Re: The lie that Bush "lied" about WMDs in Iraq

In article <AaHsj.101$VG.18@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"George Z. Bush" <georgezbush@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Jean Smith wrote:
In article <bStsj.338$Gm1.200@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"George Z. Bush" <georgezbush@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

XJarHead wrote:
http://thinkexist.com/quotes/Vladimir_Lenin/

"A lie told often enough becomes truth"

Vladimir Lenin quotes (Russian Founder of the Russian Communist
Party, leader of the Russian Revolution of 1917, 1870-1924)

You are either terminally naive or your judgement has been distorted
by your venomous anti- American, anti-Bush bias.

Anti-Bush bias, ubetchurass.....and with reason out the kazoo.
Anti-American? Where do you get that ***? Let me remind you that a
Republican President, Theodore Roosevelt, said that he believed it to be
tantamount to treason for an American citizen to fail to bring his
government to account in time of war if he had reason to believe that its
prosecution of that war was deficient in any way. It was during World
War I
and he had two sons in uniform fighting in France when he said that for
publication. If he could define patriotism in that way, I see no reason
why
I can't. And if you're going to question my patriotism, then you'll have
to
question that Republican President's as well.

President Clinton claimed Iraq had WMDs in order to get unanimous
support for his Iraq Liberation Act in 98 when Bush was still governor
of Texas.

None of that matters because he didn't take us into war over his
mistakes.
Bush's gaffes, OTOH, have cost thousands of American lives, tens of
thousands of grievously wounded American men and women, hundreds of
thousands of Iraqi casualties, and literally millions of Iraqi refugees
who
felt obliged to flee their own country because the conditions Bush
exposed
them to were so much worse than those that Saddam had imposed on them.
If
that wasn't enough, we lost the friendship of most of the world's nations
and the respect of practically all of them who now fear and despise us
for
our heavy-handed and clumsy performance as the world's only super-power.
And if that wasn't enough, our ground forces are now stretched almost to
the
breaking point according to numerous qualified military observers, we've
borrowed a disgraceful amount of money in order to pay for Bush's folly
that
our grandchildren will eventually have to pay for, and our deficit is now
at
record levels.

You can defend that kind of deplorable performance from the President,
but I
cannot. More to the point, I fought for the right to criticize him by my
service during three major wars and, by God, nobody with lesser
contributions than I've made will ever talk me out of that. He has it
coming and it's my duty to make sure if I can that it comes to pass.

(Red herrings expunged)

George Z.

Is it not very much a lie repeat it after the particular bit of
misinformation has been pointed out and acknowledged?

This must be my slow day because I don't understand your question. Would
you mind rephrasing it, please?

George Z.
If I catch you in a misstatement, e.g. 'yellow and blue make orange.'
That could just have been a mistake. But if I catch you again, after
correction, it's nothing but a lie.


They also just made things up:
Consider, for example, these false public statements made in the
run-up to war:

* On August 26, 2002, in an address to the national convention of
the Veteran of Foreign Wars, Cheney flatly declared: "Simply stated,
there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass
destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our
friends, against our allies, and against us." In fact, former CIA
Director George Tenet later recalled, Cheney's assertions went well
beyond his agency's assessments at the time. Another CIA official,
referring to the same speech, told journalist Ron Suskind, "Our
reaction was, 'Where is he getting this stuff from?' "
* In the closing days of September 2002, with a congressional vote
fast approaching on authorizing the use of military force in Iraq,
Bush told the nation in his weekly radio address: "The Iraqi regime
possesses biological and chemical weapons, is rebuilding the
facilities to make more and, according to the British government,
could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45
minutes after the order is given. . . . This regime is seeking a
nuclear bomb, and with fissile material could build one within a
year." A few days later, similar findings were also included in a
much-hurried National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's weapons of mass
destruction ? an analysis that hadn't been done in years, as the
intelligence community had deemed it unnecessary and the White House
hadn't requested it.
* In July 2002, Rumsfeld had a one-word answer for reporters who
asked whether Iraq had relationships with Al Qaeda terrorists: "Sure."
In fact, an assessment issued that same month by the Defense
Intelligence Agency (and confirmed weeks later by CIA Director Tenet)
found an absence of "compelling evidence demonstrating direct
cooperation between the government of Iraq and Al Qaeda." What's more,
an earlier DIA assessment said that "the nature of the regime's
relationship with Al Qaeda is unclear."
* On May 29, 2003, in an interview with Polish TV, President Bush
declared: "We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found
biological laboratories." But as journalist Bob Woodward reported in
State of Denial, days earlier a team of civilian experts dispatched to
examine the two mobile labs found in Iraq had concluded in a field
report that the labs were not for biological weapons. The team's final
report, completed the following month, concluded that the labs had
probably been used to manufacture hydrogen for weather balloons.
* On January 28, 2003, in his annual State of the Union address,
Bush asserted: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein
recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our
intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase
high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production."
Two weeks earlier, an analyst with the State Department's Bureau of
Intelligence and Research sent an email to colleagues in the
intelligence community laying out why he believed the uranium-purchase
agreement "probably is a hoax."
* On February 5, 2003, in an address to the United Nations
Security Council, Powell said: "What we're giving you are facts and
conclusions based on solid intelligence. I will cite some examples,
and these are from human sources." As it turned out, however, two of
the main human sources to which Powell referred had provided false
information. One was an Iraqi con artist, code-named "Curveball," whom
American intelligence officials were dubious about and in fact had
never even spoken to. The other was an Al Qaeda detainee, Ibn
al-Sheikh al-Libi, who had reportedly been sent to Eqypt by the CIA
and tortured and who later recanted the information he had provided.
Libi told the CIA in January 2004 that he had "decided he would
fabricate any information interrogators wanted in order to gain better
treatment and avoid being handed over to [a foreign government]."

--
Stuffed Animals WVU http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07207/804507-55.stm
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/ssn_predict_l.gif
Solar http://www-istp.gsfc.nasa.gov/istp/outreach/solarmax/learnmain.html
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/15aug_backwards.htm
.

Loading