grafs: "Some have said...it is not an option."1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CoreyRobin
@CoreyRobin@jrubinblogger@crowleytime My read is that in rejecting what have some said . . . he's arguing that it is an imminent threat3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @speechboy71
@speechboy71@JRubinBlogger@CrowleyTIME My read is that he's saying imminence is the wrong standard to apply.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CoreyRobin
@CoreyRobin@jrubinblogger@crowleytime Interesting. Think he's saying no way to know when threat is imminent cuz terrorists hide intentions2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @speechboy71
@speechboy71@JRubinBlogger@CrowleyTIME Exactly, which is why we can't use imminence as standard.4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CoreyRobin
@CoreyRobin So relying on when the threat seem obvious is too late - but that also supports your interpretation!3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@speechboy71 @CoreyRobin "smoking gun" rhetoric was designed to bypass fine distinctions about imminence, which is why it was effective.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.