The Road to Iraq - 237 Lies (page 4)

Yerusalyim

SS,

The last number I saw for total Iraqis in civilian clothes that were dead was right at about 7000...many of them were in civilian clothes and shooting at Americans. That's less than would have died under Saddam in a year.

blacksheep

"'Unlike America, we get independent news up herein Canada. We hear the stories of people who have had they're homes burglarized by thieves, who were thrown into jail, only to discover that america let them out. Not very nice."

By "independent" you mean "liberal bias." Do you get the same scary stories about Castro's Cuba? Your recent (and current) leaders encouraged your country to "play nice" with him, encouraged tourism to Cuba (your country provides the largest number of tourists to that nation. Perhaps if your "indpendent" news would report a few more facts about the tyranny, poverty, and violence Castro subjects his nation to, you too might decide to sanction him, rather than support him.

shamus

Perhaps if your "indpendent" news would report a few more facts about the tyranny, poverty, and violence Castro subjects his nation to, you too might decide to sanction him, rather than support him.

I'll be sure to change my viewing habits.... just for you. B.S. I guess we're all just a bunch of "liberal bias" redneck hillbilly Canadians to you anyways, LOL! Nice to see that you sound like a typical big-shot bully. Or maybe I just misunderstood your comment, LOL! I guess here's another country that you understand and want to "help".

Abaddon

Ah, yes. Invading Iraq and deposing Sadaam was evil. After all, he was a ruling sovereign. We should have respected that. Never mind that he was a horrific, tyrannical dictator that murdered tens of thousands of innocent people for their religious/political beliefs. That damned Bush lied, lied, lied....We shoulda just left the poor guy alone.

Nice collection of straw men there, with a dash of red herring. Some people obviously like being governed by incompetants or being mislead by them

I've read it, and I also noticed that SLH has decided to call these "lies"...The document calls them "misleading statements" in actuality the statements were based on the best available intelligence at the time. George Tenet should have been fired long ago.

Yeru, pity you missed out the last paragraph of page 11 where it clearly states that 10 statements were false and known to be false at the time they were made. Now, in your attempts to purify anything the Bush admin does, you'll no doubt argue that saying something you know is not true is not a lie. We know better.

And no one here has said that Iraq should not have been invaded to stop human rights offenses, nor has a major lobby sprung up with such an argument.

What people have said is that the US government mislead and lied in presenting justifications for the war, and that is a fact.

So, vote for Bush, and vote for someone who withholds or distorts facts and allows the advancement of known falsehoods to swing public support in his direction, or is so incompetant that he allows such events to happen in his Administration!

It really is that simple; they either lied or are otherwise unfit for public service.

Yerusalyim

There were no lies...if you think there were...press a law suit. Bush is better than Kerry ANY DAY. At least you know where Bush stands...

Abaddon

Yeru

There were no lies...

So, someone saying something that they know is not true is not lying?

What a twisted little world you live in... as you've never been a Witness I really cannot imagine a rational explanation for your stunning ability to fool yourself... oh, yeah, you're in the millitary... ok, so you've been trained to fool yourself...

Bush is better than Kerry ANY DAY.

Better at either being an incompetant leader or liar? Or better at evading active millitary service during time of war.

At least you know where Bush stands...

As far away from live bullets as possible?

I think we need to coin a new term refering to people who will swallow anything.

How about Repubukkakee? And the person supplying the information can be a Repubukkaker!

Oh, yeah, you note how not one item on that document has actually been disputed, but they insist that it was okay...

... sad...

Yerusalyim

So, someone saying something that they know is not true is not lying?

That's not been proven, and if it could be proven they would have already started the impeachment proceedings.

Abaddon

Yeru, why did you say you've read that document when your reply shows clearly that you have not?

Page 11, which I've already mentioned, and page 36 (I refer to the PDF pages, the actual page numbers at the foot of the pages are 5 and 29) would be good for you to look at. According to you the CIA are lying and the documents that were used to prepare this report are falsified, otherwise they ARE facts... unlike the statements themselves.

The fact that the shrubbery ddin't make any himself is not that comforting, as page 31 (pdf, page number 25 at fppt of page) reveals he made 55 misleading statements in 27 appearances, that's over two per appearance.

Of course he might just be a clueless muffin who read out what he was handed and whom you would absolve of all responsibility for misgvernment during his Administration, but he's a clever clueless muffin is the shrubbery, as the timing of the misleading statements shows.

A page beyond the one I refer to above it reveals that on 10/7/03 (US format) days before the congressional votes on Iraq he made 11 misleading statements, a higher number of misleading statements in any single appearance than any of the other people studied in the report. He makes Incontinentia Pants-on-fire, the person who made the most statements that they knew to be false, look almost competent, as she only averaged 1.81 distortions per statement.

As he made the most misleading statements at a time when it was of great benefit to get Congress ready, one has limited options.

One can like our little millitary friend here, believe absolutely anything the shrubbery or his supporters say.

One can try and convince oneself it was accidental; maybe Incontinentia Pants-on-fire was having a bad hair day on each of the 8 seperate occasions she knowingly or incompetently made statements she knew were false, and that the convenient timing is coincidental.

Or one can look at the statements effect, and the timing of the statements, and conclude that anyone who thinks there was not a determined effort to sway public opinion by an orchestrated campaign of disinformation and misinformation is as credulous as the shrubbery adminstration hoped they would be.

Isn't it funny though, to imagine the fury that Yeru and his ilk would be shaking the same document if the President had been a democrat? I'd have to get INSIDE my PC to wipe the spit off the screen.

But no, all hail to the thief, let's castigate a man for getting a blowie in the Oral Office and sweep intentional deciet that lead to the deaths of US Servicemen, amongst other dead humans, under the same office's carpet.

Those who died were victims of deciet Yeru. They were your comrades in arms, your brothers in the millitary. And you're washing the hands of those who by any reasonable interpretation of the evidence twisted facts that resulted in their deaths.

Saddam should have been removed anyway, but that's a different issue. The issue here is the shrubbery administration's lack of candour and intentional use of deception.

But yeah, the shrubbery didn't lie, the pope shits in the woods, and bears are catholics... believe what you like...

Yerusalyim

In 2001 and 2002, shipments of aluminum tubes to Iraq were intercepted. 29 This discovery led to an active debate within intelligence agencies about the intended use of the tubes. Numerous experts believed the tubes were for conventional rockets rather than a nuclear development program. And others believed they were for a nuclear program, not for conventional (and still illegal per the ceasefire) rockets In his February 5, 2004, speech, Mr. Tenet explained that disagreement over the purpose of the aluminum tubes was ?a debate laid out extensively in the estimate and one that experts still argue over.? 30 The agency with the most technical expertise in this area, the Department of Energy, believed that the tubes likely were not part of a nuclear enrichment program, stating in the NIE that ?the tubes probably are not part of the program.? 31 The International Atomic Energy Agency agreed, concluding: ?There is no indication that Iraq has attempted to import aluminum tubes for use in centrifuge enrichment.? 32 In addition to dissent from the Energy Department and international inspectors, the State Department also expressed formal eservations, stating in the NIE that ?INR is not persuaded that the tubes in question are intended for use as centrifuge rotors.? 33 Instead, the State Department accepted the ?judgment of technical experts at the U.S. epartment of Energy (DOE) who have concluded that the tubes Iraq seeks to acquire are poorly suited for use in gas centrifuges.? The State Department explained its position in detail: The very large quantities being sought, the way the tubes were tested by the Iraqis, and the atypical lack of attention to operational security in the procurement efforts are among the factors, in addition to the DOE assessment, that lead INR to conclude that the tubes are not intended for use in Iraq?s nuclear weapon program. 35 According to the NIE, ?INR considers it far more likely that the tubes are intended for another purpose, most likely the production of artillery rockets.? 36 These doubts about the use of the aluminum tubes were not conveyed by Administration officials, however. Instead, the aluminum tubes became one of the two principal pieces of information cited by the Administration to support the claim that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary Powell, and National Security Advisor Rice made 10 misleading statements in 9 public appearances about the significance of the aluminum tubes. So where exactly is the lie here? Seems to me a healthy debate was going on. It DOESN'T seem to me a lie occured

Xena

Well I believe Bush lied...he's a politician.

I still think it was the right thing for humanitarian reasons to oust Saddam. I, also, think one of the reasons the WMD was used is because people would be more likely to support a war against terrorism that was aimed at them then a war to help a suppressed people....I could be wrong but that is my take on it...I'm turning into quite a cynic lately.

I think Bush served his purpose in getting Saddam out of power but in the process he took a lot of credibility away from the US and therefore should consider himself collateral damage.

The Road to Iraq - 237 Lies

Share this