The problem with keeping up with the recent lies this administration is telling is that lies that were told in the past lost their punch:
Professor Postol doesn’t get it. Good or bad intelligence matters not to Democrats. They use it all to further their global agenda.
For years I said never let Democrats get anywhere near the intelligence community. The Soviet Union would still be intact today had Democrats controlled the intelligence community throughout the Cold War. That’s why I’m not at all convinced that this wasn’t preplanned:
I am convinced that telling lots of lies is Democrat strategy. They know they won’t be punished for lying.
NOTE: The HillaryCare II lies has Democrats sweating for one reason only. Americans can see how they are being hurt. Most Americans cannot see or do not inform themselves about the harm done by the torrent of lies Democrats tell about everything else.
Think of Democrat lies in terms of a one on one debate. One debater tells so many lies his opponent gets lost trying to expose them. If he zeros in on one lie the liar combats the truth with more lies. Oddly enough, the audience believes the lie if it is well-told, while the guy exposing the lie usually comes off as pedantic and downright boring.
Parenthetically, a torrent of lies was, and is, a favorite tactic among Communists at labor union meetings. The tactic doesn’t work so well in written debates. The inconvenience of putting a lie in writing does not stop message board liberals from trying anyway.
Aside from the fact that Barack Taqiyya is a natural lying sack of shit, the reason he lies so much about policy is identical to his reason for writing executive orders and issuing bureaucratic regulations. Just keep churning them out because nobody can stop their implementation, and there is no punishment involved even when they are unconstitutional.
The McClatchy News Service has a fascinating article about the infamous chemical weapons attack on the suburbs of Damascus that almost dragged America into the brutal Syrian civil war. The American media might want to drag itself away from its 24/7 coverage of bridge lane closings in New Jersey to consider the very strong possibility that the Obama Administration lied about the attack. And one of the key operators in this lie was none other than John Kerry, currently our bumbling Secretary of State, who once ran a very annoying presidential campaign that sought to harness liberal anger about a war that began, in part, due to faulty intelligence.
The McClatchy report makes this comparison, in an unfortunately disingenuous way, as they discuss a report issued by a team of security and weapons experts who investigated the Syrian gas attack:
The report also raised questions whether the Obama administration misused intelligence information in a way similar to the administration of President George W. Bush in the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Then, U.S. officials insisted that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had an active program to develop weapons of mass destruction. Subsequent inspections turned up no such program or weapons.
“What, exactly, are we spending all this money on intelligence for?” [MIT science professor Theodore] Postol asked.
Professor Postol doesn’t get it. Good or bad intelligence matters not to Democrats. They use it all to further their global agenda.
For years I said never let Democrats get anywhere near the intelligence community. The Soviet Union would still be intact today had Democrats controlled the intelligence community throughout the Cold War. That’s why I’m not at all convinced that this wasn’t preplanned:
The Obama Administration should have top-shelf intelligence before it starts making bold declarations and pushing for intervention. The intervention didn’t happen – we got an embarrassing geo-political rout at the hands of Russia’s Vladimir Putin, courtesy of John Kerry – but it remains relevant that the case made for military action was sloppy at best.
Serious questions raised about the intel that almost got us into war with Syria
By: John Hayward
1/16/2014 09:20 AM
Serious questions raised about the intel that almost got us into war with Syria | Human Events
I am convinced that telling lots of lies is Democrat strategy. They know they won’t be punished for lying.
NOTE: The HillaryCare II lies has Democrats sweating for one reason only. Americans can see how they are being hurt. Most Americans cannot see or do not inform themselves about the harm done by the torrent of lies Democrats tell about everything else.
Think of Democrat lies in terms of a one on one debate. One debater tells so many lies his opponent gets lost trying to expose them. If he zeros in on one lie the liar combats the truth with more lies. Oddly enough, the audience believes the lie if it is well-told, while the guy exposing the lie usually comes off as pedantic and downright boring.
Parenthetically, a torrent of lies was, and is, a favorite tactic among Communists at labor union meetings. The tactic doesn’t work so well in written debates. The inconvenience of putting a lie in writing does not stop message board liberals from trying anyway.
Aside from the fact that Barack Taqiyya is a natural lying sack of shit, the reason he lies so much about policy is identical to his reason for writing executive orders and issuing bureaucratic regulations. Just keep churning them out because nobody can stop their implementation, and there is no punishment involved even when they are unconstitutional.
Last edited: